GOT CAUGHT USING 11-15 OYSTER. HELP!!

[r4miii]

You do not have to attend the court as you are being prosecuted using the SJPN. However the case will be dealt with in court, by a magistrate, who will sentence you. You will receive the sentence via post. This is a criminal conviction, hence it being dealt with by the magistrates' court.

I see.

assuming no point in me appealing either.

I wonder how they view these circumstances. Someone i know intentionally did this with 347 cases of avoiding fares and they only got a warning

 

[NorthWestRover]

Unfortunately thats my university offer out the window for sure now.

Not necessarily. Universities admit people with all sorts of convictions (almost all more serious than this conviction) even for courses for regulated professions, so have a chat to someone in Admissions at the University and you may be able to forget that worry.

 

[Huntergreed]

I see.

assuming no point in me appealing either.

I wonder how they view these circumstances. Someone i know intentionally did this with 347 cases of avoiding fares and they only got a warning

I can only speak from what we hear from the cases we get here on the forum, but to be let off after 347 instances seems exceedingly lenient, and that is most certainly not a normal outcome (particularly when dealing with TfL).

No, you are guilty and there is little point in appealing this fact. TfL are not known for being lenient so a prosecution is the outcome we would expect given the circumstances.

 

[r4miii]

Not necessarily. Universities admit people with all sorts of convictions (almost all more serious than this conviction) even for courses for regulated professions, so have a chat to someone in Admissions at the University and you may be able to forget that worry.

i specifically asked the one i hold an offer with and wanted to go to, before i received this letter. i was hoping to study a health care related course and the university stated i would not be considered anymore if i got a criminal conviction

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Jun 2024 ==

I can only speak from what we hear from the cases we get here on the forum, but to be let off after 347 instances seems exceedingly lenient, and that is most certainly not a normal outcome (particularly when dealing with TfL).

No, you are guilty and there is little point in appealing this fact. TfL are not known for being lenient so a prosecution is the outcome we would expect given the circumstances.

yh i found it surprising too. just made me wonder how they view these on case by case basis

 

[SuspectUsual]

- A fine based on your weekly 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 the train company’s costs
- Compensation for the fares avoided

For my interest and the OP's clarity (don't think I've seen this specifically mentioned before) is the victim surcharge 40% of the fine actually imposed on the defendant (ie after any discount for a guilty plea) or 40% of the gross / headline fine?

 

[pedr]

assuming no point in me appealing either.

You can’t appeal until a decision has been made. The next decision is yours, not the court’s - you can’t plead guilty (which says you accept that you committed the crime) then appeal. If you want to argue that you didn’t commit the crime or there is some reason why the court should not convict you then you need to present that to the court by pleading not guilty. It’s clear from the circumstances that this is unlikely to be beneficial because the law which applies here leaves no room for questions about circumstances or reasons.

If you do not accept that you should plead guilty and accept the criminal conviction that brings the option is open to you to pay for a solicitor to, first, give you advice on your situation and then possibly to put your case to TfL and/or to a court. But the general position is that there is a high risk this is paying money for no benefit as the outcome will be the same or even more expensive.

 

[AlterEgo]

You can’t appeal until a decision has been made. The next decision is yours, not the court’s - you can’t plead guilty (which says you accept that you committed the crime) then appeal. If you want to argue that you didn’t commit the crime or there is some reason why the court should not convict you then you need to present that to the court by pleading not guilty. It’s clear from the circumstances that this is unlikely to be beneficial because the law which applies here leaves no room for questions about circumstances or reasons.

If you do not accept that you should plead guilty and accept the criminal conviction that brings the option is open to you to pay for a solicitor to, first, give you advice on your situation and then possibly to put your case to TfL and/or to a court. But the general position is that there is a high risk this is paying money for no benefit as the outcome will be the same or even more expensive.

The OP should bear in mind that if they accept they commuted the offence they are guilty. “But this is unfair, someone I know said they got let off” is not a defence and pleading not guilty will result in no discount on the fine.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Jun 2024 ==

I see.

assuming no point in me appealing either.

I wonder how they view these circumstances. Someone i know intentionally did this with 347 cases of avoiding fares and they only got a warning

TfL almost never settle or give warnings. That’s very rare. It’s probably they were dealing with another company, but regardless, they view the misuse of high value passes very dimly. They were always going to prosecute you.

 

[r4miii]

The OP should bear in mind that if they accept they commuted the offence they are guilty. “But this is unfair, someone I know said they got let off” is not a defence and pleading not guilty will result in no discount on the fine.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Jun 2024 ==


TfL almost never settle or give warnings. That’s very rare. It’s probably they were dealing with another company, but regardless, they view the misuse of high value passes very dimly. They were always going to prosecute you.

I never mentioned that would be my defence. Is that even a valid defence?

I was just stating i didn’t understand how tfl or whoever it is assess these.

And the person was dealing with tfl from the same station my incident occured at

 

[pedr]

The OP should bear in mind that if they accept they commuted the offence they are guilty. “But this is unfair, someone I know said they got let off” is not a defence and pleading not guilty will result in no discount on the fine.

Yes, I agree. It is likely they have been charged with a crime that they have committed and will be found guilty of (according to the information they’ve given in this thread).

It’s important for the OP to know that the decision they make in returning the form is final, though, and involves accepting that they will be convicted when the form is processed if they plead guilty. It’s very unlikely there’d be any other outcome from a trial but this is the last opportunity to require one or to prevent immediate and final conviction. I think pleading guilty is the most rational option now, as the alternative would almost certainly be much more expensive. It ends the case and brings known consequences from this point.

 

[r4miii]

You can’t appeal until a decision has been made. The next decision is yours, not the court’s - you can’t plead guilty (which says you accept that you committed the crime) then appeal. If you want to argue that you didn’t commit the crime or there is some reason why the court should not convict you then you need to present that to the court by pleading not guilty. It’s clear from the circumstances that this is unlikely to be beneficial because the law which applies here leaves no room for questions about circumstances or reasons.

If you do not accept that you should plead guilty and accept the criminal conviction that brings the option is open to you to pay for a solicitor to, first, give you advice on your situation and then possibly to put your case to TfL and/or to a court. But the general position is that there is a high risk this is paying money for no benefit as the outcome will be the same or even more expensive.

I see,

Thank you.

Im just stressing that now i will have issues caused with my university offer.

But thanks for clearing it up

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Jun 2024 ==

For my interest and the OP's clarity (don't think I've seen this specifically mentioned before) is the victim surcharge 40% of the fine actually imposed on the defendant (ie after any discount for a guilty plea) or 40% of the gross / headline fine?

My apologies if i mis understood but is this question for me?

 

[Pushpit]

i specifically asked the one i hold an offer with and wanted to go to, before i received this letter. i was hoping to study a health care related course and the university stated i would not be considered anymore if i got a criminal conviction

Did the Uni know exactly what was the story behind your query? In other words did they know if would be a byelaw conviction for fare dodging? With so many people being prosecuted by TfL (20,000 per year) I would find that a bit odd.

 

[r4miii]

Did the Uni know exactly what was the story behind your query? In other words did they know if would be a byelaw conviction for fare dodging? With so many people being prosecuted by TfL (20,000 per year) I would find that a bit odd.

Yes, i even explained the circumstances around it. Unfortunately not in my luck i guess. To be honest im not surprised, i did commit fare evasion i guess. I mean was about to, cause i only managed to tap in with it not even get on the train

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Yes, i even explained the circumstances around it. Unfortunately not in my luck i guess. To be honest im not surprised, i did commit fare evasion i guess. I mean was about to, cause i only managed to tap in with it not even get on the train

I am writing this on the assumption that you will plead guilty on the SJPN.

Once you have done that, get in touch with the university which you currently have an offer with, and tell them precisely what you have pleaded guilty to (so what it says on the SJPN). If they then withdraw the offer, that gives you the maximum possible time to apply through clearing and so on to find a course at another institution. Or you might get lucky and your current institution will be prepared to look at your position again.

 

[furlong]

You could also send another letter to TfL again apologising deeply and politely asking if there isn't some way they could review your case again for leniency, enclosing a copy of the correspondence from the university and explaining how the overall consequences on your life appear disproportionate.

 

[r4miii]

I am writing this on the assumption that you will plead guilty on the SJPN.

Once you have done that, get in touch with the university which you currently have an offer with, and tell them precisely what you have pleaded guilty to (so what it says on the SJPN). If they then withdraw the offer, that gives you the maximum possible time to apply through clearing and so on to find a course at another institution. Or you might get lucky and your current institution will be prepared to look at your position again.

Unfortunately my course wont go into clearing in any nearby universities

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Jun 2024 ==

You could also send another letter to TfL again apologising deeply and politely asking if there isn't some way they could review your case again for leniency, enclosing a copy of the correspondence from the university and explaining how the overall consequences on your life appear disproportionate.

I mean i sent them a letter showing proof that my father who was diagnosed last year with cancer has been in hospital for the past 3 months and how it would really affect me if it meant id go to court or get a criminal offence as my mum is working including over night shifts so its up to me to go visit him in the morning, sometimes at lunchtime, and the evening. I even showed i have learnt my lesson and have been always paying for tfl. I do not work either and am a gap year student.

I sent in proof of bank statements and proof of hospital statements from my dads Dr and hospital staff which goes in depth of what he has and how long he’s been in.

Im not making out like this is a sob story. I dont mind paying the fine its just the after affects it will have … i mean the sjp

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Jun 2024 ==

You could also send another letter to TfL again apologising deeply and politely asking if there isn't some way they could review your case again for leniency, enclosing a copy of the correspondence from the university and explaining how the overall consequences on your life appear disproportionate.

I contacted tfl they don’t have a relevant department regarding this. And they said they don’t deal with this stuff at this stage. They just catch people evading fares and report them

 

[AlterEgo]

TfL are not going to care about your personal circumstances. It sounds harsh, but you will be prosecuted and convicted of the offence, so you should start making preparations for when that happens. You dodged fares because you were dishonest. You are fortunate that the result is going to be a minor Bylaw conviction and not something worse. Try this in many other places, like passing dodgy vouchers in a High Street shop and you could end up with a fraud conviction.

Now you should be looking to move past it, become a more honest person and learn an adult lesson about reaping consequences. This is basically the long and short of it.

 

[najaB]

To be honest im not surprised, i did commit fare evasion i guess. I mean was about to, cause i only managed to tap in with it not even get on the train

You had breached the law by attempting to travel without paying your fare. The fact that you got stopped before you boarded doesn't change that.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Unfortunately my course wont go into clearing in any nearby universities

So you may need to start considering what compromises you can make. What is the most important thing to you? It might be being on exactly the right course. Or it may be being able to commute from home every day. Or it may be career prospects. Or it may well be something else.

Whatever, consider what else is available out there that will meet your most important needs. That may well be a university course - but maybe with a rather different title or in a different town. Or it could be an alternative route to your chosen career. Or maybe taking (another) gap year and reapplying for 2025 will allow more choice. Or it might even mean rethinking what you are going to be doing for a living. But work out what bits of your perfect plan you can manage without, and see what that leaves out there.

Despite all this, please do get in touch with your institution. At the very worst, you will free the place they are holding for you for someone else - which is a decent thing to do. And while I accept that you have been told there is no flexibility, you have nothing to lose by asking, so it could be worth a try.

 

[island]

For my interest and the OP's clarity (don't think I've seen this specifically mentioned before) is the victim surcharge 40% of the fine actually imposed on the defendant (ie after any discount for a guilty plea) or 40% of the gross / headline fine?

The surcharge – the word "victim" was dropped many years ago – is 40% of the fine actually imposed.

 

[r4miii]

TfL are not going to care about your personal circumstances. It sounds harsh, but you will be prosecuted and convicted of the offence, so you should start making preparations for when that happens. You dodged fares because you were dishonest. You are fortunate that the result is going to be a minor Bylaw conviction and not something worse. Try this in many other places, like passing dodgy vouchers in a High Street shop and you could end up with a fraud conviction.

Now you should be looking to move past it, become a more honest person and learn an adult lesson about reaping consequences. This is basically the long and short of it.

Yh unfortunately i learnt that they dont care the hard way !

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Jun 2024 ==

You had breached the law by attempting to travel without paying your fare. The fact that you got stopped before you boarded doesn't change that.

I never said it did? I am aware of what i did and it was wrong

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Jun 2024 ==

So you may need to start considering what compromises you can make. What is the most important thing to you? It might be being on exactly the right course. Or it may be being able to commute from home every day. Or it may be career prospects. Or it may well be something else.

Whatever, consider what else is available out there that will meet your most important needs. That may well be a university course - but maybe with a rather different title or in a different town. Or it could be an alternative route to your chosen career. Or maybe taking (another) gap year and reapplying for 2025 will allow more choice. Or it might even mean rethinking what you are going to be doing for a living. But work out what bits of your perfect plan you can manage without, and see what that leaves out there.

Despite all this, please do get in touch with your institution. At the very worst, you will free the place they are holding for you for someone else - which is a decent thing to do. And while I accept that you have been told there is no flexibility, you have nothing to lose by asking, so it could be worth a try.

I am definitely applying for the right course for me, which makes this harder. There is not alternative route unless i wait till im about 21-25 to try get in through another way and even thats not 100%.
I would be commuting regardless which wasnt an issue for me, and unfortunately cant afford to take another gap year

I dont really know the relevant body to speak to. I have been told tfl but they dont have a department regarding this.


Thanks though

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Jun 2024 ==

I was just wondering, how come they did not mention criminal record or conviction on the letter?

 

[SuspectUsual]

The surcharge – the word "victim" was dropped many years ago – is 40% of the fine actually imposed.

Thanks

 

[r4miii]

If i was to hire a solicitor anyone know roughly how much it will cost?

 

[AlterEgo]

If i was to hire a solicitor anyone know roughly how much it will cost?

We've seen figures of £500-800 here before. But a solicitor will not be able to do much for you here. The sentence is basically fixed, your mitigation is unlikely to be given any weight, and you do not need to attend court. TfL will not withdraw the case; they basically do not settle out of court. So you'll have £500-800 plus the fine, surcharge, TfL's costs, and compensation for the fare avoided, which puts you in a worse position.

 

[r4miii]

We've seen figures of £500-800 here before. But a solicitor will not be able to do much for you here. The sentence is basically fixed, your mitigation is unlikely to be given any weight, and you do not need to attend court. TfL will not withdraw the case; they basically do not settle out of court. So you'll have £500-800 plus the fine, surcharge, TfL's costs, and compensation for the fare avoided, which puts you in a worse position.

I dont care much about the fine to be fair its just the conviction and where it will show up

 

[AlterEgo]

I dont care much about the fine to be fair its just the conviction and where it will show up

A solicitor won’t be able to help with the consequences. You will have a criminal record.

TfL are a private prosecutor and do not have access to or provide updates to the Police National Computer. Most prosecutions for fare evasion (like the Bylaw offences) are considered non-recordable offences meaning they are not captured on the Police National Computer. A conviction for fare evasion which is a criminal offence is recorded by HM Courts and Tribunal Service and is a matter of public record - for all time. As such, a person when asked to declare convictions for vetting or DBS purposes is obliged to declare them all whether recorded on the PNC or not and therefore this can impact them.

A conviction for a Bylaw offence should be spent after one year, but some jobs (or university courses) can legally demand you disclose spent convictions too. Unlock is a charity which can help with this.

 

[najaB]

I never said it did?

Well, to my eye:

To be honest im not surprised, i did commit fare evasion i guess. I mean was about to, cause i only managed to tap in with it not even get on the train

Reads to me like "I didn't really evade a fare".

 

[WesternLancer]

I find it fairly improbable that a fare evasion conviction would prevent admission to a university course.

 

[island]

A conviction for fare evasion which is a criminal offence is recorded by HM Courts and Tribunal Service and is a matter of public record - for all time.

I think this sentence needs to be qualified somewhat.

A conviction in open court can be recorded publicly by anyone who is present at the time the case is heard. Bona fide journalists can request records of these and SJP cases from the courts. But it is not the case that any random person can go online and request details of such and such person’s court case. An application has to be made to the court and decided upon by the magistrates. This includes requests by future employers – and most magistrates would want a very good reason that the employer wanted to do it this way rather than by the established practice of DBS checks.

If of course a journalist has written about such a case and published an article, then that will be on the public record, subject where applicable to the defendant exercising the right to be forgotten under GDPR at a later stage.

 

[r4miii]

Well, to my eye:

Reads to me like "I didn't really evade a fare".

If i didnt i wouldn’t be pleading guilty

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Jun 2024 ==

A solicitor won’t be able to help with the consequences. You will have a criminal record.

TfL are a private prosecutor and do not have access to or provide updates to the Police National Computer. Most prosecutions for fare evasion (like the Bylaw offences) are considered non-recordable offences meaning they are not captured on the Police National Computer. A conviction for fare evasion which is a criminal offence is recorded by HM Courts and Tribunal Service and is a matter of public record - for all time. As such, a person when asked to declare convictions for vetting or DBS purposes is obliged to declare them all whether recorded on the PNC or not and therefore this can impact them.

A conviction for a Bylaw offence should be spent after one year, but some jobs (or university courses) can legally demand you disclose spent convictions too. Unlock is a charity which can help with this.

I’ll take a look into a solicitor. Thanks though

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Jun 2024 ==

I find it fairly improbable that a fare evasion conviction would prevent admission to a university course.

Same, but unfortunately in my case it has

 

[WesternLancer]

If i didnt i wouldn’t be pleading guilty

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Jun 2024 ==


I’ll take a look into a solicitor. Thanks though

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Jun 2024 ==


Same, but unfortunately in my case it has

I would wait and see if convicted. Then if so ask the university in writing. Setting out the detail of the specific conviction in what you ask.