Issued Witness Statement Receipt

[Pacoishere]

Good Evening,

Today I was issued with a witness statement receipt. There were staff at the exit to Royston train station, I went on my phone to get my ticket, saw that I had accidentally bought a single ticket in the morning, panicked and bought a ticket then - was flagged immediately as having just bought the ticket, and pulled over.

I have been issued with a penalty fare in mid-August for travelling without a ticket (was in a rush, got on, was going to get on the train when inspector arrived). I paid this penalty. Since then, I have always bought tickets beforehand and in full, but I'm really worried that now over an honest mistake (accidentally buying the single) I'm screwed because of the fact I have a history. I am hopeful that my purchase history since this incident shows I've been behaving: I have been buying returns consistently each day since I have taken the train since.

I am expecting to receive a letter of intention to prosecute from Govia Thameslink. I intend to apologise, and say that I will pay a fine + administrative costs. I am genuinely remorseful and very frustrated that I've clicked the wrong option in the morning, putting me in this situation.

I would appreciate advice on the following:

1. Is this the best course of action, or should I be doing more?
2. How likely am I to be able to avoid going to court? I'm a chartered accountant, I'm really worried that the conviction could cost me my job and profession.
3. If I go to court, do I have any chance of not being found guilty? As I understand it, I have travelled without a ticket unintentionally - this makes me guilty of the strict liability, but not of intent to travel without a ticket, which is more severe.
4. New: My partner thinks I should hire a solicitor. Is there any value in this? I am worried it will make me appear guilty.

I would appreciate any and all advice.

 

[some bloke]

You're right about the offences, and being guilty only of a strict liability offence.

To reduce the chance of being charged for the offence involving intent, and increase the likelihood of a settlement, you could first write down (perhaps first making a voice recording if it helps) how you made the error this morning, and what happened after you saw the error. Think both defence and mitigation.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Sep 2024 ==

I'm a chartered accountant, I'm really worried that the conviction could cost me my job and profession.

Have you checked your regulator's policies and procedures (some of which are likely to be on the web) and what your employment contract says, about both criminal matters and "fitness to practise"-type issues in general?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Sep 2024 ==

Govia Thameslink/GTR are more inclined towards settlements than some companies are.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Sep 2024 ==

You might also think about and write down anything that could help you, about how the previous incident occurred.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Sep 2024 ==

You can imagine questions someone might ask and think how to answer them: for example,

"why should we not believe that these two incidents, including shifty behaviour when the passenger saw the staff at the exit, point towards deliberate evasion?"

What was the difference in price between a single and return? If it was minimal and you usually buy a return, and/or can give a credible reason why it is likely you would have intended to buy a return, those kinds of things may help.

Think how you may have appeared to staff, and what they said. These things could be relevant to how you respond to GTR.

 

[WesternLancer]

Good Evening,

Today I was issued with a witness statement receipt. There were staff at the exit to Royston train station, I went on my phone to get my ticket, saw that I had accidentally bought a single ticket in the morning, panicked and bought a ticket then - was flagged immediately as having just bought the ticket, and pulled over.

I have been issued with a penalty fare in mid-August for travelling without a ticket (was in a rush, got on, was going to get on the train when inspector arrived). I paid this penalty. Since then, I have always bought tickets beforehand and in full, but I'm really worried that now over an honest mistake (accidentally buying the single) I'm screwed because of the fact I have a history. I am hopeful that my purchase history since this incident shows I've been behaving: I have been buying returns consistently each day since I have taken the train since.

I am expecting to receive a letter of intention to prosecute from Govia Thameslink. I intend to apologise, and say that I will pay a fine + administrative costs. I am genuinely remorseful and very frustrated that I've clicked the wrong option in the morning, putting me in this situation.

I would appreciate advice on the following:

1. Is this the best course of action, or should I be doing more?
2. How likely am I to be able to avoid going to court? I'm a chartered accountant, I'm really worried that the conviction could cost me my job and profession.
3. If I go to court, do I have any chance of not being found guilty? As I understand it, I have travelled without a ticket unintentionally - this makes me guilty of the strict liability, but not of intent to travel without a ticket, which is more severe.

I would appreciate any and all advice.

You just need to engage with them, apologise, ask to pay a settlement in respect of fare owed and they are very likely to settle the matter without prosecution.

For now you need to wait to hear from them probably by post and be absolutely sure to reply to them.

 

[John R]

Out of interest, where did you board? If it is a barriered station they may be sceptical as to your story that you travelled not knowing you didn’t have a ticket and interested as to how you got through the gateline.

 

[Pacoishere]

Out of interest, where did you board? If it is a barriered station they may be sceptical as to your story that you travelled not knowing you didn’t have a ticket and interested as to how you got through the gateline.

I boarded at Knebworth (no barriers). I can provide a transport history from the last month showing the purchase of returns to and from this station 3x a week.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Sep 2024 ==

You're right about the offences, and being guilty only of a strict liability offence. Thanks

To reduce the chance of being charged for the offence involving intent, and increase the likelihood of a settlement, you could first write down (perhaps first making a voice recording if it helps) how you made the error this morning, and what happened after you saw the error. Think both defence and mitigation.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Sep 2024 ==
. My write-up. How does it read? On the day of the 23rd, I purchased a single in the morning as I knew I would be working late that night, and would get a taxi home. On the 24th, I forgot to adjust the setting back to a return, and travelled with only a single. As there are no barriers at Knebworth, where I board, this error was not discovered until my ticket was checked by the inspector. I hope that my travel records, which shows I have bought return tickets each day I have travelled the last month, lend weight to this story. I have also attached my taxi receipt for the night of the 23rd. I apologise for this oversight, and in future, will always check manually that I have the correct ticket before boarding"

Have you checked your regulator's policies and procedures (some of which are likely to be on the web) and what your employment contract says, about both criminal matters and "fitness to practise"-type issues in general?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Sep 2024 ==
. Yes - I am required to report criminal convictions. Not automatic dismissal - but potential. A separate fight, really.
Govia Thameslink/GTR are more inclined towards settlements than some companies are.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Sep 2024 ==

You might also think about and write down anything that could help you, about how the previous incident occurred. I was just stupid and in a rush - I will say this but I don't think I've got as good a reason as this time. All I can say is that I paid the penalty promptly and have been buying full tickets consistently since.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Sep 2024 ==

You can imagine questions someone might ask and think how to answer them: for example,

"why should we not believe that these two incidents, including shifty behaviour when the passenger saw the staff at the exit, point towards deliberate evasion?" Best evidence I have is my travel records. I did seem shifty, but this is because I was very panicked. :/

What was the difference in price between a single and return? If it was minimal and you usually buy a return, and/or can give a credible reason why it is likely you would have intended to buy a return, those kinds of things may help. Full-price ticket is £10.50, return is £14.20. I wouldn't risk my career on £3.70; hopefully this helps.

Think how you may have appeared to staff, and what they said. These things could be relevant to how you respond to GTR.

I have responded to each of your points in turn. Thanks for your advice - could you particularly check my write-up?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Sep 2024 ==

Out of interest, where did you board? If it is a barriered station they may be sceptical as to your story that you travelled not knowing you didn’t have a ticket and interested as to how you got through the gateline.

Knebworth to Royston, no barriers at either station. I have a ticket history which shows I do usually buy returns.

I occasionally board at Stevenage and again there should be record of me going through the barriers legitimately.

 

[furlong]

Indeed, with GTR, you should be able to resolve this out-of-court through co-operation - no need for a solicitor. If you bought the correct ticket already, you can argue no further fare needs to be paid though you should probably still offer to pay their (likely inflated) costs. (There's a small chance they might not even contact you.)

 

[some bloke]

I've put your account here so it's easier for others to see, and added line breaks.

"On the day of the 23rd, I purchased a single in the morning as I knew I would be working late that night, and would get a taxi home.

On the 24th, I forgot to adjust the setting back to a return, and travelled with only a single.

As there are no barriers at Knebworth, where I board, this error was not discovered until my ticket was checked by the inspector.

I hope that my travel records, which shows I have bought return tickets each day I have travelled the last month, lend weight to this story.

I have also attached my taxi receipt for the night of the 23rd.

I apologise for this oversight, and in future, will always check manually that I have the correct ticket before boarding"


Seems pretty good to me, as explaining why they shouldn't charge you with intent and why thry should offer a settlement despite the other incident.

But "this error was not discovered until my ticket was checked by the inspector" differs from this:

There were staff at the exit to Royston train station, I went on my phone to get my ticket, saw that I had accidentally bought a single ticket in the morning, panicked and bought a ticket then - was flagged immediately as having just bought the ticket, and pulled over.

 

[SuspectUsual]

I've put your account here so it's easier for others to see, and added line breaks.

"On the day of the 23rd, I purchased a single in the morning as I knew I would be working late that night, and would get a taxi home.

On the 24th, I forgot to adjust the setting back to a return, and travelled with only a single.

As there are no barriers at Knebworth, where I board, this error was not discovered until my ticket was checked by the inspector.

I hope that my travel records, which shows I have bought return tickets each day I have travelled the last month, lend weight to this story.

I have also attached my taxi receipt for the night of the 23rd.

I apologise for this oversight, and in future, will always check manually that I have the correct ticket before boarding"


Seems pretty good to me, as explaining why they shouldn't charge you with intent and why thry should offer a settlement despite the other incident.

But "this error was not discovered until my ticket was checked by the inspector" differs from this:

I'd delete "story", it reads fine without it and to me story is a bit of a negative word when defending your version of events