Magistrates Court for sitting in First Class with Standard Ticket.

JessicaR13 · 30 Apr 2019

I was caught sitting in First Class with a Standard ticket- yes I admit I was in the wrong there is no point going on with excuses and I accepted that. I offered to move from first class back to standard they didnt accept that- fine (again im in the wrong, fair enough im due a fine). However at the time of the offence I was offered to pay a £20 fine there and then (I only had my work credit card on me at this time) so I asked the conductor what my other options were, they advised I would be sent a £20 fine in the post- this was all being recorded on their body cameras. I said thats fine, gave my details willingly.

I didn't receive any correspondence from the train company for 6 months then all of a sudden I receive a letter saying I am summoned to Magistrates court- I wrote back to see if this was some mistake as I hadn't received any kind of penalty charge or anything before in the post and explained in the letter that I had been told (on record on camera) that it would be a £20 sent to my home address.

They wrote back to say that my appeal had been rejected and that hey were proceeding with the court hearing.

This is my first offence and to be honest I'm a a state of shock that I am being summoned to court and could potentially end up with a fine of hundreds of pounds and potentially a criminal record for sitting in first class with a standard ticket, which can affect my job, my ability to travel abroad for work, my mortgage etc- yes I know still wrong but do I not have the right to pay an initial fine first, as I've never denied my wrong doing, I accepted the £20, I gave my details willingly to pay the fine?

Id appreciate any advice.

RailUK Forums

cuccir · 30 Apr 2019

Can you remember the exact date that this happened? When did you get the first letter from the Magistrates Court? Legally they have to inform the Magistrates Court of their intention to prosecute you within 6 months of the event happening. They have probably made that deadline but it is worth checking.

There's no right to a Penalty Fare - the £20 fine - that you were initially offered; it's something that the train companies offer as an alternative to prosecution. I don't know why they didn't offer you one, but I'm afraid they were within their rights to move to prosecution instead. It doesn't seem particualrly fair that you weren't informed of this on the train.

It sounds like time is tight, but there may be the option to contact the train company and offer to settle. When is your court date?

furlong · 30 Apr 2019

If the company agreed on the spot to settle the matter by invoicing you for £20, then that is what should have happened, unless the company discovered some new evidence that was not available to the company at the time that that was agreed and which would have had a material effect on that agreement? (This might be a discovery that something you told the inspector which fed into that decision was untrue.) Or in other words, ask for a copy of the recording, send a cheque for £20 to resolve the matter in accordance with your recorded verbal agreement, and if the company proceeds with the case find a local solicitor to help you argue the company's actions amount to an 'abuse of process' ?

jon0844 · 1 May 2019

I doubt very much the incident was recorded on camera. While it is constantly recording, like a dashcam, footage is only saved if a button is pressed (as is my understanding). I am pretty certain footage is only recorded if the staff member was in some way threatened?

furlong · 1 May 2019

If there's potentially going to be a court case for which the recording might be needed as evidence (if witnesses disagree about the content), and the company destroyed that evidence, there could be tricky questions for it to answer - it wouldn't help its case.

ForTheLoveOf · 1 May 2019

What precise legislation are they prosecuting you under? Does it say something like "travelled without previously having paid his fare with intent to avoid payment thereof", or more like "remaining in an area reserved for holders of a first class ticket without a valid ticket entitling him to remain in that place"? This makes a difference to the potential penalties and whether or not you need to declare a conviction, if you plead guilty or plead not guilty but are found guilty.

some bloke · 1 May 2019

ForTheLoveOf said:
This makes a difference to...whether or not you need to declare a conviction

There is no reason in the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act to suppose that a byelaw conviction is exempt from the "rehabilitation period" during which you are required to disclose it, when asked for employment or insurance purposes - see this thread:

https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...-a-letter-from-tfl.173719/page-6#post-3964553

and from the last part of this post onwards:

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/unpaid-fare.178432/page-3#post-3968098

For a person aged 18 or above at the time of conviction, where the sentence is a fine, the period is a year.

The Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 as amended with effect from 2014 does not say that "non-recordable" offences (ie those not on the Police National "Computer") are exempt.

Edit: the last sentence should read, "...."non-recordable" offences (ie those which *should not be* on the Police National Computer)"

ForTheLoveOf · 1 May 2019

some bloke said:
There is no reason in the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act to suppose that a byelaw conviction is exempt from the "rehabilitation period" during which you are required to disclose it, when asked for employment or insurance purposes - see this thread:

https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...-a-letter-from-tfl.173719/page-6#post-3964553

and from the last part of this post onwards:

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/unpaid-fare.178432/page-3#post-3968098

For a person aged 18 or above at the time of conviction, where the sentence is a fine, the period is a year.

The Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 as amended with effect from 2014 does not say that "non-recordable" offences (ie those not on the Police National "Computer") are exempt.

A conditional discharge is a possible sentence within the Sentencing Guidelines.

some bloke · 1 May 2019

ForTheLoveOf said:
A conditional discharge is a possible sentence within the Sentencing Guidelines.

Yes, but I was addressing your point on types of offence. Are you saying that a conditional discharge is only, or far more likely to be, given for a byelaw offence? If so, then its being a byelaw offence "may" make a difference.

In itself the fact of a byelaw offence does not necessarily make "a difference to..whether or not you need to declare a conviction".

185 · 1 May 2019

Just a note.. re the original post, passenger states "I was offered" ..I read this to perhaps mean the RPOs offered a penalty fare of £20 and the poster then asked what their other options were. May need clarification.

ForTheLoveOf · 1 May 2019

some bloke said:
Yes, but I was addressing your point on types of offence. Are you saying that a conditional discharge is only, or far more likely to be, given for a byelaw offence? If so, then the offence being a byelaw offence "may" make a difference.

In itself the type of offence mentioned does not necessarily make "a difference to..whether or not you need to declare a conviction".

Whilst the sentencing guidelines do not, per se, distinguish between RoRA and Byelaws offences in terms of when a conditional discharge is appropriate (it being the lowest range of outcome for a category 3 offence either way), the circumstances of an incident leading to a charge under RoRA are likely to be such that a conditional discharge is less likely to be appropriate.

Conditional discharges are sometimes awarded, but we do not yet know the exact circumstances of the OP's journey - for example, which station they boarded at, whether that station had adequate ticketing facilities, and so on.

some bloke · 1 May 2019

ForTheLoveOf said:
A conditional discharge is a possible sentence within the Sentencing Guidelines.

A conditional discharge is not a conviction, at least according to this from 2014 (paragraph 22):

https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/utiac/2014-ukut-314

But an employee or job applicant might consider carefully what they say in response to questions, for reasons potentially including:

a) issues concerning trust, personal relationships at work or perceptions of trustworthiness;

b) the "rehabilitation period" lasts for the period of the order;

c) the question of what is lawful to say when asked "have you been found guilty" is a different matter to questions about convictions (above, paragraphs 20 and 23);

d) other questions might raise different legal issues;

e) in some professions perhaps there are other considerations:

"If you are a registered Nurse or Midwife, your NMC code (section 23.2) places an obligation on you to inform your employer about “any caution or charge against you, or if you have received a conditional discharge in relation to, or have been found guilty of, a criminal offence (other than a protected caution or conviction)”.
https://www.rcn.org.uk/get-help/rcn-advice/police-cautions-convictions-and-criminal-procedures

f) the order should be on the Police National Computer.

ForTheLoveOf said:
the background of something being charged as RoRA means that a conditional discharge is likely to be appropriate.

I'm afraid I'm not sure what that means, or how frequent conditional discharges are for ticketing offences.

Haywain · 1 May 2019

Can I suggest that the constant discussion of what does and doesn't constitute a conviction and whether it is spent would be better in a thread of it's own rather than in every single thread where it fails to do anything other than cloud the issues the OP want's help with?

some bloke · 1 May 2019

The OP is worried about the potential effect of a court case on her career.
The effect of a byelaw conviction was clarified, by linking to previous threads.
That issue has now reached a broad consensus on the forum, so is not being constantly discussed.

The possibility of a conditional discharge was raised: the issue of disclosure in that case is a bit complex, and was hopefully clarified.
To my knowledge that issue is not constantly discussed.

najaB · 1 May 2019

furlong said:
...and the company destroyed that evidence...

There likely was no evidence to destroy. As @jon0844 said, body cameras don't save the footage unless the operator specifically presses a button.

boxy321 · 2 May 2019

Haywain said:
Can I suggest that the constant discussion of what does and doesn't constitute a conviction and whether it is spent would be better in a thread of it's own rather than in every single thread where it fails to do anything other than cloud the issues the OP want's help with?

I agree. Convictions and their effects and outcomes should have a special section referred to when required, rather than be brought up every other post. As in; "#see here# link for more info". The same goes for penalty 'fake', 'it's not a fine blah blah blah' comments all the time.

Correctly tagged posts could also remove the same discussion about virtually identical events being raised again and again and again, like short ticketing, lost/out of date railcard etc etc, as the personas looking for advice would often find what they want without creating so many new threads. Granted, a lot of people's experience may seem new and unique to them so not trying to put anyone off asking. Indeed a section: 'If you've been accused of.... do this...' would help rather than a worried OP asking a question and then disappearing as the debate goes on....

ForTheLoveOf · 2 May 2019

boxy321 said:
I agree. Convictions and their effects and outcomes should have a special section referred to when required, rather than be brought up every other post. As in; "#see here# link for more info". The same goes for penalty 'fake', 'it's not a fine blah blah blah' comments all the time.

Correctly tagged posts could also remove the same discussion about virtually identical events being raised again and again and again, like short ticketing, lost railcard etc etc, as the person looking for advice would often what they want without creating so many new threads. Granted a lot of people's experience may seem new to them so not trying to put anyone off asking.

I wouldn't disagree in respect of things which are fixed and the same each time - e.g. the effect of convictions (which will only change if the law changes). But in respect of giving 'fixed' advice for specific scenarios I'm not sure that this is advisable. It is very rare that we come across two identical cases, in terms of what the person did, what the train company did, which train company was involved, whether there were ticketing facilities at the boarding station, and so on and so forth. I wouldn't want to link to 'general' advice that ends up being inappropriate.

boxy321 · 2 May 2019

ForTheLoveOf said:
I wouldn't disagree in respect of things which are fixed and the same each time - e.g. the effect of convictions (which will only change if the law changes). But in respect of giving 'fixed' advice for specific scenarios I'm not sure that this is advisable. It is very rare that we come across two identical cases, in terms of what the person did, what the train company did, which train company was involved, whether there were ticketing facilities at the boarding station, and so on and so forth. I wouldn't want to link to 'general' advice that ends up being inappropriate.

Absolutely, but it's the duplicate pages of near identical debate (present company excepted!) that accompany every help request which drown out the OP. I'll get my hat.

Watson Wilde · 10 May 2019

A couple of points here. Maybe three

I travel weekly on the Thursday 18:43 ex Euston to Crewe - first port of call Milton Keynes. The train is always full to bursting point even in first which is where I am sitting. Now out the corner of a bleary eye I notice when the tickets are checked that probably 60+% of people show what I assume to be a second class ticket and then pay what I assume to be the upgrade in price between standard and first and get off at MK. Nobody is getting prosecuted. No fines issued. Was this offered? Also for the weekend upgrades you are specifically told to sit in first and then upgrade from standard.

Something I have seen many, many times is a completely different set of standards applied when the tickets are checked depending upon who is in the crosshairs. One example where the punter was in the too much hassle box was a couple of months ago when I came through New St and a guy got on and sat in the table next to me opens a beer and relaxes. The ticket guy arrives. The guy duly tells him that not only does he have no first class ticket; he has no ticket at all and has no intention of paying for one! Not even one word of displeasure from the ticket fellow. No threat of the police at Wolves. Nothing. This guy is in the too difficult box so he's basically got a Gold Pass. A year ago around now there was some debate between this American family and the guard on the way to London next thing, brakes smoking, we pull in to Milton Keynes or somewhere, and the police are waiting to give this couple and their 3 kids and luggage the bums rush. They are in the compliant box . Easy to pick away at to your heart's content.

On the magistrates front I am involved in construction disputes regularly - too regularly - if the contract calls for arbitration rather than adjudication before any referring party has access to the court system the pre-action protocol demands that all reasonable avenues to settle the dispute must be exhausted prior to an action being sought, otherwise the courts would be even more clogged than they already are. I don't know what the process is at magistrates level but surely the referring party must make some sort of effort to settle?

My only advice is: Stop being a middle class and agreeable traveler, much better you adopt a semi-aggressive stance with staff and have that look as though you have nothing to loose and that recovery of any CCJ will be impossible. Maybe even dangerous. You'll be fine then.

anme · 10 May 2019

Watson Wilde said:
My only advice is: Stop being a middle class and agreeable traveler, much better you adopt a semi-aggressive stance with staff and have that look as though you have nothing to loose and that recovery of any CCJ will be impossible. Maybe even dangerous. You'll be fine then.

This seems like extremely bad, and extremely anti-social, advice.

Watson Wilde · 10 May 2019

anme said:
This seems like extremely bad, and extremely anti-social, advice.

It's called irony.

Darandio · 10 May 2019

Watson Wilde said:
It's called irony.

Yet this section of the forum is specifically for knowledgable members to give helpful advice and guidance.

Watson Wilde · 10 May 2019

Darandio said:
Yet this section of the forum is specifically for knowledgable members to give helpful advice and guidance.

I have given a couple of avenues to explore by the originator's solicitor.

anme · 10 May 2019

Watson Wilde said:
I have given a couple of avenues to explore by the originator's solicitor.

Maybe you could clarify which parts of your post are intended to be "ironic" and which parts are intended to be "helpful".

Watson Wilde · 10 May 2019

anme said:
Maybe you could clarify which parts of your post are intended to be "ironic" and which parts are intended to be "helpful".

I could. Yes.

island · 10 May 2019

Watson Wilde said:
On the magistrates front I am involved in construction disputes regularly - too regularly - if the contract calls for arbitration rather than adjudication before any referring party has access to the court system the pre-action protocol demands that all reasonable avenues to settle the dispute must be exhausted prior to an action being sought, otherwise the courts would be even more clogged than they already are. I don't know what the process is at magistrates level but surely the referring party must make some sort of effort to settle?

That’s civil procedure, not paying your train fare is criminal. Apples and oranges.

bionic · 11 May 2019

Watson Wilde said:
A couple of points here. Maybe three

I travel weekly on the Thursday 18:43 ex Euston to Crewe - first port of call Milton Keynes. The train is always full to bursting point even in first which is where I am sitting. Now out the corner of a bleary eye I notice when the tickets are checked that probably 60+% of people show what I assume to be a second class ticket and then pay what I assume to be the upgrade in price between standard and first and get off at MK. Nobody is getting prosecuted. No fines issued. Was this offered? Also for the weekend upgrades you are specifically told to sit in first and then upgrade from standard.

Something I have seen many, many times is a completely different set of standards applied when the tickets are checked depending upon who is in the crosshairs. One example where the punter was in the too much hassle box was a couple of months ago when I came through New St and a guy got on and sat in the table next to me opens a beer and relaxes. The ticket guy arrives. The guy duly tells him that not only does he have no first class ticket; he has no ticket at all and has no intention of paying for one! Not even one word of displeasure from the ticket fellow. No threat of the police at Wolves. Nothing. This guy is in the too difficult box so he's basically got a Gold Pass. A year ago around now there was some debate between this American family and the guard on the way to London next thing, brakes smoking, we pull in to Milton Keynes or somewhere, and the police are waiting to give this couple and their 3 kids and luggage the bums rush. They are in the compliant box . Easy to pick away at to your heart's content.

On the magistrates front I am involved in construction disputes regularly - too regularly - if the contract calls for arbitration rather than adjudication before any referring party has access to the court system the pre-action protocol demands that all reasonable avenues to settle the dispute must be exhausted prior to an action being sought, otherwise the courts would be even more clogged than they already are. I don't know what the process is at magistrates level but surely the referring party must make some sort of effort to settle?

My only advice is: Stop being a middle class and agreeable traveler, much better you adopt a semi-aggressive stance with staff and have that look as though you have nothing to loose and that recovery of any CCJ will be impossible. Maybe even dangerous. You'll be fine then.

I thought this was a decent post, raised some good points and contributed positively to the thread. There are many individuals on this forum who have no concept of irony, sarcasm, subtle wit and so forth.

anme · 11 May 2019

bionic said:
I thought this was a decent post, raised some good points and contributed positively to the thread. There are many individuals on this forum who have no concept of irony, sarcasm, subtle wit and so forth.

Haha now we see some irony.

Western Sunset · 11 May 2019

"Oh the ironing of it all", as Bart Simpson once said...........

Enthusiast · 16 May 2019

some bloke said:
A conditional discharge is not a conviction, at least according to this from 2014 (paragraph 22):

I don't quite know what a Conditional Discharge has to do with an Immigration Tribunal but a Conditional Discharge in criminal proceedings is indeed not a conviction. Nor is a fine, nor is a prison sentence. They are all sentences following a conviction (which comes either from a guilty plea or being found guilty at trial). As far as the Rehabilitation of Offenders' Act goes a conviction dealt with by way of a Conditional Discharge is deemed "spent" when the period of the discharge (which can be anything between six months and three years) has ended.

Magistrates Court for sitting in First Class with Standard Ticket.

New Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member