Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I would suggest that you stop trying to rely on legal theory – as you understand it. Firstly, because we are dealing with practical/pragmatic situations and at a low value level where these arguments tend not to work. Secondly, because you clearly have misunderstood the assessment of quantum where there are breaches of obligations. The formula that you have cited above is the method of loss calculation in torts. In contract it is entirely different. The law of obligations generally attempts to remedy the breach. This means that in tort, damages seek to put you into the position you would have been in had the breach not occurred. In other words it returns you to your starting position – point zero. Contract damages attend put you into the position that you would have been had the breach not occurred but this is not your starting position, contract damages assume that the agreement in dispute had actually been carried out. This puts you into your final position. You sold an item for £XXX. Your expectation was that you your item would be correctly delivered and that you would be the beneficiary of £XXX. Your expectation loss is the amount that you sold the item for and that is all you are entitled to recover. If you want, you can try to sue for the larger sum – and we will help you. But if they ask for evidence of the value of the item as it was sold then I can almost guarantee that either you will be obliged to settle for the lesser sum – or else a judge will give you judgement but for the lesser sum. This will put you to the position that you would have been had there been no breach of contract. I understand from you now that when you dispatch the item you declared the retail cost to you and not your expected benefit of £XXX. To claim for the retail value in the circumstances would offend the rules relating to betterment. If you want to do it then we will help you – but don't be surprised if you take a tumble.  
    • I was caught speeding 3 times in the same week, on the same road. All times were 8-12mph higher than the limit. I was offered the course for the first offense and I now need to accept the other 2 offenses. I just want to be ready for what might come. Will I get the £100 fine and 3 points for each of them or do I face something more severe?  These are my only offenses in 8 years of driving.
    • I'll get my letter drafted this evening. Its an item I sold, which I'm also concerned about, as whilst I don't have my original purchase receipt (the best I have is my credit card statement showing a purchase from Car Audio Centre), I do unfortunately have the eBay listing where I sold it for much less. But as I said before this is now a question of compensation: true compensation would seek to put me back into the position I was in before the loss ie: that title would remain with me until my buyer has accepted this, and so compensation should be that which would be needed to replace the lost item. But in the world of instant electronic payment, it could be argued that as I had already been paid, the title to the goods had already transferred, and I was required to refund the buyer after the loss. And so, despite my declared value being the retail price - that which is needed to return me to my pre-sales position, the compensatory value should be the value I sold it for, which being a second-hand item from a private seller is lower. I still believe that I should be claiming for the item's full value, rather than how much I sold it for, as this is the same for insurance: we don't insure the value we paid, but rather the value of the item to put us back into the position we would be in if we ever needed to claim. Its for the loss adjuster to argue the toss
    • amusing that 'bad economic judgement on behalf of prior party ISN'T a major reason to wingers to move to deform yet immigration is, where record levels of such has been driven by the right wings terrible brexit and the later incompetent dog whistle 'proposals largely driven to whistle to the right wingnuts Just seems to confirm the are clueless numpties 'wetting their own shoes   Has farage bought a property in Clacton yet?   yet concern for the NHS is listed as a major issue even by those saying they are moving to deform  
    • Also, have you told us how much you paid for this vehicle? Are there any other expenses you have incurred – insurance, inspections et cetera? How far away from the dealership do you live?
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

Being taken to Court for Fare Evasion! PLEASE HELP!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4836 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

I am due to enter a plea of guilty or not guilty on 7th August for fare evasion. I was travelling with an Oyster card in zone 8 and only had zones 1 and 2 on my card. I thought I had beeped in but hadn't (I did have enough on my Oyster card on pre-pay). I explained this to the guard, but he read me my rights and gave me a formal interview on the train.

 

He asked me to pay the £50 penalty charge (which in hindsight I wish I had done!) but I explained I didn't have that amount on me. Incidentally he asked me to sign the interview which I did pretty much without reading it as I was scared, intimidated and embarrassed. I have been sent a transcript and the guard has written that he asked me to pay the FARE not the penalty fare and that I said I didn't have that amount on me which of course doesn't look great!

 

Also, he informed me that because I had zones 1 & 2 on my card I would not have to pay the full fare when I went through the barriers at Euston as Euston is in zone 1. I told him I wasn't aware of this and to be honest didn't think it was a huge issue if I didn't beep in as I would be charged the full fare when i went through the barriers at Euston. I didn't realise this would be avoided and got a zone 1 & 2 because I use the buses and the tubes in these zones and felt it was a cheaper way to use the underground.

 

I am unsure whether to just plead guilty and take the £100 fine now rather than going to court. I know that there have certainly been other occasions where I have forgotton having checked my usage of my oyster card online to beep in and I assume this isn't going to help my case.

 

What are the chances of me being found not guilty if I try to go to court? I am not great at arguing and don't have enough money really to pay for a solicitor as I am a Masters student. I have never had any form of conviction or warning in my life. I am 28 and work for the NHS - I am really worried that this conviction will show up on a CRB form as a conviction for dishonesty and that it will affect the rest of my career, which involves working with vulnerable children and adults with disabilities.

 

Please can someone give me sound advice as to what I should do here. I would be really grateful. I know I have been incredibly stupid.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm confused...On the one hand the Revenue guy is issuing you with a Penalty Fare, yet on the other, he's reporting you for offences. You can't do both...Maybe I misunderstood!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm confused...On the one hand the Revenue guy is issuing you with a Penalty Fare, yet on the other, he's reporting you for offences. You can't do both...Maybe I misunderstood!

 

I think that there is a small element of confusion in referring to a Penalty Fare here, but if an inspector starts to issue a PF and in the process it is revealed that other action is warranted, he / she is at liberty to cancel the notice and make out a report for prosecution.

 

SRPO is right in your choices, but I have one question that I'd like answered please MissyLow and perhaps we can give you a little more advice in preparation for your Court appearance.

 

What have you actually been charged with?

 

On the Summons, does it say something like:

 

'that you did travel on a railway without having previously paid the fare due and with intent to avoid that fare contrary to Section 5.3.a of The Regulation of Railways Act 1889.'

Link to post
Share on other sites

c) ask them to settle out of court.

 

If you choose © you will need to agree a figure and show a very good reason why it would not be in the public interest to prosecute you.

 

SRPO, could you advise from your experience, any examples of the kind of reasons which might be considered an acceptable basis not to prosecute?

Link to post
Share on other sites

OC puts it better than I could:

That will depend on your response when you get any first letter from the rail company. Your admission at the time may encourage the TOC prosecutors to go straight to Summons, but they will often write to you for an explanation of your actions first.

 

Given the detail of your original posting here, I suggest most rail companies will be satisfied that a prosecution is warranted and the issue of a Summons is likely.

 

Most importantly, when you get any letter or Summons, don't ignore it.

 

Write to the office that send you the letter explaining that you:

 

regret your very stupid action in attempting to leave without paying.

 

I can only suggest that you state something along the lines of:

 

that this was completely out of character and that you have no real explanation other than to say that it was a momentary act of silliness for which you are extremely remorseful.

 

Your letter should include a request that you be allowed to recompense the rail company for the fare and their reasonable administration costs so as to settle the matter without the need to trouble a Magistrates Court and should include an undertaking not to repeat the offence.

 

Say that you understand that what you did was wrong, but that the likelihood of a conviction for this first (and last ) offence would have a detrimental affect on your employment. Ask the rail company to recognise that the likely damage to your career might be wholly disproportunate to the level of offence committed.

 

If that doesn't work and you still get a Summons, don't ignore it. You can use exactly the same response if you are entering a 'guilty' plea by post.

 

This will allow the Court to dispose of the matter without you having to attend. You would then be ordered to pay a fine, a victim surcharge, compensation of the fare and probably have to pay a proportion of the costs that the rail company will claim.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If that doesn't work and you still get a Summons, don't ignore it. You can use exactly the same response if you are entering a 'guilty' plea by post.

 

My point was: why does it matter what you put in your response when you are making a guilty plea?

Link to post
Share on other sites

My point was: why does it matter what you put in your response when you are making a guilty plea?

Beacuse although you are admitting what you done was wrong, there might be circumstances you wish the Magistrate to be aware of....maybe it'll make them give you less of a fine? :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks guys this was all really helpful. I have received a summons but is it too late to now write to them and beg that they not prosecute me on the grounds that this was a first offence and a moment of silliness etc and that it will have a disproportionate effect on my career or is it now too late to do so as the arrainment date has been set for four days time?

 

Thanks :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi - my original post was as below and I have had some great feedback information. However, I have now updated with a bit more info and was wondering if I could get some further advice from those in the know?

 

Thank you :))

 

ORIGINAL POST:

 

I am due to enter a plea of guilty or not guilty on 7th August for fare evasion. I was travelling with an Oyster card in zone 8 and only had zones 1 and 2 on my card. I thought I had beeped in but hadn't (I did have enough on my Oyster card on pre-pay). I explained this to the guard, but he read me my rights and gave me a formal interview on the train.

 

He asked me to pay the £50 penalty charge (which in hindsight I wish I had done!) but I explained I didn't have that amount on me. Incidentally he asked me to sign the interview which I did pretty much without reading it as I was scared, intimidated and embarrassed. I have been sent a transcript and the guard has written that he asked me to pay the FARE not the penalty fare and that I said I didn't have that amount on me which of course doesn't look great!

 

Also, he informed me that because I had zones 1 & 2 on my card I would not have to pay the full fare when I went through the barriers at Euston as Euston is in zone 1. I told him I wasn't aware of this and to be honest didn't think it was a huge issue if I didn't beep in as I would be charged the full fare when i went through the barriers at Euston. I didn't realise this would be avoided and got a zone 1 & 2 because I use the buses and the tubes in these zones and felt it was a cheaper way to use the underground.

 

I am unsure whether to just plead guilty and take the £100 fine now rather than going to court. I know that there have certainly been other occasions where I have forgotton having checked my usage of my oyster card online to beep in and I assume this isn't going to help my case.

 

What are the chances of me being found not guilty if I try to go to court? I am not great at arguing and don't have enough money really to pay for a solicitor as I am a Masters student. I have never had any form of conviction or warning in my life. I am 28 and work for the NHS - I am really worried that this conviction will show up on a CRB form as a conviction for dishonesty and that it will affect the rest of my career, which involves working with vulnerable children and adults with disabilities.

 

Please can someone give me sound advice as to what I should do here. I would be really grateful. I know I have been incredibly stupid.

 

OK, so I have now decided to plead not guilty. I am a full time student and don't have a lot of means anyway so I hope that will be taken into account if I'm found guilty anyway. Secondly, I can prove good character (volunteering, master's degree, raising money for charity, good family, first offence etc).

 

Also, I have been informed by Oyster that they cannot keep records for longer than 8 weeks for the purposes of data protection. Therefore they do not have a record of what occurred other than what the inspector has said (according to them - I don't know whether they have kept a print out or whether they are allowed to).

 

I have a signed witness form from the inspector at the time which states that he asked me: "do you have any means to pay for your rail journey today?" and that I said "no, not the amount". Actually he asked me whether I had the £50 to pay the penalty fare, not the actual fare which I would have been happy to pay. However, I signed this as a true record but I only scanned it as I felt embarrassed and scared by the inspector and signed it quickly (the guy read my my rights and interviewed me on the train in full view of everyone).

 

I want to refute this as a true record (I agree with the rest of the statement but not "do you have any means to pay for your rail journey today?". The reason I answered "no, not the amount" (what I acually said was "no, not THAT amount"). is it possible to refute that statement?

 

I gave him all my details was co-operative and I believe that I did have enough money on my oyster card at the time to pay, although apparently I can't prove that. I can however show that I had enough on my bank card at the time to pay the fare.

 

Further, I didn't hear from them for almost three months. When I hadn't heard anything after 1 month I contacted them by phone, by email and wrote to them (all of which I have records of) stating that I hadn't heard, wanted to pay my penalty fare, stating that I had intended to beep in but didn't realise it hadn't gone through. I emailed a number of times and tried to contact them a number of times with no response.

 

Will any of this help me? I also have absolutely no criminal record whatsoever and in addition I am working towards a career working with vulnerable children and adults requiring a CRB check. If I have a conviction for dishonesty then I think this will truly affect my career path in a very negative way, so I feel that the punishment will be disproportionate.

 

Thanks guys

Link to post
Share on other sites

keep to one thread please.

 

i'll get this merged with you original one.

 

dx

  • Haha 1

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 threads merged.

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry - what is the TOC?

 

As my summons is 7th Aug shall I just enter the not guilty plea and then write to TfL about the circumstances and ask if they will drop the action against me?

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry - what is the TOC?

 

As my summons is 7th Aug shall I just enter the not guilty plea and then write to TfL about the circumstances and ask if they will drop the action against me?

 

You have still not told us what you have been charged with so it is difficult to give you case specific advice. SRPO is right, IF you have been charged with the strict liability offence, you do not have a defence - only mitigation. You need to make clear what the charge on the Summons actually says.

 

Whilst you are entitled to change your plea, I wouldn't do it the way you are suggesting

 

You get the maximum credit for pleading guilty at the earliest opportunity

 

If you plead 'not guilty' the case will be set down for trial and the TOC witness (inspector) will be warned to attend. that increases the costs incurred by the TOC and if you are then found guilty, you might be ordered to pay higher costs.

 

I would ask for an adjournment, you might not get it although that's unlikely because there will be evidence of correspondence on file, and you will not have entered a plea on that basis

Edited by Old-CodJA
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...