Court Summons

[pink123]

Hi
Yesterday my daughter received a court summons from South West Trains. She is 19 years old and back in December she was stopped and questioned as she was using a Child Ticket to travel from Guildford to Woking. She co operated fully giving all correct details and was told she would receive a letter from the Prosecution Department. We expected to receive a fine which would have been paid. However they seem to have gone straight to Court Action . This seems strange and would have thought there would have been some sort of correspondence and opportunity to pay a fine first.
Please could somebody advise the best course of action. Would like to avoid a Criminal Record if possible - would south west trains accept an out of court settlement ?
Also (and not trying to make excuses here just stating the facts) she did not actually buy the ticket her friend who she was travelling with did as she had no money. This is all in the statement that was enclosed with the Court papers.
Thanks in advance for any help.

 

[reb0118]

It is often the case that buying the wrong ticket to save money is seen by the railway, and the courts, as much worse than having no ticket at all!

Having no ticket, depending on reason, may be put down to an oversight BUT purchasing a lower value ticket that you are not entitled to, or allowing one to be purchased on your behalf, could be construed as a deliberate attempt to defraud the railway.

This is probably why your daughter has been reported for prosecution by a court as only a court can issue fines.

Your daughter was not offered a penalty fare, if one existed for the route she was travelling, as she had shown by holding a child ticket, however obtained, when she was in fact 19 years old that it was her intent to avoid the correct fare. Penalty fares are for those who make genuine mistakes.

The fact that her friend bought the ticket is immaterial as it was your daughter who was in possession of it when questioned. Her friend may be liable (?) for another offence but don't quote me on that ~ however I would not mention it.

Just to confirm: have you received a summons from a court or a letter from the railway asking for your daughter's explanation of the facts?

It's a waiting game from hereon in

 

[pink123]

yes I thought the fact she had a ticket would be worse than having none at all.
Yes she has received a summons from the Court.
Im thinking plead guilty by post, apologise and hope the fine is not to great (however she then has a criminal record)
Or should she call the prosecutions department and try for an out of court settlement ?? At lest then she will not have a criminal record .

 

[bb21]

Yesterday my daughter received a court summons from South West Trains.

Just to doublecheck that it is not a letter asking for her version of the events.

It is rare that the passenger is not given a chance to tell their side of the story, although it is not impossible if the company thinks that they have enough evidence to secure a prosecution.

She is 19 years old and back in December she was stopped and questioned as she was using a Child Ticket to travel from Guildford to Woking.

So basically that is quite clearly an attempt to defraud the railway by deliberately paying a lower fare with intent to avoid paying the correct fare. Unfortunately the child ticket could be all the proof they need to demonstrate intent unless there are mitigating circumstances. (Where, ie. at the ticket office, from a machine, etc, was the ticket purchased by the way?) At 19, there is usually no excuse to be travelling on a child ticket, which she would not have been eligible for for well over 3 years. If "intent" can be proven in a court of law, your daughter could be convicted under Section 5(3a) of the Regulation of Railways Act 1889, which would carry a criminal record.

Alternatively she could be prosecuted under the Railway Byelaws, in which case conviction would not carry a criminal record, although you will have very little defence against such a prosecution as the fact she failed to show a valid ticket on demand is all they need.

She co operated fully giving all correct details and was told she would receive a letter from the Prosecution Department. We expected to receive a fine which would have been paid. However they seem to have gone straight to Court Action . This seems strange and would have thought there would have been some sort of correspondence and opportunity to pay a fine first.

Unfortunately they do not have to give you a chance to pay a Penalty Fare if that is what you are referring to. Penalty Fares are for people who make genuine mistakes. (See Question 15 on this leaflet.) If an attempt at defrauding the railway and "intent" is detected or suspected, the passenger should be reported for prosecution which is what happened here. A Penalty Fare would not be appropriate in these circumstances.

Please could somebody advise the best course of action. Would like to avoid a Criminal Record if possible - would south west trains accept an out of court settlement ?

If it is simply a letter asking for her side of the story, then be honest and explain to them what happened. Express the regret and remorse she now feels, promise that she has now learned her lesson and will not do it again, and offer to pay them reasonable costs and the fare due. When I say promise that "she will not do it again", she must ensure that this absolutely does not happen again, as further travel irregularity could see the book thrown at her.

If it is a court summons then I would still expect there to be a chance for them to accept an offer although the sum demanded could be much larger.

If you are not sure what the letter is saying, post the details here (obviously leave out confidential information such as name, etc) and we will be happy to advise.

Also (and not trying to make excuses here just stating the facts) she did not actually buy the ticket her friend who she was travelling with did as she had no money. This is all in the statement that was enclosed with the Court papers.
Thanks in advance for any help.

Won't help you at all I'm afraid. Could get her friend in trouble if over-emphasised.

yes I thought the fact she had a ticket would be worse than having none at all.
Yes she has received a summons from the Court.
Im thinking plead guilty by post, apologise and hope the fine is not to great (however she then has a criminal record)
Or should she call the prosecutions department and try for an out of court settlement ?? At lest then she will not have a criminal record .

If she pleads guilty and is convicted under the Regulation of Railways Act then that could have a serious effect on her future career.

Does it say what Act they are prosecuting her under?

 

[pink123]

not sure what Act it is (do not have the papers to hand) but pretty sure it the 'regulation of Railways Act' rather than the byelaw.
It is definitely a court summons and to my knowledge this is the first letter she has received.
So im guessing call them and see if they will accept out of court settlement. If they wont then plead guilty and accept what happens. Anybody any ideas what sort of fine can be expected ?

 

[bb21]

You are very unfortunately then if it is the first letter received. They must have felt confident that they had sufficient evidence to go for the more serious offence.

It is always worth trying to settle if it is important to avoid a criminal record, and I think it could well be in most cases especially at your daughter's age. It is not always financially advantageous for a train company to go through the court system so there is always a financial incentive for them to settle, especially if it is your daughter's first time. On the other hand, they might be determined to make an example of your daughter so there is no guarantee any offer would be accepted.

Another option for you is to have a free initial consultation with a local solicitor and then make a decision.

 

[maniacmartin]

Is it possible that your daughter received previous letters regarding this, but neglected to tell you in the hope that it would go away?

 

[swt_passenger]

I noticed an SWT poster on the platform at Eastleigh today stating that adults caught using a child ticket would normally be prosecuted. (Exact wording forgotten, but that's the gist of it.)

Presumably they reckon it is a cut and dried offence as it is tending towards impossible to accidentally buy a child ticket.

 

[pink123]

I guess there is a possibility that she may have received something although says she hasn't.
We totally understand that she has done wrong and are not trying to 'get out of it' but just really needing to know what the least painful option would be.
Any advice greatly appreciated and thanks to those who have taken the time to reply.

 

[moonface123]

Hello,
I am talking from experience (not proud of it at all). The best thing you can do is to try to google the contact details of the prosecution office at the rail company. On the summons, you should find the name of the prosecutor. He or she works for the train company.

Try to find out about the phone number of the prosecution office and call them. If you do not find the name of the prosecutor, refer to the case number when you talk with them.

If you can't find out about the PO's phone number, call the information line of the Train operator company and ask them. If you are lucky, they can tell you.

If you are able to get in touch with them, follow what everyone else said here. Apologise and make sure you mean it (well, your daughter needs to do this I guess....). The best course of action is to be honest. Don't try to bend the through, it may come back and bite you.

If you can't get in touch with them priory the court date, there is always a chance that the prosecutor will drop the case on the debate of the court hearing. You can go upto him and talk to him and hope for the best. In this case, you need to go to court and you can't plead quilt in writing.

If you decide to go for this option, you are risking being rejected at the court and if the pronounce you guilty, you will end up with a larger fine (covering the cost of the TOC staff who will need to appear in front of the court, extra court fees and the frustration of the court staff...) plus you will still have the criminal record. It is a risky thing...

If I were you, I would try to find out the phone number of the TOC's prosecution office and try to settle out of court.

I am not pro in this but I've done a stupid thing a couple of month ago that almost resulted with a criminal record (railway act prosecution intent). As I said, I am not proud of that - I am just trying to give advice.

Please everyone, correct me if I am wrong above (recommended thins), I would hate to mislead the OP.

 

[Stigy]

You can offer to settle by meeting all reasonable costs incurred by SWT right up until the court date, although that's not to say the offer will be accepted by them. It is strange that SWT have gone straight for court action if this is a first offence, but quite acceptable practice. If your daughter didn't buy the ticket, she might like to enter a defence to this effect, in that she wasn't aware it was a child ticket....Just a thought. It's up to SWT to be able to prove beyond reasonable doubt that she intended to avoid payment of the full fare where the Regulation of Railways Act is concerned, and if she wasn't aware, this can't be proved.

It very much depends on what she was asked under questioning, and what answers she gave though. Other offences may have applied if the proof wasn't there for the Regualtion of Railways Act, such as Byelaw 22 (although a seemingly harsh one if a friend bought the ticket in good faith).

 

[island]

It is strange that SWT have gone straight for court action if this is a first offence, but quite acceptable practice.

There is a non-negligible chance that there was previous correspondence which was ignored in the hope it would go away.

If your daughter didn't buy the ticket, she might like to enter a defence to this effect, in that she wasn't aware it was a child ticket....Just a thought.

I am not sure how far such a defence would go. To succeed, the defendant would need to establish that she had an intent to pay her full fare, whereas in questioning she probably established the contrary. Probably not quite correct; see subsequent posts.

 

[Stigy]

There is a non-negligible chance that there was previous correspondence which was ignored in the hope it would go away.

I am not sure how far such a defence would go. To succeed, the defendant would need to establish that she had an intent to pay her full fare, whereas in questioning she probably established the contrary.

I see what you're saying, but it's quite possible, that if somebody buys a ticket for them, they are unsure as to what ticket that is, and therefore couldn't be in breach of 5(3)a RoRA 1889. It's all about what was said under caution, to be honest. Only if she answered yes to something like, "Were you aware this was a Child Rate Ticket when it was bought", or, "Did you purchase this ticket" would she be well and truely bang to rights. All about what the Mags believe at the end of the day though....Ideally the person who allegedly bought the tickets needed to have been spoken to...

 

[island]

If somebody travels with a ticket purchased by someone else, has that person failed to pay his or her fare?

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I am not sure how far such a defence would go. To succeed, the defendant would need to establish that she had an intent to pay her full fare, whereas in questioning she probably established the contrary.

This is incorrect advice. I'd be interested to learn where this point of view has been found.

(The Defendant would wish to demonstrate that they did not intend to avoid payment of the fare due. That is not the same as, and is evidenced quite differently from, "she had an intent to pay her full fare".)

Furthermore, evidence of neither of these are applicable where the ticket was bought for the passenger by someone else and was accepted for travel in good faith.

 

[furlong]

If somebody travels with a ticket purchased by someone else, has that person failed to pay his or her fare?

(I think that question contains too much ambiguity to help.)

 

[Draconian]

I guess there is a possibility that she may have received something although says she hasn't.
We totally understand that she has done wrong and are not trying to 'get out of it' but just really needing to know what the least painful option would be.
Any advice greatly appreciated and thanks to those who have taken the time to reply.

Court summons would not be the first letter from SWT, get your daughter to tell all !! The SWT prosecutions telephone number would be on the paperwork you have and they do like to settle out of court so give them a call.
They take credit or debit card payments over the phone after a chat, assuming it's the little cherubs first offence.

 

[island]

This is incorrect advice. I'd be interested to learn where this point of view has been found.

(The Defendant would wish to demonstrate that they did not intend to avoid payment of the fare due. That is not the same as, and is evidenced quite differently from, "she had an intent to pay her full fare".)

They look quite the same to me (yours being a double negative and mine a positive), but I will yield to your superior knowledge on the matter.

 

[Fare-Cop]

(I think that question contains too much ambiguity to help.)

Yes, much too ambiguous

The judgment in Browning & Floyd (1946) made perfectly clear that a traveller who uses a ticket that was issued for the sole use of another person, has not paid his/her fare

That would also apply to the railcard holder who obtains a discounted ticket, but it is used by someone who has no entitlement to the discount.

Tickets purchased on-line for example may be paid for by Mr X, but may state specifically that the traveller is Mr Y

Although the general rule is that 'tickets are not transferable', that was never intended to prevent me from paying my daughters' rail fare for example.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

The judgment in Browning & Floyd (1946) made perfectly clear that a traveller who uses a ticket that was issued for the sole use of another person, has not paid his/her fare.

Indeed.
What I think is most interesting in Browning v Floyd is that he had, in fact paid his fare. His error was in keeping his (valid) Monthly Return ticket in his pocket, intending to use it on another occasion, and instead presented his wife's unused outward portion of a Day Return (of which she had already used the return portion).

Consequently, we see that "intent to avoid payment" extends beyond simply 'not paying'.

They look quite the same to me (yours being a double negative and mine a positive), . . .

The two statements are not mutually exhaustive; it would be possible to present a valid ticket for inspection without intending to pay the fare (or having intended to pay it). Many of us will have have done this many times, we can imagine that the OP's daughter has done so many times.

Further, the two statements are not mutually exclusive, either, as Browning v Floyd illustrated.

There are good reasons for using a double negative when we want to isolate a specific circumstance.

 

[bb21]

she might like to enter a defence to this effect, in that she wasn't aware it was a child ticket....

The only issue I have with this line of argument is that the ticket would have printed on it in big bold highlighted letters "CHILD" so I am unsure how far claiming ignorance would go.

 

[trc666]

Also if the ticket was purchased from a TVM (Ticket Vending Machine) you cannot accidentally buy a child ticket - the passenger has to press 'OK' on the screen to confirm that they (or the person they are buying the ticket for) are aged between 5 and 15 years old.

 

[pink123]

Going to call SWT tomorrow and request a settlement. If they decline this then will go with a Guilty plea and apologise and hope it doesn't end in too large a fine. Would have liked to avoid the criminal record but ultimately she did do it and we are not going to lie to try and get out of it. I will let you all know the outcome and thanks for all you advice.

 

[GadgetMan]

Before you ring ask your daughter one last time if she has received and ignored/responded to any previous letters from the TOC. If she genuinely hasn't then that's fair enough however as others above have mentioned it would be very unusual (but not impossible) for you to not receive any letters asking for your version of events before the summons is sent. You really do want to be in possession of the full facts before ringing to ensure they don't spring any surprises on you that you aren't already aware of.

Aslong as your daughter now realises the importance of paying the correct fare and holding a Valid ticket in future then I hope you can reach a satisfactory outcome on the phone.

 

[Fare-Cop]

Would have liked to avoid the criminal record but ultimately she did do it and we are not going to lie to try and get out of it.

If only all of society at large shared your values.

I hope that you get the result that your effort deserves, I genuinely wish you the best of luck.

 

[chillibabe]

Going to call SWT tomorrow and request a settlement. If they decline this then will go with a Guilty plea and apologise and hope it doesn't end in too large a fine. Would have liked to avoid the criminal record but ultimately she did do it and we are not going to lie to try and get out of it. I will let you all know the outcome and thanks for all you advice.

could you please tell me the outcome of your phone call as my daughter is in the same situation and she knows she done wrong but would really like to avoid a criminal record
many thanks

 

[Andrewlong]

And the cost of a 16-25 railcard is £30 per year or £70 for three years. You can even buy them online - upload a photo and off you go!

 

[pinguini]

And the cost of a 16-25 railcard is £30 per year or £70 for three years. You can even buy them online - upload a photo and off you go!

Or currently £27 with promo code 'POSTER3'