Bought a ticket as the inspector was approaching - now a criminal court hearing through the post?

[jd5253]

HI,

Travelling from High Wycombe to London Marylebone I boarded the train without buying a ticket (Gate open) and later, after seeing the ticket inspector walking through, purchased a ticket on my phone. I am now being prosecuted for travelling without a valid ticket (as "all tickets have to be purchased before boarding the train").

This seems harsh, although I wouldn't mind too much paying a fine (since I was trying to get away with paying a smaller fair than by purchasing a ticket from the last stop into London). However, rather than being sent a fine, I've been sent a criminal offence notice stating that I can either plead guilty and pay a £175 fine or not guilty and appear in court to defend myself. It also states that if I plead guilty (and pay the fine) I will obtain a criminal record.

I don't quite understand how a small incident like this leads to a criminal court hearing/criminal record - I was under the impression that these kind of things were followed by a fine (around £100) and that's it?

I also don't quite understand why it is only now - 5 months after the event - that I am receiving the letter in the post.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated on this case and if it seems fair or next steps to take.

Thank you.

 

[Gloster]

If you have received a letter, please post it in this thread so that thexperts know exactly how the railway are handling the matter. Please obscure your name, address and any other identifying details, such as reference numbers, before doing so.

 

[WesternLancer]

I don't quite understand how a small incident like this leads to a criminal court hearing/criminal record - I was under the impression that these kind of things were followed by a fine (around £100) and that's it?

That is a Penalty Fare of the sort you often see detailed on posters at stations. They are usually for people who are judged to have made errors and ended up with the wrong ticket through some sort of genuine mistake. Where people are suspected of deliberate fare evasion there are other sanctions including being reported for criminal prosecution. It sounds like this is what has happened to you.

Since you actually admit to the intention of deliberately evading your fare buy buying a ticket for a station closer to London than the station you boarded at (known as 'short faring'), it sounds to me like the staff member who decided to report you made the correct judgment call by not issuing you with a Penalty Fare.

But if you can upload an anonymised copy of the documents / letter you have been sent people will be able to advise you on the options available to you or what next steps to take to try to minimise the consequence's of your action.

I don't quite understand how a small incident like this leads to a criminal court hearing/criminal record - I was under the impression that these kind of things were followed by a fine (around £100) and that's it?

That the wrong impression to have I'm afraid - If you have a read of this it might help you understand more clearly - Chiltern Railway Revenue / Enforcement Policy

https://www.chilternrailways.co.uk/sites/default/files/files/timetables/Revenue%20Enforcement%20%26%20Prosecutions%20Policy.pdf

 

[AlterEgo]

This seems harsh, although I wouldn't mind too much paying a fine (since I was trying to get away with paying a smaller fair than by purchasing a ticket from the last stop into London). However, rather than being sent a fine, I've been sent a criminal offence notice stating that I can either plead guilty and pay a £175 fine or not guilty and appear in court to defend myself. It also states that if I plead guilty (and pay the fine) I will obtain a criminal record.

Please post the letter with your details removed. This makes no sense.

It's most likely Chiltern have sent you a summons for the offence - but offered to withdraw it in lieu of an out of court settlement of £175, but to be sure, we need to see the letter. All the pages, too, if there are mutliple.

 

[skyhigh]

(since I was trying to get away with paying a smaller fair than by purchasing a ticket from the last stop into London)

If they looked at your online purchase history, would they happen to find quite a large number of Wembley Stadium to Marylebone tickets?

 

[WesternLancer]

If they looked at your online purchase history, would they happen to find quite a large number of Wembley Stadium to Marylebone tickets?

As a matter of interest do these even open the barriers at Marylebone? I'd have thought they were such obvious red flag tickets for fare evaders to use they would set the barriers to 'seek assistance' given Chiltern's firm stance on fare evasion.

 

[jd5253]

thank you for the advice so far, here are some relevant pages of the letter

 

[skyhigh]

Was there not a cover letter included too?

 

[jd5253]

Correction - the closest station stop before London is Wembley Stadium, however, tickets purchased from here must be collected from a machine. I actually purchase from Denham which is roughly halfway. This isn't that regular of an occurrence since most often the gates at High Wycombe are closed and so I purchase a full ticket - or I usually have a weekly/monthly season ticket since I used to commute in for work often.

Correction - the closest station stop before London is Wembley Stadium, however, tickets purchased from here must be collected from a machine. I actually purchase from Denham which is roughly halfway. This isn't that regular of an occurrence since most often the gates at High Wycombe are closed and so I purchase a full ticket - or I usually have a weekly/monthly season ticket since I used to commute in for work often.

 

[WesternLancer]

Was there not a cover letter included too?

Or indeed any earlier letter in the time period between the date of travel (when the offence was committed) and the receipt of this SJPM document?

This could have been sent by Chiltern Railways or by a company called Transport Investigations Ltd - TIL (who Chiltern often use to pursue fare evasion cases)

I assume that in addition to the sums detailed on the SJPN papers shared - the fare evaded and Chiltern's costs (the £175 is not the fine, it's the costs they have undertaken to prepare your case for court etc) - there would also be a Court Fine (based on details in the income form mentioned) and a Victim Surcharge. This does not look like an offer of an Out of Court settlement unless I have that wrong.

 

[AlterEgo]

So they are not proposing to fine you £175. Chiltern can't set the level of fine. That is their costs, which you have to pay if you plead or are found guilty, plus the fare avoided. The court will set the level of fine as a punishment for the criminal offence you committed; that's separate. Be clear that this is not a civil matter but a criminal one.

As @skyhigh asks - was there a cover letter too? We have seen Chiltern send out covering letters with these offering to withdraw the case for an out of court settlement, but also recently it seems they have sent some with no covering letters. Perhaps they have discovered the extent of your offending and don't fancy negotiating, and are just taking you straight to court. It seems you regard Penalty Fares as an occupational hazard while fare evading, and they are looking to rectify that behaviour by prosecuting you in the magistrates' court.

 

[jd5253]

Or indeed any earlier letter in the time period between the date of travel (when the offence was committed) and the receipt of this SJPM document?

This could have been sent by Chiltern Railways or by a company called Transport Investigations Ltd - TIL (who Chiltern often use to pursue fare evasion cases)

I assume that in addition to the sums detailed on the SJPN papers shared - the fare evaded and Chiltern's costs - there would also be a Court Fine (based on details in the income form mentioned) and a Victim Surcharge. This does not look like an offer of an Out of Court settlement unless I have that wrong.

the cover letter is the first picture from my reply titled, "Single Justice Procedure Notice". And no, this is the first correspondence of any kind since the incident.

So they are not proposing to fine you £175. Chiltern can't set the level of fine. That is their costs, which you have to pay if you plead or are found guilty, plus the fare avoided. The court will set the level of fine as a punishment for the criminal offence you committed; that's separate. Be clear that this is not a civil matter but a criminal one.

As @skyhigh asks - was there a cover letter too? We have seen Chiltern send out covering letters with these offering to withdraw the case for an out of court settlement, but also recently it seems they have sent some with no covering letters. Perhaps they have discovered the extent of your offending and don't fancy negotiating, and are just taking you straight to court. It seems you regard Penalty Fares as an occupational hazard while fare evading, and they are looking to rectify that behaviour by prosecuting you in the magistrates' court.

I don't believe there is a cover letter, the first page entitled "Single Justice Procedure Notice" is the first from the document

Out of interest, could anyone adivise whether it is true that the ticket I had purchased was invalid since I had purchased it onboard the train?

 

[WesternLancer]

the cover letter is the first picture from my reply titled, "Single Justice Procedure Notice". And no, this is the first correspondence of any kind since the incident.

Thanks for clarifying this. It does look like as @AlterEgo suggests they have decided to prosecute straight away without asking you if you had any 'mitigating circumstances' as to whey they should not prosecute you.

I suspect you have 2 options:
- plead guilty to at least benefit from a 33% reduction in the court fine
- write to Chiltern to try and persuade them to settle out of court and withdraw the court action against you. You would need to achieve that within the 21 days deadline for return of these court documents

I suppose other options include
- pleading not guilty (but I can't see that working really, given what you have said)
- engaging a solicitor to deal with this for you (extra costs will arise from their fees)

Out of interest, could anyone adivise whether it is true that the ticket I had purchased was invalid since I had purchased it onboard the train?

I believe so yes, you are required to have a valid ticket at the point of stepping on the train. Not having one means the offence concerned is committed. It's 'slam dunk' I think. Usually promoted by Railways operators as 'Buy Before You Board'. There are exceptions but these apply when there are no ticket buying facilities at the station you board at (no ticket office, no ticket machine).

 

[jd5253]

Thanks for clarifying this. It does look like as @AlterEgo suggests they have decided to prosecute straight away without asking you if you had any 'mitigating circumstances' as to whey they should not prosecute you.

I suspect you have 2 options:
- plead guilty to at least benefit from a 33% reduction in the court fine
- write to Chiltern to try and persuade them to settle out of court and withdraw the court action against you. You would need to achieve that within the 21 days deadline for return of these court documents

I suppose other options include
- pleading not guilty (but I can't see that working really, given what you have said)
- engaging a solicitor to deal with this for you (extra costs will arise from their fees)

Thank you again for your help, There is actually a 'mitigating circumstances' sheet which I didn't't attach before - please see below.
In terms of pleading guilty and receiving a 33% reduction of court fine - do you have a rough estimate of court fines for this type of case? Also is this 'fine' separate from the £175 + £17.20 fare as mentioned in the letter?

 

[ikcdab]

You don't need you answer this question, but if Chiltern look at your purchasing history, will they find more fare evasion?
The charge is only for a single occurrence and I don't think they can now add extras. But if you plead guilty, then you may wish to ask to have the other cases taken into consideration so that you are not charged separately for those later.

 

[Starmill]

thank you for the advice so far, here are some relevant pages of the letterView attachment 159084View attachment 159085View attachment 159084View attachment 159086

Do you mean that you didn't actually pay for the whole journey you made on the occasion set out in this form?

I'm afraid that if you deliberately paid for a ticket shorter than the journey you actually made you don't have a choice but to plead guilty.

 

[jd5253]

Update - offer of interview and potential out of court settlement from Chiltern railways (below was attached in this document but I hadn't properly read it yet). it seems to be a potential offer to settle out of court...

 

[AlterEgo]

Have you calculated how many fares you have evaded over the years? Chiltern will basically know, but if you calculate it yourself and show some honesty they will probably settle.

 

[jd5253]

Have you calculated how many fares you have evaded over the years? Chiltern will basically know, but if you calculate it yourself and show some honesty they will probably settle.

Looking back briefly now, I think I have done this (get on at Wycombe but buy a ticket from Denham) 6 times previously, in amongst around 40 journeys to and from High Wycombe and London Marylebone including several week and month long season tickets.

 

[AlterEgo]

Looking back briefly now, I think I have done this (get on at Wycombe but buy a ticket from Denham) 6 times previously, in amongst around 40 journeys to and from High Wycombe and London Marylebone including several week and month long season tickets.

Do you mean you've had season tickets from Denham, but travelled from High Wycombe?

 

[WesternLancer]

Update - offer of interview and potential out of court settlement from Chiltern railways (below was attached in this document but I hadn't properly read it yet). it seems to be a potential offer to settle out of court... View attachment 159090

Thanks for posting this additional letter - this is vital

The advice usually given on here is not to attend the interview being asked for (since they are used to incriminate yourself) unless accompanied by a solicitor - but it seems to me they believe that you have evaded in similar terms on other occasions and they are seeking to establish what those are, and when they total that up the out of court settlement offer will include fares for all of those occasions too.

But that would avoid a criminal record.

So now the forum knows what you are dealing with you will need to weigh up options and consider the advice people will suggest.

I would now be estimating all the occasions you have short fared (buying tickets from Denham not High Wycombe for example) and the costs of those at the Full Anytime Single Adult fare. This is what they will be looking to charge you for I would think, plus their £175 admin costs as well.

More generally I hope you are now able to appreciate that the situation you are in is way more serious than paying a £100/£50 Penalty Fare and you need to consider carefully what you do to deal with it.

You need to weigh up how damaging a criminal record might be to you as part of your decision making process around what you do next.

 

[ikcdab]

I think the letter is fairly clear. They have researched your ticket history and they know what you have done.
I have read elsewhere (others will confirm) that you do not have to attend the interview. If you just write to them with a complete list of the fares you have evaded and that matches with their records, then that should lead to a settlement.

 

[Honestviews]

From a legal point of view this is a very strange letter - to carry out a prosecution, even mentioning it in the letter and referencing the court bundle, but not to have completed the investigation, is odd. I know they are prosecuting for once incident and investigating others but:

1. Normal practice is to investigate matters before proceeding to prosecute and
2. If someone wants to plead not guilty it puts them in a very difficult position in relation to an interview

 

[AlterEgo]

From a legal point of view this is a very strange letter - to carry out a prosecution, even mentioning it in the letter and referencing the court bundle, but not to have completed the investigation, is odd. I know they are prosecuting for once incident and investigating others but:

1. Normal practice is to investigate matters before proceeding to prosecute and
2. If someone wants to plead not guilty it puts them in a very difficult position in relation to an interview

The prosecution is for a single offence. The investigation into that is complete. The interview is to establish other offences.

 

[swt_passenger]

HI,

Travelling from High Wycombe to London Marylebone I boarded the train without buying a ticket (Gate open) and later, after seeing the ticket inspector walking through, purchased a ticket on my phone. I am now being prosecuted for travelling without a valid ticket (as "all tickets have to be purchased before boarding the train").

This seems harsh, although I wouldn't mind too much paying a fine (since I was trying to get away with paying a smaller fair than by purchasing a ticket from the last stop into London). However, rather than being sent a fine, I've been sent a criminal offence notice stating that I can either plead guilty and pay a £175 fine or not guilty and appear in court to defend myself. It also states that if I plead guilty (and pay the fine) I will obtain a criminal record.

Now you’ve posted the notice, it doesn’t actually say what you thought. It says Chiltern want the unpaid fare of £17.20, and their own “prosecution costs” of £175.00, that would be separate to the fine and victims surcharge that would be imposed on top of Chiltern’s figure by the magistrates court if found guilty. I think it’s important you understand the difference.

 

[Honestviews]

The prosecution is for a single offence. The investigation into that is complete. The interview is to establish other offences.

I appreciate that which is why i said "I know they are prosecuting for once incident and investigating others but:"

It's just not the normal way a criminal investigation is carried out and importantly could put the person in difficulty in relation to the interview as there is a risk of questions being asked about the first instance or even the person commenting about the first incident.

 

[AlterEgo]

I appreciate that which is why i said "I know they are prosecuting for once incident and investigating others but:"

It's just not the normal way a criminal investigation is carried out and importantly could put the person in difficulty in relation to the interview as there is a risk of questions being asked about the first instance or even the person commenting about the first incident.

That's true, but the OP does not have much of a choice here - they either get prosecuted for the offence for which they are surely guilty, or they admit to the sum of their offending and they can settle outside of court. It's definitely not how the police would do things, but it is not uncommon when other prosecuting bodies get involved, like train companies.

 

[Haywain]

It's definitely not how the police would do things,

I think it's actually quite common for the police to continue investigations into further offences after a suspect has been charged with one (or more).

 

[island]

I think it's actually quite common for the police to continue investigations into further offences after a suspect has been charged with one (or more).

I think the underlying reason is that they are running out of time to commence the prosecution for the original offence which was committed in December.

Incidentally, High Wycombe has a compulsory ticket area, so Chiltern has once again charged the wrong offence.

 

[gholamkabuj]

Update - offer of interview and potential out of court settlement from Chiltern railways (below was attached in this document but I hadn't properly read it yet). it seems to be a potential offer to settle out of court... View attachment 159090

Have a look at other threads in this forum about Chiltern. Prepare a well-written apology, and they are likely to offer you an out-of-court settlement. It would be costly (a four-figure fee), but you would avoid a conviction.