First Capital Connect - Intention to Prosecute

[namelessb]

Hi there,

I've been browsing this board for a little while and have noticed how incredibly helpful you have all been to several different people in similar circumstances. I was hoping that perhaps someone would be able to find the time to help me out.

I received a letter from First Capital Connect stating their intention to prosecute, requesting that I explain myself in relation to "the following alleged offence(s): failing to hand over a valid rail ticket for inspection".

I penned a reply, based loosely on a couple of extremely helpful posts on this forum, and was hoping I'd be able to get a second opinion on its likely effectiveness before I send it.

 

Dear Sirs,

 

Your reference _________

 

Please accept my sincerest apologies for failing to have a valid ticket for my journey on ________.

 

After performing for free at a charity event in _______ in aid of the Teenage Cancer Trust, I began my journey home, as I needed to be in _____ first thing Monday morning to attend work (teaching music at a local school). Realising that my mobile phone had no battery power and that I had no means of paying for a ticket at the time, my friends suggested that I obtain a “permit to travel” (the first I had ever heard of this system) which I was told would allow me to defer the purchase of a ticket until I was able to buy one (I learned, upon arrival at _______, that this was incorrect and was not the purpose of the system). So, having purchased a permit to travel, I fully believed I would be able to board the train and find, at ________, a way of contacting my family so that they could aid me in purchasing a ticket (by transferring the money to my bank account, or by purchasing one online). I would like to stress that I fully intended to purchase a ticket for this journey, and that this incident occurred entirely due to my ignorance of the regulations which applied to me.

 

Upon arrival at ________ I showed the member of staff manning the barriers my permit to travel, fully believing that this would allow me access to the main station where I could reach a pay phone and purchase a ticket. I was not, of course, allowed through the barriers, and was informed that this was not the purpose of a permit to travel and that I could either purchase a ticket from a member of staff or be placed under caution and interviewed. As I was unable to pay for a ticket or make contact with anyone, I had no option but to be interviewed. After the interview, the member of staff to whom I spoke made no mention of any intention to prosecute - I was instead informed that I would be given an opportunity to explain myself and that the company would then decide whether or not to issue me with a fine. At this point I asked what steps I should take to purchase the ticket and was told, “don’t worry about the ticket now. Just wait for the letter.”

 

I hope that this demonstrates that I intended to pay my fare from the outset. I appreciate that I have inadvertently breached a byelaw but genuinely did not understand that a permit to travel did not allow me to defer the purchase of a ticket until I was able to pay my fare.

 

I am deeply upset by the idea that I might be prosecuted by what was a truly unintentional act and ask that you please reconsider your intention. A prosecution for such an uncharacteristic and involuntary act would be highly damaging to my career as a music teacher, and may even prevent me from teaching in the future.

 

I am offering to pay the outstanding fare and all of the reasonable costs, administrative or otherwise, that you may have incurred in order to resolve this matter swiftly, as an alternative to court action. I am also willing to pay any penalty you feel it fair to impose upon me.

 

Yours Sincerely,

 

___________

 

Do you think it is worth having a conversation with the company first over the phone to find out if they are willing to settle?

 

Many thanks!

[Grotesque]

No.

 

GOOD LETTER.

 

Good luck!

[namelessb]

Thanks for your reply. Any particular reason why not?

[Stigy]

Thanks for your reply. Any particular reason why not?

There's no point in phoning them at this stage, as your letter will be received, and will be much clearer as to what occured on the day, and might make them more inclined to settle the matter administratively. It's a good letter by the way, if a little sarcastic looking in the first paragraph?

 

It looks from your post as though they want to prosecute under a Byelaw, which would suggest they haven't got the evidence they'd like, otherwise I fear you'd be looking at a more severe Regulation of Railways Act 1889 offence (all this would have been bottomed out during questioning).

 

Good luck!

[Old-CodJA]

I hope that you will not mind me disagreeing a little bit regarding your letter. It does contain a lot of good points, but I think 'Stigy' touched on a part of what I think needs attention when referring to 'sarcasm' in the first paragraph. (amended, in error I had referred to 'Grotesque' picking up on this point - my apologies.)

 

For what my opinion is worth, I think you are much more likely to get a sympathetic hearing if you were to leave out all the irrelevant bits.

 

Concentrate on the facts that are relevant to the allegation of an offence for which FCC might go to issue of a summons.

 

Some people may be offended by my comments and I apologise if that is the case, but I do try to be constructive in offering suggestions which I believe might assist

 

 

After performing for free at a charity event in _______ in aid of the Teenage Cancer Trust, I began my journey home, as I needed to be in _____ first thing Monday morning to attend work (teaching music at a local school).

 

Whilst your actions are clearly laudable, it is not unheard of for such comments to be read as an attempt at emotional blackmail and this can risk being counter-productive. Whatever your reasons for being where you were, they do not have relevence to the actual allegation, which is that you travelled on a train and did not have a ticket or means to pay the fare.

 

Realising that my mobile phone had no battery power and that I had no means of paying for a ticket at the time, my friends suggested that I obtain a “permit to travel” (the first I had ever heard of this system)

which I was told would allow me to defer the purchase of a ticket until I was able to buy one (I learned, upon arrival at _______, that this was incorrect and was not the purpose of the system). So, having purchased a permit to travel, I fully believed I would be able to board the train and find, at ________, a way of contacting my family so that they could aid me in purchasing a ticket (by transferring the money to my bank account, or by purchasing one online).

 

That is relevant, it explains why you travelled without a ticket. It does not and cannot excuse your action, but does explain the reason.

 

I would like to stress that I fully intended to purchase a ticket for this journey, and that this incident occurred entirely due to my ignorance of the regulations which applied to me.

 

Ignorance of a rule is not a defence.

 

Upon arrival at ________ I showed the member of staff manning the barriers my permit to travel, fully believing that this would allow me access to the main station where I could reach a pay phone and purchase a ticket.

 

The Permit to Travel has printed on it clear instructions regarding how it must be exchanged and the fare paid. Having found yourself in this position, prosecution office staff reading your letter will expect that you would have read the permit that you had obtained.

 

I was not, of course, allowed through the barriers, and was informed that this was not the purpose of a permit to travel and that I could either purchase a ticket from a member of staff or be placed under caution and interviewed. As I was unable to pay for a ticket or make contact with anyone, I had no option but to be interviewed. After the interview, the member of staff to whom I spoke made no mention of any intention to prosecute - I was instead informed that I would be given an opportunity to explain myself and that the company would then decide whether or not to issue me with a fine. At this point I asked what steps I should take to purchase the ticket and was told, “don’t worry about the ticket now. Just wait for the letter.”.

 

Telling the rail company all of this is entirely unnecessary as their staff have already filed a report, hence your receipt of their letter. Your claim that you were not made aware that this could result in prosecution will not be accepted because you have already said that you were 'cautioned' and the caution reminds you that evidence might be placed before a Court.

 

I hope that this demonstrates that I intended to pay my fare from the outset. I appreciate that I have inadvertently breached a byelaw but genuinely did not understand that a permit to travel did not allow me to defer the purchase of a ticket until I was able to pay my fare.

 

Stating that you did not set out intending to avoid a fare is a good idea, but I would leave it at that if I were you

 

I am deeply upset by the idea that I might be prosecuted by what was a truly unintentional act and ask that you please reconsider your intention. A prosecution for such an uncharacteristic and involuntary act would be highly damaging to my career as a music teacher, and may even prevent me from teaching in the future.

 

I am offering to pay the outstanding fare and all of the reasonable costs, administrative or otherwise, that you may have incurred in order to resolve this matter swiftly, as an alternative to court action. I am also willing to pay any penalty you feel it fair to impose upon me.

 

This is the main thrust that your letter should convey and I think that offering to pay the fare and all reasonable costs incurred by the rail company through dealing with your actions is the best that you can do.

 

Sorry if you feel I have been overly critical, but I hope that you will understand that years of reading and assessing such letters goes into looking for the bits that matter. There are no guarantees that you will get the outcome that you are hoping for, but concentrating on the points that really have relevance to the offence will maximise your chances.

Edited August 1, 2011 by Old-CodJA
corrected reference to another contributor - para 1