Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About chillysnow

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Yes thats the story. He is a foreign student, studying in the UK. He keeps a scanned copy of all their documents on the internet - something I would advise other people to do when they travel abroad When they arrived back in UK (they had passport, thats the only document they need), they had forgotten all of the other documents , and also house keys They *own* a valid student discount card, which they are now in possession If the story were wildly different , I wouldn't waste your (or my) time trying to seek help here @honeybee - yes as you say it is essential to get opposing views/ look for chinks in the story, as a magistrate or jury might. But as well as a help forum, this is also here to *support consumers* in their actions. "Bang to rights" and "plead guilty" are not examples of helpful or supportive behaviour that one would expect to see in a forum such as this
  2. Thanks for your reply - yes we are contacting solicitors - but trying also to get as much help as possible here
  3. Thanks for your kind reply Strangely , I spoke to the original duty solicitor last night, he claimed that the BTP had a different prosecution service?! Even in this case where he was definitely arrested by the Met. I have never heard of this - and can find no reference to it, I am sure you are right. So - He was definitely arrested and charged by the Metropolitan Police - He was charged only on Sec 5(3) of Railways act - which he is contesting - He would accept having infringed Byelaw 18 (requiring him to carry the original document) The other relevant points I should make clear (from previous posters questions) - He bought and owns a currently valid Student Discount card together with the photo ID It was the ticket inspector who decided to call the police, who were waiting at the platform at the next train stop. I think what you are saying is that there should be more reason apparent as to why the inspector may have taken such action. My line of thinking at the moment (without having seen the Inspector statement) is that: - Using a black and white photocopy of the document would instantly appear to the inspector to be a fraudulent attempt - My friend's use of English is not very good, I would say about 50%. (That is why I am writing this on his behalf.) He would have been very confused with the situation and likely unable to explain himself Another point to note - i understand from some sources that the Ticket Inspector is bound to write a statement in a notebook or similar and ask the Passenger to sign this - is this the case? It did not happen in this instance. Thanks for your attention
  4. Thanks for your advice - yes we are having sent directly over, the original Student Card , with the photo ID, together with it's receipt
  5. Thanks for your contributions It isn't the CPS who would be dealing with this but the BTP prosecution service in fact. They are charged to deal with this kind of case Having looked at the process so far, the person in question would not appear to deny that he infringed the railway byelaw by not carrying the original of the rail card with him. (also see various other threads for this kind of thing eg byelaw 18). I think what he would regard to be relevant would be that the Section 5 charge would require "intent to avoid payment" . He would deny this because 1) He owns a valid Student Discount Card (plus its photo ID) - and can show the original 2) He showed his copy to the ticket seller at the purchasing station 3) He paid for the fair 4) He showed both the copy (with photo) and the original receipt to the ticket inspector Speaking as yet another 'internet lawyer' I gather that - with 'intent' the prosecutor would have to show evidence of an element of 'mens rea' , which is a guilty intention I do appreciate the help offered here but posts from someone who can 'guarantee there is something amiss with this story' shows elements of predujicial assumptions that I can only hope that he or (anyone else for that matter) never faces in court. Does anyone have any advice which may help the person in this case please Many thanks
  6. If the person owns a valid railcard already, (and is now able to present) , showing the photocopy isn't 'obviously' an offence. @honeybee - yes its worthwhile considering the range of views and possible objections that may be made by the prosecution , but 'bang to rights' and 'plead guilty' are probably not examples of this
  7. @45002 - I am sorry but I don't think you are helping. This is really a forum for helping others. I won't be able to reply to any more of your suggestions.
  8. honeybee, thanks Yes it is a Charge sheet MG4, with bail conditions at the bottom to surrender to Mags court
  9. thanks for your reply honey bee Her went to the Police station. It was the Metropolitan Police . Not BT Police. The single of offence of Regulation of Railways Act 1889: Section 5(3) was mentioned on a charge sheet given to him at police station. there are not other documents. So it doesnt appear to be a summons from Mags If it went to court I assume he would be entitled to call whichever witnesses are appropriate for his defense
  10. Thanks for your welcome. He has had no correspondance with the rail company - the only information he has is from the charge sheet from the Police station. The court case is on the 4th Feb 2013 I have already drafted a letter which I was considering sending to Network Rail - stating that he would accept that he had broken the byelaws , and would be happy to pay penalty fare. But would not accept the criminal charge. I emphasised that we would require the Inspector and the Ticket seller to appear as witnesses, together with request for CCTV footage of him showing the Student Card copy to the Ticket Seller I dont want to send it without some good advice however
  11. My friend is a foreign student studying at uni here. He left his documents in his home country at Christmas by accident, but always keeps copies here in UK - eg drivving licence , visa etc He took a day return to London on Saturday, but used a photocopy of the Student Discount Card. He showed this to the ticket clerk when he bought the ticket. Unfortunately the ticket inspector on the train was not pleased and arranged for the police to come and arrest him, even though my friend explained, and also showed him the receipt for the original purchase. He is now being prosecuted for Regulation of Railways Act 1889: Section 5(3): “If any person—(a)Travels or attempts to travel on a railway without having previously paid his fare, and with intent to avoid payment thereof;” He now understands the conditions of carriage require him to carry the original discount card (although at the time he did not know), and accepts that he has broken this railway bye law 18.2 - which would normally result in a penalty charge. However he does not accept that he is guilty of "intent to avoid payment" - and what could be a very serious charge, as it will most certainly affect his Visa requirement for him to remain at study here , should he be prosecuted Thanks for any help
  • Create New...