• 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!

Stopped by inspector

Status
Not open for further replies.

ikorodu

Member
Joined
21 May 2009
Messages
21
Yorkie said: 'Seek legal advice, but you have to prove innocence or you are considered guilty when it comes to the railway.'

In all seriousness, is that an opinion or is that legal fact?

I didn't think any crime was guitly unless proven innocent in the uk. I thought there needed to be proof...

Slightly OT, but offences under the Health and Safety at Work Act reverse the burden of proof, such that the defendant has to prove they had done what is required. Eg an employer would need to prove (training docs, systems of work, etc) they had taken all reasonable steps to ensure the employee's safety. In effect guilty until proven innocent.

Section 40 of the Health and Safety at Work Act states:

"In any proceedings for an offence under any relevant statutory provisions consisting of a failure to comply with a duty or requirment to do something so far as is practicable or so far as is reasonably practicable, or to use the best means to do something, it shall be for the accused to prove (as the case may be) that it was not practicable or not reasonably practicable to do more than was in fact done to satisfy the duty or requirment, or that there was no better practicable means that was in fact used to satisfy the duty or requirement."

However this does not apply to not buying a ticket.

ikorodu
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

350401

Member
Joined
5 Feb 2009
Messages
275
Agreed, I was generalising when I said the BTP "never settle". There is of a course a public interest test when deciding whether to prosecute. I think though it is unlikely they'll concur its not in the public interest to prosecute. Regarding the other child tickets found, whilst it is clear to us that it shows previous evasion, the rules of criminal evidence state that evidence showing bad character needs to be properly gathered. Procedures need to be followed. Such evidence would need to be obtained through a legitimate police stop and search or through a court sanctioned search order. Just finding the tickets on a person is not enough - its not obtained through legitimate means. RPO's / Ticket Inspectors have no rights to stop and search people - only legitimate Police do. So unless obtained by the BTP under S1 PACE Stop and Search the previous child tickets do not come into it. Only the current 'offence' should be taken into account - i.e. that the OP tried to pass through a gate or used an old ticket. That is the offence. It looks like they did commit that offence. However, if its the TOC's prosecution office, in deciding whether to settle or not, that will be the only offence that's allowed to be considered.

Oh and regarding the post by Gary Holt Solicitors, that's just wrong. Huge generalisation and advertising spiel. Whilst I'm only studying the LPC and thus not a practising solicitor, that screams a breach of SRA guidelines and professional conduct. It almost seems to be deliberately misleading people to drum up business.
 

DaveNewcastle

Established Member
Joined
21 Dec 2007
Messages
7,387
Location
Newcastle (unless I'm out)
Slightly OT,
. . . .
However this does not apply to not buying a ticket.
SLIGHTLY Off Topic? Er, Yes, ikorodu, very OT !
(Note to OT:- OT = Off Topic)

Lets not confuse the matter any further.
There are lots and lots of statutory requirements where the burden of proof is on the individual. Other examples might include the Display of a Vehicle Excise Licence, the satisfactory accounts to challenge a Tax Assessment by HMRC, and many more. These are "absolute" offences.
Nevertheless, it is still possible to avoid prosecution even after an absolute offence (and that too is something I've achieved, though only once and just in a Magistrates Court)
 

Old Timer

Established Member
Joined
24 Aug 2009
Messages
3,703
Location
On a plane somewhere at 35,000
. Regarding the other child tickets found, whilst it is clear to us that it shows previous evasion, the rules of criminal evidence state that evidence showing bad character needs to be properly gathered. Procedures need to be followed. Such evidence would need to be obtained through a legitimate police stop and search or through a court sanctioned search order. Just finding the tickets on a person is not enough - its not obtained through legitimate means. RPO's / Ticket Inspectors have no rights to stop and search people - only legitimate Police do. So unless obtained by the BTP under S1 PACE Stop and Search the previous child tickets do not come into it................................................Only the current 'offence' should be taken into account - i.e. that the OP tried to pass through a gate or used an old ticket. That is the offence. It looks like they did commit that offence. However, if its the TOC's prosecution office, in deciding whether to settle or not, that will be the only offence that's allowed to be considered.

Oh and regarding the post by Gary Holt Solicitors, that's just wrong. Huge generalisation and advertising spiel. Whilst I'm only studying the LPC and thus not a practising solicitor, that screams a breach of SRA guidelines and professional conduct. It almost seems to be deliberately misleading people to drum up business.
Nobody suggested anyone was searched. It is taken that the person gave up the ticket under questioning, so not obtained by search...freely given.

The current offence will not be the only offence taken into account. There is clear evidence of wilful fare evasion contrary to the Theft Act 1978. Remember the person was cautioned under PACE.

As for the Solicitors, I am sure they will welcome your advice. You have made some very serious allegations which verge on professional conduct issues. Let us know how you get on ?
 

tony_mac

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2009
Messages
3,626
Location
Liverpool
Nobody suggested anyone was searched. It is taken that the person gave up the ticket under questioning, so not obtained by search...freely given.
There isn't really any indication that is the case.
he found a child ticket on me
Does suggest a search, although it could be interpreted in other ways, it doesn't really sound like 'freely given'

and I have a feeling they won't be coming back here to explain it!
The current offence will not be the only offence taken into account.
There was possibly a confession to using a child ticket, but I don't see that there is evidence here for any other offences. Although cctv records may show otherwise if there is an investigation.
 

350401

Member
Joined
5 Feb 2009
Messages
275
Nobody suggested anyone was searched. It is taken that the person gave up the ticket under questioning, so not obtained by search...freely given.

The current offence will not be the only offence taken into account. There is clear evidence of wilful fare evasion contrary to the Theft Act 1978. Remember the person was cautioned under PACE.

As for the Solicitors, I am sure they will welcome your advice. You have made some very serious allegations which verge on professional conduct issues. Let us know how you get on ?

Stating that "The conviction will have to be disclosed on every subsequent application for employment. It never becomes "spent" like a driving offense for say speeding, it will always have to be disclosed" is simply wrong. That is contrary to the RHOA. Offences that carry under 3 years in prison *do* become spent. I'm only stating my opinion, not making any allegations. In my opinion, stating that on a public website is simply wrong. It is wrong in fact, and wrong in morals. It simply appears to be an attempt to scare people to get potential clients to consult them in exchange for £££. No need to be so mean Old Timer.

That the OP freely gave the ticket up was not clear. If that is the case, there are no issues and it can be used in evidence as the PACE caution was used. No problems there. However, the fact that they did not have to give the ticket up as the RPO had no search powers under law remains a valid point. Off topic, but whenever PACED, any person would be well advised to remain silent and not answer any questions until they've got legal advice. No adverse inferences can be made from silence until legal advice is provided. Many people do not realise this and those in authority use this fact to their advantage. Often that is morally justified as offences are clearly committed, but that people's ignorance is taken advantage of is a sad fact in our justice system.
 

Old Timer

Established Member
Joined
24 Aug 2009
Messages
3,703
Location
On a plane somewhere at 35,000
But if they are using improper and incorrect information in order to gain business then that is a contravention of professional standards, surely.

My understanding is that fines levied by a Court are spent after FIVE years, although I an happy to be corrected if this is wrong.

They are experienced Solicitors, they would hardly write something they know to be wrong, and which could be picked up by others with relavant knowledge ?

If it is wrong then they should be told, as should the ASA.



There isn't really any indication that is the case.

Does suggest a search, although it could be interpreted in other ways, it doesn't really sound like 'freely given'

and I have a feeling they won't be coming back here to explain it!

There was possibly a confession to using a child ticket, but I don't see that there is evidence here for any other offences. Although cctv records may show otherwise if there is an investigation.
RPIs do not have the power to search, and would not be stupid enough to do a search. It is not only wrong but would also constitute an assault.

Proper questioning under PACE requires the person to answer specific questions, in any case asking a person to hand over any other tickets they have in their possession is quite legitimate as the tickets remain the property of the TOC.
 
Last edited:

350401

Member
Joined
5 Feb 2009
Messages
275
But if they are using improper and incorrect information in order to gain business then that is a contravention of professional standards, surely.

My understanding is that fines levied by a Court are spent after FIVE years, although I an happy to be corrected if this is wrong.

They are experienced Solicitors, they would hardly write something they know to be wrong, and which could be picked up by others with relavant knowledge ?

If it is wrong then they should be told, as should the ASA.

RPIs do not have the power to search, and would not be stupid enough to do a search. It is not only wrong but would also constitute an assault.

Proper questioning under PACE requires the person to answer specific questions, in any case asking a person to hand over any other tickets they have in their possession is quite legitimate as the tickets remain the property of the TOC.

Yes, your broadly accurate Old Timer - the rehab period is 5 years for most non-custodial sentences, 7 years for prison sentences of up to 6 months, and 10 years for prison sentences of between 6 months and 2.5 years. After 2.5 years it always has to be declared. If it went to court and the OP got a fine, it'd be spent after 5 years. Thus on the face of it, it seems that Gray Holt Cooper are misleading people as stating that the offence never becomes spent is simply wrong. No doubt there will be some smallprint on their site that legally saves their ass, but its pretty bad advertising, and I would not be surprised if the ASA and SRA felt that way too. This is just my *opinion*, not a fact so don't quote me on it.

And yes, the tickets are the property of the Railway, so should be surrendered. However, your right, he cannot be searched. So looking at it purely from a defence POV, it was a mistake to hand the child tickets over - as provides the CPS/TOC with useful evidence to back their case up. Again from a defence POV, if questioned under PACE for anything really (not just confined to the railway), confirm your name and address and then SHUT UP! Negative inferences cannot be drawn until your being interviewed by the police and have legal advice - see Pace Code of Practice A and C.
 

DaveNewcastle

Established Member
Joined
21 Dec 2007
Messages
7,387
Location
Newcastle (unless I'm out)
. . . . No doubt there will be some smallprint on their site that legally saves their ass, but its pretty bad advertising, and I would not be surprised if the ASA and SRA felt that way too. This is just my *opinion*, not a fact so don't quote me on it.
I won't quote you on it, then ! !

I know its pain when people repleat themselves, but, can I quote my own post no 28 where I added my own emphasis to the statement on Gary Holt Solicitors webite? please?
Quote, with my emphasis: "If you decide not to engage the help of a specialist solicitor, you may find that you are subsequently convicted of an offence"
" may " doesn't amount to any challengable assertion
 

dylerturden

Member
Joined
18 Dec 2009
Messages
5
This is really sad and depressing me. I am a very ambitious person and have got an offer to study accounting and finance at Warwick University. I really hope this does not weigh me down in terms of future career prospects.
I will keep my situation updated with you.
 

Railjet

Member
Joined
28 Feb 2009
Messages
408
I was caught by an inspector trying to go through the barriers on someones elses ticket at Chelmsford and then he found a child ticket on me from Chelsmford to Ingatestone from a previous date when i had told him my journey starts at Harold Wood, i said i was travelling to Ingatestone on the day but he didnt believe me.

Could you clarify whether he searched you or you handed over the child ticket of your own free will?
 

Lampshade

Established Member
Joined
3 Sep 2009
Messages
3,715
Location
South London
Accounting and Finance? With a possible conviction that amounts to Fraud?

I think you may need to pray for some divine intervention :shock:
 

ChrisTheRef

Established Member
Joined
15 Apr 2009
Messages
1,432
Location
South Liverpool
I don't evade fare myself, but I know why people do it, as they're so expensive.

But if you had no money to pay for a ticket, you shouldn't try it.
Then, trying to go through barriers was just stupid! At a quiet suburban station, I'd have some sympathy, maybe. But it was stupid and you'll be lucky not to be convicted
 

dylerturden

Member
Joined
18 Dec 2009
Messages
5
I opened my wallet to show identification and he saw there was another ticket there and he asked what it was. I had no option but to show it to him.
 

mumrar

Established Member
Joined
26 Sep 2008
Messages
2,646
Location
Redditch
I don't recall any mention of a railcard in this incident at all. However, you did cast my mind to a scheme in the W. Mids whereby students are given a 16-18 card, which entitles them to local child fare tickets in lieu of their actual age. I know it's not relevant to this topic, but wondered if other PTEs have something similar.
 

SouthEastern-465

Established Member
Joined
24 May 2009
Messages
1,657
Location
Greater London
You knew what you was doing why did you continue and decide to jump the barrier I have no sympathy for you as you could of walked home and got some money and gone happily along with your trip.

Well call me nasty anyone but hope you get a big fine and next time learn from your previous mistakes.
 

theblackwatch

Established Member
Joined
15 Feb 2006
Messages
10,713
This is really sad and depressing me. I am a very ambitious person and have got an offer to study accounting and finance at Warwick University. I really hope this does not weigh me down in terms of future career prospects.
I will keep my situation updated with you.

I presume you never considered what a fraud conviction would do when you didn't purchase or bought a child ticket? Or did you just assume that you wouldn't get caught?
 

350401

Member
Joined
5 Feb 2009
Messages
275
I think what is saddest is that he didn't even need to go home to avoid this prosecution. Had he made himself known to the barrier or on train staff and explained the situation, it is very likely he would of got a unpaid fares notice. If you make a mistake, generally honesty is the best policy. Most rail staff are understanding people.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,823
Location
Yorkshire
Yes, he showed intent by "doubling up" through the barriers. So no real prospect of avoiding a criminal record.

If he'd done this at Leeds he'd have got away with it though! Some people "doubled up" on Family Metrocards (valid but they should be asked to show the metro card!) and were not challenged. Although even if they were challenged, producing an orange rectangle shaped piece of card would allow you through at Leeds anyway.

Doubling up through barriers without a valid ticket is going to probably be seen as enough evidence to demonstrate intent to avoid payment, I'd have thought.

Travelling without a ticket and without a means of payment is also seen as enough evidence to demonstrate intent too.

Unless he gets the world's best lawyer I think he will need to consider a change of career not in the financial sector. I hear there's plenty of media courses available.
 

Helvellyn

Established Member
Joined
28 Aug 2009
Messages
2,013
I foolishly decided not to buy and ticket as by the time i had reached the station i realised i had no money with me and it was a 15 minute walk back to my house.
As you were questioned under caution it is likely you will be reported under the Regulations of Railways Act 1889, Section 5 (3) (a): -
(3)If any person—

(a)Travels or attempts to travel on a railway without having previously paid his fare, and with intent to avoid payment thereof; or

(b)Having paid his fare for a certain distance, knowingly and wilfully proceeds by train beyond that distance without previously paying the additional fare for the additional distance, and with intent to avoid payment thereof; or

(c)Having failed to pay his fare, gives in reply to a request by an officer of a railway company a false name or address,​

he shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding [[level 2 on the standard scale] or [level 3 on the standard scale]], or, in the case of a second or subsequent offence, either to a fine not exceeding [level 2 on the standard scale] or [level 3 on the standard scale]], or in the discretion of the court to imprisonment for a term not exceeding [three months].

I was caught by an inspector trying to go through the barriers on someones elses ticket at Chelmsford
This is in contravention of the Railway Byelaws (ammended 2006), specifically Section 9 - Stations and Premises: -

(2) Where the entrance to or exit from any platform or station is via a manned or an automatic ticket barrier no person shall enter or leave the station, except with permission from an authorised person, without passing through the barrier in the correct manner.​

Then he found a child ticket on me from Chelsmford to Ingatestone from a previous date when i had told him my journey starts at Harold Wood, i said i was travelling to Ingatestone on the day but he didnt believe me.
Is it any wonder when you've just been caught trying to "tail-gate" through the barriers, and have no ticket and no money?


If you'd gone up to someone at the barriers and said you had no ticket, you might have been issued a nil-paid Penalty Fare, or if you were lucky an Unpaid Fare Notice. By your actions you were clearly intending to evade paying the fare for your journey. That is what the TOC has to prove in the Magistrates Court - intent. Attempting to "tailgate" was clear intention in the eyes of the Inspector.

Courts in area South West Trains operates in are hitting convicted Fare Evaders with fines of between £150 and £300 on a regular basis. On top of that they get costs of between £100 and £150 (as the fine goes to the Courts), plus a victim surcharge and finally the originally fare avoided still has to be paid! To settle out of Court, if the TOC were to do that, I doubt they'd settle for anything less than all that.

As to the conviction, if you are convicted, then as has been said that stays with you for life. Nobody has mentioned one of the other consequences of this - travel. If you are convicted forget trying to make a trip to the USA as you have to declare that conviction on your entry forms, and I have been told of several examples where someone has had to cancel a trip to the USA because they were convicted of fare evasion.

The Railway Companies take a bit of a softly, softly approach to publicising the impact of being convicted for fare evasion. Unfortunately too many people only realise when they get to Court. My opinion is that if the consequences were very clearly spelled out on stations, more people would be discouraged from doing it.
 

DaveNewcastle

Established Member
Joined
21 Dec 2007
Messages
7,387
Location
Newcastle (unless I'm out)
I have to agree with recent posts, particularly with those by Yorkie and Helvellyn.
(and others!)
Can we be reassured that the OP has taken legal advice (as we've advised) and that we will be informed of the ultimate outcome, please?
 

will1337

Member
Joined
5 Feb 2008
Messages
613
Location
Laaandaaan
The Railway Companies take a bit of a softly, softly approach to publicising the impact of being convicted for fare evasion. Unfortunately too many people only realise when they get to Court. My opinion is that if the consequences were very clearly spelled out on stations, more people would be discouraged from doing it.

SWT don't, I've seen many posters with the cost of fare evasion added up like you did mounting to several hundreds of pounds. Not sure if I've seen any other TOCs do the same apart from Merseyrail.
 

Helvellyn

Established Member
Joined
28 Aug 2009
Messages
2,013
SWT don't, I've seen many posters with the cost of fare evasion added up like you did mounting to several hundreds of pounds. Not sure if I've seen any other TOCs do the same apart from Merseyrail.

A significant number of passengers think thsoe posters are made up though, because they don't use real names. I heard that Central Trains used to have a wall of shame at New Street where they would name and shame convicted fare evaders. The TOCs could do this, they'd just have to take the posters down within six months. Certain Police Forces name and shame too, but they must remove the details within a few months.

My point about softly, softly was that the fines are highlighted but not the fact it is an actual conviction, that it stays with the person for life, and the consequences that can cause. It's considered customer "unfriendly" to do so I've been told.

You're right about Merseyrail. They take a tough approach to a lot of things. Yet look at all the bad press they get for having people issue on the spot fines for putting your feet on the seats. Remember the student who said she was hard done by for it when she "only" had her flip-flops on the seat? The press had a field day, yet it's good to see Merseyrail stuck to their guns.
 

37401

Established Member
Joined
12 Nov 2008
Messages
3,276
Location
Birmingham
I heard that Central Trains used to have a wall of shame at New Street where they would name and shame convicted fare evaders.

Yup they did, wasnt just a new street either it seemed to be at every station and I think it was specific to the line (so at sutton coldfield people in four oaks, redditch, Lichfield ect were named and shamed)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top