Intention to prosecute

[nevermore]

Hi, first time posting here.

I was hoping you could help with an issue that has been causing me quite a bit of distress recently.

I was travelling back from St Pancras to Leagrave on 13th January 2017, and my details were taken by a revenue protection officer near Harpenden station.

Basically the officer asked for my train ticket which I provided, however the ticket had been purchased with a third off using the 16-25 discount card. Which unfortunately I had misplaced/thrown away the date part of it.

The officer then issued me a penalty fair of £36, I knew I had only £32 on me so I stated I had no cash. He then took down my details, read me what felt like my rights. I panicked and said let me check my cash, again I only had £32 on me. Then I said this is why I said no cash I knew I didn't have enough to pay the fine. I had no bank card or ID with me at the time, so when he asked fro either I couldn't provide it.

When he looked at my details, my postcode and name were correct, however due to my nervousness, and my typically messy joint up hand writing, my house number looked wrong. 50 looked like 80, he stated that 80 did not match the post code. I verbally stated that it was definitely 50.

A week and a bit later I get an intention to prosecute letter with the offences, giving a false address and entering a train for the purpose of travelling without a ticket.

Upon doing a bit of research, I noticed that a penalty fair is £20/double the tickets price which in my case was £20 or 2*15, which were affordable with the cash I had. So I'm not sure where the £36 came from.

I haven't wrote back yet, I'm just looking for advice on he situation.

Thanks

 

[mikeg]

I was travelling back from St Pancras to Leagrave on 13th January 2017, and my details were taken by a revenue protection officer near Harpenden station.

Basically the officer asked for my train ticket which I provided, however the ticket had been purchased with a third off using the 16-25 discount card. Which unfortunately I had misplaced/thrown away the date part of it.

The 'date part of it' is the actual railcard, the other part is merely a photocard.

The officer then issued me a penalty fair of £36, I knew I had only £32 on me so I stated I had no cash. He then took down my details, read me what felt like my rights. I panicked and said let me check my cash, again I only had £32 on me. Then I said this is why I said no cash I knew I didn't have enough to pay the fine. I had no bank card or ID with me at the time, so when he asked fro either I couldn't provide it.

When he looked at my details, my postcode and name were correct, however due to my nervousness, and my typically messy joint up hand writing, my house number looked wrong. 50 looked like 80, he stated that 80 did not match the post code. I verbally stated that it was definitely 50.

A week and a bit later I get an intention to prosecute letter with the offences, giving a false address and entering a train for the purpose of travelling without a ticket.

Ah, did he take a record in his notes of this verbal transaction that it was definitely a 50? I find the giving a false address part probably hard to prove, it may be worth pointing this out to them, whilst being apologetic for not having your railcard.

Also you should have said the amount of money you had to pay the penalty fare, I believe you can part pay a minimum amount and pay the rest later, though others will advise. Not that it's of any relevance now, but it's important to be upfront about things, if you had stated you only had £32 the story may have been different.

Upon doing a bit of research, I noticed that a penalty fair is £20/double the tickets price which in my case was £20 or 2*15, which were affordable with the cash I had. So I'm not sure where the £36 came from.

It's twice the full single for the relevant class of accommodation. In this case the full single is £17.80 in standard, so it should have been £35.60. The £15.20 fare is an off peak single, which counts as a discounted ticket.


Can you say which legislation they are quoting? The latter offence is definitely a byelaw matter, but does it say which legislation the first one is under? I'd imagine it's the sort of thing with a suitably apologetic, factual and to-the-point letter that they'd settle out of court for.

 

[gray1404]

In order for a penalty fare to be issued the passenger needs to be able to pay at least the Anytime single fare to the next station at which the train calls. So in your care if you were travelling to Leagrave then the fare is £17.80 (£28.50 first class). So the value of the PF would have been twice this at £35.60 (£57.00 first class) The right thing to do here would have been for the RPI to ask you how much you wished to pay at the time, explaining that the minimum they would be able to accept is £17.80 (£28.50 first class) and give you the paperwork to pay the remainder later. The RPI should understand that the usual passenger does not understand the PF system in detail and the onus is on them to explain all the required information to the passenger, whilst being proactive at taking into account the distress the passenger may be under and how this mind hinder their replies to questions and understanding of information.

Quite honestly, if I had been the RPI, I would have reverted back to issuing a PF once I became aware the customer had £32 on them. Also, when he advised you the the PF was the amount it was (I am confused as to how £36 has been reached), did he explain to you that only part payment was needed today?

Secondly, I am concerned as well about the passenger being asked to write down their details. I am aware there although there is a requirement for the passenger to provide their details in such circumstances, it does not mean they have to write them down. I believe you are just required to state them at the time with your mouth to the authorized person. Different people have different handwriting and it is quite easily I think for one person's 50 to look like an 80. I know when I am in a situation that is making be feel nervous, my handwriting suffers. (remembering when I went to a company recruitment day and had to fill out a registration form. I have never spent so long writing my own name).

I think you next step here is to write back to the company explaining your side of the story. I am not convinced the RPI did everything correctly here and I wonder if you might be able to reach an out of court settlement with GTR. Others will be along to give you detailed advise on how to write the letter.

 

[nevermore]

Quite honestly, if I had been the RPI, I would have reverted back to issuing a PF once I became aware the customer had £32 on them. Also, when he advised you the the PF was the amount it was (I am confused as to how £36 has been reached), did he explain to you that only part payment was needed today?

For some reason £36 is the only number I remember from the whole ordeal, I may have mentally rounded it up. Basically when he quoted £36 I said I have no cash. As I only had £32, not enough to cover the full penalty. When I was filling out the form he produced, I got desperate and said let me just double check my cash which was still £32, then I said to him that's why I said I have no cash, as I didn't have £36 on me to pay the full amount.

At no point did the RPI offer a part payment, despite knowing I had cash.

 

[cuccir]

Mikeg asked you about the legislation that they are prosecuting you under - it will likely either be the 'Byelaws' or 'Regulations of the Railways Act' - does it mention one? This is important as a Byelaw prosecution results in a lower fine and no criminal record; a Regulations of the Railways prosecution is more serious.

It reads like it is a Byelaws case, which is relatively good news. If that's the case, write up what a formal letter telling your story factually and concisely, apologise and state you realize that you've made a mistake, and offer to pay for the fare owed and any admin costs in investigating this so far.

 

[nevermore]

Thanks for the replies. In regards to the legislation it doesn't state whether it's 'Byelaws' or 'Regulations of the Railways Act'. If it helps their intention is to take the to magistrates court, are there any telltale signs on the letter which would suggest the type of legislation they are prosecuting me under?

 

[najaB]

...are there any telltale signs on the letter which would suggest the type of legislation they are prosecuting me under?

The wording of the charge would give a good indication. What does it say you have been charged with?

 

[nevermore]

The offences are: 'giving a false address' and 'entering a train for the purpose of travelling without a ticket entitling travel'.

 

[najaB]

The offences are: 'giving a false address' and 'entering a train for the purpose of travelling without a ticket entitling travel'.

The second is almost word for word from the Railway Byelaws, the first could be either Byelaw or RoRA though I suspect the former (though the wording more closely matches the RoRA).

 

[Puffing Devil]

"False Address" is a Regulation of Railways Act (RORA) offence.

"Entering a train....." is a Byelaws offence, as written, though they may prosecute under the RORA.

 

[nevermore]

Thank you for the replies I'll write up a letter this afternoon and get it sent off

 

[AlterEgo]

OP - can you confirm if anywhere in the RPI's notes, or correspondence you've had from the TOC, that they accept you did give the correct address in the end and the circumstances surrounding that?

 

[nevermore]

OP - can you confirm if anywhere in the RPI's notes, or correspondence you've had from the TOC, that they accept you did give the correct address in the end and the circumstances surrounding that?

Honestly, I'm not sure how to. All I know is on the day I gave the correct post code, name, street. The only issue is he thought the 50 I wrote down looks like 80. When he said the post code and address do not match, I firmly stated my address was 50.