Caught without means to pay for a ticket

[Monty]

If its any comfort you are being prosecuted under byelaw 18 and not section 5 3a of the RotRA 1889. So if you plead guilty or are found guilty you will not receive a criminal record. My advice is to apologise and plead guilty, unlikely the company will settle out court unless you were to pay all substantial sum -and- their court costs since the case is now due to be heard in court.

 

[truthbetold]

thanks for replies. how much is substantial? over £1000? and will it still come up in on a crb check?

 

[Monty]

Couldn't comment on the amount, but no a byelaw 18 prosecution will not show up on a crb check.

 

[cuccir]

It's hard to say how much, but it's more likely to be in the low to mid hundreds, based solely on what other posters on this forum have had to pay in the past.

It shouldn't come up on a normal crb check, though should appear on an enhanced crb (required for, say, teaching, working with vulnerable people, etc).

 

[ainsworth74]

how much is substantial? over £1000?

The maximum fine for a Byelaw offence is Level 3 on the standard scale which I believe to be £1000. However, that doesn't mean it will be £1000, I'd imagine it will be less (I can't speculate how much exactly) but that's the maximum fine you're looking at.

 

[michael769]

thanks for replies. how much is substantial? over £1000? and will it still come up in on a crb check?

Fines are generally means tested (take care to fill out the statement of means correctly)

According to the Magistrates sentencing guidelines for a first offence the starting point is 50% of the weekly equivalent salary, with the recomended range being between a conditional discharge and 125% of weekly income. There is an automatic 1/3 discount if you plead guilty at the earliest possible opportunity.

There will also be costs and a mandatory victim surcharge of £15. You can ask for time to to pay or to be allowed to pay in installments.

The offence is not recordable and should not appear on a CRB check.

 

[SussexMan]

It shouldn't come up on a normal crb check, though should appear on an enhanced crb (required for, say, teaching, working with vulnerable people, etc).

Please could you provide some evidence for your statement because I think you are incorrect. I do not believe that a byelaw offence would show on an enhanced CRB check.

 

[michael769]

Please could you provide some evidence for your statement because I think you are incorrect. I do not believe that a byelaw offence would show on an enhanced CRB check.

I would not think so either. All an enhanced CRB adds to a standard CRB is any information that the Chief Police Officer deems appropriate to include. As a byelaw offence is not recorded on the PNC it would not normally be on their Police's radar given that they are mostly prosecuted by ToCs without any police involvement.

 

[cuccir]

Please could you provide some evidence for your statement because I think you are incorrect. I do not believe that a byelaw offence would show on an enhanced CRB check.

I would not think so either. All an enhanced CRB adds to a standard CRB is any information that the Chief Police Officer deems appropriate to include. As a byelaw offence is not recorded on the PNC it would not normally be on their Police's radar given that they are mostly prosecuted by ToCs without any police involvement.

I'm happy to defer to any specialist knowledge if anyone has any, but it is generally suggested that they'll appear on enhanced crb checks. Eg Merseyrail's prosecution FAQ:

http://www.merseyrail.org/about-us/prosecutions.html:

Q:Will I get a criminal record?
A: If found guilty of a Byelaw offence, it may appear on an enhanced CRB CHECK but if you are found guilty of a Railway regulation act 1889 section 5 offence, then this would show up on any CRB CHECK. If you pay the administrative penalty, this will enable us to withdraw your case from court, and consequently you will have no CRB RECORD

 

[michael769]

I'm happy to defer to any specialist knowledge if anyone has any, but it is generally suggested that they'll appear on enhanced crb checks. Eg Merseyrail's prosecution FAQ:

http://www.merseyrail.org/about-us/prosecutions.html:

I draw your attention to the use of the word may in the above statement.

It is true that if the police have some record of the incident from which a bylaw offence arose (for example if they were called to attend due to the passenger being abusive or committing a breach of the peace) then the Chief Police Officer may choose to reveal that, but if the police are not involved it is unlikely that they will have any record of it.

Incidentally if the police attend then even if the matter is disposed of out of court, the record of their attendance might still be revealed in an enhanced check!

 

[6Gman]

Without wishing to be unkind to the OP nobody would think of going into Sainsburys and helping themselves to food in such circumstances - however hungry - so why is the railway viewed in any different light?

 

[Jonny]

Without wishing to be unkind to the OP nobody would think of going into Sainsburys and helping themselves to food in such circumstances - however hungry - so why is the railway viewed in any different light?

Well, there is no physical product loss for a start; it's not like Greater Anglia actually lost anything (directly) through the OP's actions; even if it was, it is too small to quantify - trains cost about the same to run, largely regardless of passenger weight "on the day". Simples...

 

[DarloRich]

QUOTE=truthbetold;1206805]

What are my options?

Your best course of action if you are not going to instruct solicitors is:

1) Contact the court ASAP.
2) Tell them you will plead guilty in person at the hearing
3) Apologise (profusely)
4) Set out your mitigation. You were robbed, had no money, late at night wanted to get home, sick cat, stressed, confused, panicking, didn't know what to do, thought (wrongly) you could buy at the gate etc etc. Try not to overdo it mind. The mags will see through any amount of bullsh*t!
5) Set out what you can afford to pay and why anythig different would cause you financial hardship
6) Stress first offense and apologise - and for gods sake dont tell them it is your first offense if it isn't!

As an aside in all my dealing with the Mags i always found they responded so much better if the defendant actually turned up! The point being that magistrates tend to be decent people. If you turn up, behave in a civilised manner, explain your position, set out WHY it happened, apologise and explain that you cant pay they will do what they can to help you. Turn up and act the tw*t and they will very quickly follow the advice of the prosecutor!

Is it worth getting a solicitor involved? Is this possible with no money?

You may be entitled to legal aid of some form. Contact a local Criminal La firm and they will advise. I doubt you need a "railway law" expert. It seems an open and should case

Is it too late to settle out of court now?
almost certainly but you could try to offer them something to buy them off + pay their costs. I doubt it will work now. Are you even able to pay? The mags might be more helpful in setting a realistic payment plan for any penalty.

You could also try the court steps settlement. This will only work if you have the wherewithal to pay a decent sum to the prosecutor on the day. Alternatively, seek out the prosecutor in the court before the hearing and ask them to talk about settlement. (this may not e sensible without representation) IF you can present a sensible agreement to the Magistrate things will proceed much quicker!

Edit: by the way I don't have a crime reference number. My belongings were stolen at a festival in Portugal that I was making my way back from.[/QUOTE]
Careless and doesn't help your case at all. First question will be why didn't you report it

 

[DaveNewcastle]

What a fascinating post :-

Well, there is no physical product loss for a start; it's not like Greater Anglia actually lost anything (directly) through the OP's actions

While I don't have the figures for GA, but I have posted the figures for East Coast a few times - Operating Expenditure of £641mil with passenger revenue accounting for £578mil. (Year 2010-11).
Quite how we can deduce that a TOC doesn't loose anything from a non-paying passenger with a business model illustrated by the figures I've quoted will require quite a lot of evidence. It appears to me that they did loose something - they lost the most important element of their entire operation: the passenger's fare!

. . . . even if it was, it is too small to quantify - trains cost about the same to run, largely regardless of passenger weight "on the day". Simples...

Now, this becomes even more interesting.
How does the quantum affect the principle?
Are four thousand pound season ticket holders somehow morally or contracturally to be differentiated from the casual fare evader? And if so, what Judgments would give you the differential you want when the Company prosecutes the regular, low-value fare evader from the rare, pre-paid, Season Ticket holder's travel irregularity?

 

[ANorthernGuard]

No matter how many times I read these posts, one things gets me everytime

If they are NOT in a DOO area why didn't they ask the guard?

If someone is honest with me they get my respect

If they are attempting to take the p**s they get a visit from the BTP

Manners and respect go a long way

 

[Nym]

Without wishing to be unkind to the OP nobody would think of going into Sainsburys and helping themselves to food in such circumstances - however hungry - so why is the railway viewed in any different light?

Can we please not start this one again?

There aren't rail kitchens and buses that go out from the railvation army to provide poor and homeless with free rides home. Perhaps if we didn't have any charity involvement to prevent people starving on the streets we would have more incidents of people stealing from stores in order to prevent starvation.

 

[jon0844]

The comment from Jonny is presumably why people have no problem going without paying if there's an opportunity to get away with it.

It's the 'no victim' mentality, that seems to also extend to putting in a few extra things on an insurance claim, because the insurance companies can afford it and, hey, you've paid all those premiums with no return so you deserve it.

It's as if when there's no enforcement, there's no law. Why would anyone abide by the law merely because it's there?

 

[michael769]

The 'no victim' argument is the way by which those lacking a moral compass try to justify their thieving to themselves.

 

[sevenhills]

There aren't rail kitchens and buses that go out from the railvation army to provide poor and homeless with free rides home.

The OP had just been on a holiday abroad, he wasnt a poor starving homeless person. He is a person that had a mobile and takes holidays abroad. Payment would just be a phone call away.

I have a mobile, but I cannot afford foreign holidays - I have never got on a bus/train without expecting to pay.