Cautioned and awaiting letter. I cant see what ive done wrong

[Hadders]

You will probably get a letter in a few weeks from Greater Anglia stating that they are considering prosecution but asking for your version of events. The best thing you can do is write a short, concise letter apologising for what happened and saying that you are willing to pay the outstanding fare due plus their administrative costs in dealing with the issue. Hopefully they will agree to a settlement which will keep the matter out of court.

One potential issue you have is what the inspector has written. There's nothing you can do about that at the moment, you'll need to wait for the letter to arrive.

 

[furlong]

(I googled off peak on the greater anglia website and on the front page mentioned travel after 9, i have subsequently found out its arriving at liverpool street after 10 and i arrived at 9.53).

Make a copy of the pages of information that you relied upon. Re-read them. Did you miss some small print? I see https://www.greateranglia.co.uk/tickets-fares/daily-tickets/off-peak-and-super-off-peak-tickets

 

[furlong]

Now regarding the signature, what exactly did you sign? If it was a notebook, there should have been no blank space above it, and the inspector should have written that you signed, then left, and he completed the rest afterwards. If you do get a letter, ask for a copy of this so that you can check correct procedures were followed. (There's nothing wrong with the inspector completing information afterwards, as long as he stated that this is what was done and did not misrepresent your signature)

 

[afcgate]

Now regarding the signature, what exactly did you sign? If it was a notebook, there should have been no blank space above it, and the inspector should have written that you signed, then left, and he completed the rest afterwards. If you do get a letter, ask for a copy of this so that you can check correct procedures were followed. (There's nothing wrong with the inspector completing information afterwards, so long he stated that this is what was done.)

Yes it was a notebook, yes there was some space above it, he did say that only what he had told me would be written. Thanks i will ask for a copy.
I cant believe i signed it, was just in a crazy state of mind as have never being cautioned or been in trouble before!

 

[afcgate]

Thanks everyone for all help and advice, i appreciate it greatly. I will update as and when i hear.

 

[furlong]

Yes it was a notebook, yes there was some space above it, he did say that only what he had told me would be written. Thanks i will ask for a copy.
I cant believe i signed it, was just in a crazy state of mind as have never being cautioned or been in trouble before!

Well there is no way you should have been invited to sign under blank space. You should have signed at the top, and the inspector would have written that you needed to leave and he was writing this afterwards. No problems whatsoever that way - it's factual and there's no possibility of misrepresentation. What he wrote MUST state that your signature was given in advance. Otherwise, if proven, it could cast doubt on the admissibility of other notebook evidence from this inspector and if GA doesn't do an adequate independent investigation itself then a police investigation may be required.

 

[afcgate]

Well there is no way you should have been invited to sign under blank space. You should have signed at the top, and the inspector would have written that you needed to leave and he was writing this afterwards. No problems whatsoever that way - it's factual and there's no possibility of misrepresentation. What he wrote MUST state that your signature was given in advance. Otherwise, if proven, it could cast doubt on the admissibility of other notebook evidence from this inspector and if GA doesn't do an adequate independent investigation itself then a police investigation may be required.

ok thank

 

[furlong]

Here are some rules for Police Notebooks (obviously broader than what a ticket inspector deals with, but the principles should be the same):
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/requ...ional Guidance on Using a Pocket Notebook.pdf

 

[talldave]

OK, so if they read the magnetic stripe it will tell them if it had been put through a ticket gate previously (and they could then look at the corresponding CCTV to get an image of the person who used it) - that would give them evidence they could use against you. If as you assert, the only barrier you put it through was the one that morning, then this will not give them the evidence they are hoping to find.

I thought the magstripe was desperately short of bits, so can it hold date/time/barrier details for more than one barrier read?

 

[afcgate]

I thought the magstripe was desperately short of bits, so can it hold date/time/barrier details for more than one barrier read?

Hopefully this is the case as it wasnt used.

 

[furlong]

I thought the magstripe was desperately short of bits, so can it hold date/time/barrier details for more than one barrier read?

No - please read the whole context. The ticket has supposedly not opened any barrier yet.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Hopefully this is the case as it wasnt used.

How can you be 100% certain as it was given to you by someone else?

Just saying.

 

[afcgate]

How can you be 100% certain as it was given to you by someone else?

Just saying.

Hi Gareth, i picked him up from the station and he was with us over xmas until i drove him home.

 

[CNash]

Is the return portion of a return ticket considered to be a separate ticket for the purposes of being "non-transferable", or are both portions jointly non-transferable? If it's separate, then who's to say that the plan wasn't always for one person to use the outward portion and the other to use the return? Nobody could prove otherwise, so that argument is unlikely to factor in.

 

[island]

Is the return portion of a return ticket considered to be a separate ticket for the purposes of being "non-transferable", or are both portions jointly non-transferable? If it's separate, then who's to say that the plan wasn't always for one person to use the outward portion and the other to use the return? Nobody could prove otherwise, so that argument is unlikely to factor in.

A return ticket is issued as two coupons, but they form one ticket. You will see, if you inspect one, that they have the same number. The two coupons of one return ticket are not to be used by different people.

 

[furlong]

A return ticket is issued as two coupons, but they form one ticket. You will see, if you inspect one, that they have the same number. The two coupons of one return ticket are not to be used by different people.

The new definition of Ticket (quoted earlier) does not depend on any number. The return portion in isolation appears to meet the definition better (note the word "any") than the two physical items treated as a pair, so I think what you write is less clear than it used to be (when the term was not explicitly defined).

 

[najaB]

The return portion in isolation appears to meet the definition better (note the word "any") than the two physical items treated as a pair, so I think what you write is less clear than it used to be (when the term was not explicitly defined).

I would agree if they didn't say something like "Coupon x of y" or whatever it is that they say. That, to my mind at least, makes it clear that it's a single ticket that spans more than one piece of paper.

 

[furlong]

I would agree if they didn't say something like "Coupon x of y" or whatever it is that they say. That, to my mind at least, makes it clear that it's a single ticket that spans more than one piece of paper.

It also says on the back '+denotes ticket is valid for one journey across London by Underground/DLR services if required'. So how can you make two such journeys (one in each direction) if it's only one ticket? Shouldn't it say "two journeys" (or be reworded e.g. to say coupon instead of ticket)? The railway does not itself use this term consistently.

 

[najaB]

So how can you make two such journeys (one in each direction) if it's only one ticket?

It's one return journey.

 

[talldave]

No - please read the whole context. The ticket has supposedly not opened any barrier yet.

Ok, I hadn't twigged that only a successful barrier open would result in a write to the ticket; brain still in holiday mode!
I guess hardened open return fraudsters carry a magnet in their pocket .

 

[robbeech]

A couple of points. They don’t really contradict each other but they show differing views.

Regardless of where you signed on a notebook and what wording was used, the fact remains that the other person gave you a ticket which is considered against the rules. If the wording has changed and it has become unclear then it’s unlikely to have been done intentionally.
You then proceeded to use the ticket that wasn’t yours on a train that it wasn’t valid on. So two things there that are (with respect) worthy of penalty.

HOWEVER.
You were allowed through the barrier at Your origin, this could be seen as authority to travel.
Your journey finished at Tottenham Hale.
We can confirm this because at the time you boarded that journey and commenced using that (irrelevantly invalid) ticket you did not have a ticket to travel beyond there.
During your journey you say you bought and activated a ticket from Tottenham Hale to London which was valid on the train you were on.
The train calls at Tottenham Hale so it passes that check.
It’s not set down only so if passes that check.
Your journey was Tottenham Hale to London Liverpool Street. You had a valid ticket for this. I cannot see why your previous journey was brought up as it wasn’t relevant.

So to conclude, whilst you did things wrong, the person you spoke to was questioning your journey which you had a valid ticket for. Surely the matter wouldn’t go any further if any previous journeys were not taken into account.

Are you sure there isn’t more information ?

 

[afcgate]

A couple of points. They don’t really contradict each other but they show differing views.

Regardless of where you signed on a notebook and what wording was used, the fact remains that the other person gave you a ticket which is considered against the rules. If the wording has changed and it has become unclear then it’s unlikely to have been done intentionally.
You then proceeded to use the ticket that wasn’t yours on a train that it wasn’t valid on. So two things there that are (with respect) worthy of penalty.

HOWEVER.
You were allowed through the barrier at Your origin, this could be seen as authority to travel.
Your journey finished at Tottenham Hale.
We can confirm this because at the time you boarded that journey and commenced using that (irrelevantly invalid) ticket you did not have a ticket to travel beyond there.
During your journey you say you bought and activated a ticket from Tottenham Hale to London which was valid on the train you were on.
The train calls at Tottenham Hale so it passes that check.
It’s not set down only so if passes that check.
Your journey was Tottenham Hale to London Liverpool Street. You had a valid ticket for this. I cannot see why your previous journey was brought up as it wasn’t relevant.

So to conclude, whilst you did things wrong, the person you spoke to was questioning your journey which you had a valid ticket for. Surely the matter wouldn’t go any further if any previous journeys were not taken into account.

Are you sure there isn’t more information ?

Hi thanks for your response, and agreed on all points.
I think it all stemmed from the first inspector that spoke to me accusing me of using a previously used ticket.
As mentioned previously, it is impossible as I picked my cousin up from BS station and took him home instead of him using the train. (my goodwill gesture that has seriously backfired!)

 

[gray1404]

I would totally agree that you need to request a copy of what was written in the notebook so you can check that the correct procedure was followed.

It almost seems pointless being asked to sign something if you are not going to be there when the information is filled out.

 

[cornishjohn]

Make a copy of the pages of information that you relied upon. Re-read them. Did you miss some small print? I see https://www.greateranglia.co.uk/tickets-fares/daily-tickets/off-peak-and-super-off-peak-tickets

Googles is quoting from that very page, but skipping much of the detail. The OP's screenshot is of part of a paragraph about halfway down. The screenshot does include the phrase "Please enquire as to the restrictions applying to the journey you wish to make" after all. But the sentence at the start of the paragraph (not shown by google) refers to CENTRAL London (my emphasis). Tottenham Hale is about as close to Central London as is Wimbledon?

The table before all this is what is needed, and is not shown by google, and is unfortunately not small print.

 

[shredder1]

So if you are buying a return ticket from say A to B with the intention of giving the return half to a friend or family member because you are returning on a different mode of transport, and they wish to travel to A, should you really be buying two single tickets?

 

[Haywain]

So if you are buying a return ticket from say A to B with the intention of giving the return half to a friend or family member because you are returning on a different mode of transport, and they wish to travel to A, should you really be buying two single tickets?

In a word, yes.

 

[Bletchleyite]

So if you are buying a return ticket from say A to B with the intention of giving the return half to a friend or family member because you are returning on a different mode of transport, and they wish to travel to A, should you really be buying two single tickets?

Yes, correct. A return ticket is discounted because one person is going to make both journeys, it's not a simple bulk purchase. Consider it similar to if you were, for instance, to purchase a 7-day gym pass - only one person can use it, and if a second person wants to you need a second one.

The railway could, if it wished, make this kind of casual transfer of tickets glaringly obvious (and more difficult) by issuing returns as a single piece, but it stubbornly refuses to do this.

 

[shredder1]

Fair comment, cheers guys.

 

[afcgate]

Hi, just to update so I can close this thread.
I received a letter 6 weeks after the incident asking for any mitigating factors.
I was honest with my responses and apologised and offered to pay admin costs and outstanding fair.

Letter has now been received accepting my offer and the matter will not be taken any further.
Thanks everyone for there help on this board. Hopefully others that make genuine mistakes will have the same result.

 

[najaB]

Thanks for letting us know.