Magistrates Court for a £1 Underground fare "evasion"?

[crash3903]

A question

 

Based on the fact that the OP was cautioned was she told of her statutory rights before interview?

[miautopia]

A question

 

Based on the fact that the OP was cautioned was she told of her statutory rights before interview?

 

no I was not, except I was told that I don't actually HAVE to speak to the inspector at all and it's up to my free will.

[crash3903]

Yes I know that but were you given your other rights before the interview started?

[funkyparott]

Hi

 

You say you "admitted" to the ticket inspectors in respect of the fore mentioned allegation.

 

Question. Were you given the full 'you do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence' caution?

 

Were you also told you were entitled to have a solicitor present and that you were under no obligation to remain with the inspector for questioning?

 

I would imagine you would be required to give your name and address for the purpose of receiving a summons, but they can't force you to stay with them for their questionining - not without cautioning you and informing of your right to free and independant legal advice.

 

I would suspect that the inspector would not have followed the above (I know police officers that forget). I believe any confession obtained without the PACE guidelines being followed makes any such confession inadmissable in a court of law.

 

I know officers that forget the bit about being entitled to legal advice and not having to remain with them.

 

If they suspect an offence has been committed, and then go on to question you, this is classed as an interview by PACE. Therin, the guidelines must be followed.

 

You should take legal advise.

 

FP

[miautopia]

Hi

 

You say you "admitted" to the ticket inspectors in respect of the fore mentioned allegation.

 

Question. Were you given the full 'you do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence' caution?

 

Were you also told you were entitled to have a solicitor present and that you were under no obligation to remain with the inspector for questioning?

 

I would imagine you would be required to give your name and address for the purpose of receiving a summons, but they can't force you to stay with them for their questionining - not without cautioning you and informing of your right to free and independant legal advice.

 

I would suspect that the inspector would not have followed the above (I know police officers that forget). I believe any confession obtained without the PACE guidelines being followed makes any such confession inadmissable in a court of law.

 

I know officers that forget the bit about being entitled to legal advice and not having to remain with them.

 

If they suspect an offence has been committed, and then go on to question you, this is classed as an interview by PACE. Therin, the guidelines must be followed.

 

You should take legal advise.

 

FP

 

 

well, I wish I'd known that. In court my "statement" (i.e. what I said to the inspector) was read out as official, I was only asked if I had anything to add. I didn't realise that it might have not counted.

 

During the interview with Transport Police officers I was not given the full 'you do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defence...' spiel, nor was I told I could have a solicitor present. Transport police don't have the same rights as police anyway.

[crash3903]

Transport police don't have the same rights as police anyway.

 

A popular misconception they do

 

Even if they were called transport enquiry section and wearing black bin liners, the fact they are charged with investigating offences makes them bound by the PACE 1984 act and they should have carried out the interview properly and within the law

 

What did their statements say about the interview?

[greatwhite]

Do you know what it means by non recordable criminal offence? I am in a professional where I am obliged to declare any criminal conviction to the professional regulatory body and any criminal conviction will mean that I will lose my professional licence and job for good!! I will lose my livelihood! So I am very worried about this summons I recevied recently and decided to fight and pleaded not guilty to the summons.

 

I read about the " caution " bit above. Similiar to you, I was not given a " full " caution "- I was not told I did not have to say anything and that I was entitled to a solicitor. Does this mean the statement they obtained from me is inadmissable in court?

 

Also before the interview took place, the inspector promised me that fare evasion is not a criminal offence- it is a civil matter like a parking offence, the underground would send me a form, where I plead guilty or not guilty. The inspector said that if I plead not guilty in the form, then I will l have to go to court and pay a £1000 fine. If I plead guilty, I will just have to pay a £100 fine. Obviously now I know it is totally NOT TRUE. I was sort of "tricked" into making a confession statement!! I mentioned this in my comments to the form received from the Underground but they just ignored it! Should I mention this in court and what would the judge do?

 

Would be grateful for your advice.

[funkyparott]

You really should take legal advise.

 

Although I believe that questioning when the PACE guidelines specific to interviewing have not been followed can make evidence inadmissable there could be an exception.

 

For example, the law provides that Police can question you in relation to road traffic matters and there are certain questions they can ask you without you being under caution. To the best of my knowledge, these are purely limited to questions to ascertain the identity and address of a driver.

 

It depends what questions they asked you.

I have no idea if there is any similar provision for railway byelaws.

 

You could end up incurring additional costs in court if they feel you have wasted the courts time. Unfortunatley, the magistrates court seems to be very biased towards the Police viewpoint.

 

 

It would be interesting to see a ticket inspector asked to resite the caution in court and to explain the meaning and obligations that fall under section C of PACE. I know this section makes reference to Police Officers, but I believe it is also applicable to those charged with the responsibility of investigating offences.

 

FP

[Alastrum]

The technology for Oyster is not safe. I recently used my own card on the Underground, changing at Wimbledon station to the tram line. They have card readers on the platforms too. At one point I had some time before my tram, so left the station for a cigarette. however, I did not realise that this meant I had touched my card too many times. This somehow (don't ask me how) scrambled the card, and when I attempted to get back into the station to continue my journey, it wouldn't let me. When i queried this with the staff, they read my Oyster card with their hand-held reader, and said it was registering as an out-of-date travelcard, which is why it wasn't letting me in! They initially said there was nothing they could do, and it was only me arguing very loudly, and being able to produce the receipt for the £10 I'd put on the card just before starting my journey, that they let me through to the information office, where they were able to return my card to normal.

[gyzmo]

I'm sorry I just come across this now. On Manchester Metro a few years back I got "done" for not haveing a ticket (£20 note on me, 6 am on a Sunday, machine said change upto £7.00 only and fare was only £1.80 so I thought I would pay an inspector onboard, but oh no - can't do that - she wanted a £10 on the spot or £20 by post. Told her neither, signed her form under protest and left). first time I had used the damned thing and last). Made a right fuss and a 3 page letter to head office got an apology and request to pay the £1.80 - fine dispensed with.

 

Anyway, I would see a solicitor about this even if it is over a quid. Probably some issues over PACE here which may allow an appeal. You should not have to suffer a blemish over such a silly incident. Good luck

[littlestar1]

I tried reasoning to a prosecutor at TFL investigation and prosecution phone line and they were rude and useless.

I did not manage to get any help at Citizens Advice Bureau and found that free legal advice is nearly impossible to come by.

I was not allowed a duty solicitor in court. I was advised to come early in the morning to consult a duty clerk, however he waved me through to the usher even though I explained I'd never been to court and needed to find out about mitigation, etc. Everyone at the magistrates court was condescending and unhelpful. I plead guilty just to get it over and done with as soon as possible. I did not manage to get any advice, I wasn't given opportunity to plead mitigation. The juridical clerks in the courtroom didn't even consider my income sheet showing I'm a struggling self-employed artist. When they asked if I had anything to say in court and appeared to be going blah blah blah to themselves all through the delivery of my scrupulously prepared apology speech. They might as well have been an automatic fine collection machine, for the amount of attention and consideration I received, and I was charged £150 court fees for the privilege. That's on top of £100 for TFL (for hiring 3 guys to harass me on the train, obviously) and the god damn £1 fare I supposedly evaded (which made the clerk choke in surprise).

 

All I can say is I am hugely disappointed in the legal system, and being collaborative, polite and decent makes no difference, and no matter how many apology letters/phonecalls you waste your time on you will be treated like a criminal and fined a standard fine (which ended up £251 instead of the £101 they were claiming for in the summons letter, thanks for the warning).

 

If you get caught with a wrong ticket or no ticket or whatever I suggest you DO NOT TALK to the inspectors, you don't have to give any statement, because if you do they will happily use it to take you to court (as I was told "TFL strongly believe it is NOT ridiculous to waste the court's time for a quid and take fare evasion very seriously").

 

I was told I did not end up with a police criminal record, by the way. I guess that was a pleasant surprise.

 

 

 

Hi, can I ask what happen to your friend who is the owner of the oyster card? My boy friend lent his season ticket to his flatmate who got caught in the train. Will my boy friend get prosecuted as well?

 

thanks

[Conniff]

All I can see on their site is 'you must produce a valid ticket', nothing about a valid ticket in 'your name'.

[buzby]

For the ticket to be valid, it must be used by the person who purchased it. There would be no requirement for a 'name' as the bulk of tickets I've seen state 'non transferable'. This prevents 1 person buying a dingle ticket, immediately passing it to the next person and so on. In your reading of the rules, all had a 'valid' ticket!

[charlie7111]

Hi just posted a thread on here about fare on the underground :

 

HELP! I had been taking steroids to help with my illness and these caused numerous side effects. I had not been out for nearly 6 weeks when I went out to celebrate it. I knew I was going to be late as I had been sleeping for most of the day and didn't think so I just grabbed my mother's freedom Oyster card. An inspector stopped me at the entrance and asked questions. In my state of mind and being impatient to be there on time I just said 'yes' to his questions even though one or two of them weren't correct. My solicitor and even my doctor to wrote to them to explain the side effects I had due to the medication but they still issued me with a summon. My doctor wrote another letter to see if they could settle out of court but they seemed to ignore it so now I have to attend the hearing next Monday. I need to enter my plea. Can anyone suggest what I should do. Does it mean I get a criminal record if I plead guilty (with mitigating circumstances) or should I not plea guilty and get my solicitor to argue it? I cannot afford a criminal record with my work in education.

[Conniff]

If you read right through the thread charlie you will see what your options are and that you don't get a criminal record.

[charlie7111]

Thanks Conniff for the reply. Some thread said its a criminal record others said its non-recorded one. My solicitor hasn't said anything about this at all. Ideally I would like to plea not guilty as I was under enormous stress recovering from the C.diff I caught whilst in hospital and the steroids impaired my judgment as the doctor stated. Still looks like doctor's letters do not amount too much.

[stupid123]

I was also caught as a result of a stupid mistake but I called the criminal bureau agency and I was told that a fare evasion is non recordable offence. But advised me to get a solicitor.

Is this true?

Does anyone have a good solicitor to recommend?

[charlie7111]

According to the solicitor its a non recordable offfence which means that it will not show up on the national police record but it will on the enhanced CRB as it will also check for local police record too.

[stupid123]

According to the solicitor its a non recordable offfence which means that it will not show up on the national police record but it will on the enhanced CRB as it will also check for local police record too.

 

Do you have a good solicitor you could recommend?

[stupid123]

Do you know a good solicitor who you could recommend?

[charlie7111]

Well there's a solicitor at Edwarhayes in City of London but they charge like £200 per hour

[charlie7111]

Sorry it should be Edwardhayes - can be found on the internet

[stupid123]

Thanks for that.

Good luck with your cour case. What is your plea?

 

Will you let me know the outcome of the came I am in very similar situation as yours.

Mum dad was having a major hart operation and when we went to the hospital my mum managed to leave her bag in the cab. The cab driver thankfuly brought it back to her. She did not want to lose her stuff so so gave me half of her belongings as well as her freedom pass to look after.

 

Not realising it was my mums card ( I had my one in my bag) I used it and I was stopped by the inspector. I wrote a letter appologising explaining the situation I had my own health problems, but they are still taking me to court.

 

I am so scared as I have never done such a thing in my life and all this is effecting my health and I would really appreciate it if you let me know the outcome of your case and if you are using a solicitor to represent you.

 

Thanks

 

Stupid123

[charlie7111]

just been advised by another solicitor to plea not guilty as I've nothing to lose. Will be using the duty solicitor first then will use my own one after. Will let u know what happens. In my case I did admit I deliberately used my mother's freedom pass.

[stupid123]

Thanks for that.

 

I told the inspector it was a mistake but in his note book he wrote that I said that I didn't know why I used it and stupidly enough I signed the book.

 

Is your cour case this coming Monday?

 

When do you have to send your plea by?

 

Has your solicitor told what is the worst thing that can happen, because I cannot get a proper answer from anyone.

 

I have been calling around for a solicitor all morning and now one is interested in the case have you actually used Edward Hayes?

 

Sorry for all those questions, I so scared and I don't know what to do.