well, I wish I'd known that. In court my "statement" (i.e. what I said to the inspector) was read out as official, I was only asked if I had anything to add. I didn't realise that it might have not counted. During the interview with Transport Police officers I was not given the full 'you do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defence...' spiel, nor was I told I could have a solicitor present. Transport police don't have the same rights as police anyway.

no I was not, except I was told that I don't actually HAVE to speak to the inspector at all and it's up to my free will.

I asked the clerk after I came out of the court room, and she assured me that this didn't mean that I had to declare this when I applied for a visa, job etc. I'm sorry I can't tell you the exact term for the conviction, nor have I applied for a visa to check it out, but from what I was told I should not worry about it any further than having to cough up the fine. so when i went to court I pleaded guilty, gave my excuses (wish I hadn't bothered), paid the fine, that's all. If it happened to me again I would honestly not even bother to go in to court. They'll send you the bill, you pay it by cheque, a hell lot of nerves saved. Good luck.

My experience is with Underground, the bus company might be more sympathetic, though I sincerely doubt it. In my case, the letter I sent "commenting on the incident" made no difference, it wasn't even brought up in court. I called the prosecutions team and that helped nothing either. In my experience it's not even worth the stress of turning up to court, they will send you a letter demanding some ridiculous amount of money and you can just pay the fine by phone. I was told by court clerk that this conviction doesn't end up with police criminal record. good luck

I tried reasoning to a prosecutor at TFL investigation and prosecution phone line and they were rude and useless. I did not manage to get any help at Citizens Advice Bureau and found that free legal advice is nearly impossible to come by. I was not allowed a duty solicitor in court. I was advised to come early in the morning to consult a duty clerk, however he waved me through to the usher even though I explained I'd never been to court and needed to find out about mitigation, etc. Everyone at the magistrates court was condescending and unhelpful. I plead guilty just to get it over and done with as soon as possible. I did not manage to get any advice, I wasn't given opportunity to plead mitigation. The juridical clerks in the courtroom didn't even consider my income sheet showing I'm a struggling self-employed artist. When they asked if I had anything to say in court and appeared to be going blah blah blah to themselves all through the delivery of my scrupulously prepared apology speech. They might as well have been an automatic fine collection machine, for the amount of attention and consideration I received, and I was charged £150 court fees for the privilege. That's on top of £100 for TFL (for hiring 3 guys to harass me on the train, obviously) and the god damn £1 fare I supposedly evaded (which made the clerk choke in surprise). All I can say is I am hugely disappointed in the legal system, and being collaborative, polite and decent makes no difference, and no matter how many apology letters/phonecalls you waste your time on you will be treated like a criminal and fined a standard fine (which ended up £251 instead of the £101 they were claiming for in the summons letter, thanks for the warning). If you get caught with a wrong ticket or no ticket or whatever I suggest you DO NOT TALK to the inspectors, you don't have to give any statement, because if you do they will happily use it to take you to court (as I was told "TFL strongly believe it is NOT ridiculous to waste the court's time for a quid and take fare evasion very seriously"). I was told I did not end up with a police criminal record, by the way. I guess that was a pleasant surprise.

If I plead not guilty and am still convicted later I'll be in deeper trouble than now. damn. My last chance is to call up TFL investigation and prosecution team and try to convince them to get an out-of-court settlement. Thanks everyone for your help.

No. In the statement the inspector said "Miss you have not used your card correctly" And i said "OK the truth is I borrowed my boyfriend's card but he doesn't know". And then I said yes to all their questions. Perhaps in court I can say that since the inspector told me that I misused the card I said yes to their questions, having then realised my error that I can’t use someone else’s card. However I wasn’t sure of that before the incident (as it's not clearly marked on the Oyster and that usual cards are sometimes transferable) EDIT: If I say I was feeling vulnerable surrounded by a bunch of guys in an empty train so I agreed to everything on the spot without giving it a second thought, will it count as mitigation or complicate my circumstances due to the change of statement?

yes. I was stressed and frightened and I said yes to everything to basically get out of the situation. (later I sent a letter to TFL explaining the circumstances and apologising and telling them I bought an annual ticket to avoid such mistakes in the future, but curiously that letter isn't included with the court summons and the rest of the evidence)

along with the summons I received a copy of witness statements from the inspectors, and copies of the Oyster cards, receipts and journey breakdowns proposed as evidence.

I am also told that if I plead not guilty I must be sure to win, otherwise I will end up with even bigger court costs and a definite CR.

Apparently not so with seasonal cards. My friend's Oyster card was annual and registered. It's confusing.

My worry is that when I was stopped I co-operated too much and confessed to the 'crime'. I was in a hurry, on PMS, intimidated by 3 officers in an empty carriage and so I just answered yes to all the questions (“do you understand the caution? Do you agree you should use your won tickets to travel? Do you know you’re not allowed to use someone else’s travelcard? Do you agree it was your intent to avoid the fare?”) Will I have to ask to have my statement changed in court, and will that complicate my case?

hello, I have court summons at the Magistrates court next week, and I'm finding it impossible to get through to CAB for legal advice, and with no duty solicitor on my case I would like to ask you helpful and wonderful people here. A couple of months ago I was stopped on the tube by London Underground inspectors. By confusion I had used my friend's seasonal Oyster card on that journey, even though I had mine (with money on it). Upon the inspection I produced my own card (which hasn't been beeped), ended up getting both cards confiscated, and now I received court summons for having not "previously paid the fare and with intent to avoid payment thereof". They are claiming £1 compensation of the "outstanding fare" - although technically I ended up paying it twice, as I did use the Oyster card (albeit not mine) and I paid the cash fare after getting my Oyster confiscated. Upon the inspection I was collaborative, I offered to pay the fine on the spot (they wouldn't have it), then I wrote to London Underground with apologies and bought myself an annual Oyster in order to avoid such a mistake in the future. And even so I am being dragged to Magistrates court for a quid, and I'll have to pay £100 contribution to prosecution costs! I think it's ridiculous. Should I plead guilty, and if I do does the charge for compensation (not fine) lead to a criminal record (which I dread the most, and which seems to be rather harsh for such a petty misconduct)? Or should I try to represent myself and argue the charge of fare evasion, seeing as I haven’t imposed any loss of revenue to London Underground, as my journey was paid for. Also usually Oyster card is transferable (and it doesn't say on the card that the seasonal one isn't) I can say I was confused... The Oyster stuff is pretty confusing, and I wonder if it's law or a private company policy that sometimes tickets can be used by anyone or just one person, and how that works in court. Thanks in advance for any advice.