Used staff pass for 4 days

[reb0118]

I'm guessing from the responses I should just admit I used the pass on the buses (even if I didnt)..seen as it will be less hassle.

Do not admit to something you didn't do.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Mar 2022 ==

I'm not sure if u guys are understanding what I'm saying...I did use the pass on the underground for the 4 days in October...but I did not use the staff pass in August where it was stated the bus journeys where made!my cousin who is the the rightful owner of the pass made those journeys..but TFL have accused me of making them journeys..I have no reason to lie seen as I'm admiting I did use the pass...but what should I do regarding the journeys I did not make!!

There's two issues here

1) did you use the pass on the buses on those days? You have told us that you didn't, so my comments here are based on that.
2) did your cousin use the pass on the buses on those days? What you've told us is that you might ask them to write to the court saying that they did.

It's important that any defence you give is true. So if your cousin can't say for certain that they made the August journeys, then they should not be telling the court that they did so - that could get them into trouble with the court, and with their employer.

But if you know that you didn't make those journeys then I think that it's reasonable to tell TfL that. It might be worth thinking whether you have any other evidence that would suggest that it wasn't you who made the journeys. Have TfL told you what the specific journeys were (the number 99 from Balham to Trafalgar Square at 0900 on 1 August, or whatever)? If so, do you have anything that shows that you were somewhere else at the time - at work, or buying something with a credit/debit card or whatever?

 

[Jimmy92]

Do not admit to something you didn't do.

So what should I do?this is the help I want...when filling in the court forms should I attach a letter stating I did not use the pass on these dates?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Mar 2022 ==

There's two issues here

1) did you use the pass on the buses on those days? You have told us that you didn't, so my comments here are based on that.
2) did your cousin use the pass on the buses on those days? What you've told us is that you might ask them to write to the court saying that they did.

It's important that any defence you give is true. So if your cousin can't say for certain that they made the August journeys, then they should not be telling the court that they did so - that could get them into trouble with the court, and with their employer.

But if you know that you didn't make those journeys then I think that it's reasonable to tell TfL that. It might be worth thinking whether you have any other evidence that would suggest that it wasn't you who made the journeys. Have TfL told you what the specific journeys were (the number 99 from Balham to Trafalgar Square at 0900 on 1 August, or whatever)? If so, do you have anything that shows that you were somewhere else at the time - at work, or buying something with a credit/debit card or whatever?

Thank you for the response...my cousin 100% made them journeys..I can not prove it wasn't me on them dates unfortunately I checked my online bank account and my phone to find anything to prove I wasn't there but on both dates I have nothing

 

[reb0118]

You might be best speaking to a lawyer. Most criminal defence lawyers will offer a free initial interview.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

my cousin 100% made them journeys.

In which case, as it's the truth then there's no reason not to ask your cousin to write a letter confirming this.

 

[Dai Corner]

Presumably the investigators identified the use of the pass on the buses in August as unusual and that is why they're linking it with the OP's use of it on the Tube. Would the passholder be able to provide evidence that it was him/her?

 

[Gloster]

If I was the passholder I would be reluctant to sign any letter saying that I had used the pass on the bus unless I had reasonable proof of so doing, even if I was privately fairly sure of having used it on the buses. The passholder does not want to put themselves in a difficult position.

 

[AlterEgo]

If I was the passholder I would be reluctant to sign any letter saying that I had used the pass on the bus unless I had reasonable proof of so doing, even if I was privately fairly sure of having used it on the buses. The passholder does not want to put themselves in a difficult position.

I agree. The pass holder must be absolutely certain before telling a court they definitely used it rather than the accused.

 

[pedr]

The interaction between prosecutors encouraging a defendant to ask the court to take uncharged offences into account, the position a prosecutor would take if that request isn't made, and the effect on other aspects of the criminal justice process (including time-limits) is likely to be quite complicated. It would be appropriate for the OP to seek independent legal advice on that, I think.

 

[Nym]

And regardless of the truth. The staff pass is a discretionary benifit that can be withdrawn without notice or reason.
Very dangerous ground indeed.

 

[transportphoto]

Reading through this thread, the OP is very lucky to only be facing prosecution for bylaw offences. Railway specific stature aside, I should expect TfL would have sufficient evidence to bring a prosecution under the Fraud Act. I’ve been able to mentally tick off the points to prove for Fraud by False Representation contrary to s2 Fraud Act 2006:

Fraud by false representation (Section 2)
The defendant:

• made a false representation
• dishonestly
• knowing that the representation was or might be untrue or misleading
• with intent to make a gain for himself or another, to cause loss to another or to expose another to risk of loss.

The offence is entirely focused on the conduct of the defendant.

(https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/fraud-act-2006)

 

[WesternLancer]

I'm guessing from the responses I should just admit I used the pass on the buses (even if I didnt)..seen as it will be less hassle.

I don't know what would be best - I think I would be tempted to write to their prosecutions people along lines of saying 'I admit to the use of the pass in error on these dates for the reasons I have explained, and for which I am extremely apologetic. However I would like to state that I did not use the pass on the the bus services listed on these dates and I would be grateful if you could take that in to account'.

Obv it would help if you have some kind of record or note that proves you could not have used the buses, but at the end of the day that may not be easy to prove.

I can't see what is wrong with telling the truth, if that is the truth and there is no being 'economical with the truth' in what you say to them either. I can see what benefit comes of admitting to a wrong doing that you did not actually do. But others may be able to explain the benefit of that....

 

[6Gman]

Hello just need some advice...I have recieved a court summons in a few months time..I just need some help in a few issues.

1. I have been charged with TFL byelaws17(1)entering a compulsory ticket area without a valid ticket
2. But on the offence sheet I have also been accused of using this pass on bus journeys which I did not do...what can I do about this?
3. How will this impact my job im a security officer.
4. I have read numerous times this is a non-recordable offence will it still show up on the DBS.

Any help will be much appreciated.

Can you clarify whether these alleged bus journeys were within the same time period as the underground journeys?

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Can you clarify whether these alleged bus journeys were within the same time period as the underground journeys?

See the OP's post #26 above:

I did use the pass on the underground for the 4 days in October...but I did not use the staff pass in August where it was stated the bus journeys where made!

 

[Statto]

The OP needs to have a careful think here, misuse of staff pass is serious offence, which can lead to the pass holder being fired from there job, if not prosecuted as well.

I know every case is different, but those can be one of the consequences of misusing staff pass, & there is another locked thread on here somewhere, were someone did get fired from there job, over misuse of a staff pass.

 

[GM078]

To be honest, I've worked with a few involved in promoting awareness of mental health and anxiety issues; it's kind of undermining to the cause when people try to use it as a get out of jail card for this kind thing... All it means is the cause will be taken less seriously by judges, HR departments and the like...

 

[skyhigh]

The OP needs to have a careful think here, misuse of staff pass is serious offence, which can lead to the pass holder being fired from there job, if not prosecuted as well.

I know every case is different, but those can be one of the consequences of misusing staff pass, & there is another locked thread on here somewhere, were someone did get fired from there job, over misuse of a staff pass.

True but it's a bit late for that now...

 

[johnny_t]

With regards to the bus, why not ask them what evidence they have to say it was you using the pass at that time ? Surely it's for them to prove, not for you to disprove.

However, if the bus use sits inbetween your periods of train use, it makes it look like you and your cousin were passing it between yourselves, which could have consequences for him too. If that is the case, it may be better to take it on the chin.

 

[Sandy15]

Hi , is there any update to this? Hope everything goes well. I was in the same/similar predicament , seems TFL have a thing for adding on journeys to add more to the costs for OP to pay

 

[ChewChewTrain]

Hi , is there any update to this? Hope everything goes well. I was in the same/similar predicament , seems TFL have a thing for adding on journeys to add more to the costs for OP to pay

You would be well advised to start your own thread, as there may be important differences between your case and this one.

 

[Snow1964]

Presumably the investigators identified the use of the pass on the buses in August as unusual and that is why they're linking it with the OP's use of it on the Tube. Would the passholder be able to provide evidence that it was him/her?

There is quite a gap between you using a pass in October, and some random journeys on a bus during school holidays in August.

Add that to your previous comments about the pass holders family members giving you the pass, and it seems to me that there is a choice of you denying the bus in August (assuming it wasn’t you), and leaving the problem where the bus use came from to the pass holder to explain.

I am wondering if the pass holder (or their family member) lent it to someone else during that period (who had it, is not your problem to find out) But if it was not you, then deny the bus journeys.

If you admit the bus journeys then it will look like you had the staff pass in August, gave in back, borrowed it again in October. And a staff member lending out their pass at intervals will be a problem for them (they could even be fired).

 

[Jimmy92]

Update:Court appearance!!
So I had my court date today.

It was a very professional setting,after TFL put there case forward and the judge reviewed and also read all my letters he asked if I had anything to say..I have fretted about this since the day I got stopped and tbh I just wanted this over and done with..so I just apologised and admitted to my carelessness and promised the judge this kind of mistake will not happen again.He then decided to give me a CONDTIONAL DISCHARGE which meant no conviction and also gave me a generous amount to pay this included sur charge and court fees NO TFL FINE!!.

He did say I have taken whatever u have said in consideration. I will give u one final chance make sure this does not happen again.I am very happy to come out of this with a clean record and I can assure you I will never make this mistake again!

So this is for all the people like me since Last year reading these forums.Please bare in mind,my journeys were for a very limited amount of journeys not months and months of usage so if you have used a high value pass for a long time the courts will likely prosecute and will give you a criminal conviction.

I'm glad to put this behind me and get on with my life.Thanks to all.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Update:Court appearance!!
So I had my court date today.

It was a very professional setting,after TFL put there case forward and the judge reviewed and also read all my letters he asked if I had anything to say..I have fretted about this since the day I got stopped and tbh I just wanted this over and done with..so I just apologised and admitted to my carelessness and promised the judge this kind of mistake will not happen again.He then decided to give me a CONDTIONAL DISCHARGE which meant no conviction and also gave me a generous amount to pay this included sur charge and court fees NO TFL FINE!!.

He did say I have taken whatever u have said in consideration. I will give u one final chance make sure this does not happen again.I am very happy to come out of this with a clean record and I can assure you I will never make this mistake again!

So this is for all the people like me since Last year reading these forums.Please bare in mind,my journeys were for a very limited amount of journeys not months and months of usage so if you have used a high value pass for a long time the courts will likely prosecute and will give you a criminal conviction.

I'm glad to put this behind me and get on with my life.Thanks to all.

Thanks for the update - it's good to know that it's over and that you're content with the outcome.

Someone who knows better will no doubt be along soon, but I think you need to be a little bit careful as taking this as 'no conviction': my understanding is that a conditional discharge is just as much of a sentence as a fine or probation or being sent to prison. That means that you have been convicted - it's just that there's no punishment (as long as you don't break the rules of the conditional discharge).

This probably won't be a problem - but if you have to fill in any forms that ask about convictions, you might want to check with whoever gave you the form whether they need to know about a conditional discharge.

 

[Clip]

A conditional discharge does get registered on your criminal record and it will show up on a DBS both standard and enhanced - only once it is spent will it not show on a standard DBS

 

[transportphoto]

He then decided to give me a CONDTIONAL DISCHARGE which meant no conviction

Indeed as pointed out above, a conditional discharge ≠ no conviction. Instead it means that no further action will be taken on the matter unless you commit further offences within a specified timeframe. This is as defined by the Crown Prosecution Service:

Discharge is when the court decides that given the character of the offender and the nature of the crime, punishment would not be appropriate. There are two types of discharge:
1. Absolute discharge - no further action is taken, since either the offence was very minor, or the court considers that the experience has been enough of a deterrent. The offender will receive a criminal record.
2. Conditional discharge - the offender is released and the offence registered on their criminal record. No further action is taken unless they commit a further offence within a time decided by the court (no more than three years).

(https://www.cps.gov.uk/cps-page/sentencing)

 

[Jimmy92]

My understanding is this a condtional discharge for a TFL byelaw which itself is a Non-recordable offence but still a criminal conviction on a enhanced DBS.So this mean I will not have anything on my record.

 

[AlterEgo]

My understanding is this a condtional discharge for a TFL byelaw which itself is a Non-recordable offence but still a criminal conviction on a enhanced DBS.So this mean I will not have anything on my record.

An Enhanced DBS may include intelligence or information held elsewhere than on the Police National Computer, including non-recordable offences. I cannot think of an instance where a Bylaw offence which attracted a conditional discharge would be disclosed, but do not think that the offence could never be disclosed. Enhanced DBSs disclose information based on a proportionality and relevance test.

 

[island]

A conditional discharge does get registered on your criminal record and it will show up on a DBS both standard and enhanced - only once it is spent will it not show on a standard DBS

Wrong – a conviction does not come off a standard DBS once it is spent. You may be thinking of a basic.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 May 2022 ==

My understanding is this a condtional discharge for a TFL byelaw which itself is a Non-recordable offence but still a criminal conviction on a enhanced DBS.So this mean I will not have anything on my record.

The part to focus on here is that the offence was non-recordable, not that the discharge was conditional.

A non-recordable offence should not appear at all on a basic or standard DBS check (unless the conviction was recorded at the same time as the defendant was also convicted of a recordable offence, but that's not applicable here). It might, but is highly unlikely to, appear on an enhanced DBS check.

There is still a conviction, which becomes "spent" at the end of whatever the conditional discharge period set by the magistrates/district judge was, but it's unlikely to appear on any DBS checks for the reasons already mentioned.

 

[1955LR]

I believe a conditional Discharge means one is Guilty, either found Guilty or pleaded Guilty .