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

[thegalax]

Hi everyone, 2 MUST sites to check when dealing with fare evasion:

 

First one informs you about your rights and what you can use as argument to defend your case for being caught on tube:

Lost London Law Student: Dodging Fare Evasion - A Guide

 

this one relates to anyone being caught on buses:

Know Your Bus Rights

 

make sure you read any statements made on the court summons. Check whether you have signed it or not. If you haven't then it will easier to get out of it. Look for discrepancies, the TFL inspector may have surmised what you have said, or might not have written down what you said at all.

 

Finally check the PACE act 1984 which states: "You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence.” Followed by you are not under arrested nor obliged to stay behind to answer questions.

 

If these guidelines have not been followed properly then:anything obtained from you from that point onwards is unfair and should be excluded under s 78 PACE. As funkyparott mentioned earlier you could then state: I believe any confession obtained without the PACE guidelines being followed makes any such confession inadmissable in a court of law.

 

Hope this helps.

 

I am in touch with TFl atm, hoping they will drop the case and settle out of court. fingers crossed.

[andydd]

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.

 

I'd have to agree, I'm not as familiar with the Underground laws as i am with the Train ones BUT Im pretty sure the UG laws are roughly the same and say that you MUST EITHER produce a valid ticket for your journey OR provide your address (they may well be lots of checking up on this, i.e checking if you have any ID, checking voting register etc, of course you are quite legally entitled not to carry ID and you may or may not be registered on voting register).

 

The WORST mistake anyone can make is any sort of admission, it is quite possible to enter the tube system and your oyster hasnt worked properally, TfL are well aware of this, it must happen 1000's of times every day and certainly has to me !

 

For example I have often used mny oyster and it ahs worked ok but the person in front of me, their oyster hasnt, but buy this time the gate has opened and we both have no choice but to go through, although they are now 'in' the tube system through no fault of their own havn't swiped their oyster..there are various other variations of this, another example is a DLR station that has no barriers and only 1 or 2 oyster posts but neither of them work.

 

Andy

[sonneybouy]

ive kind of got that same problem now but im 15 and was ten pence short the other day and jumped the barriers with my mate in order to get home. What do you think is going to happen to me?

 

you dont suppose i will have to go to court, and if i do, what do you think i should say? As the guy came up to me and i kind of put my foot in it and confessed. he wont give it back and says he's sent it off already

Edited July 5, 2009 by sonneybouy
forgot to add info

[krakov]

hi guys

 

and wanted to enquire whether anyone can recommend a decent solicitor or barrister to represent me in a fare evasion magistrates court case with First Capital Connect.

 

They have flatly refused to settle out of course despite me subsequently purchased an annual ticket.

The consequences of receiving a criminal record would be very serious. I would be required to report it to my employers and to my professional body. I would lose my job and possibly professional accreditation. Beyond that a conviction for an offence of dishonesty would mean that it would be very difficult if not impossible for me to obtain ordinary employment, particularly in the present economic crisis.

 

someone please recommend a good solicitor/lawyer preferably offering a fixed fee for the service? thanks a lot

[Old-CodJA]

hi guys

 

and wanted to enquire whether anyone can recommend a decent solicitor or barrister to represent me in a fare evasion magistrates court case with First Capital Connect.

 

They have flatly refused to settle out of course despite me subsequently purchased an annual ticket.

The consequences of receiving a criminal record would be very serious. I would be required to report it to my employers and to my professional body. I would lose my job and possibly professional accreditation. Beyond that a conviction for an offence of dishonesty would mean that it would be very difficult if not impossible for me to obtain ordinary employment, particularly in the present economic crisis.

 

someone please recommend a good solicitor/lawyer preferably offering a fixed fee for the service? thanks a lot

 

I cannot advise a legal representative for you, but can perhaps offer a little help in other ways.

 

Firstly, it is important to check what you have been charged with. I realise that you have said this is a 'fare evasion' case and I'm sorry if it's being pedantic, but what does the charge on the Summons actually say?

 

I don't mean specific details or times of the alleged offence, but the actual charge. It is most likely to be one of the following:

 

That on (date) at (time) and (place or, between places) you did travel on a railway without having previously paid the fare due and with intent to avoid payment contrary to Section 5.3.a of The Regulation of Railways Act 1889

 

or

 

That on (date) at (time) and (place or between places) you were on a railway and failed to show a valid ticket on demand by an officer of the railway company contrary to National Railway Byelaw 18 (2005)

 

The wording doesn't have to be exactly as I have suggested and there will be references to other statutory legislation & amendments etc, but the generality of the charge will be one of the above.

 

The key is differentiating between the charge of intentional fare evasion, which is the first one, and the strict liability offence of breach of Byelaw.

 

The second charge is less serious and on conviction will attract a lower fine (unless there are really serious aggravating factors)

 

If your are charged with fare evasion and convicted, there will be a record made of the conviction & fine, but this is not something that will normally need to be declared nor adversely affect employment unless you are in a very strictly regulated profession such as a police officer, lawyer, charity fund manager etc.

 

Of course, the rail company are not compelled to accept any offer of out of Court settlement if they have a genuinely held belief that an offence has been committed and if there are aggravating factors, they very rarely will.

 

I am not suggesting these are relevant in your case, but as a general observation, aggravating factors may include:

 

If the traveller gave any details that were materially false when asked for his/her name and address then a second summons may be issued alleging a charge under Section 5.3.c of the RRA 1889. Conviction for this offence is a serious matter and a much higher fine may well be imposed.

 

The reason that a record is made of conviction for offences against the 1889 Act is because the ultimate penalty available to the Magistrates is a brief term of imprisonment, but the chance of this being imposed is about as likely as me winning the lottery or hitting the Moon with a snowball. It will only be considered for incredibly persistent offenders and then other sanctions will have to have failed.

 

If evidence can be shown that the traveller was:

unco-operative and Police assistance was sought,

was threatening or violent,

had altered or forged a ticket,

had refused to give details or to pay the fare due when asked

had formally been previously warned for a similar matter

or had made any attempt to make off without payment,

these are all factors that will have a bearing on the Magistrates decision to a greater or lesser degree.

 

If it is a first offence and there were no aggravating factors whatsoever it is unusual (in my experience) for the TOC not to consider a settlement. The proviso is that they will expect the costs that they have incurred are paid along with any fare due.

 

Hope that helps

[krakov]

I cannot advise a legal representative for you, but can perhaps offer a little help in other ways.

 

Firstly, it is important to check what you have been charged with. I realise that you have said this is a 'fare evasion' case and I'm sorry if it's being pedantic, but what does the charge on the Summons actually say?

 

I don't mean specific details or times of the alleged offence, but the actual charge. It is most likely to be one of the following:

 

That on (date) at (time) and (place or, between places) you did travel on a railway without having previously paid the fare due and with intent to avoid payment contrary to Section 5.3.a of The Regulation of Railways Act 1889

 

or

 

That on (date) at (time) and (place or between places) you were on a railway and failed to show a valid ticket on demand by an officer of the railway company contrary to National Railway Byelaw 18 (2005)

 

The wording doesn't have to be exactly as I have suggested and there will be references to other statutory legislation & amendments etc, but the generality of the charge will be one of the above.

 

The key is differentiating between the charge of intentional fare evasion, which is the first one, and the strict liability offence of breach of Byelaw.

 

The second charge is less serious and on conviction will attract a lower fine (unless there are really serious aggravating factors)

 

If your are charged with fare evasion and convicted, there will be a record made of the conviction & fine, but this is not something that will normally need to be declared nor adversely affect employment unless you are in a very strictly regulated profession such as a police officer, lawyer, charity fund manager etc.

 

Of course, the rail company are not compelled to accept any offer of out of Court settlement if they have a genuinely held belief that an offence has been committed and if there are aggravating factors, they very rarely will.

 

I am not suggesting these are relevant in your case, but as a general observation, aggravating factors may include:

 

If the traveller gave any details that were materially false when asked for his/her name and address then a second summons may be issued alleging a charge under Section 5.3.c of the RRA 1889. Conviction for this offence is a serious matter and a much higher fine may well be imposed.

 

The reason that a record is made of conviction for offences against the 1889 Act is because the ultimate penalty available to the Magistrates is a brief term of imprisonment, but the chance of this being imposed is about as likely as me winning the lottery or hitting the Moon with a snowball. It will only be considered for incredibly persistent offenders and then other sanctions will have to have failed.

 

If evidence can be shown that the traveller was:

unco-operative and Police assistance was sought,

was threatening or violent,

had altered or forged a ticket,

had refused to give details or to pay the fare due when asked

had formally been previously warned for a similar matter

or had made any attempt to make off without payment,

these are all factors that will have a bearing on the Magistrates decision to a greater or lesser degree.

 

If it is a first offence and there were no aggravating factors whatsoever it is unusual (in my experience) for the TOC not to consider a settlement. The proviso is that they will expect the costs that they have incurred are paid along with any fare due.

 

Hope that helps

 

Thank you very much, that's very useful information.

Unfortunately my charges (about 8 times of them on the one summon) are the first sort

That on (date) at (time) and (place or, between places) you did travel on a railway without having previously paid the fare due and with intent to avoid payment contrary to Section 5.3.a of The Regulation of Railways Act 1889

 

The thing is the RPI confiscated my oyster card on the day and questioned me under caution about the others. he said if i admitted and sign his notes then it will just be a fine. it was a very cold day outside the station and i asked him several times to move the interview to a warmer private place but he didn't oblige and in the end i just said yes to everything and signed so i could leave because i was soooooo cold.

 

i've talked to one solicitor who's very pessimistic having read the summons and my admissions in the RPI statements.

i've pleaded not guilty and asked the RPI to come to court but am not sure of my chances.

 

i was hoping i can persuade the magistrates to discard his statement on the basis that it was sooo cold and i just agreed so i could go because he refused to go some place warmer.. how are magistrates in terms of dismissing RPI statements?

 

my other argument was going to be that this was so out of character for me because my job was under threat at the time and my uncle's wife had just died.

i am a seasonal ticket holder and over the last 5 yrs have spent over £10,000 in tickets for this company.

i do lots of charity work and my MP even wrote to them in my support by they say they take a zero tolerance stance.

 

my other argument is that this is not in the public interest because if i lose my job and my wife ends up on benefits (as i can't find another) then the taxpayer will suffer unnecessarily.. could this work?

 

what can i do to get anything but guilty verdict e.g. a discharge of some sort or just warning and fine?

 

i even offered contributions to charities of their choice for a few years but nothing..

 

is there any chance for me here?

 

would appreciated comments and experiences of those who have been here before or heard things about this. i've never been in a situation like this before.. thanks a lot

[Conniff]

with intent to avoid payment

 

What makes them say you did it intentially, this could easily have been an error, they will have to prove intent, can they do that?

[krakov]

Apparently they are going by my admission statements which i signed.. the RPI insisted i agree to intention so it should just be a fine and said that the two go together i.e. you can't travel without a ticket without intention to do so.. perhaps i was naive to believe him and sign..

 

any way i can argue for these to be discarded? the place was freezing and he didn't agree to my requests to move to somewhere warm, so i just agreed, signed so i could go.. he stood me in that cold for over half an hr..

 

any advise, very much appreciated please.. am in a terrible situation, the consequenses are immense... i fee sick!

[Old-CodJA]

Apparently they are going by my admission statements which i signed.. the RPI insisted i agree to intention so it should just be a fine and said that the two go together i.e. you can't travel without a ticket without intention to do so.. perhaps i was naive to believe him and sign..

 

any way i can argue for these to be discarded? the place was freezing and he didn't agree to my requests to move to somewhere warm, so i just agreed, signed so i could go.. he stood me in that cold for over half an hr..

 

any advise, very much appreciated please.. am in a terrible situation, the consequenses are immense... i fee sick!

 

 

I hope that you don't mind, but I am going to be blunt in this case.

 

The statements will show the time that you were cautioned and the time that you signed off the notes.

 

I know some people might not like this answer, but I wouldn't pin any high hopes on these charges being dismissed just because the weather was cold. This isn't meant to be flippant, but I would be very surprised indeed if someone doesn't point out that it would have been just as cold for the inspector and although some might consider an element of duress may be attributable, I cannot see how that can have any bearing on the other seven of eight charges.

 

I think that your earlier comment whereby you said that you had 'talked to one solicitor who's very pessimistic having read the summons and my admissions in the RPI statements' should be thought about a little more

 

This can only be supposition on my part, not having read the actual allegations, but eight charges of 'intent to avoid a fare' that may all be alleging the same offence, suggests to me that the prosecution believe they have a strong case.

 

Given that you say the Oyster was siezed and held as evidence, it could be that they may be seeking to prove 'systematic misuse' of the Oyster. If this is the case, have they served evidence of an expert witness statement along with data from Oyster records?

 

If the Oyster season was registered to you, it may not have been necessary to withold it, because the data record will show all of the journey record outside the zones paid for the past 8 weeks.

 

Where there are multiple charges of this type laid aginst someone who is fully capable of rationalising their own actions, the argument that the prosecution is 'not in the public interest' has little hope of success in my experience. I believe that there would have to be other, much stronger evidential factors than you have suggested for that to be considered appropriate.

 

You may of course plead not guilty and the matter will be adjourned to trial whereby the rail company will be required to put their evidence fully and you will have the opportunity to question that and the reporting inspector.

 

If you are ultimately found guilty, you will get little if any reduction in the penalty that the Magistrates may impose.

 

Having said that, of course you should not plead guilty for expediency, but many people do fear the effects of conviction in these low level offence cases unnecessarily.

 

If as you say, your solicitor has little faith in the likelihood of your acquittal, I would suggest that you seek advice from any employment advisor relevant to your occupation on the reality of how pleading guilty to such a charge might affect your job.

 

Your suggestion that a line of defence might be that the loss of a close relative was uppermost in your mind at the time, could be a good mitigating factor. However, I guess it has to be said that in most people's mind this would only be seen as relevant if the eight charges all relate to incidents during the period following her death.

 

If there are any real failures to observe PACE rules by the reporting inspector, I'm sure that your solicitor would have suggested these as a way to get the case discontinued.

 

Writing another request to the the prosecutor, asking them to allow you to pay all the costs incurred and expressing remorse for the offences, carried out whilst you were suffering stress brought on by the loss of a close family member is your best bet in my view.

 

It may help if you c.c. your letter to the Legal Advisor at the Court where the case is to be heard.

 

Good luck

[casualsurfer]

Hi everyone, 2 MUST sites to check when dealing with fare evasion:

 

First one informs you about your rights and what you can use as argument to defend your case for being caught on tube:

Lost London Law Student: Dodging Fare Evasion - A Guide

 

this one relates to anyone being caught on buses:

Know Your Bus Rights

 

make sure you read any statements made on the court summons. Check whether you have signed it or not. If you haven't then it will easier to get out of it. Look for discrepancies, the TFL inspector may have surmised what you have said, or might not have written down what you said at all.

 

Finally check the PACE act 1984 which states: "You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence.” Followed by you are not under arrested nor obliged to stay behind to answer questions.

 

If these guidelines have not been followed properly then:anything obtained from you from that point onwards is unfair and should be excluded under s 78 PACE. As funkyparott mentioned earlier you could then state: I believe any confession obtained without the PACE guidelines being followed makes any such confession inadmissable in a court of law.

 

Hope this helps.

 

I am in touch with TFl atm, hoping they will drop the case and settle out of court. fingers crossed.

 

Hi thegalax

Would you mind telling me what happened with your case ? I am in a similar situation, no success with the prosecution team and pretty much made up my mind going to court and plead guilty.

 

Thx

[casualsurfer]

Apparently they are going by my admission statements which i signed.. the RPI insisted i agree to intention so it should just be a fine and said that the two go together i.e. you can't travel without a ticket without intention to do so.. perhaps i was naive to believe him and sign..

 

any way i can argue for these to be discarded? the place was freezing and he didn't agree to my requests to move to somewhere warm, so i just agreed, signed so i could go.. he stood me in that cold for over half an hr..

 

any advise, very much appreciated please.. am in a terrible situation, the consequenses are immense... i fee sick!

 

Hi Krakov

Have you already been to court ? If so, how was your experience ? I am going there soon.

 

Thanks in advance.

[VyeKing]

OldCodJA,

 

Out of interest, am confused by what you say in an earlier post in this thread:

"If your are charged with fare evasion and convicted, there will be a record made of the conviction & fine, but this is not something that will normally need to be declared nor adversely affect employment unless you are in a very strictly regulated profession such as a police officer, lawyer, charity fund manager etc. "

 

Why would a criminal record not normally need to be declared? Do these low-level offenses not show up on the Police National Computer? Would there be a court record only?

[ilukan]

What is the court judgement for giving fake identity to a train ticket inspector in London?

 

I was going to get fined for not touching in my oyster card. I tried to explain to the ticket inspector why I didnt touch in my oyster card. (I nearly missed the train and I had no time to touch in). The ticket inspector asked me my name and address. I lied to him about my identity. He verified but he said he was going to call the police if he cant identify who I was. So I told him my real identity. He said I am going to court for misdeamanor (giving fake identity). He asked me a few questions and took note of them. So what is the fine by the court or punishment. Will I get a criminal record? What should I do? Plea guilty or not guilty?

 

Thanks in advance.

[Old-CodJA]

OldCodJA,

Why would a criminal record not normally need to be declared? Do these low-level offenses not show up on the Police National Computer? Would there be a court record only?

 

In my experience the fairly unhelpful answer to that is 'Maybe'

 

In the past, manual inputting was very much a case of 'it depends on where you were reported' and it had been unlikely to make it onto PNC, but I believe it it is much more likely to do so now.

 

Of course there is always a Court record

[Old-CodJA]

What is the court judgement for giving fake identity to a train ticket inspector in London?

 

I was going to get fined for not touching in my oyster card. I tried to explain to the ticket inspector why I didnt touch in my oyster card. (I nearly missed the train and I had no time to touch in). The ticket inspector asked me my name and address. I lied to him about my identity. He verified but he said he was going to call the police if he cant identify who I was. So I told him my real identity. He said I am going to court for misdeamanor (giving fake identity). He asked me a few questions and took note of them. So what is the fine by the court or punishment. Will I get a criminal record? What should I do? Plea guilty or not guilty?

 

Thanks in advance.

 

Passenger 'running late' or 'not wishing to queue' are not valid reasons for not buying a ticket (which is what touching-in is). In a 'controlled ticket-area such as the tube or DLR or any area on the TOCs where penalty fares exist, you are obliged to buy a ticket if facilities are available (Passenger Charter pledges should be taken into account by staff.)

 

By giving false details you compound the offence and have shown intent to avoid a fare.

 

You are likely to face two charges:

 

1) Travelling on a railway without having previously paid the fare and with intent to avoid payment thereof (contrary to Section 5.3.a of The Regulation of Railways Act (1889)

 

2) Giving a false name and / or address when requested by an officer of the railway (contray to Section 5.3.c of the same Act.)

 

The maximum penalty in each charge is a fine of up to £1000 and this matter does carry the possibility of a term of imprisonment.

 

In practice, you can disregard the likelihood of imprisonment (unless you have a long history of convictions for avoiding rail fares)

 

If you are Summonsed and it is a first offence, you would normally be fined on each count if convicted and if you are pleading guilty, the fine is likely to be around £150 or so. Please bear in mind this is just my opinion based on current daily experience.

 

Yes, there is a record if you are convicted (see earlier posting)

[ilukan]

Passenger 'running late' or 'not wishing to queue' are not valid reasons for not buying a ticket (which is what touching-in is). In a 'controlled ticket-area such as the tube or DLR or any area on the TOCs where penalty fares exist, you are obliged to buy a ticket if facilities are available (Passenger Charter pledges should be taken into account by staff.)

 

By giving false details you compound the offence and have shown intent to avoid a fare.

 

You are likely to face two charges:

 

1) Travelling on a railway without having previously paid the fare and with intent to avoid payment thereof (contrary to Section 5.3.a of The Regulation of Railways Act (1889)

 

2) Giving a false name and / or address when requested by an officer of the railway (contray to Section 5.3.c of the same Act.)

 

The maximum penalty in each charge is a fine of up to £1000 and this matter does carry the possibility of a term of imprisonment.

 

In practice, you can disregard the likelihood of imprisonment (unless you have a long history of convictions for avoiding rail fares)

 

If you are Summonsed and it is a first offence, you would normally be fined on each count if convicted and if you are pleading guilty, the fine is likely to be around £150 or so. Please bear in mind this is just my opinion based on current daily experience.

 

Yes, there is a record if you are convicted (see earlier posting)

 

Old-CodJA

How sure are you? Have you experienced this before? Will the criminal record stay permanent? I am a student will the judge reduce the fine?

Thanks

[Old-CodJA]

Old-CodJA

How sure are you? Have you experienced this before? Will the criminal record stay permanent? I am a student will the judge reduce the fine?

Thanks

 

I can only give you my opinion, each case is dealt with by the Court on individual merit measured against the law and other precedent judgements.

 

I have worked in railway revenue protection and then prosecutions for the past 30 years and I still do, which is why I said my comments are based on current daily experience.

 

Any conviction record for these type of offences is spent after a short time

 

If you have already attempted to settle this with the rail company and failed then the matter will proceed to a Court hearing

 

I cannot advise that the Magistrates will reduce any fine they decide to impose just because you are a student, but what you tell them will make a difference.

 

An early guilty plea will definitely result in a reduced fine, but you should never plead guilty if you do not believe that you did anything wrong.

 

1) Fill in the 'means declaration form' that came with the Summons,

2) Fill in the 'notice of plea' form according to your conscience

3) Give a brief explanation of what you believe happened and why in a

letter to go with the forms

 

Send all these back to the Court office

[ilukan]

I can only give you my opinion, each case is dealt with by the Court on individual merit measured against the law and other precedent judgements.

 

I have worked in railway revenue protection and then prosecutions for the past 30 years and I still do, which is why I said my comments are based on current daily experience.

 

Any conviction record for these type of offences is spent after a short time

 

If you have already attempted to settle this with the rail company and failed then the matter will proceed to a Court hearing

 

I cannot advise that the Magistrates will reduce any fine they decide to impose just because you are a student, but what you tell them will make a difference.

 

An early guilty plea will definitely result in a reduced fine, but you should never plead guilty if you do not believe that you did anything wrong.

 

1) Fill in the 'means declaration form' that came with the Summons,

2) Fill in the 'notice of plea' form according to your conscience

3) Give a brief explanation of what you believe happened and why in a

letter to go with the forms

 

Send all these back to the Court office

 

So if I plea guilty will I still go prison? Will the criminal record stay permanent? I just want to pay the fine straight away and end this case to have a free mind. Do you think I should just ring up the national express and agree to pay a fine over by phone even though I was not issued a fine ticket.

 

I'm really sorry about the questions, I know these questions might seem silly to you. I'm just depressed. This case has always been on my mind. I cant think right. I can't even fully concentrate on my studies.

 

Thanks in advance.

[Old-CodJA]

Please don't worry,

 

YOU WILL NOT GO TO PRISON for this offence

 

There is no fine to pay until the Magistrates decide whether you are guilty or not.

 

You can write to the Prosecutors' office and ask if they will allow you to pay the fare and the costs that they have incurred in stead of Court action, but because you gave false details instead of giving your real name and address when first asked, it is unlikely that they will agree.

 

It is still worth trying though

 

No, the record of conviction is not permanent for something like this. It will be spent after a short time.

[qood]

Old-CodJA, it's really helpful advices.

 

I was caught today not touching in my oyster card, and tried give false details, bu I gave correct details when I noticed the officer was trying to confirm my details over phone. I thought I just pay a penalty fare and not give my real name infront of many passengers.

 

now I want to proactively contact TFL Prosecutors Office to plea for a fine, could you give me their address please?

 

thanks to anyone who also can help.

 

a stupid thing to do, but never thought this could go beyond a penalty fare.

[iambilly]

Please let me know how you go on in court, as I have mine next week.

 

Thanks

[flynnsmum123]

Ive read through this thread like how can skipping tube/bus/train fare intentional or not be taken so seriously?

 

from my experiences through friends here (in glasgow) if you skip fares on public transport you just get put off the train at the next stop and thats that.

 

good luck to everyone who is going through one of these cases

[Old-CodJA]

Ive read through this thread like how can skipping tube/bus/train fare intentional or not be taken so seriously?

 

Intentionally 'skipping a fare' is stealing. Why should theft not be taken seriously?

 

As for 'unintentional' avoidance of a fare, perhaps you can also answer why should this be ignored?

 

Maybe, sometime in the future you will be running a business and some of your so called 'customers' will conveniently 'forget' that they need to pay you.

I sincerely hope that you will still be so blase about the loss then, but somehow, I doubt it.

[flynnsmum123]

there was really no need to be rude,i am allowed an opinion and that is mine.

 

to be taken to court over a few pounds for a bus/train/subway ride just seems ridiculous to me.it may be the culture difference in cities but i know plenty of people where i live that think exactly the same.

 

a fine issued by post seems sufficient to me,but again this is just my opinion which i am allowed as i everyone else.

[Conniff]

Please let me know how you go on in court, as I have mine next week.

 

Thanks

 

Seeing as this thread stopped being responded to in 2010, I would think he has done his sentence and been released by now.