Court Action Help

[smiffywales]

A relative of mine has recently received a Further Steps Notice from West Midlands Central Finance Unit regarding a fine of £519.50. The fine has been imposed for non-payment of a fare for a train journey in a part of the UK that he has never visited. In fact, on the day in question he was at work many miles away from the location of the alleged offence.This has been sent as the first letter sent out was never seen by my relative and therefore he did not respond at that time. He is now being told that he will receive a summons to attend a local court where he will naturally plead Not Guilty as he was not the person who committed the alleged offence. He will then have to go to court to make his case.

He can prove that he was at work on the day in question, by his employer writing a letter in his defence stating that he was at work. I also understand that an extract from a staff register may also be available to support his defence. It seems that whoever was responsible for the non-payment of the fare gave the same name as his, and some agency has by some means identified him as the offender, when this simply cannot be the case. Does this really need to go to court - it seems an awful waste of time, not to mention the stress and anxiety this is causing him and his family. Any advice would be appreciated.

 

[najaB]

I'm a little confused - a fine can only be imposed by a court. Has the case already been heard in his absence?

 

[smiffywales]

No, he has to attend court in two weeks time to enter a plea which will be Not Guilty. He has been informed over the phone that by entering a plea of Not Guilty he will then automatically be summoned to court at a later date in Birmingham.

 

[smiffywales]

He has received a Further Steps Notice for non-payment of a fine of £520.00 received from West Midlands Central Finance Unit. As the original fine notification was never received by him the fine was not challenged until receipt of the Further Steps Notice.

 

[Fare-Cop]

I'm a little confused - a fine can only be imposed by a court. Has the case already been heard in his absence?

For the matter to be subject to a 'Further Steps Notice from West Midlands Central Finance Unit regarding a fine of £519.50' as referenced by the OP, it seems that it must have been heard by a Court and therefore, in order to overturn that judgment, yes, it will need to go back before the Court

Given your comment that your friend knew nothing about the matter, it seems that your friend will have to make a 'Statutory Declaration' and get the matter revisited

The Court will advise the prosecuting office that such a declaration has been made. Of course, if the prosecution believe that they have good evidence to confirm that the person was correctly identified they might seek a trial, but that's another matter.

 

[najaB]

For the matter to be subject to a 'Further Steps Notice from West Midlands Central Finance Unit regarding a fine of £519.50' as referenced by the OP, it seems that it must have been heard by a Court and therefore, in order to overturn that judgment, yes, it will need to go back before the Court.

That's what I thought. I am confused by the OP saying that his relative has been told that he is going to receive a summons?

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I agree. The matter has already gone to Court, and the 'Guilty' Judgement has already been given (presumably in the absence of any defendant) and a Fine with Costs will have been determined as the sentence. The 'further steps notice' is an attempt to recover those unpaid fines and costs.

I'm adding this just to clarify that the 'notice' is only concerned with the unpaid fine, and any Summons that is issued now, will be concerned with the recovery of the fine, and not with the alleged incident in another part of the country.

The 'Statutory Declaration' should be made promptly, and should be an absolutely truthful statement of fact. It is made on a very short form and is very straightforward, but the Court office or a local Solicitor will assist your relative in making the declaration if (s)he prefers.

 

[ainsworth74]

I apologise there were a few posts waiting for approval (#3 and #4) people may wish to go back and read them.

 

[najaB]

Any advice would be appreciated.

Thanks Fare-Cop and DaveNewcastle, I should have figured out what was happening. Since there are two separate, but related, issues (the initial ticketing offence and the action to recover the unpaid fine), does the OP's relative have to make two declarations?

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I apologise there were a few posts waiting for approval (#3 and #4) people may wish to go back and read them.

No, he has to attend court in two weeks time to enter a plea which will be Not Guilty. He has been informed over the phone that by entering a plea of Not Guilty he will then automatically be summoned to court at a later date in Birmingham.

He has received a Further Steps Notice for non-payment of a fine of £520.00 received from West Midlands Central Finance Unit. As the original fine notification was never received by him the fine was not challenged until receipt of the Further Steps Notice.

Thanks, but I feel confident that we've correctly identified the issues here (including some informed guesswork!).
Yes, if he attends and gives a 'not guilty' plea, then a later date will be set for the hearing. But all of that is missing the point (as it has been made on here) that he isn't the guilty party and therefore isn't criminally liable. So, instead of entering a 'not guilty' plea, he really must make the Statutory Declaration to state that he was not aware of any proceedings against him, and do so a.s.a.p. to be well ahead of that date in two weeks time.

The consequence of doing this is:
1. The initial decision of the Magistrates Court in the matter of fare evasion or whatever it was is quashed. The Sentence is quashed. The collection of the Fine is set aside.
2. The Court has the authority to restart the initial prosecution straight away, or may choose to set a new date.
3. If the Court decides to restart the initial prosecution, the relative will be asked straight away for their plea (which will presumably be 'not guilty') but without any prosecution or evidence present, another date will be set for a hearing, and the prosecution will have the opportunity to reconsider their position in the light of the Statutory declaration.
4. If the Court decides to offer a new date for the initial prosecution, then the Company will be aware of the Statutory Declaration and will hopefully realise the misrepresentation and will drop the matter. If it still wants to persue the matter (at which the relative would presumably plea 'not guilty', then the relative will introduce the evidence of employment elsewhere).

 

[smiffywales]

Sorry for the late reply but, thank you all for your comments and help in this matter.

 

[smiffywales]

This is now becoming farcical. My relative made a statutory declaration just over a week ago stating that they were Not Guilty. The officials on duty at the Magistrates Court were to be quite honest somewhat surprised at the action being taken. The only evidence the prosecution have is a signature which looks nothing like my relative's. Having made the declaration, a pack of evidence to show that my relative could not have been the person on the train was sent off to those instigating this ridiculous action, and we are awaiting their response. This evidence consisted of a letter from the employer stating that my relative was at their place of work on the day when the alleged offence took place, and bank statements showing shopping transactions in a town a long way from the location of the alleged incident. I have now been told today that my relative has had the full amount of the fine of more than £500.00 deducted from this months pay!! What on earth is happening here? The only option my relative now has is to place this in the hands of a solicitor, to try and seek some justice from this disgusting mess. Mr Exceedingly Angry!!!

 

[34D]

Is that as an attachment from earnings order?

 

[smiffywales]

I dont know what it is called but the full amount was deducted from his pay at source. This has been done whilst they are in receipt of the wealth of evidence submitted to show that he was not the offender. According to the Prosecutions officer "the case has been adjourned to Birmingham Magistrates Court for a date this month to fix a trial date and that his attendance has been excused from that hearing. The evidence submitted will enable them to ascertain how to deal with the trial when the dates is fixed". So they have the evidence to enable them to decide how to proceed but they still take his money, and the wording would suggest they still intend to go to trial.

 

[najaB]

My relative made a statutory declaration just over a week ago stating that they were Not Guilty.

Again, confused. Did they make a declaration that they had no knowledge of the original court action, or did they make a not guilty plea to the second - they are two different things.

 

[smiffywales]

Again, confused. Did they make a declaration that they had no knowledge of the original court action, or did they make a not guilty plea to the second - they are two different things.

The statutory declaration was made because he knew nothing about the matter at all until the Further Steps Notice was received. He knew nothing about the original action at all because the original letter went to some other address. All I know is that a plea of Not Guilty was entered.

 

[najaB]

All I know is that a plea of Not Guilty was entered.

Still confused. A statutory declaration doesn't require a plea to be entered - unless the court required the plea to be made at the same time, perhaps?

 

[ainsworth74]

Still confused. A statutory declaration doesn't require a plea to be entered - unless the court required the plea to be made at the same time, perhaps?

I believe that is fairly common.

 

[najaB]

I believe that is fairly common.

Mmm.. I guess so. I am wondering though if the plea/declaration actually was for the original matter as the deduction from earnings has gone ahead.

To the OP, do you know on what date the statutory declaration was made?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

So they have the evidence to enable them to decide how to proceed but they still take his money, and the wording would suggest they still intend to go to trial.

I wouldn't put too much emphasis on the wording of the letter as it is likely a standard letter that they use for all cases.

 

[Deerfold]

Your friend should have received details that an attachment of earnings order had been made, asking for his work details - this should also have included the option to appeal against it being made - the fact it wasn't the right person should have been relevant.

I am wondering why it seems to have taken so long to complete the declaration - this probably hasn't helped - most payrolls close several days before the money is paid so any cancellation may not have been received in time.

 

[Southwest]

I dont know what it is called but the full amount was deducted from his pay at source.

So, as I see this in my own simple world, he/she is considered 'guilty' before having their innocence proven.

What kind of stazi rule is this?

 

[Deerfold]

So, as I see this in my own simple world, he/she is considered 'guilty' before having their innocence proven.

What kind of stazi rule is this?

As I said, it should not happen, but we need more details from the OP to try and work out why it has.

 

[smiffywales]

... for the time being!
Solicitor instructed to sort out this mess!
Thanks everyone.

 

[talltim]

Could I just get this clear in my head.
You can get taken to court, found guilty and fined in your absence/without your knowledge, but you can't get the fine deducted from pay without interaction from yourself?

 

[Puffing Devil]

It is technically possible, if the court has details of your employer. However, an AOE Order is something that is normally made after other repayment plans have failed. I would expect some interaction with the court's Fines Officer to take place before an order is suggested.

The option of an AOE can often focus the mind of a defendant when agreeing a repayment schedule - quite often not having your employer know of your appearance is a factor. Also, the deductions are a prescribed percentage of income within an AOE, and may well be higher than a court is prepared to accept in a voluntary repayment scheme.

Edited to add:
Checking my sentencing guidelines, it shows that an AOE must be imposed if a sentence includes compensation, which would be the case for unpaid rail fares. Otherwise, AOEs can only be imposed in the first instance with the agreement of the defendant. If they fail to pay an involuntary AOE is an option, making their employer aware of their misdemeanour - see my comments above.

 

[Fare-Cop]

The statutory declaration was made because he knew nothing about the matter at all until the Further Steps Notice was received. He knew nothing about the original action at all because the original letter went to some other address. All I know is that a plea of Not Guilty was entered.

This is quite normal nowadays

If the alleged offender makes a Statutory Declaration that they knew nothing of the prosecution hearing and the Court accepts that position, in an effort to save further Court time, the Legal Advisor may ask that defendant if they wish to enter a plea.

If the defendant enters a 'Guilty' plea and accepts the evidence of the prosecution statement, having notified the prosecutor that a Stat. Dec. has been made, the Court may decide to sentence there and then so as to clear the matter up and avoid any unnecessary delay.

If the defendant enters a 'Not Guilty' plea, the matter will normally be set down to a full trial to take place at a later date and the prosecutor's office will be notified accordingly.

 

[Puffing Devil]

This is quite normal nowadays

If the alleged offender makes a Statutory Declaration that they knew nothing of the prosecution hearing and the Court accepts that position, in an effort to save further Court time, the Legal Advisor may ask that defendant if they wish to enter a plea.

If the defendant enters a 'Guilty' plea and accepts the evidence of the prosecution statement, having notified the prosecutor that a Stat. Dec. has been made, the Court may decide to sentence there and then so as to clear the matter up and avoid any unnecessary delay.

If the defendant enters a 'Not Guilty' plea, the matter will normally be set down to a full trial to take place at a later date and the prosecutor's office will be notified accordingly.

Indeed - which is why the advice on this forum is to make the declaration with a Solicitor and send it to the court. This allows a breathing space before a new court date is set for a plea.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

. . . . . the advice on this forum is to make the declaration with a Solicitor and send it to the court. . . . .

I agree.
I'll just add for the avoidance of doubt, that this had not been the advice on here until recently, not until the Courts began to adopt the 'streamlining' of Statutory Declarations by requiring the person making the Declaration to enter a plea at the same time as accepting their Declaration.

 

[Fare-Cop]

I agree.
I'll just add for the avoidance of doubt, that this had not been the advice on here until recently, not until the Courts began to adopt the 'streamlining' of Statutory Declarations by requiring the person making the Declaration to enter a plea at the same time as accepting their Declaration.

Yes, a perception of being 'pushed' into entering a plea at the time of making the Declaration can do the alleged offender a dis-service.

Far better to make the Declaration with the assistance & benefit of a Solicitor's legal expertise

 

[smiffywales]

The rail company who instigated this ridiculous action have, on seeing the evidence provide by my relative decided to in their words, "not take any further action". How generous of them. They falsely accused an innocent person, made no attempt to confirm that the person they were chasing was indeed the person who made the train journey and then deducted the full fine amount from salary. The letter from the train company makes no apology and, even sounds like they were doing my relative a favour. It is great to have the weight lifted however, I think there are certainly grounds to make a formal complaint about this. Some may say that this matter is best put behind us however, should we just say thank you so much for not pursuing an innocent person any further or, seek some redress?