A byelaw conviction will not show up on an Enhanced DBS check.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both 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!
Prosecution for alleged alteration of date on carnet ticket
- Thread starter buchsj
- Start date
- Status
A byelaw conviction will not show up on an Enhanced DBS check.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
DaveNewcastle and Cuccir
Many thanks for your helpful advice. I had decided just to admit defeat and try and settle out of court but your comments have given me the confidence to plead not guilty because the facts are as I stated. Don't know about hiring a lawyer or defending myself at this point due to cost. It does concern me that the TOC may take me more seriously if I have the backing of a lawyer.
Do the TOCs draw up this paper work fairly routinely just to see who holds their nerve?
Many thanks for your helpful advice. I had decided just to admit defeat and try and settle out of court but your comments have given me the confidence to plead not guilty because the facts are as I stated. Don't know about hiring a lawyer or defending myself at this point due to cost. It does concern me that the TOC may take me more seriously if I have the backing of a lawyer.
Do the TOCs draw up this paper work fairly routinely just to see who holds their nerve?
I do think the TOC is hoping people will just pay up (I am sure this isn't the first time), because even though the OP would know the ticket definitely wasn't altered, it could be costly to prove that fact - and I am not even sure the money could be recovered?
It does scare me that an RPI can just make a claim that a ticket is altered without having to do the necessary forensic examinations (later, obviously) to prove that - and then bring a proper prosecution. If the TOC isn't willing to do the necessary checks and go by a subjective look, that's a big problem (although one that has been well known and talked about before on here regarding carnet tickets).
This is more like the TOC taking a punt. The RPI thinks it must be tampered with, and the TOC thinks it's worth a chance - with the odds stacked in its favour.
The TOC certainly can't be sure, hence not going down the fraud route. In fact, there's a chance that the TOC wouldn't even take any action, but hopes for an out of court settlement.
It's easy to say when it isn't you, but these are the examples where I'd love for things to be taken to court and fought, to expose TOCs that take advantage. Because anyone could be a victim.
As I've said many times before, don't use carnet tickets. They're just too much grief. Having to carry a special pen and still risking ruining a ticket, rendering it invalid (or usable at extreme risk) just isn't worth the relatively modest savings.
It does scare me that an RPI can just make a claim that a ticket is altered without having to do the necessary forensic examinations (later, obviously) to prove that - and then bring a proper prosecution. If the TOC isn't willing to do the necessary checks and go by a subjective look, that's a big problem (although one that has been well known and talked about before on here regarding carnet tickets).
This is more like the TOC taking a punt. The RPI thinks it must be tampered with, and the TOC thinks it's worth a chance - with the odds stacked in its favour.
The TOC certainly can't be sure, hence not going down the fraud route. In fact, there's a chance that the TOC wouldn't even take any action, but hopes for an out of court settlement.
It's easy to say when it isn't you, but these are the examples where I'd love for things to be taken to court and fought, to expose TOCs that take advantage. Because anyone could be a victim.
As I've said many times before, don't use carnet tickets. They're just too much grief. Having to carry a special pen and still risking ruining a ticket, rendering it invalid (or usable at extreme risk) just isn't worth the relatively modest savings.
If the RPI thinks it's been tampered with then it's completely appropriate and correct to report the matter for further investigation.
This is the same question I have - if they are confident enough to allege a Byelaw 20 breach then you would expect they are confident enough for a RoRA prosecution. Though, I suppose, there is no requirement for them to go for the more serious offence.
Only if the OP is confident that there is no way that a reasonable person, looking at the ticket, might reach the conclusion that the 17 had been changed to 19. If there's any doubt about it, then this wouldn't be an appropriate test case.
Again, that depends on specific circumstances - some people need to use carnets because they are transferable.
I still don't recommend their use, unless you're totally aware of the risk and make sure you are extremely careful when 'activating' one.
And of course an RPI is entitled to have a suspicion, but at the same time, the TOC should need to be able to prove the offence. Surely a proper, likely expensive, forensic check needs to be carried out?
Not just going to court and saying it is the belief that the ticket was probably altered.
The fact is, it's bloody easy to make it look like a ticket has been altered. If I was silly enough to use a biro (and that's not really silly) then chances are the first stroke or two won't make an impression on the shiny orange surface. Even if it does, the second stroke might not.
It's common to need to go over the indentation again to make your writing visible. Depending on the pen, it's also easy to scratch away the orange surface, which now means you're basically screwed. Take the risk, or chuck the ticket away (losing the value of that ticket, and pretty much all your savings)?
Tough choice.
For the record, when I travel in the peak, I would save money using a carnet. In fact, I'd also avoid needing to go to a TVM to collect my ticket, which can potentially run the risk of me missing a train. But I've decided not to buy them anymore, at least until you can get them on the Key - which may or may not happen anytime soon.
And of course an RPI is entitled to have a suspicion, but at the same time, the TOC should need to be able to prove the offence. Surely a proper, likely expensive, forensic check needs to be carried out?
Not just going to court and saying it is the belief that the ticket was probably altered.
The fact is, it's bloody easy to make it look like a ticket has been altered. If I was silly enough to use a biro (and that's not really silly) then chances are the first stroke or two won't make an impression on the shiny orange surface. Even if it does, the second stroke might not.
It's common to need to go over the indentation again to make your writing visible. Depending on the pen, it's also easy to scratch away the orange surface, which now means you're basically screwed. Take the risk, or chuck the ticket away (losing the value of that ticket, and pretty much all your savings)?
Tough choice.
For the record, when I travel in the peak, I would save money using a carnet. In fact, I'd also avoid needing to go to a TVM to collect my ticket, which can potentially run the risk of me missing a train. But I've decided not to buy them anymore, at least until you can get them on the Key - which may or may not happen anytime soon.
Last edited:
I'd be very concerned if this got anywhere near a court (for the Byelaw 20 offence) without the TOC making those checks since the lack of such forensic evidence means that, by default, there is reasonable doubt.
DaveNewcastle
Established Member
We shouldn't imagine that anyone in the Railway Company has given this any real thought. There will not be any posturing of 'holding their nerve', in fact, it's not uncommon for a case to get all the way to Court and be read out in front of the Magistraes before anyone seems to really think about the facts, not through any negligence, but just through the sheer volume of almost identical incidents of fare evasion).
If you do attempt to resolve this by phone, letting them see that you will be continuing to assert that you did nothing wrong, then I wish you good luck - just don't get into any sort of argument - stick to the simple question of whether they want to contest this in a Court where you will be pleading 'not guilty', or not.
But if they insist, then I would advise instructing a local law firm to help you in Court. You may defend yourself, I would only suggest this if you are comfortable in public speaking, and are moderately knowledgable in the facts of the alleged crime and court procedures, and how, in the event of failure (we hope this won't arise!), how to make appropriate representations to mitigate the sentence.
Sorry, one more thing.
I have to return a notice for the prosecution in which it asks me if I accept the evidence therein and so not require the RPI to attend
or I do not accept the evidence and do wish the RPI to attend as a witness.
I haven't got a solicitor as yet so unsure how to answer this.
The witness statement is accurate as far as it goes apart from the fact I asked the RPI to add additional comments on the back of the form which he did and they have not been sent to me with the summons. Should I phone Govia and tell them I am pleading not guilty but can't return the form until I have reviewed the back comments too?
I have to return a notice for the prosecution in which it asks me if I accept the evidence therein and so not require the RPI to attend
or I do not accept the evidence and do wish the RPI to attend as a witness.
I haven't got a solicitor as yet so unsure how to answer this.
The witness statement is accurate as far as it goes apart from the fact I asked the RPI to add additional comments on the back of the form which he did and they have not been sent to me with the summons. Should I phone Govia and tell them I am pleading not guilty but can't return the form until I have reviewed the back comments too?
furnessvale
Established Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 4,733
If you wish to cross examine a witness he must be present.
Be careful about accepting the evidence as read. His statement may say something like, "The date written on the ticket was unclear", or "The date had been overwritten changing a 7 to a 9". Accepting that without question you have lost your defence.
Can our resident legal guy confirm if it might be a good idea to write back and state quite clearly that the ticket was not tampered with and the OP intends to defend any action, and demand proof*.
* I am not sure how you'd word that. Demanding proof sort of implies it had been tampered with but you're asking them to prove it, so - again- hopefully someone can give more advice.
* I am not sure how you'd word that. Demanding proof sort of implies it had been tampered with but you're asking them to prove it, so - again- hopefully someone can give more advice.
DaveNewcastle
Established Member
My earlier post referred to the disclosure of evidence in the future, but I think you are now saying that you have been given disclosure of the prosecution evidence (albeit without the second page of the Inspector's note).
If you reply saying that you accept the evidence, and consequently the Inspector is not summonsed to appear, and the evidence includes an assessment that the date had been tampered with or altered, then it is likely that the matter will be decided on the first hearing and it is also likely that the allegtion of tampering will be accepted (because you will effectively have endorsed it!).
Now I don't know what is in that Witness Statement, but I cannot advise you to accept it. Perhaps there is, or soon will be, another Witness Statement from a forensic analyst who makes the assessment that the date was altered. It is that crucial assessement that you are challenging, whoever makes it. And its that assessment which has to be challenged, in person, in Court.
(Or the Prosecution is abandoned on learning of your challenge).
Hope this helps
Last edited:
PauloDavesi
Member
- Joined
- 14 Dec 2011
- Messages
- 229
When the ticket was taken by the RPI was it placed into a sealed evidence bag so that it's condition would not be changed or altered in any way by the RPI or other TOC operatives?
If not, there is no proof that the RPI, or another TOC operative, haven't "adjusted" the condition of the ticket to strengthen their case.
If not, there is no proof that the RPI, or another TOC operative, haven't "adjusted" the condition of the ticket to strengthen their case.
Its a copy of the conversation between myself and the RPI,
e.g. I said "Do you have a valid ticket ticket or authority to travel for your rail journey at this time?"
She said "Yes, I do, its the one you've got there" etc
Its called a witness statement and it is signed by myself and the revenue officer.
Its some of the passenger comments that are missing as there is only room for two and a 1/2 lines and I wanted to say more than that. The RPI said there wasn't space so I told him to continue on the back which he then did. However looking at the front there is no PTO or indication that there are additional comments as the sentence is complete and there is a line drawn across the blank part of the last line. I remember at the time i started my next sentence and the RPI said there was no more space so he would have already drawn the line. We had a bit of an exchange over why he couldn't simply continue on the back and he reluctantly did so. I made him write quite a bit as far as I remember.
e.g. I said "Do you have a valid ticket ticket or authority to travel for your rail journey at this time?"
She said "Yes, I do, its the one you've got there" etc
Its called a witness statement and it is signed by myself and the revenue officer.
Its some of the passenger comments that are missing as there is only room for two and a 1/2 lines and I wanted to say more than that. The RPI said there wasn't space so I told him to continue on the back which he then did. However looking at the front there is no PTO or indication that there are additional comments as the sentence is complete and there is a line drawn across the blank part of the last line. I remember at the time i started my next sentence and the RPI said there was no more space so he would have already drawn the line. We had a bit of an exchange over why he couldn't simply continue on the back and he reluctantly did so. I made him write quite a bit as far as I remember.
DaveNewcastle
Established Member
Then I'm going to assume that there is another Witness Statement to come, which is the Statement of whoever has made the assessment that the ticket appeared to have been altered. And that it will be that Statement which you will want to challenge, and will be that Statement which hasn't been disclosed yet.
You need to speak to the Prosecutions team to find out what their timetable is for your case. Are they expecting the contested hearing on the date on the Summons, or are they expecting only to take your 'not guilty' plea and schedule a future date for the hearing of Evidence?
It would be of no assistance to them to call the RPI as a Witness on the date on the Summons without also having whoever has made the assessment of altering the ticket to give their Evidence. Perhaps they intend bringing that other Witness anyway (in which case you need sight of their Statement in advance); or perhaps they are just planning ahead and want to know if the RPI will be needed for the full hearing.
[for what little difference it makes, I would still insist on getting the statement from the reverse of the notebook page presented as part of the evidence.]
Another possibility is that they have abandoned the claim that you altered the ticket and are simply accusing you of travelling without a valid ticket because you hadn't filled in the date clearly. While it is not a very serious accusation, it certainly doesn't require any forensic evidence - more of a straw poll : pass the ticket round 10 people and ask how many of them consider that it is clearly written. All the more reason to contact the Prosecution to find out what evidence they are intending to present.
If you are not comfortable in having that discussion with the Prosecution yourself, then you will need to get somone from a local law firm to do it for you. I don't think you can make properly informed decisions without that knowledge.
You need to speak to the Prosecutions team to find out what their timetable is for your case. Are they expecting the contested hearing on the date on the Summons, or are they expecting only to take your 'not guilty' plea and schedule a future date for the hearing of Evidence?
It would be of no assistance to them to call the RPI as a Witness on the date on the Summons without also having whoever has made the assessment of altering the ticket to give their Evidence. Perhaps they intend bringing that other Witness anyway (in which case you need sight of their Statement in advance); or perhaps they are just planning ahead and want to know if the RPI will be needed for the full hearing.
[for what little difference it makes, I would still insist on getting the statement from the reverse of the notebook page presented as part of the evidence.]
Another possibility is that they have abandoned the claim that you altered the ticket and are simply accusing you of travelling without a valid ticket because you hadn't filled in the date clearly. While it is not a very serious accusation, it certainly doesn't require any forensic evidence - more of a straw poll : pass the ticket round 10 people and ask how many of them consider that it is clearly written. All the more reason to contact the Prosecution to find out what evidence they are intending to present.
If you are not comfortable in having that discussion with the Prosecution yourself, then you will need to get somone from a local law firm to do it for you. I don't think you can make properly informed decisions without that knowledge.
By strict interpretation of the rules, yes it is and yes it could. The T&Cs for carnets require the date to be clearly filled in, if it isn't clear then it isn't a valid ticket.
I don't believe there's any specific requirement for the signature to be clear.
DaleCooper
Established Member
Imagine the potential trouble if an American fillied in the date on a Carnet.
The ones I've seen have the boxes labelled. Don't know if they all do though.
DaleCooper
Established Member
Even with labelled boxes it would be an easy mistake to make for someone who habitually puts the month first.
Oh, I don't doubt that it would be. And, thinking about it, writing it wrong in labelled boxes would make it even worse.
I have notified the court of my not guilty plea and received a response from them to say the hearing will be after the march date set for the plea to be entered.
I spoke to Govia Prosections Dept to clarify this is the case, check that I don't need to respond to the Witness form. The RPI will be at the hearing according to the person I spoke to on the phone.
At this point I did not enter into any negotiation or ask if it was still their intention to go to court. I just kept it simple and non contentious.
I'll wait and see what happens and in the meantime engage a lawyer.
If anyone has any comments please feel free.
I spoke to Govia Prosections Dept to clarify this is the case, check that I don't need to respond to the Witness form. The RPI will be at the hearing according to the person I spoke to on the phone.
At this point I did not enter into any negotiation or ask if it was still their intention to go to court. I just kept it simple and non contentious.
I'll wait and see what happens and in the meantime engage a lawyer.
If anyone has any comments please feel free.
furnessvale
Established Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 4,733
Which offence are you appearing in court for? If it is for changing the date see below.
You need to find out where the ticket is now. Has it been forensically examined by anyone? If not, and you did not change the date, you need to consider having it done. It will prove your innocence 100%.
If the offence is unclear dating. As said before this is a subjective test and the prosecution need to convince the magistrate that is unclear, no one else.
I agree that the ticket needs to be examined by an expert, but I am uneasy with the phrase "prove your innocence 100%" - even experts avoid such absolute terms.
furnessvale
Established Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 4,733
PauloDavesi
Member
- Joined
- 14 Dec 2011
- Messages
- 229
Has the ticket being kept secure by the TOC after they took the ticket?
If not they could have altered the condition of the ticket to assist their case.
If not they could have altered the condition of the ticket to assist their case.
Puffing Devil
Established Member
- Joined
- 11 Apr 2013
- Messages
- 2,962
To build on this point. If challenged, it will be for the TOC to show a secure chain of evidence for this ticket, from the time it was seized to the time it passed for analysis (if at all) and then returned to court to be presented. Did the ticket ever get placed in a sealed evidence bag, or was it simply taken by the RPI? Where has it been since then? How has it travelled?
The HSE has a handy guide to maintaining an audit trail: http://www.hse.gov.uk/enforce/enforcementguide/investigation/physical-preparing.htm
This may be interesting reading for the OP if it does get as far as court.
i am being charged under section 18 1 of the railway bylaws and also section 20 1, so both.
I note the comments about the ticket, I can't remember but I doubt very much the RPI put it in a secure bag, I think I would have noticed that.
I guess I have to wait until the Prosecution dept release their evidence to me and then I can see what I need to do?
No idea how forensics work or who I could get to do this but if a forensic examination is conclusive proof I am at least home and dry on one of the charges.
Currently more concerned that I am having difficulty finding someone who can represent me in a magistrates court.
I note the comments about the ticket, I can't remember but I doubt very much the RPI put it in a secure bag, I think I would have noticed that.
I guess I have to wait until the Prosecution dept release their evidence to me and then I can see what I need to do?
No idea how forensics work or who I could get to do this but if a forensic examination is conclusive proof I am at least home and dry on one of the charges.
Currently more concerned that I am having difficulty finding someone who can represent me in a magistrates court.
This is a personal opinion, but given the comparatively low impact of a Byelaw prosecution (limited fine and no criminal record) I don't think the cost/benefit makes it worth engaging a specialist solicitor.
Any solicitor who has experience with criminal defence would should be able to represent you adequately.
DaveNewcastle
Established Member
Whereever you live or work, I doubt that you are far from a general practive law firm which deals with basic Criminal Law Defence work. You do not need a specialist in Railway Law or Contract Law. The Byelaws are simple enough, and the procedure in the local Magistrates Court will be very familiar to them. You really shouldn't have any trouble finding someone to assist you. But if you really are finding difficulties, then feel free to ask again for more specific advice in dealing with the problem you're facing.
We must have been typing at the same time . . . . I completely agree. Railway specialisation is going to be of little help here.
Last edited:
I have no skilled knowledge about these matters, but I would have thought that the OP should be given a copy of the prosecutions evidence such as a copy of the disputed ticket, and the OP had reasonable time to compile his defence (if any) before the matter went to court.
- Status