Hi , I heard a legend about something that happened to a friend of a friend:

They were stopped on British Rail allegedly without means to pay and intent not to pay,

They changed address.

Summons Letter went to the wrong address

They missed the court date. (A month ago)

Only recently. the occupant of previous address notified them of the letter.

They have been advised to do the following steps:

1. call the court ask for Statutory Declaration to re-open the case.

2. This will trigger an interview to decide on re-opening and they will be asked for their plea..

3. Do not submit a plea - but say they want to get legal advice.

4. This will adjourn the case ?

This is the bit where the story gets cloudy - does it sound right ?

Now its adjourned, they can petition , plead with the rail company to settle out of court and avoid a criminal record?

If the rail company refuse then they get one of these 'fare dodger' specialists to help mediate for out of court settlement.

Hows that for a story?

if the case is reset

yes he can plead for an out of court settlement

right till the time the case starts.

 

They changed address.

Summons Letter went to the wrong address

They missed the court date. (A month ago)

 

 

 

This is the bit where the story gets cloudy - does it sound right ?

 

Now its adjourned, they can petition , plead with the rail company to settle out of court and avoid a criminal record.

If the friend of a friend knew they had been stopped, why did they not arrange for their mail to be forwarded or inform the TOC of their new address?

The TOC might agree an alternative disposal, but given the offender had alternatives they didn't avail themselves of, why should they?.

The offender can get the case re-opened, but may just get their day in court.

If the friend of a friend knew they had been stopped, why did they not arrange for their mail to be forwarded or inform the TOC of their new address?

 

The TOC might agree an alternative disposal, but given the offender had alternatives they didn't avail themselves of, why should they?.

The offender can get the case re-opened, but may just get their day in court.

The current occupant of their prior address (a relative) had agreed to forward / notify of mail in general but unfortunately ignored this 'very plain looking' letter and sat on it.

if the case is reset

yes he can plead for an out of court settlement

right till the time the case starts.

that sounds like how the legend should go ... the main thing is they do not submit a plea but trigger an adjournment (reset?) - to hope to settle out of court ?

The current occupant of their prior address had agreed to forward / notify of mail in general but unfortunately ignored this 'very plain looking' letter and sat on it.

That doesn't impact on the fact that:

The friend of a friend (FOAF) could have paid for a mail redirection, or could have informed the TOC of the change in address.

There would also (usually!) have been a letter from the TOC asking for details / comments before proceeding to summons.

FOAF can ask the TOC for an admin settlement, (and there is no harm in asking!), but given what has already happened, why should they?

That doesn't impact on the fact that:

The friend of a friend (FOAF) could have paid for a mail redirection, or could have informed the TOC of the change in address.

 

There would also (usually!) have been a letter from the TOC asking for details / comments before proceeding to summons.

 

FOAF can ask the TOC for an admin settlement, (and there is no harm in asking!), but given what has already happened, why should they?

thanks I think ..

thanks I think ..

Why "I think"?

Do you only want to give thanks for advice you want to hear, or for advice you think is correct, even if it isn't what you want to hear?

If the FOAF (get them to post here, BTW, so we can find out if there was an initial letter from the TOC, and what they are being summonsed for!) doesn't reply to the letter asking them to indicate a plea, the court may just enter a 'not guilty' plea on their behalf. They can always plead guilty later at court if they realise the TOC are going to take it to court.

Not replying may not delay things very long : since they made a Stat Dec, it isn't unreasonable for the court to conclude they have had the opportunity to seek legal advice.

Are they charged with a strict liability (Bylaw) offence or the "intent" offence (could they argue lack of intent if not the strict liability Bylaw?

Hi , I heard a legend about something that happened to a friend of a friend:

 

They were stopped on British Rail allegedly without means to pay and intent not to pay,

 

They changed address.

Summons Letter went to the wrong address

They missed the court date. (A month ago)

Only recently. the occupant of previous address notified them of the letter.

 

They have been advised to do the following steps:

1. call the court ask for Statutory Declaration to re-open the case.

2. This will trigger an interview to decide on re-opening and they will be asked for their plea..

3. Do not submit a plea - but say they want to get legal advice.

4. This will adjourn the case ?

 

This is the bit where the story gets cloudy - does it sound right ?

 

Now its adjourned, they can petition , plead with the rail company to settle out of court and avoid a criminal record?

 

If the rail company refuse then they get one of these 'fare dodger' specialists to help mediate for out of court settlement.

 

Hows that for a story?

The application for a Statutory Declaration will be notified to the prosecution dept. by the Court

The defendant may be asked to show evidence of when they left that address and if the Court is satisfied that they had not received the Summons the case can be reset to the point at which the Summons is served.

If your friend enters a guilty plea, the case can be heard by the Court without need to attend and a penalty may be imposed

If your friend decides to enter a not guilty plea the matter will be adjourned to a trial date

It might be the case that the prosecutor is minded to permit an administrative disposal if there are compelling reasons to do so, but it is equally as likely that they may decide to continue as before.

Thanks to all those that responded constructively.

So the legend went ...

Statutory Declaration was heard and agreed.

Prior to entering court the offender had an opportunity to speak privately directly with the prosecutor.

At this point they fell on their sword, "mea cupla" etc.

and prosecutor offered an opportunity to settle out of court In part, I suspect, influenced by offenders admittance, youth and the size of the court fine (very much north of 500)

Needless to say the opportunity to settle was grabbed with both hands.

And a lesson was learned ...

So, ALL THIS had already happened and you just wanted to waste our time and efforts?

So, ALL THIS had already happened and you just wanted to waste our time and efforts?

Er no ? Last bit/post happened a couple of weeks ago - thought I'd come back and say thanks to the constructive/helpful responders.

as I said in post 2

as I said in post 2

Yup , I just came back to say thanks.