Potential Court case

[Helena895045]

Ok, I’ll admit hands down what i did was stupid and definitely deserved it.
The past few weeks I’ve been getting Anytime Open Returns from Hayward’s Heath > London Bridge. The outward journey is valid to use once from 5 days from purchase and the return lasts 1 month. I travel to London around 2-3x per week and have not committed to a season ticket because
1) my work changes per week
2) the prices are extortionate and I can’t afford.

To avoid the automatic gate at LB ‘eating my outward ticket’ I instead bought a cheap Clapham > LB ticket hoping that I could that. Then when I use HH > LB outward ticket I could then use this for the next day up until I know I don’t need to travel in. In short, I was using the HH > LB ticket to cover the first part of the journey without the ticket being taken off and having the pay the whole amount again. Very stupid I know, and it was literally to save money.

I was then caught at the gate by someone that questioned the Clapham > LB ticket (asked about postcode etc and what street I lived on). He then asked to look into my wallet and spotted the HH>LB any time return ticket. Also mentioned they can check how many times this ticket was purchased and that they can check on CCTV. Obviously had to fess up at this time but they still wrote my details down, questioned hard and warned of court action and that they would email or send a letter to me.

I haven’t received anything yet but really scared of the consequences. Any advice on what to do when the letter comes through? Wondering how much this would affect my job if I get a criminal record for fare evasion and if anyone knows whether I can potentially avoid court and agree on a fee

 

[Mike395]

Unfortunately the below is probably not what you're going to want to hear, but I don't want to sugar-coat this and set false expectations. The first thing I'll say is try not to worry for now (but get saving - see below) - until they get in touch there really is very little you can do.

If the train operating company suspects multiple-use with intent, they're likely going to come down quite harshly on it. At a minimum, I'd expect a potential RoRA (Regulation of Railways Act) prosecution, and it's possible (though unlikely for a first-time offence) that they'll go for a more serious charge under the Fraud Act.

In any case, in the first instance you're likely to get a letter from the train operator who's member of staff interviewed you (if at a London Bridge ticket barrier this will either be Southern or Southeastern) asking for your side of the story and any mitigation. I highly advise being honest and upfront here.

After receiving this first letter, you might consider contacting the prosecutions office, being very apologetic and honest, and asking for an out-of-court settlement, however this is going to be, at a minimum, the fare they feel you evaded plus an admin fee. On a Haywards Heath to London Bridge journey I would estimate this is going to be in the high £100s at a minimum, however is probably worth paying as a RoRA charge carries a criminal record. They're also within their rights to say no and proceed to court anyway.

If they do decide to prosecute after taking into account any mitigation or out of court settlement offer, they'll then write and tell you which Act they're prosecuting under. At that point, let us know here and we'll advise on the best steps (though my personal view is that if they do go for a Fraud Act prosecution, it's probably time to seek professional legal advice).

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Ok, I’ll admit hands down what i did was stupid and definitely deserved it.
The past few weeks I’ve been getting Anytime Open Returns from Hayward’s Heath > London Bridge. The outward journey is valid to use once from 5 days from purchase and the return lasts 1 month. I travel to London around 2-3x per week and have not committed to a season ticket because
1) my work changes per week
2) the prices are extortionate and I can’t afford.

To avoid the automatic gate at LB ‘eating my outward ticket’ I instead bought a cheap Clapham > LB ticket hoping that I could that. Then when I use HH > LB outward ticket I could then use this for the next day up until I know I don’t need to travel in. In short, I was using the HH > LB ticket to cover the first part of the journey without the ticket being taken off and having the pay the whole amount again. Very stupid I know, and it was literally to save money.

I was then caught at the gate by someone that questioned the Clapham > LB ticket (asked about postcode etc and what street I lived on). He then asked to look into my wallet and spotted the HH>LB any time return ticket. Also mentioned they can check how many times this ticket was purchased and that they can check on CCTV. Obviously had to fess up at this time but they still wrote my details down, questioned hard and warned of court action and that they would email or send a letter to me.

I haven’t received anything yet but really scared of the consequences. Any advice on what to do when the letter comes through? Wondering how much this would affect my job if I get a criminal record for fare evasion and if anyone knows whether I can potentially avoid court and agree on a fee

I've only got one question - as far as I'm aware, there are no Anytime (Open) Returns from Haywards Heath to London. They would be to or from Gatwick, since Anytime Returns were abolished for journeys within the southeast about 35 years ago. So what ticket is it that you held?

 

[Helena895045]

I've only got one question - as far as I'm aware, there are no Anytime (Open) Returns from Haywards Heath to London. They would be to or from Gatwick, since Anytime Returns were abolished for journeys within the southeast about 35 years ago. So what ticket is it that you held?

Without sounding like a super paranoid person (as it’s my first time on this forum). I’m actually using Hayward’s Heath as a placeholder from the small nearby sussex area I am from. Can confirm the rest of the journey and premise is all correct though.

Apologies for the confusion. Just trying to remain as anonymous as possible

 

[Helena895045]

Unfortunately the below is probably not what you're going to want to hear, but I don't want to sugar-coat this and set false expectations. The first thing I'll say is try not to worry for now (but get saving - see below) - until they get in touch there really is very little you can do.

If the train operating company suspects multiple-use with intent, they're likely going to come down quite harshly on it. At a minimum, I'd expect a potential RoRA (Regulation of Railways Act) prosecution, and it's possible (though unlikely for a first-time offence) that they'll go for a more serious charge under the Fraud Act.

In any case, in the first instance you're likely to get a letter from the train operator who's member of staff interviewed you (if at a London Bridge ticket barrier this will either be Southern or Southeastern) asking for your side of the story and any mitigation. I highly advise being honest and upfront here.

After receiving this first letter, you might consider contacting the prosecutions office, being very apologetic and honest, and asking for an out-of-court settlement, however this is going to be, at a minimum, the fare they feel you evaded plus an admin fee. On a Haywards Heath to London Bridge journey I would estimate this is going to be in the high £100s at a minimum, however is probably worth paying as a RoRA charge carries a criminal record. They're also within their rights to say no and proceed to court anyway.

If they do decide to prosecute after taking into account any mitigation or out of court settlement offer, they'll then write and tell you which Act they're prosecuting under. At that point, let us know here and we'll advise on the best steps (though my personal view is that if they do go for a Fraud Act prosecution, it's probably time to seek professional legal advice).

I kind of expected a large fine. If I’m honest, I’d rather pay that to settle out of court. I havent heard yet from them but I’m assuming this might take a couple of days to come through? Do you know by any chance if this accounts to a criminal record?

If the fine is in £100s I should be fine, although If it’s anything near £1000 it might be a struggle. Would be great to know anyone else paying whatever the fine is, if it’s a one up sum you have to pay ASAP or would they be willing to do instalments if you don’t have the means

 

[Fawkes Cat]

In terms of a criminal record, if the railway agree to settle out of court, then you will not have a criminal record. If the matter goes to court and you are convicted, you will have a criminal record.

How much of a problem this will be for your job is hard to say. Many employers can be understanding and accept the occasional lapse of judgement by their staff. But jobs in the law and finance can be less forgiving - and many employers take badly to a pattern of poor judgement, such usas repeated use of a scheme like this. If you have a trade union or professional body to support you, it may be sensible to talk to them sooner rather than later (although once you know what line the railway are planning to take) to see if they can predict what your employer will do.

One last thing: almost inevitably, the railway will be looking for full compensation for the fares that you have not paid. They will probably argue that if you were doing it this week, you were doing it last week - and the month before that, and the year before that, and so on. You will know when you started doing this, so try to find evidence to support your view - maybe when you started in your London job, bank/credit card statements showing regular ticket purchases, time sheets showing what days you were in London and so on.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

They will probably argue that if you were doing it this week, you were doing it last week - and the month before that, and the year before that, and so on. You will know when you started doing this, so try to find evidence to support your view - maybe when you started in your London job, bank/credit card statements showing regular ticket purchases, time sheets showing what days you were in London and so on.

That, of course, is the basis for negotiating an out of Court settlement. However, if the train company takes the matter to Court then they will not be awarded compensation by way of unpaid fares on the basis of a suggestion that you "probably" did it for a long period of time (unless, of course, this is admitted). It will be for them to prove this beyond all reasonable doubt, so seeing as in most cases CCTV and the like is not kept for a long period of time (perhaps a month at most), they will struggle to prove a prolonged period of evasion.

Usually such cases can only be proven on the basis of undercover operations or ticketing systems that provide data (e.g. Oyster, contactless or ITSO cards).

 

[Fawkes Cat]

That, of course, is the basis for negotiating an out of Court settlement. However, if the train company takes the matter to Court then they will not be awarded compensation by way of unpaid fares on the basis of a suggestion that you "probably" did it for a long period of time (unless, of course, this is admitted). It will be for them to prove this beyond all reasonable doubt, so seeing as in most cases CCTV and the like is not kept for a long period of time (perhaps a month at most), they will struggle to prove a prolonged period of evasion.

Usually such cases can only be proven on the basis of undercover operations or ticketing systems that provide data (e.g. Oyster, contactless or ITSO cards).

I think that this may be an overly comforting view of the matter. If we take conviction as read, then that means that in this case it has been shown that the defendant is unreliable, and will do whatever it takes to save money. That means that their assertion ('I've only been doing this for the last few weeks') is unreliable as evidence since if it was believed it would save them money. The railway - as prosecutor and injured party - has not been shown to be unreliable (although they obviously have an interest in recovering as much money as possible) so their assertion ('the defendant has been making this journey for five years and cannot show that they bought a ticket every time') is more believable.

The OP may have a right to require the railway to prove their case. But in practice it's worth helping the court by making sure that you have the evidence to hand to demonstrate your point.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

I think that this may be an overly comforting view of the matter. If we take conviction as read, then that means that in this case it has been shown that the defendant is unreliable, and will do whatever it takes to save money. That means that their assertion ('I've only been doing this for the last few weeks') is unreliable as evidence since if it was believed it would save them money. The railway - as prosecutor and injured party - has not been shown to be unreliable (although they obviously have an interest in recovering as much money as possible) so their assertion ('the defendant has been making this journey for five years and cannot show that they bought a ticket every time') is more believable.

The OP may have a right to require the railway to prove their case. But in practice it's worth helping the court by making sure that you have the evidence to hand to demonstrate your point.

I don't disagree that it will be good to gather evidence to disprove any spurious allegations, but I think you are perhaps misstating the reality of the situation. As stated, merely asserting that something is the case, because the defendant cannot disprove it (and what reasonable person could, that far back, whether they were a fare-paying passenger or not?), is not going to cut it for a massive compensation order.

The passenger may be an unreliable witness - but equally the train company's mere claim cannot on its own be trusted to be gospel, seeing as they stand to benefit massively if a longer length for which the evasion occurred is accepted.

Other cases where substantial settlements have been agreed or compensation has been awarded have been because of strong evidence on the train company's part, or because the defendant did not deny it.

This is the kind of case where, if a 'minor' settlement for the one-off incident where the OP was 'caught' is not achievable, a solicitor would be of use to ensure that any ridiculous suggestions such as you allude to are quickly quashed.

 

[Haywain]

The passenger may be an unreliable witness - but equally the train company's mere claim cannot on its own be trusted to be gospel, seeing as they stand to profit massively if a longer length for which the evasion occurred is accepted.

Other cases where substantial settlements have been agreed or compensation has been awarded have been because of strong evidence on the train company's part, or because the defendant did not deny it.

You seem to suggest that the train operator will make a claim about how long this has been going on without gathering any evidence, and the defendant will simply be able to say no. It is quite likely that the prosecution will gather evidence that is available in the public domain if not provided by the defendant and it will then be necessary for the defendant to introduce the reasonable doubt by providing their own evidence. You are in danger of oversimplifying things.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

You seem to suggest that the train operator will make a claim about how long this has been going on without gathering any evidence, and the defendant will simply be able to say no. It is quite likely that the prosecution will gather evidence that is available in the public domain if not provided by the defendant and it will then be necessary for the defendant to introduce the reasonable doubt by providing their own evidence. You are in danger of oversimplifying things.

That is the suggestion made by @Fawkes Cat, so I was addressing it accordingly. I am by no means oversimplifying things - and indeed I have alluded to exactly what you have said in the last paragraph of my post that you quoted.

To get back on topic for the OP, all that can be said with any certainty is that if Southern want to pursue more than the incident on the day where the OP was caught, they would be well advised to consult a criminal law solicitor, as that is then outside the realm of the kind of situation for which we can give advice here.

 

[js1000]

I'd pay a fine immediately if they offer it. Generally, they are obliged to settle it out of court before pursuing prosecution. You've effectively "short fared". Train companies absolutely hate this as it's quite a premeditated action.

Also, I echo others' view that you'll need to be careful if they query how long you've been doing this.

 

[Haywain]

I'd pay a fine immediately if they offer it. Generally, they are obliged to settle it out of court before pursuing prosecution.

Complete rubbish. There is no such obligation.

 

[6Gman]

Complete rubbish. There is no such obligation.

And the TOC cannot offer a "fine". What they can offer is a settlement.

 

[Helena895045]

Thanks for your responses guys.
Just wondering if anyone had experiencing in have to repay whatever fine or settlement amount is agreed? As I said, I’d 100% go through with whatever payment it is. I’m more worried I won’t be able to pay a sum up front. I can’t however pay in instalments.

I still have yet to hear back from them

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Thanks for your responses guys.
Just wondering if anyone had experiencing in have to repay whatever fine or settlement amount is agreed? As I said, I’d 100% go through with whatever payment it is. I’m more worried I won’t be able to pay a sum up front. I can’t however pay in instalments.

I still have yet to hear back from them

There is no dearth of cases on this section of the forum where such settlements have successfully been negotiated. Have a read through some similar threads to see what sort of things people write, and what the outcome tends to be.

If I had to guess, I'd say that in about 75% of cases involving TOCs, it's possible to negotiate a settlement. TfL are less amenable to settlements but luckily it's not them that have caught you.

 

[najaB]

Just wondering if anyone had experiencing in have to repay whatever fine or settlement amount is agreed? As I said, I’d 100% go through with whatever payment it is. I’m more worried I won’t be able to pay a sum up front. I can’t however pay in instalments.

If it goes to court, they will usually accept payment in installments. A TOC is less likely to accept paying a settlement by installments. This is because, compared to the Courts, a TOC has little recourse if someone defaults on their payment plan.

 

[some bloke]

Obviously had to fess up at this time

What exactly did you confess to?

If you admitted repeated fare evasion, then it's more likely that they will proceed on that basis. If they do, then as @ForTheLoveOf suggests, consulting a criminal defence solicitor may be well advised. Whether you consult a solicitor before they respond would be a personal choice.

You could start to prepare now. As the process can take a long time (see below), you may find it useful to note down clearly any details of not just what was said at the time and perhaps what seemed to be written down, but other aspects you think may be relevant later.

I havent heard yet from them but I’m assuming this might take a couple of days to come through?

It may be important to adjust to the fact that the wheels of justice can turn slowly. They have six months to start the court case if they choose. So it may be some time before they write.

@Mike395 says above that you will probably get a letter asking for your side of the story.

It might be a good idea to start thinking about and writing down any mitigating factors now.

Wondering how much this would affect my job if I get a criminal record for fare evasion

If I could add to @Fawkes Cat's comments: It can also depend on rules of professional organisations.

Note that the government advice page mentioned below says,

"Before your conviction is spent, you only have to tell the employer about your past crime if they ask you."

Again, the type of job may be relevant.

Do you know by any chance if this accounts to a criminal record?

A conviction for fare evasion or fraud would result in an entry on the Police National Computer, which means that even a basic DBS (Disclosure and Barring Service) check would reveal it.

Where the conviction results in a fine, the "rehabilitation period" would be a year, after which you are legally allowed to say "no" when asked if you have been convicted (if no other convictions are relevant) - unless you are under 18 on the date of conviction, in which case the period is 6 months.

See https://www.gov.uk/exoffenders-and-employment (though that government advice is wrong about the under-18 period). The page also mentions that "standard" and "enhanced" DBS checks reveal spent convictions (ie after the rehabilitation period).

A conviction for a lesser, byelaw offence not involving dishonesty would not normally appear on the PNC; however, this would still be a conviction you are legally obliged to disclose if asked by an employer, insurance company etc in relevant circumstances, before the period is up; this type of prosecution or threat of it might be less likely in your case.