Govia Thameslink - Notice of intention to prosecute

[Swap]

Hi all, I need your help and expert advise on my case below:

I was travelling from A to D but taken tickets only for A->B and C->D as separate tickets to save few quid but unfortunately a ticketing officer came to me between the journey B->C and asked for the ticket as I was trying to take tickets out, he spotted my two tickets and said its fare evasion and took all my details. I even offered to pay the penalty but the officer refused and insisted that I will receive the letter from them.

After a month I received a letter today saying that they wanted to take the case to magistrate court.

They asked me to reply to them by writing my statement and the details of offence is: "Entering a train for the purpose of travelling without a ticket entitling travel."

I really don't want this issue to be gone to the court and would like to settle out of the court. If I write an apology letter and agree to pay the penalty, would they be willing to settle out of court or do they go ahead with prosecution?

I completely take full responsibility for my mistake and want to deal this in the correct way, please help me.

 

[najaB]

What you have done is known as doughnut ticketing. Unfortunately, for you, TOC's take a dim view of it as it shows clear intent to avoid paying the correct fare.

I think you would be lucky to get an out of court settlement, but anything is possible, especially as they are apparently going to prosecute for a byelaw offence.

To be honest, you are probably just as well pleading guilty and getting it over with since the fine will be lower and it doesn't carry a criminal record.

 

[Paul1]

What you have done is known as doughnut ticketing. Unfortunately, for you, TOC's take a dim view of it as it shows clear intent to avoid paying the correct fare.

I think you would be lucky to get an out of court settlement, but anything is possible, especially as they are apparently going to prosecute for a byelaw offence.

To be honest, you are probably just as well pleading guilty and getting it over with since the fine will be lower and it doesn't carry a criminal record.

If you plead guilty, do you only get a fine and not a criminal record?

 

[jopsuk]

They're prosecuting you under Byelaw 18; this does not carry a criminal record. By the sound of it, you may be lucky they're not going for a more serious charge. Plead guilty, pay the fine, don't deliberately attempt to evade paying the fare again (this was no mistake, it was a deliberate act)

 

[najaB]

If you plead guilty, do you only get a fine and not a criminal record?

Not for a Byelaw offence, no. And based on the language in the summons - "Entering a train for the purpose of travelling without a ticket entitling travel." - it appears that is what they are bringing the summons for.

 

[221129]

Not for a Byelaw offence, no. And based on the language in the summons - "Entering a train for the purpose of travelling without a ticket entitling travel." - it appears that is what they are bringing the summons for.

They don't appear to have issued a summons yet. They are asking for the OPs explanation.

 

[najaB]

They don't appear to have issued a summons yet. They are asking for the OPs explanation.

Sorry, yes. You are correct.

 

[Swap]

Thank you all for replying.

yes they haven't sent summons yet, just the explanation letter.

Is it good to plead guilty straight away or write some explanation why I did it by providing proper reason which may help to settle out of the court?

the ticket inspector took away only one ticket(C->D) with him.

I really want to settle out of court.

 

[221129]

They're prosecuting you under Byelaw 18; this does not carry a criminal record. By the sound of it, you may be lucky they're not going for a more serious charge. Plead guilty, pay the fine, don't deliberately attempt to evade paying the fare again (this was no mistake, it was a deliberate act)

No Summons has been issued, so they could still go for a RoRA charge if the evidence shows it.

 

[najaB]

Is it good to plead guilty straight away or write some explanation why I did it by providing proper reason which may help to settle out of the court?

What 'proper reason' did you have in mind?

 

[Swap]

What 'proper reason' did you have in mind?

By saying I had bought 3 separate tickets and the middle leg ticket was missing.

And to justify the reason for buying 3 separate tickets for one single journey would be -

"I originally thought that the station "C" is under London Zone 6 and I already have a London Zones 1-6 travel card for the day, So I purchased the ticket only for C->D but later I found out it is not in the london zones, so purchased a seperate ticket online for A->B and thought of catching a bus from B->C. However as I reached the station A, I was already late and no point of catching the bus and as I already have tickets for A->B & C->D so all I need is a ticket from B->C and I purchased it by using cash at the station A. Unfortunately when traffic inspector asked me the ticket, I lost the ticket from station B->C and was unable to prove the journey."

Does the explanation look odd and sporadic? The only reason I am using this explanation is to settle outside of the court and avoid prosecution.

And apologies for being discreet about the station names.

 

[MikeWh]

That explanation stands out as a desperate attempt to dream up an excuse after the event. It will do you no favours at all and probably make the situation worse.

If you apologise, admit that you were wrong and explain that you now understand how serious fare evasion is, promise never to do it again, and offer to pay the fare plus their costs in investigating the matter then they may agree to settle.

Don't try and make excuses, there aren't any.

 

[najaB]

By saying I had bought 3 separate tickets and the middle leg ticket was missing.

In other words, by lying.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

You've already said that you want to "save a few quid" which shows on your part - intent to avoid paying the correct fare, or - intent to defraud the railway.

And as for your proposed excuse or "alibis", do you really honestly think that an authorised officer or a prosecutor is going to believe you? Really?

Problem is, once you start spinning the web of lies, you will eventually dig yourself a deeper hole and look every bit the fool.

Don't make it any worse for you - man up and admit you made an error of judgement. This clearly does not sound like a "mistake".

Remember, whatever you write down now can/will be used as evidence

 

[najaB]

Problem is, once you start spinning the web of lies, you will eventually dig yourself a deeper hole and look every bit the fool.

To the OP - take heed of this advice. I, for one, am not going to help you to dig yourself any deeper than you already are.

 

[30907]

I think the OP should consider themselves fortunate that they are only being prosecuted under byelaw 18, and should bear that in mind in their apologetic response.

 

[221129]

I think the OP should consider themselves fortunate that they are only being prosecuted under byelaw 18, and should bear that in mind in their apologetic response.

That charge can change though.

 

[FenMan]

That charge can change though.

Quite. To minimise the risk of that happening the OP needs to do two things.

1. Take heed of the advice proffered on here.

2. To not try this stunt again, as their details will be on file.

 

[bb21]

I completely take full responsibility for my mistake and want to deal this in the correct way, please help me.

I think your last post completely contradicts this.

Please, take note of what people are saying. Very sound advice is being offered. Please do not make this worse for yourself.

If you lie, and as MikeWh said, this is going to look like an extremely desperate attempt to get off scot free, unless you can prove that you bought that middle ticket, who do you think a court of law is going to believe? At the same time you will have got the prosecutors' backs up and may well see one of the Section 5 offences being pressed for, with its associated criminal record when (not "if" in your case) convicted. Remember the prosecutors have probably heard all the excuses that exist from the fare evader they met before.

The worst a Byelaw offence will do is making your wallet lighter. The worst a criminal record will do, well, you don't need me to tell you.

In case you are still not clear, DON'T DO IT!

 

[Fare-Cop]

the ticket inspector took away only one ticket(C->D) with him.

This appears to be why they are only talking about a Byelaw offence at this stage.

A well-trained and more attentive inspector would have seized both tickets thereby retaining the clear evidence of the attempt to avoid a fare contrary to S.5(3)(a) RoRA [1889].

It will still be possible for GTR to lay the more serious charge IF the RPI has recorded reference and questioning in his notes that identifies the use of both tickets in order to avoid the central portion of the fare due.

 

[Swap]

Thank you all for your replies.

Yes I really want to be honest in my statement and plead guilty. I came up with the above statement in the fear of getting a criminal record. I don't mind the penalty charge that they are going to impose here, my only worry here is to avoid any prosecution or criminal record as this will turn my life upside down and my lose my current job and my plans of buying a house in future.

I underestimated the fare evasion completely, I swear this was the first time I used this route and I have been told by a lot of people that you normally pay the penalty on the spot when you are caught without a ticket, so I was prepared to pay if anything goes wrong. The ticket inspector didn't allow me to pay on the spot but insisted I would receive a letter.

This appears to be why they are only talking about a Byelaw offence at this stage.

A well-trained and more attentive inspector would have seized both tickets thereby retaining the clear evidence of the attempt to avoid a fare contrary to S.5(3)(a) RoRA [1889].

It will still be possible for GTR to lay the more serious charge IF the RPI has recorded reference and questioning in his notes that identifies the use of both tickets in order to avoid the central portion of the fare due.

Actually, I dropped both the tickets while trying to take them out and the Ticket Inspector picked them both and handed me the first one (A->B) saying it is not valid and when he looked at the second, he understood what I did and then after a little bit of explanation and offering to pay the penalty we both got off at my stop and he asked me for the one which he gave back, I said I missed it and might have lost it in the train, so he had to take the ticket he had. Hope it helps to understand what happend.

That charge can change though.

Now Iam really worried, what are the chances of the charge being changed? What is the best I can do to not change the charge?

 

[Islineclear3_1]

Penalty fares are usually issued for honest mistakes - clearly your actions contravene this which is why you weren't issued one.

You might have the option to offer an out of court settlement so put some money aside

 

[Deepgreen]

Thank you all for your replies.

Yes I really want to be honest in my statement and plead guilty. I came up with the above statement in the fear of getting a criminal record. I don't mind the penalty charge that they are going to impose here, my only worry here is to avoid any prosecution or criminal record as this will turn my life upside down and my lose my current job and my plans of buying a house in future.

I underestimated the fare evasion completely, I swear this was the first time I used this route and I have been told by a lot of people that you normally pay the penalty on the spot when you are caught without a ticket, so I was prepared to pay if anything goes wrong. The ticket inspector didn't allow me to pay on the spot but insisted I would receive a letter.

Whether it was your first time on this particular route or not, you still went for the deliberate option of incomplete ticketing that you did, and hoped to get away with it. You haven't. You need to be aware that perpetrating fraud may well lead to adverse consequences for you. My impression from this thread is that you hoped that advice from members would help you escape justice. It is very unlikely to, and you should take from this that the railway is not an environment to be taken lightly.

There have been/are enough publicity campaigns warning against railway fraud to make anyone aware of the issue, so a plea of ignorance is extremely unlikely to work in your favour.

I'd also question the wisdom and morality of "a lot of people" who have advised you - the strong implication here is that they also are regular fare evaders. I would not rely on such people for advice!

 

[talldave]

Thank you all for your replies.

Yes I really want to be honest in my statement and plead guilty. I came up with the above statement in the fear of getting a criminal record. I don't mind the penalty charge that they are going to impose here, my only worry here is to avoid any prosecution or criminal record as this will turn my life upside down and my lose my current job and my plans of buying a house in future.

I underestimated the fare evasion completely, I swear this was the first time I used this route and I have been told by a lot of people that you normally pay the penalty on the spot when you are caught without a ticket, so I was prepared to pay if anything goes wrong. The ticket inspector didn't allow me to pay on the spot but insisted I would receive a letter.

The "lot of people" are obviously cleverer than you and ensure that they are caught without a ticket. You were caught with tickets that highlighted the fraud you were perpetrating.

 

[Swap]

Is it ok if write the letter as follows to keep it simple -

Dear Sir/Madam,

I take full responsibility of my actions and deeply regret about this incident. I would like to apologise sincerely and promise never to make this mistake again and I am happy to offer a contribution towards the cost of dealing with this incident and would appreciate if we can settle it out of the court.

Yours Respectfully,
X

 

[najaB]

Is it ok if write the letter as follows to keep it simple -

That sounds about right. You can't "deeply regret about" something though - you can "feel great regret about" it though. I'd also make it clearer that you want to recompense the lost fare revenue as well.

 

[Swap]

That sounds about right. You can't "deeply regret about" something though - you can "feel great regret about" it though.

Thank you najaB, I will update as per your suggestion.

 

[island]

I hesitate to say this, but this looks like the wrong charge. If your train from A called at at least one station at which the A-B ticket was valid, then you wouldn't be guilty of the offence of entering a train without a valid ticket entitling you to travel. You are no doubt guilty of the more serious offence of travelling on a train without having previously paid your fare and with intent to avoid the payment thereof, however.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Swap, I'm unable to advise placing too much confidence in this suggestion:

I hesitate to say this, but this looks like the wrong charge. If your train from A called at at least one station at which the A-B ticket was valid, then you wouldn't be guilty of the offence of entering a train without a valid ticket entitling you to travel. . . . .

The Company may indeed have been better advised in pursuing a different offence, but I can't agree that a Byelaw 18 (1) would fail. The phrase "entering a train for the purpose of travelling . . . . [without] a valid ticket . . . to travel" has to be read in the context of the relevant facts, and these include the facts that (1) you entered a train, (2) you intended to travel, (3) the intended travel was from 'A' to 'D' (which included between 'B' and 'C' -the evidence is the tickets for either end of the journey, and probably something in your statement to the Inspector), (4) at the point of enteringing, you did not have a ticket which entitled that travel (including between 'A' and 'D').

Although I can't find an example of case law to support this interpretation under the current Byelaws, there are examples under previous Byelaws
such as Browning v Floyd (1946) where the passenger's actions, which included multiple ticket, were captured by the Byelaw, and Murphy v Verati (1967) where the passenger's ticket did not cover the full journey was also captured by the Byelaw. At that time the Byelaw had the same sense - the entering a train, the obtaining a ticket, and entitlement to travel, without each of the three elements being expressly tied together : "No person other than an authorised person shall enter any vehicle for the purpose of travelling unless and until he or she or someone on his or her behalf shall have obtained from the Board or from an authorised person a ticket or other authority entitling him or her to travel therein."

Helpfully, that compares favourably with today's Byelaw 18 (1), which states: "In any area not designated as a compulsory ticket area, no person shall enter any train for the purpose of travelling on the railway unless he has with him a valid ticket entitling him to travel."

Under the procedures for statutory interpretation, the interpretation of the identical concepts under the previous Byelaw can be read into the present Byelaw, where there is no definition or judgement to the contrary.
For these reasons, I believe that your circumstances are captured by Byelaw 18 (1).

 

[island]

We'll have to agree to disagree in that case. I think you're reading into the byelaws verbiage that isn't there; if the draughtsman had intended "a ticket entitling him to make the journey he intended to make" he would have so written.