arriva trains wales .lied about boarding station with no ticket . Advice needed

[BazzaS]

 

While the OP can ask for a admin fee resolution and ask not to be prosecuted, if they have valid reasons why they could not buy a ticket they should concentrate on that.

 

They shouldn't concentrate on that.

Whatever reasons they had not to have bought a ticket up to that point can be viewed as irrelevant by the TOC, as, even if no offence had been committed prior to that point, the offence was made out when they lied about their starting station in an attempt to pay a "short fare".

 

The OP may have been able to claim any of the protections within Bylaw 18 (so if there were no ticket facilities at the first station, they'd approached the on train staff and their ticket machine wasn't working and they'd said "OK to pay at destination"), and by offering a short fare they'd still have committed the offence, even if they had a (Bylaw 18) cast-iron defence up until that point.

[BazzaS]

Thanks everybody for the help and advice , im going to write my second letter today and get it sent off. I was clearly in the wrong and it was just a stupid moment of madness. Only thing i am worried about is how much the fine is going to be if they do not agree to a out of court settlement , i am unemployed at the moment and anything in the region of £500 plus would be very difficult to pay.

 

An administrative settlement might be a significant sum, and they might not want to accept an offer for instalments .... There aren't many advantages to going to court but the fact that the defendant's means are considered is one of them!

 

If it goes to court you MUST complete and return the court's "means form" so that your financial status can be factored into any penalty.

 

Sadly, stating "I'm an impoverished student" or "I'm unemployed" might be counter-productive with the TOC ; it might mean that they feel it gives you a reason behind offering a short fare other than "a moment of madness".

[BazzaS]

Either a Bylaw 18 conviction or RORA 1889 s5(3) conviction (for first offence) incurs a "level 3" fine, which sets a maximum according to statute, but the courts will then use the Magistrates Court sentencing guidelines (new edition just released) which deal with s5(3) on page 89

https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/Final-MCSG-July-2016.pdf

 

So, a starting point of a band B fine, with a range of Band A to Band C.

Page 148 for the bands (with their ranges, and the starting point for each band).

Assuming they go for the starting point of Band B : that is a fine of 100% of "relevant weekly income".

Usually, for someone unemployed / on benefits, this is then deemed to be £120/week.

 

A guilty plea attracts a 1/3 reduction : making £80.

There will be a victim surcharge : £30 (10% of fine but a £30 minimum)

The TOC will likely apply for their costs (and compensation: the fare).

 

Expect to be allowed to pay the total at £10/week if unemployed (but it is VITAL to return the "means form" in advance, to the court, else a weekly income of £440 is assumed!)

[BazzaS]

See previous threads for advice from OCJ re: solicitors and "not getting a criminal record".

(HB, might OCJ drop in on this thread? I think his insight might help?? : he is an "industry expert")

 

How confident is the solicitor? Are they willing to forgo their fee if they don't help you avoid prosecution : that might determine if they are sure or just hoping for the best!

 

My personal view : it is in the TOC's power to choose to prosecute or not. A solicitor can help you write a letter giving you the best chance of avoiding prosecution (but then again so can the people here!) but can't make the TOC not prosecute, if their minds are set on prosecution.