Bailiffs and supposed fine

[Dannywhiltshire]

Greetings.

 

I didn't see this issue raised on any other threads and so made a new topic.

 

I hope someone can help me in my current predicament.

 

My mum has just received a note from a Bailiff company saying that as I didn't appear in court (or pay the initial fine) for what appears to be travelling without a ticket on South West Trains I now owe them £675. Presumably this is Court charges etc.

 

The issue here is that this is the first that I have heard of it.

 

The initial letters were sent to an old address of mine and so I never received them and I do not currently live at the address they have sent the new letter to. I don't know when this was supposed to have happened and don't recall ever getting a fine.

 

My mum just called them to say I don't live there (not saying where I currently live) and they requested a utillity bill of hers to prove that I do not live there.

 

So whats the deal here?

 

Should I simply ignore it and hope it will go away?

Or should I contact the Bailiffs or South West Trains and argue the case that someone else had received this fine and used my name and address. I'm almost certain that I didn't live at the house they sent the letter to at the time I was meant to have got the fine.

Also how (or why), if I am registered on the electoral roll at my Mums house did they send the letters to the other house? Don't they call up and check? They obviously have found my former (and at that time current) address somehow. Why wasn't that done initially?

 

I will be honest, i'm kind of worried about this. Firstly I cannot afford to pay that amount. Secondly I work in a school and dont want them somehow causing issues with my ability to work there.

 

Please, if anyone has any advice on this or has experienced a similar situation I would be very appreciative of the help.

 

Peace and blessings to all.

[honeybee13]

Hello and welcome to CAG.

 

I don't think you should ignore this. I hope some of the transport guys will see this and help you, but I'll also flag it up with the site team to see if anyone can help. If need be, your thread can be moved to the bailiffs forum.

 

My best, HB

[Dannywhiltshire]

Hello and welcome to CAG.

 

I don't think you should ignore this. I hope some of the transport guys will see this and help you, but I'll also flag it up with the site team to see if anyone can help. If need be, your thread can be moved to the bailiffs forum.

 

My best, HB

 

Thank you for you quick response. I hope that someone will be able to help. The thing is I am dubious about speak to either of these groups (SWT of Bailiffs) in case I somehow back myself into a corner (or get forced as the case may be) and end up having to not eat for a month.

How would my post be moved? Should I simply re-post in that forum.?

[dx100uk]

if you honestly knew nowt about it i think you need to contact the court as a matter of urgency and get it set aSIDE

OR WHATEVER THE PROCESS IS.

 

DX

[Old-CodJA]

You say that the address to which you were originally addressed was 'at that time current'. Are you saying that you are the alleged offender, but didn't get any correspondence?

 

If so, you also need to consider the information that you gave when you were reported. It is your responsibility to give your proper address and if you knew that you were moving in the immediate future, but didn't declare that, the Magistrates might be inclined to consider what effect that had on the likelihood of you getting any mail.

 

IF you honestly did not know anything about this case you need to go to your local Court with the papers that you have received and make what is known as a 'Statutory Declaration' on oath in front of the Magistrates to the effect that you did not know of the case until you received the demand from Baliffs.

 

It goes without saying that this must be an honest declaration. It will tell you on the notice that the penalty for being found guilty of Perjury may be up to two years imprisonment.

 

The most important thing is to make this declaration immediately. Do not ignore the notice. It will not go away and it will become much more expensive the longer you forget about it.

[RPI]

All of your address information is held on your credit report so you could be chased up quite easilly, did you commit the offence or not?

[Feebee_71]

Firstly, I'm not sure how a bailiff thinks a utility bill will prove who does or doesn't live at a particular address - all it definitively shows is one person who is responsible for paying that particular utility bill for that property and not who the individual occupants of an address are.

 

Secondly, if you have no recollection of receiving a fine from SW Trains then you are going to have to contact someone to get to the bottom of this matter - I would suggest SW Trains as they are the one's who would have instigated the case against whoever was stopped without a ticket. You should find out from them when and where the offence happened and what evidence was shown to confirm identity of the person stopped.

 

If you don't get in touch with anyone how do you propose to prove you are not liable for the fine?

 

You should also be contacting the court involved as you need to stop proceedings involving the bailiffs while you get this matter sorted out. If you never received any notification of proceedings against you in the matter you need to get the conviction set aside so it goes back to the summons stage and hopefully you will be able to sort it out.

 

Here's hoping someone more knowledgable than me comes along and is able to offer better advice than I,

 

Feebee_71

[Old-CodJA]

You should also be contacting the court involved as you need to stop proceedings involving the bailiffs while you get this matter sorted out. If you never received any notification of proceedings against you in the matter you need to get the conviction set aside so it goes back to the summons stage and hopefully you will be able to sort it out.

 

Yes, it needs attending to a.s.a.p.

 

That is the whole point of going to the Court and making a Statutory Declaration. SWT will not do it.

 

If the defendant says they did not receive a Summons it is up to them to make that declaration and get enforcement stopped as soon as possible.

[Dannywhiltshire]

You say that the address to which you were originally addressed was 'at that time current'. Are you saying that you are the alleged offender, but didn't get any correspondence?

 

If so, you also need to consider the information that you gave when you were reported. It is your responsibility to give your proper address and if you knew that you were moving in the immediate future, but didn't declare that, the Magistrates might be inclined to consider what effect that had on the likelihood of you getting any mail.

 

IF you honestly did not know anything about this case you need to go to your local Court with the papers that you have received and make what is known as a 'Statutory Declaration' on oath in front of the Magistrates to the effect that you did not know of the case until you received the demand from Baliffs.

 

It goes without saying that this must be an honest declaration. It will tell you on the notice that the penalty for being found guilty of Perjury may be up to two years imprisonment.

 

The most important thing is to make this declaration immediately. Do not ignore the notice. It will not go away and it will become much more expensive the longer you forget about it.

 

As far as I am possibly aware I am not the offender in this case. These things usually get imprinted onto your mind and I have no recollection of it.

 

Pain in the arse to be honest. On Monday I will contact the court - if I can find which one it is since it only says HMCS Surrey - and explain my situation.

My concern here is that it is a criminal offence to provide an address which is incorrect. I doubt they will give much credeence to the truth (G-d bless justice!) and will work on the basis that I did get the fine but didn't receive the letters. Their next question will probably be why didn't I live there if I gave the address. I dont know when this happened though so I don't know if I was there or not.

The thing is I did leave the house pretty sharpish and so I suppose I could argue that out if they want to try and play the "its a criminal offence to provide details for an address you knowingly will soon vacate"

Waa waa! I think this is Kamma kicking my arse for all the times I have proudly and smugly cheated SWT.

[RPI]

I find it difficult to believe that you dont recall the incident? did you get issued a Penalty Fare and not pay it? Get an unpaid fare notice and not pay it?

[Dannywhiltshire]

I find it difficult to believe that you dont recall the incident? did you get issued a Penalty Fare and not pay it? Get an unpaid fare notice and not pay it?

 

Thats what I have been saying. I am certain that I never received this fine. I wont lie, I have received a few in the past and have regularly not paid for a ticket on SWT, and this is what annoys me. In this case I have not been caught and I have presumably been sent all the details to another address of which I lived at without my knowledge.

Is it possible someone has provided my details when they have been caught? That is the only explanation I can think of. What safeguards do SWT have in place to prevent fraudulent details being provided?

I ahve tried to contact them but they do not seem to know.

[honeybee13]

Thats what I have been saying. I am certain that I never received this fine. I wont lie, I have received a few in the past and have regularly not paid for a ticket on SWT, and this is what annoys me. In this case I have not been caught and I have presumably been sent all the details to another address of which I lived at without my knowledge.

Is it possible someone has provided my details when they have been caught? That is the only explanation I can think of. What safeguards do SWT have in place to prevent fraudulent details being provided?

I ahve tried to contact them but they do not seem to know.

 

Hello there.

 

I just wondered if you're still 'dodging the fare regularly' without being caught?

 

My best, HB

[Old-CodJA]

The ONLY way that you are going to be able to deal with this if you did not know of the prosecution is to make a truthful Statutory Declaration.

 

If you do that the Court will set aside the conviction and void the fines etc. SWT will be advised by the court that they are able to re-issue the Summons to the address that you give on your declaration without time limit. This means the case starts again. You will then be able to answer the charge as originally laid.

 

If you say that it was not you and that someone else has given your details you will need to enter a 'not guilty plea' either in writing, or by attending Court and doing so in person.

 

The case will then be heard at trial at which the person who put in the report will be called to give evidence and the SWT prosecutor will need to put evidence before the Court to support the allegation that you were the person who was reported. You will have to attend and this could be as simple as the inspector swearing on oath that you were that person.

 

If you read the sticky at the beginning of the forum the rest of the court procedure is explained.

[Dannywhiltshire]

Hello there.

 

I just wondered if you're still 'dodging the fare regularly' without being caught?

 

My best, HB

 

No I do not. I haven't done for well over two years now

[Dannywhiltshire]

The ONLY way that you are going to be able to deal with this if you did not know of the prosecution is to make a truthful Statutory Declaration.

 

If you do that the Court will set aside the conviction and void the fines etc. SWT will be advised by the court that they are able to re-issue the Summons to the address that you give on your declaration without time limit. This means the case starts again. You will then be able to answer the charge as originally laid.

 

If you say that it was not you and that someone else has given your details you will need to enter a 'not guilty plea' either in writing, or by attending Court and doing so in person.

 

The case will then be heard at trial at which the person who put in the report will be called to give evidence and the SWT prosecutor will need to put evidence before the Court to support the allegation that you were the person who was reported. You will have to attend and this could be as simple as the inspector swearing on oath that you were that person.

 

If you read the sticky at the beginning of the forum the rest of the court procedure is explained.

 

Thank you for this. That is what I will do.

This really is ridiculous though. I mean, to think that a Revenue Protection Agent - who as their job title suggests is to make as much money for their company, and are judged successful or unsuccessful by the amount of money in fines that they bring forth - should do anything other than confirm that "that is the person" and their fine was justified is just plain stupid.

I have already contacted SWT and the Iracc (or whatever the anacroynim is) complaining about this. They need to ensure that they ahve some measures in place to prevent this from happening to others in future.

[Old-CodJA]

This really is ridiculous though. I mean, to think that a Revenue Protection Agent - who as their job title suggests is to make as much money for their company, and are judged successful or unsuccessful by the amount of money in fines that they bring forth - should do anything other than confirm that "that is the person" and their fine was justified is just plain stupid.

 

I realise that you are perhaps annoyed, though for someone who openly admits to having been a serial fare evader, I have to say I find it difficult to have any sympathy. However, please do not confuse your interpretation with what my post actually said.

 

I'm sorry if it wasn't clear, but what I said was, if you make a statutory declaration and the process starts again, you may choose to plead not guilty and claim that you have been the victim of an impostor.

 

If there is no other evidence to support your claim, this may well then go to trial.

 

When it comes to identification, the inspector may be asked to identify you at Court and swear on oath 'Yes, I am certain that is the person I reported on XXXXXX date.'

 

If so, the trial will go ahead. It will be up to the Magistrates to decide whether any fine is justified.

 

In the absence of any other evidence, if the inspector cannot positively identify you, the case is almost certain to fail.

[SRPO]

To add to OC's post regarding ID evidence, any court asked to gve consideration to a 'dock ID' only, will most probably dismiss the allegation.

The reporting officer should have a description of the offender in their statement & that is the ID evidence to be examined at court.

[Old-CodJA]

To add to OC's post regarding ID evidence, any court asked to gve consideration to a 'dock ID' only, will most probably dismiss the allegation.

The reporting officer should have a description of the offender in their statement & that is the ID evidence to be examined at court.

 

Yes, quite right. There should be evidence of identity in the original report and the 'dock identification' will only be supplementary, sorry if that wasn't clear.

 

If there is no evidence of identity in the original report, it is unlikely in my opinion that the prosecution would be restarted.

[Dannywhiltshire]

Yes, quite right. There should be evidence of identity in the original report and the 'dock identification' will only be supplementary, sorry if that wasn't clear.

 

If there is no evidence of identity in the original report, it is unlikely in my opinion that the prosecution would be restarted.

 

Sorry about the last post I wasn't saying what you had said was stupid. I meant that it's stupid to listen to anything that someone says who's sole aim is the opposite of justice i.e. the ticket inspector.

 

In terms of this description that they write just how specific would it need to be? I mean lets say it goes so far as "5ft 7 approx, brown hair" If I am this height and have this colour hair then does that mean that it is me? Surely the only way to conclusively tell would be photographic evidence.

I would hate to be there and have them say the description fits when it could equally fit any number of people and then be back at square one.

 

Too be honest I think this may have to be a case of getting over the sense of injustice that I have and just simply pay the fine if I can get the case re-opened again. I dont want to take the risk of having to go to court, get prepared, only to fail.

 

Thank you to everyone for their help in this matter it has really been incredibly useful. I will keep you updated with the progress of this if you wish and let you know how it worked out. Hopefully I will have a positive story to tell

[Old-CodJA]

Sorry about the last post I wasn't saying what you had said was stupid. I meant that it's stupid to listen to anything that someone says who's sole aim is the opposite of justice i.e. the ticket inspector.

 

No problem, yes, I understood that, but you need to also consider that you are making an accusation that may well be unfounded. The inspector has only submitted a report at this point. If the inspector met you at Court for the first time and said 'This is not the person I reported' how can that be described as 'the opposite of justice'?

 

Surely the only way to conclusively tell would be photographic evidence.

 

Photographic evidence could be conclusive of course, but it is equally unrealistic to expect railway inspectors to photograph everyone they report

 

Too be honest I think this may have to be a case of getting over the sense of injustice that I have and just simply pay the fine if I can get the case re-opened again. I dont want to take the risk of having to go to court, get prepared, only to fail.

 

I think you may have misunderstood here too.

 

You either accept the judgement and pay the penalties imposed by the Court, or you ask for the case to be re-opened.

Edited February 13, 2012 by Old-CodJA

[Dannywhiltshire]

Thank you OC.

 

I have now got the Statutory Declaration and am sending this off to the necessary court.

In relation to your last point I am sadly (and maybe luckily in some ways) ignorant of the process. I have read the "sticky's" about the court proceedure but am not sure if this would apply to me also.

If I plead guilty just to get this out of the way, or argue my case and fail, is there any way of gauging how much I may have to pay or is this simply an arbitrary amount that the magistrates decide upon at the time?

Is there no way now of speaking to SWT trains now and settling this out of court? I will gladly pay for the initial fine if it prevents me having to go to court. Even just signing the form today was horrible (-_-) I'm not keen on being spoken to like a naughty child and treated with such disdain, especially when their attitude is born purely on presumption of who I am.

[timbo58]

Just as an aside and perhaps I should ignore it as everyone else has seemingly?

A revenue protection assistant or whatever grade they are within revenue protection does as their title infers: protect revenue that would otherwise be lost, not 'maximise profit' at all.

 

This is borne out by the fact most revenue protection departments use a great deal of discretion when dealing with cases and only tend to report for prosecution those that they feel most deserve it.

Were it as per your version they would try to settle out of court for a whacking great fee every time whether they had evidence or not and wouldn't leave it to the magistrates to decide what their 'reasonable' costs were.

[Old-CodJA]

Thank you OC.

 

I have now got the Statutory Declaration and am sending this off to the necessary court.

Even just signing the form today was horrible (-_-) I'm not keen on being spoken to like a naughty child and treated with such disdain, especially when their attitude is born purely on presumption of who I am.

 

I assume that you mean you have attended a Court and made the declaration hence your comments about how you were spoken to?

 

In relation to your last point I am sadly (and maybe luckily in some ways) ignorant of the process. I have read the "sticky's" about the court proceedure but am not sure if this would apply to me also.

 

The procedure is the same for all contested cases.

 

If I plead guilty just to get this out of the way,

 

If you have made a Statutory Declaration that you knew nothing about the offence and citing the fact that you are not the person who was reported, the Court will not look kindly on a guilty plea for expediency.

 

You cannot not be the offender and plead guilty to the offence.

 

The 'talking to' that you experienced at Court today is likely to be nothing compared to what might be expected in that scenario.

 

or argue my case and fail, is there any way of gauging how much I may have to pay or is this simply an arbitrary amount that the magistrates decide upon at the time?

 

The papers that the Baillifs produced will give you an accurate idea. It is likely that there will have been a fine of anywhere between £175 - £350, plus prosecution costs (usually between £100 - £150), the claimed fare and the victim surcharge of £15. The remainder of the £600-odd pounds will be Baillif's charges.

 

Is there no way now of speaking to SWT trains now and settling this out of court? I will gladly pay for the initial fine if it prevents me having to go to court.

 

If you have made the Statutory Declaration and said it isn't you that was reported, why would you want to accept punishment for someone elses' misdemeanour.

[Dannywhiltshire]

I assume that you mean you have attended a Court and made the declaration hence your comments about how you were spoken to?

 

 

 

The procedure is the same for all contested cases.

 

 

 

If you have made a Statutory Declaration that you knew nothing about the offence and citing the fact that you are not the person who was reported, the Court will not look kindly on a guilty plea for expediency.

 

You cannot not be the offender and plead guilty to the offence.

 

The 'talking to' that you experienced at Court today is likely to be nothing compared to what might be expected in that scenario.

 

 

 

The papers that the Baillifs produced will give you an accurate idea. It is likely that there will have been a fine of anywhere between £175 - £350, plus prosecution costs (usually between £100 - £150), the claimed fare and the victim surcharge of £15. The remainder of the £600-odd pounds will be Baillif's charges.

 

 

 

If you have made the Statutory Declaration and said it isn't you that was reported, why would you want to accept punishment for someone elses' misdemeanour.

 

Yeah I went to court today. I made the statutory declaration as I haven't received any paperwork or anything, I believe it was sent to another address. I made it clear to them that I haven't ever heard anything from SWT or the court, this is why the case is being re-opened.

 

To be honest I really dont care about paying for someone elses fine, anything is better than having to go back to that place and also have to pay the ridiculous £600 fine.

My argument to SWT is that due to not having received anything to date I haven't been given the oppurtunity to pay the fine. This has (from my perspective) gone directly to court without any of the normal opportunities to resolve it. I have sworn this is the case under oath and as such I hope that they will take their Revenue Protection role seriously and try to recover the lost revenue (which can only be something like £5 or something) If they wish to take it back to court it would seem to me that protecting their revenue is not their intention and retribution is.

[Old-CodJA]

Yeah I went to court today. I made the statutory declaration as I haven't received any paperwork or anything, I believe it was sent to another address. I made it clear to them that I haven't ever heard anything from SWT or the court, this is why the case is being re-opened.

 

To be honest I really dont care about paying for someone elses fine, anything is better than having to go back to that place and also have to pay the ridiculous £600 fine.

My argument to SWT is that due to not having received anything to date I haven't been given the oppurtunity to pay the fine. This has (from my perspective) gone directly to court without any of the normal opportunities to resolve it. I have sworn this is the case under oath and as such I hope that they will take their Revenue Protection role seriously and try to recover the lost revenue (which can only be something like £5 or something) If they wish to take it back to court it would seem to me that protecting their revenue is not their intention and retribution is.

 

The issue here is that, if there is evidence of a prosecutable offence the TOC does not have to allow an opportunity to pay later and can proceed to prosecution. There is never any obligation on them to accept a settlement.

 

A penalty fare notice is a civil resolution, but you say you were not issued such a notice. You would know if you had been as these are numbered notices handed to the traveller at the time of detection. There is no obligation on rail staff to ussue any such notice if evidence suggests that more serious action is warranted.

 

The role of a Revenue Protection Inspector is not just to collect money as you seem to suggest, that may sometimes be a part of it, but it is also to identify and report incidences of fare evasion and the penalties for conviction of this offence are prescribed by parliament, not the rail companies.

 

If you persist with the claim that this is a matter that concerns an 'impostor' as your posts have suggested, the Court will not let you plead guilty to the charge.

 

You will just have to see how this turns out now that you have made that declaration on oath.

Edited February 16, 2012 by Old-CodJA