Ignored mg11?

[DaveNewcastle]

Do we actually have those statistics?

How many incidents of alledged Fare Evasion are settled by an accepted offer?
How many offers are declined?
How many are prosecuted successfully (under each instrument : RRA and Byelaws)?
How many are prosecuted and fail (under each instrument : RRA and Byelaws)?
And the average monetary values of each?

 

[Flamingo]

I meant the number that end up in court as opposed to the number that travel without valid/any tickets.

In terms of pure "no/wrong ticket" ending up in court, I've personally had two in 5 years. I probably average 4-6 a day travelling from stations with facilities to buy a ticket with no ticket, and as many more missing railcards.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

What you have posted makes absolutely no sense to me. You start by saying not many of the cases brought to court receive a large fine and continue telling me that its usually repeat offenders or those with a history of previous offenses that even end up in court yet for some reason I will be made an example of. How did you come to that conclusion? was it the part about having previous offenses that gave you the impression I would be made an example of? That for me can be the only thing that would allow your post to make sense.

Sorry, I thought you had been given a court date. I didn't realise you were still waiting.

 

[RPI]

FGW prosecute quite a few, lets say I have that on very good authority

 

[al_zaine]

Received the court summons today
It says a lot of the same thing. I'll write up the charge,
1. that you did contravene byelaw no 18 (1) of the railway byelaws made
under section 219 and schedule 20 of the transport act 2000.
It goes on to say at the bottom of the Statement of Facts page,
The fare avoided is £2.30 and compensation of this amount is claimed together
with the sum of £100.00 towards the prosecution costs.

 

[First class]

You're very lucky. A byelaw offence is not recorded or sent on an NPA01 form to the PNC.

If the offence was more:

On **date** in the **city name**, did travel on the railway without
previously paid the fare and failed to produce a valid ticket when
requested to do so by an Authorised Person.

Contrary to Section 5 (3)(a) of the Regulation of Railways Act
1889 as amended by section 67 of the Transport Act 1962, Section
129 of the Railways Act 1993, Section 219 of Schedule 20 of The
Transport Act 2000 and Section 46 of the Railways Act 2005 and
Byelaws 24 (1) and 26 of the Merseyrail Electric Limited Byelaws

 

[al_zaine]

From the way they worded the last part, Fare avoided is £2.30 and compensation of this amount is claimed together with the sum of £100.00 towards the prosecution costs, I get the impression they can add a hefty compensation charge if they wanted. I have no idea how much to expect but I'll know sometime after the 5th of May whether I'm lucky or not

 

[222007]

Compensation in cases like this is the fare avoided (well the cases ive been involved in anyway) its the fine that will makew the total higher

 

[DaveNewcastle]

You're very lucky.

With the cirumstances of the incident, I agree.

 

[al_zaine]

Anyone have any idea what I can expect? Will it be compensation or a fine on top of the court charge? Will I be better off calling someone to deal with it out of court? It's May 5th so it's not long away!

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I am not at all clear what any additional compensation would be seeking to compensate them for.

You may call the TOC's Prosecutions Department and tell them the Case reference number and ask exactly that question, if they will accept your out-of-court payment in full and final settlement of the Claim.
If so, they may even be able to process a Debit Card payment there and then, though that is less likely and doesn't guarantee you any receipt which shows that the Claim has been settled.

I will send you a PM with some wording to use in a written offer.

 

[222007]

Anyone have any idea what I can expect? Will it be compensation or a fine on top of the court charge? Will I be better off calling someone to deal with it out of court? It's May 5th so it's not long away!

In the cases i've seen with my TOC the outcome was - Compensation to the TOC (the fare avoided) Cost's the victim surcharge (which is £15) and the fine (typically what is see is between £175 and £350)

 

[Asian Demon]

Anyone have any idea what I can expect? Will it be compensation or a fine on top of the court charge? Will I be better off calling someone to deal with it out of court? It's May 5th so it's not long away!

My advice to you is this. Send a grovelling letter of apology offering to pay the court prosecution cost, the cost of the ticket and an additional amount towards their generalised costs. They may look upon it more favourably than you waiting for the court date. I know some TOC's are more prone to wanting prosecutions to go ahead, but you may get lucky. Hopefully something good will come of all this.

 

[al_zaine]

OK thanks for your help guys. I will probably just let it go to court and find out what the damage is. If its anything below £250 in total I will take that as a good outcome whatever the amount, it will be paid off in installments anyway so that will dampen the blow.
I won't be attending the court so I assume they will make the decision and send it to me in the post which will take a couple of days more but as soon as I know anything I will post the details on here.
P.S. what does TOC stand for?

 

[Mike395]

TOC = Train Operating Company (in this case National Express East Anglia)

 

[al_zaine]

TOC = Train Operating Company (in this case National Express East Anglia)

Ahhhhh I see now, thanks for that

 

[al_zaine]

Well the letter finally came today and it reads.....
Notice of fine and collection order

Fine £33
Comp £2.30
Victim Sur £15
Costs £100

Total £150.30

To be paid on or before 2 June 2011

 

[scotsman]

Well the letter finally came today and it reads.....
Notice of fine and collection order

Fine £33
Comp £2.30
Victim Sur £15
Costs £100

Total £150.30

To be paid on or before 2 June 2011

You are very, very, very lucky to get away with that

 

[al_zaine]

I refuse to believe I am lucky that they are taking £150 off me for a £2.30 train fare. That sort of thinking I can not understand. The only joy out of this is the train company are getting less than the court

 

[Darandio]

I refuse to believe I am lucky that they are taking £150 off me for a £2.30 train fare. That sort of thinking I can not understand. The only joy out of this is the train company are getting less than the court

Wrong way to look at it I am afraid. You did what you did and there has to be a deterrent for it.

Considering earlier posts in the thread, from people who know what they are talking about, you have done very well. To consider that although unlikely, prison is a possibility for this offence, coupled with similar cases bringing an outcome of £175 - £350, how have you not done well.

Pretty sure you won't be doing it again though.

 

[Stigy]

As has been said, you've done quite well. I would imagine it's because of your means that you weren't fined more! I'm assuming you were charged under 5.3(a) RRA1889? That being the case, the norm is usually much higher.

The only joy out of this is the train company are getting less than the court

How are they getting less than the court? The costs of £100 are awarded to the TOC, and the £33 fine will go to the court (Government). Of course all of their costs are accounted for, so the Government is the only real winner...I'm sure that's what you meant

 

[Solent&Wessex]

I refuse to believe I am lucky that they are taking £150 off me for a £2.30 train fare. That sort of thinking I can not understand. The only joy out of this is the train company are getting less than the court

You are very lucky. Only the other day I was perusing the court results and noted a case which I reported a few months ago. The fare avoided was £2.20 for one stop. The result at the magistrates court was :

Found Guilty.
Fine £350.00
Costs £110.00
Victim Surcharge £15.00
Compensation £2.20
Total Payable : £477.20

Which is considerably more than the £2.20 fare the person avoided paying.

 

[Flamingo]

I refuse to believe I am lucky that they are taking £150 off me for a £2.30 train fare. That sort of thinking I can not understand. The only joy out of this is the train company are getting less than the court

Last one I was involved in ended up as over £250 when everything was added up.

It's not the cost of the fare evaded, but the thought process behind it.

Anyway, it is not the TOC or nasty Revenue people that decided how much, but a court, which obviously took your arguments into account.

Sympathy - not a lot.

But thanks for coming back to tell us what happened.

 

[al_zaine]

Don't get me wrong, I'm pleased the fine wasn't higher and after consideration I agree that I got off lightly from one perspective. The luck factor was lost when I got caught in the first place and even more so when it was taken to court.
When I spoke earlier of the court getting more from it than the TOC I thought the £100 court charge went to the court and the fine, plus victim sur, plus comp went to the TOC, so the court gets £100 and the TOC gets £50.30. I'm not sure to be honest. You can count on some warm kind thoughts being sent in the direction of the judge

 

[Stigy]

When I spoke earlier of the court getting more from it than the TOC I thought the £100 court charge went to the court and the fine, plus victim sur, plus comp went to the TOC, so the court gets £100 and the TOC gets £50.30. I'm not sure to be honest. You can count on some warm kind thoughts being sent in the direction of the judge

Costs = Awarded/reimbused to the winning party (TOC)

Compensation (Fare avoided in this case)= Awarded to the winning party (TOC)

Victim Surcharge = Awarded to a 'charity' which I believe helps victims of crime...

Fine = Awarded to the Gopvernment.

All the TOC gets are their costs reimbursed.

 

[b0b]

All the TOC gets are their costs reimbursed.

Seems a bit pointless for them to prosecute - and better for them to accept an out of court settlement!

 

[island]

Seems a bit pointless for them to prosecute - and better for them to accept an out of court settlement!

Which is why we have heard many doing so. Some companies (LUL is the one I've seen most) have however been known to decline all settlements and insist on prosecuting in order to make an example of people.

 

[Stigy]

Seems a bit pointless for them to prosecute - and better for them to accept an out of court settlement!

Yes, but if they're acting as they should, then the costs they gain out of court, should be around the same as they get going through court. Realistically though, if somebody offers to pay £500 because they have a lot to lose if it goes to court, the TOC is hardly going to decline!

 

[Mike395]

Which is why we have heard many doing so. Some companies (LUL is the one I've seen most) have however been known to decline all settlements and insist on prosecuting in order to make an example of people.

Makes more sense with LUL as there is nearly always proof of intent (i.e. all but 2 or 3 of their stations are gated) so I can understand their approach more than with a privatised TOC

 

[Stigy]

Makes more sense with LUL as there is nearly always proof of intent (i.e. all but 2 or 3 of their stations are gated) so I can understand their approach more than with a privatised TOC

There's nearly always intent with a TOC too. I'd say more so than with LUL, as passengers dont so often simply say "I would have bought my ticket at the barrier, how would I have got out at the other end without paying?". With un-barriered stations it's often far easier to prove intent. With barriers, short of tailgating, intent is often harder to prove.