Punishment to fit the crime, in first class for 3 stops and accused of providing false details - **SETTLED**

[BarleyGB]

I shall aim to draft a response tomorrow (personal details removed). Should I just stick to the facts at this stage or express my genuine regret and apologies / propose a settlement?

[steampowered]

I think you need to be careful to strike a balance between appearing respectful, giving an honest factual statement and not making any admissions. Do not do the prosecution's job for them. Admitting being in first class without a ticket is probably reasonable but I do not think you should admit giving false details.

 

If what you said in your first post is truthful, I would simply say that you gave your address to the ticket inspector, the inspector wrote down the wrong number/postcode, he asked you whether it was correct and you corrected him. There isn't much more to say. Personally I do not think you should say that you gave the wrong details - instead say the inspector wrote down the wrong details. Leave it open as to whether you said the wrong thing or whether the inspector misheard you; you do not have a perfect memory of the event so you cannot be sure either way. Don't say anything like you might have given the wrong details because you were feeling embarassed as that could be a damaging admission.

[Old-CodJA]

I think you need to be careful to strike a balance between appearing respectful, giving an honest factual statement and not making any admissions. Do not do the prosecution's job for them. Admitting being in first class without a ticket is probably reasonable but I do not think you should admit giving false details.

 

If what you said in your first post is truthful, I would simply say that you gave your address to the ticket inspector, the inspector wrote down the wrong number/postcode, he asked you whether it was correct and you corrected him. There isn't much more to say. Personally I do not think you should say that you gave the wrong details - instead say the inspector wrote down the wrong details.

 

 

I'm afraid that this would not help in the OPs case, being seen to be untruthful for a second time is unlikely to gain any sympathy whatsoever

 

 

I was asked for my name and address which I wrote on in the inspectors book. Shortly after this I was asked if I had provided the correct details and I realised I had not. I had incorrectly written the incorrect house number. The inspector told me I had provided false details and thus I understand a prosecution may now be pending?

 

 

It is clear from the OPs first post that s/he wrote the false details.

 

Attempting to apportion blame with the inspector at this late stage is not going to be very helpful at all so far as the prosecution staff are concerned.

[BarleyGB]

Clearly I wrote in the inspectors book and I have to be truthful and not misleading.

 

Im stuggling a bit with how to explain the incorrect details, that it wasnt my intention to provide false info and that I corrected the details verbally when challenged.

 

Is there any suggested wording how to do this without incriminating myself? Also to emphasise that I didnt give a false name and address in terms of what the allegation implies?

[steampowered]

I'm afraid that this would not help in the OPs case, being seen to be untruthful for a second time is unlikely to gain any sympathy whatsoever

 

I am not suggesting the Op says anything that is untrue. What I am saying is that the Op should not give the prosecution a free pass. It is for the prosecution to prove their case. Op shouldn't be making admissions which would damage his ability to defend court proceedings, in the unlikely event this gets further. The key point is that the ticket inspector walked away with the correct address.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the offence of providing false details is a specific intent crime. This means it requires intention (i.e. deliberately giving a false address), not simply negligence. Intention is quite a high threshold and to me it would seem difficult for the train company to prove intention in circumstances where the Op immediately corrected himself and let the ticket inspector walk away with the correct address. Provided, of course, that the Op does not say anything stupid in his letter.

[steampowered]

Im stuggling a bit with how to explain the incorrect details, that it wasnt my intention to provide false info and that I corrected the details verbally when challenged.

 

What was the bit you had to correct?

 

It is very easy to believe someone innocently got the house number or post code wrong. More difficult to believe that you got the county or street name wrong.

[BarleyGB]

The incorrect bit was house number (15 instead of 11), all the remainder of the details, full name, address, street district & town was correct. The inspector also implied he thought my postcode wasnt written correctly but thats him misreading my writing, guess thats subjective?

 

"Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the offence of providing false details is a specific intent crime. This means it requires intention (i.e. deliberately giving a false address), not simply negligence. Intention is quite a high threshold and to me it would seem difficult for the train company to prove intention in circumstances where the Op immediately corrected himself and let the ticket inspector walk away with the correct address. Provided, of course, that the Op does not say anything stupid in his letter."

 

Im interested to understand the thoughts on this / the chances of conviction in these circumstances?

[Old-CodJA]

"Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the offence of providing false details is a specific intent crime. This means it requires intention (i.e. deliberately giving a false address), not simply negligence. Intention is quite a high threshold and to me it would seem difficult for the train company to prove intention in circumstances where the Op immediately corrected himself and let the ticket inspector walk away with the correct address. Provided, of course, that the Op does not say anything stupid in his letter."

 

Im interested to understand the thoughts on this / the chances of conviction in these circumstances?

 

 

Yes, that is fundamentally correct.

 

However, we are always in the position of having only one side of a story and any prosecution staff will have both versions of events on which to base their decision.

 

If the OP immediately noticed his error and said 'Oops! I've put the wrong number there' before any further checks or investigation were made, that is obviously not an attempt to mislead.

 

If the inspector accepted what was written and the OP made no attempt to correct it before the inspector made an address check by telephone (common practice) or other by means, s/he would be correct in saying to the OP 'I have reason to believe that you have given a false address' and a quite different opinion may be formed.

 

If the inspector had not checked, the OP would not receive mail at their address and could avoid a liability. The inspector would be justified in making a report in those circumstances.

 

The assumption that Mr X at No 15 might know the OP and might therefore deliver any Summons to No 11 cannot be relied upon.

 

We do not have the benefit of seeing the inspector's report here.

Edited June 21, 2013 by Old-CodJA

[BarleyGB]

Edited to note that cut and paste removes some carriage (excuse the pun) returns

 

I think im going to explore the settlement option before getting into the detail. Ive drafted a response (below) and am wondering if making an early apology and showing thatI really do care about whats happened that FCC will consider it?

Is the areasonable approach, financial cost isnt my prime consideration at this point,the worry and potential impact to overwhelming. Is the worst that can happen that they still ask me to provide my response?

 

Draft:

 

Ref: XXXXX

 

XXXX,

 

Ive spoke to XXXX in your office this morning, I had a few questions about competing my response to the Notice of Intended Prosecution I received yesterday. I also explain how worried ive been since Monday.

 

XXXX suggested that you are understanding and may agree to a settlement. In view ofthis, I would be grateful if you would consider the following:

 

I am deeplysorry for my actions which were an uncharacteristic moment of stupidity, which I very much regret. I am ashamed and embarrassed about what I have done. I sincerely apologise to yourself, the ticket inspector and all the staff atFirst Capital Connect.

 

This was myfirst offence, ive never been stopped for not having a ticket on the railways before nor have I any other criminal convictions. I promise and undertake toensure this never happens again. Ive studied and worked hard all my life andconsider myself a good honest person of good character, I assure you this incident is an exception, those that know me would acknowledge im of good character and a very honest and genuine, kind person.

 

I wouldreally appreciate it if you would consider an offer to reach amicable settlement instead of a prosecution. I am prepared to pay all necessary costs including those for your office’s administration, First Class fare/penalty fare and any other form of compensation to you feel is appropriate to First Capital Connect that satisfactorily represents my regret and remorse for my actions.

 

A convictionwould have a significant impact on my career as I work in a highly regulated Financial Services sector as a freelance consultant and have done sofor 19years. If convicted there is a good chance that I could lose my livelihood andfuture career prospects in this area.

 

My biggest passion would also be impacted, having invested hundreds of hours of my time and commitment. I learnt in May after 8 years of competing that I have been successful in qualifying for the XXX in Hawaii. This is the pinnacle of mysport and something ive worked so hard for. I understand a conviction will beclassed as ‘Moral Turpitude’ by US Immigration, this would likely prevent entryto the US indefinitely and prevent me taking part.

 

A convictionwould have a profound and disproportionate effect on my employment and life,both now and in the future. I hope you can consider these factors when deciding if a settlement would be acceptable.

 

On theTuesday morning 18th June I sought to admit my mistake, apologise and deal with these matters. I even visited the Offices at XXXX in the hope there was acustomer services counter, reception staff gave me a number and I was able tohave a brief conversation with XXXX. XXXX whilst unable to help at the time took my details and advised I should wait for your letter. I hope you will see this as proactive attempt to take responsibility.

 

 

 

Edited June 21, 2013 by BarleyGB

[Old-CodJA]

An excellent letter,

 

Good luck

[Stigy]

I'm interested to see what the alleged charges are exactly. As Barley said, false name and/or address is an offence of dishonesty. More specifically it falls under under s5(3)c of the Regulation of Railways Act 1889, which amounts to intent to avoid payment. For that one to be used, they'd need to be using a 5(3)a too, which relates to having no valid ticket with intent to avoid payment of the fare. The two have to 'hold hands' so to speak. Now the initial charge of the First Class issue appears to be being dealt with under Byelaw 19 judging by what the op says, and you can't use a 5(3)c with a Byelaw offence. They could however use Byelaw 23, which is refusal of details, as you failed to give the correct address. I'd be willing to be that if they used this one in court in THIS occasion, they'd be on a sticky wicket.

 

It might be that they're not quoting the specific legislation, just outlining what occurred. It's what's on any pending summons that counts legally.

Edited June 21, 2013 by Stigy

[Old-CodJA]

I'm interested to see what the alleged charges are exactly. As Barley said, false name and/or address is an offence of dishonesty. More specifically it falls under under s5(3)c of the Regulation of Railways Act 1889, which amounts to intent to avoid payment. For that one to be used, they'd need to be using a 5(3)a too, which relates to having no valid ticket with intent to avoid payment of the fare. The two have to 'hold hands' so to speak. Now the initial charge of the First Class issue appears to be being dealt with under Byelaw 19 judging by what the op says, and you can't use a 5(3)c with a Byelaw offence. They could however use Byelaw 23, which is refusal of details, as you failed to give the correct address. I'd be willing to be that if they used this one in court in THIS occasion, they'd be on a sticky wicket.

 

It might be that they're not quoting the specific legislation, just outlining what occurred. It's what's on any pending summons that counts legally.

 

 

I suggest that it is much more likely that FCC will go with RoRA S.5(3)a and 5(3)c if they continue to prosecution, but it does depend on the strength of evidence presented in the inspectors' statement.

 

The NIP does not have to confirm the substantive charge, but may refer to the generality that there is sufficient evidence to proceed in the opinion of the prosecutor.

[BarleyGB]

Thank you again,

 

Im currently waiting to hear from FCC with regard to my letter, ive also drafted my version of events in case they ask for this? I maybe back asking for some guidance as feel its a bit long winded and not sure all the content is entirely appropriate?

[Old-CodJA]

Thank you again,

 

Im currently waiting to hear from FCC with regard to my letter, ive also drafted my version of events in case they ask for this? I maybe back asking for some guidance as feel its a bit long winded and not sure all the content is entirely appropriate?

 

 

I notice that you have posted the same queries on other forums and that the responses have been consistent throughout.

 

FCC do not have to agree to settle, but may do so at their discretion. All you can do now is wait for their reply.

[BarleyGB]

I have reached a settlement with First Capital Connect and finalised the matter today, no prosecution will take place.

Thank you all so much for your help and guidance, it really helped get me through a few dark days last week. Your help was invaluable and influenced me to make an early apology and offer a settlement.

Once again massive heartfelt thanks.

[steampowered]

Very pleased for you, well done.

[honeybee13]

Hello again.

 

That's great news for you. I'm pleased it's over and that you can move on. Thank you for letting us know as it will help future caggers.

 

I'll alter your thread title.

 

HB

[Stigy]

Great news, I bet that's a big weight lifted!

[BarleyGB]

Yes its a massive weight lifted, this pretty much dominated my head for a week and caused a number of sleepless nights.

 

As someone else said its the real fare dodgers that probably get away with this and dont really case, the likes of you and I (people who have a lot to lose) worry and will do anything to settle. Part of me wonders if was premature, offered to much to settle but it just wasnt worth the risk. The weight off my shoulders is worth it.

[MrHat]

The important thing is that it is over and you can now get on with things free of stress.