Recent content by AlterEgo

Yes. If they bother to check this then it could get very expensive for you

They would be looking to recover any fares via a settlement rather than via court.

Your letter should start with addressing the person or department who wrote to you, and have a starting sentence that mentions what you are replying to “eg: thank you for your letter of (date)” Always close with a call to action, repeating that you wish to settle out of court and saying...

What a thick response. They've conflated etickets and ToD *again*. Mindlessly incompetent and incurious.

Thanks for the update, it is always useful to know the outcome!

Is there any evidence of this? TfL haven't asked about other offences right now, but that is exactly what they will think given the pattern of tickets. Key to this is why she hasn't been using contactless or Oyster for these journeys. It is rare to see paper tickets wholly on contactless routes...

I'm afraid the inspector will have seen this as a red flag. Buying a paper ticket from Canary Wharf to Hayes and Harlington is very expensive. It's £10.90 single or £21.80 return. Why is she doing that? On contactless it costs less than half the price with single fares at just £5.10 in the...

Did she have a paper ticket, or was she using contactless? Did she make any attempt to purchase a ticket to cover her whole journey?

Firstly, what journey were you making? This will help us to understand if the fare due is calculated correctly.

I mean the witness statement from the RPI at the time, which we have seen on here. Not the statement from the train company to the court.

We see it here very frequently! The first they know is something like a threat of further action from a court fine or an attachment of earnings order going to their employer. It is a horrendous system. 1714048827 There is sometimes bodycam footage, which may supplement the case. When we see...

Right now there are probably hundreds or thousands of people who don't know that, and it will only come to light when they get background or credit checked, refused insurance in some cases, or face further consequences for not paying court fines.

This wasn't an assumption, it was in an earlier post which is why @furlong made specific reference to it, but it has been edited away by now I suppose.

The OP mentions early on that it was a 60+ Oyster.

But with due respect those are very rare, and usually as a result of a witness misidentifying someone. That is, a person who looked like John Smith fired the gun, so John Smith gets arrested - and perhaps even convicted - but it was actually David Jones who did it and they get away with it...