London Underground

[mlondon]

I found this post interesting - from the Underground union:

Revenue Control Training | RMT Platform

 

Seems not all staff have received proper training so MAY not be fully aware of the full procedures around evidence gathering/PACE.

[UNDERGROUND]

I found this post interesting - from the Underground union:

Revenue Control Training | RMT Platform

 

Seems not all staff have received proper training so MAY not be fully aware of the full procedures around evidence gathering/PACE.

 

mlondon

 

The post you have linked to is referring to members of staff that have applied for the job and been accepted but are yet to receive their training, they will not be working as RCIs. It's not on really because they say to people 'yes, you've got the job' then keep them hanging for months, or years to be trained and promoted.

 

LU are careful not to put people on the frontline as an RCI before they are fully trained.

 

UNDERGROUND

[UNDERGROUND]

I was caught with a friend's freedom pass at a zone 1 station but I also had a monthly zone 1-3 oyster card on me, registered on my name and with a credit of 5.00GBP on it. Could this undermine the 'intention of fare evasion' by any chance?

 

I'm assuming you used the Freedom Pass to enter at a station outside your Oyster Travelcard's validity, otherwise why would you have used at all? Just because you had a Travelcard that covered zone 1 that doesn't mean you had a valid travel pass, it would have had to have been validated ('swiped in') at the start of your journey and used to exit to be valid. You must have a valid ticket / pass for your entire journey. So there was still the clear intention to avoid your fare. Plus if you were caught using the Freedom Pass to exit (ie. to open the barrier) you would have used it for the entire journey.

 

The ticket inspector never told me that I do not have an obligation to stay for being interviewed. I was on my way to work & indicated this to him & that I just want it to be done as quickly as possible. He wanted to know the reason why, so I told him that its because of the type of job I have. He asked the details about it and maybe wrote it down, maybe not. He did take an awful long time to finish with all the writing (30 mins – but seemed longer), all this time I was stood there and feeling even more nervous and uncomfortable as everyone was looking and I was realising am gonna be late for work. I guess he did everything by the book but i felt that the more I tried to reason with him to be quick the more he took his time with the writing.

 

I was calm and polite all the way down, provided driving licence as proof of ID when asked. Shall I mention this when writing to them in my own defence? I was a bit shaking during the questioning and at one point I had one of the police officers coming up to me (with a sniffer dog...) to ask whether I was feeling ok.

 

I didn’t know what’s going to happen so the inspector said that I'll be sent a letter in which if I plead guilty I will get a penalty fine to pay, if I plead not guilty, I will have to appear on court and take it from there.

 

He got me to sign the notes he wrote, I did not read it cos didnt have the time and he was well aware of this, also I was way too nervous by then plus his handwriting was a total scribble to me as am a foreign person.

 

I received the letter from the tfl prosecutions department saying that they taking me to court & I should write them back in my own defence. I am really really scared of whats going to happen now!!!!!

 

I havent been given time off work to seek citizen advice bureau/legal advice.

 

I am sh*t scared of being prosecuted & having to go on court, I cannot afford to have anything on my CRB as I have to work with vulnerable people.

 

As I understand, if I'll be on court that will go on my CRB??? Also I understand that tfl treats this as a serious offence. Do they check how many times I might have used the freedom pass or they prosecute just for that one time when they caught me? Just so I’ll know what to expect coming….

 

I appreciate that dealing with revenue staff can be intimidating and embarrassing. From what you have written it seems the inspector has done things correctly, apart from informing you that you were not obliged to remain with them, although you shouldn't rely on this as a core part of any defence.

 

As I've said to other posters the best you can do at this stage is write to TfL prosecutions with any mitigating circumstances and asking them not to proceed. It may not be effective as others have found but it really can't harm to try.

 

They will only try to prosecute for the one offence as this is the only one they have evidence for. As far as the CRB implications I'm still investigating and I'll post ASAP.

 

Best wishes

UNDERGROUND :grin:

[UNDERGROUND]

Underground

 

Thank you so much for your input on this site; I've been reading your posts and they're extremely helpful.

 

My sister used a freedom pass for 4 weeks and was stopped. She is about to begin a profession where any conviction or caution would need to be disclosed immediately and where the conviction will never be spent i.e it will have to be disclosed on job applications and will show on employers' CRB checks for the rest of her life.

 

We have written to the TFL in response to the initial letter expressing remorse, showing that substantial fares have always previously been paid and that the effect of a criminal conviction would be disproportionate taking into account her career and offering to pay costs etc. out of court. We have had a response to say that they will not settle.

 

Please could I ask for your thoughts on these questions:

 

1) Is the effect on someone's career something that TFL really consider? Do you think this is enough of an argument on its own (together with nil chance of reoffending, admitting it straightaway, no previous convictions etc) given that this was a freedom pass?

 

2) Does the fact she admitted it straightaway and in subsequent correspondence mean that this is open and shut and is the only way out would be on techincal discrepancies? Can you suggest what discrepancies we should be looking for?

 

3) Is there any possibility of them agreeing to issue a caution rather than a criminal conviction (although this is still a criminal record so we are in the same position when it comes to career).

 

4) Should we continue writing/speaking to the TFL even though we have had a letter to say they will not settle - is there any worth in that or should we instruct a solicitor (we have not yet received the court summons).

 

5) Do TFL repsond better to solicitors?

 

6) Is it correct that TFL convictions do not appear on the Police National Computer and are held on a separate database? Would a conviction from the TFL still show on a CRB check?

 

7) Is the TFL bound by the CPS code or do they have some other document that governs whether or not they prosecute?

 

Thank you very much.

 

rewley

 

Firstly take a look at the document in this link, if you haven't already:

 

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/revenue-enforcement-and-prosecutions-policy.pdf

 

1) It is a consideration, but if this is the only reason put forward for not proceeding with prosecution it's unlikely to succeed. Freedom Pass offences are taken particularly seriously because of the value of the pass (paid from public funds) and because of the abuse of trust given that they are issued to (usually) vulnerable people.

 

2) Any subsequent admissions of guilt after the interview with the inspector would not be used in court. Once / if you receive prosecution's evidence you'd need to look out for discrepancies in the facts (sounds obvious I know) and whether the inspectors notebook matches exactly what is in his / her witness statement. Inspectors will use some shorthand and abbreviations in their notebooks for standard questions and courts will accept this.

 

3) It seems you have already exhausted this option as they have not agreed to halt prosecution proceedings.

 

4) + 5) If they have stated they are going to proceed there isn't really much merit in writing again unless you have come up with further mitigating circumstances. If TfL feel they have a solid and reliable case against you they will not be bothered if you instruct a solicitor. They have experienced prosecutors who specialise in these cases day in day out. Also an inspector will attend court as a witness for any case that goes to trial - you could hope that a solicitor may be able to catch the inspector out, but it's a long shot IMO.

 

6) Don't know, I'm investigating CRB implications and will post when I've spoken to some old colleagues.

 

7) See link above.

 

I hope my response is of some help.

 

Regards

UNDERGROUND

[rewley]

Thank you for this.

 

We received the summons on Friday. They have attached a copy of the inspector's witness statement but there is no copy of his notebook - you say we should be comparing the two - should they have enclosed this?

[rewley]

Sorry, just one more question - if we want to call the ticket inspector to trial it says we must do so within 7 days of receipt of papers. The papers are date stamped 17 April but we only received the papers on Friday! How do we prove we only just received them. Would they not argue we are now out of time?

[Old-CodJA]

Sorry, just one more question - if we want to call the ticket inspector to trial it says we must do so within 7 days of receipt of papers. The papers are date stamped 17 April but we only received the papers on Friday! How do we prove we only just received them. Would they not argue we are now out of time?

 

The date stamp on the Summons will be when it was authorised by the legal advisor at the Court office. Aside from the date of hearing, the important date you should be looking at is the date of service of the Summons on the defendant (your sister I believe?).

 

That date will be on the Certificate of Service provided to the Court by the prosecution and this will confirm that the Summons was served (by post) with at least 14 clear days between the date of service and the listed Court hearing.

 

So far as a copy of the Inspector's notebook is concerned, the prosecution are not obliged to send it along with the Summons (though it is sometimes done and I consider that good practice), but you may ask them for a copy of any contemporaneous notes taken.

 

In accordance with PACE guidelines, your sister should have been given an opportunity to read and sign the inspector's notes taken at the time. It doesn't matter if she refused to sign them as often happens (many people mistakenly believe that refusing to sign means they cannot be prosecuted), but she is entitled to see the notes so she should write straight away, asking for a copy to be provided by return post.

[SRPO]

MCA states the minimum period for service of a summons is 7 days, however most courts will only accept service of at least 10 days prior to the hearing.

[Old-CodJA]

MCA states the minimum period for service of a summons is 7 days, however most courts will only accept service of at least 10 days prior to the hearing.

 

Absolutely correct SRPO,

 

However, from my own practical daily experience, I can say that most Legal Advisors and Magistrates tend to take the view that 14 days is essential to allow for weekend post and the defendant to seek advice and prepare a defence hence my comment.

[RMT Platform]

Thanks for clarifying that, Underground.

 

I was about to give exactly the same clarification, but you saved me the trouble.

 

RMT Platform

 

mlondon

 

The post you have linked to is referring to members of staff that have applied for the job and been accepted but are yet to receive their training, they will not be working as RCIs. It's not on really because they say to people 'yes, you've got the job' then keep them hanging for months, or years to be trained and promoted.

 

LU are careful not to put people on the frontline as an RCI before they are fully trained.

 

UNDERGROUND

[rewley]

Thank you everyone for your help

[rewley]

I think this has been queried a few times in this forum but I'm not sure anyone knows the answer:-

 

Is a conviction under section 5(3) recordable on the PNC? I understand that an offence is only recordable if imprisonable. The statute (section 5(3)) says that fare evasion will only be imprisonable on a second offence but we have been told by various people that because fare evasion carries the possibility of imprisonment, it will be recordable on the PNC EVEN IF this is your first offence. Is anyone aware whether this is correct? The TFL say they do no inform the PNC but at the end of the day it's the magistrates who decide whether to refer to the PNC or not.

 

Also, is there any way of getting TFL to prosecute under the bylaws rather than section 5(3)? The byelaws do not carry imprisonment as a punishment and so a conviction under them would not be recordable on the PNC.

 

Many thanks

[SRPO]

It is a recordable offence, however, unless an arrest summons number is obtained from the police it will not appear on PNC.

You will still be required to declare it if asked by prospective employers & if you dont and they find out at minimum you face disciplinary action at worst prosecution for obtaining a pecuniary advantage.

[rewley]

SRPO thanks for responding so quickly. How would an arrest summons number be obtained? Is it the magistrates who decide whether they are going to refer it to the PNC or not? I'm just trying to understand the mechanics of all this.

[spatel2]

Hi underground

Can you please help with this query...

 

We have a friend who we've known for 6 months and she's sometimes stays over at hour house and helps out around the hosue. English is her second language and recently she was on the bendy bus and fogot to swipe her oyster card, for what ever reason and she was asked to pay a fine for £25, she only had £15 but they were askign her name and address etc but as English first language she was strugglign to udnerstand what they wanted, especially with what had jsut happened....

Anyway they searched her bag, and foudn keys and a letter which had my address... so they took her to my house and searched a couple of rooms in her presence........... can they do this, surely not?

And is there anything I can do to complain?

She has been frightened and said she will not be returning to my house for a while.... I think she had a some kind of receipt which should have the inspectors name etc.

 

Thanks for your help

[SRPO]

Rewley:

 

An ASN is obtained by the prosecuting authority, its a fairly new thing and not all are set up for this yet. It will appear on your Summons if one has been obatined.

 

spatel2:

 

Inspectors wont have searched your friend, it would have been officers from either BTP or more likely the Met Police TOCU & they would have been looking to verify her status in the UK most likely.

[rewley]

SRPO, thank you. If TFL have not obtained an ASN, can the Magistrates do this independently?

 

Can TFL do so retrospectviely? You say it is a new thing - are there plans to put all TFL cases onto the PNC?

[UNDERGROUND]

rewley

 

I have spoken to an old colleague, unfortunately he was little vague to say the least!

 

He seems to believe that fare evasion does appear on PNC, but don't quote me on that, I don't know that for a fact.

He also said that the offence is recorded with the CRB but is only revealed if you are assessed under 'enhanced disclosure', for example teaching jobs, police officers etc. Whether it requires disclosure to all employers I couldn't say.

 

With regard to the case being prosecuted under RRA, they will not alter this to be prosecuted under byelaws instead. The RRA is a reliable piece of legislation for TfL and they will always use it when they can prove intent.

 

The stuff about arrest warrants and the like is over my head I'm afraid!

 

spatel2

 

SRPO's post explains perfectly.

 

Out of interest, where was the penalty fare issued?

 

UNDERGROUND :grin:

[SRPO]

Without an ASN, which is up to the prosecution to supply, a conviction cannot be added to the PNC.

However, it will be recorded on HMCS computer system called LIBRA.

An Enhanced CRB check will flag this up.

[rewley]

Underground, many thanks for your previous post.

Edited July 30, 2009 by rewley

[SRPO]

TFL and prior to that LUL, are a bit of a law unto themselves and pretty much do whatever they like so I dont what mechanism will be used when they merge databases.

The police wont chase for an ASN post conviction.

The purpose of the ASN is to build a skeleton record prior to conviction & then the result is added later, its a bit of bureaucratic nonsense really.

However the serious side effect is that people will have a PNC record even if they are found Not Guilty at court.

[rewley]

SRPO, thank you. I find it amazing that if the police have a conviction sitting in front of them which is recordable they don't just create an ASN themselves and put it onto the PNC. Isn't 'no ASN' just a technicality?!

[SRPO]

SRPO, thank you. I find it amazing that if the police have a conviction sitting in front of them which is recordable they don't just create an ASN themselves and put it onto the PNC. Isn't 'no ASN' just a technicality?!

 

The police create them when they are the reporting agency, railway prosecutions are private prosecutions and therefore require an ASN to be obtained by that prosecuting authority from the police (a form containing certain personal information is submitted).

 

The police wont do this retrospectively as HMCS update the PNC post conviction.

 

In the old days a cert was sent to the Criminal Records Office and a file created or amended.

[rewley]

But don't HMCS now do this via LIBRA which is also available to the police. LIBRA must show the police which convictions haven't been transferred automatically to the PNC i.e. those without ASN's and then are those not inputted to the PNC manually? I hope I'm not irritating you with the questions - your help much appreciated.

[SRPO]

In a joined up system then yes....however the justice system is held together by clerks who have enough on their plate just getting the court open.