Notice of intention to prosecute plz help.

[irfan]

This very morning i've received a notice of intention to prosecute from first capital connect. actually on 23rd of February i bought a return ticket to harpenden from luton station which is only from a distance of one station what actually happened is just before harpenden i feel crumble in my stomach and need for the toilet and went for it.

 

after some time when i came out of a toilet i realize that train had left harpenden and went beyond st. albans i was not yet recovered from that shock when a revenue protection officer came to me and asked for a ticket i showed him that ticket to harpenden he told me to give him panelty fare but i refused he asked for my datails and i gave him all correct details about me and after that today i've received this letter.

 

now plz help me what should i do now...

[BankFodder]

if that is the story then as long as you tell the truth, I can't see that there should be any problem. It will help if you back it up with some evidence. I think the most important thing is to show why you were going to Harpenden and why you wouldn't have gone any further. For instance, do you work in Harpenden? Did you have an appointment in Harpenden? I think it will help enormously to show very clearly that Harpenden had to be your destination.

 

Although this may sound dramatic, I think on the basis of what you say, it seems to me that your defence is one of "self defence". You are allowed to take any reasonable action to protect your personal property and in this case going to the lavatory because you were ill seems to me to be very reasonable.

 

What exactly are they proposing to charge you with? I think that we need to see what the defence is – meaning chapter and verse in the regulation somewhere.

 

Also are you able to demonstrate that as soon as you go to the next available station you turned round and travel back to Harpenden? This is very important.

[irfan]

thank you very much for reply..

 

I've been alleged to violate 53 (b) )Having paid his fare for a certain distance, knowingly and willfully proceeds by train beyond that distance without previously paying the additional fare for the additional distance, and with intent to avoid payment thereof; or.

 

I was going to harpenden in search for a job which one of my friend told me about

 

also i asked him several times that let me go back to harpenden but he didn't listen to me ..

Edited March 9, 2011 by irfan

[Stigy]

It will help if you back it up with some evidence..I

I'd rather he didn't....Sorry, couldn't resist, lol.

 

thank you very much for reply..

 

I've been alleged to violate 53 (b) )Having paid his fare for a certain distance, knowingly and willfully proceeds by train beyond that distance without previously paying the additional fare for the additional distance, and with intent to avoid payment thereof; or.

 

I was going to harpenden in search for a job which one of my friend told me about

 

also i asked him several times that let me go back to harpenden but he didn't listen to me ..

FCC want to prosecute you under an offence of intention to defraud them. In laymans terms you set out to travel on the ticket to Harpenden, but intentionally travelled beyond to save money.

 

Now for someone in your predicament, it seems very harsh to lay this charge, assuming you didn't admit to setting out to defraud FCC when questioned. I would write to the company at the address they supplied and advise them of what happened. It all depends on if they believe what you say really, which is the whole idea of the court system. I say harsh in that there'd have to be evidence to suggest this more serious Regulation of Railways Act 1889 offence, whereby to lay a Byelaw is far easier and requires no intention to defraud (Byelaw 18.1). Were you 100% clear as to why you overstayed your welcome?

 

As I said, write to them and see what they say. I'd make reference that you accept you probably should have accepted the Penalty Fare and appealed later (even if you disagree), but outline your reasons for this and say you weren't being awkward.

[Burzyn]

thank you very much for reply..

 

I've been alleged to violate 53 (b) )Having paid his fare for a certain distance, knowingly and willfully proceeds by train beyond that distance without previously paying the additional fare for the additional distance, and with intent to avoid payment thereof; or.

 

I was going to harpenden in search for a job which one of my friend told me about

 

also i asked him several times that let me go back to harpenden but he didn't listen to me ..

 

In case of 53(b) the prosecution has to prove that you did it "Knowingly and willfully". Unless you've said something stupid it would be hard too prove. Did you behave sensibly? If you lied to him, you might give reasons to be that you have indeed evaded.

[irfan]

yeah i behave with him nicely and requested him that its a genuine mistake but he keeps on writing my details and didn't listen to me at all

[Burzyn]

yeah i behave with him nicely and requested him that its a genuine mistake but he keeps on writing my details and didn't listen to me at all

 

Have you been offered to pay £20 or £75 fine?

[irfan]

yeah he offered me to pay him a penalty fine without telling me what is it for so i refused him by saying that i don't have money right now...

[irfan]

@ stigy

 

Please tellme how should i respond to them and how could i persuade them about the situation. i'm in deeply distressed and seriously worried about what will happen will they prosecute me or not..

 

if you please write a letter for me that i could forward them

[Burzyn]

In my case, they have sent me £75 fine, but I never got the letter. Next was the Notice of Intended Prosecution. Chances are, you missed some correspondence.

Engage in dialog, ask if you could reach the compromise. It shouldn't cost you more than £100 at this stage and it's only money.

Of course, you can take your chances in the Court, if you're believe you're innocent.

 

BTW. You should have paid this twenty quid.

[Burzyn]

@ stigy

 

Please tellme how should i respond to them and how could i persuade them about the situation. i'm in deeply distressed and seriously worried about what will happen will they prosecute me or not..

 

if you please write a letter for me that i could forward them

 

I'm afraid I cannot do that. I've been advising you on the basis of having similar experience, but I don't have any legal education.

 

Besides, are you old enough to act like a grown-up? Ability to negotiate your way is an essential skill. Consider it a lesson in the school of life.

Perhaps you should start with why you haven't paid these twenty quid. But, don't expect you'll settle for £20, services of legal department are usually expensive.

[Stigy]

@ stigy

 

Please tellme how should i respond to them and how could i persuade them about the situation. i'm in deeply distressed and seriously worried about what will happen will they prosecute me or not..

 

if you please write a letter for me that i could forward them

In other such cases I would advise people to write back and say how deeply sorry they are, that it was their first such offence and that they should offer to pay any reasonable admin charges to stay out of court. Your situation I feel is slightly different, so maybe your initial letter should outline the issue you have on that day. If you have any medical condition that could cause you to need to visit the WC occassionaly, by all means tell them! Just say in hindsight you accept you should have taken the Penalty Fare and appealed later, but at the time you weren't thinking straight etc. Did you pay the fare owed, or offer to at the time?

 

They are of no obligation to offer you any form of settlement as Burzn was lucky enough to get, but I wouldn't go down that route yet though.

[Wriggler7]

All stories such as this tend to 'grow' a little as people (Like Stigy, SRPI etc) ask very pertinent questions.

 

Let us consider what the Inspector thinks. (And this is speculation) He was checking tickets, out of the corner of his eagle eye, he sees a character leap up and rush to the toilet. He waits for that person to emerge, and checks tickets, to find that the ticket was only valid to the station tht the train just stopped at, and has now passed.

 

Quite correctly, there has been a conversation, one hopes after the words 'you do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defence etc'.

 

The inspector has written a statement, which is normally called an 'MG11', or by prosecutors a 'section 9 statement'.

 

Now the poster is looking for how to deal with the case.

 

It is very important to know the truth. Was the intended journey fully paid for? Is there a way of 'proving' the intended journey? Perhaps an appointment, or some other proof. In the conversation with the Inspector, exactly what was said? Defence needs to be raised at the earliest opportunity, and consistent. If the case gets to Court, is there a difference in the conversation as remembered by the passenger and as recorded on paper by the Inspector?

 

What happened after the conversation? did the passenger get off and return to the intended destination, or continue in the direction of travel?

 

If the passenger is truly innocent, then all the talk of 'paying' should be put aside, the prosecution have to prove the case, and if there is 'reasonable doubt' that the passenger knowingly and wilfully travelled beyond validity, then the passenger will be found not guilty.

 

If there are bits of the story that we have missed, then the passenger might want to offer to pay up.

[Old-CodJA]

Excellent 'advice' from Wriggler7 as always and again, as always, we naturally only get one side of the interaction between passenger and inspector on here.

 

To try to close this down, if you were travelling to Harpenden with intention of seeking employment as a result of a job vacancy that you'd heard about, giving the TOC all the details of that vacancy and who you were going to see would be a good start. If it is the case that a medical condition results in sudden urges to use a lavatory and there is some evidence that you immediately returned to Harpenden on the next train, this would be sufficient to deal with it in my opinion.

 

However, the details of what you actually did after being spoken to by the inspector will be important. Because you have only mentioned Harpenden & St Albans in your post, I assume you were on a fast service.

 

If after passing Harpenden, you failed to alight at St Albans and return to Harpenden by the first available service, but continued to St Pancras and then failed to get on the first train back to Harpenden without leaving the station, there is good cause to show that a fare has been avoided.

 

Much will depend on what notes the inspector might have made in addition to issuing the notice and the better inspectors always do so.

Edited March 10, 2011 by Old-CodJA

[Grotesque]

i refused him by saying that i don't have money right now...

 

 

So as far as the Inspector was concerned you had no means of paying between Harpenden and 'beyond st. albans'? How far beyond St Albans?!