TFL Oyster 18+ Student Card - multiple uses over 3mts - Caught **SETTLED OOC**

[act0145]

Thank you dx.

 

Regarding losing my job, how would I go proving that as HR won't give me a letter and I'm reluctant to share internal policy information.

[dx100uk]

don't need to provide proof you state you will, they know the score

if you read a few recent threads here marked with won OOC 

 

 

and TfL guy comments on loss of job in the reply letter

[dx100uk]

 

[act0145]

Thank you dx.

 

I know I have asked this question already, but is there any merit at all in sending the initial letter through a solicitor? I have read the reviews on some of them and it seems that if the initial letter is sent through a solicitor, things are resolved quicker.

 

Your opinion is much appreciated.

[dx100uk]

no none at .....all waste of money.

don't believe all those fake reviews.

 

 

dx

 

[act0145]

ok...thank you. I have read the post (thank you for guiding me to that) and will write in similar thread.

 

My worry is that I lied to the inspector about not having used the card before. I also recall now that he did not ask me to sign the notes he took so I am worried I have no idea what he wrote down. 

 

Without my signature on his notes, would this be admissible evidence in court?

[dx100uk]

yes they would

lets wait and see

as far I remember from other threads

the notes are only used if you plead by post

which if it does.. you will be pleading guilty and MUST attend to show remorse in person 

[act0145]

thank you dx.

 

It appears that majority of the offences on the public transport forums related to Freedom Pass abuse.

 

In my case, it was an annual student Oyster card in my spouse's name which I had paid for on their behalf being the sole earner in the household. I have the receipts to display the card used to pay for their Oyster card is mine.

 

Do you think I should mention it in my letter?

[BazzaS]

The relevant case law is Browning v Floyd (1946) KB 597

(funnily enough, a husband using his wife's non-transferable ticket).

The fact that a fare (her fare) was paid didn't mean that HIS fare was paid ....

 

So, the risk is that you'll in effect be saying (since this was an annual Pass):

 

"Dear TfL,

I evaded my fare for months, using my wife's Student Annual Oyster.

(It doesn't matter that I'd paid for her Oyster, as that was for HER fare, but I didn't pay MY fare).

So, it is bad, but not as bad as Freedom Pass abuse, so you shouldn't take me to court."

 

The fact that freedom pass abuse is "worse" doesn't equate to them having to offer an administrative settlement, and how are you going to get past any discrepancy between what you are saying, and the RPI's notes (given that you have said here you lied to the RPI).

Additionally, Freedom Pass abuse might be on multiple occasions, but might be just the one event, and if they go looking, they might see your use was multiple times over months ... so the two aren't directly comparable.

 

I suggest you tread warily. By all mean stress that the result of a conviction may be disproportionate for you, but I wouldn't try to suggest that because Freedom Pass abuse is worse they are obliged to offer you an administrative settlement.

You also want to try (as far as possible, while being truthful) to not bring in anything that the RPI's notes contradict ... you don't have to own up to anything they aren't asking you about, but don't get caught in a (further) lie, either.

[act0145]

Thank you BazzaS for putting this in a concise and highly articulate manner.

 

Another query if I may.

 

In my letter, to support the impact a criminal conviction will have on my future livelihood, I would like to state that I have a lot of credit card debt and loss of earnings (due to prosecution) will mean I will not be able to afford the monthly interest payments in the future.

 

Would this be reasonable to include in my letter?

 

 

[BazzaS]

Note my previous advice “don’t over-egg the pudding”. So, I’m going to be blunt.

They’ve heard all of this (and more) before.

 

Are you you looking to have them decide to offer an alternative to prosecution? There will still be a financial cost, and it’ll be expected as a lump sum (you only get “instalments” with a court fine and that’d mean a conviction).

 

or do you want to risk it looking to them that you want them to decide it’s OK for you to evade your fare, arrange a refund for your wife’s Oyster, and have a whip-round in the prosecution office to knock a bit off your credit card debt while seeing if they can sort you another ticket to Canada??

 

You still need to come across as contrite, not as if you are looking for sympathy and offering excuses.

Edited May 19, 2019 by BazzaS

[honeybee13]

To add to what Bazza has said so eloquently, TfL will also want to see not just whether you are contrite but also if they think you have learned a lesson from the experience and won't evade fares again.

 

HB

[act0145]

Thank you BazzaS and HB.

 

Would it be wise to mention that I will be losing my professional status in the event of a conviction and prosecution? Or is it best not to bring this to their attention?

[BazzaS]

I think it is fine to highlight that the effect of a conviction could be disproportionate for you because of the profession / employment side of things, just do so factually without 'laying it on thick'.

[act0145]

Morning,

 

I realised something else. In my letter, when I mention my spouse's unemployed status, it'd contradict the RPI's notes as I lied to her saying that my spouse works in the area I got caught in.

 

How am I going to address this...

[honeybee13]

Do you need to mention your spouse in the letter? Otherwise you may need to attribute the error to panic in the heat of the moment.

 

HB

[act0145]

Hi HB,

 

Yes cause the fact that I am the sole earner is a strong factor for me as it's true that any loss of income will be devastating for us.

 

The other aspect of prosecuting me being in public interest (high profile role and professional status), how can I argue that it won't be in public interest to prosecute?

[honeybee13]

Have they used the words 'public interest'? See what the others think, but I'm not sure it's an argument you want to get into, could open a whole new can of worms.

 

HB

[honeybee13]

This is from TfL's Revenue Enforcement and Prosecutions Policy, which you can google. HB

 

6.3 Public Interest and Interest of Justice

Even where the evidential test has been satisfied, the prosecution of an alleged offence must be in the public interest and in the interests of justice, i.e. must be seen to be appropriate, fair and properly brought. There can be no definitive guidance as to when it may not be in public interest or in the interest of justice to prosecute an alleged offence, as each case will turn on its own individual factor.

[Manxman in exile]

3 hours ago, act0145 said:

Hi HB,

 

Yes cause the fact that I am the sole earner is a strong factor for me as it's true that any loss of income will be devastating for us.

 

The other aspect of prosecuting me being in public interest (high profile role and professional status), how can I argue that it won't be in public interest to prosecute?

 

Are you suggesting that a high profile role and professional status would mean it's not in the public interest to prosecute you?  If I were you I would stop and think about that - more likely to backfire on you...

[act0145]

Hi,

 

Rather the very opposite, it may be in the public interest to prosecute me for those very reasons.

[honeybee13]

So in that case do you need to mention your employment?

 

HB

[act0145]

Hi HB,

 

Probably not...

[act0145]

Hi all,

 

A bit of an update. My mitigating letter was accepted and I was issued a warning letter with a fine of £951.85

 

The letter noted that despite strong grounds to prosecute me (multiple offenses, lying to the revenue inspector etc), based on my mitigating circumstances (and by the grace of my Creator) they have decided not to prosecute.

 

The matter is now settled with no further action. It is needless to say how relieved I am and what a nightmare I went through. 

 

I wanted to thank the CAG forum and to give back in some way, by sharing the below tips:

 

-Solicitors are truly worthless. They tend to scare you into spending money you'll need later on. Avoid them, read up on CAG

 

-Write your own, heartfelt, and sincere letter. Show genuine remorse. Thank TFL for the opportunity to provide your side of the story

 

-Read the TFL Prosecution Policy thoroughly and draft your letter accordingly. Any prosecution decision will be made following those exact guidelines and Solicitors use that very document to draft your letter (for £250 and upwards)

 

-Buy an annual travel card to prove that there is no intention or opportunity to reoffend and submit that as evidence with your mitigating circumstances letter 

 

-If your health has deteriorated or impacted as a result of the stress, submit medical evidence to that effect. 

 

-TFL is committed and bound by the Human Rights Act and any conviction decision will need to be fair and proportionate. Those are very important and serious concepts.

 

-Display in your mitigating letter how a conviction decision will be unfair and disproportionate. For example, a criminal conviction will mean limiting future career progression, mortgage applications, travel prospects, personal health, volunteering opportunities etc 

 

-Emphasise that you are willing and able to pay any fines and penalties applicable to avoid the inconvenience of TFL taking you to court 

 

The mitigating circumstances letter is the make or break of your case. Each situation, level of offense, type of concession card, and personal circumstances are different. You may have a lot of "aggravating factors" (e.g. lies, multiple offenses etc) but remorse and active steps not to reoffend (buy an annual travel card if financial means to do so and offer the penalty payment upfront) goes a long way.

 

Hope the above helps in some ways. I will be regularly visiting the forum to provide my insights if I can.

 

Thank you.

 

 

 

 

[honeybee13]

Well done and thank you for your thoughts on fare evasion issues. I'm pleased that you got the result you hoped for. 

 

HB