London Underground

[mikeldn]

Is it worth getting a solicitor to try and settle with them, or do you get 'extra marks' for being unrepresented?

[Old-CodJA]

Is it worth getting a solicitor to try and settle with them, or do you get 'extra marks' for being unrepresented?

 

Sorry if it seems uncharitable, but if you look back through these threads this question gets asked almost every time a new post occurs

 

It really is a matter for the individual, but it's worth remembering this is a low-level matter in the scheme of life and the potential fine for a first offence isn't really high.

 

If you engage a Solicitor you may find that his charges will be far greater than any potential saving that he might achieve.

 

Yes, I know that you might argue that saving the conviction is most important, but in my experience if you are polite and apologetic and have a good manner in approaching this and if the TOC are minded to settle, your personal application is just as likely to succeed as getting someone to speak for you.

 

.

[Wriggler7]

With 'fare dodging' there is not much room for a solicitor to work in. Many of the charges are 'strict liability'. Either you had a ticket or you didn't. Perry Mason will not change that for you.

 

With the strict liability offences, the defences are equally simple. There was not a working machine. Or there was. No doubt a clever solicitor can say the words with a very plummy voice, but it is not likely to change the outcome of the case. Except you will pay him for the pleasure.

 

With the 'with intent' offences, there is just a bit more to get teeth into, but still not a lot.

 

If you speak honestly, whether to the 'prosecution team' or to the Court, I doubt if a solicitor will acheive much for you. The Court Legal advisor has a responsibility to assist with the Court processes, and the Court will understand if your diction is more Albert Square than Harrow and Eton.

 

I will not (ever) say 'don't employ a solicitor', but I am unlikely to say 'get one'.

 

Things are different if you are a recidivist, and prison is a probability, and if 'fare dodging' was done by serious methods and charged under 'indictable offences', but I am confident that if the charge is of that nature, the Court will be quite blunt, adjourn the matter and tell you to get advice. I am equally confident that prosecutors will also make it clear at an early stage if things are 'going that way'.

[jiggy_]

Hi

 

i was caught using a oyster that was given free as my cousin worked for LU. The card didnt belong to me. any ways i got a court ordered fine as i had pleaded guilty. this is the worst thing i have done and was out of pure ignorance.

 

i now need to apply for natrualisation and wanted to know if this would have a huge impact on the application?

 

thanks.

[SRPO]

Hi

 

i was caught using a oyster that was given free as my cousin worked for LU. The card didnt belong to me. any ways i got a court ordered fine as i had pleaded guilty. this is the worst thing i have done and was out of pure ignorance.

 

i now need to apply for natrualisation and wanted to know if this would have a huge impact on the application?

 

thanks.

 

I cannot see it having any effect, there are lots of successful applicants with much more serious convictions than fare evasion.

[Wriggler7]

I know nothing about 'immigration law', appeals for asylum, or naturalisation. As such, I recommend that any queries regarding such things are put to law firms that work regularly in that field.

 

I suspect that one 'fare dodging' conviction will make no difference, but, as ever, my advice is to not commit offences in the first place, and then there will be 'no consequences'.

[jiggy_]

Thanks for the info SRPO

 

Hi Wriggler7 thanks for that i know not to commit offences but this was pure ignorance thinking it is not being used by him so i could use it.

dont worry nowadays i read the T&Cs before anything

 

i will go to a solicitor to get advise on this.

 

thanks appreciate your time.

[JessyBlanca]

Hello again,

 

It Jessy again seeking help for my friend.

 

He mistakenly used someone's else freedom pass. He received the letter from the underground prosecution team after a month. He replied the letter telling the details of the mistake and undertook he won't do it again.

 

He called undergound prosecution team, and they told him they have received his reply. They will write back to him and telling the next steps as no decisions has been made yet. When my friend insisted to talk to the prosecution manger, the receptionist advised him to wait for the decision from the prosecution department in reponse to his letter and then he can talk to the prosecution manager to discuss his case and possibilities of settlement out of court.

 

Please advise, should he wait for the second letter & decision from the Underground Prosecution Team or keep try calling few times and try to talk to the prosecution manager and convince him to settle the case out of court?

 

Also, any idea how long it takes for the underground to write (and decide) in response to the reply sent by my friend.

 

Thanks.

[SRPO]

Hello again,

 

It Jessy again seeking help for my friend.

 

He mistakenly used someone's else freedom pass. He received the letter from the underground prosecution team after a month. He replied the letter telling the details of the mistake and undertook he won't do it again.

 

He called undergound prosecution team, and they told him they have received his reply. They will write back to him and telling the next steps as no decisions has been made yet. When my friend insisted to talk to the prosecution manger, the receptionist advised him to wait for the decision from the prosecution department in reponse to his letter and then he can talk to the prosecution manager to discuss his case and possibilities of settlement out of court.

 

Please advise, should he wait for the second letter & decision from the Underground Prosecution Team or keep try calling few times and try to talk to the prosecution manager and convince him to settle the case out of court?

 

Also, any idea how long it takes for the underground to write (and decide) in response to the reply sent by my friend.

 

Thanks.

 

 

I would imagine a record has been made of the call & advice given. He could ignore it & keep calling but I think that may alienate the decision maker, not a good move.

[JessyBlanca]

Thanks SRPO for advise.

 

Is that a normal routine, i.e. they receive reply from the person, then write him/her with the decision?

 

Any comments from Old-CodJA, Wriggler7?

 

Would you recommend to wait until the decision is made, and then talk to the prosecution manager for settling out of court?

 

Thanks.

[Stigy]

Thanks SRPO for advise.

That wasn't his advice, it would have been his opinion....

[Old-CodJA]

I'd go along with that opinion to a certain extent too.

 

It can be frustrating not getting an immediate reply, but we all have to acknowledge that although our own case is the most important thing in the world to us, it is only one of many hundreds that these teams will be dealing with.

 

Your friend might give it a week or so and then ring again, politely asking if a decision has been made and how soon he will receive a reply.

[JessyBlanca]

Hello,

 

If the call is made after the decision is made, is there still a chance that Prosecution manager will listen and can settle it out of court?

 

I thought the recommendation of this forum is to reply LU's first letter and call immediately and try convincing the Prosecution manager to settle out of court before the decision is made in response to the replied letter. Am I right?

 

Thanks.

[Wriggler7]

It is only too late to ask if the case can be settled outside of Court when the Magistrates have made their orders. I have even known cases where after 'mitigation', the Court have suggested that they 'wonder' if a conversation should take place without them hearing it, but:

 

Once all of the paperwork has been done, there is very little reason for the prosecutor to accept a settlement. It will also depend on how 'compelling' the case is, and why they have decided to prosecute. It is true that some cases are listed just to 'make up the numbers', whilst other cases are listed for very good reason. It does not hurt to ask them.

[Wriggler7]

In general terms, your understanding of the 'normal' recommendations is correct.

[JessyBlanca]

Hello again,

 

He has tried calling the LU prosecution team for few times so that he could talk to the prosecution manager. He is always told that their general policy is that he cannot discuss the matter with the prosecution manager because decision has not been made yet. Once decision is made, then LU will write a letter, after that he can discuss it with the manager.

 

LU policy seems to be different, they don't discuss before making any decision, I am wondering how/why the recommendation of this forum is based on (i.e. call the prosecution manager after receiving the first letter)?

 

Thanks again for all your help.

[Old-CodJA]

Having been 'on the inside' for a long time I can say that I always suggest waiting until you get the letter and then write in reply.

 

It avoids the possibility of misunderstanding what was said by either side and can be added to the file for future re-assessment

 

I rarely suggest that anyone rings the prosecution manager (there have been very rare exceptions). It is far better to make your point clearly in writing, whether by email or snail mail.

[Wriggler7]

I often preach the idea that one side of a matter should get to understand the 'mind' of the other.

 

In this type of situation, 'the manager' has many conflicting matters all seeking his/her attention. He may be pre-occupied with anything from replacing a broken shoe lace to a submission to 'the Board' relating to complete redundancy for all of the staff.

 

A telephone call about a case that he may not have heard of is, in real terms, going to annoy him. Firstly, he cannot answer at once, as he does not know who the caller is, and he will not have 'the file' in front of him. If he is 'worth employing', he will be reticent about making any comment until he has read the file, and taken into consideration all of the 'facts', and any other considerations.

 

Conversely, writing will ensure that your comments are attached to the correct file (One wonders how many 'John Jones' and Tony Smiths are prosecuted annually by Tfl/LUL) and can be considered along with all of the 'evidence'.

 

That said, in deciding to 'write', e-mail or ring, you will wish to think about when the case is likely to be 'considered' or summons applied for and when the 'court hearing' is going to be listed.

 

Ideally, you will wait for 'their' first letter, and respond 'that day'. Leaving it to the last moment reduces any chances that there might have been for an amicable settlement.

[IyaCiara]

Hello All. I really need help pls. My husband just told me today that he was caught using my student oyster card two weeks ago. Firstly I never gave him permission to use it and secondly he's been using it for the past 4 months (I drive everywhere so didn't even know it was missing). He was caught on the bus on his way to work. Silly beggar panicked and gave the inspector his real name but our old address. This morning he received a redirected letter from tfl saying that he had to explain his actions and that prosecution is a possibility. My husband cannot afford a criminal conviction because it would mean the automatic loss of his job and would prevent him from finding work again in the future. Apparently he was never cautionned, questionned or read PACE. He didn't sign anything that he can remember. Can someone pls advise how he can avoid a criminal conviction? Also, can I get my student oyster back from tfl? I would appreciate your responses. This is really making me sick with worry. Many Thanks.

[Wriggler7]

Oh dear. None of us can give you the assurance that you seek, the decisions to be made lie with Tfl, and they would be 'correct' to plow ahead to Court.

 

I strongly recommend replying to their letter, to fail to do that probably ensures a prosecution. Without knowing what your husband actually said to the Inspector, it is difficult to advise. Did he admit to them that he had been using the card for four months? Or did he only admit to them the 'one day'? (And then admit to you the 'more serious' bits?)

 

I think that 'teasing' Tfl would be a good tack to take, that is to say, let them see a better result by 'negotiating' with you than by prosecution. At Court, they are likely to 'only' get one fare and 'costs'. If they can see that they might get 'more', that is to say 'costs' plus four months of fares, (Or two months, let us not be silly) they might find that more interesting than all of the paperwork for Court.

 

But: it is tricky to know what best to do. He seems to have been dishonest with his address, which is a separate offence. Is it possible that he was 'difficult' with the Inspector?

[Wriggler7]

You say that he will get the sack if convicted. Most offenders with this type of matter will not be dismissed from work. Is he in a Union that will help with 'legal fees'? Does he have some form of professional indemnity that would cover 'fees'?

[IyaCiara]

Thank you for getting back to me so quickly! My husband had just admitted to using the pass for one day. He was not at all difficult with the inspector and said that he co-operated fully. He just panicked when my student oyster was seized and was told that there was a strong chance of prosecution, but as I said previously he can't remember signing anything and was certainly never told that he didn't have to stay etc. All of our post from our previous address is still being forwarded to us. Can't he just say in the letter that he has just moved and then provide them with the address that we live at now? He would definitely be dimissed from his role if he was successfully prosecuted because he works was a contractor within a government department that requires him to have an enhanced crb check and have security clearance as well When writing to tfl can you please advise what he should say? How would he go about negotiating without providing them with further ammunition to prosecute?

Thanks again.

[Wriggler7]

To start with, wait for 'them' to write to you. At this stage, 'we' are not even sure who the prosecuting authority are. It is probably going to be 'Tfl', but it could be 'CPS' if the matter is referred through either British Transport or Metropolitan Police. (Not sure how these things work some of the PCSOs working on the 'bendy buses' seem to be 'Met')

 

The main reason for patience is simply to get the right address and 'reference numbers'.

 

At that point, write an apology, explain that prosecution could have a 'more serious' effect on you than other people, and ask if a payment equal to 'reasonable costs' and the fare would allow a settlement out of Court.

 

Promise that you 'will never do it again'.

 

There is no garauntee that 'they' will allow a settlement.

 

As to 'work', I still doubt that it would cost him his job. All people being vetted in the various ways will have a 'past', fare dodging is not 'murder', and for most folk, the reason it would cost a job is trying to hide it rather than declaring it. That said, keep your fingers crossed that 'they' are willing to play ball.

[IyaCiara]

Again, thank you for the reply. The letter has arrived and was sent by TfL, Community Safety, Enforcing and Policing. Is this good or bad or better?

 

Thanks.

[Wriggler7]

It is 'progress'.

 

Don't lose any time in responding. Prosecution teams have to decide whether they are going to take a case to Court within a few weeks, (they have 6 months from the time of the offence, but they will not leave it that long), and to a degree, they will be more likely to accept a settlement 'early' rather than 'late'.

 

That said, one or two days shouldn't make a difference, if you want to show us your draft reply, one or another of us will be happy to 'comment'. Leave out things by which you can be identified though, this is an open forum.