• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

First class - Intention of prosecution

Status
Not open for further replies.

Soobs

Member
Joined
16 Aug 2019
Messages
9
Location
Moon
Hi there,

I received an intention of prosecution letter from Govia Thameslink. They want me to give them my side of the story.

4 months ago I accidentally & stupidly sat in the first class area I had only a standard oyster card fare for my journey. This is the only alleged offence they intend to prosecute me on. It's the first time I have done this and did not intend to sit there as the train was half empty when I entered.

I was inspected by a RPI, I politely gave him my details, he then put me under caution, he didn't give me a receipt. I asked how I could pay the penalty and that I had cash on me. He said I would be contacted. The chain of events happened quickly and he didn't give me an opportunity to pay a penalty.

Would anyone mind having a look at my response letter? I added an excuse but should I take it out?

Letter attached.
Many thanks...
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Hadders

Veteran Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
27 Apr 2011
Messages
12,984
It would be helpful to know exactly what train service you were travelling on because some of GTR's trains do not convey 1st class accommodation and therefore any 1st class accommodation on the train may be used by passengers with standard class tickets.

Also if you were travelling on a new class 700 Thameslink branded train (the walk through trains with the horrible blue ironing board seats in standard class) then the rear 1st class compartment is permanently declassified.

Although unlikely it is not unheard of for RPIs to make a mistake.
 

Soobs

Member
Joined
16 Aug 2019
Messages
9
Location
Moon
It would be helpful to know exactly what train service you were travelling on because some of GTR's trains do not convey 1st class accommodation and therefore any 1st class accommodation on the train may be used by passengers with standard class tickets.

Also if you were travelling on a new class 700 Thameslink branded train (the walk through trains with the horrible blue ironing board seats in standard class) then the rear 1st class compartment is permanently declassified.

Although unlikely it is not unheard of for RPIs to make a mistake.

Thank you for the reply.
It was a southern train, the first class compartment had no physical door dividing it but it wasn't de-comissioned.
 

furlong

Established Member
Joined
28 Mar 2013
Messages
3,480
Location
Reading
You said "accidentally". Did you admit to knowing you were in first class? The next thing these companies sometimes get wrong is that they don't display the correct notice stating that only holders of first class tickets can use that section of the train. When you were approached, did the inspector point out the notice to you, or did you see them take a photo of it to use as part of their evidence if challenged on this point?
 

Soobs

Member
Joined
16 Aug 2019
Messages
9
Location
Moon
You said "accidentally". Did you admit to knowing you were in first class? The next thing these companies sometimes get wrong is that they don't display the correct notice stating that only holders of first class tickets can use that section of the train. When you were approached, did the inspector point out the notice to you, or did you see them take a photo of it to use as part of their evidence if challenged on this point?

I did not not admit knowing I was in first class. The inspector did not take a photo for evidence, he didn't point to any sign either.

Thanks, these are good points
 

cuccir

Established Member
Joined
18 Nov 2009
Messages
3,659
I did not not admit knowing I was in first class.

This is useful for you as stating that you did know you were in first class would be evidence to help them achieve a prosecution under the stronger Regulation of the Railways Act. This has a higher fine than the alterantive legislation for prosecution, the Byelaws, and is visible on DBS checks while the Byelaws aren't. If they want to settle out of court, this should lead to them suggesting a lower amount.
 

cuccir

Established Member
Joined
18 Nov 2009
Messages
3,659
Would anyone mind having a look at my response letter? I added an excuse but should I take it out?

Your letter does not unambiguosly state that you sat in first class by mistake. For the reasons I gave above, you should edit it accordingly eg "these factors resulted in poor judgement. This is by no means an excuse and I acknowledge what happened was wrong". I would replace with "these factors contributed to me unknowingly sitting in first class. This is by no means an excuse and I acknowledge my error in not paying more attention".
 

Soobs

Member
Joined
16 Aug 2019
Messages
9
Location
Moon
Your letter does not unambiguosly state that you sat in first class by mistake. For the reasons I gave above, you should edit it accordingly eg "these factors resulted in poor judgement. This is by no means an excuse and I acknowledge what happened was wrong". I would replace with "these factors contributed to me unknowingly sitting in first class. This is by no means an excuse and I acknowledge my error in not paying more attention".

That's a very good edit, I will add this suggestion.

Thanks so much for spotting.

Is there anything else you think I can do to improve the letter ? I kept it as factual and streamlined as possible.
 

Soobs

Member
Joined
16 Aug 2019
Messages
9
Location
Moon
This is useful for you as stating that you did know you were in first class would be evidence to help them achieve a prosecution under the stronger Regulation of the Railways Act. This has a higher fine than the alterantive legislation for prosecution, the Byelaws, and is visible on DBS checks while the Byelaws aren't. If they want to settle out of court, this should lead to them suggesting a lower amount.

Is the Regulation of the Railways Act permanent? Or does it get spent after a year?
 

some bloke

Established Member
Joined
12 Feb 2017
Messages
1,561
The offence in your letter is a breach of Byelaw 19. Unless they also mentioned the possibility of prosecuting you for intent to avoid a fare, a RoRA offence, they're only specifically showing interest in the offence that doesn't imply any dishonesty.

For most jobs the requirement to declare a byelaw conviction when asked would end after 12 months, and many - perhaps the great majority of - employers are not likely to care about it any more than if you had a minor conviction such as for speeding. If their letter isn't clear that when they refer to prosecution they're only talking about byelaw 19, you could upload a photo of it here with identifying details removed.

It sounds like the inspector may have realised that you made a mistake. And hopefully they'll agree a settlement.

Railway Byelaws said:
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.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/railway-byelaws
 
Last edited:

Soobs

Member
Joined
16 Aug 2019
Messages
9
Location
Moon
The offence in your letter is a breach of Byelaw 19. Unless they also mentioned the possibility of prosecuting you for intent to avoid a fare, a RoRA offence, they're only specifically showing interest in the offence that doesn't imply any dishonesty.

For most jobs the requirement to declare a byelaw conviction when asked would end after 12 months, and many - perhaps the great majority of - employers are not likely to care about it any more than if you had a minor conviction such as for speeding. If their letter isn't clear that when they refer to prosecution they're only talking about byelaw 19, you could upload a photo of it here with identifying details removed.

It sounds like the inspector may have realised that you made a mistake. And hopefully they'll agree a settlement.


https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/railway-byelaws


Thanks so much! I'v attached both sides of the letter.

Screenshot_20190818-134834.png Screenshot_20190818-135029.png
 

some bloke

Established Member
Joined
12 Feb 2017
Messages
1,561
Thanks so much! I'v attached both sides of the letter.

Right, so despite the irrelevant stuff about fraud, evasion and prison, they're only saying you were spoken to about an alleged offence that's a paraphrase of Byelaw 19.
 

Soobs

Member
Joined
16 Aug 2019
Messages
9
Location
Moon
Right, so despite the irrelevant stuff about fraud, evasion and prison, they're only saying you were spoken to about an alleged offence that's a paraphrase of Byelaw 19.

Yep. The irrelevant stuff (fruad, evasion,etc) isn't mentioned in what they alleged so I assume they're juat getting me just on byelaw 19.
 

some bloke

Established Member
Joined
12 Feb 2017
Messages
1,561
Well, they say "this case" on page 1 and "Details of offence" on page 2; you're not even being asked about dishonesty. I hope this is reassuring.
 

Soobs

Member
Joined
16 Aug 2019
Messages
9
Location
Moon
Yep. The irrelevant stuff (fruad, evasion,etc) isn't mentioned in what they alleged so I assume they're juat getting me just on byelaw 19.
Thank you it definitely is reassuring. I'll send my letter with the suggestions made so far.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top