Old Altered Train Ticket Found by Officer

[Merseysider]

I would have thought, like you, that the case could not progress through lack of evidence. An altered ticket issued to the OP is evidence. The evidence the railway has is of an altered ticket, not of its use. A court would take a very dim view of "I changed the date but I never used it, honest guv." I would be very wary of admitting to anything at all. It cannot be even proved that the OP himself altered the ticket in question, never mind used it. I would be very tempted to say you have no explanation for the event. So you would advise the OP to lie, and risk further criminal charges? You are not obliged to offer one, but if you do it may be used in evidence...They may be watching for you next time but I cannot honestly see how they can proceed to prosecution unless the OP admits wrongdoing. It might be an idea to offer the railway an amount as a gesture of goodwill to cover their expenses.I don't see how this would help the situation at all?

Poor advice.

 

[Tibbs]

[/color]
Poor advice.

Why is being told to keep your mouth shut poor advice?

Most importantly, he's not advocating the OP to lie, just not to say anything.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

And that in itself is a bylaw offence. And unless you are the worlds most trusting purpose you can only come to the conclusion that they have indeed used it.

It's still up to the TOC to prove that it was used, beyond reasonable doubt. Talk to any copper and he'll be able to point you to the perpetrator of any number of crimes that he knows did it, but can't prove to the standard needed. Frustrating, I agree, but that's our legal system.

 

[Flamingo]

I would have thought, like you, that the case could not progress through lack of evidence. The evidence the railway has is of an altered ticket, not of its use. I would be very wary of admitting to anything at all. It cannot be even proved that the OP himself altered the ticket in question, never mind used it. I would be very tempted to say you have no explanation for the event. You are not obliged to offer one, but if you do it may be used in evidence...They may be watching for you next time but I cannot honestly see how they can proceed to prosecution unless the OP admits wrongdoing. It might be an idea to offer the railway an amount as a gesture of goodwill to cover their expenses.

Poor advice (again).

 

[EM2]

It's still up to the TOC to prove that it was used, beyond reasonable doubt.

It isn't. The byelaw offence is (as the OP has already pointed out) as follows:

20. Altering tickets and use of altered tickets
(1) No person shall alter any ticket in any way with the intent that an Operator
shall be defrauded or prejudiced.
(2) No person shall knowingly use any ticket which has been altered in any way in breach of Byelaw 20(1).

The byelaw offence is committed as soon as the ticket is altered.

 

[Flamingo]

It's still up to the TOC to prove that it was used, beyond reasonable doubt. Talk to any copper and he'll be able to point you to the perpetrator of any number of crimes that he knows did it, but can't prove to the standard needed. Frustrating, I agree, but that's our legal system.

You are forgetting, the Railway Bylaws can be described as over 150 years of closing loopholes. Do you really think this is the first time this scenario has occured?

 

[LateThanNever]

[/color]
Poor advice.

"An altered ticket issued to the OP is evidence."
But evidence of what? The fact that he keeps altered tickets as souvenirs perhaps?
The OP is being invited to incriminate himself out of his own mouth. He is free to decline that invitation.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

You are forgetting, the Railway Bylaws can be described as over 150 years of closing loopholes. Do you really think this is the first time this scenario has occured?

As is much law.

The onus of proof beyond reasonable doubt is still on the prosecutor. Otherwise why bother with courts?

The byelaw offence is committed as soon as the ticket is altered.

Not if evidence of intent to defraud the Operator is lacking.

 

[Panda]

Been following this thread since the start and as usual, I just tend lurk and read and wait for people to state the obvious or ask the questions, but I am confused.

In your initial post, while not actually stating it as a fact, you pretty much allude to the fact that you altered the ticket a couple of months ago because you had no money, was desperate and needed a way to get to work. This 100% gave me the impression that you had actually used the altered ticket not only once, but several times as you referred to "tickets".

Even later on in the same initial post, you ask about the theory of stating that the ticket was not used on that day (as opposed to it never being used) and whether that is an option for you.

You further state that this was the only choice you had to work and avoid disciplinary action as you were unable to take out loans or borrow money - again, this to me sounds like you got to work using the altered ticket (is there any other way to interpret it?).

Your story then started to change and whilst still pleading that you have no money, suddenly you claim that you have bought tickets for the last two years, with only a few days exception, when previously you were talking about months.

And then a few posts later, at some point this morning, you suddenly claim that you never actually used the altered ticket.

Are you trying to play with words and make it seem like you never used the ticket by claiming you weren't caught using the ticket or am I just completely misunderstanding this? I don't think it's very wise to try and conceal the facts by playing with words or carefully choosing them (you might see it as not really lying, but you are deliberately misrepresenting the facts - because they seem to have changed quite a bit over the last 24 hours - from having no money and having to get to work and not being able to get any loans to never using the ticket because you weren't caught).

Just an observation - I don't think you are doing yourself any favours by trying to disguise the facts.

 

[Flamingo]

As is much law.

The onus of proof beyond reasonable doubt is still on the prosecutor. Otherwise why bother with courts?

Can I refer you to post #34...

 

[MikeWh]

Your story then started to change and whilst still pleading that you have no money, suddenly you claim that you have bought tickets for the last two years, with only a few days exception, when previously you were talking about months.

The ticket was altered a few months ago and used on a couple of occasions. At least that's the way I read it.

 

[Flamingo]

The ticket was altered a few months ago and used on a couple of occasions. At least that's the way I read it.

And kept in the wallet in case it was needed again, is how I also read it...

 

[MikeWh]

And kept in the wallet in case it was needed again, is how I also read it...

agreed, yes.

 

[Clip]

The ticket was altered a few months ago and used on a couple of occasions. At least that's the way I read it.

Indeed. But yet again 2 posters of which one has a long history of doing have ignored this and again looking for 'outs' for the op

 

[island]

A lot here depends on whether the Train Operating Company has evidence that the OP travelled on the altered ticket, thereby defrauding the railway. It is worth remembering that a Byelaw offence, on its own, does not ordinarily result in a criminal record.

 

[Merseysider]

Why is being told to keep your mouth shut poor advice?

Most importantly, he's not advocating the OP to lie, just not to say anything.

It's poor advice because the OP is already guilty of a Byelaw offence. Keeping his mouth shut will be viewed as being deliberately uncooperative and obstructive and NT will be far less likely to settle.

Edit: I've only just noticed this.

But evidence of what? The fact that he keeps altered tickets as souvenirs perhaps?

I'm sorry but this is the most ridiculous excuse I've heard in a long time. OP, please do not attempt to argue that you keep altered tickets as souvenirs.

 

[PermitToTravel]

It's still up to the TOC to prove that it was used, beyond reasonable doubt. Talk to any copper and he'll be able to point you to the perpetrator of any number of crimes that he knows did it, but can't prove to the standard needed. Frustrating, I agree, but that's our legal system.

They only need prove that he intended to use the ticket, which is rather a lower bar

Perhaps the OP ought to seek the assistance of a solicitor somewhat urgently
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

A lot here depends on whether the Train Operating Company has evidence that the OP travelled on the altered ticket, thereby defrauding the railway. It is worth remembering that a Byelaw offence, on its own, does not ordinarily result in a criminal record.

I don't think that much depends on this. Attempts and conspiracies to commit fraud, too, can elicit a criminal record.

 

[Murph]

The byelaw offence is committed as soon as the ticket is altered.

Not quite. The intent to defraud has to be there. The intent is inferred from the actions and words (and the person's actual thoughts are irrelevant). So, not all alterations would demonstrate the necessary intent, e.g. if they were something ridiculous like making the destination "Trumpton", or changing the date to something long in the past, or changing the price to £1M. On the other hand, an alteration which changes the validity of the ticket in a potentially beneficial way (e.g. making it valid on a new date, a longer journey, better class, etc), is likely to demonstrate the required intent.

From the sound of things, it would be very easy to argue that the intent was there if the alteration was to a recent date after original date on the ticket, i.e. altered in any way that would have permitted it to be used beyond its original validity. I'd strongly urge the OP to settle if possible, and not to fight it unless they are advised to do so by a very good solicitor (and one who actually does know the railway bylaws and case law).

 

[StephenWasHere]

So, to clarify here: in my explanation of events, I am explaining how I was in possession of an altered ticket, that had been used in the past, on 2 occasions, because I was unable to secure the monetary funds to make my commute.

And I resorted to using this altered ticket in order to complete a train journey to/from my job.

I have proof that I've been buying monthly tickets for the past 12 months (on a nearly back to back routine), therefore proving that I haven't been using this altered annual season ticket for the entire 12 months.

This is a truthful account of what has happened. I feel need to reply to prevent making things worse, and I am best owning up to what has happened to hopefully convince NR to accept my plea, and opt for an out of court settlement.

 

[Merseysider]

So, to clarify here: in my explanation of events, I am explaining how I was in possession of an altered ticket, that had been used in the past, on 2 occasions, because I was unable to secure the monetary funds to make my commute.

And I resorted to using this altered ticket in order to complete a train journey to/from my job.

I have proof that I've been buying monthly tickets for the past 12 months (on a nearly back to back routine), therefore proving that I haven't been using this altered annual season ticket for the entire 12 months.

This is a truthful account of what has happened. I feel need to reply to prevent making things worse, and I am best owning up to what has happened to hopefully convince NR to accept my plea, and opt for an out of court settlement.

Thank you for being honest, StephenWasHere. Contrary to some posters on here who seem to believe hiding the truth or lying or trying to wriggle your way out of it would be the best option, unless you can hire Saul Goodman, if Northern find out you tried it on rather than fessing up, you will end up in court.

 

[cjmillsnun]

So, to clarify here: in my explanation of events, I am explaining how I was in possession of an altered ticket, that had been used in the past, on 2 occasions, because I was unable to secure the monetary funds to make my commute.

And I resorted to using this altered ticket in order to complete a train journey to/from my job.

I have proof that I've been buying monthly tickets for the past 12 months (on a nearly back to back routine), therefore proving that I haven't been using this altered annual season ticket for the entire 12 months.

This is a truthful account of what has happened. I feel need to reply to prevent making things worse, and I am best owning up to what has happened to hopefully convince NR to accept my plea, and opt for an out of court settlement.

This is absolutely the correct approach. By being co-operative, it is more likely Northern will want to settle.

 

[timbo58]

Just a minor point for anyone viewing.

Being able to prove you bought tickets covering the period the altered ticket could have been used doesn't prove the altered ticket was not needed/used.

You could just as easily have bought these tickets and passed them to another person, I know that sounds implausible, but it just shows that proving you have bought a ticket is never the same as showing a valid ticket.

A few years back a man & wife 'team' were detected regularly fare evading on the malvern line, they would split up every day whilst ticket checks were carried out (before ticket barriers at most stations) and when either had had 'their' ticket checked would quickly walk past the checker and pass the ticket to the other.

Unfortunately for them a plain clothes RPI was travelling and noticed this pattern after the 1st 3 days, it was THAT blatant.

 

[thealexweb]

What evidence do Northern have that this ticket was ever used to board a train after it was altered? It has never been put in a ticket barrier traveling between those stations.

 

[221129]

What evidence do Northern have that this ticket was ever used to board a train after it was altered? It has never been put in a ticket barrier traveling between those stations.

They don't need it?

 

[timbo58]

it wouldn't have worked in the barrier since that reads magnetic data on the ticket.
Even at barriered stations there are ways and means to avoid putting it into such a slot in any case.

Although they would not be prosecuting under the theft act -the mere fact he has a ticket that could have been used to avoid payment is 'going equipped to steal' IMHO.

If you manufacture £20 notes at home and the police pop round you can still be prosecuted even if you aren't actually caught attempting to 'pass them off'.

 

[yorkie]

What evidence do Northern have that this ticket was ever used to board a train after it was altered?

I refer you to previous posts!

It has never been put in a ticket barrier traveling between those stations.

I don't see the relevance of ticket barriers? Neither station has them, the tickets wouldn't work them if they existed.

 

[First class]

Simple possession of the ticket is sufficient, if Northern wanted to use the Fraud Act 2006. I think this offence is by far the most suitable in the circumstances, but logistically, it may be a bit more difficult to proceed with.

Sec 6 Possession etc. of articles for use in frauds

(1)A person is guilty of an offence if he has in his possession or under his control any article for use in the course of or in connection with any fraud.

(2)A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable—
(a)on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum (or to both);

Obviously not going to be prison unless the ticket is worth thousands, and there's a few of them! But a fine/community order is likely if convicted under that Act.

The danger of this (for Northern) is that if the OP elects for a trial by jury, (which would be seriously stupid!), they may not have a barrister available, as their prosecutor is unlikely to have the rights of audience in the Crown Court.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Simple possession of the ticket is sufficient, if Northern wanted to use the Fraud Act 2006. I think this offence is by far the most suitable in the circumstances, . . .

I agree.

The danger of this (for Northern) is that if the OP elects for a trial by jury, (which would be seriously stupid!), they may not have a barrister available, as their prosecutor is unlikely to have the rights of audience in the Crown Court.

Perhaps so, but I'm sure that hurdle can be overcome!
(There's a pool of out of work barristers looking for briefs.)

 

[Andrew1395]

You need to be able to demonstrate that you were unable to travel over the tickets altered validity. For example if you have been in a job that involved travel from home over the route of the altered ticket, it will be difficult to prove you did not travel with it. In altering the ticket dates you intended to defraud, having been caught with the altered ticket, the fact that you have paid for tickets in the past is irrelevant. If they prosecute I think it unlikely you will not end up with a heavy fine and criminal record. Avoiding prosecution is now you principal goal. That involves being totally transparent and being prepared to make a lump sum payment to settle the matte.

 

[455driver]

455driver - I am not trying to 'cheat' my way out of this. If you look at what I've been saying, I have complied for the past 2 years in buying tickets. Unfortunately I've been unable to pay for a ticket due to some quite severe financial reasons, and resorted into doing something very stupid and foolish out of desperation.

My comment wasnt aimed at you but at the person offering the 'advice' which I considered ill conceived and very dangerous for you to take.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

A lot here depends on whether the Train Operating Company has evidence that the OP travelled on the altered ticket, thereby defrauding the railway. It is worth remembering that a Byelaw offence, on its own, does not ordinarily result in a criminal record.

Lets assume the altered ticket was used for a couple of months,

So the OP is in Court for a Byelaw offence (altering the ticket) and under oath is asked 'did you use the altered ticket', what is the answer?
Do they-
A/ lie and say no, at which point the TOC solicitor offers evidence of the use of the altered ticket
B/ lie and get away with it
C/ admit it because they are under oath and lying is not a good thing to do in Court!

 

[DownSouth]

It is worth remembering that a Byelaw offence, on its own, does not ordinarily result in a criminal record.

Little consolation if Northern Rail use the press to skewer the offender afterwards, or use him as an example in an anti-evasion campaign.

It's not defamation if it's true.

 

[Abpj17]

If I were the TOC, I’d be assuming you had altered your season ticket for a whole extra year (or possibly take weekly tickets and extended them to monthly). Evidence of purchased tickets may get you a reasonable settlement, but the alterations are equivalent to cheque fraud or counterfeiting bank notes in a moral/practical sense (both of which are taken v. seriously).