Allegations by GTR that ticket was previously used

[Dlougo]

Hey everyone,

Looking for a little advice on what is now a court case.

On the return portion of a journey I was making with Govia Thameslink Railway (GTR), I was approached by a ticket inspector and he checked my ticket but unusually asked if it had been used. It was an anytime return within 1 month. It had not been used and I told him this. He put it through his handheld device and told me that it supposedly had in fact been used previously. He said he would send it off to their offices and it would get checked on a more accurate computer. He asked me questions and filled out a sheet - I'm assuming the standard cautioning questions.

Following that, the next thing I receive from them is a letter asking for me to describe the events and following that they tell me they are going to prosecute me.

A few points I feel worth noting;

At no point was I told that I was being issued a penalty fare

As I was never told I was being issued a penalty fare, I had no opportunity to appeal it (Which I believe looking through the IRCAS/SAR regulations I should've been able to)

The evidence sheet they have submitted states that I offered to pay "nil" of the amount owed, at no point was I given a chance to pay, simply asked whether I could (to which I said I could do)

The evidence sheet also states that I offered a ticket that was scanned through the barriers approximately 30 minutes prior to the train leaving as the reason for questioning. This seems ridiculous and is the only statement or "evidence" saying the ticket had already been used. I obviously would have scanned the ticket to get through the barriers to board my train. If my ticket had already been used and become invalid, surely it would no longer work going through the barriers?

Thank you to anyone who has read this, and thank you in advance for any help I get. Sorry if this is a long walk of text.

 

[yorkie]

Hey everyone,

Looking for a little advice on what is now a court case.

On the return portion of a journey I was making with GWR, I was approached by a ticket inspector and he checked my ticket but unusually asked if it had been used. It was an anytime return within 1 month. It had not been used and I told him this. He put it through his handheld device and told me that it supposedly had in fact been used previously. He said he would send it off to their offices and it would get checked on a more accurate computer. He asked me questions and filled out a sheet - I'm assuming the standard cautioning questions.

Following that, the next thing I receive from them is a letter asking for me to describe the events and following that they tell me they are going to prosecute me.

A few points I feel worth noting;

At no point was I told that I was being issued a penalty fare

A Penalty Fare is not applicable to this scenario.

As I was never told I was being issued a penalty fare, I had no opportunity to appeal it (Which I believe looking through the IRCAS/SAR regulations I should've been able to)

You will be able to defend yourself in court (if they do prosecute).

The evidence sheet they have submitted states that I offered to pay "nil" of the amount owed, at no point was I given a chance to pay, simply asked whether I could (to which I said I could do)

The evidence sheet also states that I offered a ticket that was scanned through the barriers approximately 30 minutes prior to the train leaving as the reason for questioning. This seems ridiculous and is the only statement or "evidence" saying the ticket had already been used. I obviously would have scanned the ticket to get through the barriers to board my train. If my ticket had already been used and become invalid, surely it would no longer work going through the barriers?

Thank you to anyone who has read this, and thank you in advance for any help I get. Sorry if this is a long walk of text.

There is a lot of text in this post but not a lot of relevant information.

But if what you say is true that the ticket was unused then you held a valid ticket and you should defend your position. Be careful what you say when you write back to them as they may use this against you. It would be prudent to seek legal advice.

Do you have any idea why you were asked if it was used?

If the company really is stating the ticket is invalid simply because you inserted it into the gateline at the origin station 30 minutes before your ticket was inspected then I don't think this will go very far. Are you sure there is nothing more to it than that?

 

[Dlougo]

A Penalty Fare is not applicable to this scenario.

Okay, so because I held a ticket that was invalid, they are unable to issue me a penalty fare and it has to go to courts for them to make a claim?

Sorry, not entirely sure what is relevant information and is not.

The only reason I can think they may have asked was because it was two weeks into the month in which it could be used.

In their "statement of facts" They have stated that I "could not show a valid ticket for [my] journey and did not have the means to pay for one". This has already been put forward and is going to court. I was never asked to pay the fare though, if that makes any difference to how their side of the case can hold up, as they are lying.

Is it possible that the ticket inspector's machine will have shown my ticket as having been used previously due to being scanned through the barriers to get onto that train, and it getting all the way through to court based on it being used within the half hour prior to my train departing? Does them saying that it had been used before count as evidence?

As far as I can tell there is nothing more to the case, simply that the ticket had already been used and was invalid, according to them. The description on the witness statement that they have put forward as evidence simply states that I offered a return ticket issued on the 19th of March (this train departed on the 3rd of April), states the ticket was swiped through barrier at 1135. I see nothing else on the statement or anywhere else in anything I have received that implies there is any other issue, or that the ticket was used elsewhere at another date or time.

When I go to court, will the argument that the ticket was used approx. 30 minutes prior to the train departing hold up? I feel like it's too obvious a slip up on the train companies part to have gotten this far.

Apologies if I'm giving too much information that isn't relevant or missing something. Thank you for the response.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

A thought... was there a break of journey involved in which travel resumed on a subsequent date from the first part of the return leg?

 

[yorkie]

Okay, so because I held a ticket that was invalid, they are unable to issue me a penalty fare and it has to go to courts for them to make a claim?

You are not being accused of making a mistake (certain types of mistake can result in a Penalty Fare being issued).

You are being accused of something far more serious, for which the company is considering prosecuting you.

Sorry, not entirely sure what is relevant information and is not.

The only reason I can think they may have asked was because it was two weeks into the month in which it could be used.

In their "statement of facts" They have stated that I "could not show a valid ticket for [my] journey and did not have the means to pay for one". This has already been put forward and is going to court. I was never asked to pay the fare though, if that makes any difference to how their side of the case can hold up, as they are lying.

Is it possible that the ticket inspector's machine will have shown my ticket as having been used previously due to being scanned through the barriers to get onto that train, and it getting all the way through to court based on it being used within the half hour prior to my train departing? Does them saying that it had been used before count as evidence?

As far as I can tell there is nothing more to the case, simply that the ticket had already been used and was invalid, according to them. The description on the witness statement that they have put forward as evidence simply states that I offered a return ticket issued on the 19th of March (this train departed on the 3rd of April), states the ticket was swiped through barrier at 1135. I see nothing else on the statement or anywhere else in anything I have received that implies there is any other issue, or that the ticket was used elsewhere at another date or time.

If what you say is true, then providing you are represented by a competent solicitor, you should be found not guilty.

Are there any complications to this case, such as a break of journey or anything?

When I go to court, will the argument that the ticket was used approx. 30 minutes prior to the train departing hold up? I feel like it's too obvious a slip up on the train companies part to have gotten this far.

Apologies if I'm giving too much information that isn't relevant or missing something. Thank you for the response.

You need to consult a solicitor. Do not attempt to represent yourself in court.

 

[AlterEgo]

You say the ticket was passed through a barrier 30 minutes prior to your train leaving. Did you wait 30 minutes for your train?

What was the journey you were making? Was it a short journey?

A very confusing case!

 

[Bletchleyite]

You say the ticket was passed through a barrier 30 minutes prior to your train leaving. Did you wait 30 minutes for your train?

There are certainly quite a number of stations on the Thames Valley where the toilets are inside the barriers, which could certainly account for such a situation. Slough is one such station, and between using the bog and letting a couple of heavily overcrowded trains go I've certainly spent half an hour on the station there before deciding to finally board one.

 

[soil]

It might help if you post the letter from the TOC, with your personal information deleted.

Also it's a bit difficult to comment without further information on the actual ticket and where it was used.

For example, if you had Bristol - London return and were boarding at Reading then there could be an issue with break of journey (in that you can use part of the ticket on a different day)

But if you had a Swindon - London ticket and were boarding at Swindon, that wouldn't apply.

In terms of the ticket itself, they are not very sophisticated, and basically the ticket itself contains a record of the time and place of first entry into a machine and not really anything more than that. So if the (return portion of the) ticket had been inserted into a machine a week ago, that information would be present on the machine.

If, as above, that insertion had been done at the station you were boarding at, then they would be able to prove the case and successfully convict you of a criminal offence.

However if the ticket merely shows that the ticket had been first inserted into the machine on the day you were stopped, then that would in fact suggest the ticket had NOT been used before, and therefore you have done nothing wrong.

The other possibility is a passback, where two people use the same ticket on the same day. I don't think they are alleging that?

 

[EssexCommuter]

There are certainly quite a number of stations on the Thames Valley where the toilets are inside the barriers, which could certainly account for such a situation. Slough is one such station, and between using the bog and letting a couple of heavily overcrowded trains go I've certainly spent half an hour on the station there before deciding to finally board one.

And for me, when travelling off peak I might also buy a coffee, sandwich etc and the coffee shop is so slow to serve, I've missed a couple of trains before as I'd rather feed myself than be tied to a time. If true, this is worrying.

 

[Dlougo]

It might help if you post the letter from the TOC, with your personal information deleted.

Posted as an attachment - regarding the date, there have been some issues with the courts and me not receiving court summons and the case is going to be re-opened. I only came across this forum yesterday otherwise I would've asked these questions a long time ago.

Also it's a bit difficult to comment without further information on the actual ticket and where it was used.

For example, if you had Bristol - London return and were boarding at Reading then there could be an issue with break of journey (in that you can use part of the ticket on a different day)

But if you had a Swindon - London ticket and were boarding at Swindon, that wouldn't apply.

Regarding the break of journey, the whole journey was made in a single trip, from Peterborough to Kings Cross. It was an off-peak return (the return you can use within a month of the outbound journey) for Peterborough to Kings cross. I was the only person to use the ticket, so passing back is not a possibility, even if it had happened what can they do to prove it? It would need to show as being scanned through the barriers multiple times, which it was not, so hopefully this argument is out of the question for them.

I seem to have incorrectly remembered the timings, there was only 11 minutes between passing through the barriers and the train departing. Not sure why I thought it was half an hour. Not that this should make any difference.. past the barriers there are toilets and coffee shops so there's no reason to suspect that there is anything suspicious about going through a little early.

You need to consult a solicitor. Do not attempt to represent yourself in court.

Being a student (20, at university) I can't really afford to get a solicitor, aren't they quite expensive? How difficult would it be to stand for myself? I'm going to ask at my university with regards to any legal aid I may be entitled to as a student or if they offer any legal advice themselves.


Thanks for responses so far, much appreciated!

 

[yorkie]

Ah, it's the infamous and dreaded worst train company in Britain, Govia Thameslink Railway (GTR). Not GWR!

They are well known for 'trying it on' (see GTR demand £2,100 when travelling on valid Oyster card with Travelcard & PAYG credit)

If what you say is 100% true, you need to fight this, but you do need to ensure you are represented in court by a competent solicitor. Do not attempt to represent yourself. I don't think legal aid applies to cases of this nature. If convicted, you'll get a criminal record. You can't let that happen.

 

[Dlougo]

Govia Thameslink Railway (GTR). Not GWR!

Oh yes, sorry, it's great northern not great western. Sorry, stupid error on my part - and probably evidence that I need someone else to look over everything.. How much would a solicitor likely set me back, I understand it would be better but I'm not sure I can afford it. Or if I won and was found not guilty would the solicitor be a cost I could claim compensation for from GTR(!)?

 

[Dlougo]

Just had a quick google at solicitors rates, and given I'm in London and these are only guidelines, https://www.gov.uk/guidance/solicitors-guideline-hourly-rates I don't know how I would be able to afford it.. Obviously I don't want a criminal record, how much would it affect me? Would all future employers be able to see?

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Just had a quick google at solicitors rates, and given I'm in London and these are only guidelines, https://www.gov.uk/guidance/solicitors-guideline-hourly-rates I don't know how I would be able to afford it.. Obviously I don't want a criminal record, how much would it affect me? Would all future employers be able to see?

It would, I fear, cost you a lot more in the long run if you didn't use a solicitor like Yorkie says and you subsequently lost the case. Please listen to what Yorkie says; he is an expert in these matters.

 

[najaB]

Thank you to anyone who has read this, and thank you in advance for any help I get.

Dlougo, do you have an actual court date for the case to be heard? Could you post the evidence sheet, (with any personal details redacted of course).

 

[cuccir]

I wouldn't be quite as quick as Yorkie to definitively state that you must instruct a solicitor now - it depends on your financial circumstances and as you note solicitors aren't cheap.

You should understand the costs of a conviction. If GTR continue to prosecute, then I presume it would be under the Regulations of the Railways Act. If convicted, this would result in a criminal record that would be spent after 1 year, and a fine (presuming no prior convictions or other mitigating factors, then this would likely be a few hundred -sentencing guidelines are here and fines are based on weekly income). After 12 months, no future employer would see a criminal record in normal circumstances. If you need a DBS (formerly CRB) for anything, then it would continue to appear for 11 years. Consider though too that criminal records are looked at when searching for a mortgage, buying insurance etc, but ONLY when unspent, ie, for 12 months following the date of conviction. What I'm trying to say is that if you have a secure job, don't need to renegotiate your mortgage (or indeed don't have one and won't for the next couple of years), aren't planning to adopt in the near future etc, then a criminal record can have a surprisingly low impact on your life.

Solicitors are better at defending in court - they know what to do - and so have a much higher chance of success. It is possible to defend yourself - there's a guide here, which also contains details as to how to get good value legal support. If you do this, familiarize yourself with basic railway law (we have an outline) but be prepared that it is not easy and you'll have a lower chance of success, even if you're not guilty.

If it were me in this circumstances I would probably:

• See if I could get a free consultation from a solicitor. The Citizens Advice Bureau is often able to arrange these
• Consider the costs of a solicitor's letter to respond robustly to GTR outlining that you will plea not guilty and making a point about the weakness of their evidence. This will cost you something but less than instructing a solicitor in court, and may be enough to frighten them off.
• Wait to see exactly what law GTR intend to use to prosecute. You can come back here if/when it gets to that stage and we can help advise on the severity of the attempted prosecution
• Depending on how severe it is, then consider instructing a solicitor in court. A lot of this would come down to your own finances, the effect of a criminal record on you, and your own trust in your abilities to defend yourself.

Don't get me wrong - getting a solicitor is the most likely way of achieving a not guilty result. If you get that, you should be able to claim some of your costs back. However, solicitors aren't cheap and there are circumstances when they are not worth the money, even at increased risk of conviction.

 

[Dlougo]

Dlougo, do you have an actual court date for the case to be heard? Could you post the evidence sheet, (with any personal details redacted of course).

Yes, I can post the sheet when I get home. I don't have a date to appear in court yet, not since the first one which I was not informed of ( or the letter got lost in the post..) this whole ordeal has been a bit of a mess really. Currently appealing to re-open the case so I can actually go to court

 

[AlterEgo]

Yes, I can post the sheet when I get home. I don't have a date to appear in court yet, not since the first one which I was not informed of ( or the letter got lost in the post..) this whole ordeal has been a bit of a mess really. Currently appealing to re-open the case so I can actually go to court

 

[najaB]

Currently appealing to re-open the case so I can actually go to court

 

[najaB]

Have you been informed you've been convicted of the offence?

It sounds like we're in a 'convicted in absence so making a statutory declaration' scenario.

 

[cuccir]

An addition to my previous posts - I've read over a few more posts and I see you're a student. Hmm, the criminal record could be difficult if you're looking to graduate in the near future and apply for jobs soonish then that could be awkward.

I also note confusions over the timings in your own mind - I suggest you very carefully write down what happened on the day now, as you'll forget things as time progresses.

Can I suggest also speaking with a member of staff you trust - a personal tutor, a dissertation supervisor? Your lecturers are qualified professionals who may be able to offer some advice and support - you can show them this thread if you like.

Finally - I don't know if you've told your parents, but again I'd be tempted to tell them, emphasizing that you've done nothing wrong here.

 

[cuccir]

Note that it's GWR involved here, in case they have a different approach.

No it is GTR - the initial post stating GWR was a mistake!

 

[Bletchleyite]

The paperwork posted above is from GTR.

Sorry, missed that, was going on the OP's first post (and there is definitely a difference in general competence between those two TOCs, certainly on whether such a case would be prosecuted or not).

 

[WelshBluebird]

You say the ticket was passed through a barrier 30 minutes prior to your train leaving. Did you wait 30 minutes for your train?

Is that something that is classed as suspicious now?

 

[soil]

Too much - almost everything - is missing from this story.

The threatogram is dated 4th May 2016

You evidently replied to that - do you have a copy of your responses?

They said 'we will prosecute you' in reply to that, on 9th June 2016.

The prosecution has evidently resulted - did you receive any OFFICIAL correspondence (i.e. from a court, not just a threatening letter from GTR) about this? Or had you moved house? If you were at the same address throughout the period you would have received MULTIPLE letters about this. It is not plausible to say they were all lost in the post.

You apparently have now been convicted? On what date? Of what offence? How did you become aware of this, and when did you become aware?

 

[AlterEgo]

Is that something that is classed as suspicious now?

No, of course it shouldn't be. I share others' concern about the series of events reported. I've often spent an hour or more on the "paid" side of a barrier (Newcastle first class lounge for one example).

 

[Joe Paxton]

One thought I had, though the given timings (if accurate) would seem to rule it out, is the possibility of mistakenly putting the return portion ticket in the gates in order to get out at the end of the outward leg. I'd expect the gates to reject such a ticket, but would it also record the time on the magstripe?

 

[cuccir]

Soil's post is important - well done on carefully noting those dates. This seems very odd indeed?!?

 

[Dlougo]

Too much - almost everything - is missing from this story.

The threatogram is dated 4th May 2016

You evidently replied to that - do you have a copy of your responses?

They said 'we will prosecute you' in reply to that, on 9th June 2016.

The prosecution has evidently resulted - did you receive any OFFICIAL correspondence (i.e. from a court, not just a threatening letter from GTR) about this? Or had you moved house? If you were at the same address throughout the period you would have received MULTIPLE letters about this. It is not plausible to say they were all lost in the post.

You apparently have now been convicted? On what date? Of what offence? How did you become aware of this, and when did you become aware?

I will list everything I have received, and when they are dated, unless I state otherwise I will have received them within a few days of the date.

Incident occurred on 03/04/16

"Notice of intention to prosecute" dated 04/05/2016, asking for my description of the events that occurred. I responded with a letter saying something similar to 'I boarded the train with a ticket that I had not used before and was approached by the ticket inspector who accused me of using a ticket which had already been used. At no point had it been used and it was in my wallet throughout the entire period from collection to use' I may have mentioned that I was home from uni for Easter and had been the whole time, had not used any trains since. I unfortunately do not have a copy of what I sent, foolishly.

Letter to inform that the TOC will proceed with prosecution dated 09/06/16

Court summons dated 21/06/16, I plead not guilty and the court date was adjourned (Initial court date 02/09/16).

"Notice of fine and collection order" dated 07/10/2016. I rang up and found out that I was supposed to be in court on the 7th of Oct, and am told to email them. I then email explaining that I had plead not guilty and wish to represent myself in court but had received no physical or digital communication indicating that I should have been in court on the 7th blah blah explaining the situation. They respond saying they are looking into it. I was convicted of the offence/imposition of "Board a train in a non compulsory ticket area without a valid ticket - railway bye-law."

"Further Steps Notice" dated 06/11/2016. I ring up and question why I have not heard back from them and why I am receiving this without a response. I am told that there has been a "glitch" and the summons were not sent out. Stupidly I did not take down the person's name who I was talking to. I am told they will look into it and I should wait, informed they will put the collection on hold.

Awaiting, exams came and honestly this dropped off my priorities and as I had informed them of what I had to say, through both email and a few phone calls, I wasn't going to chase them. Stupid of me. Never got a response to the initial email.

"Notice of Enforcement" dated 12/01/17, warrant of control issued. I am told in email and from the enforcement agency that I need to make a Statutory Declaration. I apply for this and it is booked in.

Statutory Declaration Court Date 10/02/17. I am informed because I knew of the case, I cannot make a statutory declaration simply on now knowing when the court date was. I can only make a stat. dec. if I was not aware of the entire court proceedings.

I have a court date in April to appeal to re-open the case...

I'm sorry, I would have posted all of this together at first if I knew it was wanted, I didn't want to bother everyone with the whole case, just the rail issue.

I have asked at uni about legal advice and they have a drop in session weekly (but not this week, "reading week"). I will go next week, I have already told my parents and fully disclosed everything to them.

I have attached a copy of the witness statement that they have tendered as evidence at the beginning. I requested that the witness be present for the court hearing, as he at no point requested any money from me, and informed me the ticket would be checked at their offices more accurately, as well as telling me that it may have been possible that the ticket would show as having been used if I accidentally scanned it on the outward journey.

 

[soil]

I see you actually appear to have held an 'Off-Peak Return' valid on 'Great Northern Only'. This ticket costs ~£40 http://www.brfares.com/#faredetail?orig=PBO&dest=KGX&grpd=1072&rte=28&tkt=SVR. A walkup single on a Sunday would have been ~£18 http://www.brfares.com/#faredetail?orig=PBO&dest=KGX&grpd=1072&rte=28&tkt=CBB. So the ticket does look suspicious in that you had a more expensive ticket that could (potentially) be used multiple times rather than a cheaper one that would expire the same day.

The fare they suggest you have avoided is the Anytime Day Single Great Northern Only @ £31.30. (It doesn't really make a difference, dodging an £18 or £31 fare is still a criminal offence.)

There's nothing from the witness statement that amounts to evidence of a criminal offence. (You entered at 11:35, the first train your ticket was valid on was 11:46 which, naturally, you caught - nothing wrong here). Buying the more expensive ticket unnecessarily is certainly not a crime, and they would need to provide evidence that your ticket had been used before - and this is completely absent from their witness statement, which provides NO evidence of guilt at all. However, with you having been convicted several months ago, that's almost beside the point now....

It appears to me that your issue at this point is NOT primarily a railway issue, but rather your failure to address the procedural requirements of the criminal law. You might seek some more general advice on this side of things at the Consumer Action Group forum, as this not really so much of a rail issue at the moment.