Court summons for travelling first class

[Old-CodJA]

Yep I'd say Partybonkers is negtive on train travel, no doubt he's got quite a few friends, no doubt his friends will sympathize with him, no doubt his

friends will consider alternative methods of transport. Word of mouth either relays a bad experience or a good experience. Yep they'll gain his

£105, but they'll lose £500.

 

I have no problem with that,

 

Everyone makes choices, and has a right to do so

 

All of those paying First Class fares will congratulate an inspector on a job well done.

[rebel11]

'All of those paying First Class fares will congratulate an inspector on a job well done.', lol

[andydd]

'All of those paying First Class fares will congratulate an inspector on a job well done.', lol

 

I was once on a late night train home, as is common on the late trains, they were very busy and full off rather drunk but friendly people, many of whom had decided (like me) to take advantage of the first class section (it is well known that an inspector wouldnt dare try and check tickets at that time of night).

 

Anyway there was a passanger in the first class section who took offence to his lovely first class carraige being filled with us 'drunken oiks', he started ranting and raving and eventually lashed out and hit a poor girl who happened to be there, lucky for him her boyfriend and friend didnt lash out they calmly called the police and didnt let the guy leave untill the police arrived, this guy was then arrested for assault and carted off, the police asked everyone for their name and addresses should witnesses be needed and we all continued on our way, of course the police were not at all interested in wether we had first class tickets or not.

 

Now this guy who no doubt did have a first class ticket (and had also had a few beers like the rest of us) could of just sat there and enjoyed the rather festive atmosphere but instead he decided upon a 'I'm better than you because I have a first class ticket' attitude which ultimately led him to being arrested and maybe even charged.

 

It's something that always sticks in my mind.

 

Andy

[partybonkers]

I have no problem with that,

 

Everyone makes choices, and has a right to do so

 

All of those paying First Class fares will congratulate an inspector on a job well done.

 

 

You know I do not think people in first class would congratulate a inspector, I beleive if any one was explained the full story they would see it from my side and say I should be just asked tom move,

I think you are the one with the negative view, but you have the negative

on every one who is travelling and you probably think every one is a fare evader and no won deserves the benifit of doubt that they actually could have made a mistake, and we are not all tyring push the boundaries.

[Old-CodJA]

If I had a 'negative on everyone', would I come on to this site to try to help people?

 

Because that's what I actually try to do and so do a great many others on here who give some very sound advice based on the comments posted in these threads

 

Where the 'negative' comes in is when the person who has been reported and appears to ask for help, gets advice based on fact (and not gut reaction) and it doesn't match up with what they want to hear.

 

Obviously, it's best that I don't try to offer any more comment that is intended to help.

Edited November 13, 2009 by Old-CodJA

[imucky]

Did you pay the penalty on the spot?

[partybonkers]

No I refused to pay it, told her that I had just sat down and did not realise

I was sitting in first class and offered to move.

[JimmySpangle]

I am interested to know how you were unaware you were in 1st class? All the windows are marked 1st class, the carriage is marked 1st class, the nicer seats with white head cloths etc are a clue too.

 

Why did you refuse the penalty? You were in the wrong!

[rebel11]

He wasn't in the wrong he made a mistake. What benefit did he gain in his three minutes in first class? For all you know he might of been waiting ages for the train, the first thing you want to do is sitdown. If you never let anybody try First Class why the hell should they buy a First Class ticket. Or are they reserved for people who have travelled First Class all thier lives.

[partybonkers]

I am interested to know how you were unaware you were in 1st class? All the windows are marked 1st class, the carriage is marked 1st class, the nicer seats with white head cloths etc are a clue too.

 

Why did you refuse the penalty? You were in the wrong!

 

The seats are exactly the same, they do not have white cloths on the head rests there were no doors seperating it off, they do have stickers on the windows but I did not notice them at the time, like I said before I would have noticed eventually and I would have moved but I was not given that

chance, I did not pay the £20 penalty charge because I object to paying

£20 for sitting in the wrong seat for 3 mins.

[andydd]

The seats are exactly the same, they do not have white cloths on the head rests there were no doors seperating it off, they do have stickers on the windows but I did not notice them at the time, like I said before I would have noticed eventually and I would have moved but I was not given that

chance, I did not pay the £20 penalty charge because I object to paying

£20 for sitting in the wrong seat for 3 mins.

 

True..they do vary a lot, some are completely different seats in seperate area, some have white head 'cloths', others appear to be exactly the same as the other seats, occasionally a different colour.

 

On my local line, (C2C) Im pleased that they did away with them completely, I think the space is better spent on more 'normal' seating or bike space or toilets.

 

Andy

[Old-CodJA]

I did not pay the £20 penalty charge because I object to paying £20 for sitting in the wrong seat for 3 mins.

 

 

As I said previously, if that is the case and you genuinely believe that you did nothing wrong, then you should attend Court and plead 'not guilty'.

[rebel11]

partybonkers

 

if you do plead not guilty, can you ask the judge why people are quoting a case thats over a hundred years old and surely we are in very different times with the amount of rolling stock thats available, no doubt in 1889 the timetable was very different, the population was very different. Oh, and what is his definition of a mistake?.

[Old-CodJA]

partybonkers

 

if you do plead not guilty, can you ask the judge why people are quoting a case thats over a hundred years old and surely we are in very different times with the amount of rolling stock thats available, no doubt in 1889 the timetable was very different, the population was very different. Oh, and what is his definition of a mistake?.

 

This is exactly why some of us come onto these sites. To try to correct misunderstandings and to help people understand what the process is.

 

Rebel11, you are clearly confused here.

 

Firstly, it will be a Magistrates Court hearing that this matter is summonsed to be heard by and although it's not beyond the realms of possibility that there could be a District Judge sitting, it is far more likely to be a Bench of 3 Magistrates who will decide this case.

 

Secondly, the year 1889 does not relate to any particular case.

 

1889 is the year in which the particular Act of Parliament, ( The Regulation of Railways Act ) under which the charge is alleged, was confirmed by the then government and was put onto the Statute Book. There have been many amendments in the intervening 130 years, bringing that legislation more up to date with modern life, but they are just that, amendments to an existing legislation.

 

This is very much in line with the situation concerning many other summary offences nationwide, which are charged as breaches of original legislation laid down a hundred or more years ago.

[rebel11]

I'm not confused you quoted Gillingham 1881, I know what I'm talking about.

[Old-CodJA]

Can you see how important attention to detail is?

 

I quoted Gillingham (1881) as one of the cases that determined what constitutes a valid ticket. It must be valid for the day, date, time, place and class of travel occupied.

 

You were referring to 1889 - that's the date the Regulation of Railways Act was passed.

 

Please see YOUR quote copied into my earlier posting.

Edited November 16, 2009 by Old-CodJA

[rebel11]

I really wasn't paying too much attention to the date or the name.

As I said it's over 100 years old and times have moved on so should

the case law that you rely on to prosecute people. Attention to detail, lol.

[Old-CodJA]

I am here to help people, I am not here to debate things that none of us can alter at the moment in time that the advice is sought.

 

Rebel11, Exactly how you think that that particular precedent can be changed is beyond me!! All it does is explains what constitutes a valid ticket.

 

In a further hundred years that explanation it will probably still be the same.

 

All of the technology will be different as it already is in the case of Oyster, which by the way still has to be measured as valid against the description given.

 

Any ticket / permit / pass or, whatever you are required to have in 2100 is called, will still have to be valid for where you are when you are there.

 

I have had a surprising number of messages of support from other readers suggesting amongst other things that my 'tolerance is admirable', 'why bother to post publicly when a PM to the OP would deliver help to the person seeking advice', 'Don't bother with them, they are not worth it ' etc.

 

I have had some messages that have suggested that such blatant attacks on sound advice given by people who are actually involved in the process daily, are the very reason that some of those incredibly helpful people do not post on CAG forums any more.

 

Of course you have the right to continue to throw your opinions into the discussion, but they will not alter the present legal position. They are just your opinion.

 

It may be that I agree with some points of your argument, but I am not expressing my personal opinion.

 

I have made clear that so far as I am concerened, the OP is advised to plead not guilty if he/she genuinely believes that they have done nothing wrong.

 

I only posted openly because I genuinely feel that it's the right thing to do, and in the genuinely held belief that understanding the actual legislation in force might help others who come along looking for explanation or advice in the future.

 

You are of course welcome to have the last word on this particular subject as I have no doubt you will, I have had mine.

[rebel11]

'I have had some messages that have suggested that such blatant attacks on sound advice given by people who are actually involved in the process daily, are the very reason that some of those incredibly helpful people do not post on CAG forums any more.'

 

Good I'm glad your getting loads of support.

[RPI]

What difference does it make whether the act was passed in 1889 or 2009 it's still illegal to travel without a valid ticket, I expect murder was illegal in 1275 are you saying that it shouldn't be the case now because the act is old?

The regulation of railways act 1889 is obviously a very watertight piece of legislation as it has stood the test of time with thousands prosecuted under it every year!

[SRPO]

If people are unhappy with current legislation, instead of bitching about it on an internet forum why not contact your MP?

They are the only ones who can change it.

Until then either accept the advice of people who know how the system works or ignore it. Whining on about it being sooo unfair wont make the penalty fare or summons go away for the person who has come onto this site for help.

Please remember that anyone who has worked in a customer facing role knows that the public have to complain about something or they feel they are'nt getting their moneys worth.

[rebel11]

Two of your chums, lol.

 

It goes against the very foundation that law in this country is based on,

unfortuantely some on here have missed that.

 

SRPO, is it your forum? do you own it? No didn't think so.

 

'Please remember that anyone who has worked in a customer facing role knows that the public have to complain about something or they feel they are'nt getting their moneys worth.' I've worked in enough customer service

roles to tell you thats rubbish. Thats the most supid thing I seen anyone post on any thread, reading threads and posts would tell you that. congradulations.

[danielr]

It goes against the very foundation that law in this country is based on,

how can paying the correct fee for a service that you use go against the very fibre and foundation of this nation?

 

I do think that a ton for sitting in the wrong seat is a bit steep though...

 

for the OP

regardless of whether you sat in 1st class deliberately or by mistake it really doesn't matter.

the fact is that you sat there, and you didn't have a ticket to sit there, so you didn't have a valid ticket.

 

If you really feel that an injustice has been done then fight it.

 

 

 

'fight' the charge on the fact that your fine suggest that you sat in first class longer than you'd said that you were, (included a leg of the journey made on a different train) -the train company say that you sat in 1st class for half the journey and should pay 1st class the whole way, you're saying that you sat in standard class for half the journey so should pay standard class for the whole way. -neither is right, really you should only pay for what you've used, and that's 1st class from your changing station to your destination.

 

 

I've got a few questions for you...

 

You say that you objected to paying the £20 fine for sitting in the wrong seat for 3 minutes. what exactly was this fine? was it a fine for not having the right ticket? or was it the cost of a first class ticket from the stations that you were going from - to?

 

if it's a fee for a 1st class ticket, then I'd stick to your guns, an honest mistake was made and you offered to correct the mistake at the first opportunity given to you.

if it's a fine then things are a little shakier as you were in the wrong place, so the train company could be right to impose the fine, even if it does go against common sense, or common decency to just accept that you made a mistake and let you move.

 

 

Also you say that you were prevented from leaving the 1st class section, how were you prevented from leaving? told to stay there, physically barred? threatened? had the doors closed to prevent you leaving the 1st class carriage? threatened with arrest by the transport police if you left 1st class? told that you weren't allowed off the train when it stopped in a station? (to move down a carriage to standard class).

(I'm assuming that there was a first class carriage and there was no way to get between standard and first class whilst the train was moving?).

 

Could you have just ignored the person gotten up and walked away? or did they tell you that bad things would happen if you did that?

 

(if that were the case then you should see if you could counter claim for false imprisonment). -make sure what happened first with the definition of that though.

 

 

how long ago was this? would it be worth asking the train company for a copy of the CCTV footage of the incident, this would presumably show you innocently getting on the train, probably in a rush and sitting down.

 

I'd imagine it'd also show you standing up and offering to move when you were asked for a 1st class ticket by the ticket inspector?

 

 

 

 

Basically, if you want to fight, you can fight on the grounds that you shouldn't pay a penalty/fare for a service that you didn't use. (first leg of the journey).

or that the fare should be reduced because of this... (if it is a fare, and not a penalty fine).

 

or you can try to gather favour with the judge explaining that it was a simple mistake, perhaps showing the video footage (of you offering to move and the inspector being "unreasonable") most(if not all) trains have CCTV now, and pray that the judge will reduce the fine on the basis that there wasn't a intent to commit an offence...

 

both of those are pretty rubbish and overly hopefully defences though.

 

or you can go the third route and prove (again perhaps with the CCTV) that you were unlawfully detained and counter claim damages...

-which, if you're telling the truth, you should be able to prove with the CCTV.

 

 

if you can't prove that you tried to offer to get up and move,

if you can't prove that you were in a rush and made an innocent mistake -that you tried to correct

if you can't prove that you were unlawfully detained then you might not really have a chance or case to fight with.

[rebel11]

danielr,

 

you missed the point, but you do raise some good points, it sounds like he was forced to complete the journey in First Class because his path was blocked.

[partybonkers]

Hi Danielr

 

Firstly thanks for your suggestions,

 

It was first class seats at the end of the carriage, there were no doors

seperating it off, the only indication it was first class were the stickers on the windows, and I think there were signs on the wall at the end of the carriage,

When the conducter asked to see my ticket, I was then told that I was in first class, I apologised said I had just sat down and did not relalise, I went to stand up and offer to move the conducter then stood in front of me so i could not get out of my seat, they were the type of seats that sit 4 round the table 2 on each side, so my exit out of these seats was blocked.

Also the conducter had my monthly ticket in their hand and would not give that back.

 

I was told I would be getteing a penalty fine for my offence and I would have to pay £20, when I refused to pay I was even threatened that they would keep my monthly ticket if I did not pay.

I told them that they could not do that (do not know if they can) and it was not mentioned again.

 

I posted on this forum to see if anyone had been through some thing similar and beat it.

things have gone a little bit off subject here and maybe a little bit heated, but it is a opinion forum and every one is entitled to their

opinion.

I do feel it is a little bit harsh for it to have gone this far for some thing

to me that seems quite trivial, but do accept that i made a mistake in sitting in the wrong section, should the punishment be so harsh for that

offence, I do not think so, I think a penalty should be saved for people

travelling with out any ticket, but that is just my opinion.

 

The way I'm looking at it is they are looking for £105 now, as much as I

want to fight it, the further it goes the more expensive it could get, with court costs, costs if i want the conducter to show up in court and be questioned, and from the advice I have got on this site I will probably lose, and I just cannot afford for this to get more expensive.

 

I'm just going to have to plead guilty pay the £105 if it is awarded by the judge and put it behind me.