Summons from Merseyrail

[Foolish Frank]

Okay, this situation has truly caught me off-guard, I have done some research to see if there is anything I can do, but I am completely stumped. Allow me to explain:

Back in November, I had to attend class at university during the afternoon. So I went to Ormskirk station but on arrival, I saw that I had around 20 seconds before the train would depart. The next train was not due until another 20 minutes or so. Considering it takes around 25-30 mins to get to Liverpool Central, I would have been very late for my class, which I could not afford to happen (I was resitting the year at the time, so my attendance/punctuality was being closely monitored by the university). Additionally, there was a very long queue at the ticket booth - so I quickly boarded the train. I rationalised that this would not be a problem, as there is a ticket barrier at Liverpool Central, so I'd have to pay regardless in order to get through.

While on the train, however, a Byelaw enforcement officer asked if I had a ticket. I explained my situation to him, and emphasised that I could not afford to miss class. He simply said that it was an offence to travel on their trains without a ticket - which I now understand, but at the time, I assumed they would be more lenient due to the fact that you need a ticket to get through Liverpool Central anyway. Oh how I was mistaken.
It is worth pointing out that I was very sleep deprived throughout this entire affair (I suffer from chronic insomnia, and this was an especially stressful period of my life, so I'd often go days without sleep), and as you can probably tell, I was not thinking very rationally at the time. As a result, when the Byelaw enforcement officer asked for my name and address, I seriously freaked out, and gave him a fake name/address. I know, I know - this was a very stupid move, but you must understand that I was not thinking at the time - this was simply my adrenaline-fuelled reaction, as when he began questioning me, I realised that I was in trouble and panicked. He saw through this, and very quickly, I admitted the truth. He said that it was also an offence to give false information, so I explained that I just got scared of getting in trouble. At this point I accepted that I made a mistake, and asked him when I would receive the penalty fare notice - he said it should arrive in the post within 21 days.

...but, no notice would arrive. Initially, I waited eagerly for it to arrive in the post, but as time went on I eventually forgot about it and assumed that there was some form of administrative error, and I just went on with my life (ultimately, I had more important things to think about, so naturally, I came to the conclusion that it would not arrive and I moved on with life). Fast-forward to the 29th of June (last Saturday), and suddenly, I have a summons in my post and I am due to appear in the Magistrates court on the 10th of July...
Now, this is what annoys me about this: I would have gladly paid the penalty fare if they actually sent me the notice within 21 days like they said. Even if it was a bit late, I still would have been happy to pay it. But, 7 months late is genuinely absurd. They had every opportunity to send me the penalty fare notice in this time-frame, but they didn't. It is absolutely unfair that they have denied me both the right of appeal (I would not have appealed if they had sent the notice, but they cannot assume this to be the case and now I cannot appeal even if I wanted to...), AND the opportunity to pay. Now I am stuck in a position where I cannot just pay the fine, I need to attend Court, and will likely have to pay more than the initial fine, just because they did not send me the penalty fare notice (it 100% definitely did not arrive, I did not misplace it or anything - it simply did not come). How is this fair?

Is there anything I can do here? The trouble is that they have sent me this summons at a time in my life where I cannot afford it - if they had sent me the penalty fare notice in time, I would have been able to pay it just fine. But now I am unemployed, cannot afford legal advice, and certainly cannot afford the costs of going to court. I need to give my plea, but I really don't know what to do as they have sent this summons less than two weeks before my appearance, without giving me the opportunity to pay the penalty fare, and as such I am dangerously unprepared for this.

ANY advice would be greatly appreciated - I do not have much time, and I do not have a clue about what to do, so do not hesitate to share your thoughts on this. Many thanks.

 

[gray1404]

Can I please ask you to confirm the exact date you travelled? Can you also confirm what date the summons on issued on? My understanding is that a train company has only 6 months to commence proceedings (i.e. make an application for a case to be heard, to the Court). So what matters here is your date of travel and the date at which Merseyrail applied to the Court for your case to be heard. I am hopeful that Merseyrail may be out of time on this one. Can you also confirm what exactly (i.e. as printed on the summons) the charges are that they are bringing against you?

At the same time yes, it is an offence to travel without a ticket when you had the opportunity to buy one before travel. Likewise it is an offence to give false details when asked. That said, if a train company wishes to make use of the legal system they must do so within the time limits allowed. I am sure others will be along shortly to confirm the situation. However, if you could provide the above information in the mean time it would be most helpful.

Also wanted to check that (assuming you gave your correct address in the end on the day) that you have not moved address since or had any problems receiving mail? It sounds to be like it might have been a Revenue Protection Inspector you encountered, rather then a Byelaw Enforcement Officer, as it is most unusual for the latter to check tickets. That said, if it had been a RPI I am surprised they didn't resort to issuing a penalty fare, as tends to be the usual action on Merseyrail.

 

[furlong]

So you did give correct contact details at the time (after the fake ones)? Assuming you did, and assuming the charges are the usual ones train companies use which have a 6 month time limit, contact the court to check the relevant date.

 

[Foolish Frank]

Can I please ask you to confirm the exact date you travelled? Can you also confirm what date the summons on issued on? My understanding is that a train company has only 6 months to commence proceedings (i.e. make an application for a case to be heard, to the Court). So what matters here is your date of travel and the date at which Merseyrail applied to the Court for your case to be heard. I am hopeful that Merseyrail may be out of time on this one. Can you also confirm what exactly (i.e. as printed on the summons) the charges are that they are bringing against you?

At the same time yes, it is an offence to travel without a ticket when you had the opportunity to buy one before travel. Likewise it is an offence to give false details when asked. That said, if a train company wishes to make use of the legal system they must do so within the time limits allowed. I am sure others will be along shortly to confirm the situation. However, if you could provide the above information in the mean time it would be most helpful.

Also wanted to check that (assuming you gave your correct address in the end on the day) that you have not moved address since or had any problems receiving mail? It sounds to be like it might have been a Revenue Protection Inspector you encountered, rather then a Byelaw Enforcement Officer, as it is most unusual for the latter to check tickets. That said, if it had been a RPI I am surprised they didn't resort to issuing a penalty fare, as tends to be the usual action on Merseyrail.

I travelled on the 23rd November, and it does not say on any of the pages of the document when exactly the summons was issued on - but it arrived on the 29th of June, and the witness statement attached in the document is dated the 26th June...so I am assuming they could not have made the application any-time before this, right? As for the charges, it only lists that I "failed to produce a valid ticket. When asked by an officer or servant of the railway company, failed to either produce, and if so requested to deliver up, a ticket showing that your fare was paid" as the only charge it seems - which is very strange, because the witness statement clearly says that I tried to provide false details...so perhaps they are not charging me with this offence because I quickly told the truth?
I did not know that there was a time limit, do you happen to know the legislation that prescribed this rule by any chance?

I did indeed give the correct name and address and I have lived in the same address since this occurred. It probably was an RPI, I did not get a chance to see the back of his uniform. That is the strange thing - he explained that he would be issuing me a penalty fare, and that it would arrive in the post within 21 days, but it just never came - I definitely did not misplace it and I habitually open all the post that comes to me, so I would have seen it if it did arrive.

Thanks for your reply I really appreciate the support!

 

[furlong]

Check the exact date with the court. Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 - https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/43/section/127

 

[furlong]

The legislation suggested is here http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/52-53/57/section/5 5(1).
But the bit you've typed up is only the first part of that and as you can see if you read the whole thing there are additional conditions to be met if it is to be used.

 

[furlong]

That is the strange thing - he explained that he would be issuing me a penalty fare, and that it would arrive in the post within 21 days, but it just never came

Is that included in his witness statement? If not, you might wonder why not? By the way, true "Penalty Fares" are always issued on the spot, not by post. Were you given any paperwork at the time? But if whatever it was amounted to a verbal settlement agreement between yourself and the company, which the company failed to honour by not sending you whatever it was (an invoice?) in 21 days, that might well be relevant information.

 

[najaB]

That is the strange thing - he explained that he would be issuing me a penalty fare, and that it would arrive in the post within 21 days,

Is that included in his witness statement? If not, you might wonder why not?

Might I suggest: because it never happened, at least not exactly as described? As you noted, penalty fares are issued on the spot. I rather suspect that the OP's recollection some seven months on may be a little bit hazy.

 

[najaB]

But the bit you've typed up is only the first part of that and as you can see if you read the whole thing there are additional conditions to be met if it is to be used.

If you're referring to intent, then that can be inferred from passing up an opportunity to purchase. The "But Liverpool Central is barriered" argument only holds water if there were no umbarriered stations left on the train's route. I don't know if this was the case?

 

[some bloke]

They can still agree an out-of-court settlement after a summons has been issued, though it may be costly.

Also, if the court staff give a date the "information was laid before the court" that's within six months of the offence, then I'd call Merseyrail [Edit: though see the next post - maybe best to wait for an answer on here first], say the summons is the first thing you've received, and ask whether you should have received anything in the meantime.

It's not impossible for things to get lost in the post, or for administrative errors to be made. It's usual for companies to write asking for the passenger's version of events rather than start proceedings first.

I rather suspect that the OP's recollection some seven months on may be a little bit hazy.

Is it possible that the inspector said they would send a letter and you would have a certain number of days to reply?

The "But Liverpool Central is barriered" argument only holds water if there were no umbarriered stations left on the train's route.

Perhaps evidence of the location and time of the class you were going to would help the argument, as part of an overall argument.

 

[some bloke]

There's also the report saying you gave a false name and address. Someone on here might confirm whether by raising questions you might risk them adding that charge. Perhaps, as they've issued the summons, they can't add it without being seen as engaging in abuse of process.

 

[JBuchananGB]

This is at least the second and maybe the third report of this type, see:
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/court-summons.184354/
another one, I.e. incident last November, nothing heard until June.
While not condoning the OP’s actions, it seems as though someone at Merseyrail has found a few files at the bottom of a box and is trying to progress them, when they might well be out of time.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If you're referring to intent, then that can be inferred from passing up an opportunity to purchase. The "But Liverpool Central is barriered" argument only holds water if there were no umbarriered stations left on the train's route. I don't know if this was the case?

The vast majority of Merseyrail stations are not barriered. And, at all Merseyrail stations that are barriered, you can change trains without passing through it.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

If you're referring to intent, then that can be inferred from passing up an opportunity to purchase. The "But Liverpool Central is barriered" argument only holds water if there were no umbarriered stations left on the train's route. I don't know if this was the case?

Oh dear, this old chestnut again. That's not what Corbyn said and no amount of TOCs twisting the decision in case can change that! Passing an opportunity to pay is never, on its own, going to suffice as evidence of intent to avoid payment. It will always require an additional component - e.g. hiding in the toilet, or as in Corbyn's case, on multiple occasions self-completing (effectively) a UFN with no intent of paying it unless chased.

However, intent is irrelevant to the offence in question. They are prosecuting under RoRA S.5(1). This is about committing the 'three fails'. Merseyrail have listed two of the fails, but this is not, in this case, fatal, because the OP did indeed commit the 'three fails' by giving an incorrect name and address.

Someone on here might confirm whether by raising questions you might risk them adding that charge. Perhaps, as they've issued the summons, they can't add it without being seen as engaging in abuse of process.

As per S.127 of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980, adding an additional charge is no longer possible. There are a very limited number of circumstances under which a Magistrates' Court may consider hearing an alternative charge but in these circumstances it is almost certain that they would not entertain hearing an additional charge in this way.

If there is any defence to what is happening, it will be from Merseyrail not laying the information before the Court in time. The lack of correspondence and unusually late summons leads me to believe that they have attempted to have their cake and eat it after a colossal organisational cock-up with some MG11s.

 

[Mojo]

If you're referring to intent, then that can be inferred from passing up an opportunity to purchase. The "But Liverpool Central is barriered" argument only holds water if there were no umbarriered stations left on the train's route. I don't know if this was the case?

I think even then making an argument of that nature would be dubious given how easy it is to pass through ticket barriers without a ticket.

 

[island]

There is a lot of detail on this thread which will be of limited use to the OP.

I think we should focus on the timing. On the court documentation, it should say that on a given date, an information was laid before the magistrates. When was that date, and when was the alleged offence? If they are more than six months apart, then the information has been laid out of time and the magistrates cannot try it.

 

[Foolish Frank]

Check the exact date with the court. Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 - https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/43/section/127

Thanks for the information this was very helpful!

Is that included in his witness statement? If not, you might wonder why not? By the way, true "Penalty Fares" are always issued on the spot, not by post. Were you given any paperwork at the time? But if whatever it was amounted to a verbal settlement agreement between yourself and the company, which the company failed to honour by not sending you whatever it was (an invoice?) in 21 days, that might well be relevant information.

In the witness statement it does say that he issued me a penalty fare for the breach but it does not go into detail about it or mention the 21 days. I do not remember being given any paperwork - the only thing he gave me was a receipt, as I had to buy a ticket on the spot, but this receipt did not mention the penalty fare at all.

They can still agree an out-of-court settlement after a summons has been issued, though it may be costly.

Also, if the court staff give a date the "information was laid before the court" that's within six months of the offence, then I'd call Merseyrail [Edit: though see the next post - maybe best to wait for an answer on here first], say the summons is the first thing you've received, and ask whether you should have received anything in the meantime.

It's not impossible for things to get lost in the post, or for administrative errors to be made. It's usual for companies to write asking for the passenger's version of events rather than start proceedings first.

Is it possible that the inspector said they would send a letter and you would have a certain number of days to reply?

Just been on the phone with the Magistrates and unfortunately they issued the summons in May. I will ring Merseyrail next - any advice on how to go about it? (other than what you have mentioned of course)
You are right the Inspector said they would send a letter, and that I would have 21 days to reply - my mistake, I thought he said it would arrive within 21 days :')

 

[island]

Ok, as it appears the information was laid in time, we need to move onto the next point.

It’s a criminal offence to board a train without a valid ticket if the station you’re joining the train at has facilities to issue them, which I understand it did.

Not having a ticket on Miseryrail would normally result in the issuance of a Penalty Fare of £20. As you chose however to give false details to the officer, that more lenient option was withdrawn and you now face prosecution and a criminal record.

Penalty Fares can only be issued on the spot and not by post, and whilst it is often the case that train companies will settle matters out of court on payment of some sum of money in respect of the costs incurred detecting and dealing with criminals such as yourself, they aren’t under any obligation to.

That doesn’t mean they won’t. You can and should still call up and ask if they are prepared to accept a sum of money in settlement. Typical sums are in the region of £100-150. They may be attracted by this, because they will receive all the money whereas at court they would only receive a smaller part of what you pay, namely the costs and compensation.

If you aren’t able to convince them, you can also turn up in court and make the same offer to the prosecutor.

Good luck.

 

[najaB]

I do not remember being given any paperwork - the only thing he gave me was a receipt, as I had to buy a ticket on the spot, but this receipt did not mention the penalty fare at all.

Do you still have the ticket and/or receipt?

 

[Foolish Frank]

Ok, as it appears the information was laid in time, we need to move onto the next point.

It’s a criminal offence to board a train without a valid ticket if the station you’re joining the train at has facilities to issue them, which I understand it did.

Not having a ticket on Miseryrail would normally result in the issuance of a Penalty Fare of £20. As you chose however to give false details to the officer, that more lenient option was withdrawn and you now face prosecution and a criminal record.

Penalty Fares can only be issued on the spot and not by post, and whilst it is often the case that train companies will settle matters out of court on payment of some sum of money in respect of the costs incurred detecting and dealing with criminals such as yourself, they aren’t under any obligation to.

That doesn’t mean they won’t. You can and should still call up and ask if they are prepared to accept a sum of money in settlement. Typical sums are in the region of £100-150. They may be attracted by this, because they will receive all the money whereas at court they would only receive a smaller part of what you pay, namely the costs and compensation.

If you aren’t able to convince them, you can also turn up in court and make the same offer to the prosecutor.

Good luck.

I am perfectly aware that is a criminal offence + you pointing this out is not useful to me whatsoever...this is beyond obvious considering I have been summoned to attend a Magistrates Court...

However, the rest of this response is rather informative. So are you saying that because I gave false details, they were no longer required to send me a letter in the post? This still seems absurd - whether I gave false details or not, surely I should have still been given the opportunity to pay the fine before the mere prospect of being summoned would become a reality, right? The problem is that they had months to send this letter, to give me the opportunity to either pay the fine or appeal against it. But now I do not have the financial wherewithal to offer a settlement - I am no longer employed as I said. This summons could not have come at a worse time for me.

 

[Haywain]

They may be attracted by this, because they will receive all the money whereas at court they would only receive a smaller part of what you pay, namely the costs and compensation.

If they are awarded the same amount in costs as they request they will surely receive the same amount? The bonus for the train company is not having to incur the additional expense of prosecuting the case, while the bonus for the OP is not having to pay a fine on top.

 

[some bloke]

I had to buy a ticket on the spot

Then I can't see how you are guilty of the second of the three fails in 5 (1).

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/52-53/57/section/5

 

[island]

If they are awarded the same amount in costs as they request they will surely receive the same amount? The bonus for the train company is not having to incur the additional expense of prosecuting the case, while the bonus for the OP is not having to pay a fine on top.

An out of court settlement will typically be for more than the costs claimed in the court summons.

 

[some bloke]

Then I can't see how you are guilty of the second of the three fails in 5 (1).

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/52-53/57/section/5

I suppose there might be some argument like this:

"you failed to pay the fare due, which was a penalty fare, through giving the wrong name and address which are required for a penalty fare to be correctly issued".

But magistrates might think that's a bit funny. Is it clear that you failed to pay a penalty fare when requested, especially considering that you did give the correct name and address later?

In the witness statement it does say that he issued me a penalty fare

If he issued it rather than just intending to, then he should have given you various information about it in writing.

If you upload the summons and witness statement with identifying details removed, people on here may spot things of interest.

What you say to Merseyrail might need more thought.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

However, the rest of this response is rather informative. So are you saying that because I gave false details, they were no longer required to send me a letter in the post? This still seems absurd - whether I gave false details or not, surely I should have still been given the opportunity to pay the fine before the mere prospect of being summoned would become a reality, right? The problem is that they had months to send this letter, to give me the opportunity to either pay the fine or appeal against it. But now I do not have the financial wherewithal to offer a settlement - I am no longer employed as I said. This summons could not have come at a worse time for me.

Unlike with civil matters, prosecutors are under no obligation to give criminal defendants an opportunity to settle the matter out of Court. It is lamentable that Merseyrail did not afford you the opportunity to make representations before deciding to prosecute but there is nothing legally speaking wrong with it. I'm struggling to see how the timing of the prosecution makes any difference as to whether or not it is a good time - there is never really a good time to be prosecuted and you would have to pay certain amounts (prosecutors' costs, any fares outstanding, the Victim Surcharge) either way, whether sooner or later. If anything, you will see a substantially lower fine if you are convicted whilst not in employment.

 

[some bloke]

It is lamentable that Merseyrail did not afford you the opportunity to make representations before deciding to prosecute

It's possible they attempted to and the letter got lost in the post, or that they thought they had but made an admin error.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

It's possible they attempted to and the letter got lost in the post, or that they thought they had but made an admin error.

In which case they still didn't end up affording the OP that opportunity.

 

[Haywain]

An out of court settlement will typically be for more than the costs claimed in the court summons.

Do you have any evidence to support this assertion?

 

[island]

Plenty of posts in this very forum over time. You’re welcome to browse through them.

 

[Haywain]

Plenty of posts in this very forum over time. You’re welcome to browse through them.

Nothing you feel able to point out then? I'll take it as being your opinion and nothing more in that case.