Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I see the poops are still trying to deflect from their own criminality and and abuses by whinging on about raynors buying her council house - now about election registration - anyone who owns a flat or house understands that you dont give up your and your childrens home just because of a new relationship and while we are on about that ..   lets start with When is jenrick being revisited for both lockdown abuses and self admitted (claims estate is his main home - not the property in his electorate or his london property) 'possible (lol) electoral registration abuses as he claimed he was at his estate 'main home' away from both London and his electoral 'home'  - much of which paid for by the taxpayer     Cabinet Minister Robert Jenrick 'breaks lockdown rules twice' by going to 'second home' - Mirror Online WWW.MIRROR.CO.UK Key Cabinet Minister Robert Jenrick drove 150 miles to his 'second home' after urging the nation to remain in their homes in a bid to...   ... perhaps follow with more self admitted lobbying while in a potion where they shouldn't “A few of us in parliament have lobbied the government – and with the help of the Treasury select committee, the chancellor has listened,” John Baron wrote.   Tory MP faces lobbying questions over Treasury committee role | Investing | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Co-owner of investment management firm called for ‘urgent’ post-Brexit changes to City rules at committee meetings     About time labour got in the game and started pressing for these self admitted/bragged Tory abuses were properly investigates.
    • No I didn't I got the dates mixed up.   
    • Sorry about that, TJ. The person who posted it specifically said it was free access. Here's another version of the FT article. https://archive.is/KYrPa
    • Isnt there some indication in there of at least intent to inform arbuthnot? IF he wasn't then it would seem to be Vennells decision to keep him 'uninformed .. Although seems to me if arbuthnot was unaware - he was either incompetent or should have very detailed records of denials. Seems vennells is constantly at the core of all the lying about all these issues though.
    • Paywalled/subscribe HB I'm unaware of the details on this HB but why is it a potential taxpayer burden? Hasn't a judge already ruled port has rights of access - so shouldn't costs be on the private company (South Tees Development Corporation) trying to change established access?     LIVE: High Court updates as CEO gives evidence in access rights row between STDC and PD Ports - Teesside Live WWW.GAZETTELIVE.CO.UK The face-off between the Teesport operator and Mayor Ben Houchen's South Tees Development Corporation continues in the High Court  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 1 reply
    • 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
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
        • Like
      • 160 replies
    • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Fare Evasion - Court Summons - Info & Advice Please?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4675 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

Hi,

 

My (stupid) 18yr old son has received a court summons for fare evasion (date of offence in Jan 11) at my address.

 

This a bit confusing as he wants to please guilty but the evidence sheet submitted from the train inspector has incorrect/conflicting information contained within it.

 

Basically my son left the family home to live with his father in July last year and has just moved back with me this month. Because of elections/council tax etc. I made sure the relevant authorities (including electoral roll) etc. had his new address details straight away, and any post that came for him to my address I wrote the new address on and put back in the mail.

 

- My son says he lost the penalty notice, and has not received any other documentation.

 

- The evidence sheet has some negative comments on it that he is alleged to have said he disputes this

 

- The inspectors confirms she checked his address and confirmed my address (he only moved back at the begnning of this month and I informed ctax and electoral roll at the begining of last week) - any records should have him at his dad's house

 

- He says he gave my address because he was not getting any mail at his dad's house but didn't tell me about the fare evasion until it came in the post on Friday..

 

Is there any point in attending a court date to dispute info in the evidence sheet - the main offence is fare evasion and he is unfortunately guilty of this - can we enter this disputed info on the evidence sheet, and the reasons for evasion in the mitigating curcumstances?

 

Its £4 for the ticket and £105 fine - can he pay this before the court date - would this avoid prosecution... He is unemployed at the moment and starting college in September,

 

Any advice would be appreciated.

 

C

 

BTW it was his last day of college and lost his travelcard, he was having probs at his father which is why he has come back home (and is a lot more appreciative now)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello there. The guys in the know don't seem to be around atm, but I'm sure they'll give you advice as soon as they turn up. It sounds fairly straightforward [to me at least, not an expert] and your son isn't disputing it unlike some of the posters here.

 

My best, HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Children eh!

 

If evidence is disputed where that evidence relates directly to the charge, that is to say, does the evidence prove that he committed the offence charged, then that may amount to a 'defence'.

 

Firstly, you do not tell us what offence he is charged with. There are two main offences which are charged, and one or two others that can crop up. It would be useful to know what 'act and section' the summons describes.

 

If the dispute relates to issues that do not affect the charge, that can be explained to the Court in mitigation. But: Inspectors tend to keep accurate notes, in my experience, sons tend to 'embroider' stories. I am not saying 'the inspector is always right', but before he marches in stating 'I never called her a fat cow' (or whatever it is that is disputed), encourage him to understand that 'honesty' might be a good idea.

 

You say that the fine is £105.00. That sounds like the 'claim for costs'. The prosecution cannot begin to guess what the fine can be. For most fare avoidance cases, it tends to end up somewhere between £100 and £350.00, as well as 'costs' and compensation fo the fare. It is important that he tells the Court all about his income, as some I have seen have ended up with fines reduced to £17.00, and sometimes, the Court may award less than the full costs claim.

 

The issues about 'address' are just down to 'time'. The records that railways check are not updated 'daily'. Some records will show the state of play last October.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi - thanks for the replies - he is a silly sod!

 

It states on the summons

 

contrary to Bye Law No 18(2) or the Railway Byelaws made under Section 219 of teh TRansport Act 200 by the Strategic Rail Authroity and confirmed under scedule 20 of the Transport Act 2000

 

How did you know the nature of the disputed coversation......

 

The docs say teh fare outstanding is £4 and £105 for prosecution costs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, the charge is one of failing to show a ticket. That is the 'lesser' of the various charges, which is both good and bad news. Prosecution have less to prove, but the penalties are lower.

 

He can attend Court, I recommend that he does, to explain in person his version of events, or he can write to the Court.

 

Either way, he needs to fill in the Form MC100 and explain his income.

 

If he does nothing, the case can be proved in his absence, the Court will assume 'average earnings', and fine him (probably) £175.00 plus £105 costs, plus 'the fare' and the £15.00 victim surcharge.

 

He needs to understand that fines etc are payable on the day of the hearing, the Court takes a pretty dim view of people who state 'I can't pay'. Whilst prison is not an option for this offence, it becomes an option if people do not pay fines.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Hi - I am waiting for a response from the court - he completed all the forms including the finance one and sent them in the post. Lucky he had a copy and I sent that one special delivery. He pleaded guilty though. I'll update this when we get a response.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...