I have been charged with an offence... but I feel that I did not commit it!

[mikeg]

I don't want to give the OP false hope but it may be worth reading through this guidance:

CPS guidance for private prosecutions

In particular:

When to take over a private prosecution in order to stop it​

A private prosecution should be taken over and stopped if, upon review of the case papers, either the evidential sufficiency stage or the public interest stage of the Full Code Test is not met.

Given that the public interest stage of the Full Code Test is highly unlikely to be met, it may be worth making the CPS aware of this case.

I was given this idea by my brother who saw the case on Reddit and immediately thought of this. Though not a legal professional he is involved in gathering and giving evidence in private prosecutions for another, non-railway organisation and their policy as a result is to make sure the public interest test is met for precisely this reason.

 

[island]

I don't want to give the OP false hope but it may be worth reading through this guidance:

CPS guidance for private prosecutions

In particular:



Given that the public interest stage of the Full Code Test is highly unlikely to be met, it may be worth making the CPS aware of this case.

I was given this idea by my brother who saw the case on Reddit and immediately thought of this. Though not a legal professional he is involved in gathering and giving evidence in private prosecutions for another, non-railway organisation and their policy as a result is to make sure the public interest test is met for precisely this reason.

This just about never happens in practice.

 

[mikeg]

Irrespective of whether it is common or not, it may be worth reminding in this case the CPS of their own code of practice and obligations thereunder. With that attitude it certainly never happens in practice. The OP has nothing to lose from this approach but as I said I didn't want to give them false hope.

 

[jvrmgonzalez]

Many of you are asking for me to share the documents I have received and sent to LNER.

I hear you! I will upload them when I have a chance. At the moment I am travelling and can't access the files I have.

Thank you all so much for your help so far.

I sent the email below to LNER this morning after calling their prosecutions team, as they suggested:

Hello, I contacted the prosecutions team and they suggested I reply this appeal for a further evaluation of my case.

On the 22nd of July 2022, I was returning from a trip to England, and I took an LNER train at Newark North Gate with destination to York where I would take another train to Aberdeen. I boarded at 16:46 which was the time of the ticket that I purchased using the company’s application. I attach a receipt for this purchase to this email.
On the train, an inspector asked for my ticket to which I complied, showing them that I had purchased a ticket for 16:46 from Newark North Gate to York. They informed me that the train that I took was the wrong train. Apparently, this train was the 16:30 train from Newark North Gate to York which was delayed and that is why it arrived to Newark North Gate at 16:46. I was not aware of this at the time of boarding.
Despite explaining this, the inspector insisted that I had to pay a fee because I boarded the wrong train, even when I held a ticket that showed clearly that the date, time and stations I was boarding the train for corresponded to the date, time and stations I indeed boarded. I believe it is not my fault that LNER’s train was late. When I boarded, I understood that since I paid for a train between Newark North Gate and York at 16:46, I was indeed boarding the correct train. I did not evade the fare!

Since at the time I did not have any money to pay the fee, I was given a UFN with reference [REFERENCE] by the train’s inspector. I promptly appealed it on the same day on the basis that I took the train of the same company, for the same destination and at the same time.
LNER has now sent me a notice that they are charging me with an offence of byelaw 18.1 of the Railway Byelaws 2005. I consider this letter as an intimidating action, a reckless letter since the responsibility for compliance with train schedules is the responsibility of the railway company and not the user. My responsibility as a user was to buy a ticket, which I did.
The appeal to the UFN was sent on time and LNER did not deign to accept it nor use my statement as mitigating circumstances. They have ignored (or at least not received) any appeal I have sent after the first one.
I appreciate immensely your time reading this and I wish we could discuss this further. I believe I am being wronged by LNER by being prosecuted for avoiding a fare when I did not do this, and I believe that scratching my name with a criminal offence when no crime was committed is absolutely unfair.
I hope this email will allow this action to cease and the matter to be investigated and mitigated.

And this was their reply:

Dear [MY NAME]



I have forwarded your e-mail to my colleague who will make a 2nd assessment of your case – she will respond back to you as soon as possible.



Kind regards

[LNER Prosecutions representative]

 

[AlterEgo]

That seems positive. As a rule LNER don’t prosecute unless they don’t think you’ve engaged with the process. Perhaps they didn’t receive your other correspondence or perhaps they’ve made an error. Do keep us posted.

 

[fishwomp]

1. I am not sure that "while travelling" bears that meaning. The ticket is for "travel" by (a specific) train.

Otherwise you could claim that any delay whatsoever to your booked train voided the restriction. (My trains routinely leave Saltaire a minute or two late, does that mean I can use my Advance to London on an earlier/later train from Leeds because I prefer an Azuma/a 225 or whatever....?)

That said, the OP is hard done by, and one would hope a court would agree.

Gosh. This is staggering.

A no-win no-fee class action would destroy the railways: imagine if every single such fine that has been levied incorrectly were in scope?

Any train on which a fine was levied where the original ticket holder had a ticket for a (5 min, 10 min over more?) different but late train would have to be refunded..

 

[island]

Gosh. This is staggering.

A no-win no-fee class action would destroy the railways: imagine if every single such fine that has been levied incorrectly were in scope?

Any train on which a fine was levied where the original ticket holder had a ticket for a (5 min, 10 min over more?) different but late train would have to be refunded..

This is further from correct or realistic than Inverness is from Kings Cross.

 

[Cowley]

Many of you are asking for me to share the documents I have received and sent to LNER.

I hear you! I will upload them when I have a chance. At the moment I am travelling and can't access the files I have.

Thank you all so much for your help so far.

I sent the email below to LNER this morning after calling their prosecutions team, as they suggested:



And this was their reply:

Ok I think for now we’ll put a pause on this thread as it’s been going quite off topic at times. So @jvrmgonzalez, if you could in contact with us either via the report function below or via the pm that I sent you the other day, we’ll reopen the thread once you’ve received a reply so we update everyone on the outcome.

Thanks everyone