[Help] GF used my student oyster card and faces prosecution

[honeybee13]

Hello again, DH. I don't know when I last saw so many questions, phew.

 

Have you thought about something like wikipedia for the legal terms? It might put you a step ahead.

 

If you click on a forum user's name, some people have a little biography that tells you what they do. Mine isn't a good example, but try OC and firstclass.

 

HB

[Darkhiatus]

Yeah, I'm the sort of person you could say feels that knowledge is power or that sort of thing. Thanks for the profile thing, it seems like quite a varied community! I've looked on wiki for a variety of terms, but it's ones that i don't think of checking that people point out here, which is of course one of the great things coming here.

 

I have an additional question to add to my 2 above questions in my previous post...

 

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/revenue_inspectors_and_drivers_o - according to this resource which is prosecutions statistics (ctrl+f '2,481' to find the relevant section, though the whole thing is interesting), only 32 of 2,481 cases by London Underground were settled out of court. This was in 2009, and as i understand it, the stance has grown harder in recent years. Are these reliable statistics by your experience? (I am looking for tfl employees who might have experience in this ideally)

 

EDIT: on further reading the article, the prosecution statistics state 4,567 underground cases, with 2,481 progressing to formal prosecution. The remaining 2,176 were a mixture of formal warnings for first time offenders, lack of evidence and ongoing cases.

 

What are the chances of receiving a formal warning for a 21 year old first time offender?

Edited January 18, 2013 by Darkhiatus

[honeybee13]

Are the cases divided between what you might call 'straight' fare evasion for want of a better word, and freedom passes/student passes for instance? If not, the stats could be rather misleading.

 

From what I've read, certain types of fare evasion are viewed more seriously, particularly for passes that are publicly funded.

 

HB

[Darkhiatus]

I just realised that point myself actually but thanks for pointing it out. in that case it's very likely that most of the formal warnings were issued for the less serious travelling without a valid ticket offence. I can only hope that someone experienced with the numbers could shed light on the likelihood of not being prosecuted for using someone else's student oyster.

[BazzaS]

 

I am also curious - are you forum regulars mostly just frequent forum goers who begun from someone like myself, or is it more normal to be involved within the relevant businesses? (I have come to know that there are some prosecution managers/supervisors/ticket inspectors and all sorts around here!)

 

I can't really speak for others except where I know they've made their 'status ' clear in the past, and I'm not sure I count as a "regular", and I'm certainly NOT an "industry expert".

 

For me, I accepted a £10 penalty fare some 21 years ago on the Underground, when I felt a little leeway could have been applied (travelling Zone 1 to Zone 1, accidentally got on wrong train, tried to change back at Camden Town (Z2), explained my intent when stopped at top of escalator, not trying to exit station). I couldn't argue on basis of fact, so paid up.

 

But, over 20 years later, fast forward : while on CAG, the title of a post caught my eye, and I followed a thread with interest.

 

I then noticed the "industry experts" answering the complex, but the "routine" questions, too ; & I thought "if I learn from them & answer the simple or more routine stuff where I can get to them before the experts" - the experts can just add 'BazzaS is correct', freeing them up to answer the tricky ones (or to correct me if I've got it wrong).

 

SRPO and RPI's screen names are suggestive of a role.

Firstclassx could be taken to mean a number of things but their posts sometimes suggest they work on the RPI side.

HB is on the site team & seems to take an interest in this forum.

OC has posted in the past of working as a Prosecutor, and of their interest in the field being back when the organisation was BR, so it appears they have been doing this a while

 

I don't think I've revealed anything that hasn't been noted before, and would stress that even where I believe the posters "to work in the industry" or even "in prosecutions", I've never seen the poster to be claiming to speak on behalf of a TOC (in fact, I've never seen them even hint as to what TOC they might work for).

 

I'd further commend the "industry experts" for not preaching, or gloating "caught bang to rights" .... I've only ever seen them say "it looks like you may have to accept being guilty" (where from the OP it seems that they are!) and offering advice on how to mitigate the consequences.

 

My respect to them for their even-handed and constructive approach (especially when not everyone appears to appreciate this is what they are doing).

Edited January 18, 2013 by BazzaS

[Darkhiatus]

I really do appreciate all the help and thanks for really framing what goes on in this forum. I've visited many sites and there is normally a large proportion of people ready to point the blame and take the high moral ground. As you say, the constructive advice on how to mitigate the consequences is really quite something which I realised before i posted. I acknowledged my position in the first post and I'm really looking for a way to limit the damage I suppose.

 

The 3 remaining questions I have I can summarise here since I feel the posting has muddled things somewhat:

 

1) In reference to "mitigating the effects" of the alleged offence - in what way can the effects be mitigated from the prosecution manager's point of view? Is the only form of mitigation in my instance not being called to court?

 

2) How is a penalty considered proportionate to a crime? For example, it would be disproportionate to pay £5,000 for fare evasion (or is it? this is my opinion), yet on the other hand, it could be deemed that the impact of a criminal record could be greater than a £5,000 fine. Is there the prospect of pointing out that the effect of a criminal record could be disproportionate in that respect, thus implying that we would rather incur a large penalty to cover costs?

 

3) http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reques..._and_drivers_o - according to this resource which is prosecutions statistics (ctrl+f '2,481' to find the relevant section, though the whole thing is interesting), only 32 of 2,481 cases by London Underground were settled out of court. This was in 2009, and as i understand it, the stance has grown harder in recent years. Are these reliable statistics by your experience? (I am looking for tfl employees who might have experience in this ideally)

 

EDIT: on further reading the article, the prosecution statistics state 4,567 underground cases, with 2,481 progressing to formal prosecution. The remaining 2,176 were a mixture of formal warnings for first time offenders, lack of evidence and ongoing cases.

 

What are the chances of receiving a formal warning for a 21 year old first time offender?

[Old-CodJA]

I really think that you are overcomplicating things here.

 

1. If you want to stand any chance of mitigating this matter, simply tell the truth when you respond to the letter from TfL, apologise and ask if the case can be disposed of without Court action. They do not have to agree. They take a very dim view of people intentionally avoiding payment of their proper fare.

 

2. Penalty fares are not relevant in cases of fare evasion. Using someone else's pass / card etc to avoid paying your own fare is a criminal offence

 

3. The numbers of case prosecuted and convicted in past years will have no bearing on your case. Each is decided on it's own merit.

 

It is possible that if you are very fortunate, you may be permitted an opportunity to resolve the matter outside Court, BUT in my experience, very much more likely that you will receive a summons in due course.

 

One thing that you do need to bear in mind is the fact that you are asking people to help you with suggestions based only on your assessment of the incident. Those of us who do work in this field will always temper replies with the knowledge that there are always two versions of a report and frequently, there will be variations between the two versions.

 

That said, like Bazza, I am sure that most users of the forum are fair and objective in giving their suggestions.

 

You really do need to slow down, wait until you get that letter from TfL and then respond to the actual allegation, rather than creating some pre-determined reply based on reading reports of irrelevant statistics and legislations.

 

To do the latter would be much more likely to increase the chances of being summonsed in my view.

Edited January 18, 2013 by Old-CodJA

[Darkhiatus]

Alright, well I suppose I shall seek further advice when the letter detailing the allegation comes through, thanks for making it clear.

 

I have obviously been writing in my girlfriend's position and what I could do to help. One unresolved issue is the mention in many places where the card owner may face action if intentionally allowing use of it (which it seems I would fit a description of). What is the likelihood of my own self facing any sort of penalty and/or court action? I am even afraid of re-applying for a student oyster at this point because I feel that leaving this mention could help me more.

[honeybee13]

This from my post #5. Have you looked at the TfL website? It has a lot of information about Ts and Cs of student cards.

 

From section H

51. Your 18+ Student Oyster photocard, and any season ticket or pay as you go credit held on it, are for your use only.

52. An 18+ Student Oyster photocard can only be used by the person whose photograph and name appears on it. If you allow someone else to use your photocard, we may withdraw your Student-rate travel concession and the person using your photocard may be subject to a penalty fare and/or prosecution.

 

HB

[Darkhiatus]

Yes, I did read that. Sorry if i wasn't clear - I was more looking at the realistic prospect of this happening. The "may"s really complicate things. I am prepared for the worst case scenario, however, I wonder what the chance of it coming to a prosecution for myself is?

 

EDIT: I can't read. I am glad that I shouldn't face prosecution and that the worst to happen is I need to bike more often (good for me anyway...).

 

 

It seems all my questions have been answered at this moment in time. I don't know forum policy, but is it advised that I leave this thread open until the full issue is resolved, or that I closed this thread and create a new thread when the letter comes?

[honeybee13]

No, you definitely don't start a new thread please, it just leads to confusion.

 

Leave this one open, who knows you may have more comments, and when you have more news you can update us.

 

HB

[rambo]

TFL really don't like it if someone uses someone elses discounted oyster.

TFL will prosecute, IMO.

[HavingABadDay]

Darkhiatus, I am basically in the same situation - my girlfriend also used my 18+ student oyster and got caught on a bus. Do you have some news to share?