Fare evasion case studies

[ChewChewTrain]

A long and interesting list of ticketless travel cases solved by a particular firm of solicitors (with whom I am not affiliated, and of whom I hadn’t heard until today):

Gray Hooper Holt LLP Solicitors

Solicitors offering a wide range of legal services

www.grayhooperholt.co.uk

One example:

Miss V was a student at the London School of Economics, intending to pursue a career in investment banking. She was interviewed under caution at a London Underground railway station by a Transport for London Revenue Protection Inspector after she was stopped using a ‘Freedom Pass’ belonging to a retired relative. Miss V said she had picked up the wrong pass by mistake. Transport for London subjected the pass to a forensic analysis which indicated that it had been used by a working person over the previous two months, behaviour inconsistent with that of a pensioner. Transport for London rejected Miss V’s arguments and applied to the magistrates’ court for a 'Single Justice Procedure Notice’. We were able to raise issues of procedure on behalf of our client with Transport for London which encouraged them to reconsider their decision to prosecute. We negotiated an out-of-court settlement on behalf of our client which preserved her clean record. Our client was delighted by the outcome and also by the swiftness with which we were able to secure such a satisfactory outcome.

And another:

After Dr J had engaged in a heated argument with an inspector at a Southeastern Railway station, the railway company’s prosecution department referred his case to the British Transport Police for processing. Fortunately, Dr J contacted us immediately after the incident and we were able to make immediate representations to Southeastern whilst the case was still to be delivered to the police. As a result, the British Transport Police agreed to allow Southeastern to continue dealing with the matter. After submitting appropriate apologies on behalf of Dr J and an offer for him to make full financial restitution to the railway company, Southeastern agreed to give him another chance and on this occasion disposed of Dr J’s case by administrative means. The result was of great importance to our client who was subject to extremely stringent vetting criteria under the ‘Code of Conduct’ of his professional body.

I’ve never heard of BTP agreeing to let a train company deal with a case once it’s been referred to them. I’m sure these guys are Very Expensive but they seem to be able to get impressive results, even when involved at the eleventh hour. Of course, we don’t know what percentage of the time they succeed because, insightful though it would be, failures are unsurprisingly not listed.

 

[Tubeboy]

Excellent. It will give the fare dodgers who come on here some hope.

 

[ChewChewTrain]

Excellent. It will give the fare dodgers who come on here some hope.

Look, I’m not altogether sure either that I want people who do things like that to be allowed to teach, make decisions about our health, handle our money, etc. But the purpose of this forum is to assist, for better or for worse, those who are accused of ticketless travel (the vast majority of the time under the strict liability legislation).

If there is indeed a growing problem in this country of people in positions of trust acting in an inappropriate manner, then that is an issue that is far bigger than this forum or anything that’s posted on it (or, for that matter, anything that one firm of solicitors does).

 

[Starmill]

I’ve never heard of BTP agreeing to let a train company deal with a case once it’s been referred to them. I’m sure these guys are Very Expensive but they seem to be able to get impressive results, even when involved at the eleventh hour. Of course, we don’t know what percentage of the time they succeed because, insightful though it would be, failures are unsurprisingly not listed.

We don't have any information as to what the argument was caused by, but we do know that BTP are very limited in their resources. If a prosecution seemed very unlikely to succeed because of the difficulties involved in investigating the matter, it seems likely that they would take this way out from having to deal with the case.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Nov 2022 ==

Excellent. It will give the fare dodgers who come on here some hope.

The cases used in the marketing material will of course have been very carefully 'cherry-picked' so as to sound good. The OP did hint at this.

 

[Master29]

Excellent. It will give the fare dodgers who come on here some hope.

This doesn't sit right with me. This part of the forum exists to help people with issues they have encountered through either their own possible wrongful decision, possibilities of a fault through the TOC's or simply through their own mistakes. Although you may not have intended this, a fare dodger is a choice rather than an accident and giving them a bye is not good advice.

 

[AlterEgo]

Excellent. It will give the fare dodgers who come on here some hope.

Sure, if they or their mummy or daddy can afford a very expensive solicitor.

 

[jon0844]

Sure, if they or their mummy or daddy can afford a very expensive solicitor.

Isn't that how it has always been and always will be? Money talks.

And if you break the law, money will get you out of a sticky situation and allow you to continue in your chosen profession (law, healthcare, police, politics, finance....)

 

[MP33]

How many lost cases were there? If there was a success rate of 10% what about the other 90%.

When Drink Driving was a lot more common. I was told of a Solicitor who if you were charged could get you off. In fact he won a case on a legal loophole, nothing was said about all the other unsuccessful cases.

 

[Tetchytyke]

I’ve never heard of BTP agreeing to let a train company deal with a case once it’s been referred to them.

Man doesn't have valid ticket but thinks he does, gets sweary at an RPI, abusive behaviour referred to BTP. Not in public interest to investigate a shouting match, goes back to TOC, man agrees he didn't have a ticket and pays a nice fee to the TOC. Everyone's a winner.

 

[SuspectUsual]

I know these people like to big themselves up but “checking the system to see when a pass has been used” is hardly a “forensic analysis”

 

[WesternLancer]

I know these people like to big themselves up but “checking the system to see when a pass has been used” is hardly a “forensic analysis”

well put.

 

[43066]

Not exactly a list of poor unfortunates being subjected to aggressive and vexatious prosecutions, as we are often (falsely) assured happens all the time on here, but simply examples of people chancing their arm, getting caught and desperately trying to “get off”.

What’s striking is how many of them are people who *will* know better, including accountants, financial services professionals etc. It’s extraordinary that people are tight fisted enough to risk their livelihoods for the sake of a few quid, but there are clearly many of them out there. Often well paid too, and a long way from the stereotypical fare dodger!

 

[Fawkes Cat]

I haven't read the whole way down the page, but the August and May cases all end with something very like 'an out of court settlement was reached'. Which is pretty well the outcome that we encourage people towards with (I think) quite a lot of success.

 

[contrex]

Look, I’m not altogether sure either that I want people who do things like that to be allowed to teach, make decisions about our health, handle our money, etc. But the purpose of this forum is to assist, for better or for worse, those who are accused of ticketless travel (the vast majority of the time under the strict liability legislation).

If there is indeed a growing problem in this country of people in positions of trust acting in an inappropriate manner, then that is an issue that is far bigger than this forum or anything that’s posted on it (or, for that matter, anything that one firm of solicitors does).

I'm not sure either that I want that either. What I am sure of is 1. Reputable professions have always included chancers and people who think that the rules don't apply to them 2. Miss V and Dr J will try a lot harder not to get caught in future.

 

[dcbwhaley]

How many lost cases were there? If there was a success rate of 10% what about the other 90%.

When Drink Driving was a lot more common. I was told of a Solicitor who if you were charged could get you off. In fact he won a case on a legal loophole, nothing was said about all the other unsuccessful cases.

There is no such thing as a "legal loophole". Just badly drafted law

 

[neilmc]

Actually I think there are PLENTY of vexatious and aggressive prosecutions seen in this forum, hoping that travellers will be cowed and unknowledgeable enough not to realise when this is the case, but I accept that the majority of incidents we read about will be "bang to rights" ticketless travel. In these cases presumably the prosecuting authority may drop the case in return for a wodge of cash being thrown their way just in case they have not acted with proper procedure and the solicitors may expose this.

 

[Ediswan]

Be wary of assuming that Dr J is an MD. Could be a PhD.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Excellent. It will give the fare dodgers who come on here some hope.

TOCs already do that by agreeing out of Court settlements with people who have the means to cough up immediately, and prosecuting those who don't.

The best example of this was the Surrey stockbroker who paid £35,000 to make a long-term short-faring problem go away. Good for the TOC, good for him, but Joe Pleb would never have been able to make such a settlement.

 

[43066]

1. Reputable professions have always included chancers and people who think that the rules don't apply to them

I have absolutely zero sympathy for people like this who can afford to pay (and know the potential consequences of not doing so for their professional lives), yet choose not to due to stinginess or blind arrogance. If you are an accountant or a solicitor (particularly the latter) you are rightly held to a higher standard than the general population.

Actually I think there are PLENTY of vexatious and aggressive prosecutions seen in this forum

Can you highlight any?

 

[danm14]

Can you highlight any?

This one would seem to fit the bill quite well: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/merseyrail-prosecution.229114

 

[43066]

This one would seem to fit the bill quite well: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/merseyrail-prosecution.229114

Yes we discussed that one previously.

It doesn’t really fit the bill because, although Merseyrail clearly cocked up, the person admits they committed an offence in the OP. Had they not been given a PF’d they could have been prosecuted for a strict liability offence in the first place!

 

[contrex]

contrex said:
1. Reputable professions have always included chancers and people who think that the rules don't apply to them

I'm thinking of a Tribunal President and Crown Court Recorder jailed for perjury, and a surgeon who burned his initials on patients' livers with a laser. Plus any number of accountants, solicitors, barristers, doctors, etc. In my childhood a relative who was a chartered (!) accountant was held up to me as an example to follow. Lovely wife, nice house, big car, etc, in a posh suburb. Quite recently I found that he worked for a London gang in the early 1950s, laundering cash from crime through the books of a West End night club that the gang owned. He contrived to skim a considerable amount for himself, over and above any reward the gang gave him. He spent 40 years looking over one shoulder for the police (although I think they may have been 'fixed') and over the other shoulder for the gang. I mentioned this to my father, who said 'Well, he never got caught'. That's the 'crime' for many middle class people.

 

[ChewChewTrain]

How do you know? A Savilesque posthumous revelation?

 

[contrex]

How do you know? A Savilesque posthumous revelation?

He told me; he was my cousin. He died a few months ago aged 90.