Appreciate any advice regard a prosecution notice

[arnold_the_cat]

Hi All,

This is my first post and I wish it was under better circumstances. I would greatly appreciate it if any one can offer advice on a prosecution letter my girlfriend received. The situation seems really quite unfair to me!

She was travelling from Bicester to Banbury on a Chiltern train. She purchased a discounted ticket (she has a young person's railcard) from a ticket machine and travelled the 15 mins to Banbury. As she was leaving the station, a ticket inspector asked to see her ticket and then her corresponding railcard. She was able to produce the ticket but could not locate her railcard. She knew she had the railcard at Bicester but could not find it when she arrived at Banbury. She was detained for 45 minutes. She was not offered the opportunity to pay a penalty fare or pay the £1.55 difference in ticket price. The ticket inspector confiscated her ticket and didn't supply a receipt (I understand they have to under the National Rail Conditions of Carriage) and then took a statement. My girlfriend was truthful and provided all the correct details. She has now received a letter in the post stating that she has 14 days to reply with any mitigating circumstances before they intend to take the matter to a magistrates court. There's no opportunity to just pay a fine it really justs seems like a letter of intent. There is the usual levels of worry about this and I'd really appreciate it if anyone could offer some advice. The worst part about this is that she got home, tipped her handbag upside down and out fell the railcard

Thanks in advance!

 

[DaveNewcastle]

A "Prosecution Letter"?

I hope it is just an investigation, asking her for her explanation of the incident, and which just happens to point out that Prosecution is a possibility in the case of fare evasion on the railways? It will help if you could clarify this. If it really is a Prosecution Letter, complete with Court date, place and time, then we're a bit late in the day to minimise the effect of this, but we can help.

I'll assume that it is just an investigation, asking for information. Your phrase "before they intend to take it to the Magistrates" suggest that it is.

The good news is that she found the Railcard and can produce it. I suggests that she replies with the simple truth, plus a photocopy of the card and including the card number and expiry date in the letter. A simple instance of being unable to find it in the bottom of a bag where the passenger has no history of ticket irregularities should be accepted - whether it is accepted or not, she will have to wait and see.

Of course, it is technically a breach of the Conditions if a passenger cannot produce the card on request, and even to provide it later doesn't prove that it wasn't being used by another passenger at that time, so the Company is under no obligation to accept the story, and if this isn't the first instance, then I'm sure they won't. Perhaps she could offer to pay the difference in fare and a small contribution to their admin time in dealing with the unfortunate matter?

Keep it simple. Help her to reply with the plain truth and an apology.

 

[arnold_the_cat]

Thanks for your quick response. You are correct, the letter does not contain court dates or anything along those lines. Its from Transport Investigations Ltd. and states that she has 14 days to respond with mitigating circumstances. I'm afraid I don't have it available at the moment to quote exactly what it says. Suffice to say, it's pretty intimidating.

In entering a letter of appeal, should it be mentioned that the ticket was confiscated without a receipt? The reason I ask is that in other situations (not rail related) often any mistake in procedure results in proceedings being thrown out?

You must also excuse any naivety in this rant but the whole system seems unfair. I would have imagined that rail companies would have been more lenient in these cases as they are private companies that rely on consumers to make money. Taking care of consumers should be in their interest to protect their business. This Transport Investigations Ltd. company has prosecution in it's best interest as that's where their profit comes from. Surely this is a bad system that is stacked against the consumer. Is there anything like an ombudsman for matters like this?

Sorry for the rant at the end. Its just frustrating.

 

[bb21]

A Penalty Fare can be offered if the RPI did not have grounds to believe that she had "naughty" intentions. There is no obligation on their part to do so. They are perfectly entitled to report her for further investigation and possible prosecution.

A zero-fare ticket must be provided to enable the passenger to complete the current journey. As she was at the end of her journey, there is no obligation to do so, so the actions taken are appropriate on that front too.

A bit harsh, if it was simply a mistake? Possibly. Unfair? No.

 

[Mojo]

What's with all these Chiltern threads in the past week? From zero to how many..?

 

[185]

My suspicion is the debt is sold, like any debt, by Train Companies to TIL Ltd for a fixed amount.

Where this process falls down is the Train Company send everything over to TIL without even looking at what the (alleged) offence was; as a business, TIL will only have interest in getting as much money as possible from the offender/victim via threat letter or by courts.

 

[34D]

My suspicion is the debt is sold, like any debt, by Train Companies to TIL Ltd for a fixed amount.

Where this process falls down is the Train Company send everything over to TIL without even looking at what the (alleged) offence was; as a business, TIL will only have interest in getting as much money as possible from the offender/victim via threat letter or by courts.

Theoretically possible, though most unlikely (given how this forum knows that TOC investigations departments operate).

 

[HSTfan!!!]

What's with all these Chiltern threads in the past week? From zero to how many..?

TIL were doing a lot of work at ATW so I can only assume they've done a hit at Chiltern as well.

 

[andykn]

My suspicion is the debt is sold, like any debt, by Train Companies to TIL Ltd for a fixed amount.

Where this process falls down is the Train Company send everything over to TIL without even looking at what the (alleged) offence was; as a business, TIL will only have interest in getting as much money as possible from the offender/victim via threat letter or by courts.

But surely the debt is only the difference in fare if paid at the soonest possible time? Even if the traveller didn't have a travelcard?

 

[185]

But surely the debt is only the difference in fare if paid at the soonest possible time? Even if the traveller didn't have a travelcard?

Sadly some train companies see any unpaid / underpaid amount as prosecutable, and will threaten prosecution (under acts or bylaws) demanding large sums of money to stop legal action proceeding.

On the other hand, there are as many cases where the train operator gave the option for the passenger/customer/offender to pay, and they simply chose not to come up with the money when contacted first time around.

 

[island]

My suspicion is the debt is sold, like any debt, by Train Companies to TIL Ltd for a fixed amount.

Where this process falls down is the Train Company send everything over to TIL without even looking at what the (alleged) offence was; as a business, TIL will only have interest in getting as much money as possible from the offender/victim via threat letter or by courts.

I don't think you're right in your suspicion.

 

[arnold_the_cat]

Thank you to everyone for the input but especially to DaveNewcastle. She wrote a letter of apology and explained what happened. TIL wrote back dropping the case but mainly because she'd had no ticket infringements before. Lesson learnt, I don't think she'll lose it again!

 

[185]

I don't think you're right in your suspicion.

Are you suggesting the TOCs make no money from passing the prosecution on to this private, independent company?

Quite charitable of them.

 

[island]

Are you suggesting the TOCs make no money from passing the prosecution on to this private, independent company?

Quite charitable of them.

Please don't put words in my mouth.

You said "the debt is sold", but this is not a debt. It is a prosecution.

I am sure TIL is paid a fee, which may or may not be proportionate to the amount recovered, but naturally the TOC will have to share the proceeds of any out-of-court settlement rather than keeping them.

 

[Yew]

Thank you to everyone for the input but especially to DaveNewcastle. She wrote a letter of apology and explained what happened. TIL wrote back dropping the case but mainly because she'd had no ticket infringements before. Lesson learnt, I don't think she'll lose it again!

I'm glad you have had a favorable outcome