Caught using Oyster Nominee pass - Should I get a solictor?

[ryanb1990]

Hi All,

 

Like all those before me, I'd like to say this site has been very useful.

 

I was stopped/caught using an oyster nominee card I found - I have used it for a few weeks.

 

 

To start off with, I know I am in the wrong - much like a few people here,

my reasoning behind this was financial (or lack of finances) driven.

 

 

To be more specific, I have been without an income for a couple of months and at the same time have been paying medical bills (Cancer) for my dad.

 

 

I have started a new job, and getting a (criminal) record would not only be detrimental

but actually stop me getting any future employment in my role

(note I have just started a career/working life).

 

 

Note also: this is my first mistake.

 

I don't know what to do - and even though money is extremely tight - I am considering getting a (payday) loan so I can get/talk to a solicitor.

 

I received the 1st letter giving me 10days to present my case/supporting comments etc.

 

What should I do?

 

In the worse case and I do get a record - is it a "full" criminal record or a "civil" record? (i seem to recall someone writing here there is a difference...)

 

how long would this last/does it get erased?

 

Many thanks for any help/advice

[honeybee13]

Hello and welcome to CAG. I expect the forum guys will be along later.

 

How long do you have to reply to the letter asking for your version of events please?

 

I'm not sure if you need a lawyer at this stage, let's see what the experts think. If at a later stage you need one, we can talk you through that. You should be able to have initial phone conversations without paying if it comes to that, anyway.

 

If you like, you could post up the letter you plan to send and we can help you to refine it. Please don't put in any details that might identify you.

 

Lastly from me, a payday loan is the last thing you want to get involved with. If you really find you need money, try your local credit union.

 

My best, HB

[king12345]

What did you say to the inspector who stopped you?

What questions did he/she asked?

Were you stopped on the underground, national rail, overground, dlr or buses?

How old are you?

We need to know more details to get a better picture of what the revenue protection department might do next and if you could plead mitigating circumstances and try to convince them not to prosecute

[ryanb1990]

Hi HB, thank you for prompt response!

 

I have a 4 days left to respond, From reading other peoples post - would it be better to send an email rather than respond on the letter? That way I have an audit trail myside?

 

I am fully aware how these payday loan companies charge an extortionate rate of interest - and although ironically lack of finances were the reason i got myself into this situation, I need to do whatever I can to get myself out (of criminal record) - I will look into credit unions (not familiar with this to be honest).

 

Do you/anyone know of any solicitors with proven success with out of court settlements in similar situations?

 

thanks, R

[ryanb1990]

I told the inspector I found the card a few weeks ago (no specific date given because to be frank cant remember)

I was asked how many times have I used it - I said i dont know

I was asked if it was my intention not to pay for the journey - to which i said yes, and I know i am wrong

I was asked/i gave my details (name age dob)

I was asked why - I explained my situation (as above)

I was asked if i realised what I did was wrong - I said yes

I was asked what was my journey - I mentioned my path

I was asked for address: Which i gave

 

2) TFL Underground

 

3) Between 21-25yrs old

[honeybee13]

Hi HB, thank you for prompt response!

 

I have a 4 days left to respond, From reading other peoples post - would it be better to send an email rather than respond on the letter? That way I have an audit trail myside?

 

I am fully aware how these payday loan companies charge an extortionate rate of interest - and although ironically lack of finances were the reason i got myself into this situation, I need to do whatever I can to get myself out (of criminal record) - I will look into credit unions (not familiar with this to be honest).

 

Do you/anyone know of any solicitors with proven success with out of court settlements in similar situations?

 

thanks, R

 

Thank you for the information. I'll find you a link to the stikky on credit unions, great institutions.

 

We don't recommend solicitors here. If it turns out that you need one, you will need to look at the Law Society website Find a Solicitor page and look for a criminal lawyer who is local to where your case might be heard. I don't think you need one yet though.

 

HB

[honeybee13]

Here you go, information on credit unions.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?396633-Credit-Unions-an-alternative-to-payday-loans

 

HB

Edited January 26, 2015 by honeybee13
Forgot the link. :(

[ryanb1990]

Thanks for help with this HB

 

I agree, maybe a solicitor is a little premature at the moment but I feel like it could hurt/ could potentially help getting out of court settlement (apart from my wallet - but getting myself into more debt is better than not being able to work!) - I really know nothing about law unfortunately.

[king12345]

Given your age and your answer at the interview when you were stopped it is very likely they will prosecute you under rra 1889.

Your best bet will be to beg for an out of court settlement.

 

Don't mention it in your response, but simply explain your circumstances and say that you are willing to meet any administrative fees and your evaded fares.

 

You can email them, they accept electronic responses.

 

In my experience they rarely settle in this sort of situations, you need to substantiate your reasons, for example by sending them a copy of your father diagnosis and your bank statement.

[ryanb1990]

Thank you again for help.

 

What is a RRA 1889?

Do you know the implications this will have i.e. is this something which goes on a record.

 

Would you explicitly mention in the message to them

"I am willing to pay/meet any administrative fees and fares evaded etc" or would you mention it more subtly?

 

I am more than happy/able to send them my dads diagnosis etc (though not sure if i will be able to do this within the 4days (3days tomorrow)...

 

As for banks statements - i can easily show them the debts i have racked up etc.

Would you just attach these as scanned images or send them photo copies?

 

Would the above count towards a mitigating circumstance

[Old-CodJA]

Hi All,

 

Like all those before me, I'd like to say this site has been very useful.

 

I was stopped/caught using an oyster nominee card I found - I have used it for a few weeks. To start off with, I know I am in the wrong - much like a few people here, my reasoning behind this was financial (or lack of finances) driven. To be more specific, I have been without an income for a couple of months and at the same time have been paying medical bills (Cancer) for my dad. I have started a new job, and getting a (criminal) record would not only be detrimental but actually stop me getting any future employment in my role (note I have just started a career/working life). Note also: this is my first mistake.

 

Firstly, I am going to say that it is good that you have recognised the seriousness of this and although I shall outline the actual legislation and remedies in response to your further question, this is for information and not simply a criticism of your actions. You know that you've done wrong and don't need any of us to underline that further.

 

I don't know what to do - and even though money is extremely tight - I am considering getting a (payday) loan so I can get/talk to a solicitor.

 

It may be that you don't need a loan to seek such advice as may be helpful for you. Some solicitors will still offer a short initial consultation for a small fixed fee, but your post suggests to me that you are perfectly capable of putting an initial letter together, with the help of a little knowledge of the legislation and knowing that there is little point in simply denying any liability.

 

Much depends on the charge or charges that might be laid by the company. The most likely charge will be 'intent to avoid payment of a fare contrary to Section 5.3.a of The Regulation of Railways Act [1889]' and there may be other similar charges for each of the other journeys that can be identified from the pattern of travel that you admitted to the inspector. The Oyster records will show all the journeys made during the last 8 weeks.

 

I received the 1st letter giving me 10days to present my case/supporting comments etc.

 

What should I do?

 

Whilst there is a strong case for prosecution in such situations and the company do have a policy of prosecuting misuse of Oysters / Tickets that are issued for the sole use of another person, it is not beyond the realms of possibility that an administrative settlement might be achieved, but if agreed, this will be expensive.

 

If convicted, the maximum penalty for a first offence will be a fine of up to £1000, but this will normally be reduced to around £400 (entry level equal to assessed average weekly wage) and will be reduced by a further third if an early guilty plea is made. The fine may be increased if the Magistrates are asked to take into consideration aggravating features, such as a pattern of repeated offending.

 

The best suggestion I can make is to write to the company, be entirely truthful, apologise to the company & staff concerned and ask if you might be allowed to pay all of the fares plus the company's reasonably incurred costs in order to dispose of the matter without Court action. You can explain that this was an irrational response to finding the card and might like to suggest that conviction could have a disproportionate effect on your embryonic employment

 

In the worse case and I do get a record - is it a "full" criminal record or a "civil" record? (i seem to recall someone writing here there is a difference...)

 

how long would this last/does it get erased?

 

Byelaw offences are 'strict liability' matters and do not result in a 'full' criminal record although there will be a record of conviction. It is very unlikely that charges would be brought under Byelaws in these circumstances.

 

If convicted of an offence of intending to avoid a fare, this is a recordable offence, which means it does result in a criminal record that will appear on DBS and should be declared as required. Normally considered 'spent' after a year, but will remain on DBS for a further 10 years

[king12345]

RRA 1889 = Regulations of Railway Act.

You can google it and look at section 5(3)(a), that's the bit they use in such prosecution.

 

If you haven't got all your supporting documents, say so in your response and state that you will submit them asap.

As pointed out, be truthful and apologise profusely.

 

Even if they send you a summon, don't give up communicating with them, there's always a chance that they will settle, although small.

[ryanb1990]

Thank you Old-CodJA and King12345 for advice help.

 

I have only just had a chance to look. I am duet to respond to the letter - but I have contacted a solicitor as this is obviously a very worrying matter for myself (Jon implications).

 

I was quoted a high number several hundred £ and while this is not money I have easy access to - I feel like I need all the luck / skill possible.

 

Old-CodJA - you mention that I could write an appropriate letter myself with some advice on legislation? Could you advice further please? What should I specifically mention ?

 

From your experience/ knowledge do the prosecution/ tfl people look differently when someone has representation from solicitor?

 

Part of me is scared the solicitor will write an overly long and detailed piece which sounds like a good idea but from what I have been reading - the tfl pretty much just ignore what you send them and go to trial (likely to happen I guess In my case) - which basically means I have paid a lot just to end up same situation and on a small chance I may have angered them by getting solicitor involved? Thoughts?

 

King12345 - I have managed to get the supporting docs -thanks for advice.

 

Note: I contacted solicitor this morning - before I say both of your replies last night / this morning.

 

I have not paid/ out any money down

[Old-CodJA]

In my experience, any reasonably articulate person should ensure that when writing to the train operator / TfL, you stick to true facts, do not try to blame others or offer irrelevant excuses, recognise your guilt and the affect that fare evasion has on everyone else's fares, apologise to the company and staff concerned and ask if you might be allowed to settle the matter without Court action.

 

You will be well advised to offer to pay all of the fares and administration costs incurred by your actions in order to try to protect your good name and employment prospects.

 

You might offer to compensate the company, but should not offer huge unaffordable sums that you cannot pay in one go in a timely manner, because if they say 'yes', it has to be cleared up quickly.

 

If they say 'no', then a solicitor will be invaluable in looking at the paperwork once a Summons is issued to see if there are any procedural errors or other matters on which the prosecution can be challenged, but the first step should be to write in reply, promptly and with genuine apology, seeking an opportunity to resolve the matter

[ryanb1990]

Does it make any difference replying using the letter they sent me or via email?

 

Should I add any supporting information as email attachments or photocopies / scanned images ? Will it help?

 

One thing I was mentioned to say was to obviously apologies profusely to tfl staff, the inspector who stopped me, the passages of tfl the pass holder etc. but was mentioned to leave it their and not mention anything about the actual event (regardless of the way I see it as it could be used against me). Is this correct approach to deal with this?

[Old-CodJA]

Always respond in writing (typed is fine), your letter must be signed and dated and should be sent by recorded / signed for mail

 

For peace of mind always keep a copy of what you sent too.

 

General email is not considered a secure process.

 

Given the content of your original post, you found someone else's pass and used it to save paying your own fare, but admitted that when reported and I assume the inspector then retained the pass as evidence along with the contemporaneous notes of the interview that were signed by you, I think it best to keep it simple

[ryanb1990]

Correct regarding keeping the pass and notes and signed - however am not sure if this is worth mentioning or not but when i was initially stopped I was threatened by the inspector that if i did not open my wallet/its contents I would be arrested/detained /searched by police.

 

I admitted during the "interview" and i did sign however I clearly mentioned numerous times to the person when asked at the end if i wanted to read what was written that I could not read it as i did not have the time, it was near work so could not be seen in the situation or else potentially face issues.

 

I stated numerous times i have no idea what you wrote and do not agree/validate what you have said. I wasnt trying to be smart I was being honest - I got the impression the person was trying to humiliate/drag out the process so as to cause me further embarrassment (I asked numerous times if we could speed the process up). (I was their in the open for close to 2hrs)

 

Please advice me if im looking at this wrong, would it not be better to simply just apologies profusely but not give them anything more than what i said on the night? in addition explain my circumstances and like you mentioned offer to pay back the cost/admin fee etc they seem appropriate.

[Old-CodJA]

You now seem to be giving a lot of information that really ought to have been included in your earlier posts if you hoped to get good and helpful information.

 

If what you are now saying is true, you should certainly seek the advice of a solicitor

 

I am not suggesting this is what is happening here, but having read thousands of traveller allegations of bad staff behaviour over the years I can say for certain that those people who stick to the facts when replying and do not try to embellish what actually occurred do more frequently achieve what they want from their responses.

 

That is not to say that all staff are perfect, far from it, but if under caution, you have signed each page of the inspector's notes agreeing that they were made out correctly, you will benefit from a trained lawyer's explanation as to how things will progress and what it means to be a credible witness under pressure if you are going to discredit the evidence put by that inspector.

 

Please remember what the caution actually says, it is certain that the prosecutor will do so.

 

Were there any other witnesses, for example, were there any other inspectors present or any other members of the public, known to you and who will be able to corroberate your story?

 

Two hours seems an extraordinarily long time for such an interview and of course, if you were interviewed under caution all of this will be timed in the notes.

 

If you touched the validator the time at which you attempted to use the pass will have been recorded by the system.

 

There may even be a CCTV record of the interaction as all station barriers are covered and actual timings will be shown there.

 

That said, if the more detailed account that you have now given is wholly true, you may well find that a solicitor will suggest that you challenge the inspector's evidence by pleading not guilty and electing for the matter to go to trial.

 

Without the benefit of seeing the evidence in this case I don't really think that anyone here can help you further.

[ryanb1990]

Was i supposed to sign each page?? If that is the case then i think they have dropped the ball here - there must have been over 10 pages of which i was only asked to sign twice...

 

The staff in question came across very by the book, but looking back on it now - i'm not sure if the way the event planned out was justified i.e. the initial threat of police to search me and duration of detention.

 

I am pretty sure I can prove timings myself (assuming i can check the time of when i used my oyster to finally get home and also i made a call about ~15 minutes after commencing the detention).

 

I did not think anything of the long length of time i was there for over than i felt the inspector was on purposely trying to embarrass me - even when i continued to say i wanted to wrap it up quickly.

 

How long should/would it normal last? Is that a topic of discussion that it lasted so long? There were over witness (inspectors) but don't know names unfortunately.

 

" Please remember what the caution actually says, it is certain that the prosecutor will do so. "

 

what do you mean by this?

 

thanks again Old-CodJA for your help and time!

 

EDIT: I can certainly prove timings - As I withdrew £5 from cash machine just after I was allowed to leave. And I have a very good estimate of when it commenced.

[timbo58]

Generally you'll only be asked to sign once at the end and on any amendments (possibly) that you wish to be made in the transcript.

Once you've signed the document you've acknowledged 'it is a true record' (and thats generally the question asked right at the end 'if you agree this is a true record of our conversation today...sign here'.)

 

It's not really worth grasping at the possibility the inspector who questioned you did something fundamentally wrong, as it doesn't sound like they did, the best advice is that you should presume their case is strong and play it from that perspective.

 

2 hours sounds like a ridiculously long amount of time to me, all my interviews were less than 20 minutes typically, of course if you 'waffled on' and the inspector had to write all of this up it would run into many pages and have to be read back to you, so that obviously delays the interview.

[Old-CodJA]

Yes timbo58, one signature at the end is the norm, after having read & agreed the notes, but I was thinking of exactly the point you make re amendments.

 

The OP says that there were many points where they expressed that they could not see / understand what was written and I was thinking of the likelihood of amendments throughout the interview in this case.

[ryanb1990]

I have decided, as per your advice, to write the letter myself instead of paying for a solictor.

 

The letter: should it be hand written or can I type it up and sign it?

 

How long should i keep the letter? I recall reading somewhere that a long letter just gets ignored and to keep it short (bullet points etc)..

 

Once I know they have received it (recorded delivery) how should i proceed from their? Do i call them ask to speak to the case manager? Will they contact me?

 

Should I be expecting them to contact me with either a letter/court summons or settlement? how do i go about trying to seek a settlement? is this done over the phone or do they send me a letter offering settlement?

[Old-CodJA]

I have answered all of these points in earlier posts and I do have to make clear, it is your decision as to whether you try to deal with this yourself, or through legal representation.

 

I have simply pointed out the factors from your account that will be likely to be taken into consideration by the prosecutions unit. They will also take account of public interest in respect of the alleged offence/s and the company's policies in this regard. TfL do have a robust record of prosecuting misuse of passes as previously stated.

 

ryanb1990 said:

Once I know they have received it (recorded delivery) how should i proceed from their? Do i call them ask to speak to the case manager? Will they contact me?

 

All that you can do once you have confirmed that your letter has been received is to wait the reply. You may choose to telephone and see if you can speak to someone.

 

There is no guarantee that any opportunity to settle out of Court will be given, but you lose nothing by trying.

[king12345]

If you really were kept for 2 hours you should do the following asap:

- sar TfL for cctv footage before the 14 days deadline is up

- ask prosecution for inspector statement before you give your statement to them (possibly they will have to extend their deadline)

 

A bet a shilling that the timing in the inspector notes will be very different from reality.

If his statement gives a total time of let's say 30 minutes and you indeed were there for two hours, you would have something to dispute the inspector statement should you be summoned and decided to plead not guilty.

A solicitor in this case would be invaluable because they would "grill" the inspector and make him look like a liar/incompetent and fabricating/doctoring facts.

 

In essence you need to do a bit of legwork yourself, gain evidence and take it from there.

 

Please note: This is what I would personally do.

Many caggers will advise to say sorry and accept whatever TfL throws at you.

Instead I think that if indeed the inspector doctored the timing in his notes, the case should be dropped.

Interviewing someone for two hours is unreasonable and could also be seen as detention should a good solicitor take your case to court.

[Old-CodJA]

A bet a shilling that the timing in the inspector notes will be very different from reality.

 

 

You may be right, BUT until anyone checks the CCTV footage, the notes that were agreed & signed by the OP and the inspector, the Oyster touch record etc. who is to say which version of events is reality??

 

None of us were there and we only have one side of the story to assess.

 

Having to assess these type of matters every day I make a point of never making decisions based on one side of any story.

 

Yes, the OP might be well-advised to seek the assistance of a solicitor if the scenario is exactly as described in the later post.

 

If it was as simple as the story given in the original post then seeking a settlement might be the best option.

 

Perhaps reality lies somewhere between the two - the OP and the inspector are the only ones who really know the answer.