Seeking advice for Appeal

[Tal]

Hello,

With little time to spare, think of me as a fairly quiet and ever-nice guy, not naive but never offensive - except to friends :P.

With the rubbish out of the way, here is my dilemma.


In early 2011 I arrived at a major train station in a city at rush hour, when the barriers go down and let everyone stream through. I was on one of the most busy trains. I exited the train with the crowd and then pulled away to go to the ticket salesman. Yes, I walked away from the crowd so that I could buy the ticket before getting out of the station. I hadn't bought one yet because I arrived when it was leaving my station - there are no barriers at my town station.

I told them I had come from Salford Cresent (which is actually where I change trains, not where my full journey had started that morning). I was approached by a G4S guard who asked me where I had gotten on - I repeated to him the same station: Salford Cresent. He told me that Salford Cresent had inspectors barring entry without ticket today and asked me again where I'd come from, he asked for my details and added that I could be prosecuted.
I gave him my details and walked away.

6 months later I get a letter calling me to court in 4 days time. I had exams etc and I sought legal advice over the phone, many quotes of £2000 to "start the case" and one female lawyer refused the case outright. Well I don't come from a family that can spare that to "start a case" when the fine is around £100. I was finishing my university course entirely at the time and I decided to give my Statement oin Mitigation and walk away. The event stressed me a lot and I thought it had gone away after a month of receiving nothing. In hindsight I was crazy to plead guilty, but my statement in mitigation outlined many good points, such as that the prosecution witness states I arrived at rush hour when I could just go past. I made an effort to pay. I merely underpaid on a stressful day when I barely caught the train and I had a revision etc to do, standing in such a cramped train is not fun either.

I had checked for CCTV before pleading guilty but it had been deleted 6 weeks after the event. Why did it take 6 MONTHS to tell me I was being prosecuted? Perhaps I should have asked for 6 weeks worth of that weekday and time, to show the court the rush hour and reliability of the barriers going down.


Anyway. Now I want to appeal this decision as it may affect my career prospects. In terms of fighting this in court, what are my options? I've used the GOV website but I wanted good advice like I've seen a few users on this website bring up.
Please help if you can.

Mod Note - additional information

The OP stated that the route taken was Walkden Station > Salford Cresent Station > Oxford Road Station

 

[bb21]

Hi and welcome.

Did you admit at the time that you lied about the origin of your journey after being caught out?

Lying about the origin of your journey is a Section 5(3a) offence. They have up to six months to lay a charge in front of the court, so they are perfectly entitled to do this. The rates you were quoted are not atypical of specialist railway law practitioners because there are not many of them.

On what grounds do you intend to appeal? I see none from what you have explained so far. Sorry.

Also were you convicted in your absence?

 

[maniacmartin]

On what grounds are you planning to appeal? Is there any new evidence that has come to light in the last 2 years? If there is none, then this appeal will be a waste of time and money. The correct time to care was 2 years ago.

You committed a criminal offence by not buying at the origin station, then committed another, more serious offence when you lied about where your journey started. That does not sound like "an effort to pay" the full fare due.

Under what legislation were you prosecuted? If it was the Railway Byelaws (ie not the Regulation of Railways Act), then things may not be as bad as you think.

 

[bb21]

Under what legislation were you prosecuted? If it was the Railway Byelaws (ie not the Regulation of Railways Act), then thigns may not be as bad as you think.

Yes, this is important. I missed this bit out in my reply.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I'm confused by some of your vocabulary, "appeal" "in 4 day's time", "fighting this in Court".

If the Court hearing is still in the future, then you have nothing to Appeal against, and you do have the right to change your plea from Guilty to Not Guilty, though you must inform the Court of that change of plea immediately AND send a written copy to the Prosecution (fax, email or DX). Because the adte of the Hearing is so close, then the Prosecution will have to change their plans at short notice so you'll also have to request an adjournment.

You CAN do all this yourself, but a local Criminal Defence Law Firm will be able to do it in a moment.

If the Court date is in the recent past, then you may Appeal. This will either be on the grounds of new Evidence which wasn't available at the original hearing, or will be a challenge to the application of procedure or the Law. This will require professional representation.



I agree with bb21 that you haven't provided any basis to suggest that any of these options will have any merit.
But one thing that a good Defence solicitor can do is argue for mitigation (following a Guilty verdict) on various grounds of personal information and financial circumstances; and in some cases they will achieve a Discharge instead of a Prosecution.
I am quite sure that a local firm specialising in Criminal Defence work will be able to assist in mitigating a Guilty plea for under £1000.

 

[Tal]

Hi

I told him the name of the station I had actually gotten on from and I apologised.

His Witness Statement "quotes" me telling him that I did it "to save money and because nobody pays". (Are you serious? I'm a uni student? Am I an ape? So angry about him lying. His quota must be have been REALLY high!)

I told him I was rushed/hurried to uni and I was late to the train. He doesn't include that though, instead the other filth! This is long ago so I'm fairly calm but now I'm clear on the implications of this "conviction", I want to destroy it!!
Yes I was convicted and I paid the £100 or whatever fine.

Can you tell me what kind of law it is? It is a theft law? or was it fraud? I had NO IDEA that it was such a life-ruining stamp on my integrity. I thought it was a fine and the rest was spent soon after I left uni. I had a holiday planned abroad after uni anyway, I thought I'd be sorted after that period.
I cannot exist easily at all with this!

I will tell everything that is needed. I am not a rager; but I am in dire need of help.

 

[Tal]

I'm sorry, I will reply when I am back from hospital. Close family member is in critical care. I will be back soon.

 

[Tal]

I don't know how to find out under which act I was prosecuted. I'm also not finding an easy way of being informed. Hence I came here.
And the court case was all in 2011.

But it is now that I see what this might do to me.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

This is long ago . . . .

. . . .
Yes I was convicted and I paid the £100 or whatever fine.

Can you tell me what kind of law it is? It is a theft law? or was it fraud?

. . .

Now I can see that the Conviction is in the past. Thanks.

It will almost certainly have have been an Offence under Regulation of Railways Act which is classed as a crime of dishonesty, similar to fraud. There is a slim possiblity that it will have been a conviction under the Railway Byelaws which should not even appear on a check of the DBS database (a.k.a. CRB check).

There is very little that you can do about it at this point. The time available to lodge an Appeal is typically 21 days.

You committed the Offence. You were Prosecuted. You pleaded Guilty. You were fined. You paid the Fine. Matter closed.

In the very unlikely event that there was a procedural error in the Conviction, then, technically, you could request a Judicial Review and an extension of time, but this is extremely costly, may be refused, and as I said above, you have given us no reason to believe that there would be any grounds for success.

 

[Fare-Cop]

There is very little that you can do about it at this point. The time available to lodge an Appeal is typically 21 days.

You committed the Offence. You were Prosecuted. You pleaded Guilty. You were fined. You paid the Fine. Matter closed.

I know it's not what you want to hear, but I have to say Dave has summed the situation up perfectly here.

When you were summonsed to Court to answer the charge against you it was your decision to tell the Magistrates you admitted the offence.

The time to seek advice was before you answered that Summons and before you told the Court that you were guilty I'm afraid.

 

[martybabes]

The rates you were quoted are not atypical of specialist railway law practitioners because there are not many of them.

IME the rates are for doing the job not because there are fewer people who can do it.

Taking instructions can easily take an hour. Then there is the time taken for reading the charge and the evidence being relied on. This might generate some correspondence with the Prosecutor in an attempt to settle the matter other than by way of a prosecution. If this fails, advice is given to the client and instructions must be taken as to the plea to be offered in court. If a guilty plea is to be offered, instructions as to mitigation and financial circumstances must be given. Attendance at court can very easily take up a half day, even for a guilty plea. This can be longer if the court is far from local.

So, I don't think any legal professional will be prepared to do this job "on the cheap" and, if you are trying to avoid a criminal record, how much would you pay for proper legal representation to try and achieve this?

 

[bb21]

IME the rates are for doing the job not because there are fewer people who can do it.

They are both contributory factors in my opinion.

There are not many out there who specialise in railway legislation, and I would be surprised if that does not have an impact on the prices charged. While responsible practitioners may not be willing to do the job on the cheap, charging a premium in the circumstances described is quite a different matter and quite possible.

Also note that the quote of £2k is just to "start the case" using the OP's words, so to do all of those things you have described may well cost more.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

There are not many out there who specialise in railway legislation, and I would be surprised if that does not have an impact on the prices charged. While responsible practitioners may not be willing to do the job on the cheap, charging a premium in the circumstances described is quite a different matter and quite possible.

I can probably count the number of firms who might be considered as 'specialising in railway legislation' and 'charging a premium' on my thumbs.

However, a great number of passengers detected with a suspected ticket irregularity can be adequately assisted and represented by an experienced general practice Criminal Defence solicitor, and many of them are used to appearring in the local Magistrates Courts representing people of little means (whether rightly or wrongly accused). Such practioners represent the life blood of the legal profession in its work assisting the ordinary citizen when in conflict. Their charges, even when preparing for a Court appearance, can be nearer £500-£800 if outside London and £1200 in the capital.

Between these two tiers (the railway specialist and the experienced general practice Criminal Defence solicitor) are a vital tier of legal professionals who have experience in learning new territory quickly, in instructing counsel or undertaking the advocacy themselves, and with as much or more experience of process as the Clerks to the Court. In my opinion, that hard won expertise in managing the process is worth more to the wrongly accused passenger than the flamboyant flair of a specialist.

 

[bb21]

Between these two tiers (the railway specialist and the experienced general practice Criminal Defence solicitor) are a vital tier of legal professionals who have experience in learning new territory quickly, in instructing counsel or undertaking the advocacy themselves, and with as much or more experience of process as the Clerks to the Court. In my opinion, that hard won expertise in managing the process is worth more to the wrongly accused passenger than the flamboyant flair of a specialist.

Oh, yes. I agree.

I was solely referring to the specialists, which is what I inferred from the OP's account and the prices quoted. This, of course, may be an incorrect assumption.

Reading the prior conversation again, I get the feeling that martybabes and I may have been at cross purposes here, since we were probably talking about two quite different things.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

. . . . . we were probably talking about two quite different things.

Perhaps.
You remind me that I do sometimes wonder if we give an unhelpful steer to a few people enquiring about a potential prosecution.

As I mentioned above, it is usually going to be adequate assistance to be reresented by someone from a general-purpose Criminal Law firm, when defending or mitigating a ticketing irregularity. But with some of the highly detailed analysis of tickets in some threads on here, disputing validity on the grounds of arcane terms and conditions, then some passengers might raise these issues in their initial chat with a solicitor and find that they are dealt with by the Commercial division, who will be charging more for the services of a team of experts in Commercial Contract Law who analyse the technical details thoroughly. (The upshot might be over the heads of the Court and the Prosecution!).

 

[martybabes]

If the client turns up at the office with a summons, it is very likely that he will be seen by someone from the criminal department. I would suggest that attending the Magistrates' Court for a guilty plea (or a CMH in readiness for a trial) is not outside the skills of a reasonable criminal defence practitioner. After all, one statutory offence (theft, benefit fraud, speeding, untaxed vehicle, TV licence stuff) is pretty much like another.

Going to trial on a strict liability offence would be interesting inasmuch as the prosecution need only prove the Defendant is travelling without a valid ticket.
However...
What if the Defendant produces a ticket he reasonably believes was valid? How he came to his reasonable belief must be put before the Bench, I would submit, especially if he was sold that ticket - possibly by the TOC itself - in the belief (shared by vendor and purchaser at the time of and at the point of sale) that it would be valid.

It is, of course, pretty evident from the several threads we have seen on here, and recently too, that it is entirely possible for a ticket to be used that some RPO's (and/or others) consider invalid when it is entirely valid. I suppose this comes down to there being many, many different ticket types for different journeys at different times on different Networks sold by different organisations.


And another thing, the extension of a TOC's franchise is very likely to be the sort of thing undertaken by a "specialist railway practitioner" assisted by (or should that be assisting) senior Counsel.

 

[reb0118]

After all, one statutory offence (theft, benefit fraud, speeding, untaxed vehicle, TV licence stuff) is pretty much like another.

Is Theft not a Crime at Common Law?

(or is it one of those that can be both a Common Law and a Statutory Offence?)

(I now see in England & Wales it is a Statutory Offence thus, but in Scotland it is still a Common Law Offence)

 

[Fare-Cop]

Going to trial on a strict liability offence would be interesting inasmuch as the prosecution need only prove the Defendant is travelling without a valid ticket.
However...
What if the Defendant produces a ticket he reasonably believes was valid? How he came to his reasonable belief must be put before the Bench, I would submit, especially if he was sold that ticket - possibly by the TOC itself - in the belief (shared by vendor and purchaser at the time of and at the point of sale) that it would be valid.

If the defendant had not produced a ticket at the time of travel and the strict liability offence you refer to was the matter of 'Fail to hand over his ticket' contrary to National Railway Byelaw 18.2 (2005), I cannot see that the supposed defence has any merit.

Production of a ticket after being reported does not automatically prevent a prosecution from succeeding.

I speak from experience of cases where a traveller has been reported and has later produced a ticket that had been obtained from a friend or colleague who had made the same journey to work and attempted to pass it off as their own. (Usually pretty easily identified & rebutted by good investigations & prosecutions staff.)

 

[island]

If the defendant had not produced a ticket at the time of travel and the strict liability offence you refer to was the matter of 'Fail to hand over his ticket' contrary to National Railway Byelaw 18.2 (2005), I cannot see that the supposed defence has any merit.

Production of a ticket after being reported does not automatically prevent a prosecution from succeeding.

I speak from experience of cases where a traveller has been reported and has later produced a ticket that had been obtained from a friend or colleague who had made the same journey to work and attempted to pass it off as their own. (Usually pretty easily identified & rebutted by good investigations & prosecutions staff.)

Byelaw 18.2 requires a passenger to hand over a ticket. It does not require the ticket be valid. A passenger who hands over an invalid ticket has not committed an offence under that byelaw.

 

[Fare-Cop]

Byelaw 18.2 requires a passenger to hand over a ticket. It does not require the ticket be valid. A passenger who hands over an invalid ticket has not committed an offence under that byelaw.

Yes, I am aware of that, I was thinking of a literal 'failure to hold' rather than 'to present' and ought to have made myself clearer. 18.1 would have been more relevant

The error in my post that you refer to was identified as the prosecution's 'failure' in the FCC v Burns case of course.

Thanks for reminding me

 

[tony_mac]

I don't know how to find out under which act I was prosecuted. I'm also not finding an easy way of being informed. Hence I came here.
And the court case was all in 2011.

For £25 you can get a 'Basic Disclosure' from Disclosure Scotland
http://www.disclosurescotland.co.uk/apply/
That will tell you what (unspent) convictions you have recorded.

 

[Tal]

Thanks a lot for your help guise.

FYI It's a non-issue now.

 

[bb21]

Thank you for letting us know.