Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • dx100uk
      Lowell/Overdales Claimform - Paypal Credit

      By dx100uk · Posted

      Bit unfair to come back here the day it's due to be filed.... Looks like london1971 one?  I'm not sure if they did Inc point 5, let @AndyOrch confirm it should be there before filing please A day late won't hurt Dx
    • tobyjugg2
      The Power Of Nature.Wild Weather.Climate Change.

      By tobyjugg2 · Posted

      Last month was confirmed to be the hottest-ever May on record, in terms of global average temperatures, completing an entire calendar year of month-by-month records.  The average temperature last month was 1.52C above the pre-industrial average, according to the Copernicus Climate Change Service, known as C3S. The average global temperature for the 12-month period to the end of May was 1.63C (2.9F) above the pre-industrial average
    • FTMDave
      Countrywide ANPR PCN - in carpark for 10 mins - Disabled Parking Spot - appeal refused by CW - Kingswood Way Great Denham Bedford Bedfordshire MK40 4GH

      By FTMDave · Posted

      This time you do need to reply to them with a snotty letter to show you'd be big trouble for them if they did try court. We will help this evening.  
    • zyghom
      Lowell/Overdales Claimform - Paypal Credit

      By zyghom · Posted

      Hi, I just wanted to update the post and ask some further advice  I sent the CCA and CPR request on the 14th May, to date I have had no reply to the CCA but I received a load of paperwork from the CPR request a few days ago. I need to file the defence today and from the information I have read the following seems to be what is required.  I would be grateful if some one could confirm suitability. Many thanks   Claim The claim is for the sum of £255.69 due by the Defendant under an agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a PayPal account with an account reference of xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)  The Defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a Default Notice was served under s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 which has not been complied with. The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on 15-09-21, notice of which has been given to the defendant. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £0.00. The Claimant claims the sum of £255.69   Defence  The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 1. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have had financial dealings with PayPal  in the past but cannot recollect the account number referred to by the Claimant. 2. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am not aware of service of a Default Notice by the original creditor the Claimant refers to within its particulars of claim.  3. Paragraph 3 is noted. On the 17/5/2024 I requested information related to this claim by way of a Section 77 request, which was received and signed for by the claimant on 20/5/2024. As of today, the Claimant has failed to respond to this request, and therefore remains in default of the section 77 request and therefore unable to enforce any alleged agreement until its compliance. 4. Therefore it is denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) Show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement and: (b) Show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice Pursuant to s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. 5. Paypal (Europe) S.A.R.L is out of the juristriction of English Courts. 6. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 7. By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed, or any relief.
    • Jaksmyboy
      IVA failure- Lowell Chasing Old CAp1 Card Debt

      By Jaksmyboy · Posted

      Thanks @dx100ukI followed the advice given on here... then it went very quiet!  The company was creditfix I think then transferred to Knightsbridge (or the other way around) The scammer independent advisor was Roger Wallis-having checked his LinkedIn profile just this morning, it does look like he's still scamming vulnerable people... I know I was stupid for taking his advice, but i do wonder how many others he has done this to over a longer period of time (it came as a  massive shock to him when our IVA suddenly failed). Lowell have our current address (and phone numbers if the rejected calls over the past couple of days is anything to go by!) No point trying the SB because of the correspondence in 2019? Thanks

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

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

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All

  • Recommended Topics

Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

Will a fare evasion case make it onto the Police National Computer?

VyeKing
 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4896 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

VyeKing

VyeKing

Posted
Posted

OK, I've read around the subject, cross referencing various articles, threads and forums and cannot seem to find a definitive answer to this.

 

The general consensus seems to be one that a case of fare evasion convincted under the byelaws is not recordable on the Police National Computer (PNC) and that those convicted under a breach of the Regulations of Railways Act 1889 (since section 5c allows the possibility of up to 51 weeks in prison for repeat offenders) could in theory have an entry made against them in the PNC but it rarely, if ever is.

 

Would this only be recordable onto PNC therefore for someone who actually was a repeat offender? Am I correct? there seems some very knowledgable people on this board, whom I'm hoping might clarify this.

 

Also I presume for an entry to be made onto the PNC fingerprints and DNA samples would be taken? For this to happen, wouldn't the Police need to be involved, who I believe rarely are in these private prosecutions brought about by the TOCs?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
Old-CodJA

Old-CodJA

Posted
Posted (edited)

This question has been asked many times before and as SRPO makes clear, the view from those of us on the 'prosecuting side', the answer is yes

 

To balance the books as it were, perhaps the advice given by one of the country's law firms defending people Summonsed in this field might be useful too

 

See this link

 

Railway Fare Evasion Solicitors - Fare Evasion Solicitors

 

I must make absolutely clear that I have no connection with this firm, but suggest the brief guide given on their website also makes the position clear.

Edited by Old-CodJA
Link to post
Share on other sites
VyeKing

VyeKing

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Had a brief look at the website, and talk about scaremongering!

 

"A conviction will also prevent travel to certain foreign countries including the U.S.A and Australia"

 

How a company that claims to specialise in law can have an absolute total lack of appreciation of immigration law for both the USA and Australia is beyond me!

 

Suggest looking up for USA the so-called "Petty Offence Exception", and also to properly read Australian Immigration law before they try and panic anyone

 

 

e.g. for Australia, the law simply states that to enter: "you have no criminal convictions for which you have been sentenced for a total combined period of 12 months or more, whether or not the sentence/s were served."

 

Not aware of any cases under the standard Byelaws or Regulation of Railways Act where anyone was handed a full 12 months.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Old-CodJA

Old-CodJA

Posted
Posted
Had a brief look at the website, and talk about scaremongering!

 

"A conviction will also prevent travel to certain foreign countries including the U.S.A and Australia"

 

How a company that claims to specialise in law can have an absolute total lack of appreciation of immigration law for both the USA and Australia is beyond me!

 

Suggest looking up for USA the so-called "Petty Offence Exception", and also to properly read Australian Immigration law before they try and panic anyone

 

 

e.g. for Australia, the law simply states that to enter: "you have no criminal convictions for which you have been sentenced for a total combined period of 12 months or more, whether or not the sentence/s were served."

 

Not aware of any cases under the standard Byelaws or Regulation of Railways Act where anyone was handed a full 12 months.

 

 

No, I haven't heard of anyone getting a 12 month sentence either and don't have knowledge of immigration law, but I think the information given simply answered the specific question that was asked by the OP.

 

Yes, the offence can result in a record.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 5 months later...
Old-CodJA

Old-CodJA

Posted
Posted (edited)

Yes, that's how I understand it although it does not rely on the police being involved in every case because there are very occasional instances where an arrest may be made by a Railways Revenue Protection Inspector

 

The ASN is given at the time the Summons is applied for if appropriate.

 

As most fare evasion cases do not involve arrest, there is no ASN and therefore only a Court record

 

The ASN or Arrest Summons Number, is essential for Bichard 7 to match a result to an original record on PNC. If the ASN is missing, the update to PNC cannot occur.

 

I believe that there are plans to bring all convictions into line to make this process more efficient

Edited by Old-CodJA
Link to post
Share on other sites
VyeKing

VyeKing

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Under breaches of Regulations of Railways Act 1889 an ASN will be applied for by the Prosecuting Authority (since it is a Recordable Offence). For byelaw offences, there will be just a court record.

 

Although called an "Arrest summons Number", no arrest needs to take place - admission of guilt can come outside of arrest of course.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Old-CodJA

Old-CodJA

Posted
Posted
Under breaches of Regulations of Railways Act 1889 an ASN will be applied for by the Prosecuting Authority (since it is a Recordable Offence). For byelaw offences, there will be just a court record.

 

Although called an "Arrest summons Number", no arrest needs to take place - admission of guilt can come outside of arrest of course.

 

Yes, sorry I could have made that clearer.

 

Because there isn't an arrest most private railway prosecutors don't apply for the ASN and that's why adding to the PNC isn't standard practice yet.

 

The Summons can still be issued without ASN and usually is

Link to post
Share on other sites
strangee

strangee

Posted
Posted

I think in general the policy of prosecuting authority (Tfl etc etc) for a first offender (also under breaches of Regulations of Railways Act 1889 section 5.3.a that is the most common...)i that summons are issued without ASN.

First offence should be non imprisonable.

 

I have seen this in a police forum :

 

"You will often have a choice between specific legislation relating to the form of transport, and proceedings under the Theft Act 1978, or Forgery and Counterfeiting Act 1981.

 

Section 5 Regulation of Railways Act 1889 is usually used for offences of fare evasion on the railways for:

 

Both Section 5 and Section 103(a) are summary only offences. "Intent to avoid payment" in Section 5 does not mean a dishonest intent, but an intent to avoid payment of the sum actually due.

 

There are provisions in bye-laws which cover fare evasion, but in the vast majority of cases it will be appropriate to use the Section 5 offence.

 

Consider using the provisions of the Theft Act 1978, especially Sections 2 and 3, where there is evidence of premeditation, or persistence, or repeat offending, or large loss by the transport authority.

 

Where tickets have been altered or defaced consider a charge under the Forgery and Counterfeiting Act 1981."

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 6 months later...
onebadday

onebadday

Posted
Posted
As per the initial question my recent experience in this is "NO" to the PNC

 

Hi Henry, U mentioned that this does not lead to a record in PNC and thus would not appear on CRB as well. R u sure of that? I mean do u know someone who happened to go thru this and finally came clean on CRB check?appreciate ur reply.

Link to post
Share on other sites
SRPO

SRPO

Posted
Posted
Hi Henry, U mentioned that this does not lead to a record in PNC and thus would not appear on CRB as well. R u sure of that? I mean do u know someone who happened to go thru this and finally came clean on CRB check?appreciate ur reply.

No one can say categorically whether a conviction will appear or not on a CRB check as private prosecutions should not (for technical reasons) but it has been shown that sometimes they do.

 

Whatever happens, if asked by an employer if you have qualifying convictions under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act & you do not answer truthfully there are 3 possible outcomes:

1) No action.

2)Dismissal for gross misconduct.

3)Prosecution for obtaining pecuniary advantage.

Link to post
Share on other sites
SRPO

SRPO

Posted
Posted

Any prosecution not undertaken by the CPS falls into the catagory Non CPS, the only Non CPS convictions which automatically appear on the PNC are Customs.

Other prosecuting authorities need to obtain an Arrest Summons Number for each prosecution to ensure the PNC is updated.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Stigy

Stigy

Posted
Posted
Hi SRPO,what exactly u mean by PRIVATE PROSECUTION here? and what are the technical reasons??thx.
A prosecution by anybody other than the CPS probably. The trouble with Train Operating Companies etc, is that as they are not in cahoots with the CPS, or Police I guess, they often don't get things transfered. I'm not too sure what input the courts have, as I would have thought it would be them that passed on the details of the won cases etc.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Wriggler7

Wriggler7

Posted
Posted

Offences charged under Section 5, Regulation of Railways act 1889 are 'recordable', under National Rail Byelaws are not.

 

'Non Public' prosecutors are slowly being brought into line, and will arrange for 'recordable' offences to be 'recorded'. For further light reading, start with the Bichard report, and his recommendations. The concept is that at the point of deciding to charge a recordable offence, the 'non public' prosecutor, through the appropriate police authority, will have the charge given an 'arrest/summons' number. After the hearing, the Court will put the result onto PNC.

 

This is supposed to be universal 'by Christmas'. It doesn't currently happen with all 'non public' prosecutions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...