Help please! Notice of intention to prosecute recieved from FCC

[bengolding]

FCC on the Thameslink side certainly seem to have stepped up their on board checks. I travelled to Luton Airport Parkway twice last week and on both occasions, RPIs caught Standard customers sitting alongside me in First. This was on off peak services with plenty of room in Std, so I had no sympathy with them, having seen teh clearly visible warning signs before entering. At peak times, however, the crush to St Albans is hell and First is hard to enforce.

Good luck to the OP in getting this resolved out of court.

 

[Stigy]

One is under the Regulation of Railways Act 1889 S.5 (which requires evidence of intent, albeit a brief moment of failing to take an opportunity) and which is a Criminal matter, and the other is under the Railway ByeLaws S.18 (which is an 'absolute offence', boarding without a valid ticket) which is a Civil matter.

But I'm now a little confused.
The phrase "Occupy a reserved seat, berth or train without an appropriate ticket" is FCC's contraction of the wording in Railway ByeLaw S.19, which is a Civil matter for the County Court etc.
But they have advised you of their intention to take it to the Mags, in which case its surely the Criminal matter of the RoRA S.5 Offence, which requires evidence of 'intent' by yourself.
From what you've posted and what I recall (I have not checked with any authorities this evening), they'd be more likely to suceed with the Civil ByeLaw S.19 Offence.

Both are criminal matters, but the RRA 1889 offence is recordable on the PNC whereas the Byelaw (19.1) isn't. Both will also be heard in Mags Court, so FCC's intention to go to the Mags court wont dictate as to what offence is being charged.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

This matter has now been resolved by way of a settlement agreed between the TOC, FCC, and the passenger, the OP.