TfL Fare evasion.

[LightingPig123]

Hi guys,

I was caught with my father's freedom pass in oct 2025. Revenue protection officers caught me at Euston sq, I tried to walk away but they grabbed me.
I received a letter of requisition and I am to be summoned at Magistrates' in April. 52 journeys are suspected for £180, but only £77 was me with 11 journeys (the rest was my father rightfully using his pass). I do not really want to contest this and look for further investigation.
I do not want a criminal record as I am a masters student, looking for a career in high-government, and such a conviction seems very excessive.
How long does it take for the conviction to be 'spent', and what does this actually mean? Can i still work in government? how does this limit me?

I have no prior convictions, no other PCN paid to the network, and I am deep in my overdraft and have quite a bit of credit card debt. I want to argue that a conviction is not in the public interest; who do I address such to? What other tips do you have.

Thanks.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Jan 2026 ==

Also, any recommendations of pro bono solicitors in ldn that help with this?

 

[AlterEgo]

Why wouldn't a prosecution be in the public interest?

By way of providing perspective TfL prosecute basically everyone who rips off free travel in this way, becuase it is a clear abuse of a high value pass paid for by taxpayers. They prosecute 10,000 to 20,000 people a year.

Did you respond to their verification letter? If so, what did you say to them?

Convictions of this nature are spent after a year but if you intend to work in any sphere which involves SC or DV disclosures, or if you intend to take any role not covered by the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act, you will need to declare the conviction for all time, even after it is spent.

 

[John R]

Hi guys,

I was caught with my father's freedom pass in oct 2025. Revenue protection officers caught me at Euston sq, I tried to walk away but they grabbed me.
I received a letter of requisition and I am to be summoned at Magistrates' in April. 52 journeys are suspected for £180, but only £77 was me with 11 journeys (the rest was my father rightfully using his pass). I do not really want to contest this and look for further investigation.
I do not want a criminal record as I am a masters student, looking for a career in high-government, and such a conviction seems very excessive.
How long does it take for the conviction to be 'spent', and what does this actually mean? Can i still work in government? how does this limit me?

I have no prior convictions, no other PCN paid to the network, and I am deep in my overdraft and have quite a bit of credit card debt. I want to argue that a conviction is not in the public interest; who do I address such to? What other tips do you have.

Thanks.
[
Also, any recommendations of pro bono solicitors in ldn that help with this?

You broke the law 11 times and don't think a prosecution is in the public interest, and it would be very excessive? And you want a solicitor to help you for free to get yourself out of this hole?

And yet you are looking for a career in high-government?

Ask yourself, do you think your attitude to what you have done is consistent with your aspirations? I would imagine most people would regard a prosecution as very much in the public interest, if it impeded your aspiration to work in a sector where utmost integrity should be paramount.

Realistically, any solicitor will cost you several hundred pounds, and with a strong likelihood that they will be unsuccessful based on TfL's prosecution policy. There are some specialist fare evasion firms mentioned often on this board if you have a search which would be your best chance, and will give you an honest view on what your chances are.

 

[WesternLancer]

Hi guys,

I was caught with my father's freedom pass in oct 2025. Revenue protection officers caught me at Euston sq, I tried to walk away but they grabbed me.
I received a letter of requisition and I am to be summoned at Magistrates' in April. 52 journeys are suspected for £180, but only £77 was me with 11 journeys (the rest was my father rightfully using his pass). I do not really want to contest this and look for further investigation.

This case / thread might be worth you reading over as the person concerned updates through to conclusion

Freedom pass misuse- requisition to attend court

Hello, I was caught for using my brother's freedom pass at Leicester Square last year on the 2rd of July. I have since then received a letter from TFL asking for my side of the story and now a letter of requisition to attend court. I am pleading guilty as I did use the pass on multiple occasions...

www.railforums.co.uk

I do not want a criminal record as I am a masters student, looking for a career in high-government,

What do you mean by 'high government' ?

MP / Minister etc - expect the press to trawl records going back for all time in that sort of scenario (or acquaintances of yours to spill the beans in years to come if anyone knows) elected politics is not known for being a squealy clean game. Then you just have to weather it out politically, with the public and your party of choice - up to the voters if they want to vote for you. I doubt it is a legal impediment to standing for election.

Senior Civil Servant after career progression - I would imagine you would be subject to vetting at some point and they would discover this - but the usual advice is that what you need to do is to declare it (in that scenario probably best to do so years after the event even if that is not a legal obligation) because better to declare it than they discover it later) I doubt it would be considered a bar to working as a civil servant.

I have no prior convictions, no other PCN paid to the network, and I am deep in my overdraft and have quite a bit of credit card debt. I want to argue that a conviction is not in the public interest; who do I address such to? What other tips do you have.

I'm afraid that what is in the public interest as far as most of the public are concerned is for people to pay their fares so that the rest of us don't have to pay higher taxes to make up the bigger subsidy needed to run the transport system as a consequence of other people not paying....

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Jan 2026 ==

Also, any recommendations of pro bono solicitors in ldn that help with this?

I would start with your university or college student advice centre if you want free advice on this - they may have arrangements with legal firms that would give initial free advice to students and may have in house staff who can advise - you will not be the first student who has been caught fare evading so they will have experience of this I would suspect.

 

[Haywain]

I am a masters student, looking for a career in high-government,

I want to argue that a conviction is not in the public interest;

Some would argue that your employment aspirations make a prosecution, and conviction, very much in the public interest.

 

[Mattplans]

I have no prior convictions, no other PCN paid to the network, and I am deep in my overdraft and have quite a bit of credit card debt. I want to argue that a conviction is not in the public interest; who do I address such to? What other tips do you have.

Did you receive a TfL "Verification letter"? What did you say in response.

 

[Swedenorer]

Any argument that prosecution is not in the public interest will get nowhere. TfL will see it very much as in the public interest and they are right. You need to look at this from the point of view of somebody outside London with a patchy public transport system, if any, and nothing like this concession. It is about time that misuse of these passes was made a strict liability offence in my view. So you don't want a criminal record - sorry it's too late for that. Also someone on a Master's course should realise, without being told, that being caught was pretty well inevitable.

 

[WesternLancer]

In fairness to the OP I suspect that they are not really familiar with what the term 'not in the public interest' means in this context - I recall a good post once on here explaining it in the context of this sort of thing - frustratingly I can't find that thread - it was some time back

But I'm pretty sure what it does not mean is to apply it in circs where you are saying 'I'm skint, I've learned my lesson, I won't do it again, you could save court time and public money by not prosecuting me'

Anyway - if it goes to court and an in person hearing you can presumably make such points to the magistrates if you wish. If done politely and respectfully I'm sure they would at least hear you out.

 

[Haywain]

if it goes to court and an in person hearing you can presumably make such points to the magistrates if you wish.

As the OP states they have received a "letter of requisition, we can safely say that it is going to court and the OP will be required to attend so will have the opportunity to make their case to the magistrates.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

I do not want a criminal record as I am (...) looking for a career in high-government, (...)
How long does it take for the conviction to be 'spent', and what does this actually mean? Can i still work in government? how does this limit me?

You might want to look at https://www.civil-service-careers.gov.uk/prison-leaver-recruitment/. If you're convicted of fare dodging you won't go to prison, but I don't imagine the civil service will have stiffer rules for people convicted of more minor offences than those convicted of things serious enough to go to prison.

The really relevant bit is

The good news is that having a criminal conviction is not a barrier to joining the Civil Service. We believe the knowledge, skills and lived experience that prison leavers can bring are invaluable.

You might be concerned that you need to declare your offence at an early stage and will be immediately sifted out. In reality, your application is considered alongside others in the same fair and open recruitment process. We only ask about criminal convictions once a job offer is made and accepted.

 

[LightingPig123]

I am due in court in April for a fare evasion case, being prosecuted by TfL. I’ve pleaded guilty already, but I just want to know how the process works and how quick it would be.

Do I get to ‘plead my case/ circumstances’?
Do we sort out a payment plan for the expected proposed fine?

I was also on suspicion of committing a further 52 cases of fare evasion. This is not true, as only 6 of them were me, and it was the same journey that I got stopped for. How does this work?

Any help would be great.

 

[WesternLancer]

I am due in court in April for a fare evasion case, being prosecuted by TfL. I’ve pleaded guilty already, but I just want to know how the process works and how quick it would be.

Do I get to ‘plead my case/ circumstances’?
Do we sort out a payment plan for the expected proposed fine?

I was also on suspicion of committing a further 52 cases of fare evasion. This is not true, as only 6 of them were me, and it was the same journey that I got stopped for. How does this work?

Any help would be great.

Welcome - who is taking you to court?
Is it TfL?

There was a good thread on here a while ago where a forum member provided really helpful and detailed advice on what to expect in court, and how you should best prepare - I'll try and find it for you.

Have you completed all your court paperwork and stuff like income statements yet? - you should do that / look into that because AIUI any court fines and payment plans that may be on offer are dependent on the correct paperwork being completed. People here will be able to answer questions for you on aspects of that I think if you need advice and help. Might serve to help you achieve the 'least worst' outcome from the experience.

 

[Sun Chariot]

I was also on suspicion of committing a further 52 cases of fare evasion. This is not true, as only 6 of them were me, and it was the same journey that I got stopped for. How does this work?

Hello @LightingPig123 - in answer to your point here.

Take some time to collate your proof, of the travel you made with correct valid tickets.

1) Did you buy digital tickets and have them alll as scannable tickets on your mobile device?

2) If yes, then:
a) wee all your tickets bought that way? Or only some?
b) Where did you buy the tickets from? TfL, or via third party ticket seller like TrainLine?
c) does your digital purchase history show - and prove - you bought 46 valid tickets for those ourneys TfL states you did not?

3) For the seven fare-avoidance cases you mentioned in post 1, what were they? No ticket at all? Short-fares (with no ticket for middle part of your journeys? Ticket fares using discount type(s) you were not entitled to?

 

[AlterEgo]

If it's TfL and they're going to court fot that number of offences it'll be for high value pass misuse.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

I was also on suspicion of committing a further 52 cases of fare evasion. This is not true, as only 6 of them were me, and it was the same journey that I got stopped for. How does this work?

As I understand it from what has been posted previously in this forum, TfL want the court to take the 52 cases 'into consideration'. What that means is that if you admit they were you, then you'll be punished for them along with the time when you were caught - and that will be the end of the matter. But if you don't accept them, then TfL are able to come back and take you to court separately for those 52 incidents.

From what we see here, it's not unusual for TfL to list journeys that actually you didn't make: as far as we can make out, they decide which of the journeys look like they were made by you rather than by whoever really can use the pass. So they won't be surprised if you strike through some of the journeys and say that they weren't you.

But crossing out 46 of 52 journeys is an awful lot. They might think that you're trying it on. So try to think about it like TfL would:

- what's different about the six journeys that you admit against the 46 that you don't? As an example, if the six journeys are from Woolwich to Oxford Circus, and the other 46 are from Woolwich to Greenwich, that's an obvious difference. Can you explain why you needed to go to Oxford Circus but not Greenwich (n.b. probably don't answer that question here - if you tell us the real journeys and reasons right now, TfL might work out who you are from this thread!)?
- are you sure that it's only six? Again, if you're prepared to admit to six trips out to Oxford Circus in the morning, TfL won't believe you if you say that the journeys back to Woolwich in the evening weren't you
- strictly, it's for TfL to prove that you made the 46 disputed journeys, and not for you to show that you didn't - but you can do yourself a favour if you can explain why the 46 journeys weren't you. So try and work out who did make them, and why that can't have been you.

 

[SuspectUsual]

are you sure that it's only six? Again, if you're prepared to admit to six trips out to Oxford Circus in the morning, TfL won't believe you if you say that the journeys back to Woolwich in the evening weren't you

It was 11 in the OP’s original post back in January

 

[Snow1964]

You also need to realise that if you want to deselect some of the journeys, and they were made by the relative that held the pass, then you are admitting that you were regularly swapping users (which is against rules of the pass). That means you are incriminating the pass holder by saying they abused terms of their pass. The other alternative is you say you took pass without their consent (but that opens up different problem of theft of pass).

Obviously only the Op knows the truth, and either they accept the problem for all journeys, or they might have to explain some new reasons about how pass came to be swapped between people multiple times.

It was wrong, taxpayers shouldn't be expected to subsidise fare dodgers, and how the Op wants to explain it to a magistrate (if asked) is their choice.

One thing, everyone here would like, is whatever happens, any outcome is followed up, and come back and tell it, because if people just disappear, then there is no feedback.

 

[Haywain]

You also need to realise that if you want to deselect some of the journeys, and they were made by the relative that held the pass, then you are admitting that you were regularly swapping users (which is against rules of the pass). That means you are incriminating the pass holder by saying they abused terms of their pass. The other alternative is you say you took pass without their consent (but that opens up different problem of theft of pass).

Obviously only the Op knows the truth, and either they accept the problem for all journeys, or they have to explain some new reasons about how pass came to be swapped between people multiple times.

The OP will be admitting to, or denying, the additional offences in court and must be truthful. There is nothing we have seen in numerous threads to suggest that TfL are going to follow up on unusual patterns of usage, or attempt to prosecute the passholder for any misuse by another party but that must not be used to bend the truth or admit to offences that they have not committed.

It was wrong, taxpayers shouldn't be expected to subsidise fare dodgers, and how the Op wants to explain it to a magistrate is their choice.

We have seen nothing to suggest that the OP is required to explain their answers to the magistrates for offences taken into consideration.

 

[WesternLancer]

As mentioned earlier in my post #12

Here is some information posted on another thread which will help you know what to expect at a court appearance - the work of other helpful and knowledgeable forum members I should add! :


When attending court, you should bring with you copies of all paperwork you have received, and a form MC100 income and expenditure form. If there is anything on paper that you will want to give the court, such as a statement, you must have six copies of each document:

• Three for the magistrates
• one for the legal advisor
• one for the prosecution
• one for yourself

It is strongly recommended to dress formally. Where possible, gentlemen should wear a dark suit, tie, and formal shoes, and ladies should wear a suit with jacket, a formal top and skirt/trousers, or a dress, nothing too revealing, formal shoes and tights or similar should be worn. Jeans, trainers, open-toed shoes, anything bright, gaudy, or with slogans of any sort should be avoided.

At the court, you should make sure to arrive in good time before the time indicated on your summons. You will need to pass through security checks, which will typically include a walk-through metal detector and a bag search. Certain items are prohibited – check the Courts Service website.

Most courthouses have a number of courtrooms. You will need to check a noticeboard to see which courtroom your case has been assigned to. Staff can point this out. Speak to staff to identify yourself as a defendant.

You will probably have a fair bit of waiting around to do. Bring a book/magazine. You can use your phone whilst waiting in the court building but it should be on silent/do not disturb when in the court room itself.

When you are called into the courtroom, staff will indicate where you need to go. Do not sit down until invited to do so. You will likely have three magistrates sitting at the back on the highest level, with a legal adviser in front of them. (It's possible but unlikely that these four will be replaced by a single district judge.) Towards the centre of the court will be one or more prosecutors – solicitors representing TfL.

The legal adviser will ask you to confirm your personal details (name/address/DOB) and from there they will step you through what needs to be done – you'll likely be asked to confirm your guilty plea and then explain your mitigation. Mitigation means the reasons you are saying the court should punish you less harshly, or not at all.

After that, it could go off in several different directions, so I can't predict beyond there, all I can do is remind you that the court understands that their process is unfamiliar and will be happy for you to ask clarifying questions if you are unsure about anything. If you end up with a fine, you'll be asked if you can pay it right away (which really means within 28 days) or if you need to pay in instalments; they'll usually want it paying within 12 months. A letter will be sent to you with instructions on how to pay online, over the phone, or with a barcode at a "Paypoint" (convenience store).

Finally, don't be tempted to call anyone "your Honour" – that phrase isn't used at Magistrates Court. The magistrates collectively are addressed as "your Worships". Anyone else, including magistrates individually, should be addressed as "sir" or "madam" (not "ma'am").


and also this might apply
Court Fines Formula

The Magistrates Courts will typically deal with an offender convicted under byelaw 18 by way of a "band A fine".

The amount of a "band A fine" is:

• 50% of one week's wages, with a maximum fine of £1,000, if the offender has a job and has declared their income on the court paperwork;
• £60, if the offender is a student, or on benefits; or
• £220, if the offender has not engaged with the court case or provided the necessary information.

The fine would then be adjusted downwards if the offender had pleaded guilty, with a reduction of one-third for a plea at the first opportunity, tapering down to one-tenth for a plea at the start of a trial.

There are also three more amounts to pay:

• A victim surcharge, which is 40% of the fine
• Compensation for the unpaid fare
• The prosecution costs

The amount being claiming for the latter two items should be on your SJP paperwork, but the costs may increase if there has to be a hearing in court.

I say "typically" above for two reasons:

1. There is no entry in the sentencing guidelines for Railway Byelaw offences. This is unfortunate, as they occur very frequently indeed. The court will usually use the section 5 (1) Regulation of Railways Act guideline instead.
2. The court is not rigidly bound to follow sentencing guidelines, and it can raise or lower the punishment due to the specific facts of any individual case.

A fines calculator is at https://sentencingcouncil.org.uk/fine-calculator/

also
This thread is useful because the person concerned posted after the event about their experience in court:

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/freedom-pass-misuse-requisition-to-attend-court.297308/page-2

 

[Sun Chariot]

I was also on suspicion of committing a further 52 cases of fare evasion. This is not true, as only 6 of them were me, and it was the same journey that I got stopped for.

I was caught with my father's freedom pass in oct 2025. Revenue protection officers caught me at Euston sq, ... I received a letter of requisition and I am to be summoned at Magistrates' in April. 52 journeys are suspected for £180, but only £77 was me with 11 journeys (the rest was my father rightfully using his pass).

Which is it?
With inconsistencies in your own thread @LightingPig123 it's even more imperative you take my advice in my post 13; and also the advice given to you by others here.

 

[LightingPig123]

You also need to realise that if you want to deselect some of the journeys, and they were made by the relative that held the pass, then you are admitting that you were regularly swapping users (which is against rules of the pass). That means you are incriminating the pass holder by saying they abused terms of their pass. The other alternative is you say you took pass without their consent (but that opens up different problem of theft of pass).

Obviously only the Op knows the truth, and either they accept the problem for all journeys, or they might have to explain some new reasons about how pass came to be swapped between people multiple times.

It was wrong, taxpayers shouldn't be expected to subsidise fare dodgers, and how the Op wants to explain it to a magistrate (if asked) is their choice.

One thing, everyone here would like, is whatever happens, any outcome is followed up, and come back and tell it, because if people just disappear, then there is no feedback.

Yes so this is what I was worried about. The 6 (I am aware I said 11 previously, but this was subject to further scrutiny) journeys that I committed myself were all in order, with no pass swapping. How can I not incriminate the pass holder, or myself, for theft?

And I was just wondering how it actually works. Like, I will be guilty for the one count of fare evasion, and then will I be asked something along the lines of "Are you guilty of the extra 52" to which do I just reply "only the last 6?". I did not send the document because it was only suspicion and my legal advisor said it was not required. I have sent my plea and MC100.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Mar 2026 ==

As I understand it from what has been posted previously in this forum, TfL want the court to take the 52 cases 'into consideration'. What that means is that if you admit they were you, then you'll be punished for them along with the time when you were caught - and that will be the end of the matter. But if you don't accept them, then TfL are able to come back and take you to court separately for those 52 incidents.

From what we see here, it's not unusual for TfL to list journeys that actually you didn't make: as far as we can make out, they decide which of the journeys look like they were made by you rather than by whoever really can use the pass. So they won't be surprised if you strike through some of the journeys and say that they weren't you.

But crossing out 46 of 52 journeys is an awful lot. They might think that you're trying it on. So try to think about it like TfL would:

- what's different about the six journeys that you admit against the 46 that you don't? As an example, if the six journeys are from Woolwich to Oxford Circus, and the other 46 are from Woolwich to Greenwich, that's an obvious difference. Can you explain why you needed to go to Oxford Circus but not Greenwich (n.b. probably don't answer that question here - if you tell us the real journeys and reasons right now, TfL might work out who you are from this thread!)?
- are you sure that it's only six? Again, if you're prepared to admit to six trips out to Oxford Circus in the morning, TfL won't believe you if you say that the journeys back to Woolwich in the evening weren't you
- strictly, it's for TfL to prove that you made the 46 disputed journeys, and not for you to show that you didn't - but you can do yourself a favour if you can explain why the 46 journeys weren't you. So try and work out who did make them, and why that can't have been you.

So the last 6 journeys were the same as the one I was caught on. The other journeys are completely different, so I think TfL are obviously just chancing it.

I don't think that I would have to produce a ticket for alternate journeys on days that I was in consideration of making another journey. Eg if I went from Woolwich to Oxford Circus in reality, but I am under suspicion of going from Woolwich to Romford. What do you think?

Also, thank you @WesternLancer for your lengthy response. much appreciated.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Mar 2026 ==

and @Fawkes Cat too!

 

[AlterEgo]

How can I not incriminate the pass holder, or myself, for theft?

By saying "No comment".

 

[Haywain]

The 6 (I am aware I said 11 previously, but this was subject to further scrutiny) journeys that I committed myself were all in order, with no pass swapping.

What does this mean - were the journeys made using the freedom pass or not? If they were, theye were not "all in order".

How can I not incriminate the pass holder, or myself, for theft?

You are being asked if you accept an offence of using the freedom pass in each instance, nothing more, nothing less.

so I think TfL are obviously just chancing it.

TfL are not 'chancing it'. They deal with many thousands of cases every year and know what they are looking at. They have suspicions and this is how they deal with them.

I don't think that I would have to produce a ticket for alternate journeys on days that I was in consideration of making another journey. Eg if I went from Woolwich to Oxford Circus in reality, but I am under suspicion of going from Woolwich to Romford. What do you think?

You are being charged with one offence, and in that one case you will be found guilty - you were caught red handed, so to speak. You are then being asked for other cases to be taken into consideration, and for these it is a simple matter of yes or no (I'm not convinced that no comment is an option), you are not being asked to provide proof of what else you might have been doing on those days.

 

[AlterEgo]

You are then being asked for other cases to be taken into consideration, and for these it is a simple matter of yes or no (I'm not convinced that no comment is an option), you are not being asked to provide proof of what else you might have been doing on those days.

"No comment" would be an option to a question as to whether the OP stole the pass, or misused it with the holder's consent - but as you say, this is very unlikely to come up at this stage.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Realistically, I don't think TfL have very much comeback on journeys to be taken into consideration if a defendant denies making them - surely, if TfL had sufficient evidence for a conviction they would be prosecuting each journey that they knew was fare dodging and looking for a guilty verdict?

But against that, the OP is planning to only accept guilt for a little more than 10% of the journeys that TfL think that they fare dodged on. TfL is a big organisation, but it's one staffed by human beings, and I have no difficulty in thinking that those human beings might not believe the OP - and despite the difficulties, TfL might make an exception to what I think will be their usual practice, and investigate the remaining 46 journeys more closely.

Our advice must always be that the OP needs to reply honestly. If the 46 journeys were made by someone else, TfL will not be able to find evidence that they were made by the OP. But if it was the OP travelling on their dad's pass, then there is a more than negligible risk that TfL will discover that, and return to court to impose punishment and compensation for those journeys.

 

[Haywain]

surely, if TfL had sufficient evidence for a conviction they would be prosecuting each journey that they knew was fare dodging and looking for a guilty verdict?

I don't think the courts would take kindly to TfL bringing multiple cases against the same individual, so the approach of 'taking into consideration' is good for TfL, good for the courts and good for the person being charged.

 

[AlterEgo]

Realistically, I don't think TfL have very much comeback on journeys to be taken into consideration if a defendant denies making them - surely, if TfL had sufficient evidence for a conviction they would be prosecuting each journey that they knew was fare dodging and looking for a guilty verdict?

No, taking offences into consideration is standard practice and happens with lots of offences, even ones prosecuted by the police/CPS. It saves the courts time and offers a chance for the defendant to wipe the slate clean.

eg: a serial burglar who had an offence taken into consideration: https://www.gmp.police.uk/news/grea...n-week-long-crime-spree-jailed-for-28-months/

 

[Fawkes Cat]

I don't think the courts would take kindly to TfL bringing multiple cases against the same individual, so the approach of 'taking into consideration' is good for TfL, good for the courts and good for the person being charged.

No, taking offences into consideration is standard practice and happens with lots of offences, even ones prosecuted by the police/CPS. It saves the courts time and offers a chance for the defendant to wipe the slate clean.

eg: a serial burglar who had an offence taken into consideration: https://www.gmp.police.uk/news/grea...n-week-long-crime-spree-jailed-for-28-months/

I take the point. What I'd been meaning to suggest was that someone for whom multiple cases could be proved would be liable to face a charge of 'fare dodging on 1 January, and fare dodging on 2 January, and' (and so on) rather than just being charged with fare dodging on 1 January , and 2 January (etc.) being taken into consideration.

 

[island]

I am due in court in April for a fare evasion case, being prosecuted by TfL. I’ve pleaded guilty already, but I just want to know how the process works and how quick it would be.

Do I get to ‘plead my case/ circumstances’?

You can try to make pleas in mitigation as to why you should not be punished harshly. You cannot (having already pleaded guilty) turn around and say you didn't do it.

Do we sort out a payment plan for the expected proposed fine?

As TfL will claim compensation for the avoided fares, the court will give you two choices:
1) Pay in full within 7 days (you might get a month if you ask nicely)
2) Attachment of earnings order if you are not working or deduction from benefits order if you are not

Option 2) will result in money being taken from your wages or benefits and paid to the court, until the total is settled. The amount is calculated based on a formula which can be read on gov uk website.

The "TfL court" in Lavender Hill rarely offers you the option to pay by yourself.

I was also on suspicion of committing a further 52 cases of fare evasion. This is not true, as only 6 of them were me, and it was the same journey that I got stopped for. How does this work?

You can say which cases you admit and which you deny. TfL's prosecutor will then have to decide whether they want to try and prove the 46 cases you deny, in a separate hearing.

As mentioned earlier in my post #12

Here is some information posted on another thread which will help you know what to expect at a court appearance - the work of other helpful and knowledgeable forum members I should add! :


When attending court
...
Anyone else, including magistrates individually, should be addressed as "sir" or "madam" (not "ma'am").


and also this might apply
Court Fines Formula

The Magistrates Courts will typically deal with an offender convicted under byelaw 18 by way of a "band A fine".
...
A fines calculator is at https://sentencingcouncil.org.uk/fine-calculator/

I put quite some time into writing the above and would appreciate being credited in the future, please

 

[WesternLancer]

I put quite some time into writing the above and would appreciate being credited in the future, please

Quite rightly so @island - information I would think anyone in this situation would find helpful.