Court Summons Next Week - Northern Rail

[SP123]

Hello

Firstly – I expect to be found guilty of the charges below and am not seeking views that relate to the specifics of my case. The text below is for context and to get a feel for what fines I am likely to receive.

Thanks

I have a court summons that I am attending next week for alleged fare evasion - which I dispute as it was a genuine mistake (however implausible the revenue officer thought it is) and to which following accusation of 'willful' evasion bought a ticket immediately. At the summons I will be seeking to make the point that the reality is that if I had used the automated barriers rather than been a sheep and blindly followed all the other commuters to the manned barrier I could not be accused of willful evasion. I realise based on responses in this forum this will be of little interest to NR and it is an open and shut case.

I am also charged with using abusive and offensive language for the terms "your job is rather pointless" which I didn't say and "I cannot wait to bust your balls" which I did after sarcastically thanking the revenue officer for busting mine and being spoken to in a way that is best described as less than friendly and likely to provoke a less than friendly response. Again I realise based on responses in this forum this will be of little interest to NR and it is an open and shut case.


I was so aggrieved at the way I had been treated I sent a compliant 2 hours after the event to which I still have received no response from Northern Rail (other than the automated email confirming receipt) and which I attached as my response to prosecutions unit's first correspondence outlining their intention to prosecute along with scans of all the tickets I have purchased during the same month (including the one I bought immediately after signing my statement on the officer’s note pad and in response to the advice of the revenue officer before our argument began) to demonstrate that I am an honest patron and that this was a one-off genuine mistake. The majority of tickets I buy for rail are also usually claimed on company expenses (a point I made in my complaint) and therefore the accusation that is associated with willful evasion (ie, that I would get financial gain) is diluted somewhat (in my view anyway!)

 

[maniacmartin]

Under which legislation are you being prosecuted? (e.g. Railway Byelaws or Regulation of Railways Act).

Did your origin station have ticket purchasing opportunities?

 

[SP123]

Under which legislation are you being prosecuted? (e.g. Railway Byelaws or Regulation of Railways Act).

Did your origin station have ticket purchasing opportunities?

Hi - verbatim from the summons

For ticket evasion its:

"Contrary SC.5(3)(a) of the Regulation of Railways Act 1889 as amended by Section 84 (2) of the Transport Act 1962 and Section 18 of the British Railways Act 1977"

For abusive and offensive language its:

"Contrary to section 219 and schedule 20 of the Transport Act 2000 as preserved by clause 4 (a) & (b) of the Railways Act 2005 Byelaw No.6(1) of the National Railway Byelaws in that no person shall use any threatening, abusive, obscene or offensive language on the railway.

Made under section 219 of the Transport Act 2000 by the Strategic Railway Authority as preserved by clause 4 (a) & (b) of the Railways Act 2005"

For background - it was the 06:31 service Wigan Wallgate to Manchester Oxford Road. The ticket office was closed. There is a machine but based on experience it often freezes and is slow to use. I turned up very late at the station and standard practice is that you are usually advised (when staff are there - but they weren’t that day) to purchase on the train. I got on the train and on route there was an announcement that the ticket machine was defective and there would be no ticket sales. At that point I cracked on with work on my laptop (I’m a consultant and had a project deadline to meet that morning) and completely switched off - went into autopilot just thinking about getting to the office to hit my deadline, alighted the train and when I got to the barrier I presented a ticket, rightly got pulled up, started searching my wallet for a valid ticket when it dawned on me that I hadn't bought one that morning (I appreciate that the officer will have 'heard it all before' but however implausible anyone thinks this is I know it was a genuine mistake). I immediately offered to pay but was refused access to a kiosk and told I had willfully evaded the fare. The witness statement says I had covered the date on the ticket originally presented which I don’t recall doing but can’t prove either way but it view as a pretty weak tactic against staff that are trained to look at train tickets.

The discussion which then turned into an argument was that I had not willfully evaded a fare and I could not see how they could prove this as I was nowhere near getting through the manned barrier. In hindsight I realised if only I had gone through the automated barriers this would not have even been an issue, I would have realised I hadn’t bought my ticket just as I had at the manned but there would be no grounds for the accusation for of willful evasion. The revenue offer repeatedly used this phrase repeatedly and his attitude became more and more derogatory and started coming up with hypothetical scenarios such as if they were not there and I walked through unchallenged but then realised the ticket was out of date that I would come back an pay? – I said I couldn’t possibly answer the question and the reality is that I would have put the ticket straight in my pocket and probably would not looked at it until I claimed expenses - whether at that point I realised I hadn’t paid I simply don’t know.

Apologies for my rambling but its been quite Cathartic if nothing else and as I say I fully expect to be prosecuted and will take this on the chin.

 

[bb21]

It seems to me a rather unfortunate set of circumstances that led to you showing an invalid ticket. It is also unfortunate that I believe it is highly likely this action could be interpreted by the court as intent, regardless of what your real intention is.

If you want to fight it, then I think you need to speak to a solicitor. Fighting it on your own is never a good idea, especially when the odds are stacked against you as your actions on the day at the gateline at your destination station had all the hallmarks of someone who only pays when challenged.

Just be aware that conviction under the Regulation of Railways Act 1889 is recordable. The decision to fight it in court should not be taken lightly.

 

[GadgetMan]

If all else fails then turn up to court early and approach Norther Rail's prosecutor before going in. You may well be able to reach an out of court settlement with him/her before going into court.

Having attended court and witnessed numerous Ticket Irregularity cases, the circumstances are definitely stacked against you and chances of any sort of result in your favour are very remote unless the prosecution manages to screw up the process with missing paperwork/statements etc. I wouldn't rely on that happening.

 

[SP123]

To clarify I realise the issue of intent and I have tried to counter this by providing a dozen tickets purchased during the month it happened I'm not looking to fight the charge as such just provide some context and background. I found it morally (not a legal issue I appreciate) impossible to plead guilty given the content and inaccuracy of the witness statement so I am where I am I guess.

 

[SP123]

Thanks Gadget Man and BB21. I have already been advised on by a prosecutions solicitor to do just what you have said. I have no previous convictions and hopefully the evidence I have provided demonstrates I am not a ticket dodger but realise that if someone else set out the circumstances I found myself in I would be 'oh yeah pull the other one'

 

[bb21]

To clarify I realise the issue of intent and I have tried to counter this by providing a dozen tickets purchased during the month it happened I'm not looking to fight the charge as such just provide some context and background. I found it morally (not a legal issue I appreciate) impossible to plead guilty given the content and inaccuracy of the witness statement so I am where I am I guess.

It might work in the sense of a lesser fine if convicted, but don't count on it is all I can say. What you find morally acceptable can come at a price however, as a guilty plea can mean a lesser penalty if convicted.

It is unlikely to affect the decision in the court case. It will be your behaviour on the day that the prosecution will focus on in an attempt to argue that it was your intent to avoid paying the correct fare that day.

Thanks Gadget Man and BB21. I have already been advised on by a prosecutions solicitor to do just what you have said. I have no previous convictions and hopefully the evidence I have provided demonstrates I am not a ticket dodger but realise that if someone else set out the circumstances I found myself in I would be 'oh yeah pull the other one'

Are you sure you want to have a day in court and potentially end up with a criminal record? I ask because a RoRA conviction can have quite serious consequences so make sure you understand what impact it can have on your life before going for it.

An out-of-court settlement is likely to cost less and won't leave you with a criminal record which the RoRA will if convicted.

 

[SP123]

Thanks BB21 I will review again with a view to trying to get this sorted out of court.

 

[maniacmartin]

Normally a passenger who did not attempt to buy a ticket at the origin station would be given a Penalty Fare or prosecuted under the Railway Byelaws, which is not as serious and is not recordable. I think the fact that you showed an invalid ticket to the gateline staff (even if inadvertently) is what has caused Northern to instead prosecute under the Regulation of Railways Act, as they can argue that you demonstrated 'intent' through your actions. (Intent is proven by actions rather than thought). Your comments and attitude towards the staff on the day also will have meant that any discretion will have gone out of the window.

You mention that the ticket machines often freeze. If they were in a state where they were unable to vend tickets, then you would have a case, as the destination would have been your first ticket-purchasing opportunity, however it seems that you did not even attempt to use the machines, and I am willing to bet that the machine was working, just it was very slow.

I echo the advice of previous posters to try and negotiate an out of court settlement. If convicted under RoRA it will be costly and you will get a criminal record. Your previous tickets may result in a lesser punishment at a court, but I can't see you having a good chance of being found not guilty I'm afraid.

 

[SP123]

Thanks everyone. I have called the prosectutions unit regarding an out of court settlement and they will proceed with court. I've taken on board all your advice and will plead guilty.

 

[GadgetMan]

Thanks everyone. I have called the prosectutions unit regarding an out of court settlement and they will proceed with court. I've taken on board all your advice and will plead guilty.

I would still recommend approaching the prosecutor on the day to see if they'll settle outside of court. No harm in asking politely.

 

[SP123]

Yes will do thanks.

 

[tony6499]

I think most TOCs will see the case through due to the offensive and abusive language part, it's not just a simple fare evasion case

 

[Fare-Cop]

I think most TOCs will see the case through due to the offensive and abusive language part, it's not just a simple fare evasion case

Yes, I agree, as others have said, whatever intention you had in mind, you will be judged by your actions on the day and at the time of the ticket check.

The fact that the ticket machine has a tendency to freeze is not really relevant if, on that day, you did not attempt to use it and if it did not fail when you did.

Showing the invalid ticket indicates an intention to leave the station having not paid the fare if that ticket had been accepted without question. Using abusive language when spoken too just made the chance of prosecution much more likely.

I would certainly attend court if you are intending to plead guilty, the Magistrates are likely to view this as you taking the matter seriously and wishing to show remorse and furthermore, it gives you a final opportunity to speak with the prosecutor and ask for a final chance to avoid prosecution by paying the fare & costs incurred before actually going into the courtroom.

It may not succeed if they are set on proceeding, if it were thought that the TOC were using a summons as a lever to extract payment it may well be frowned upon by some, but the fact that you have previously tried to resolve it after summons would negate this in my view.

If it is your last-minute request to deal with it by an alternative disposal, put to the prosecutor personally it may succeed, although you should ensure that you have sufficient cash with you to discharge the whole sum and if successful, make sure that you get a receipt.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I agree with Fare-Cop.
If you do ask to speak to the Prosecutor before going in, then you need to be quite clear in your own mind what it is you are wanting to settle by means of an agreed payment. It seems to me that you are facing prosecution for two offences, and I think it is likely that the Prosecutor will have been instructed to pursue the allegation of offensive behavior to Company staff with more vigour than the allegation of 'intent to avoid payment'.

You will have to find out if (s)he might be willing to agree to settle one or both of these alleged offences out-of-court, and if only one, then you must decide if you think it is worth settling one by means of a payment and allowing the other to proceed to hearing (and you will have to make your decision immediately, because the Court will probably be waiting).

If they do want to proceed with the hearing, then the Court's assessment of an offender accused of offensive behaviour might just be influenced by a person's demeanour manner and language as it appears in front of them. I don't think anyone trying to explain that a phrase which included "bust your balls" was merely humour is going to find an interested audience.

 

[falcon]

What I find really annoying about this is:

I watched "The Railway First Great Western" last Thursday and the section of the program at the end has a team of revenue protection staff in action.
They are approached by six males who are clearly all adults who have purchased CHILD tickets and not one of them are prosecuted for any offense.It is blatant fraud with cameras recording the event(all the evidence you would need) and there is a massive argument and disorderly behaviour by all of them.

Yet the OP here has been put through the mill for something that is questionable (The Guard on the train announced there were no tickets being sold due to a fault on his ticket machine) ect.

Looks like an easy target in some respect.

Link to the program if you did not see it. http://www.channel5.com/shows/the-railway-first-great-western


I would have done my best to make sure they got prosecuted.

 

[Flamingo]

What I find really annoying about this is:

I watched "The Railway First Great Western" last Thursday and the section of the program at the end has a team of revenue protection staff in action.
They are approached by six males who are clearly all adults who have purchased CHILD tickets and not one of them are prosecuted for any offense.It is blatant fraud with cameras recording the event(all the evidence you would need) and there is a massive argument and disorderly behaviour by all of them.

Yet the OP here has been put through the mill for something that is questionable (The Guard on the train announced there were no tickets being sold due to a fault on his ticket machine) ect.

Looks like an easy target in some respect.

Link to the program if you did not see it. http://www.channel5.com/shows/the-railway-first-great-western


I would have done my best to make sure they got prosecuted.

You can't catch everybody, but that is no reason to let everybody away with it.

Also, don't forget, we are only getting one side of the story here...

 

[Urban Gateline]

What I find really annoying about this is:

I watched "The Railway First Great Western" last Thursday and the section of the program at the end has a team of revenue protection staff in action.
They are approached by six males who are clearly all adults who have purchased CHILD tickets and not one of them are prosecuted for any offense.It is blatant fraud with cameras recording the event(all the evidence you would need) and there is a massive argument and disorderly behaviour by all of them.

Yet the OP here has been put through the mill for something that is questionable (The Guard on the train announced there were no tickets being sold due to a fault on his ticket machine) ect.

Looks like an easy target in some respect.

Link to the program if you did not see it. http://www.channel5.com/shows/the-railway-first-great-western


I would have done my best to make sure they got prosecuted.

The aforementioned youths did not travel though, they were refused access into the station and most bought new adult tickets. If they had already travelled and been challenged by Revenue staff a prosecution would most certainly have been possible but probably not if they were refused travel in the first place.

 

[Stigy]

The aforementioned youths did not travel though, they were refused access into the station and most bought new adult tickets. If they had already travelled and been challenged by Revenue staff a prosecution would most certainly have been possible but probably not if they were refused travel in the first place.

They didn't need to have travelled to have committed the offence, however, the closer they got to actually travelling, the easier it would be. Also, their ages probably played a part, as although over 16-years of age, I doubt any were over 18, and thus would mean a Youth Court would have to be used, and TOCs are reluctant to do this. They could have been reported nonetheless, and FGW attempt to get money out of the parents, but a lot of time this is more hassle than it's worth.