Freedom pass misuse- pls help me!

[jiggyjiggy]

Hello, I am new on here and just needed some advice. I was caught using my family members freedom pass on tfl last week. I have been struggling with financial issues as I have just started working again (hence I haven’t been paid yet) and needed to get to work and back while I had an empty wallet until payday. I picked it up unaware of what it actually was or that using it was even a criminal offence. I wasn’t even aware that I couldn’t use it so I confidently used it in front of a group of inspectors (how stupid of me). When they caught me I willingly showed them and cooperated as I assumed that it wouldn’t be that serious and I’ll probs just end up with a fine or warning at the most.

The inspector said she wouldn’t fine me (I thought I got lucky) and that I’ll receive a letter in the post and that I had to respond to it and TFL will decide next steps? Well since coming home I researched what that letter might say and have come across how serious TFL take this, the option of prosecution and possible criminal record. I am now obviously super worried as I genuinely had no clue and I feel so stupid for my ignorance.

Has anyone been in a similar situation to me before and had a positive outcome e.g a warning or just a fine? If I respond with the information above, plead guilty and show my remorse will that increase my chances of not being prosecuted? This is my first ever offence and I obviously worry about my future career aspects as I am currently doing my psychology masters to work with vulnerable groups within the mental health/ criminal justice sector.

 

[Titfield]

Thanks to @Hadders for the advice given in response to previous posts relating to this type of issue. This is a frequent query on this forum.

I have copied this from a previous @Hadders response as it deals with the issues succinctly.

Transport for London take misuse of Freedom Passes very seriously and prosecution under the TfL Bylaws is the usual outcome.

You will be sent a Verification Letter which asks you to confirm of deny the offence and give any mitigating factors you want TfL to take into consideration when they decide how to proceed. You have nothing to lose in giving mitigating factors, or asking them to settle out of court, but don't get your hopes up because TfL generally do not settle out of court.

Assuming the case ends up in court and you are convicted (either by pleading guilty or by being found guilty following a trial) 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 DBS checks although we always advise people to be honest when asked if they have a conviction.

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

 

[jiggyjiggy]

Thanks to @Hadders for the advice given in response to previous posts relating to this type of issue. This is a frequent query on this forum.

I have copied this from a previous @Hadders response as it deals with the issues succinctly.

Transport for London take misuse of Freedom Passes very seriously and prosecution under the TfL Bylaws is the usual outcome.

You will be sent a Verification Letter which asks you to confirm of deny the offence and give any mitigating factors you want TfL to take into consideration when they decide how to proceed. You have nothing to lose in giving mitigating factors, or asking them to settle out of court, but don't get your hopes up because TfL generally do not settle out of court.

Assuming the case ends up in court and you are convicted (either by pleading guilty or by being found guilty following a trial) 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 DBS checks although we always advise people to be honest when asked if they have a conviction.

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

Thank you, I keep seeing different things surrounding with law they will prosecute you with? I’ve seen the Tfl byelaws is better because it is not shown on DBS, I also have seen that this type of offence requires prosecution under another law (Railway act something) which does show on DBS for around 2 years or something. Can something please explain the differences between the two and what constitutes for prosecution of one and not the other?

 

[Pushpit]

Thank you, I keep seeing different things surrounding with law they will prosecute you with? I’ve seen the Tfl byelaws is better because it is not shown on DBS, I also have seen that this type of offence requires prosecution under another law (Railway act something) which does show on DBS for around 2 years or something. Can something please explain the differences between the two and what constitutes for prosecution of one and not the other?

Byelaws should not appear on DBS, and actually other railways legislation such as RORA tend not to appear either. However! Mistakes happen. Even childhood offences, which should not appear on DBS, do sometimes creep in, thanks at the moment to multi year delays in the judicial system. I always argue this question is completely missing the point. If you are in protective employment then you have to declare relevant / in scope convictions when asked, you hardly want to wait to the fairly convoluted DBS process - which takes weeks - for your employer to discover you've been lying to them. Employers tend to be willing to understand minor law breaches (though this is fairly systematic law breaking on the face of it), but they can't tolerate people who put lies in their application forms. This is a bigger issue for Enhanced disclosure, but still if your employer or education provider asks the question (and assuming they are allowed to ask that question) then you have to give a full and honest answer. Honesty gets you out of trouble.

 

[30907]

Thank you, I keep seeing different things surrounding with law they will prosecute you with? I’ve seen the Tfl byelaws is better because it is not shown on DBS, I also have seen that this type of offence requires prosecution under another law (Railway act something) which does show on DBS for around 2 years or something. Can something please explain the differences between the two and what constitutes for prosecution of one and not the other?

Experience on this forum is that TfL will almost always prosecute, but do so under their Byelaws referencing the occasion when you were actually caught.
They could prosecute for a more serious offence of intending to evade the fare, but seem to prefer the simple approach even with Freedom Pass misuse.

Either way, Pushpit makes an important point about job applications etc.
I should add that a Byelaw conviction may well appear on an Enhanced DBS; your future employer should not automatically turn you down for that, but make a judgement on whether it is safe to employ you.

 

[jiggyjiggy]

Byelaws should not appear on DBS, and actually other railways legislation such as RORA tend not to appear either. However! Mistakes happen. Even childhood offences, which should not appear on DBS, do sometimes creep in, thanks at the moment to multi year delays in the judicial system. I always argue this question is completely missing the point. If you are in protective employment then you have to declare relevant / in scope convictions when asked, you hardly want to wait to the fairly convoluted DBS process - which takes weeks - for your employer to discover you've been lying to them. Employers tend to be willing to understand minor law breaches (though this is fairly systematic law breaking on the face of it), but they can't tolerate people who put lies in their application forms. This is a bigger issue for Enhanced disclosure, but still if your employer or education provider asks the question (and assuming they are allowed to ask that question) then you have to give a full and honest answer. Honesty gets you out of trouble.

Experience on this forum is that TfL will almost always prosecute, but do so under their Byelaws referencing the occasion when you were actually caught.
They could prosecute for a more serious offence of intending to evade the fare, but seem to prefer the simple approach even with Freedom Pass misuse.

Either way, Pushpit makes an important point about job applications etc.
I should add that a Byelaw conviction may well appear on an Enhanced DBS; your future employer should not automatically turn you down for that, but make a judgement on whether it is safe to employ you.

Hello, thank you for this. I saw on Tfl regulations that they may choose to not prosecute if it is not required in the public interest. I know I will never ever do anything like this again. Do you have any recommendations to help them come to this conclusion too?

 

[Seehof]

Was the Freedom pass taken off you?

 

[jiggyjiggy]

Was the Freedom pass taken off you?

Yes

 

[Titfield]

Yes

You must tell the pass holder as soon as possible (if you have not done so already) of what has occurred.

They (the pass holder) may be asked to explain how it came to be in your possession rather than theirs. Their response could result in action being taken against them.

 

[jiggyjiggy]

You must tell the pass holder as soon as possible (if you have not done so already) of what has occurred.

They (the pass holder) may be asked to explain how it came to be in your possession rather than theirs. Their response could result in action being taken against them.

Yes I did, they are aware of my current situation. They however were unaware of me using it and had assumed I picked up their Oyster card!

 

[Pushpit]

"Hello, thank you for this. I saw on Tfl regulations that they may choose to not prosecute if it is not required in the public interest. I know I will never ever do anything like this again. Do you have any recommendations to help them come to this conclusion too?"

There are a few cases in this forum where TfL has opted not to prosecute, but it's very much the exception. I don't think I've picked up a logic yet, I'm not sure if anyone else has. The "Public Interest" test is something you best discuss with your lawyer friends, it's difficult to summarise and whole books are written on it. But one reading is that criminals should face the consequences of their crimes, another reading is "this guy is terminally ill so what's the point?". You may well find yourself nearer the first reading.

 

[Titfield]

There would have to be exceptional circumstances for TfL to decide not to prosecute. Just quite what those circumstances would be I can not say for certain but, with all due respect to you, being short of funds and / or ignorance of using a Freedom pass is not exceptional, if anything these two reasons are the ones that seem to be put forward most times in the posts we see on this forum relating to Freedom passes.

You could decide to engage the services of a solicitor to put forward a response on your behalf but whether or not this is more likely to be successful I do not know. What is certain is that it will cost you a few hundred pounds for their services.

If I was in your position I would be trying to find out what effect a conviction would have on my career prospects. You say you are currently studying. Can the student union offer you any guidance or advice? Have you thought of contacting the regulator for your chosen profession to see if they give any guidance as to the impact a conviction of this type would have on your employment prospects?

Many professions use a Fit and Proper Person test. There is usually some guidance as to what convictions are an absolute bar to entry to or working in a profession, sometimes there is a time bar ie the matter is not taken into account in assessing a persons fitness after a period of time (though this usually is when the conviction is deemed to be spent). If the Regulator bars your application to join the profession there is a right of appeal where it is looked at afresh by an independent body. You can then submit grounds of appeal as to why you are a fit and proper person.

From my little knowledge of the fit and proper person test in one profession, failing to declare a conviction is an aggravating factor and is often the difference between being "allowed in" and "kept out" when looking at minor offences because it demonstrates knowingly being dishonest.

 

[Brissle Girl]

Unless there’s an unusual factor in your circumstances then as others have noted you are unlikely to persuade TfL that it isn’t in the public interest to prosecute. From what you’ve told us this is very much a bread and butter case where it typically feels that it is in the public interest.

 

[island]

Hello, thank you for this. I saw on Tfl regulations that they may choose to not prosecute if it is not required in the public interest. I know I will never ever do anything like this again. Do you have any recommendations to help them come to this conclusion too?

There is a strong public interest in prosecuting people who misuse freedom passes and other high-value tickets so as to dissuade violators and others from doing so in the future.

 

[jiggyjiggy]

Thank you guys, I appreciate the help and honesty. I have yet to receive the letter but I’m sure I’ll upload it on here to get some advice and how to go forward.

 

[tiago1234]

See my reply to the other thread here. I too, like you, have misuse a family member freedom pass over a span of months.
I went with the not in the public interest route. Before going this route, you ensure you have exceptional circumstances you can evidence - e.g. lose your job and house, mental health etc.
I received their reply yesterday. They decided to not prosecute me and a was given a warning. I was very lucky to get away as I was expecting prosecution and a conviction means losing my job.
I learnt my lesson that I will always pay my fare.

 

[Hadders]

See my reply to the other thread here. I too, like you, have misuse a family member freedom pass over a span of months.
I went with the not in the public interest route. Before going this route, you ensure you have exceptional circumstances you can evidence - e.g. lose your job and house, mental health etc.
I received their reply yesterday. They decided to not prosecute me and a was given a warning. I was very lucky to get away as I was expecting prosecution and a conviction means losing my job.
I learnt my lesson that I will always pay my fare.

It is highly unusual for TfL not to prosecute in cases like this, and we really need to know more about the circumstances of this case before we can say whether this outcome is likely in other cases.

 

[Shyh Min]

See my reply to the other thread here. I too, like you, have misuse a family member freedom pass over a span of months.
I went with the not in the public interest route. Before going this route, you ensure you have exceptional circumstances you can evidence - e.g. lose your job and house, mental health etc.
I received their reply yesterday. They decided to not prosecute me and a was given a warning. I was very lucky to get away as I was expecting prosecution and a conviction means losing my job.
I learnt my lesson that I will always pay my fare.

Hi Tiagio,

How long between you sending your response to the initial letter until you heard from them? One of my family members had just sent in their response yesterday, and now we are anxiously waiting and could use some rough idea on how long till we hear back from the IAP?

thank you.

 

[Hadders]

Hi Tiagio,

How long between you sending your response to the initial letter until you heard from them? One of my family members had just sent in their response yesterday, and now we are anxiously waiting and could use some rough idea on how long till we hear back from the IAP?

thank you.

Please start your own thread if you are in need of assistance. We operate a one case per thread policy so as not to confuse cases, and experience has taught us that no two cases are every quite the same.

 

[tiago1234]

It took almost 8 weeks before I received my reply.