Jump to content


FCC Season Ticket - Unauthorised Use


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4814 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

Hello,

 

My wife was staying with her parents over the weekend and, whilst she was there, decided to visit a friend in London. Her Dad has a FCC Season Ticket for travelling to work, and as he wasn't using it, she borrowed the ticket.

 

A ticket inspector stopped her whilst on the train to London and asked if it was her ticket, she panicked and said yes. The inspector then took her name and address (she used her parents address) and called the office to check. The office confirmed that it was her Dad's ticket and so she then admitted that it wasn't her's.

 

The inspector did not issue a fine, but took her details and said that the prosecution team would contact her.

 

After reading the other posts on the forum, we are now shocked that she could end up with a criminal record. Although ignorance of the law is not a defence, she had no idea it was a crime. She had just thought that as it was a ticket valid for 7 days, and that as her Dad wasn't using it for one day, it was OK for her to use it.

 

We are now quite distressed and with Christmas approaching, worried that this will drag on over the holidays without being resolved.

 

From the posts I've read, the general advice seems to be to wait for FCC to send a letter, but I was wondering how long it normally takes to receive the letter and whether we should pre-empt it with a letter of apology promising to pay all costs and never to do it again?

 

Any help that you can offer would be greatly appreciated.

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Instinct suggests that nothing much will happen with this matter before the new year. You may well get a letter before Christmas, but, if you think this through, the Inspector has to write & submit a report. I dare say that FCC have an 'internal mail' system, but post is taking a little longer than normal at the moment. Today i the 6th, if the report is with the prosecution team by the 8th, their letter will not (at best) be with you before 10th, and more likely something like th 17th. I think you get my drift.

 

I think that you should relax until you hear from FCC. Reply as soon as you do, but don't let it spoil 'the holiday'. Unless your wife is already on a suspended sentence for something, which I doubt, the 'worst' will be a financial penalty from a Court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good advice as usual from Wriggler7.

 

First stage processing in these matters can take up to a month at busy times and the seasonal delays at this time of year can extend even that.

 

FCC will normally send a verification letter as a first action and when she gets it, that's the time to write back with a profuse apology and an appeal to be allowed to pay the fare and all costs incurred in order to resolve the matter swiftly and without Court action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wriggler, Old-Codja,

 

Many thanks for the quick responses - it's good to have an idea of what to expect, rather than just waiting and worrying!

 

If she receives a fine from the court, does that result in a criminal record or is it just a fine?

 

Also, do you know how the train operating companies view letters from solicitors in these matters? I'm wondering whether it is worth engaging some legal assistance to try and avoid the matter going to court and resulting in a criminal record?

 

Thanks again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your wife may choose to engage a Solicitor if she is charged, BUT, why do so without first trying to seek an alternative disposal yourself. The following is intended to be helpful, I apologise if my use of language seems a little sharp, but I really don't think anything can be gained from going to a solicitor at this stage.

 

All that engaging a solicitor will do in the early stages is to increase your wife's costs dramatically.

 

Now, I know that I write this from the perspective of someone on the prosecution side with 30 years experience so it could be said that I might suggest something that could be damaging to your wife's chances of 'getting away with it', but that is not the case and I doubt that Wriggler7, whose expertise is from the 'other side' will disagree.

 

From the perspective of a miserable old prosecutor, who has the benefit of having been a 'scud' too, I have to say that whenever I have received letters from Solicitors long before Summonses have been issued, my first thoughts have usually been either, 'this one is throwing money away unnecessarily', or 'what else is there hidden here?'

 

From what you have told us, it is very likely that your wife will be convicted if FCC do decide to go to Court, unless there is some very serious error in process.

 

As you recognise, ignorance of a law is not a defence and there is a very clear legal precedent in the case of Browning & Floyd (1946) where the Court ruled that 'in the case of a person using another person's season ticket, the rail company may not have lost any money, but that traveller had not paid their fare.' It is THEIR fare that is the important issue.

 

Your wife should wait unill she gets the verification letter and then promptly write her response, sticking to the facts and not attempting to quote the law unless she is fully versed in the specific legislation.

 

A Solicitor may be useful in spotting errors in procedure IF the matter proceeds, but if she can achieve settlement by apology and promise, why waste money unnecessarily.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I cant add anything to the excellent advice given above apart from the likely bill from a solicitor will be circa £900, I hope Wriggler7 doesnt mind me saying this but you will have to look very hard for one that knows anything about railway law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Old Codja,

 

You don't need to apologies for speaking frankly, there's a lot to be said for being direct - especially as you know what you're talking about!

 

I agree with your point that we should try apologising ourselves in the first instance. In hindsight, this is clearly a more sensible idea than appointing a lawyer, especially as we are not appealing for leiniency based on a legal prescedent or technicality, but on her remorse.

 

Once again, thank you for your timely advice - I will provide an update once we receive a letter from FCC.

Link to post
Share on other sites

At various stages in potential prosecutions, people will think 'I want a solicitor'.

 

In the first instance, most solicitors spend thei working lives divorcing people or buying houses for them, and have limited expertise in 'bunking train fares'.

 

The (absolute) worst case for your wife would be a trip to Court and a £1,000.00 fine plus costs, which are often around £100. In practise, if this matter ends in Court, and she pleaded guilty at first opportunity, the fine is going to be somewhere nearer £200.00. Note that none of us know what a fine will be until a Court announces it, my figures are 'guess work' based on watching these things happen and grabbing statistics from the bloke who prosecutes railway cases locally.

 

If you pay a solicitor, depending on who you use, you will end up paying £200.00 to £500.00 for the privilege. (OK, so a good, local criminal defence solicitor will possibly be a bit cheaper, but you are still going to have to pay.) Looking at the facts, as you report them, I don't think a solicitor representing you would save you a penny at Court.

 

I have a very strong bias that if you do decide that you want a professional in your corner, you should speak to one who is a regular performer at the Magistrates Court where this case could end up. Someone from his firm is quite likley to already be at the Court on the day for something else, possibly knows the regular prosecutor from the railway at least well enough to recognise him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Old Codja will use phrases like 'Corbyn & Saunders' or 'Woodard v Eastern Counties Railways' which are cases often quoted to prove some of the finer nuances of what the prosecution need to show to get their case home, all good stuff, it is his stock in trade. At Court, the Court Legal advisor will have those same references, they are to be found as footnotes in Stones Justices Manual, a set of which will be on the desk in front of every Court Legal Advisor in England and Wales.

 

I recall sitting in the City of London Magistrates Court a few years ago, a tyro Railway Prosecutor, mentioned one of these cases, the Chairman of Magistrates said "Yes, yes, yes, we know what avoiding a rail fare is."

 

If this matter goes to Court, I see very little advantage in taking a solicitor with you.

 

Before it gets to Court, if your wife writes an honest letter to the prosecution team, setting out that this was an aberration, that she is willing to meet costs, that she will never do it again, then there is a good chance that the 'Railway' will take the easiest way to close the case. If they can see that your wife is not a regular offender, and is 'sorry', then there will be little motivation for them to carry out all of the processes required to get the case to Court.

 

A letter from a Solicitor (on their best headed notepaper, costing you £30 to £150 depending on who you use) will neither worry nor particularly impress the prosecutors. What it will do is cause them to be more meticulous with the paperwork, and reduce the possibility of them making a mistake with it.

 

For a lot of people, the real issue with this is not the financial costs, but gaining a conviction. I feel that your wife will want to show the railway that a conviction would be deeply upsetting to her, and have a disproportionate effect. 'Railway prosecutors' need a certain number of convictions to show their 'bosses', and other passengers that they are doing a good job, and are serious about protecting the revenue of the railway. One more, or one less, will not harm their statistics. You just need to show them that this is one of the cases that doesn't need a heavy hand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like to drink tea with different prosecutors, it gives me an insight into how their 'mind' works. Railways will have, buried somewhere in their dusty offices, a written policy on what types of cases will go to Court, and what ones will not, and what thought processes should be applied.

 

On my local line, if the passenger is 'nasty' to the Inspector, that often gaurantees a prosecution. If there is clear evidence that the passenger is a repeat offender, that increases the probability, if the passenger shows that they have contempt for the legal process, then the issue tends to change to one where the prosecutor will 'harden his heart'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps, when your wife receives the verification letter from FCC she might consider writing back along these lines:

 

Dear Sirs,

 

Your Reference: XXXXX

 

I write regarding the letter that I have received from you and concerning the occasion on > when I was reported for travelling on your train service from > to > without a valid rail ticket.

 

I wish to offer my unreserved apology for my actions in the hope that you will allow this matter to be resolved without court action and thereby allowing me to protect my good name. I have never been in trouble with the law in the past and I am very sorry that my misunderstanding has lead to this situation now.

 

I genuinely thought that as the fare was paid and the ticket was not being used by the regular user, that I could use it on this occasion. I am now aware that is not the case and apologise for my niaevity in this matter, it really was a complete misunderstanding.

 

I am extremely sorry for what may appear to you to have been an attempt to avoid my liability, but I must stress that this was not intentional.

 

I hope that you will recognise that I wish to apologise to the member of staff concerned and to the rail company for the extra administration work that my actions have caused.

 

I sincerely hope that you will accept my offer to pay the full fare that is due and all of the reasonable costs that have been incurred by the rail company in the hope that you will allow me to put this matter behind me. I am now fully aware of the rules relating to rail season tickets and can assure you that I will ensure that I always hold a valid rail ticket of my own on any future journeys.

 

Yours etc.

 

 

.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Old Codja writes good letter.

 

The 'points' all seem to be covered. In my past, when I had to teach a bunch of people to write statements with the (oft vain) hope that a Court would believe them, one of the 'big issues' was 'wording'. By all means use the template, but put a little of 'yourself' into letters. If I read the above words, I would expect you to look like Old Codja, or worse still, me!

 

Whilst it should remain a 'formal letter' (you are not intending to go on a hen night with the prosecutor, are you?) the letter should tell the reader what sort of person you are, and should 'look' like 'you'. If you are an 18 year old student, the letter shouldn't look like it was written by your Granddads PA.

 

Then again, if you are your Granddad's PA, it should not be in the style of a 'floosy'. One of my students was a mature man, he wrote a wonderful sample statement, full of 'I was proceeding' and 'being apprehensive of an assualt'. I spent some time trying to get him to relax his style, until the penny dropped. He really did talk like that, when he got into our 'mock' witness box, the words of his statement fitted and went with his appearance. Sincerity only 'shows' through if it comes from you, in your words.

 

I think if next week a prosecutor got 26 identical letters, albeit from different people relating different circumstances, he might wonder if they all came from the same pen.

 

I have seen many letters from different people, and some of them are pitiful in their syntax and grammar. However, they do give an insight into what sort of peron is being dealt with. Last week, I watched a certifiable idiot standing in 'the box'. His result (fines and so on) ended up reflecting his ability to pay, his ability to find a job in the foreseeable future and so on. It would have been pointless to chase him with the full weight and vigour of the law. Had he managed to find a crayon and scrawl words on the back of an old Chinese takeaway menu, the picture in the mind of the prosecutor would have allowed a decision, possibly to 'not waste the Court's time', or possibly to not suggest a cash settlement. The prosecutor squirmed, it was clear that the Bench and Legal advisor were unhappy that they had to deal with a man not capable of forming a true criminal intent.

 

The point I am driving towards is: make sure that you cover the points, but write in your own words.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely invaluable advice of course and put better than I could.

 

It is why I said 'write along these lines', use your own words to say the same thing or similar

 

If I got 10 of those identical template letters in the same week I'd doubt the sincerity too, but I hope the principle was clear.

 

.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From 'anecdotes' from a busy prosecutor, the most important thing with your letter is to put 'their reference' at the top, and you name and address. That may sound 'condescending', but there are many letters received which fail that basic test.

 

Long, and often comical, missives, illegibly signed at the end, without the clues that allow the 'prosecutor' to tie the letter to a case.

 

My observations are that Railway prosecution teams are all overworked, and have case loads that make other prosecutors wince. They will want to be able to open your letter, read a reference, and attach it to 'the file'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Old-Codja, Wriggler,

 

We received a standard looking letter from FCC yesterday, stating that they intend to proceed with prosecution and requesting that we state our version of events.

 

One point that we are unsure about is whether or not to say that she was allowed to borrow the season ticket. Do you know whether this would then land her father in trouble? Are FCC able to prosecute him if we stated that he allowed her to use it? He has already received a duplicate ticket, so I'm not sure what they could do?

 

Together with the statement of facts, we will also send a letter asking to settle out of court. This will follow along the lines of Old-Codja's template, taking in to account the useful points made by Wriggler.

 

Once again, your advice is greatly appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

People found to be 'aiding & abetting' (or 'counselling or procuring) an offence may be prosecuted. However, to do so would require that 'dad' was also interviewed as a potential defendant, that is to say, cautioned and then questioned. The prosecution would be a bit thin if it only relied on words in a letter from a loving daughter.

 

I would be inclined not to 'fully' explain how 'daughter' came to have 'dads' ticket. Apart from that, yes, tell the story, show remorse, offer to meet reasonable prosecution costs.

 

Transferring season tickets is a big threat to 'railway revenue', so I think that it needs to be made clear that the potential loss to the railway was 'just one day', and not month's worth of fares.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I agree, giving too much information may simply confuse things

 

The fact is that said daughter was caught using her Dad's season ticket.

 

Unless questioned in depth and different answers have already been given, it's much better to stick to that one incident, suggesting that 'Dad' didn't know she had got it on a one-off journey.

 

Stress that it was a momentary incident of silliness and not to be repeated when writing to FCC

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Wriggler, Old-Codja,

 

As advised, we sent FCC a letter asking to settle out of court. Fortunately, they have said that they are prepared to settle in this case and now would like us to send them an offer.

 

My question is, how much should we offer? Are they just trying to extract the maximum amount possible?

 

They state that their costs are £130, which seems a little on the high side. I'm of the opinion that we should consider ourselves lucky that they aren't going to prosecute, but my wife feels that they're taking advantage.

 

If we offer below the total of their costs and the ticket, will they then decide to continue with a prosecution, or would they simply ask us to offer more?

 

Many thanks for your continued support.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry if it is stating the obvious, but I think that there is really only one answer to this.

 

If a settlement is worth more to you than a conviction, you need to make your judgement from that perspective.

 

In my experience it has always been pretty straightforward to persuade a Court to convict in the case of a traveller using someone elses' season ticket. The Browning & Floyd case (1946) is the usual guideline. Conviction means the likelihood of a fine+surcharge+costs+compensationion and the record of conviction. (Likely total if you plead guilty of around £300+)

 

The Prosecutor will be able to make a case for their costs figure as a reasonable charge and if it goes to conviction will do so, asking the Court to order you to pay them plus the fare. You can ask for a breakdown of the costs application if you haven't already seen it.

 

If you make an offer that is much less than what they consider is their 'reasonable' costs application, they may decide that they might just as well go forward with the case.

 

It is entirely a matter for you, but it is worth remembering that they do not have to allow an opportunity to settle at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Reckless. I understand this is probably a difficult decision and expensive for you both. I just wondered if your wife has read the forum at all and understood what the penalties can be for what she's done.

 

I agree with Old CodJa that not having a conviction is worth quite a lot. Just a layperson's point of view.

 

My best, HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

£130? Wel, a tad more than some a lot less that others.

 

However, the railway has had a little more work with this one than a 'simple' fare dodge, they have had to research 'father & daughter'.

 

By all means ask for a breakdown, but: It will take 'them' longer at this stage to type up a breakdown that to apply for a summons. My instinct is screaming 'pay'.

 

If you read other threads, you will see one poster happily paid £200.00, and FGW asked for £175.00, c2c would 'often' ask £110.00.

 

And all probably still 'cheaper' than Court.

 

And much cheaper than asking a solicitor to negotiate a settlement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...