Got caught touching in on exit gates for over a year

Fayxx · 12 Feb 2024

Hi guys,
Soo I have received a letter from Magistrates court “ Notice of fine and collection order” and I have to pay certain amount of money after a fare evasion happened on the underground.
My question is there a conviction will stay on the system after this or once it gets paid off im free to go ?

RailUK Forums

scrapy · 12 Feb 2024

It's hard to answer your question without knowing what you were charged with and under which act. Did you receive a court summons?

Fayxx · 12 Feb 2024

Offences and Imposition, board a train in non compulsory ticket area without a valid ticket- railway bye-law. That’s what mentioned in the letter

and the strange part they didn’t send me that letter when they asked me if I plea guilty or not, straight away to the notice fine !

alholmes · 12 Feb 2024

Sounds as though the SJPN and/or court summons went to the old address that you gave to the inspector (as per your previous thread), and you’ve been found guilty in absence of any response from you.

There is a procedure for effectively setting the clock back so that you can have your day in court (it’s called a Statutory Declaration), but based on your previous thread you’re very likely to be found guilty again, so the SD wouldn’t really achieve anything.

Best advice is probably to pay up.

Haywain · 12 Feb 2024

alholmes said:
There is a procedure for effectively setting the clock back so that you can have your day in court (it’s called a Statutory Declaration), but based on your previous thread you’re very likely to be found guilty again, so the SD wouldn’t really achieve anything.

The only thing that might be changed (given that TfL almost always prosecute) is the level of fine imposed. If the poster did not declare earnings the court will have used a default figure so there is a chance that a reduced level of fine could be obtained if the OP is on a low income. Others will be more expert in what level of earnings is assumed by the court in such a case.

island · 12 Feb 2024

Haywain said:
If the poster did not declare earnings the court will have used a default figure so there is a chance that a reduced level of fine could be obtained if the OP is on a low income. Others will be more expert in what level of earnings is assumed by the court in such a case.

The default weekly earnings amount assumed is £440, or £120 where the defendant is known to be a student or on benefits.

Fayxx said:
Hi guys,
Soo I have received a letter from Magistrates court “ Notice of fine and collection order” and I have to pay certain amount of money after a fare evasion happened on the underground.
My question is there a conviction will stay on the system after this or once it gets paid off im free to go ?

You're "free to go" either way, in the sense that your liberty is not affected (unless perhaps you fail to pay the fine and ignore all efforts to engage for months).

Your conviction will be spent one year after the court date, after which it won't need to be disclosed for most purposes. Depending on the offence you were convicted of, it might not even appear on criminal record checks at all.

pedr · 12 Feb 2024

I think this is covered in other responses but to be precise about what is likely to have happened:

1) the company sent letters to your old address and got no response.
2) the company began a criminal prosecution against you by post, listing your old address.
3) You did not respond to the court before the deadline because you did not receive the court documents sent to your old address.
4) The magistrates’ court found you guilty of the crime because the law allows them to do this if the defendant does not respond.
5) The court sentenced you to pay a fine and other associated charges.
6) The court’s enforcement/collection team tracked you down and sent the collection notice to your new address.

This means you have been convicted of a crime. This is disclosable to people with good reason to ask you about crimes you have committed. For most British purposes like job applications and insurance it will be “spent” and can be disregarded one year after the date of the court hearing. You need to take separate advice on other people/organisations/countries and whether they would expect you to tell them about it.

If you earn less than the average it might be in your financial interest to inform the court that you didn’t hear about the case in time, as alholms and Haywain mention. This is almost certainly not going to change the rest of the outcome, though, as you would be convicted at a re-hearing of the case.

Puffing Devil · 13 Feb 2024

pedr said:
If you earn less than the average it might be in your financial interest to inform the court that you didn’t hear about the case in time, as alholms and Haywain mention. This is almost certainly not going to change the rest of the outcome, though, as you would be convicted at a re-hearing of the case.

And the clock would reset on the time taken for the conviction to become "spent". A potential saving on the fine, or having the matter the off the record* sooner.

* Let's not get into a big discussion about disclosure here.

Fayxx · 13 Mar 2024

Hello. I going through difficult times right now thinking about this issue. Soo in January I have received Notice Of Fine And Collection Order and already made instalment payment for it. But today I have received required to appear in court on May with all my case details and I need to plea guilty or not for the same matter. How is this possible.

furlong · 13 Mar 2024

Perhaps the proceedings actually relate to different offences as I seem to recall you indicated you'd not been paying properly for rather a long time? But the law here can be quite complicated so you do need someone who understands it to look through all the paperwork and explain the situation. (In essence in legal terms, I think your question is whether, having already been convicted once, might fresh proceedings be challenged as an abuse of process? A lot of detail is required to have any chance of suggesting an answer to that. Or did you perhaps do a Stat Dec to cancel a previous fine and restart proceedings?)

island · 13 Mar 2024

I think we need to see all the paperwork to give proper advice. It may be that you have been charged with further offences.

Fayxx · 13 Mar 2024

Here are some of the paperwork

skyhigh · 13 Mar 2024

Unfortunately the notice of fine suggests that you were prosecuted under Byelaw 18 on that occasion as it mentions "non compulsory ticket area". The latest paperwork says Byelaw 17 which relates to a compulsory ticket area.

As such it looks as if you are being prosecuted again for a different offence.

The latest paperwork has a TfL case number on. Does this match the first lot of paperwork or is it a different reference number?

Fayxx · 13 Mar 2024

But where does it say in the notice letter its under Byelaw 18, I can see Byelaw 17 on the newest one!
The previous one has account number and case number and the new one has Tfl Case No which all of them are different. Even the date of birth in the previous one is incorrect

furlong · 13 Mar 2024

You need to obtain full details of the first offence. You can ask the court for this if necessary.

The first thing to establish is whether or not the two cases arise from (substantially) the same or different sets of facts. E.g. same "stop" by revenue staff, details given both to a train company and TfL and then both prosecute independently in their own preferred way each paying no attention to what the other is doing? Or two separate incidents with prosecutions based on different sets of facts?

(In principle you can only be prosecuted once over any particular incident - an attempt to prosecute a second time could be challenged as an "abuse of process". But it can be a deeply technical legal question to determine whether or not this applies in any given situation.)

jumble · 13 Mar 2024

Since the paperwork appears to shows 2 different surnames on different sheets I am not surprised there is confusion

island · 13 Mar 2024

From what I can tell, this relates to two different offences. TfL does not tend to charge the non-compulsory ticket area offence because almost all its stations have CTAs.

furlong · 13 Mar 2024

island said:
From what I can tell, this relates to two different offences. TfL does not tend to charge the non-compulsory ticket area offence because almost all its stations have CTAs.

Indeed, but what matters is whether or not the two offences charged *separately* arise out of the same, or substantially the same, sets of facts. We can speculate that someone stopped and interviewed at the end of their journey might be caught by byelaw 17 there and from the same evidence applied retrospectively byelaw 18 at the start, but I think with two separate prosecutions arising from the same facts, the second would then have a good chance of being deemed an abuse of process (in that the law required that it be considered by the court alongside the first offence if it was ever going to be considered at all). But we don't yet know the circumstances of the original conviction here and the extent to which there could be any relevant connection.

30907 · 13 Mar 2024

island said:
From what I can tell, this relates to two different offences. TfL does not tend to charge the non-compulsory ticket area offence because almost all its stations have CTAs.

It is also fairly unlikely, though not impossible, that the first offence took place as late as 23 November, given that the summons for that date was issued on 12 March with a court date almost 2 months in the future.

TheJester · 13 Mar 2024

furlong said:
Indeed, but what matters is whether or not the two offences charged *separately* arise out of the same, or substantially the same, sets of facts. We can speculate that someone stopped and interviewed at the end of their journey might be caught by byelaw 17 there and from the same evidence applied retrospectively byelaw 18 at the start, but I think with two separate prosecutions arising from the same facts, the second would then have a good chance of being deemed an abuse of process (in that the law required that it be considered by the court alongside the first offence if it was ever going to be considered at all). But we don't yet know the circumstances of the original conviction here and the extent to which there could be any relevant connection.

Surely it would only be considered with the original offence if the defendant asked for the other offences to be taken into consideration at sentencing?

pedr · 13 Mar 2024

There could be a somewhat plausible argument that if someone boards a train without a ticket at a station which isn’t a compulsory ticket area and then leaves the train in a compulsory ticket area, where they are detected, it would not be entirely proper to prosecute for both the byelaw 17 and byelaw 18 offences, even though technically they were both committed at different times. It would, I think, be even worse to prosecute one, and then only prosecute the other at a later date. But I doubt that’s what has happened here.

AlterEgo · 14 Mar 2024

The two different bits of paperwork have two different names which may go some way to explaining what’s happened here.

Fayxx · 14 Mar 2024

So anyway now I believe if they have certain evidence on you pleading guilty is the only option? Do you know if the court could tolerate with reducing the amount of money? Any tips to take into account on the hearing day?

Y Ddraig Coch · 14 Mar 2024

Fayxx said:
So anyway now I believe if they have certain evidence on you pleading guilty is the only option? Do you know if the court could tolerate with reducing the amount of money? Any tips to take into account on the hearing day?

The court is unlikely to reduce any costs claimed and in fact will add on their own costs as well, what a court can do that a train company will not usually do is take into account your circumstances and allow you to pay instalments that are affordable to you.

Fayxx · 14 Mar 2024

Ok I believe if I went the court then it will be a conviction and will appear in DBS, is there anyway I could solve this matter out of court settlement?

AlterEgo · 14 Mar 2024

Fayxx said:
Ok I believe if I went the court then it will be a conviction and will appear in DBS, is there anyway I could solve this matter out of court settlement?

It sounds like you have been evading your fares and committing offences for a very long period, so I would be very surprised if they would be willing to settle outside of court.

swt_passenger · 15 Mar 2024

AlterEgo said:
It sounds like you have been evading your fares and committing offences for a very long period, so I would be very surprised if they would be willing to settle outside of court.

I’m getting a bit lost with recent additions to this discussion, but I thought the court case for the original long period had already happened, as per post #61?

AlterEgo · 15 Mar 2024

swt_passenger said:
I’m getting a bit lost with recent additions to this discussion, but I thought the court case for the original long period had already happened, as per post #61?

Yes, but they now have an unexplained new case under a slightly different name. They'll no doubt figure out it's the same person who defrauded them over a very long period; they didn't settle then, so I don't see that there is a realistic prospect now.

Sultan · 15 Mar 2024

If you haven't already, I think you need a solicitor - and quick. I'm not sure if you've uploaded all the correspondence you have received and what you have (#72) is difficult (for me) to see that it is from the same letter. How could page 1 be a fine from the court (which infers conviction and a fine / costs awarded against you) yet page 2 and 3 appear to relate to a court appearance this coming May?

If you haven't attended court at all, then the court will have no idea of your personal circumstances and apply a default methodology of collection of any fines / costs. You may wish to provide evidence of your financial circumstances that make it clear your income, fixed living costs (eg rent, travel costs(!), food, etc) so that they can see what your disposable income is. Payslips / bank statements will help you here, as will evidence of dependants (eg children). Only then can they reasonably be expected to change a repayment plan from the default to something more affordable (assuming the plan they have imposed is unaffordable to you).

If you can't afford a solicitor, then Citizen's Advice Bureau or even the court might be able to advise on how to engage in the process, but they are unlikely, unlike a solicitor, to be able to tell you what to say (for your benefit and best outcome).

jumble · 15 Mar 2024

AlterEgo said:
The two different bits of paperwork have two different names which may go some way to explaining what’s happened here.

As per my post 76

Got caught touching in on exit gates for over a year

Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Attachments

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Member

Member