Discussion on the Impact of a Conviction on Career Prospects

[Pw981]

Split from:

Caught using wife’s oyster photo id card

Hi All, I am on student dependent visa and today I caught using my wife’s photo id oyster card. I was using it almost a year without knowing that I cant use it. Now the TFL officer takes my card and told me that you will receive a letter within 2 weeks and where you have to explain why it has...

www.railforums.co.uk

Transport for London take misuse of 18+ Oyster cards very seriously and a prosecution under the TfL Bylaws is the usual outcome.

TfL will send you a Verification Letter, normally within a couple of weeks. The letter will ask you to confirm or deny the incident and ask you to give any mitigating circumstances which you would like them to take into account when deciding how to proceed.

I suggest you mention the following in your reply:

- That you are sorry for what has happened
- What you have learned from the incident
- That you are keen to settle the matter without the need for court action
- Offer to pay the outstanding fare and TfL's administrative costs in dealing with the matter

TfL generally do not offer out of court settlements although in some very limited circumstances they have been known to issue a final warning instead of prosecution. Prosecutions are normally done through what is called a Single Justice Procedure Notice. This means that if you plead guilty it is not necessary to attend court in person (unless you choose to do), you simply return the form to the court with any mitigation you want them to tae into account and they will write to you with the details of the fine you have to pay.

If you are prosecuted and plead guilty (or are found guilty by the court) then you will have to pay:

- A fine based on your income (normally discounted by a third if you plead guilty at the earliest opportunity)
- A surcharge of 40% of the value of the fine
- A contribution towards TfL's costs
- Compensation for the fares avoided

If you are found guilty then this is a criminal conviction. If you are prosecuted under the TfL Bylaws (which is what normally happens) then the conviction isn't normally recorded on the Police National Computer and won't normally appear on Basic or Standards DBS checks although we always advise people to be honest when asked if they have a conviction.

A criminal conviction for a railway ticketing matter won't normally affect future career prospects but do note that legally we are unable to comment or assist when it comes to immigration issues.

Here's a link to TfL's Revenue Enforcement & Prosecutions Policy which you might find worth reading:

https://content.tfl.gov.uk/revenue-enforcement-and-prosecutions-policy.pdf

Hello! I'm new here but I'm hoping my contributions will benefit the wider community.

I actually beg to differ regarding career prospects not being impacted due to a criminal conviction for a railway ticketing matter - the reason being is that if someone has a conviction of this type, it questions that individuals honesty and integrity which for certain job roles is crucial. For example - would it be reasonable to expect a security officer to be honest, transparent and conduct themselves in an integral manner whether at work or out of work?

In the financial services industry - there are cases of where people have been caught and convicted for rail ticketing manners and have ended up losing their jobs. See two examples:

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

Banker forged train season ticket in £8,000 scam

A City banker who forged his railway season ticket in an £8,000 scam has been sacked and is now claiming benefits.

www.standard.co.uk

 

[skyhigh]

In the financial services industry - there are cases of where people have been caught and convicted for rail ticketing manners and have ended up losing their jobs. See two examples:

Forging a season ticket worth £8k and evading over £40k in fares is fare evasion on a completely different scale.

And in your first example, there was no conviction. As your own link quotes, Mr Burrows avoided prosecution by agreeing an out-of-court settlement.

In the second example, the banker claimed a season ticket loan from his employer, faked the season ticket and pocketed the cash defrauding the train operator and his employer. So you can see why he lost his job...

 

[spotify95]

A



Hello! I'm new here but I'm hoping my contributions will benefit the wider community.

I actually beg to differ regarding career prospects not being impacted due to a criminal conviction for a railway ticketing matter - the reason being is that if someone has a conviction of this type, it questions that individuals honesty and integrity which for certain job roles is crucial. For example - would it be reasonable to expect a security officer to be honest, transparent and conduct themselves in an integral manner whether at work or out of work?

In the financial services industry - there are cases of where people have been caught and convicted for rail ticketing manners and have ended up losing their jobs. See two examples:

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

Banker forged train season ticket in £8,000 scam

A City banker who forged his railway season ticket in an £8,000 scam has been sacked and is now claiming benefits.

www.standard.co.uk

There has been mentioned before, in other threads, that if you're in a regulated profession that requires the utmost of honesty then you're more likely to be affected by a criminal conviction, even a minor one like fare evasion.

The first of your examples is an example of the finance industry, which as you may suspect is one of the regulated examples, due to the level of trust involved in such a role.

The second one looks to be a case of fraud by false representation. Fraud is a much more serious offence than simple fare evasion. He was also a banker which, as mentioned, is one of the more regulated industries - you don't want a dishonest person handling/managing your money.

For most instances of simple fare evasion, you probably won't lose your job if you're not in a regulated role, though you should always declare such convictions to your employer.

- A fine based on your income* (usually discounted for a third if you plead guilty at the earliest opportunity)
- A surcharge of 40% of the value of the fine
- Compensation for the fare avoided on the day you were caught
- Contribution towards the Train Operating Companies court costs

*See https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.u...court/item/railway-fare-evasion-revised-2017/

Just a note for the OP if they are reading this...

The last two items in this list (costs and compensation) will be stated on the Summons or SJPN paperwork if TFL decide to take this matter to court (which they likely will).

The court would probably find the OP guilty, so it is best to just enter a guilty plea at the earliest opportunity to get the 1/3 discount in the fine (which will increase to roughly what it started as once the victim surcharge is added).

 

[John R]

A



Hello! I'm new here but I'm hoping my contributions will benefit the wider community.

I actually beg to differ regarding career prospects not being impacted due to a criminal conviction for a railway ticketing matter - the reason being is that if someone has a conviction of this type, it questions that individuals honesty and integrity which for certain job roles is crucial. For example - would it be reasonable to expect a security officer to be honest, transparent and conduct themselves in an integral manner whether at work or out of work?

In the financial services industry - there are cases of where people have been caught and convicted for rail ticketing manners and have ended up losing their jobs. See two examples:

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

Banker forged train season ticket in £8,000 scam

A City banker who forged his railway season ticket in an £8,000 scam has been sacked and is now claiming benefits.

www.standard.co.uk

We've always been clear to note (where relevant to the case under discussion) that certain professions, including law, health and financial services are much more of an issue when it comes to convictions for fare evasion.

 

[rocrat]

Great Ormond Street doctor suspended for 'serious' dishonesty

Dr James Ip used his wife's free travel pass on the Tube, claiming he felt it unjust he had to pay.

www.bbc.co.uk

This was a very clear example from the GMC re fare evasion... it was hotly debated on both trains and medical reddit and twitter...

 

[Hadders]

Welcome to the forum!

The cases you mention were both very high profile cases.

In the case of Jonathan Burrows he negotiated an out of court settlement. He wasn't convicted by a court and therefore didn't have a crimial record. Unfortunately, for Burrows his dishonest behaviour came to the attention of the City watchdog authorities and, given his position and the high profile of the case, they had little option but to take the action they did.

Simon King wasn't prosecuted for fare evasion, he was prosecuted and convicted for fraud by false representation. This is much more serious than a conviction for a railway ticketing matter.

Neither of these cases aren't really representative of the sort of icases we see in this section of the forum. Clearly a conviction for a railway ticketing matter is not going to enhance career prospects but I will repeat what I always say - that is to be honest when asked if you have been convicted.

It's also important that you do what is required under your contract of employment - that will vary from job to job. Some contracts might require you to notify your employer if you are under investigation or are charged, others might not require you to tell them even if you are convicted.

 

[island]

I work in a senior role in the banking industry and this has come up from time to time in my career.

The examples the OP mentions are the top 1% of seriousness and the action taken there is far apart from the action which might be taken against someone who chanced their arm one morning or forgot their Railcard had expired.

In these run of the mill cases, what most financial services recruiters are looking for is honesty – we want to hear about the issue from the applicant themselves at the first point at which we ask about it. We understand that people make errors of judgement and a minor criminal record won't rule someone out. What probably will rule someone out is if they don't mention it when we ask, and the first we hear about it is when it comes up on their DBS check. That is an indicator of direct dishonesty, and if someone lies to us during the application process when presumably they're trying to present themselves at their very best, it raises questions about what they will be like if we employ them.

Additionally, the bank where I work operates under the "ban the box" initiative – we don't ask about criminal records on application forms, so people aren't filtered out on that basis. It comes up at a later stage.

Similar principles apply to those convicted of offences whilst in employment. If we find out from the employee directly and promptly, it is much more likely to result in continued employment.

 

[Richardr]

One minor related point I saw yesterday. I was renewing home insurance, and there was a statement of facts which included, easily missed by those who don't read the full document:

Page 12
Your Insurance History

You or any of your family haven't received a conviction for any offence except for driving or speeding.
Have you or any of your family received a conviction for any offence except for driving or speeding which you haven't told us about? If yes, please call
us within 30 days to let us know as this may affect the cover we can provide.

 

[Titfield]

Clearly a conviction for a railway ticketing matter is not going to enhance career prospects but I will repeat what I always say - that is to be honest when asked if you have been convicted.

Please note that many regulator codes of conduct or where activities are licenced (for example Driving Instructors) require you to declare convictions upon conviction not when you are asked.

 

[KirkstallOne]

There was this case where a pending conviction was causing issues with an in-flight university application. Unfortunately we never found out the final outcome and the OP wasn’t particularly clear on the full details:

GOT CAUGHT USING 11-15 OYSTER. HELP!!

There are twenty-eight TfL cases listed on at Lavender Hill Magistrates Court today so there could be quite a wait or even cases getting put back to another day depending how many people show up.

www.railforums.co.uk

I think as with most things it depends on the exact circumstances. If you are a senior banker who manages to make the national newspaper with the scale of your season ticket fraud then of course it will have an impact whether you get convicted or not.

 

[Gloster]

If I remember correctly Mr Burrows kept his name out of the news when it became known that someone had paid a massive out of court settlement to Southeastern Trains. It slowly leaked out that he was in the financial services industry, which caused the Financial Conduct Authority to become interested. Once they got an idea as to who it was, Burrows had to tell his employer’s HR department that the FCA might be contacting them. After that his feet didn’t hit the ground as they regarded failing to tell them as a seriously aggravating factor.

 

[43066]

If you’re a solicitor (or other legal professional) a conviction of this sort is going to be very bad news indeed:

Solicitor struck off after dodging £650 in rail fares

The Evening Standard reports: A solicitor faces “catastrophic” damage to his career after being struck off by the regulator for dodging £650 in rail fares. [name suppressed] repeatedly avoided paying the £17 daily return fare from his home in Shoreditch to Redhill in Surrey by leaving the...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[Tallguy]

The bottom line is this - if a criminal conviction is going to harm your future prospects then why take the risk and take actions that leave you open to criminal prosecution? Buy a correct ticket and have nothing to worry about, or fare dodge by whatever means and hope you don’t get caught. When you get caught (not if), remember you made that decision to fare dodge……

 

[Tetchytyke]

In my line of work (adjacent to the financial services industry) we use a matrix when we are assessing someone's integrity.

As you will imagine, the matrix is there to assess how serious something is, how recently something happened, and how relevant the offence is to the role. The matrix also assesses whether someone told us about it or whether we had to go looking for it.

I cannot foresee many situations where I could reasonably and justifiably decide that someone is without integrity if the fare evasion was minor, was dealt with under the Byelaws or RoRA, and where that person was upfront about it.

This was a very clear example from the GMC re fare evasion

I'd say it was more a case of it being one of the MPTS' occasionally bonkers decisions which so enrages the medical profession. You see them every now and again but the cost of appealing them is prohibitively expensive; the costs can easily top £20,000.

It's why I'd definitely be careful applying the same standards of integrity to medical professionals. Especially if they are people from a minority ethnic background; the GMC unfortunately has form for pushing for more serious sanctions against people from minority ethnic backgrounds.

As for medical students, those fitness to practice decisions are made at the University level and University decision making can be even more erratic (to put it politely).

 

[Titfield]

As for medical students, those fitness to practice decisions are made at the University level and University decision making can be even more erratic (to put it politely).

Which is why imho there should always be a right of appeal to a third party who is independent and demonstrably so from the original decision maker and their organisation.