hi there i'm looking for some help please. My daughter (age 19) has been sent an SJPN for going through the barrier behind her friend after trying to pay with the same phone (bank card). The back story is that they were in London for the day and when they got to the station to get a train back to Brighton they realised that there was a strike which meant there were no more over ground trains. They had one mobile phone between them (the other was out of battery) and this phone only had a small percentage. They didn't want to be stranded in London so managed to get in touch with her aunt who lives in croydon who was going to meet them on the underground so they could stay with her the night. My daughter's friend tapped the phone to go through and then my daughter went to tap but you can't use the same card/phone twice . they were anxious and in a hurry to meet her aunt so she went through behind the paying person. She then got stopped by a TFL person and she explained the whole fiasco to them and then paid the outstanding fare. She was told they would be writing to her and she gave her name and address. SHe now has to plead guilty or not guilty by 25 September - but I just feel this is so unfair as it was only due to the rail strikes and her anxious state that she did this - and then she has paid it anyway! Any advice on what she should plead and does it go on as a criminal record? thank you so much - Ive tried to speak to Citizens advice and lawyers but to no avail. No one seems to be able to help. Any advice greatly appreciated.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
going through a barrier behind another person
- Thread starter drew1
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
ok I will get it from her - she took it back to london with her but I will get it this weekend. thank you
Deafdoggie
Established Member
- Joined
- 29 Sep 2016
- Messages
- 3,414
Sorry, but it is important to be crystal clear. Your daughter & friend had one working phone between them before going through the barriers.
The owner of this phone tapped to get through the barriers. Then what? Passed the phone back to your daughter and realised it wouldn't work again? So followed someone else (a stranger?) through the barriers?
Or they knew before that it wasn't going to work (if so, how?) and she followed her friend straight through?
You can see how The Railway would question the first scenario and the second one is blatant fare evasion. But the barriers would close between the friend passing the phone back and the realisation it wasn't working.
The owner of this phone tapped to get through the barriers. Then what? Passed the phone back to your daughter and realised it wouldn't work again? So followed someone else (a stranger?) through the barriers?
Or they knew before that it wasn't going to work (if so, how?) and she followed her friend straight through?
You can see how The Railway would question the first scenario and the second one is blatant fare evasion. But the barriers would close between the friend passing the phone back and the realisation it wasn't working.
Some more small clarifications please
- which station did this incident take place, and was it to board a train or get off?
- did you daughter have a valid ticket from there for her journey back to Brighton, even if she couldn't show it?
PS Welcome to the forum, even though I imagine you are a reluctant member
- which station did this incident take place, and was it to board a train or get off?
- did you daughter have a valid ticket from there for her journey back to Brighton, even if she couldn't show it?
PS Welcome to the forum, even though I imagine you are a reluctant member
Others will be along to give advice, but I would suggest that the attitude taken in any correspondence shouldn't imply that the cause of the problem was the rail strike. It clearly wasn't, and when drafting a response a more realistic view of why your daughter is in the position she is in should be adopted.
Just one curious question - if they were in London for the day, I would have expected them to have had return tickets. Did she not have a ticket to Brighton anyway, which would have been valid as far as Croydon unless it was an Advance ticket?
Welcome to the forum!
You will get good advice here but we do need to know some more details about exactly what happened, as has been posted above.
A couple of further questions and observations:
1. Is the SJPN the first correspondence your daughter has had about this? TfL normally send what’s called a Verification Letter first to get any mitigation before deciding how to proceed. It’s highly unusual for them to go straight to a SJPN.
2. This is quite urgent so I would recommend getting hold of the correspondence asap and checking if any other letters have been received and replies sent. Can you get your daughter to take a photo of the letters and send them to you rather than wait until the weekend (which in effect means a delay of a week before you are able to do anything about it).
You will get good advice here but we do need to know some more details about exactly what happened, as has been posted above.
A couple of further questions and observations:
1. Is the SJPN the first correspondence your daughter has had about this? TfL normally send what’s called a Verification Letter first to get any mitigation before deciding how to proceed. It’s highly unusual for them to go straight to a SJPN.
2. This is quite urgent so I would recommend getting hold of the correspondence asap and checking if any other letters have been received and replies sent. Can you get your daughter to take a photo of the letters and send them to you rather than wait until the weekend (which in effect means a delay of a week before you are able to do anything about it).
she did receive a verification letter - she replied to this explaining what had happened - i will ask her t send photos this evening and I'll upload
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
they were getting on the underground to meet her aunt - so i think that was an additional fare - think they were meeting her somewhere so then she could drive them to Croydon where she lived - she had been working in London for the evening - she works in the West End as professional musician so had finished a gig. And yes I understand that the strike wasn't the casue of the problem - but it did trigger huge anxiety in her which she does suffer from - they thought they might be stuck in london for the night with one phone between them with a couple of % battery! I know it isn't an excuse but it does explain her keenness to get to her aunt
thank you - I think it was at London Victoria and they were heading onto the underground trains. I'm pretty sure they had a return ticket to Brighton but will check laterSome more small clarifications please
- which station did this incident take place, and was it to board a train or get off?
- did you daughter have a valid ticket from there for her journey back to Brighton, even if she couldn't show it?
PS Welcome to the forum, even though I imagine you are a reluctant member
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
yes I must admit I have been pondering this too! she didn't follow a stranger she followed her friend so maybe she didn't tap again as knew it wouldn't work - I will grill her more! But even so if she pleads guilty do you know if she will get a criminal record? that's obviously a huge concern.
Apologies, some further questions from me:
You say that after they were stopped and explained the fiasco they paid the fare. What did they pay? How did they pay it? Can this be referenced (either through a TfL account or bank statement).
I’m assuming they were caught at Victoria Underground station, as TfL are dealing with the case? Normally I’d expect a journey from Victoria to Croydon to be made from the National Rail platforms (although you do say it was a strike day and the last trains had left). How was your daughter going to get from Victoria to Croydon via the underground?
Apologies that this is like 20 questions but we need to know exactly what happened to be able to give the best advice.
You say that after they were stopped and explained the fiasco they paid the fare. What did they pay? How did they pay it? Can this be referenced (either through a TfL account or bank statement).
I’m assuming they were caught at Victoria Underground station, as TfL are dealing with the case? Normally I’d expect a journey from Victoria to Croydon to be made from the National Rail platforms (although you do say it was a strike day and the last trains had left). How was your daughter going to get from Victoria to Croydon via the underground?
Apologies that this is like 20 questions but we need to know exactly what happened to be able to give the best advice.
KirkstallOne
Member
Yes if she pleads guilty she will have a criminal record. However SJPNs can only be used to charge byelaw offences which are classed as ‘non-recordable’ which means it won’t show up on a normal DBS check.
However please give the details requested by the other posters as there may be scope to defend the charge or come to an out of court settlement. As others have stated it seems highly unusual to not have had previous correspondence from tfl about this incident.
If the worst happens and your daughter is prosecuted under the TfL Bylaws (which is what normally happens) then the outcome would be:
A fine based on her weekly income (reduced by a third for an early guilty plea)
A surcharge of 40% of the value of the fine
A contribution towards TfL’s costs
Compensation for the fare avoided
A bylaw conviction isn’t normally entered into the Police National Computer and therefore won’t normally show on a DBS check.
That said I would always advise being honest about what has happened if asked (for example during a job application) but a bylaw conviction for a minor railway ticketing matter is not going to have an adverse impact on future career prospects.
SO she was meeting her aunt in Brixton who had her car there to drive them to Croydon. She had only bought a single ticket from Brighton to Victoria that day so she needed to pay the additional fare from Victoria to Brixton via underground. Yes she has proof of payment on her bank statement - think she paid it to the person who stopped her but will check.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Ok thank you so much for this - she is a full time student - just started in London with no income so hopefully the fine won't be too large. My main worry was the DBS thing as she works with children in her spare time. thank you I really appreciate this forum. It's so difficult to get advice on these things!
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
so she will have a criminal record?! It seems so crazy for a first time offence for a measly £3 fare that she did actually pay in the end, but I know rules are rules. She did have a verification letter and she emailed them detailing the whole scenario but they still sent the SJPN
Last edited:
Yes, getting convicted of a criminal offence results in a criminal record. An enhanced DBS, required for work with children, may show even non-recordable offences, though it would depend on whether the officer processing the disclosure considered it relevant to the post applied to.
I believe that full time students have an income adjudged to be £120 per week. Sentencing guidelines stipulate where a level of fine should be set, this will be a % of the weekly income.
Anyone pleading guilty or is found guilty of an issue that gets to court receives a criminal record.
Last edited:
Deafdoggie
Established Member
- Joined
- 29 Sep 2016
- Messages
- 3,414
I wouldn't worry too much about the criminal record. Very few people, even working with children, need an enhanced DBS. A standard DBS is exceptionally unlikely to show it & it isn't relevant so is unlikely to be declared.
Something I am wondering. Out of the two phones, whose phone was it that was working? Presumably it was her friend's phone, as her friend went through first? If so, and your daughter did not have a working phone or any other means of payment, how did she pay the TFL staff member?
Fawkes Cat
Established Member
- Joined
- 8 May 2017
- Messages
- 5,367
It's perhaps also worth pointing out that while obviously a completely clear DBS is the easiest option, having a conviction reported on a DBS doesn't necessarily mean that working/volunteering is blocked. In my view, a reasonable employer (etc.) should first ask whether the conviction is relevant to the role being performed: if not, then they can overlook it. If the conviction is relevant, the next question is whether it is significant: and if it is significant will probably need to be discussed with the person whose DBS is in question.
You've said your daughter works with children. Unless her work with them involves showing them how to use public transport, it seems to me that the employer (in this case, whoever it is who manages volunteers) would decide that a conviction for fare dodging would be irrelevant, and that the matter would go no further.
Realistically, if your daughter does end up with a conviction, she should mention it to her employer. This will be embarrassing, and might lead to a difficult conversation, but I wouldn't expect anything more than that.
A bylaw conviction isn’t normally entered into the Police National Computer and ordinarily won’t show on DBS checks.
What we could do with knowing is the exact offence that the OP’s daughter is being charged with. If they were allowed to pay their fare before boarding the train then I’m not sure they can be guilty of evading the fare. They could be charged with not passing through the barriers in the correct manner, I’m not sure if there’s a TfL Bylaw that covers this - I believe there is one that covers the National Rail network. Does anyone know?
@drew1 we could really do with seeing the exact journey history. Has your daughter got a TfL account where the journey history could be downloaded (although the date of travel would need to be in the last 8 weeks as only 8 weeks worth of history is visible).
What we could do with knowing is the exact offence that the OP’s daughter is being charged with. If they were allowed to pay their fare before boarding the train then I’m not sure they can be guilty of evading the fare. They could be charged with not passing through the barriers in the correct manner, I’m not sure if there’s a TfL Bylaw that covers this - I believe there is one that covers the National Rail network. Does anyone know?
@drew1 we could really do with seeing the exact journey history. Has your daughter got a TfL account where the journey history could be downloaded (although the date of travel would need to be in the last 8 weeks as only 8 weeks worth of history is visible).
I don't know the exact term, but aren't all Underground stations "restricted areas"? So having gone through the barrier without paying the OP's daughter would have been guilty of some sort of offence, even if the fare was paid later but before boarding the train
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 34,328
Yes, they are known as “Compulsory Ticket Areas” (CTAs).
she is being charged with going through the barrier behind another person (I think but I can't remember the exact wording and am trying to get a copy of the paperwork from her!) but it was definitely the act of going through the barrier not evading a fare.
Yes, TfL byelaw 9 (2) makes it a offence to pass through a ticket barrier otherwise than in the proper manner.
yes that is what it is. So it's sounding like she has no option than to plead guilty?
How many rail offences are you allowed before it gets serious? There are so many ways they can get you it seems! It's a miracle I have got to the age I am without any rail offences!
Thanks for confirming.
Normally it’s fare evasion that people are charged with, rather than passing through the barrier in an incorrect way.
It’s probably going to be difficult to get out of this one, especially as your daughter has already replied to TfL’s initial verification letter, which is the opportunity to give TfL mitigation before they decide how to proceed.
It won’t harm writing another letter to TfL, pointing out that although your daughter didn’t pass through the barrier in the correct manner she was allowed to pay her fare, and asking if the will consider issuing her with a final warning or alternatively allowing her to make alternative reparations rather than prosecuting her.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
If you do decide to write another letter feel free to post up a draft in this thread and we will proof read it for you.
It would also be helpful to know what your daughter wrote in response to the Verification Letter.
thank you - can I do this before she pleads guilty/not guilty? I don't know what I can do within the time frame given. I don't want to write to them then miss the plea date....this has to be in by 25th September so if I write to them now I guess I might miss the plea deadline by the time they respond - do you see what I mean? I don't want to miss the plea date but I do want to ask them to reconsider. Such a minefield!
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
yes I've asked her to forward me the email she sent to them - I don't think either of us realised the gravitas of the verification letter tbh. Anyway I will get a copy of that and draft another letter as long as I have time before plea deadline, Thanks again - you've all been so helpful
Last edited:
Unfortunately it would appear to be a straightforward case that she is guilty. I don't see that they have "got her" in the sense that we often see with confusing ticketing restrictions etc, when it came down to it she tried to get through a barrier that she shouldn't have been doing.
There are a couple of aspects of the situation your daughter was in where (as I suspect is the case of many her age) a few "life skill points" might be worth pointing out to her.
Firstly - always carry a physical bank card with you, to avoid the "no charge" situation she found herself in. Next - given the tube runs every couple of minutes, it really wasn't necessary to rush through the barrier like that - it would have been more understandable (though still wrong) if the next train was in 20 minutes or even longer.
And finally, as described in the original post, it seemed they were expecting to return to Brighton that evening, until they realised that there was a train strike. Given that these rail strikes have been going on for months, and I would have expected there to have been a lot of notices around at Brighton warning passengers of the early closedown, not to mention publicity and news stories in the media, a little more awareness of things wouldn't go amiss (I know - that generation seem to have their nose in a phone every waking minute of the day, and would miss an elephant walking in front of them, but really, it shouldn't have come as a surprise to them when returning home to find out that there was a train strike.)
Deafdoggie
Established Member
- Joined
- 29 Sep 2016
- Messages
- 3,414
Most young people don't have a bank card with them, in the same way we simply don't carry cheques anymore. A physical card to them is as antiquated as a cheque to us.
Train Stikes aren't really hitting the news much. It's perfectly possible, and indeed plausible, that they were unaware. The impact of strikes, even if they were aware, probably wouldn't register with the young either.
That all said of course, if she was unaware of the strikes and had a low phone charge why buy a single in the morning? Why have no payment method to get home? What option was she expecting? If trains had been running as normal how would she have got home?
@drew1 As your daughter is 19 and you do not appear to have a 'power of attorney' for her, I would suspect that she (being the person TfL are concerned with) would need to correspond regarding the case. If anyone else entered correspondence I'd expect it to only be a waste of the limited time that exists.
- Status