Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX  2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
    • well post it here as a text in a the msg reply half of it is blanked out. dx  
  • 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
      • 161 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

Help please FCC fare dodge prosecution worry


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3509 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

I was caught by the revenue protection squad after travelling from one of the outer London zones on a Zone two oyster pass.

 

I've been cycling in regularly and then getting the train then some days I admit that I neglected to touch in on my card and so just paid for the zone two. i've done this a several times and I admitted it to the revenue protection folk after they checked my card and saw the record.

 

i have bought a range of zones 2, 3 and higher in the past on the card and when I'm not cycling i mostly touch in and out when i travel by train but sometimes forget and admit I sometimes dodge the fare.

 

I received a letter from prosecutions saying they want to take me to Mag.Court and want me to send a letter explaining my side.

 

I know what i did was wrong but i've got a new baby and a crippling mortgage so being skint all the time it felt easier to do what might otherwise have felt definitely wrong.

 

I know I dodged some of the fare but on days I'm not cycling in I generally pay the full fare.

 

What I want to know is how can they calculate a fine? How large the fine may be? And whether it;s in my interests to try and settle or not and how best to do that?

Edited by honeybee13
Paras.
Link to post
Share on other sites

ouch!

 

if there are several provable instances

and you have [correctly] coughed

 

this could prove expensive & result in a conviction/criminal record..

sorry but that's the bottom line.

 

I very much doubt you'll succeed in settling out of court.

 

they take a very dim view of repeated purposeful fare evasion

 

however if you read a few threads In this forum

there have been miracles.

 

the best advise is to be HONEST .

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a very consumer-action-orientated view @Conniff! There will be compensation as well, but i don't know how much. Very worried about how I'm going to afford it. Do they do payment plans? Serious question. For the larger fines - they threaten up to £1,000. And my compensation will add a bit more to that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that.

 

I'm admitting guilt and am expressing remorse and will sincerely apologize. It was a sustained stupidity on my part, but my finances are tight and I quickly admitted I was wrong when questioned and will co-operate fully because as I recognise I have acted foolishly.

 

Is there anything I can do to mitigate my circumstances? I'm not trying to get away with anything and am fully aware that I need to be punished and do not argue with this, but I just can't afford it. I know this won't avoid me a fine and compensation but just want to do what I can do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi W00

 

What exactly does the letter say? You need to concentrate on writing a response and mitigate circumstances - new baby, struggling with finances, low wage etc, although they might ignore them they may add some weight, don't get caught in any further deceptions, be up front. The wording of the letter is very important.

 

Write a letter, the guys can amend it for you. Stop worrying about what you can't control.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The letter said "...your details were taken by rev protection...this letter is to inform you of our intention to take to Mag Ct and the enc letter provides you with opp to tell us what happened from your point of view. Information should be both factual and honest... we always ask court to impose maximum penalty which inc £1000 fine, criminal rec, prison sentence, suspended sent, community serv, compensation, costs. Details of the offence: entering a train for the purpose of travelling without a ticket entitling to travel."

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the letter I'm thinking of writing.

 

Dear Madam/Sir

 

I've been regularly cycling in to work for some years and since recently moving to Barnet had been cycling to and leaving my bike mostly at Finsbury Park or also Alexandra Palace and getting the train from there. The days when I don't cycle I top up with pay as you go. Recently some days I admit that I sometimes didn't touch in on my card from New Barnet and so just travelled on my zone two travelcard. I've done this a several times and I quickly admitted this to the revenue protection officers after they stopped me.

 

I admit I was guilty, I admit I was dishonest - but it was a sustained stupidity on my part and I am extremely remorseful and very sorry. I know it's a very serious offence and there's no chance of avoiding court.

 

But overwhelmingly I paid the full fare - but my finances are tight with a young family and a massive mortgage. I'm not looking to get away with anything, just saying that this has affected my thinking.

 

When I was questioned I quickly admitted I was wrong and co-operated fully and want to co-operate now because as I realise I have acted foolishly. I don't want to get away with anything - I fully realise I need to be punished - but I just want to show my remorse and do whatever I can do to to show I am contrite and want to be helpful.

 

The Revenue Protection officer led me to understand a penalty fare was going to be issued rather than taking me to magistrates court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello there.

 

I expect the rail guys will be along later with thoughts on your letter, but I think the tone is right. Old-Codja usually recommends apologising to the member of staff involved and undertaking never to travel without a valid ticket again.

 

I might change the last paragraph. I know you're not criticising the RPI, but it could be read that way and that never goes down well. Maybe something more along the lines of asking if they will allow you to reach an settlement with them by paying the fares due plus their reasonable admin costs.

 

That's just a few suggestions from me, you may want to see what the forum regulars think as well.

 

When do you have to reply by?

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

21 days.

 

Is there any way to bring in the rail experts like to this conversation, as on some other forums, with @name or something, or is it a case of 'you ask the question and wait for them to come'?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So this bit specifically is key you mean, rebel11?

 

That said, I fully accept that I appear to have breached the Railway Byelaws and/or the National Rail Conditions of Carriage, and understand, fully, that it is my responsibility to ensure the safekeeping of my tickets. I can assure you that this incident has enabled me to fully appreciate the seriousness of failing to produce a valid ticket, and I sincerely apologise for the inconvenience I may have caused you.

 

I would respectfully ask that in light of the above, this matter may be concluded by covering any administrative costs you may have incurred from my actions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

21 days.

 

Is there any way to bring in the rail experts like to this conversation, as on some other forums, with @name or something, or is it a case of 'you ask the question and wait for them to come'?

 

You wait for them to come along. If we don't hear from one or two of them soon, I'll send out a couple of SOSs for you. The rail guys have day jobs, so they can't always answer straight away. :)

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This might be more appropriate now.

 

Dear Madam/Sir

 

I've been regularly cycling in to work for some years and since recently moving to Barnet had been cycling to and leaving my bike mostly at Finsbury Park or also Alexandra Palace and getting the train from there. The days when I don't cycle I top up with pay as you go. Recently some days I admit that I sometimes didn't touch in on my card from New Barnet and so just travelled on my zone two travelcard. I've done this a several times and I quickly admitted this to the revenue protection officers after they stopped me.

 

I admit I was guilty, I admit I was dishonest - it was a sustained stupidity on my part and I am extremely remorseful and very sorry. I know it's a very serious offence and there's no chance of escaping due punishment.

 

But overwhelmingly I paid the full fare - but my finances are tight with a young family and a massive mortgage. I'm not looking to get away with anything, just saying that this has affected my thinking.

 

When I was questioned I quickly admitted I was wrong and co-operated fully and want to co-operate now because as I realise I have acted foolishly. I don't want to get away with anything - I fully realise I need to pay what is due - but I just want to show my remorse and do whatever I can do to to fully prove I am contrite and want to be helpful.

 

I can assure you that this incident has enabled me to fully appreciate the seriousness of trying to avoid paying the full fare, and I sincerely apologise for the inconvenience I may have caused to the company and the relevant departments.

 

I would respectfully ask that this matter may be concluded by my paying a penalty fare/fine/fare compensation, plus compensation for any administrative costs you may have incurred from my actions.

 

Yours sincerely etc

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi w00

 

They will no doubt ask you to submit a Income and Expenditure form, so will ask you to pay what you can each month, not in a lump sum.

 

Also no-one's addressed how am i meant to pay a big fine - can i do it over a longterm plan?
Link to post
Share on other sites

I was caught by the revenue protection squad after travelling from one of the outer London zones on a Zone two oyster pass.

 

I've been cycling in regularly and then getting the train then some days I admit that I neglected to touch in on my card and so just paid for the zone two. i've done this a several times and I admitted it to the revenue protection folk after they checked my card and saw the record.

 

i have bought a range of zones 2, 3 and higher in the past on the card and when I'm not cycling i mostly touch in and out when i travel by train but sometimes forget and admit I sometimes dodge the fare.

 

I received a letter from prosecutions saying they want to take me to Mag.Court and want me to send a letter explaining my side.

 

I know what i did was wrong but i've got a new baby and a crippling mortgage so being skint all the time it felt easier to do what might otherwise have felt definitely wrong.

 

I know I dodged some of the fare but on days I'm not cycling in I generally pay the full fare.

 

What I want to know is how can they calculate a fine? How large the fine may be? And whether it;s in my interests to try and settle or not and how best to do that?

 

You wait for them to come along. If we don't hear from one or two of them soon, I'll send out a couple of SOSs for you. The rail guys have day jobs, so they can't always answer straight away.

 

Yayy, I feel useful now....Not that I received an SOS, but we can work on that! lol. :)

 

 

Hi w00,

 

Try not to worry too much. If they do chose to proceed to the Magistrates' Court, it all depends on what legislation is used as to what the likely outcome in terms of the fine goes. There's two possible charges that could apply, one more serious than the other. In layman's terms, the Regulation of Railways Act 1889 is the more serious and typically is a £400 fine, plus costs, plus £40 victim surcharge, plus ticket cost (compensation...This is the amount of fares you've avoided that they have 'done you for'...Shouldn't be immense amounts in most cases). A conviction under this act is also recordable on the Police National Computer. The less serious is a Railway Byelaw (18) and is half the fine and all the same costs (Victim Surcharge is 10% so will be £20 for a typical byelaw charge). Byelaws are non-recordable and although criminal, you won't have a record as such if found guilty of a Byelaw offence. Those are the typical outcomes in most cases, there are maximum fines, but I won't worry you with those as you won't be fined that much, I can almost guarantee. Plus I don't want to worry you further.

 

Regarding being able to pay a fine, all fines at court are means tested and you'll receive a form should you be summonsed. If you put all the correct expenditure down, you will be okay. You'll be allowed to pay in instalments if need be. It's not in anybody's interest to impose impossible fines that you can't pay, so they'll be accommodating. The fine with costs is payable immediately and in full once found guilty, but as along as you fill out a means form, you will be okay (worst case scenario, call the court!).

 

This all assumes you'll be summonsed of course! Write to them, grovel and advise you're prepared to meet their reasonable admin charges. Say how sorry you are etc etc. I have to say though, it much depends on the evidence they have against you as to what action they'll take. If they can evidence you've been deliberately doing this for some time, they'll be less likely to settle out of court I'm afraid, and this would also be the more serious Regulation of Railways Act 1889 charge, as you deliberately evaded your fare(s).

 

Was there a charge listed on their letter? (Byelaw or RRA 1889?). Were you questioned under caution, if so, what was asked/said/answered? Answering these might help us answer more accurately regarding the charges. If you can tell us this, I can probably be more specific.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Stigy is largely right however, it's worth remembering that a £400 fine is the 'entry level' normally applied for a first offence if nothing is heard from the defendant, but if you plead guilty and give an honest explanation and sincere apology the Magistrates will give credit and may reduce the fine etc accordingly.

 

When writing, stress the sincere apology to the company and staff for your action and you might like to explain how a conviction might be disproportionately damaging to your future employment etc. Give an Ask if the company will be kind enough to allow you to pay any unpaid fares plus the costs that they have incurred in dealing with this matter as an alternative to Court action. Give a sincere undertaking never to travel without a valid ticket in future.

 

FCC do not have to agree, but will consider any well reasoned and apologetic response.

 

It's worth remembering that if they agree to settle out of Court the TOC will normally expect any agreed sum to be paid promptly and in full so it may be worth examining how you could do this. If it proceeds to Court and subsequent conviction, the Court fines officer will set up a payment plan with you to ensure that your liabilities can be met

Link to post
Share on other sites

FCC have lost their bottle with private Regulation of Railways Act 1889 prosecutions. My view on this is either their prosecutions team is not as capable, or can't be bothered constructing a decent case OR they just want to go for the easy prosecution, even if it means the end result isn't as "right" as it should be IMO.

 

FCC is unlikely to genuinely want to actually prosecute you if they can avoid it. As long as you pay enough to make it worth them settling this out of court, then this is going back in the filing cabinet, (They obviously won't take installments though, unlike a court!)

 

If it does go to court, it will be the non-recordable Byelaw 18(1) offence

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe they are concentrating on how they can run a more profitable business, like empty first class carridges, when standard carridges are full to the brim, empty trains every five minutes when people can't afford train travel etc.

 

FCC have lost their bottle with private Regulation of Railways Act 1889 prosecutions. My view on this is either their prosecutions team is not as capable, or can't be bothered constructing a decent case OR they just want to go for the easy prosecution, even if it means the end result isn't as "right" as it should be IMO.

 

FCC is unlikely to genuinely want to actually prosecute you if they can avoid it. As long as you pay enough to make it worth them settling this out of court, then this is going back in the filing cabinet, (They obviously won't take installments though, unlike a court!)

 

If it does go to court, it will be the non-recordable Byelaw 18(1) offence

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...