31 people fined for boarding a train in the South West without a valid ticket

[Gareth Marston]

https://www.somersetlive.co.uk/news/somerset-news/31-people-fined-boarding-train-2035123

Stewart Grist. Partridge Way, Duffryn, Newport. Age: 29. Travelled to Bristol Temple Meads without having paid £11 train fare. Fined £220, must pay compensation of £11, a surcharge of £30 and costs of £160.

Zackorya Hassan. Dorchester Avenue, London. Age: 22. Travelled to Bristol Temple Meads without having paid £124 train fare. Fined £220, must pay compensation of £124, a surcharge of £30 and costs of £160.

Nathan Hill. Beach Road, Kewstoke, Weston-Super-Mare. Travelled with GWR without having paid £7 train fare. Fined £220, must pay compensation of £7, a surcharge of £30 and costs of £160.

Ali Hussan. Kingsmarsh House, Lawrence Hill. Age: 20. Travelled to Bristol Temple Meads without having paid £105 train fare. Fined £220, must pay compensation of £105, a surcharge of £30 and costs of £160.

Daniel Lodge. The Granby, St Margarets Terrace, Weston-Super-Mare. Age: 23. Travelled to Bristol Temple Meads without having paid £4 train fare. Fined £220, must pay compensation of £4, a surcharge of £30 and costs of £160.

David Moyle. Hazeldene Road, Patchway. Age: 42. Travelled to Bristol Temple Meads without having paid £3.20 train fare. Fined £220, must pay compensation of £3.20, a surcharge of £30 and costs of £160.

Named and shamed and in the local paper-

 

[PeterC]

The headline implies that 31 people were caught on one train. In fact they have just lumped together all the fare dodging cases over a number of days.

Were the numbers unusually high? They don't say

 

[Clip]

The headline implies that 31 people were caught on one train. In fact they have just lumped together all the fare dodging cases over a number of days.

Im not sure about being so pedantic over a headline is really necessary but its good to see that local papers do still publish this stuff.

Were the numbers unusually high? They don't say

Maybe GWR dont want to mention it but im guessing they have a load more who offered to pay out of court

 

[The_Train]

Not sure I like this. The people have been caught and punished accordingly, not sure they require further condemnation in the local paper.

I suppose it shows how desperate to fill pages these local rags are

 

[boxy321]

Is that 400 quid for a £3.20 fare dodge??? Wowsers. They won't be doing that again!

 

[westcoaster]

Interesting that they all received the same fine, surcharge and costs, the only difference being compensation. And the compensation cost is the cost of the original ticket.

 

[najaB]

Interesting that they all received the same fine, surcharge and costs, the only difference being compensation.

Not that surprising. Likely none of them attended court so a presumed income was used to set the fine.

 

[najaB]

ot sure I like this. The people have been caught and punished accordingly, not sure they require further condemnation in the local paper.

I don't see anything that could be described as condemnation, they are publishing a matter of fact.

 

[James H]

Not sure I like this. The people have been caught and punished accordingly, not sure they require further condemnation in the local paper.

I suppose it shows how desperate to fill pages these local rags are

It's important that judicial procedures are the matter of public record. Justice needs to be done in public.

 

[The_Train]

I don't see anything that could be described as condemnation, they are publishing a matter of fact.

Why the need though? They've received their punishment so why do we all need to know their names or more particularly their addresses?

It's important that judicial procedures are the matter of public record. Justice needs to be done in public.

I can understand it in some situations but these are very minor offences that in the grand scheme of things don't affect the general public in their day to day lives. If the plan is to publish as a deterrent to others then is there any need for personal details such as addresses to be published in a local paper?

 

[Karl]

Ouch indeed!

Interesting that they all received the same fine, surcharge and costs, the only difference being compensation.

I noticed 2 of the passengers received a larger fine of £470 as opposed to the standard £220 the rest were given.

Francis. Carnduff Pak, Ballycastle. Age: 29. Travelled with GWR without having paid £13 train fare. Tried to exit platform without using ticket barrier. Fined £470, must pay compensation of £13 a surcharge of £30 and costs of £160.

Lewis. Sherrin Way, Withywood. Age: 20. Travelled with GWR without having paid £12 train fare. Tried to exit platform without using ticket barrier. Fined £470, must pay compensation of £12, a surcharge of £30 and costs of £160.

It looks like they were treated differently.

 

[chorleyjeff]

Not sure I like this. The people have been caught and punished accordingly, not sure they require further condemnation in the local paper.

I suppose it shows how desperate to fill pages these local rags are

Courts are open to the public. Cases like this, assaults, benefit fraud etc are often listed in newspapers because it is news. Convictions are not private information and publicity may well discourage others for doing the same.

 

[boxy321]

Local papers routinely have an 'In the Courts' section with all those done fror driving offences, minor theft etc etc are listed.

 

[najaB]

Why the need though? They've received their punishment so why do we all need to know their names or more particularly their addresses?

This information is published in the court record and is publicly available.

 

[Clip]

Why the need though? They've received their punishment so why do we all need to know their names or more particularly their addresses?



I can understand it in some situations but these are very minor offences that in the grand scheme of things don't affect the general public in their day to day lives. If the plan is to publish as a deterrent to others then is there any need for personal details such as addresses to be published in a local paper?

Well hopefully people will see this and then see how much fare evasion could cost them and they wont try it on. Though im guessing most who do wouldnt be reading the paper anyway but you never know.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Why the need though? They've received their punishment so why do we all need to know their names or more particularly their addresses?



I can understand it in some situations but these are very minor offences that in the grand scheme of things don't affect the general public in their day to day lives. If the plan is to publish as a deterrent to others then is there any need for personal details such as addresses to be published in a local paper?

Recently there was a Cricketer who was found Not Guilty who received a lot more publicity.............

 

[Skymonster]

Only 31??? I was on a NET tram from Hucknall into Nottingham on Sunday and heard on the driver radio that Revenue were operating at Wilkinson Street - a full check not only on those boarding and alighting, but going through each vehicle while it paused. So out of curiosity I decided to get off there to see what was happening I reckon in the course of half an hour or so they took the details of about that many, some of which were taken off the trams to discuss their transgressions. It certainly gave me an appreciation of how prevalent fare evasion might be.

 

[yorksrob]

When I read the thread title, I thought it was some sort of mass protest.

 

[Kite159]

Only 31??? I was on a NET tram from Hucknall into Nottingham on Sunday and heard on the driver radio that Revenue were operating at Wilkinson Street - a full check not only on those boarding and alighting, but going through each vehicle while it paused. So out of curiosity I decided to get off there to see what was happening I reckon in the course of half an hour or so they took the details of about that many, some of which were taken off the trams to discuss their transgressions. It certainly gave me an appreciation of how prevalent fare evasion might be.

I would imagine Nottingham Trams is a bit like the Tyne & Wear Metro/Metrolink/Croydon Tramlink in having its fair share of chancers attempting a free ride.

 

[PeterC]

When I read the thread title, I thought it was some sort of mass protest.

I thought it was going to be a rant about RPIs booking all the people who couldn't legitimately buy tickets before travelling on a single train.

 

[Mag_seven]

When I read the thread title, I thought it was some sort of mass protest.

When I saw then thread title I thought it was some party booking boarding a train of the wrong TOC with Advance Purchases for another TOC. (there was a case of this a few years back when a I think a party mistakenly joined a VTWC service at Coventry with LM only advances and were excessed to some astronomic amount)

 

[70014IronDuke]

Im not sure about being so pedantic over a headline is really necessary but its good to see that local papers do still publish this stuff. ...

What do you mean "so pedantic"? It is an inaccurate, misleading headline - full stop. It is not complicated at all. It should read (something like) "31 people fined for boarding trains in the South West without valid tickets" - it really is pretty simple, and the sub got it wrong. That is not pedantry in my books.

 

[najaB]

What do you mean "so pedantic"? It is an inaccurate, misleading headline - full stop. It is not complicated at all. It should read (something like) "31 people fined for boarding trains in the South West without valid tickets" - it really is pretty simple, and the sub got it wrong. That is not pedantry in my books.

Actually, your 'correction' is no better - how many trains did each person board?

 

[yorkie]

Named and shamed and in the local paper-

Out of interest, do we know for certain the customers did not have valid tickets?

As a retailer yourself, you are well aware that some companies employ staff who, on occasion, may incorrectly state that a valid ticket is not valid.

... Staff member ripped ticket and told my customers they weren't valid, they protested and dug out journey printout they had from me...

In the case of GWR, a forum member was told by many staff at Paddington that his ticket was not valid and was treated as a potential criminal, customer services kept saying his ticket was not valid, and it took many months and intervention by the retailer contacting GWR at a higher level before GWR finally admitted that the customer did, in fact, have a valid ticket.

While I accept that in the cases cited in this thread it is more likely than not that each of the cases did involve no valid ticket being held, here is absolutely no way that we can be certain that every case of GWR claiming a customer did not have a valid ticket is definitely correct unless we independently view the facts for ourselves.

I'm also aware of half a dozen recent cases of GWR alleging that valid ticket holders did not hold valid tickets, and I've witnessed such false allegations at locations such as Paddington myself.

 

[AlterEgo]

Not sure I like this. The people have been caught and punished accordingly, not sure they require further condemnation in the local paper.

I suppose it shows how desperate to fill pages these local rags are

A local paper will typically report on smaller cases in the magistrates’ court.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Out of interest, do we know for certain the customers did not have valid tickets?

The story tells us that the passengers have been convicted in the criminal courts, so it would follow that it has been shown beyond reasonable doubt that they didn't have valid tickets. To argue otherwise is to claim at least one of
- the courts are corrupt and biased on favour of prosecutions
- the courts are incompetent and unable to apply the criminal standard of proof
- the prosecution are dishonest and are bringing false evidence to court.

These would be serious allegations if you were to make them.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Not sure I like this. The people have been caught and punished accordingly, not sure they require further condemnation in the local paper.

As quite a few people have already said, it's both a principle and very long standing practice that justice should both be done and be seen to be done: this both imposes extra punishment on offenders, and also keeps the courts under public scrutiny (so if Yorkie is right in his implication above, then the public of Somerset should pick up that false convictions are being made, and rise up against the magistracy). I know that in the past few years London Midland listed convictions on posters at their stations, and I think other companies have used the same approach.

Maybe GWR dont want to mention it but im guessing they have a load more who offered to pay out of court

So this is an additional point when we get a query about whether to settle or go to court: not only will settling be quicker, almost certainly cheaper and not give you a criminal record, but it will be a private arrangement between you and the company rather than something the public will get to know about.

 

[yorkie]

The story tells us that the passengers have been convicted in the criminal courts, so it would follow that it has been shown beyond reasonable doubt that they didn't have valid tickets. To argue otherwise is to claim at least one of
- the courts are corrupt and biased on favour of prosecutions
- the courts are incompetent and unable to apply the criminal standard of proof
- the prosecution are dishonest and are bringing false evidence to court.

These would be serious allegations if you were to make them.

It's a serious matter indeed.

See https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/taken-to-court-facing-criminal-charges-advice-needed.156920/ for example; this went to court for a preliminary hearing but the OP paid a large sum for proper representation and the case was withdrawn.

The OP had not done anything wrong but if they had not defended their case, and simply not turned up ( most people who are charged with fare evasion don't turn up) are you telling me the court will have called expert witnesses to determine the fare was valid? Are you telling me the OP would not have been convicted in their absence?

My understanding is that TOCs tend to win if you simply fail to turn up because if they say the ticket wasn't being used on a permitted route this will generally be accepted as true, even though someone who understands the Routeing guide knows it isn't true.

Edit: and if the 'strict liability' Railway Byelaws are used, there is no need to even demonstrate intent! If a defendant doesn't turn up, it's pretty easy for the TOC to win, regardless of whether or not an expert would be able to determine the defendant was actually in the right.


And here is another case http://www.penmansedgwick.com/PracticeAreas/Criminal/FareEvasion/FareEvasionCases.aspx (which I provided assistance for)

FIRST CAPITAL CONNECT.v.S
WATFORD MAGISTRATES COURT

The Defendant was charged with having entered a train for the purpose of traveling, and not having a ticket entitling such travel. The defence was that the client had in fact paid for a return ticket to London from Brookmans Park, but was obliged on the return journey due to a physical injury and severe pain to alight at a previous station, namely Hatfield. Accordingly the Revenue Protection Officer dealt with the matter, and a prosecution followed.

Submissions were made which resulted in the withdrawal of the Prosecution Summons, and an application for defence costs, which was granted

The defendant was accused of over-travelling without paying the correct fare, and I am certain that if they had not had proper representation the court would have found in favour of FCC. In fact the defendant had done nothing wrong. FCC were very worried by the presence of defence solicitors as it threatened to disrupt the day they had planned with many cases to get through, all of which were just rubber stamping exercises.

It has taken months for a forum member to get acceptance by GWR that they held a valid ticket for a journey made in April, and this was only after intervention of the retailer, and after numerous staff members (all of whom would no doubt be treated as expert witnesses by a court!) all stated the OP's fare was not valid.

I think some people really have absolutely no idea what goes on! Come and join us at a forum meal some time and I'll tell you what goes on!

 

[Smethwickian]

Not sure I like this. The people have been caught and punished accordingly, not sure they require further condemnation in the local paper.

I suppose it shows how desperate to fill pages these local rags are

One of the key principals of British justice is that is ''seen to be done' which is why, with very limited and statutorily defined exceptions, courts are open to the press and public. Local newspapers have always (until increasing centralisation and staff cuts at least) covered local courts and many also have arrangements to publish listings of case outcomes even if they were not present, as the information is in the public domain.
Whether it is assault, fare evasion, theft or benefit fraud, if you don't want to face the potential punishment or the possibility of appearing in the press, maybe don't do the crime.
Regarding the question as to why addresses need to be published, one of the caveats of publishing court cases is that the details do have to be accurate, and that includes correctly identifying the accused with the details recorded in open court, usually by name, age and address. No-one uninvolved but with a similar name therefore has a complaint.
Yorkie is concerned that TOCs win in court if the defendant does not turn up because of the strict liability law. But if it has gone to court, how many letters and warnings will the defendant have ignored without taking the opportunity to query the penalty or argue their case?

 

[Iskra]

I would imagine Nottingham Trams is a bit like the Tyne & Wear Metro/Metrolink/Croydon Tramlink in having its fair share of chancers attempting a free ride.

My only experience of T&W metro was about 18 years ago. We couldn’t get the TVM to work. We asked the shopkeeper next to it, he had no idea and said nobody pays just jump the barrier.

We eventually got tickets out of the machine, but in the time it took us to do it, not one other person paid, they all just jumped the barriers!

It is good to see people being caught for this, but some of these fines seem rather large and inconsistent compared to the punishments that career criminals get for persistent crime. It looks like fare dodgers are seen as a cash cow.