British Transport Police - caution or interview under caution? Confused!

[jumble]

But as you well know, the forum will never know until the OP receives a letter and re-posts here...

Confirms my point that no one posting here at the moment has any idea how this will play out
Of course if the OP gets a letter that asks for their side of the story and shares it here it stands to reason that there is less chance of a summons as opposed to the 100% chance if the summons arrives with no previous letter

 

[SillyTraveller]

I wish I had a crystal ball. I know you’re not a judgemental lot (thank you), but thank you for being so kind. This is not me. I made a bad decision.

should read multiple bad decisions

 

[Islineclear3_1]

I wish I had a crystal ball. I know you’re not a judgemental lot (thank you), but thank you for being so kind. This is not me. I made a bad decision.

should read multiple bad decisions

I hope the "system" is kind to you too. Not worth jeopardizing your career for a few simple bad decisions

 

[SillyTraveller]

I hope the "system" is kind to you too. Not worth jeopardizing your career for a few simple bad decisions

I hope so. I’m an idiot. I really am.

I have full remorse.

I will ensure to post back to you all. I know it’s helpful to know.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

Just to add, there’s a remarkably similar situation from a while back in the press.

Man avoids prosecution after paying back £43,000-worth of train fares

Commuter exploited Oyster card loophole, paying only £7.20 for travel between East Sussex and London Bridge over five years

www.theguardian.com

Essentially a professional (like you, with a regulatory body), was only buying tickets from what I can gather for a small part of his journey.

Seems to have been caught in similar circumstances too, after a period of intelligence gathering.

Only real difference is the length and value. Arguably if someone fiddling £43,000 can get a settlement, you certainly can.

The only caveat I would add to this, however, is that even with a settlement, you may be required to tell your employer or regulator that you’ve been involved in a criminal investigation, and the outcome was XYZ - even if it doesn’t result in a prosecution. You’ve still been interviewed under caution as a suspect of a fraud / financial crime against the railway, and a criminal investigation is now ongoing. The fact the police are (or were) involved is likely to also be an important factor.

The above case still ended up in a career ban for the chap once the regulator found out, even though he paid a settlement.

FCA bans £43,000 fare dodger from working in financial services

Financial Conduct Authority says conduct of former Blackrock MD Jonathan Paul Burrows fell short of the standards expected in the City

www.theguardian.com

I would seriously consider speaking to a union rep or solicitor, with a view to approaching your regulator, because I think if your regulator ever was to find out, they’d probably treat you more harshly for not telling them, then the effect of admitting your wrongdoing in the first place.

As the above story says, the regulator took a view that not disclosing the case to his employer made the matter more serious.

You can, of course, take the chance that they’ll never find out- but I find with considerable experience, it only takes an unhappy divorce, family dispute etc for an anonymous tip to arrive, so you really need to weigh everything up.

On the face of what you’ve said, I would personally tell my employer sooner rather than later, and express deep remorse, and explain you are doing everything possible to make things right. I would expect you to face disciplinary action, perhaps even suspension temporarily, but I very much doubt you’d lose your job. Honesty and holding your hands up counts for an awful lot.

 

[greyman42]

I would expect you to face disciplinary action, perhaps even suspension temporarily, but I very much doubt you’d lose your job.

Why would either disciplinary action or a suspension happen, neither would achieve anything? This is just a minor offence.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Why would either disciplinary action or a suspension happen, neither would achieve anything? This is just a minor offence.

Indeed, now that we know that the OP is a nurse, the information from the NMC that I quoted in post #4 is specifically relevant and not just as an example of what happens in one profession. On the basis of what we have been told, the regulator is highly unlikely to have a problem with what has happened here. We have no knowledge of what the OP's employer expects, but it seems to me to be unlikely that they will take a radically different line from the regulator.

This is an advice thread: let's keep our advice relevant and realistic for the facts that we have been asked to advise on.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

Indeed, now that we know that the OP is a nurse, the information from the NMC that I quoted in post #4 is specifically relevant and not just as an example of what happens in one profession. On the basis of what we have been told, the regulator is highly unlikely to have a problem with what has happened here. We have no knowledge of what the OP's employer expects, but it seems to me to be unlikely that they will take a radically different line from the regulator.

This is an advice thread: let's keep our advice relevant and realistic for the facts that we have been asked to advise on.

Indeed. The regulator is unlikely to have a problem with the offence in question (unless prosecution ensures) provided that the OP declares at her next DBS check.

Failing to do so will most certainly lead to disciplinary action by her hospital Trust, and either a sanction placed against her on the NMC register for a period of time or at worst, being struck off (although I think the latter is most unlikely)

Why would either disciplinary action or a suspension happen, neither would achieve anything? This is just a minor offence.

It may be minor to you or I as a lay person but in the eyes of the regulator, dishonesty is frowned upon and is not one of the behaviours expected from a nurse

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

Why would either disciplinary action or a suspension happen, neither would achieve anything? This is just a minor offence.

It is a serious matter of premeditated dishonesty, to gain a personal financial advantage. But not one which is going to be career ending!

It is also at the higher end of the offence, given the persistent nature, (not a one off) and the fact it was preplanned.

When you work in a regulated profession, you are bound by a code of ethics and other regulations, and even minor incidents are expected to be declared and fully investigated.

But I would repeat that the holding your hands up approach at an early stage is almost always appreciated and recognised by the appropriate regulatory body; with a lesser sanction.

I would argue that neutral suspension or some leave in this case could potentially even be justified just to protect the well-being of the poster, who is clearly panicking and unnerved by the incident. Whilst the incident is ongoing, it is likely to be a daily worry and distraction which as a nurse can have serious consequences.

 

[6Gman]

They definately won't.

But you should seek advice from the RCN or Nursing & Midwifery Council

The RCN is a union and are unlikely to assist a non-member, or someone who joined only after an incident.
The NMC is the regulatory body. They are not there to offer advice of this nature.

 

[mmh]

Indeed. The regulator is unlikely to have a problem with the offence in question (unless prosecution ensures) provided that the OP declares at her next DBS check.

Failing to do so will most certainly lead to disciplinary action by her hospital Trust, and either a sanction placed against her on the NMC register for a period of time or at worst, being struck off (although I think the latter is most unlikely)


It may be minor to you or I as a lay person but in the eyes of the regulator, dishonesty is frowned upon and is not one of the behaviours expected from a nurse

That is not how DBS checks work. You don't declare convictions, the check reveals them. And ordinarily an NHS organisation will be applying for checks on behalf of their staff. They receive a response which says clear or contains detail (but not the detail!), the employee is sent the paper certificate with the detail.

 

[SillyTraveller]

Hi guys,

Read all the responses, thank you, insightful to read all.

Oh my goodness, I absolutely am going to tell my employer & the NMC. That’s not something that’s even crossed my mind hiding it. However, at the moment I don’t know whether I need to being that I have not been cautioned or convicted. I have read some NMC hearings that have come under investigation when they’ve not declared that they’ve developed a conviction.
If it’s an out of court settlement then I know this may or may not show up on an advanced DBS, but besides that it’s something I would tell them either way to ensure I don’t get reprimanded for dishonesty, which I know is ironic.

Honestly, I am not a criminal. As much as actually I sound like I am, it’s not a reason or a sob story but I used it to my advantage to save money on a nurses salary. Not okay. Not fair. Im not saying this as an excuse by the way. I had travelled the entire year in the pandemic paying full price.

So yes basically I have been doing my research as when I need to tell my employer and the NMC. I have spoken to some senior nurses in a different place & they said not until you’re having to go to court. I had union membership as a student & didn’t carry it on when I finished uni, silly.

I feel like an utter criminal. Clearly sounds like I am. No false pretences here, I did wrong multiple times.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

That is not how DBS checks work. You don't declare convictions, the check reveals them. And ordinarily an NHS organisation will be applying for checks on behalf of their staff. They receive a response which says clear or contains detail (but not the detail!), the employee is sent the paper certificate with the detail.

Read my post again. I said nothing about declaring convictions as we have no idea what will happen to the OP at this early stage

I'm too tired to check whether or not multiple counts of dishonesty will be filtered from an enhanced DBS check or not. But for the record, my NHS Trust forwards me an enhanced check every 3 years and I have to complete, sign and return. The Trust does not do it for me

 

[SillyTraveller]

Read my post again. I said nothing about declaring convictions

But as you mention it, yes you do - certainly for enhanced DBS which is required for nurses. MY NHS Trust requires me to do a DBS every 3 years; I get it sent/emailed to me and I have to answer the questions and sign it. My private healthcare hospital also requires it

This is true. You do need to declare it before it is declared for you. Failure to do so is misconduct

 

[Brissle Girl]

This is true. You do need to declare it before it is declared for you. Failure to do so is misconduct

I think you shouldn’t take too much notice of the example cited. The guy was an MD of a major financial services institution. The regulator of financial services sets an exceptionally high bar in terms of ethical behaviour of senior managers of FS companies (quite rightly), and so it’s no surprise it took the action it did. I mean, as regulator would you be happy with someone that defrauded a public body of 40k being in charge of a business looking after consumers’ money? Nope, me neither.

 

[madjack]

I think you shouldn’t take too much notice of the example cited. The guy was an MD of a major financial services institution. The regulator of financial services sets an exceptionally high bar in terms of ethical behaviour of senior managers of FS companies (quite rightly), and so it’s no surprise it took the action it did. I mean, as regulator would you be happy with someone that defrauded a public body of 40k being in charge of a business looking after consumers’ money? Nope, me neither.

I keep on looking for the "like" button.

 

[SillyTraveller]

I think you shouldn’t take too much notice of the example cited. The guy was an MD of a major financial services institution. The regulator of financial services sets an exceptionally high bar in terms of ethical behaviour of senior managers of FS companies (quite rightly), and so it’s no surprise it took the action it did. I mean, as regulator would you be happy with someone that defrauded a public body of 40k being in charge of a business looking after consumers’ money? Nope, me neither.

I think you’re right. Whilst I’m not saying what I did is right, a man earning £1mill a year looking after people’s money for a job is a bit of a different situation to me.

 

[Bensonby]

If BTP are dealing with doesn’t anyone else think it’s unlikely that the TOC would be offering a settlement? BTP won’t be involved in, or interested in, a settlement as they are a police force.

In respect of professional bodies taking this sort of thing very seriously, here is a police officer dismissed for similar recently: https://news.met.police.uk/news/misconduct-proceedings-conclude-involving-former-officer-425335

and he is now on the barred list, which means he can never serve as a police officer again: https://www.college.police.uk/ethics/barred-list/search-the-barred-list/dismissal-260420211606

 

[AlterEgo]

Do you recall being asked any other questions? Did you incriminate yourself? Please do not give information here or to the police which may incriminate you further. It is usually best not to speak to the police unless you have a solicitor present.

 

[SillyTraveller]

If BTP are dealing with doesn’t anyone else think it’s unlikely that the TOC would be offering a settlement? BTP won’t be involved in, or interested in, a settlement as they are a police force.

In respect of professional bodies taking this sort of thing very seriously, here is a police officer dismissed for similar recently: https://news.met.police.uk/news/misconduct-proceedings-conclude-involving-former-officer-425335

and he is now on the barred list, which means he can never serve as a police officer again: https://www.college.police.uk/ethics/barred-list/search-the-barred-list/dismissal-260420211606

This is not what the BTP officer informed me at the time. He said that I would likely get a letter asking for my side of events, then they may consider an out of court settlement. The paper I have says that ‘I am employed by southeastern’ and that ‘southeastern will contact you in writing’ - so I think as some have suggested he might have been working with them.
Also thank you for sharing that story about the police officer because it’s made me feel 100 times worse. I am truly sorry and I know I made a very bad error of judgment. I know what’s on the line, please try and remember that I am not a corrupt person, I made a huge mistake which I regret

Bearing in mind you should assume the company are reading this forum (I know some definitely do) I'd suggest that the OP doesn't answer that.

Thank you for the heads up on this. Definitely nothing to hide at all.

Do you recall being asked any other questions? Did you incriminate yourself? Please do not give information here or to the police which may incriminate you further. It is usually best not to speak to the police unless you have a solicitor present.

He asked why I did it (I think if I remember rightly). I’m not sure what you mean by incriminate myself because I just told the truth so no.
I don’t recall being asked if I wanted legal representation. I just told him the truth about it all. He was a nice man actually. I’m glad it was him of all people as he was a decent person. There was also another chap from Southeastern there who was really kind and reassuring towards me, I went to find him the following day to thank him for being kind to me after me being an idiot, but he wasn’t there.

 

[Bensonby]

Are you sure it was a BTP officer and not a Southeastern Revenue Protection officer? They wear uniforms that some may mistake for BTP (yellow jacket, peaked cap etc).

 

[SillyTraveller]

Are you sure it was a BTP officer and not a Southeastern Revenue Protection officer? They wear uniforms that some may mistake for BTP (yellow jacket, peaked cap etc).

He wasn’t wearing a uniform, was wearing own clothes. I had my headphones in when he first said who he was so I could have been mistaken? Can revenue officers interview under caution? That’s why I guessed it was a BTP officer.

 

[AlterEgo]

He asked why I did it (I think if I remember rightly). I’m not sure what you mean by incriminate myself because I just told the truth so no.

If a police officer interviews you under caution and you tell them why you committed the crime they’re accusing you of then…you have incriminated yourself. It’s - generally - unwise to incriminate yourself without the advice of a solicitor.

The bare minimum you can do in most circumstances is give your name and address and just leave it at that. Refusing to answer incriminating questions is a right you absolutely have and should take in almost all circumstances unless or until you get legal advice.

He wasn’t wearing a uniform, was wearing own clothes. I had my headphones in when he first said who he was so I could have been mistaken? Can revenue officers interview under caution? That’s why I guessed it was a BTP officer.

Yes, some revenue officers can. Did you see the police officer’s warrant card? They normally flash this when working undercover and speaking to people they’ve stopped to identify themselves as police officers.

 

[SillyTraveller]

If a police officer interviews you under caution and you tell them why you committed the crime they’re accusing you of then…you have incriminated yourself. It’s - generally - unwise to incriminate yourself without the advice of a solicitor.

The bare minimum you can do in most circumstances is give your name and address and just leave it at that. Refusing to answer incriminating questions is a right you absolutely have and should take in almost all circumstances unless or until you get legal advice.


Yes, some revenue officers can. Did you see the police officer’s warrant card? They normally flash this when working undercover and speaking to people they’ve stopped to identify themselves as police officers.

Yes, he showed me a card but I didn’t see it clearly. As in I didn’t see a job title. Did hear the word officer.

I do know that he said they will be in touch asking for my side of events because I asked him that about 15 times what would happen next.

Also, I didn’t know that I should not answer as I have never been in trouble before. I just told him the truth.

 

[WesternLancer]

If BTP are dealing with doesn’t anyone else think it’s unlikely that the TOC would be offering a settlement? BTP won’t be involved in, or interested in, a settlement as they are a police force.

In respect of professional bodies taking this sort of thing very seriously, here is a police officer dismissed for similar recently: https://news.met.police.uk/news/misconduct-proceedings-conclude-involving-former-officer-425335

and he is now on the barred list, which means he can never serve as a police officer again: https://www.college.police.uk/ethics/barred-list/search-the-barred-list/dismissal-260420211606

we don't know if the BTP are 'dealing with it' or the TOC - the BTP officer may have just been present at the interview the OP had from what we know (or may not even have been a BTP officer). That will become apparent when the OP receives correspondence, no point in unnecessarily worrying the OP about that at this stage.

Case you cite with Met is useful, but different in my view - ie a police officer's job is to prevent and solve crime / theft. A nurses job is not to do that. FWIW I would expect their employers and regulatory bodies to deal with such things differently.

I think the OP needs advice on best courses of action going forwards. That now depends on what Train Company / BTP etc contact them with, then advice can be given when that is known if OP wishes to share it. What has happened can not be undone, no point in speculating on what might happen - just adds to OPs stress and worry and in my view not helpful

I would summarize advice for now as pretty much:

• Wait for correspondence from train company or any other official body about incident
• Prepare notes of what happened / why / draft apology letter seeking settlement without court action in readiness for when contacted
• Join union
• Speak informally to trusted work colleagues with experience (or union rep if they will discuss a case from before membership) about need to disclose to employer / professional body and consider acting on that advice accordingly
• Pay all fares in full and buy a valid season ticket for full commute ASAP
• Do not unnecessarily worry about this incident.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

Yes, he showed me a card but I didn’t see it clearly. As in I didn’t see a job title. Did hear the word officer.

I do know that he said they will be in touch asking for my side of events because I asked him that about 15 times what would happen next.

Also, I didn’t know that I should not answer as I have never been in trouble before. I just told him the truth.

This is NOT a police matter.

Sounds like a plain clothes Southeastern inspector who would also carry a warrant card to show they are authorised under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act to perform interviews under caution.

 

[AlterEgo]

Yes, he showed me a card but I didn’t see it clearly. As in I didn’t see a job title. Did hear the word officer.

I do know that he said they will be in touch asking for my side of events because I asked him that about 15 times what would happen next.

Also, I didn’t know that I should not answer as I have never been in trouble before. I just told him the truth.

It sounds like a plain clothes revenue protection inspector, and not the police.

 

[SillyTraveller]

we don't know if the BTP are 'dealing with it' or the TOC - the BTP officer was just present at the interview the OP had from what we know. That will become apparent when the OP receives correspondence, no point in unnecessarily worrying the OP about that at this stage.

Case you cite with Met is useful, but different in my view - ie a police officer's job is to prevent and solve crime / theft. A nurses job is not to do that.

Thank you so much. Your words have really settled me. I have been crying all night and all morning and been having panic attacks on and off. I don’t want people to make me feel better, i know I’ve done wrong but I also feel worse when I read about awful things.

This is NOT a police matter.

Sounds like a plain clothes Southeastern inspector who would also carry a warrant card to show they are authorised under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act to perform interviews under caution.

I think I’ve totally added confusion to this whole post. Sorry. Thanks for this. Maybe that’s who he was then as everything he said seemed to sound like he was employed by southeastern. The paperwork also indicates this. He was also able to log onto his colleague’s iPad thing and print something, not sure if the police would have the same system as such. Maybe I’m overthinking that.

 

[WesternLancer]

Thank you so much. Your words have really settled me. I have been crying all night and all morning and been having panic attacks on and off. I don’t want people to make me feel better, i know I’ve done wrong but I also feel worse when I read about awful things.

I think I’ve totally added confusion to this whole post. Sorry. Thanks for this. Maybe that’s who he was then as everything he said seemed to sound like he was employed by southeastern. The paperwork also indicates this. He was also able to log onto his colleague’s iPad thing and print something, not sure if the police would have the same system as such. Maybe I’m overthinking that.

Thanks - see my edit to post my #59 which I did at same time you posted this (in case my extra points are any help). Please don't get unduly stressed and panic over this. You know you did the wrong thing, you want to put things right. All respect to you for that.

 

[SillyTraveller]

Thanks - see my edit to post my #59 which I did at same time you posted this (in case my extra points are any help). Please don't get unduly stressed and panic over this. You know you did the wrong thing, you want to put things right. All respect to you for that.

Just had a read, thank you. Summaries it perfectly. I will try and put my anxiety at bay and really hope for the best. Thank you for being so kind and not judgmental. I appreciate it. You’re a kind person. I am too, I feel like I had to add that!

also, out of interest, who are you all? As in is this your job? Or can’t you say? Just curious as you’re all so knowledgable.