Not really wishing to get involved in the legal minutiae of the discussion, it just occurred to me that there is some provision of 'Hot Pursuit' where a potential offender can be pursued outside the locality of the original offence, e.g. chasing a shoplifter down the street. Maybe that is the impression that the employee is under.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Followed a mile from the station.
- Thread starter Biginjapan1
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
I agree with this rather neat summary of the issues
cactustwirly
Established Member
I wouldn't be too sure about that, there's a possibility that the evidence could be thrown out of court, ie it could be argued it was obtained under duress.
However if it goes to court it won't be easy and you could end up with a larger fine.
So I would just pay the £88
cactustwirly
Established Member
If the OP threw it away after leaving the railway premises, and were not aware they were being followed by an RPI, then IMO it is a reasonable defence.
If the OP has a good lawyer, and a bit of patience I do believe they could possibly win the case.
As the RPI was acting innapropriately, it casts doubts on his evidence.
Warwick
Member
It's a matter of that well-worn phrase "common sense". A valid ticket is required to travel upon a service provided by or for a TOC. Once that journey has been made there is no further use for the ticket - unless the user of the ticket wishes to retain it for perhaps claiming expenses. Once I have travelled from Truro to Penzance and walked off the station at Penzance (there is no ticket barrier there) I simply drop the used ticket into the rubbish bin that's to the left of the station entrance. If a ticket inspector then follows me up along Market Jew street and demands to see my ticket they'll be disappointed and legally they haven't got a leg to stand on.
Please don't start quoting 19th century bye-laws at me.
(a) Why would I quote 19th Century byelaws when there are a perfectly good set from 2005; and (b) the age of a law has no direct impact on its validity.
The statement was "there is no obligation" - which, to me at least, reads as there is something which specifically states there is no obligation. That's completely different to "there is nothing that makes it obligatory to..."
mallard
Established Member
- Joined
- 12 Apr 2009
- Messages
- 1,304
No, that's the same thing. There is no legal obligation to do anything unless there's a a law that says otherwise (and conversely, nothing is illegal unless the law says otherwise). "Nulla poena sine lege" in the latin.
It's not the same thing. One is a positive right (in that the right to do X has been specifically granted by law) the other is an inferred right (in that there's no law that says you can't do X). While, in practice, they amount to the same thing, it is a trivial matter to defeat a prosecution for doing X, the latter is more involved.
Warwick
Member
You can bicker all you like. You know that I'm correct in the statement that I made.
AlterEgo
Veteran Member
We don’t know the circumstances of the OP’s case. We don’t know if they pushed past the barrier line for example.
Indeed. It could have been the passenger used a exit the RPIs missed, it could have been the passenger didn't realise they were ticket inspectors, it could have been the passenger deliberately tried to avoid them due to not having a ticket.
matt_world2004
Established Member
- Joined
- 5 Nov 2014
- Messages
- 4,504
We don't but assuming the op did presentation of a ticket a mile away from the station would not be a defence to pushing past the barrier line.
Oh my word. Sometimes a discussion descends into mental onanism on obscure points - but this is seriously scraping the barrel, isn’t it?
The trouble is it’s like a car crash, I can’t help but read even though its clear from halfway down the first page which way it’s going.
Unless the OP returns, can this thread be locked before it gets even further off topic.
The trouble is it’s like a car crash, I can’t help but read even though its clear from halfway down the first page which way it’s going.
Unless the OP returns, can this thread be locked before it gets even further off topic.
RPI
Established Member
- Joined
- 6 Dec 2010
- Messages
- 2,757
We don' know what happened at the station as the OP didn't return, if an offence was observed at the station ie they were asked for a ticket and refused, jumped a barrier etc. then the offence was committed and it's irrelevant where they were stopped and questioned about it, depending on the TOC the inspector may have a body camera that could have observed the entire incident for the whole mile. But unless the op returns and clarifies some points then we have more questions than answers
Haywain
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 15,191
You're not alone in that.
DaveNewcastle
Established Member
This is a good question.
Unfortunately, there has been some replies to your request which are factually incorrect and some which are are simply opinion based on no facts at all. I'm pleased to see that the correct position in law has been given by najaB, Fare-Cop and 221129.
If I correctly understand the incorrect advice, it comes from a presumption that there is some Offence you are suspected of related to the payment of railway fares, and that the investigation and evidence gathering of a Criminal Offence is somehow confined to railway property. That is incorrect. Evidence can be gathered from conversation, correspondence, non-personal items and witness reports at any place or time. I guess people such as ForTheLoveOf, sheff1, takno and others have made an uninformed assumption that Evidence of a crime committed on Railway property, is only admissable as Evidence, if that Evidence is gathered on Railway property. There is nothing in law to support such an assumption, and I apologise that you have been given such misleading information from this forum.
I have made no such assumption and have made no comments regarding the admission of evidence.
It is surely goes without saying that evidence of a crime can be gathered from conversation, correspondence, non-personal items and witness reports at any place or time.
Last edited:
ForTheLoveOf
Established Member
- Joined
- 7 Oct 2017
- Messages
- 6,416
I don't think that's what I have argued - merely that the Railway Byelaws etc. apply only on or near railway property (something which I don't think is conscientious). If you are apprehended for an alleged Byelaw offence outside railway property and without continuous footage of you walking from the station without dropping/throwing away something, I would find it hard to believe that you could be convicted of an offence of failing to show a ticket unless you already committed the offence on railway property (e.g. jumping a barrier), or if you admit what you did.
Ultimately I agree that this is currently probably a fairly fruitless and circular discussion until the OP returns to clarify certain requested details.
The crux of the matter here is the question 'were the BTP right to advise that the inspector had no authority to pursue the matter after leaving the railway?' and the answer to that is a resounding NO, the BTP were not correct to give such poor advice.
Whether the TOC management condoned that action is an entirely separate matter between the inspector and his employer.
Whether the TOC management condoned that action is an entirely separate matter between the inspector and his employer.
Haywain
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 15,191
There's a lot of "what if" going on in this thread, mainly revolving around the failure to produce a ticket. Another possibility is that a ticket handed over was actually a discounted ticket where there was no actual possibility of the discount being correct? No requirement there for continuous CCTV.
AlterEgo
Veteran Member
This is a clear case of the OP not coming back. All he wanted was for everyone to tell him the RPI had no jurisdiction, and quote something to back him up. There’s obviously more to this than first appears.
Mutant Lemming
Established Member
That may be the case but it does raise the issue regarding the "powers" of company agents be they railway, store or private security. It may be the case the OP was in the wrong but equally it wouldn't be the first time revenue have over stepped the mark either and a kind of national guideline would help in clearing some of the grey areas with regards to who and where and when you can be challenged.
Even in the street, some distance from a train station? If the OP's statement is true, this could happen to anyone. I often dispose of my just used ticket in the bin outside of a station, off the station premises.
Police have limited powers to stop and question people, and must document when they have done so in accordance with law. It would seem unusual for me for plain clothes ticket inspectors to have the right to stop members of the public on public property let alone for that person to be under any legal obligation to show them anything.
matt_world2004
Established Member
- Joined
- 5 Nov 2014
- Messages
- 4,504
It also depends on the line of questioning the RPI used if the RPI said.
Do you have a ticket and the op said no.Then reasonably the op could argue they believed the RPI was talking about at that very moment, and not on the train. If the RPI asked did they have a ticket on board the train that's a different matter
Do you have a ticket and the op said no.Then reasonably the op could argue they believed the RPI was talking about at that very moment, and not on the train. If the RPI asked did they have a ticket on board the train that's a different matter
I think it boils down to this question - what right do you have to say nothing, not show any ticket and refuse to give details if you are stopped by an RPI anywhere that isn't on railway property?
Haywain
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 15,191
No comment.
I think the OP has been given plenty of advice and thoughts to consider in this thread so far, however as we have seen they have not as yet returned.
Until then, and until some further details are provided by them, I don't think there is much to be gained from continuing this discussion.
Biginjapan1 - if you need any further advice or assistance please use the report function to let us know and we will reopen the discussion.
thanks
Until then, and until some further details are provided by them, I don't think there is much to be gained from continuing this discussion.
Biginjapan1 - if you need any further advice or assistance please use the report function to let us know and we will reopen the discussion.
thanks
- Status