£1208.00 fine for 2 days travel HELP!!!

[bobus88]

This is going to be long winded but here goes...... basically last friday 18th june i was stopped by a revenue protection inspector at barking station and asked me if i had a ticket and i said no i haven't. By this time i had already touched in my oyster card to go from barking to becontree.

i couldnt present a ticket but i pulled out my wallet and said can i pay for one now which fell on deaf ears and took me upstairs, he then read me my rights and under caution etc..... he asked me he reason for not paying i said it was my fault i got up late couldnt afford to miss the train got to it a minute before it arrived so i didnt have time to buy one, he then scanned my oyster card and said did you pay for the 14th june i said no.

He then asked when did u start travelling from the station you board at? i said since november 2009 ( i haven't admitted not paying any fares at this stage) asked how many days a week do i travel i said 3 anyway i had to surrender my oyster card to see when else i had been travelling i agreed, he gave me a permit to travel the rest of the day and that was that bear also in mind he was writing everything down as he was talking to me so i presume its a statement.

As far as im aware the RPI's are supposed to get you to read through the statement they have written and if everything is agreed then i should sign and date it he did NEITHER!

 

On the saturday morning i recieve a letter saying: on friday 18th june was spoken to by an inspector and was reported for not paying the fare due fore the journey

At the time of making this statement the fare which was due at the time travel had not been paid and i therefore contend that the intention of myself was to travel on the railway without having previously paid the fare and with intent to avoid payment thereof.

We seek the sum of £110.00 as a contribution towards the prosecution costs and compensation of £1098.00 in relation to the unpaid fares

Contrary to section 5,3,a of the regulation act 1889 as ammended by the transport act 1962

The british railways acts section 35 (5) 1970 and section 18 1977

 

and basically if i send a cheque of £1208.00 by 9th july they'll forget the whole thing!

 

I did reply to them and they basically sent a letter back to me saying they reduced the amount by £15 setting up court dates because "apparently" i addmited to the RPI that i avoided paying my journey since november which isnt true because i didnt admit to it and they have been through my oyster card to see when ive traveled and a ticket person said to me they have probably tried to charge me since november. while he was questioning me, their's no mention of me trying to pay him and he didnt get me to check and sign it off!!!

 

I would be more then happy to pay £110.00 plus two days travel just need help to have some sort of template of a letter to send to them plus can i say the RPI's is forging my statement or misleading HELP PLEASE!!!!!

Edited June 22, 2010 by bobus88

[Old-CodJA]

I'd suggest that you write back to the company advising that you do not agree their claim and asking them to provide you within 7 days, full documentary evidence confirming the, dates & times for all of the journeys that they are claiming you have made without paying.

 

You should also ask them to provide you a copy of your statement or, a copy of the contemporaneous notes of the incident made by the inspector.

 

State that you do not dispute the one fare that is due for travel on the one day on which you did not have a ticket and were found to be travelling in breach of Railway Byelaws, for which you apologise.

 

Advise that you ask the company to accept payment of the fare due and their reasonable administration costs incurred in recovering that single fare and apologise for the incident and undertake not to repeat it.

 

 

.

[bobus88]

Thank you, that is really helpful! I was also talking to a solicitor about this and he was saying something about proving on a civil something the balance of provablities I don't know all confusing! lol justtrying to draft a letter up

[SRPO]

If your solicitor is talking about 'preponderance of the evidence' also called the balance of probabilities in civil law, I suggest you change solicitors to one that knows something about criminal law.

[bobus88]

Oh ok wont be listening to that then! lol anyway ive got my draft done for the letter to c2c

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Without predjuice

 

I am writing to you regards to the letter you sent me dated 21 June 2010.

I am advising you that i do not agree to your claim in regards to the compensation you seek of £1193.80. I want you to provide me within 7 days, full documentary evidence confirming the dates and times for all of the journeys that you are claiming i have made without paying.

 

I would also like you to provide me a copy of my statement or a copy of the contemporaneous n9otes of the incident made by the inspector which may i also add the inspector failed in his duties to present to me the statement he had written when he had finished questioning me, he also failed to get me to sign the statement so therefore i have not given him consent for what he has written.

 

With reference to your letter i do not agree with the inspectors statement of that i admitted avoiding, he said and i quote "where do you travel from?" and i replied "southend east" he then asked "When did you start travelling from southend east?" i replied "since november because i moved address.

 

I do not dispute the two fares that is 14th and 18th June which i did not have a ticket and were found to be travelling in breach of railway byelaws for which i appologise.

 

I am asking c2c to accept payment of the fares due £24.40 and your reasonable administration costs of £110.00 incurred in recovering the fares and i sincerly appologise for the incident and i undertake never to repeat it.

 

Yours sincerley

 

.................

 

hopefully this should be ok but if anyone wishes to correct me please feel free.

[SRPO]

The letter is fine, however the statement is his not yours and there is no requirement under pace for his to read it back to you and sign it although I understand to be good practice.

If a contemporaneous interview was conducted I hope that the officer told you of your rights under pace and that you were not under arrest and free to leave at any time?

[bobus88]

Do you reckon I should tweak it a bit and he read me my rights as in when we were upstairs by the bariers I dont remember the pace bit but I remember him saying I am questioning you under caution you do not have to say anything but it may harm your defence if you later rely in court can't remember exact words but hope you know what I mean lol but it probably was under pace because as he was asking questions he was writing everything down infront of me

[SRPO]

Only tweak the bit where you attempt to tell them what the officer should have done because you are mistaken and it weakens your argument.

You have admitted 1 offence & should be looking at damage limitation right now, OldcodJA gives good advice about reviewing the evidence against you.

In a contemporaneous interview he would have to tell you that you are entitled to obtain legal advice before questioning, that you were not under arrest & free to leave at any time.

During questioning he would have to re-caution for every suspected offence he was investigating, so if over a period of days he would have to caution or at least remind you that you were under caution for every journey.

[bobus88]

Ok then I'll take that out was just trying to make the letter sound like I admitted the two days and I didn't admit anything else so they should only charge me like oldcodja said I should pay the fares plus admin it's hard putting it into words

[SRPO]

Ok then I'll take that out was just trying to make the letter sound like I admitted the two days and I didn't admit anything else so they should only charge me like oldcodja said I should pay the fares plus admin it's hard putting it into words

You cannot tell them what to charge you, you need to persuade them not to prosecute you.

[Old-CodJA]

Yes, it's much more likely that you will get a favourable response if you are concilliatory in your approach.

 

I didn't actually say 'you should pay the fare', I suggested that you should ask them to accept the single fare and their costs as an alternative to continuing the prosecution, which, by your account, is justified for the offence for which you were reported.

 

They could drop their claim for all of the back-fares (which they might not be able to substantiate) and can proceed with the prosecution & claim for that one offence if they so wish, but they are not obliged to do so.

 

You do need to remember that the rail company are in the driving seat here. You were on the train without a valid ticket and have admitted that, it is only their claim that you have done it continuously over an extended period that you dispute.

 

What you should be doing is trying to get them to see this as a one-off and to dispose of the matter without Court action, thus avoiding the very strong likelihood of a conviction.

 

Telling them what to do will not get the result you are after and may well harden the resolve to continue to prosecution.

 

.

Edited June 24, 2010 by Old-CodJA

[Stigy]

Did I read the out of court settlement right?

[bobus88]

Ok all fair points and I see what you mean I don't want to go near court because of my job and family so how about this:

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Without predjuice

 

I am writing to you regarding the letter you sent me dated 21 June 2010.

I am advising you that i do not agree to your claim in regards to the compensation you seek of £1193.80. I want you to provide me within 7 days, full documentary evidence confirming the dates and times for all of the journeys that you are claiming i have made without paying.

 

I would also like you to provide me a copy of my statement or a copy of the contemporaneous notes of the incident made by the inspector.

 

I do not dispute the two fares that is 14th and 18th June which i did not have a ticket and were found to be travelling in breach of railway byelaws for which i appologise.

 

I am asking c2c to accept payment of the fares due £24.40 and your reasonable administration costs of £110.00 incurred in recovering the fares and i sincerly appologise for the incident and i undertake never to repeat it.

 

Hope this is better if so I'll hand it in on the way to work tomorrow

[Old-CodJA]

I think that is a good letter

 

.

[bobus88]

All I can say is thank you so much for your and eveyone elses help it has helped me a huge amount when they write back I'll put what they've said on here

 

Thanks once again!

[Wriggler7]

I would very much like to see how you get on. Some people I know have a similar problem.

[Wriggler7]

Have I missed something? Reading through this again, you have spoken to a solicitor already. Didn't the solicitor give you advice, or was it just a solicitor you happened to bump into?

 

It all sounds pretty serious, do you need a solicitor with this sort of thing?

[charlie1818]

Please could you let me know how you got on with your rail fine dispute? I'm in a really similar position & would really appreciate hearing your experiences! Thank you

[Wriggler7]

As with a lot of similar posts, the OP hasn't told us the outcome.

 

Shame, it could save people going all through the processes. Without telling us specifics, what is your problem? There are a few folk who read these posts who will be pleased to give you a steer.

[bobus88]

Hi all sorry I haven't got on here sooner one thing after another! Anyhow a long story short after I gave that letter in (a few posts up) I received a letter the very next morning! Saying basically they had set up a date for havering magistrates court in august for two allegations relating to the two dates in question we will be sending summons and notices as soon as practicable and basically both allegations will be charged under section 5,3,a of the regulation of railways act 1889 such offences are deemed 'recordable' and may attract fines not exceeding £1000 on each, with second or subsequent convictions carrying the possibility of imprisonment. That's what it says on the letter and it just also said they don't know my full circumstances but says a qualified solicitor in criminal defense is recommend how considerate of them!! lol and after I got that letter I borrowed some money from my parents which I'm paying back and paid c2c £1193.80 and they've taken no further action and in my situation I couldn't afford to loose my job with London ambulance so I avoided court at all cost! hope it helps in some way.

[Wriggler7]

Dear 'Bobus'

 

My apologies for what now looks like a snide comment. There are many threads that I read through, and see all the advice that was freely given, and then never get to see the result of the matter.

 

Thank you for your frank 'closing' of the thread. It seems that you identified that for you the avoidance of a conviction was worth more to you than 'the money'.

 

I guess that is what people facing this type of problem need to think about. All 'Court actions' are a bit of a gamble. Neither side knows how it will turn out until a Magistrate announces the verdict and then the sentence. Both sides need to think about 'best' and 'worst' outcomes, and which bits they can 'live with'.

 

Many years ago, I briefed a very expensive (and bloody good) barrister at the City of London Magistrates Court in a very minor matter. Defendant was accused of avoiding a rail fare of about £1.10. Barrister promptly explained to the prosecutor (in the waiting area, outside of Court) how he was going to destroy the prosecution case. Prosecutor, who had been around the circuit more than a few times, agreed to offer no evidence. One conviction would have lost the defendant his job, and along with it a £70k salary plus annual bonuses, and stopped him from ever working in his chosen field again. If the prosecutor had continued, he would probably have 'won', but the witness would have been in 'trouble'. It was likely (but not certain) that the Court would have given an absolute discharge.

 

Defendant could not afford the conviction, witness really did not want the embarrassment of a very poor job. Defence wanted the case dismissed, prosecution wanted 'the money', or failing that an untarnished reputation. Both sides pretty much got the most important things they wanted out of the hearing.

[Wriggler7]

Now, perhaps Charlie can ask his questions, and tell us his problem.

[Darzen]

Am i right in thinking you didn't even get on the train in the first place ?

[Wriggler7]

Am i right in thinking you didn't even get on the train in the first place ?

 

If you read the original posting, the allegations involve travelling between Southend East and Barking. The Inspectors spoke with Bobus at Barking.

 

In any event, the law in cases like this is usually Section 5,3,a of the Regulation of Railways Act, which involves travelling or attempting to travel.

 

There are other bits of law which make it clear that you don't have to actually be on a train to be spoken to by Railway staff.

 

With all criminal offences, there are equal penalties for 'attempting' as for 'doing', although it can be a tad harder to prove an attempt. Much easier to prove an offence when someone is caught 'in the act', or after the 'act' is completed.