Hi all,

I am writing as I too have received a letter from TFL where they threaten to prosecute me.

The incident happened in the train in March.

I use a type of ticket that you buy in advance and fill in with the date of the journey when you travel.

I was going back home after work, tired, sleepy, and I filled in the date on my ticket

and accidentally entered a future date as I am so dumb I was convinced it was a different date.

I was so convinced that I didnt even bother to double check in the calendar.

When I arrived at the destination station, I was asked to show my ticket and the inspector checked it and told me, hey this is not today's date.

He wanted me to pay the fine and I asked, is there any way to avoid this, as it's clearly been an honest mistake?

and he said, yh I can take your details and the company will write to you to ask for your version.

I thought, that is really fair!! I will give my version and then they will decide whether I have to pay or not!!

Surprise surprise........"the company asking for my version" is a letter of intention to prosecute.

I have already replied to them explaining what happened but I assume it is going to be useless.

I have some questions, and I was hoping somebody here could help.

I have read I could be prosecuted in 2 different ways

(I copy and paste from another thread):

- The most serious is section 5 of the Regulation of Railways Act 1889, criminal, requires intent to avoid fare, fine up to level 3 (£1000), or for second or subsequent offence can at discretion of court lead to imprisonment up to 3 months.

- Railway byelaws (both sections 17 and 18), criminal, strict liability (no intent needed), fine up to level 3 (£1000) except byelaw 17

My questions are:

- Will I know before going to court what law they are prosecuting me under? Can they change their mind at a later point?

- If its the railways act, do they have to prove to avoid fare? I might have a fighting chance at demonstrating I had no intent of doing so.

- If its the railway bylaws, then they dont need to prove intent.

However is there any circumstance under which their evidence would not be admissible?

The inspector was a 17 yr old bully and I believe he made some errors,

e.g. wrote comments on my witness statement on a section that was meant for my comments,

pressured me into signing,

did not explain why he was taking my details and told me it was just 'to give my version'

- Can I subpaena documents/CCTV for my defence?

I am a fighter and will certainly not go down without a fight.

At this point I dont care about the money.

I only care about being turned into a criminal.

I am most certainly not a criminal.

I volunteer for two charities where I work with children

and I need an enhanced DBS, so criminal record would mean no more volunteering.

I am really shocked. In my country these issues are not covered by criminal law,

they are covered by administration law and you would NEVER get a criminal record for such a matter.

I don't know who had this idea but it sounds really out of proportion.

Thanks for any help that you might give.

Hello and welcome to CAG. I expect the forum guys will be along later with advice for you.

I am really shocked. In my country these issues are not covered by criminal law, they are covered by administration law and you would NEVER get a criminal record for such a matter. I don't know who had this idea but it sounds really out of proportion.

Our railway laws have been in force for well over a hundred years, I'm afraid, so you will need to deal with the system as it is.

My best, HB

I have sent you a private message, by the way. Please check your inbox at the top of the screen.

HB

Thanks for replying honeybee.

[/i]Our railway laws have been in force for well over a hundred years, I'm afraid, so you will need to deal with the system as it is.

I don't think that means it is right, that's the 'argumentum ad antiquitatem' fallacy. I complain a lot on my message, I guess I am still on the 'anger' stage of grief, soon to be followed by bargaining...

Hi all,

 

I am writing as I too have received a letter from TFL where they threaten to prosecute me. The incident happened in the train in March. I use a type of ticket that you buy in advance and fill in with the date of the journey when you travel. I was going back home after work, tired, sleepy, and I filled in the date on my ticket and accidentally entered a future date as I am so dumb I was convinced it was a different date. I was so convinced that I didnt even bother to double check in the calendar.

 

When I arrived at the destination station, I was asked to show my ticket and the inspector checked it and told me, hey this is not today's date. He wanted me to pay the fine and I asked, is there any way to avoid this, as it's clearly been an honest mistake? and he said, yh I can take your details and the company will write to you to ask for your version. I thought, that is really fair!! I will give my version and then they will decide whether I have to pay or not!! Surprise surprise........"the company asking for my version" is a letter of intention to prosecute.

 

I have already replied to them explaining what happened but I assume it is going to be useless. I have some questions, and I was hoping somebody here could help. I have read I could be prosecuted in 2 different ways (I copy and paste from another thread):

 

- The most serious is section 5 of the Regulation of Railways Act 1889, criminal, requires intent to avoid fare, fine up to level 3 (£1000), or for second or subsequent offence can at discretion of court lead to imprisonment up to 3 months.

 

- Railway byelaws (both sections 17 and 18), criminal, strict liability (no intent needed), fine up to level 3 (£1000) except byelaw 17

 

My questions are:

 

- Will I know before going to court what law they are prosecuting me under? Can they change their mind at a later point?

 

- If its the railways act, do they have to prove to avoid fare? I might have a fighting chance at demonstrating I had no intent of doing so.

 

- If its the railway bylaws, then they dont need to prove intent. However is there any circumstance under which their evidence would not be admissible? The inspector was a 17 yr old bully and I believe he made some errors, e.g. wrote comments on my witness statement on a section that was meant for my comments, pressured me into signing, did not explain why he was taking my details and told me it was just 'to give my version'

 

- Can I subpaena documents/CCTV for my defence?

 

I am a fighter and will certainly not go down without a fight. At this point I dont care about the money. I only care about being turned into a criminal. I am most certainly not a criminal. I volunteer for two charities where I work with children and I need an enhanced DBS, so criminal record would mean no more volunteering.

 

I am really shocked. In my country these issues are not covered by criminal law, they are covered by administration law and you would NEVER get a criminal record for such a matter. I don't know who had this idea but it sounds really out of proportion.

 

Thanks for any help that you might give.

Thanks for replying honeybee.

I don't think that means it is right, that's the 'argumentum ad antiquitatem' fallacy. I complain a lot on my message, I guess I am still on the 'anger' stage of grief, soon to be followed by bargaining...

Lots of legislation since 1889 has been updated, or amended. The Regulation of Railways Act 1889 seems to have stood the test of time, and (requiring proof of intent beyond a reasonable doubt) doesn't seem fallacious ......

The initial "fine" sounds like a penalty fare rather than a fine.

Something then made the member of staff decide to make a report rather than offer a penalty fare.

Was this perhaps "anger" again?

It is all very well saying that it isn't a crime in your country ..... but you need to ask yourself which country you are in and which laws you need to abide by.

This may not be what you want to hear while you are still in your "anger" stage, but it doesn't mean it isn't valid advice.

Telling the TOC they shouldn't be prosecuting you or complaining about the staff member aren't often successful techniques to avoid prosecution.

Additionally, you may need to recalibrate you thoughts on "bargaining" - they don't have to agree to anything you offer and you don't "hold the cards" - you can ask but they don't need to agree : you don't really have a bargain to offer them.

You've already moved from the civil matter of a penalty fare to the risk of a criminal prosecution. You need to take a deep breath and decide if you want to keep matters escalating or try a de-escalation approach instead.

"Spoiling for a fight" will almost certainly get you one.

If they go for a (strict liability) Bylaw prosecution : do you really believe you have any prospect of avoiding a conviction, even if you want to "fight"?

What would a subpoena for CCTV add?.

For a start, a SAR might be simpler.

How might CCTV help? If it shows you being interviewed - that isn't in doubt. It is unlikely there is an audiovisual recording rather than CCTV.

If summonsed you will be informed of the charge you face.

You can ask for disclosure of the evidence against you : if it gets to that stage a solicitor might be useful to assist you with the formalities.

Thanks for taking the time to reply.

Lots of legislation since 1889 has been updated, or amended. The Regulation of Railways Act 1889 seems to have stood the test of time, and (requiring proof of intent beyond a reasonable doubt) doesn't seem fallacious ......

Was this perhaps "anger" again?

It is all very well saying that it isn't a crime in your country ..... but you need to ask yourself which country you are in and which laws you need to abide by.

This may not be what you want to hear while you are still in your "anger" stage, but it doesn't mean it isn't valid advice.

Additionally, you may need to recalibrate you thoughts on "bargaining" - they don't have to agree to anything you offer and you don't "hold the cards" - you can ask but they don't need to agree : you don't really have a bargain to offer them.

You need to take a deep breath and decide if you want to keep matters escalating or try a de-escalation approach instead.

If they go for a (strict liability) Bylaw prosecution : do you really believe you have any prospect of avoiding a conviction, even if you want to "fight"?

What would a subpoena for CCTV add?

For a start, a SAR might be simpler.

Thanks for the information!

I am trying that at the moment with my letter, but based on what I have read, it doesnt seem to have worked for anyone, so I am trying to prepare for the worst.

Plenty of people have obtained alternative dispositions to prosecution.

Usually by an honest and full explanation, avoiding criticism of the TOC and its staff, an apology for the ticketless travel, an undertaking never to avoid a fare again, and an offer to pay the fare and costs .....

What is a SAR?

If SAR is underlined and bolded, it is a clickable link.

Clicking the link will explain it better than I can.

Thanks, the SAR link is very useful.

However if I need to request documents which do not relate to myself (e.g. the company's standard operating procedures) do you know what I would need to do?

Thanks, the SAR link is very useful.

 

However if I need to request documents which do not relate to myself (e.g. the company's standard operating procedures) do you know what I would need to do?

Depends what you want.

Do you really want to risk antagonising them?.

Some information is in the public domain :

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/documents/revenue-enforcement-and-prosecutions-policy.pdf

If it isn't in the public domain you may struggle to obtain it unless you can show it is directly relevant to your case.

yep I think you need to take a deep breath and step way backwards here.

pers I don't think the route that you have indicated

if this is still your intended one, is p'haps the best to take.

we are obv unsure of what you have written to date.

but I hope you'venot hung yourself by veiled antagonism, it wont help you.

we have seen numerous cases here of prosecutions being settled even at the court door

it wont hurt either to ring them and plead.

but I think you need to solely focus on the innocent mistake issue.

just my thoughts

dx