TFW Prosecution- Second letter

Status
Not open for further replies.

WelshBen

New Member
Joined
20 Dec 2018
Messages
1
Hi everyone,

I have recently been sent a letter due to my stupidity of not buying a ticket which led to me being reported. I have the letter from TIL stating that they will be prosecuting under RORA to which I looked on these forums to write a response. I apologised profusely and offered to pay for any chargers that have been created by myself.

I have the second letter but I am really unsure of what to do next. I really don't want this to go to court and get found guilty because I will soon be looking for employment.

I hope someone can help me out.
Ben.
 

Attachments

  • 20181220_195020.jpg
    20181220_195020.jpg
    2.4 MB · Views: 167
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

ForTheLoveOf

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2017
Messages
6,416
Can you give some more background as to what happened?

What station did you board at, and at the time you boarded, were there ticketing facilities?

Did you buy any ticket at all before boarding?

Where were your details taken, and what were you asked or did you say?

Have you been honest and truthful throughout?
 

Fawkes Cat

Member
Joined
8 May 2017
Messages
1,122
To help you properly, please give the information that other people have asked for above.

But you may find it helpful to know the worst case. So let's assume that you are taken to court and found guilty of a Regulation of the Railways Act ('RORA') offence.

In this case, you will face a financial penalty, which as I understand it is made up of a fine, compensation for the railway company (i.e. the train fare you should have paid), prosecution costs and court costs. Overall, this will come to several hundred pounds, so start saving. Also note that the fine element is based on your income, so try to find proof of what your current income is - wage slips, bank statements and so on. I am not sure what the treatment is of a student loan.

As well as a fine, you will get a criminal record. There are a few jobs where any criminal record is an absolute bar - but fewer than you might imagine. By the same count, there are a lot of jobs where it doesn't matter. In between, there is a quite wide range of jobs where the employer will want to know if you are trustworthy.

For this wide range of jobs, having one conviction against you may not be a bar to being employed - employers recognise that people make mistakes sometimes. What is likely to be a bar though is trying to hide that you have a conviction - that means that as well as your railway conviction you are now not being honest. So you should tell any potential employer about your conviction if they ask.
 

Oscar46016

Member
Joined
15 Jan 2018
Messages
481
Location
Cardiff
The letter seems to imply that not only did you not have a ticket, you refused to buy one when asked to do so.

If that's the case then what you have done is dishonest and not a mistake - if their statement is not true then you need to approach the guy who wrote the letter - try calling - phone usually gets a more sympathetic response than letters or emails.
 

jumble

Member
Joined
1 Jul 2011
Messages
588
The letter seems to imply that not only did you not have a ticket, you refused to buy one when asked to do so.

If that's the case then what you have done is dishonest and not a mistake - if their statement is not true then you need to approach the guy who wrote the letter - try calling - phone usually gets a more sympathetic response than letters or emails.

My interpretation is that the statement does not say or imply you did not pay if/when asked
( based on careful looking at the words when and had ( previously) rather then "did not when asked"

It is also interesting that the letter clearly contradicts the view often expresed here that one does not need to seek out the on train staff to pay
 

ForTheLoveOf

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2017
Messages
6,416
My interpretation is that the statement does not say or imply you did not pay if/when asked
( based on careful looking at the words when and had ( previously) rather then "did not when asked"

It is also interesting that the letter clearly contradicts the view often expresed here that one does not need to seek out the on train staff to pay
The letter is quite obviously wrong in that respect (there being no requirement either in the NRCoT or implicitly through 'intent' in RoRA to actively seek out the guard). But that doesn't mean it should be ignored.
 

ForTheLoveOf

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2017
Messages
6,416
I agree as the passengers decision to follow the letters advice or the NRCoT may be the difference between a load of hassle and defending the position in court or not.
Does anyone know what an actual court has found in these circumstances
Arriva also take the view that you must seek out the guard
https://www.traveline.cymru/news/20...arn-of-rail-fine-for-not-purchasing-a-ticket/
Arriva don't run the franchise any more and in any case, they are conflating passengers who board having failed to use available ticketing facilities (who are thereby in the wrong), and those who board where there were no ticketing facilities (who remain entirely in the right if they don't actively approach the TM).
 

Greenback

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
9 Aug 2009
Messages
15,268
Location
Llanelli
I agree with what Fawkes Cat said about the consequences of a successful prosecution. I used to work in (non railway) recruitment and it was always a managerial decision when it came to anything revealed on a DBS check. Most are very happy if an applicant has been honest on their application form or in interview when it comes to their convictions. As said, everyone makes mistakes, and trying to hide things in your past is looked on more severely by most recruiters than bein open and honest about previous errors of judgement.
 

gray1404

Established Member
Joined
3 Mar 2014
Messages
5,241
Location
Merseyside
Their letter is wrong. If boarding at a station where ticket buying facilities are not available then according to their letter as soon as all the passengers get on at that station they should all approach the guard, even though he/she may still be operating the doors, and declare their journey the moment they have boarded.

The correct thing that the letter should say is that upon boarding when ticket buying facilities were not available then then passenger should buy a ticket at the first opportunity. Now this could be when the guard chooses to come through the train carrying out ticket checks, when changing trains only if there is enough time (or again facilities), on the passengers connecting train (if possible) or at their destination (if there are facilities).
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
23,809
Location
Scotland
It is also interesting that the letter clearly contradicts the view often expresed here that one does not need to seek out the on train staff to pay.
Their letter is wrong. If boarding at a station where ticket buying facilities are not available then according to their letter as soon as all the passengers get on at that station they should all approach the guard, even though he/she may still be operating the doors, and declare their journey the moment they have boarded.

I don't read it that way. It says you need to declare the journey you intend to make to on board staff, but it doesn't say you need to seek them out of they aren't visible.
 

Llanigraham

On Moderation
Joined
23 Mar 2013
Messages
5,129
Location
Powys
Their letter is wrong. If boarding at a station where ticket buying facilities are not available then according to their letter as soon as all the passengers get on at that station they should all approach the guard, even though he/she may still be operating the doors, and declare their journey the moment they have boarded.

The correct thing that the letter should say is that upon boarding when ticket buying facilities were not available then then passenger should buy a ticket at the first opportunity. Now this could be when the guard chooses to come through the train carrying out ticket checks, when changing trains only if there is enough time (or again facilities), on the passengers connecting train (if possible) or at their destination (if there are facilities).

The problem is the OP has not come back with any details of the journey he made, despite being asked for them, so we don't know where the journey started or where it ended. For example, if the journey ended at Cardiff Central I understand he would have passed an opportunity to pay in the tunnel before he got to the gateline, even if he had joined at a station with no facilities.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top