fare evasion - please help

[ticketuser99]

I was caught today using my dads freedom pass, ive been using for 2/3 week to get to and from work, im 24m, the indivdual who asked me questions was reassuring to the fact that it will most likely pay the compensation of the fares i evaded and pay a fine/admin fee. I was honest about being caught holding my hands up to abusing it for 2/3 weeks, he said do the same in the letter and you should just pay the fines and compensation

After doing some research online and referring to the TFL Revenue Enforcement & Prosecutions Policy I am very worried I will be prosecuted and face a criminal record which will affect job opportunities and where i can travel in the future. I've not offended TFL policies before.

i am on 24k a year, i'm not worried how much i will have to pay, i just dont want to be taken to court. If anyone can advise me on the likley outcomes? as well as if i should be looking into solicitors to respond to my incoming letter from TFL pleading my guilt and why i shouldnt be taken to court.

 

[furlong]

The strongest card you have is what the person who stopped you and asked the questions said to you. Make a record of this as precisely as you can remember it and be sure to quote what you were told about how the matter would be resolved when you write back, and follow what you were told. TfL will normally be expected to prosecute, but if they told you at the time circumstances in which this would not happen, you need to remind them of that fact. Was there a bodycam recording the interaction? If so, be prepared to ask for a copy of it to confirm this. Their investigators are expected to act with integrity and not lie to you. If they said something was "most likely" to happen then that is what you can expect to happen UNLESS there is some additional relevant information that they were unaware of when they said that to you which would have meant they would not have said that.

 

[SuspectUsual]

the indivdual who asked me questions was reassuring to the fact that it will most likely pay the compensation of the fares i evaded and pay a fine/admin fee

do the same in the letter and you should just pay the fines and compensation

Two things.

1 - saying stuff like this is a common tactic to deescalate situations and get you to comply

2 - "most likely" and "should" are doing a lot of heavy lifting in those sentences

TFL, as I'm sure you've read, almost always prosecute unless there is compelling evidence (eg a medical diagnosis that is shown to impair judgement) not to. Your case looks cut and dried and you've basically admitted both your guilt and that it was intentional and repeated.

Given their policies, I would be stunned if TFL didn't prosecute

 

[jfollows]

Likely outcome is that you will be taken to court.
If your dad was aware of what you were doing he could lose his pass also.
The good news is that this will affect your pocket more than your future prospects. It’s not good to have a conviction but it’s low on the scale of these things.
I don’t think a solicitor will help, it will just cost you more, be honest and accept what happens. TfL doesn’t really do out of court settlements.

 

[furlong]

The sequence of what happened may be important too. Did they say what was "most likely" to happen and THEN give you a formal interview where you were cautioned, if that happened? Or was it right at the end that you were told this "most likely" scenario?

 

[ticketuser99]

Two things.

1 - saying stuff like this is a common tactic to deescalate situations and get you to comply

2 - "most likely" and "should" are doing a lot of heavy lifting in those sentences

TFL, as I'm sure you've read, almost always prosecute unless there is compelling evidence (eg a medical diagnosis that is shown to impair judgement) not to. Your case looks cut and dried and you've basically admitted both your guilt and that it was intentional and repeated.

Given their policies, I would be stunned if TFL didn't prosecute

Thanks for the reply. If prosecuted What is likely to happen to me in regards to criminal records

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Jan 2025 ==

The sequence of what happened may be important too. Did they say what was "most likely" to happen and THEN give you a formal interview where you were cautioned, if that happened? Or was it right at the end that you were told this "most likely" scenario?

Both he showed me my rights. But after told me I’d likely just pay the fines and not to worry

 

[jfollows]

Thanks for the reply. If prosecuted What is likely to happen to me in regards to criminal records

You will have one if found guilty.
You need to be clear about to whom you need to declare it.
But it’s minor, along the lines of a conviction for speeding which is also a criminal offence.

 

[furlong]

2 - "most likely" and "should" are doing a lot of heavy lifting in those sentences

The person speaking is speaking on behalf of the investigating and prosecuting authority based on the totality of that organisation's knowledge at that time. The organisation should and can be held to such a statement. The normal get-out is "new information" that the organisation couldn't realistically have known at that time that invalidates whatever assurance was given.

 

[ticketuser99]

Likely outcome is that you will be taken to court.
If your dad was aware of what you were doing he could lose his pass also.
The good news is that this will affect your pocket more than your future prospects. It’s not good to have a conviction but it’s low on the scale of these things.
I don’t think a solicitor will help, it will just cost you more, be honest and accept what happens. TfL doesn’t really do out of court settlements.

What do you mean by not good to have a conviction? Will I be placed on a travel band abroad? Will my career be affected? Will this show on my data base for life? Quite scary to think about and I’m very upset about the whole situation. My dad was not aware of the situation

 

[ticketuser99]

You will have one if found guilty.
You need to be clear about to whom you need to declare it.
But it’s minor, along the lines of a conviction for speeding which is also a criminal offence.

Please can you expand, I told them I was using it to save money. I have no excuse. What would save me from being innocent in this case?

 

[jfollows]

Please can you expand, I told them I was using it to save money. I have no excuse. What would save me from being innocent in this case?

I can’t and won’t judge you, but if you’re taken to court it seems that you’ll probably be found guilty. Like speeding, not knowing and making a mistake is no defence, you either did it or you didn’t. I think you’ve just got to work with them to minimise the cost to you if so.

TfL usually prosecutes; other rail companies can come to settlements out of court. Sorry, but that’s the way it is.

 

[furlong]

Both he showed me my rights. But after told me I’d likely just pay the fines and not to worry

So by telling you that before, he might have affected what you said under caution and caused you to say more than you would otherwise have done had he not reassured you nothing much would happen. That has a potential impact on the use that can be made of the evidence you gave under caution. Secondly, by saying this after he has heard the answers to the questions, he, representing TfL, has already placed limits on what further action TfL may take.

You should have asked him to write down what he said to you about the outcome both before and after the interview for your own reassurance but really as a test of his integrity! If he wasn't prepared to put this in writing why did he say it? Failing that you should have written it yourself and invited him to sign it as a true record of what he told you (or made an audio recording on your phone and invited him to confirm it verbally).

I repeat my original suggestion - when responding make clear, accurately, what you were told and make clear you expect them to follow this through. If they don't, you have options of requesting internal reviews, or getting legal advice and seeing if paying a solicitor will deal with what (by then) might look like malpractice.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Jan 2025 ==

Just to be clear - the inspector should say nothing that could be deemed as interfering with your interpretation of the caution before asking questions, and should restrict information about what happens next to facts - no speculation. Of course you might have misheard or misinterpreted or misremembered something. But anything you were told you must be able to rely upon and you should make sure that the person you end up writing to at TfL (and the court if it reaches that stage) is aware of things like this as the inspector might not have mentioned in his report.

(I really struggle to understand how statements like these can ever be made in these situations. It is surely the job of the frontline investigator merely to record and report the facts - not to decide or speculate on what action will be taken subsequently. In the stress of the situations are people mishearing what they are being told?)

 

[SuspectUsual]

(I really struggle to understand how statements like these can ever be made in these situations.)

Based on comments on the many other threads where similar comments are said to have been made, I think the consensus is that it’s a tactic to keep the passenger calm and prevent escalation

If it happens a lot, you’d imagine that the tactic has been trained out to the RPIs etc

 

[furlong]

If it happens a lot, you’d imagine that the tactic has been trained out to the RPIs etc

But that would be blatant malpractice! Similar to some of the corruption that took decades to eliminate from pockets of our police forces.

 

[SuspectUsual]

the indivdual who asked me questions was reassuring to the fact that it will most likely pay the compensation of the fares (which TfL will ask to be awarded in court) i evaded and pay a fine (which is what a court would impose) / admin fee (which is what TfL could impose)

Reading the OP's first post again, I've added the bits in bold. If this is exactly what was said, is it really implying there would be no prosecution?

 

[AlterEgo]

It matters not a jot in practice whether the OP's own admissions of their offences are admissible or not; they were caught red handed using the pass and even if they had refused the interview they'd be getting prosecuted. Slam dunk abuse of a free pass; little point offering false hope here.

If the OP wants to stand any chance at all of not being convicted they should contact a solicitor.

 

[Haywain]

If the OP wants to stand any chance at all of not being convicted they should contact a solicitor.

Whilst being aware that this will likely cost almost twice as much as being convicted.

 

[furlong]

Slam dunk abuse of a free pass; little point offering false hope here.

That might be our opinion, but it is not TfL's opinion if you accept what is reported to have been said at the time by someone seemingly employed to speak to the OP about the matter on behalf of TfL!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Jan 2025 ==

But to return to what we think normally happens - TfL normally prosecutes for the single occasion on which you were caught, and invites you to come to court and admit to using the pass on other occasions (but they don't normally prosecute you for those). You end up with just one minor conviction (instead of one for each trip you made) but have to pay back all the fares still due plus other costs and a court fine and surcharge etc.
I maintain though that if you are able to prove that the inspector led you to believe the outcome was most likely going to be something other than that, there's a reasonable chance TfL would adhere to what you were told.

 

[ticketuser99]

I really appreciate what everyone on this thread has said, this situation which notably. is completely my own doing has beaten me to the ground. your advice is very helpful.

That might be our opinion, but it is not TfL's opinion if you accept what is reported to have been said at the time by someone seemingly employed to speak to the OP about the matter on behalf of TfL!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Jan 2025 ==

But to return to what we think normally happens - TfL normally prosecutes for the single occasion on which you were caught, and invites you to come to court and admit to using the pass on other occasions (but they don't normally prosecute you for those). You end up with just one minor conviction (instead of one for each trip you made) but have to pay back all the fares still due plus other costs and a court fine and surcharge etc.
I maintain though that if you are able to prove that the inspector led you to believe the outcome was most likely going to be something other than that, there's a reasonable chance TfL would adhere to what you were told.

Yes the ticket inspector after giving my formal interview and caution said "what is most likely to happen is there will be compensation of fares to pay and a fine for evading", he told me not to worry which is why i somewhat agree with other comments in this thread, is that it is a deescalation tactic. However he did say be honest and TFL will recognize my willingness to comply with my wrongdoings and it will be very unlikely to be taken to court. My memory is slightly hazy to the matter of body cams but to my recollection he didnt have one, and if he did it was not flashing red (or whatever colour) to indicate it was on, nor a open lens. If he did have one it will back your claim of adhereing to what I have been told the punishment will be.

Furlong, when you said "normally prosecute " and "dont normally prosecute", what dictates normal in this scenario?

In the heat of it all I didnt ask him to write down (or record it myself) his "reassurances" of punishment (as fines and compensation) for me. nor could i validate he wrote it down in his own transcript.

you argue it is Malpractice of TLF? with no body cam or written transcript? is it not my word against his word scenario? (which surely would not hold up in the court process)

Your say prove what he has told me, unfortunately without knowing that he wrote it down himself which im sure he probably wouldnt it is down to his integrity. what concerns me as the investigator told when you reply to the letter, be honest and hold your hands up, if by quoting him on what he led me to believe is that not creating a conflict and create more of a problem for me?

Sorry to overload my reply - if as you say, i could end up with a minor conviction, is that a criminal record? how bad is that to my ability to travel and access new jobs? will it go away after a period of time?

Whilst being aware that this will likely cost almost twice as much as being convicted.

But this comes with a criminal record, affecting my travel abilities? and job employment? and stays on my record for like. is it not worth the effort in mitigating a criminal record? As Furlong has said If the frontline investigator has provided limitation to the consequences of my action can this not be upheld? However if the criminal record is a minor offence (like a speeding offence) does this not go away after a period of time?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Jan 2025 ==

It matters not a jot in practice whether the OP's own admissions of their offences are admissible or not; they were caught red handed using the pass and even if they had refused the interview they'd be getting prosecuted. Slam dunk abuse of a free pass; little point offering false hope here.

If the OP wants to stand any chance at all of not being convicted they should contact a solicitor.

Agreed I have been caught red handed, the investigator said it is very unlikely to go to court if i admit to what I have done, offer to pay compensation and fines/admin fees. As the investigator has told me this and reassured me this is the likely outcome, can i not take this for how the situation will play out? I am happy to contact a solicitor, but i do not want to come across as i have done nothing wrong (by having a solicitor claiming my innocence). As I've been told by the investigator to play ball, admit it, pay up and reduce my chance of a criminal record/going to court (which i dont need a solicitor for). Im assuming you would recommend to contact a solicitor if TFL prosecute me?

 

[Hadders]

Transport for London take misuse of Freedom Passes very seriously and a prosecution under the TfL Bylaws is the usual outcome.

What happens next is TfL will send you a Verification Letter, normally within a couple of weeks. The letter will ask you to confirm or deny the incident and ask you to give any mitigating circumstances which you would like them to take into account when deciding how to proceed.

I suggest you mention the following in your reply:

- That you are sorry for what has happened
- What you have learned from the incident
- That you are keen to settle the matter without the need for court action
- Offer to pay the outstanding fare and TfL's administrative costs in dealing with the matter

TfL do not offer out of court settlements although in some very limited circumstances they have been known to issue a final warning instead of prosecution. Prosecutions are normally done through what is called a Single Justice Procedure Notice. This means that if you plead guilty it is not necessary to attend court in person (unless you choose to do), you simply return the form to the court with any mitigation you want them to take into account and they will write to you with the details of the fine you have to pay.

If you are prosecuted and plead guilty (or are found guilty by the court) then you will have to pay:

- A fine based on your income - normally discounted by a third for pleading guilty at the earliest opportunity
- A surcharge of 40% of the value of the fine
- A contribution towards TfL's costs
- Compensation for the fares avoided

If you are found guilty then this is a criminal conviction. If you are prosecuted under the TfL Bylaws (which is what normally happens) then the conviction isn't normally recorded on the Police National Computer and won't normally appear on Basic DBS checks although we always advise people to be honest when asked if they have a conviction.

Here's a link to TfL's Revenue Enforcement & Prosecutions Policy which you might find worth reading:

https://content.tfl.gov.uk/revenue-enforcement-and-prosecutions-policy.pdf

 

[furlong]

You said it yourself - your word against his if there's no bodycam. All you can do when you get the letter is reply truthfully, apologising wholeheartedly, offering to pay back everything you owe, saying you are doing what the inspector advised you to do at the time and tell them what you were told the consequences of following such advice were likely to be. Normal means what we usually see happen in cases on this forum. Out-of-court settlements with TfL are unusual and usually seems to require something extra. Paying solicitors can help to find that something extra but without any guarantees. The bottom line though is you knew what you were doing was wrong and there would be consequences if you were caught - you got caught and now have to deal with those consequences, which could include a criminal record.

 

[ticketuser99]

You said it yourself - your word against his if there's no bodycam. All you can do when you get the letter is reply truthfully, apologising wholeheartedly, offering to pay back everything you owe, saying you are doing what the inspector advised you to do at the time and tell them what you were told the consequences of following such advice were likely to be. Normal means what we usually see happen in cases on this forum. Out-of-court settlements with TfL are unusual and usually seems to require something extra. Paying solicitors can help to find that something extra but without any guarantees. The bottom line though is you knew what you were doing was wrong and there would be consequences if you were caught - you got caught and now have to deal with those consequences, which could include a criminal record.

thanks just to clarify a criminal record is there for life? will affect my abilities to go abroad and job opportunties?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Jan 2025 ==

Transport for London take misuse of Freedom Passes very seriously and a prosecution under the TfL Bylaws is the usual outcome.

What happens next is TfL will send you a Verification Letter, normally within a couple of weeks. The letter will ask you to confirm or deny the incident and ask you to give any mitigating circumstances which you would like them to take into account when deciding how to proceed.

I suggest you mention the following in your reply:

- That you are sorry for what has happened
- What you have learned from the incident
- That you are keen to settle the matter without the need for court action
- Offer to pay the outstanding fare and TfL's administrative costs in dealing with the matter

TfL do not offer out of court settlements although in some very limited circumstances they have been known to issue a final warning instead of prosecution. Prosecutions are normally done through what is called a Single Justice Procedure Notice. This means that if you plead guilty it is not necessary to attend court in person (unless you choose to do), you simply return the form to the court with any mitigation you want them to take into account and they will write to you with the details of the fine you have to pay.

If you are prosecuted and plead guilty (or are found guilty by the court) then you will have to pay:

- A fine based on your income - normally discounted by a third for pleading guilty at the earliest opportunity
- A surcharge of 40% of the value of the fine
- A contribution towards TfL's costs
- Compensation for the fares avoided

If you are found guilty then this is a criminal conviction. If you are prosecuted under the TfL Bylaws (which is what normally happens) then the conviction isn't normally recorded on the Police National Computer and won't normally appear on Basic DBS checks although we always advise people to be honest when asked if they have a conviction.

Here's a link to TfL's Revenue Enforcement & Prosecutions Policy which you might find worth reading:

https://content.tfl.gov.uk/revenue-enforcement-and-prosecutions-policy.pdf

when found guilty, the criminal record lasts forever? affects my ability to travel?

 

[Hadders]

A conviction for a railway ticketing matter is highly unlikely to prevent you from travelling anywhere, and I wouldn't expect it to adversely impact career opportunities. You should be truthful if asked whether you have a conviction, the fact that someone has a conviction isn't normally the issue, it's if you're found to have lied about having one that's more of an issue.

There isn't really anything more we can say at this stage. When the letter from TfL arrives post a (redacted) copy of it in this thread and we can go from there. In the meantime try and put what has happened to the back of your mind and get on with your life.

 

[furlong]

thanks just to clarify a criminal record is there for life? will affect my abilities to go abroad and job opportunties?
when found guilty, the criminal record lasts forever? affects my ability to travel?

Refer to the end of what Hadders just wrote.
Once you've paid the money required, usually the impact is minimal as long as you don't hide it when the law says you must declare it.

 

[AlterEgo]

Agreed I have been caught red handed, the investigator said it is very unlikely to go to court if i admit to what I have done, offer to pay compensation and fines/admin fees. As the investigator has told me this and reassured me this is the likely outcome, can i not take this for how the situation will play out?

No.

TfL's policy is in fact quite binary. They prosecute almost everyone, while a small number of (mostly legally-represented) offenders might be given only a warning. It's not possible whatsoever to "pay compensation and admin fees". TfL simply don't do this, as per their own publicised prosecution policy and FOI requests made on them.

Nothing turns on what the inspectors told you.

 

[ticketuser99]

TfL normally prosecutes for the single occasion on which you were caught, and invites you to come to court and admit to using the pass on other occasions (but they don't normally prosecute you for those). You end up with just one minor conviction (instead of one for each trip you made) but have to pay back all the fares still due plus other costs and a court fine and surcharge etc.

I have already admitted guilt to other occasions, will they prosecute me for every occasion or use it as one large prosecution? I cant see how they wouldnt prosecute me for the other times I have done it

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Jan 2025 ==

No.

TfL's policy is in fact quite binary. They prosecute almost everyone, while a small number of (mostly legally-represented) offenders might be given only a warning. It's not possible whatsoever to "pay compensation and admin fees". TfL simply don't do this, as per their own publicised prosecution policy and FOI requests made on them.

Nothing turns on what the inspectors told you.

a warning? as in no criminal record?

 

[Hadders]

I suggest you read TfL's Revenue Enforcement & Prosecutions Policy that I linked to in post #20. This clearly explains the approach TfL take. Have a look at section 8.2 as this lists the factors TfL will regard against prosecution.

 

[furlong]

I have already admitted guilt to other occasions, will they prosecute me for every occasion or use it as one large prosecution? I cant see how they wouldnt prosecute me for the other times I have done it

Their normal mode of operating is to prosecute for only one offence, but to bring the others to the attention of the court and, with your agreement, to take them all into account when ordering compensation and in sentencing. This is a streamlined way to clear the slate and the advantage for you is that you have only a single conviction instead of many.

But wait for the letter.

 

[ticketuser99]

A conviction for a railway ticketing matter is highly unlikely to prevent you from travelling anywhere, and I wouldn't expect it to adversely impact career opportunities. You should be truthful if asked whether you have a conviction, the fact that someone has a conviction isn't normally the issue, it's if you're found to have lied about having one that's more of an issue.

There isn't really anything more we can say at this stage. When the letter from TfL arrives post a (redacted) copy of it in this thread and we can go from there. In the meantime try and put what has happened to the back of your mind and get on with your life.

Thanks for your response, I'll let post the letter from TFL when it arrives.

Should i be contacting solicitors now to help respond to my first initial response or should i use that with clear information provided above to responsed myself?

 

[AlterEgo]

a warning? as in no criminal record?

A warning is just that - a letter saying don't do it again. Those are quite rare. No criminal record.