Byelaw 19 prosecution for being sat in 1st class acommodation on Std class ticket

[asdf777]

Hi

19. Classes of accommodation, reserved seats and sleeping berths
Except with permission from an authorised person, no person shall remain in
any seat, berth or any part of a train where a notice indicates that it is
reserved for a specified ticket holder or holders of tickets of a specific class,
except the holder of a valid ticket entitling him to be in that particular place.

I am trying to convince SWT to settle out of court but I am not optimistic.

If they are not willing to, my only option is to plead guilty.

I have gathered that the byelaw 19 offence, as opposed to some Regulations, is non-recordable and would not go to PNC. Is that accurate? I also gathered that it would, therefore, no show on a basic and standard DBS?

How serious is it in practice?

 

[yorkie]

Did you seat in a seat with a reservation label on it, and refuse to move when asked to do so?

It is correct that a Byelaw offence is non-recordable and won't show up on a DBS check.

Edit: I have now edited the thread title, to provide clarity.

 

[asdf777]

Hi Yorkie.

I was in the First Class compartment with a standard season ticket.

 

[LowLevel]

Did you seat in a seat with a reservation label on it, and refuse to move when asked to do so?

It is correct that a Byelaw offence is non-recordable and won't show up on a DBS check.

SWT/SWR don't do reservations so taking a punt it would be first with a standard ticket.

 

[asdf777]

Hi

Yes, First Class.

 

[furlong]

Checklist:
Was the train advertised as carrying first class? (Check the timetable.)
Was there a notice that satisfies the byelaw that you quoted?

What type of standard class ticket was it - season/advance/walk-up purchased in advance/walk-up purchased at first opportunity on journey?
Was this a weekday or weekend/bank holiday?

Why did the situation escalate into a potential prosecution?
Was there space available in standard class?
Was it a Penalty Fares train?

 

[asdf777]

Did you seat in a seat with a reservation label on it, and refuse to move when asked to do so?

It is correct that a Byelaw offence is non-recordable and won't show up on a DBS check.

Edit: I have now edited the thread title, to provide clarity.

Thanks Yorkie.

Any experience on how serious it is in reality in terms of impact on life?

Do I read correctly that it is considered 'spent' after a year?

 

[najaB]

Any experience on how serious it is in reality in terms of impact on life?

Do I read correctly that it is considered 'spent' after a year?

Conviction for a Byelaw offence is non-recordable and so should have little impact on life.

 

[asdf777]

Thanks najaB.

Has anyone got any experience / has heard of a Byelaw conviction having serious impact?

My employer runs triennial basic/standard DBSs. I understand this should no show up as no PNC entry. Is it wise to declare it anyway?

 

[221129]

Checklist:
Was there space available in standard class?
Was it a Penalty Fares train?

Not sure of the relevance of these two....

 

[BestWestern]

Not sure of the relevance of these two....

I was about to ask the very same!

Just to clarify, for the benefit of the OP, standard class being busy or full does not provide a legitimate reason to travel in First Class, and would have no bearing on proceedings here.

 

[Salesy]

Thanks najaB.

Has anyone got any experience / has heard of a Byelaw conviction having serious impact?

My employer runs triennial basic/standard DBSs. I understand this should no show up as no PNC entry. Is it wise to declare it anyway?

My personal experience of a Basic Disclosure from Disclosure Scotland is that a non-recordable offence on its own (speeding in my case) did not show up. That said, I would declare it anyway, better to be too honest than not mention it and it show up.

That said, the maximum penalty for breaching this byelaw is a fine and as such the conviction becomes spent after 1 year (6 months if under 18), and thereafter you would not normally need to disclose it.

 

[PaxmanValenta]

Thanks najaB.

Has anyone got any experience / has heard of a Byelaw conviction having serious impact?

My employer runs triennial basic/standard DBSs. I understand this should no show up as no PNC entry. Is it wise to declare it anyway?

Sadly the 'Rehabilitation of offenders act' in the UK is useless. Criminal records for minor offences are supposed to be considered spent after 5 years yet still appear on an enhanced DBS check. As a result many people wanting careers such as teaching, working with children and vulnerable people, healthcare etc have been banned from such careers for petty crimes; such as minor tax evasion, train fare evasion, or being slightly over the Drink Drive limit, which they might of commited 10 or more years ago despite being no danger to society.

Until the rehabilitation of offenders act is amended countless people's lives, and careers are being ruined for silly mistakes they made a long time ago.

Records for petty convictions should be fully ereased after 5 years!

 

[shredder1]

Sadly the 'Rehabilitation of offenders act' in the UK is useless. Criminal records for minor offences are supposed to be considered spent after 5 years yet still appear on an enhanced DBS check. As a result many people wanting careers such as teaching, working with children and vulnerable people, healthcare etc have been banned from such careers for petty crimes; such as minor tax evasion, train fare evasion, or being slightly over the Drink Drive limit, which they might of commited 10 or more years ago despite being no danger to society.

Until the rehabilitation of offenders act is amended countless people's lives, and careers are being ruined for silly mistakes they made a long time ago.

Records for petty convictions should be fully ereased after 5 years!

Yes indeed the system has serious flaws, I`ve worked with ex offenders in education training and employment and have a good insight into the issues.

 

[AlterEgo]

Sadly the 'Rehabilitation of offenders act' in the UK is useless. Criminal records for minor offences are supposed to be considered spent after 5 years yet still appear on an enhanced DBS check. As a result many people wanting careers such as teaching, working with children and vulnerable people, healthcare etc have been banned from such careers for petty crimes; such as minor tax evasion, train fare evasion, or being slightly over the Drink Drive limit, which they might of commited 10 or more years ago despite being no danger to society.

Until the rehabilitation of offenders act is amended countless people's lives, and careers are being ruined for silly mistakes they made a long time ago.

Records for petty convictions should be fully ereased after 5 years!

It is unlikely that people are refused entry into, say, teaching because of a byelaw prosecution. If you fail to declare and it comes back on a DBS Enhanced then that is much more serious than having the minor conviction in the first place.

 

[najaB]

As a result many people wanting careers such as teaching, working with children and vulnerable people, healthcare etc have been banned from such careers for petty crimes; such as minor tax evasion, train fare evasion, or being slightly over the Drink Drive limit...

Nobody is banned from anything. An employer has the right to know about recordable offences* which might indicate that someone is unsuitable for a role, however a quality candidate who is honest about the spent conviction will likely get the job. Certainly, in my previous job it was only a problem when people's answer to the 'Any convictions...' question on the application form was contradicted by the Disclosure Scotland results.

*A Byelaw offence is non-recordable.

 

[SussexMan]

Sadly the 'Rehabilitation of offenders act' in the UK is useless. Criminal records for minor offences are supposed to be considered spent after 5 years yet still appear on an enhanced DBS check. As a result many people wanting careers such as teaching, working with children and vulnerable people, healthcare etc have been banned from such careers for petty crimes; such as minor tax evasion, train fare evasion, or being slightly over the Drink Drive limit, which they might of commited 10 or more years ago despite being no danger to society.

Until the rehabilitation of offenders act is amended countless people's lives, and careers are being ruined for silly mistakes they made a long time ago.

Records for petty convictions should be fully ereased after 5 years!

Sorry but there are some errors in your post. Convictions become spent after 1, 2, 4 or 7 years (less if under 18 at time of offence) , but not 5.

Spent Convictions

Filtering of convictions means many people's convictions will not show up on enhanced DBS checks after they have been spent and an additional period of time has elapsed.

 

[Spurs]

Honestly the system is ridiculously lenient. It's pretty hard to get sent to prison these days - if you have been, it means you're probably a wrong 'un. As employer should have every right to know if you've e.g. done time for robbery because they would like rather hire someone who wasn't likely to steal from them. It just helps criminals get jobs ahead of honest people.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Doesn’t really provide for rehabilitation, though?

 

[najaB]

It just helps criminals get jobs ahead of honest people.

How does the Rehabilitation of offenders Act put convicted criminals who have served any sentence at an advantage compared to those who haven't committed a crime?

 

[farleigh]

How does the Rehabilitation of offenders Act put convicted criminals who have served any sentence at an advantage compared to those who haven't committed a crime?

Couldn't agree more Najab.

 

[Stigy]

Honestly the system is ridiculously lenient. It's pretty hard to get sent to prison these days - if you have been, it means you're probably a wrong 'un. As employer should have every right to know if you've e.g. done time for robbery because they would like rather hire someone who wasn't likely to steal from them. It just helps criminals get jobs ahead of honest people.

For a serious offence such as robbery, the conviction will likely never be classed as 'spent'. An employer will still know or be able to find out if an applicant as been convicted regardless of the offence as long as it's recorded somewhere, it's just the time scales that differ.

Is it wrong to hold a misdemeanour that occurred 17-years ago against somebody when chances are, that conviction won't hinder them at all in the job they're going for? Quite rightly, certain jobs are exempt for the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act, too. These are the jobs where these often trivial (in the grand scheme of things) convictions, could come back to haunt an applicant.

 

[cuccir]

For a serious offence such as robbery, the conviction will likely never be classed as 'spent'.

The only convictions which are not spent are prison sentences over 4 years. Some robbery convictions will get this, but mainly where there are higher levels of culpabiltiy and/or harm ie use of weapons, serious harm to a person business etc

An employer will still know or be able to find out if an applicant as been convicted regardless of the offence as long as it's recorded somewhere, it's just the time scales that differ.

Well no, not if it's spent, unless as you point out a job has particular exemptions.

 

[shredder1]

The only convictions which are not spent are prison sentences over 4 years. Some robbery convictions will get this, but mainly where there are higher levels of culpabiltiy and/or harm ie use of weapons, serious harm to a person business etc



Well no, not if it's spent, unless as you point out a job has particular exemptions.

Spent convictions will also show up on enhanced disclosures, although a legislation change has been mooted.

 

[Stigy]

The only convictions which are not spent are prison sentences over 4 years. Some robbery convictions will get this, but mainly where there are higher levels of culpabiltiy and/or harm ie use of weapons, serious harm to a person business etc



Well no, not if it's spent, unless as you point out a job has particular exemptions.

That's why I said 'will likely never be spent'. A lot of robbery convictions result in prison sentences over 4-years.

 

[najaB]

A lot of robbery convictions result in prison sentences over 4-years.

I would think only if a firearm/knife was involved or there was actual violence committed.

 

[jumble]

Spent convictions will also show up on enhanced disclosures, although a legislation change has been mooted.

My understanding from the Nacro website that many spent convictions are filtered on Enhanced DBS following a ruling in January 2013
Perhaps it would be more accurate to say
"Some spent convictions will also show up on enhanced disclosures and some will not depending on whether they are protected "
Regards Jumble

 

[Islineclear3_1]

The standard sentence for robbery is life but of course, this is dependent on the actual offence, the evidence offered and the decision of the jury.

I know someone who has a spent conviction that shows up on an enhanced DBS check (over 30 years ago) who works for the NHS, so provided it is declared at interview, this should not be a barrier to employment

 

[najaB]

The standard sentence for robbery is life but of course...

Source?

 

[Islineclear3_1]

The standard sentence for robbery is life but of course, this is dependent on the actual offence, the evidence offered and the decision of the jury.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/60/section/8