Fare Evasion - Child Ticket

[Andre123]

Yesterday I was attempting to travel by train from Station A to Station B. However, I had an invalid ticket as I had a child's ticket valid for a return journey between Station A and Station C. The ticket I presented at Station A was the return part of a 2 part return ticket.

When questioned by the Revenue Protection Inspector, I co-operated and gave them my details. They then cautioned me which sent me into a state of shock. I admitted that the child ticket was mine and I had already completed the first journey from Station C to Station A. I genuinely panicked and didn't know what was going to happen as I had never been in that situation before.

I admitted to the Inspector that it was my intention to avoid payment and they seized my ticket as potential evidence. I signed the notes at the end of the interview as being an accurate record.

However, in all honesty I had found the ticket on the floor as I was approaching the station and all I saw was that was in date and stupidly decided to use it.

I know what I did was wrong and idiotic. It was genuinely a one-off and have never been through this before and will never again.

Now I am waiting for their first letter which will hopefully allow me to explain my side. I do want to say what really happened but fear they will accuse me of lying and take it further. However, I do not want them to think that I already used the first part of the ticket and tried to fare evade again on the return journey because I didn't. I have never bought a child ticket.

I do not wish to lose my job and be prevented from pursuing my professional career because of me having a criminal record for an offence of dishonesty. I also wish to retain my ability to travel freely abroad.

Worst case scenario, can I also ask how long a criminal record like this appears on a standard DBS check? After

Any advice is appreciated.

 

[CatfordCat]

I will leave it to others who are better informed than me to comment on the specifics of what to say to the train operating company / what basis they may prosecute on.

In terms of convictions becoming spent, this has a guide.

While I can not give a categoric answer, I believe that (what I assume is) a first offence for this sort of thing is very unlikely to result in a custodial sentence, so I would say that it would be an 'unspent' conviction for a year

Or for 6 months if you're currently under 18.

 

[furlong]

Should we assume you are 18 or over? (If not, how old are you?)

Was this your only journey - from A to B? (So you did not earlier travel from B or C to A without a ticket?)

Which is further from A? B or C? Would you pass through one to reach the other?

And you were caught at the start of the journey from A to B?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Is the address you gave them near to any of A, B or C?

Firstly, note that being stopped at the beginning of your journey, before travelling, doesn't get you off the hook for one of the more serious railway ticketing offences:

(a)Travels or attempts to travel on a railway without having previously paid his fare, and with intent to avoid payment thereof;

Secondly, they will be able to check all sorts of things about the ticket that you presented - where and when it was purchased, how it was paid for, CCTV if bought on railway premises, credit card details, online account details if bought online, interviewing the employee who sold it if it was sold face-to-face etc.

On the other hand, they might decide your statement is sufficient and proceed straight to prosecution without further investigation.

In many situations out of court settlements are possible at a later stage, as you'll see if you browse other threads in this forum. Look particularly for threads involving the same train company, whichever it is. Each train company is different, but you can read, for example, how Great Western Trains deals with these matters here - page 25 onwards.

 

[cuccir]

As Furlong's post alludes, I don't think from the train company's perspective that it makes a lot of difference which is true out of the lie that you told or the reality of what you did (though why would you falsely claim to have already travelled on an invalid ticket?!?), particularly because you admitted to intending to avoid payment - this confession being the key thing they need if they want to try and prosecute you.

CatfordCat's post may be a bit sobering to you, but it is jumping the gun a little - as Furlong points out, most train companies will write to you asking you to explain your story (though not all - this is why knowing the company involved is important, even if you don't want to share the name of the stations). When they do so, you have an opportunity to apologize, to commit to not doing this again, and to offer to pay for their costs in investigating this incident + the fare owed. I suggest you do this - you have already incriminated yourself so there's nothing to lose on that front. Typical costs are in the low hundreds of pounds, plus the fare (don't state an amount - ask them to name one). Yours may be to the higher end of what's offered, for the reasons given below.

With regards to possible prosecution - our ticketing guide gives a comprehensive overview of railway legislation. To summarize: the train company probably has the evidence to prosecute successfully under the Regulation of Railways Act (RoRA), which brings a criminal record and a fine (you will not receive a custodial sentence for a first offence under this law unless there are absolutely extraordinary circumstances). It is possible though less likely that they will chose to prosecute under the Bylaws, which would not bring a criminal record and which would have a much lower fine. Legal advice is probably worth the cost if they attempt a RoRA prosecution, and probably not is they attempt a Bylaws one.

 

[Andre123]

CatfordCat the link you posted seems to suggest that although I do not have to declare it it would still be seen on a DBS check and be removed after 11yrs. Is that right?

Furlong- Yes I am over 18. Yes I only travlled from A to B. I did not earlier travel from B to A without a ticket. And I have never been to C. C is further away from A than B. You would pass through B to get to C but the distance between the two is very big. Like I said I have never been to C. It's a different region in the country. And B is in the same region as A. My address is at Station A's location. It's where I live and work. So I am not a daily commuter so hopefully this will go in my favour.

Yes despite me not actually travelling I still have intended to fare evade. I understand that.

Cuccur- The TOC is Southwest Trains. So it would make no difference to them what story I told. So shall I just stick to what was said and emphasise on how I was wrong in what I did and be remorseful. I am happy to pay the fine. I want this to be over with.

 

[Need2]

CatfordCat the link you posted seems to suggest that although I do not have to declare it it would still be seen on a DBS check and be removed after 11yrs. Is that right?

You will only get a criminal record if you go to court and are convicted.
The conviction will have to be declared in ALL (job applications etc) cases where asked for until the conviction becomes 'spent'. Trying to find an exact timescale for when it becomes spent depends on the penalty imposed and is a nightmare online, there are so many sites offering so many different opinions.
I am under the impression rightly or wrongly, that if you get fined or even given a community order by a court then it is a minimum 5 years before 'it' becomes spent!
I had to deal with a government backed offenders charity and even they got the answer wrong!
For certain jobs (teacher, solicitor, nurse etc etc) it can become 'exempt from rehabilitation of offenders act' and will never become spent, it will always show up in a DBS search.
Hopefully it wont go as far as court, you'll pay a penalty to the TOC and that'll be the end of it.

Just found this link https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...9916/rehabilitation-of-offenders-guidance.pdf which gives some basic examples, looks like a fine only will become spent after a year unless the application is exempt as describe above.

 

[najaB]

I know what I did was wrong and idiotic. It was genuinely a one-off and have never been through this before and will never again.

The problem for you is that it's a three-off: using a child ticket, using a ticket you hadn't bought and lying to the inspectors. I'm not saying this to twist the knife but just to stress that this will seen as a serious matter by SWT.

Now I am waiting for their first letter which will hopefully allow me to explain my side. I do want to say what really happened but fear they will accuse me of lying and take it further.

Consider carefully that if you stick with a false story then, depending on how this pans out, you could potentially end up adding perjury to your list of offences.

However, I do not want them to think that I already used the first part of the ticket and tried to fare evade again on the return journey because I didn't. I have never bought a child ticket.

To be honest, your using the child ticket at all is enough for a prosecution to succeed (as is using a ticket you found on the floor) so it doesn't make that much difference if it was once or twice - it wouldn't be two separate prosecutions.

I do not wish to lose my job and be prevented from pursuing my professional career because of me having a criminal record for an offence of dishonesty. I also wish to retain my ability to travel freely abroad.

Worst case scenario, can I also ask how long a criminal record like this appears on a standard DBS check? After

Convictions under the Regulation of Railways Act will be show up on a standard DBS check for one year, after which time they will only be disclosed if you are applying for certain jobs. A conviction of this nature will have limited effect on your ability to travel - technically it makes you ineligible to travel to the USA visa-free, but it's doubtful that they have regular access to the PNC to be able to check for a spent conviction.