Help with Single Justice Procedure

[pfanta]

Hello
Earlier this year around the beginning of June I was in London, travelling from Paddington station, heading to Heathrow terminal 5, but I bought a child ticket for the journey instead of an adult one (very poor decision on my part) and I was caught as I was going thru the ticketing turnstiles before I got on the train. I was very truthful and straightforward with the TfL officer who took my details, I provided him with my child ticket and some ID, and was made to purchase an adult one before I continued on my journey. He then told me that i'd receive a letter in a couple of days about the incident.

A week later I got a letter titled something like "intention to prosecute" and replied to it immediately, owning up to my actions and expressing extreme remorse for them, and making sure to emphsise that it was a first time offense and that i'd like to settle out of court if possible. (basically following the guidance that you would typically see on this forum regarding this type of matter)

Fast forward to today, I have received a Single Justice Procedure notice letter, telling me I have been charged with the offence on the TfL network. (entering a compulsory ticket area without having a valid ticket. byelaw 17(1)) first of all, I am absolutely guilty and would normally just plead as so, and ask not to go to court over this, and pay anything that comes my way just to get it over and done with, with the hope that they'll consider reducing my potential fine and whatnot due to my fast respone and cooperation.

However, is there a possibility that I could settle this out of court given that I am a first time offender. I also live in Scotland and I'm worried that I may have to travel down to London should they decide they need me to attend the court hearing.

In the letter it says that the cash fare value for the journey is £11.60. which is obviously a very small amount, and I hope that due to that and the fact that this is a first time offence, they may grant me so leniency. (though I am fully aware of how litigous they can be)

Ideally I would of course like to settle out of court with TfL if possible, however if this fails, then I will most likely plead guilty, hope to not go to court and accept the fine and criminal offence that comes my way.

Any and all advice on how to procede would be amazing. I am of course considering speaking to a solicitor, or trying to seek some legal advice as well. I have until the 21st of Dec to reply

Thanks.

 

[island]

I think first of all we need to establish whether there is actually a Compulsory Ticket Area in that part of Paddington, which is managed by GWR. I am not at all sure there is.

 

[Haywain]

I think first of all we need to establish whether there is actually a Compulsory Ticket Area in that part of Paddington, which is managed by GWR. I am not at all sure there is.

And which part of Paddington station it was. It sounds a little like it could be the Elizabeth Line platforms.

 

[island]

And which part of Paddington station it was. It sounds a little like it could be the Elizabeth Line platforms.

If it was in June and travelling to Heathrow, it would almost certainly have been platforms 10-14 in the main part of the station, as the low-level platforms have only gained service to Heathrow in the last few weeks.

 

[Haywain]

If it was in June and travelling to Heathrow, it would almost certainly have been platforms 10-14 in the main part of the station, as the low-level platforms have only gained service to Heathrow in the last few weeks.

Good point, I didn't consider that!

 

[spag23]

Did the original ticket include any TfL element, ie to get to Paddington by Tube?

 

[pfanta]

Did the original ticket include any TfL element, ie to get to Paddington by Tube?

I'm honestly not sure, can't remember as it was some time ago now, I did arrive at paddington via the tube, but once at paddington, bought a new ticket for the journey to heathrow.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Nov 2022 ==

Good point, I didn't consider that!

This is correct, think I was platfrom 14 if i remember correctly, sure it was elizabeth line too, however I was stopped before I even went through the ticketing turnstiles, so as far as I'm aware I wasn't in any area I wasn't supposed to be, invalid ticket or not, not that that matters though as the intent to travel was still there.

 

[island]

TfL must make the court sure that you committed the offence alleged. The offence is that you:

1. entered
2. a compulsory ticket area
3. on the railway
4. and did not have a valid ticket with you.

I don't think there is any serious debate on items 3 and 4.

As for 1, you said:

I was stopped before I even went through the ticketing turnstiles

Is that true? (If so, how did the officer know you were using an invalid ticket?)

As for 2, the definition of a compulsory ticket area is important: "compulsory ticket area" means any part of the railway identified by a notice stating that no person may enter there without being in possession of a valid ticket. There are plenty of notices of this sort at TfL-operated stations. I am not sure the same is true at Paddington platforms 10-14. Perhaps someone more familiar with the station, or passing through that way, can investigate this?

If you think TfL cannot make the court sure that the four elements of the offence above occurred, then you should plead not guilty and put them to proof.

(In this post, for simplicity, I use "TfL" in an inclusive sense to incorporate its subsidiaries. This post is not legal advice.)

 

[pfanta]

TfL must make the court sure that you committed the offence alleged. The offence is that you:

1. entered
2. a compulsory ticket area
3. on the railway
4. and did not have a valid ticket with you.

I don't think there is any serious debate on items 3 and 4.

As for 1, you said:

Is that true? (If so, how did the officer know you were using an invalid ticket?)

As for 2, the definition of a compulsory ticket area is important: "compulsory ticket area" means any part of the railway identified by a notice stating that no person may enter there without being in possession of a valid ticket. There are plenty of notices of this sort at TfL-operated stations. I am not sure the same is true at Paddington platforms 10-14. Perhaps someone more familiar with the station, or passing through that way, can investigate this?

If you think TfL cannot make the court sure that the four elements of the offence above occurred, then you should plead not guilty and put them to proof.

(In this post, for simplicity, I use "TfL" in an inclusive sense to incorporate its subsidiaries. This post is not legal advice.)

I was heading towards the ticketing turnstiles, ready to head on through to the platfrom to catch my train, there was a guard there checking everone's tickets and he checked mine. he took my details and kept my invalid ticket as evidence. I also came completely clean right away and admitted my to my wrongdoing, which is also on record, once I bought a valid ticket I caught my train.

I think its pretty much out of the question to plead not guilty if I'm being honest, I may not have actually travelled with an invalid ticket. (because I was caught before I did) but I had the intent to travel with one, and was caught in the process. plus with me addmiting that I was in the wrong right away, I doubt I could then pull a 360 and convince anyone.

I'm more curious to know if it's worth my time contacting them to try to settle out of court before it comes to that, as I've seen that a few people on here have been succesful in the past, and basically how I'd go about achieving that.
thanks

 

[WesternLancer]

I'm more curious to know if it's worth my time contacting them to try to settle out of court before it comes to that, as I've seen that a few people on here have been succesful in the past, and basically how I'd go about achieving that.
thanks

I can't see what you have to loose by trying - see many other threads on the style of letter you need to write to them.

 

[spag23]

I'm not familiar with the geography of Paddington's TfL/NR interface and Compulsory Ticket Areas.
But is the OP saying he had a valid Tube ticket (entitling presence in a TfL Compulsory Area?), but was stopped before passing through the NR turnstiles, and accused of being in a Compulsory Ticket Area without a ticket?
If an offence hadn't yet been committed, I don't see that the OP's intent would be relevant.
We are not in the world of the film Minority Report!

 

[30907]

I'm not familiar with the geography of Paddington's TfL/NR interface and Compulsory Ticket Areas.
But is the OP saying he had a valid Tube ticket (entitling presence in a TfL Compulsory Area?), but was stopped before passing through the NR turnstiles, and accused of being in a Compulsory Ticket Area without a ticket?
If an offence hadn't yet been committed, I don't see that the OP's intent would be relevant.

They would have left the Tube CTA before attempting to pass through a NR gateline. Unless their tube ticket was valid for onward travel on EL, and they were about to use it (the latter doesn't seem to be the case), I am not sure this is relevant.

Also, I doubt a court would be worried which side of the gate the ticket check took place, so long as it was in the immediate vicinity.

(Of course, if there is no CTA, then the OP cannot be guilty as charged. Should have used Byelaw 18. End of.)

 

[island]

(Of course, if there is no CTA, then the OP cannot be guilty as charged. Should have used Byelaw 18. End of.)

Byelaw 18 would also have failed, as the OP hadn't yet entered the train for the purpose of travel.

The correct offence to charge would be attempting to travel on the railway without having previously paid the fare and with intent to avoid payment thereof, contrary to S5 (3) of the Regulation of Railways Act 1889.

 

[30907]

Byelaw 18 would also have failed, as the OP hadn't yet entered the train for the purpose of travel.

The correct offence to charge would be attempting to travel on the railway without having previously paid the fare and with intent to avoid payment thereof, contrary to S5 (3) of the Regulation of Railways Act 1889.

You are of course right, but my impression is that in practice TOCs are reluctant to use this route. A conviction would be a more serious matter as it is recordable.

 

[pfanta]

They would have left the Tube CTA before attempting to pass through a NR gateline. Unless their tube ticket was valid for onward travel on EL, and they were about to use it (the latter doesn't seem to be the case), I am not sure this is relevant.

Also, I doubt a court would be worried which side of the gate the ticket check took place, so long as it was in the immediate vicinity.

(Of course, if there is no CTA, then the OP cannot be guilty as charged. Should have used Byelaw 18. End of.)

This was my impression too, I doubt it really matters whether I passed through the gates or not, I was close enough to the gates for my tickets to be checked by an employee working by them, and at the end of the day the ticket was invalid,

Not entirely sure who I'd be directing the letter to, I'm thinking of writing to I think Tfl, to try and settle this out of court, as I think its certainly worth trying. As I would like to avoid conviction if possible

 

[AlterEgo]

This was my impression too, I doubt it really matters whether I passed through the gates or not

It does. You have to be in the CTA to be guilty of the offence.

 

[gray1404]

You need to start taking on board the expertise of the people on this forum. I know you came on with a desire to help write a letter asking for an out of court settlement and this post may not have gone in the direction you expected but there is a lot of good advice being offered to you here. It may very well be that you are not guilty of the offence you are being accused of. You keep giving statements like it "does not matter......" but the reality is the fine details and specifics do matter.

I say this to you very kindly I'm with the best of intentions so would encourage you to engage in the dialogue here so we can achieve the best outcome for you.

 

[spag23]

We do like our analogies on this forum.
The OP should consider someone riding a bicycle around Staples Corner roundabout, fully intent on taking the M1 exit in order to pedal up the motorway to Birmingham.
A policeman stops them on the slip road before they reach the "Motorway Regulations Start Here" sign.
Regardless of intent, any charge of "cycling on a motorway" would self-evidently be doomed to failure.
Ditto for being "ticketless in a CTA", if you weren't in a CTA.

 

[pfanta]

You need to start taking on board the expertise of the people on this forum. I know you came on with a desire to help write a letter asking for an out of court settlement and this post may not have gone in the direction you expected but there is a lot of good advice being offered to you here. It may very well be that you are not guilty of the offence you are being accused of. You keep giving statements like it "does not matter......" but the reality is the fine details and specifics do matter.

I say this to you very kindly I'm with the best of intentions so would encourage you to engage in the dialogue here so we can achieve the best outcome for you.

Okay my apologies, I'm just super worried about the situation and I'm jumping to the worst potential outcome, I assumed that pleading not guilty in my case would be completely futile, simply because when I was initially questioned in the station by the tfl officer, I immediately showed him my invalid ticket and told him that my reasoning for buying that invalid ticket was to save money.

I thought that by admitting guilt then and there, then going to court to say otherwise would've been a bad idea, but as others have pointed out, I never made it to the train, nor did I make it past the turnstiles to get to the train, it was only as I approached the turnstiles to get to the other side where the platfroms are, that I was stopped by an officer who asked to see my ticket. he then told me to follow him and he brought me to his colleague, the one who I mentioned ealier that I gave my showed my inalid ticket to.

In my letter, it does say that I've been charged with entering a cumpulsory ticket area without a valid ticket, which now I'm not so sure I actually did. however in the statement of facts, it makes mentioned that I attempted to travel which is true.

When I did end up getting on the train later on, it was only because I bought a valid ticket.

Thanks for calming me down a little bit, too focused on what I wanted and ignored all other advice given, thanks

 

[WesternLancer]

We do like our analogies on this forum.
The OP should consider someone riding a bicycle around Staples Corner roundabout, fully intent on taking the M1 exit in order to pedal up the motorway to Birmingham.
A policeman stops them on the slip road before they reach the "Motorway Regulations Start Here" sign.
Regardless of intent, any charge of "cycling on a motorway" would self-evidently be doomed to failure.
Ditto for being "ticketless in a CTA", if you weren't in a CTA.

Obv good advice but I take it that the OP thinks, on the balance of probabilities, they were in the CTA, and do ticketing staff work outside the CTA in the hope that passengers won't realise? I'm sure they do in error sometimes.
Then the OP needs to be confident that they ere not in the CTA, potentially be able to prove that as well (which would seem hard for the OP to do given what the OP has said)

So whilst important to find this out to help the OP with the best advice applicable, if they can't prove the staff were wrong I suspect the railway company will keep pressing on with their threats of prosecution.

Obv others please correct me if I am wrong.

Otherwise, as I see it, the OP just needs the best advice on how to request and hopefully obtain an out of court settlement in order to avoid a court prosecution and potential conviction.

 

[Llanigraham]

We do like our analogies on this forum.
The OP should consider someone riding a bicycle around Staples Corner roundabout, fully intent on taking the M1 exit in order to pedal up the motorway to Birmingham.
A policeman stops them on the slip road before they reach the "Motorway Regulations Start Here" sign.
Regardless of intent, any charge of "cycling on a motorway" would self-evidently be doomed to failure.
Ditto for being "ticketless in a CTA", if you weren't in a CTA.

Doubtful.
Signage position does not always specify the start area of legislative power.
In your analogy, for example, the motorway regulations actually start at the initial junction point into the slip road, and people have been successfully prosecuted for breaking specific motorway laws on slip roads.
However, in this case I would have thought the gateline would be the demarcation point, but it would be very wise to check this.

 

[spag23]

I was caught as I was going thru the ticketing turnstiles

I was heading towards the ticketing turnstiles, ready to head on through to the platfrom to catch my train, there was a guard there checking everone's tickets and he checked mine.

The OP needs to clarify which of these two statements actually describes the episode.
If the inspection was triggered by the "Child" status of the ticket being flagged by the turnstile, OP may be considered to have crossed the boundary of the CTA.

 

[island]

Otherwise, as I see it, the OP just needs the best advice on how to request and hopefully obtain an out of court settlement in order to avoid a court prosecution and potential conviction.

We also need to consider whether there was any CTA there at all. As I understand it, the OP was stopped in the vicinity of Paddington platforms 10-14, which is in the GWR-managed part of the station and I am not sure whether that is actually a CTA.

 

[spag23]

I'd imagine that before you pass the barriers that lead you to the platforms, you wouldn't be in a CTA. But we are awaiting expert/OP confirmation of the extent of any CTA, and where the OP was when challenged.

I think only the OP can address both these questions. Can he possibly re-visit the scene and determine where he was challenged, and what the CTA status of that spot is. (Making sure he has any necessary ticket, of course!)

 

[Haywain]

While there is much discussion of whether or not a CTA is in place, I think that we need to bear in mind that challenging that may well require legal assistance which comes at a cost. While accepting fault and paying a settlement is not ideal, there needs to be a pragmatic view that it could well be the cheapest option to end the matter.

 

[ainsworth74]

The OP effectively has a choice to make between two options:

1) Attempt to negotiate an out of court settlement with TfL, this can be done by the OP without legal assistance and there are examples on this Forum of similar letters and they are welcome to post a draft letter on the Forum and members will no doubt happily offer feedback on its content. This may not be successful (and historically TfL have been one of the less likely to agree but I think this has changed in recent years) and in that event the OP may wish to return at that time to the arguments being discussed here around the CTA.

2) Plead not guilty at this stage on the basis that the offense may well not be made out. They may wish therefore to engage further to explore whether or not they do have a valid defence in that TfL have bungled their charging. They may well wish to consider engaging a criminal defence solicitor (it doesn't need to be a railway specialist) to assist them with this issue to help present any arguments in court (which will likely attract a cost) unless they're confident in presenting those arguments themselves.

In the meantime arguing amongst ourselves is not likely to actually lead to much progress as until the OP decides how they wish to proceed between option 1 and 2 as only the OP is in the position to properly weigh the two options and the costs/benefits between them.

 

[some bloke]

Is there a significant risk that if challenged on the CTA issue before a court hearing has begun, TfL would just replace this charge with the more serious "intent to avoid payment" charge

- bearing in mind that @pfanta has admitted the offence, "Travels or attempts to travel on a railway without having previously paid his fare, and with intent to avoid payment thereof"?

Regulation of Railways Act 1889

An Act to amend the Regulation of Railways Acts; and for other purposes.

www.legislation.gov.uk

While accepting fault and paying a settlement is not ideal

Is it clear how agreeing a settlement involves accepting fault?

It seems to me that paying a settlement is pretty ideal for someone who's deliberately tried to pay less to TfL.

 

[spag23]

paying a settlement is not ideal,

It seems to me that paying a settlement is pretty ideal for someone who's deliberately tried to pay less to TfL.

But remember, the OP hasn't been given the option of a settlement; instead he's just received an SJP notice. Whatever route he now decides to take, he really needs to establish for himself whether he was indeed ever ticketless in a CTA. Similarly any advice from this forum (or a solicitor) is dependent on this fact.

 

[some bloke]

But remember, the OP hasn't been given the option of a settlement; instead he's just received an SJP notice. Whatever route he now decides to take, he really needs to establish for himself whether he was indeed ever ticketless in a CTA. Similarly any advice from this forum (or a solicitor) is dependent on this fact.

As @pfanta has only just received the SJP notice, they have time if they want (unless the notice was delayed a long time in the post) to try for a settlement before deciding on intention to plead. It isn't necessary to determine the CTA issue if that's the choice taken. If they are guilty according to the charge, they would still be asking for a settlement. If they aren't guilty according to the charge, then if they tell TfL that, can't TfL then substitute the more serious offence?

@pfanta, would you like to upload the letter you sent, with identifying details redacted? It might make a difference to advice on here.

Plead not guilty at this stage on the basis that the offense may well not be made out.

Or perhaps, on the basis that it is definitely not made out (if that is determined). Perhaps the rationale would then be that if the defendant doesn't tell the court why they intend to plead not guilty, TfL wouldn't find out that they had made a mistake about the CTA until it was too late.

They might read this thread.

I have until the 21st of Dec to reply

Just to check (unless you are going to submit the response early enough for it not to matter) could you give the exact words of the paperwork about the time limit, and if relevant the date given?

 

[pfanta]

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 1 Dec 2022 ==

Obv good advice but I take it that the OP thinks, on the balance of probabilities, they were in the CTA, and do ticketing staff work outside the CTA in the hope that passengers won't realise? I'm sure they do in error sometimes.
Then the OP needs to be confident that they ere not in the CTA, potentially be able to prove that as well (which would seem hard for the OP to do given what the OP has said)

So whilst important to find this out to help the OP with the best advice applicable, if they can't prove the staff were wrong I suspect the railway company will keep pressing on with their threats of prosecution.

Obv others please correct me if I am wrong.

Otherwise, as I see it, the OP just needs the best advice on how to request and hopefully obtain an out of court settlement in order to avoid a court prosecution and potential conviction.

To also clarify things for a few people asking earlier bc I realise I might not have explained things too clearly, I was stopped when I put my ticket into the turnstiles, they didn't open. An officer then came over to help as I was carrying a lot of luggage at the time, and asked to see my ticket, upon realising it was an invalid ticket, my details were taken.

Unfortunately I can't prove anything as it was my first time in the station and I'm super unfamiliar with its layout, and what would be considered the CTA area. or if by me putting my ticket into the turnstiles and attempting to pass, would be considered entering the cta.

I don't think I'd like to go to court and take the risk to either try to prove them wrong, and be wrong myself and fail, or have them just charge me with something else entirely. (as other people have pointed out "intent to avoid payment") which as some people have said, might be a more serious charge.

Another note about going to court would be the cost, legal fees are v expensive, and on top of that, (assuming I would have to go to a court in London) I am from Scotland, so travel costs, hotels etc are also a factor, so as someone has pointed out, might not be my best option at all

I think the plan from here, is that I will try to make contact with TfL and reach an agreement, if this works, brilliant. If not, then it might be cheaper for me to just plead guilty and not attend court.
But I will probably need advice (or be pointed in the direction of a thread where someone has already achieved this) on how to go about contacting them to try and reach an out of court settlement, as I'm sure we've all already established here (based on the fact that I tried my luck at using a child ticket) I'm not the brightest

Thanks.

---