XC threatening prosecution

[KC2]

Hi all - looking for some advice.

Traveled from Stockport to Bristol Temple Meads back in July. Had an advance ticket from Macclessfield (approx. 10 miles down the line from Stockport) to Bristol but boarded one stop early due to convenience.

On meeting the inspector offered to buy a ticket (had my bank card with me so could have paid there and then), she wanted my details. I queried this so she refused to sell me a ticket and said I'd be reported. Gave her my details.

Now got a letter threatening prosecution from Transport Investigations - have just written my response. The letter doesn't acknowledge I had a valid ticket for most of my journey (even though inspector took a photo of it). Haven't heard anything from XC at all - no warning, fine, etc. Inspector said to me at the time she would recommend no action was taken - but I haven't seen a copy of any report she has written. Am I entitled to this?

It doesn't explicitly state what the charge is - I am guessing fare evasion - but to jump straight to prosecution - is this normal? In my response I admitted I didn't have a valid ticket for Stockport - Macclesfield, but this is a first time and for a very small part of a much longer journey.

What is the chance of going to court? In my response I have again offered to pay a fine - what are the chances they will accept this? XC's website is not very helpful at all. Other than what's stated (about having a partial ticket) I don't have a defense other than ignorance I guess as have bought ticket on board trains many other times and never had a problem (at a later time on the same journey I ended up buying duplicate tickets as I couldn't find my ticket in a rush, on asking the conductor for a refund I was advised that in future it's better just to buy a ticket on board the train to avoid these kind of mistakes from happening - this was also XC)

I am about to start a job abroad for two years and now not sure whether I should go - I am also autisitc and don't know how I would cope in a court setting. Willing to pay whatever fine (believe the max is £1000) but want to avoid court no matter what - will co-operating fully be enough?

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Welcome to the forum.

On the basis of what I have seen here, it is not uncommon for a first letter to threaten prosecution. But even so, many railway companies will be happy to agree a settlement out of court. Someone with more knowledge should be along soon to comment on what approach XC will take.

From what you have said here, I think that your response is fine. If you haven't already sent your response, then it might be worth checking the following points:

• Is it courteous? Whoever gets to read it at the train company will not personally have been involved in taking your details on the train, so there's no point in being rude.
• Is it short? Whoever is reading it will be busy, so there's no point in taking up loads of their time with material that doesn't add anything to your argument
• Do you accept that you were not in the right? You need to persuade XC that by agreeing to settle out of court, they are not risking you doing the same thing again and costing them more money
• Are you suggesting a sensible settlement? XC will look for a settlement that doesn't leave them out of pocket, so they will want the unpaid train fare plus the cost of their investigation. That doesn't mean you need to write 'would you settle for £150' (or whatever): it means you need to say something like 'I would like to conclude this matter without court action, and would be willing to pay the outstanding train fare plus the costs you have incurred because of carrying out your investigation'.

 

[Bletchleyite]

OP - why didn't you buy a ticket from Stockport to Macclesfield at the ticket office or ticket machine at Stockport? It seems to me like you were clearly trying to "get away with it" i.e. pay when challenged, and the railway knows this well and is looking to rein it in.

 

[The_Train]

OP - why didn't you buy a ticket from Stockport to Macclesfield at the ticket office or ticket machine at Stockport? It seems to me like you were clearly trying to "get away with it" i.e. pay when challenged, and the railway knows this well and is looking to rein it in.

This was my first thought as well and it also seems that there is an attempt at justifying it...

Traveled from Stockport to Bristol Temple Meads back in July. Had an advance ticket from Macclessfield (approx. 10 miles down the line from Stockport) to Bristol but boarded one stop early due to convenience.

It doesn't explicitly state what the charge is - I am guessing fare evasion - but to jump straight to prosecution - is this normal? In my response I admitted I didn't have a valid ticket for Stockport - Macclesfield, but this is a first time and for a very small part of a much longer journey.

At the end of the day you had every opportunity to purchase a ticket at Stockport (a mainline station with plenty of facilities) and didn't bother and the sort of statements above seem to indicate you almost felt as though the railway industry owed you this free ride because of the length of your journey in total.

This is of course my humble opinion based on what you've said, I could be way off the mark. Unfortunately I can't help you with actually trying to dig your way out of this but I'm sure there will be a few who are more sympathetic and willing to offer you some advice along shortly.

 

[KC2]

Thanks for the replies - my reply was courtespus but quite long. Do you think Id be able to obtain the CCTV of a later journey where I was told I could buy tickets on the train?

Finally in reply to the last comment - Im not after sympahy - in my post and reply to XC I said I was in the wrong. My point about the distance is I did have a ticket for most of the journey - they haven't acknowledged this. Yes I could have bought a ticket and didn't. Never been a problem before so assumed it wouldn't this time. I absolutely did not say I'm entitled to a free journey please refrain from making unhelpful comments like this without evidence.

I am looking for any likely outcome what has happened in similar cases so I can be prepared - I asked this several times on the train as well and they refused to say. I have a lot of difficulty dealing with stress and unpredictable situations.

 

[Bletchleyite]

At the end of the day you had every opportunity to purchase a ticket at Stockport (a mainline station with plenty of facilities) and didn't bother and the sort of statements above seem to indicate you almost felt as though the railway industry owed you this free ride because of the length of your journey in total.

That is the feeling I have and, if that was what the OP sent in explanation then they will feel justified in proceeding with a prosecution and may well not offer a settlement as the OP was not remorseful and did not accept that what they did was not right.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Finally in reply to the last comment - Im not after sympahy - in my post and reply to XC I said I was in the wrong. My point about the distance is I did have a ticket for most of the journey - they haven't acknowledged this.

That is because it makes absolutely no difference whatsoever to the case. You attempted to make a ticketless journey from Stockport to Macclesfield - that is all that matters. That you had a ticket from Macclesfield onwards is totally irrelevant; you will legally be treated exactly the same as if Stockport to Macclesfield was the only journey you were making and the other ticket didn't exist.

However if, in your reply to the TOC, you gave that justification, that will give them more, not less, reason to proceed with prosecution, as that clearly shows you intended to travel without a ticket as you felt it was somehow OK because you had the other ticket. They will not see this as you did, they will see this as clear intent and evidence justifying of a criminal record via a RoRA prosecution.

It is a shame you did not post here prior to that reply to the TOC. Or have you not sent it yet? If you have not, you need to be apologetic, accept that you were in the wrong, not to make any excuses, make it clear you will not do it again (and don't, because if you do it'll be a slam dunk prosecution which WILL succeed) and offer to pay the railway's costs in pursuing the matter. Then you may be offered a settlement which is likely to be somewhere in the low three figures.

If you are offered such a settlement, pay it immediately - the way your posting reads, there is no way you will win in Court.

 

[_toommm_]

How did you get through the barriers at Stockport? Even if they were open, it's still your responsibility to hold a valid ticket for all of your journey, and you would have had to have walked past an open ticket office, or the very least a ticket machine on your way to the platform.

 

[KC2]

Have changed my statement and uploaded a new one. The replies are very helpful thank you. I had not meant to come across as making excuses and if it did end up in court other than the basic facts I have stated on here I would not contest it. Have now expressed a wish for it to be settled quickly out of court and paymemt of any penalty.

Would be really grateful for any comments. Hoping a quick reply will show that I want to get it sorted.

Surely it is easier for them to settle out of court?

 

[furlong]

What was the price you paid for your ticket? You'll almost certainly find that the price of an equivalent ticket from Stockport, had you chosen to buy that in the first place, was higher, and so if you had not been challenged, you might not have paid the railway money that was properly due to it. In simple terms, if you ignore opportunities to purchase a valid ticket before boarding a train, the courts may treat that as dishonesty and punish you for deliberate fare evasion. (The argument made is that an honest person intending to pay would always do so as soon as they can, and there were ample ticketing facilities at Stockport.) Arguing that you were encouraged to do what you did because you bought on board on other occasions without being warned not to do it again would be a difficult "exceptional circumstances" type of argument in court - what solid evidence would you have if the railway denied this happens and produced paperwork that backs up what they are saying? You'll probably find everywhere you look now a consistent message from XC (and almost all other train companies) telling you wherever possible to buy before you board or risk penalty or prosecution.

The criteria XC applies when considering whether or not to offer a settlement are in section 11 of this document.

 

[KC2]

Hi Furlong - thanks. I saw that page but on the public interest test it is very vague. Wouldnt affect this probably but a few weeks later a conductor told me I could buy on the train. Would this have been captured on CCTV? And would they share it if I could name the service?

Just don't want my life ruined by a criminal record - even if it was easily avoidable. Will pay amy size fine tbh.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Have changed my statement and uploaded a new one. The replies are very helpful thank you. I had not meant to come across as making excuses and if it did end up in court other than the basic facts I have stated on here I would not contest it. Have now expressed a wish for it to be settled quickly out of court and paymemt of any penalty.

Would be really grateful for any comments. Hoping a quick reply will show that I want to get it sorted.

Surely it is easier for them to settle out of court?

This sounds a more sensible reply to them.

It is easier to settle out of Court, but it doesn't provide an example to others.

 

[JN114]

Hi Furlong - thanks. I saw that page but on the public interest test it is very vague. Wouldnt affect this probably but a few weeks later a conductor told me I could buy on the train. Would this have been captured on CCTV? And would they share it if I could name the service?

Just don't want my life ruined by a criminal record - even if it was easily avoidable. Will pay amy size fine tbh.

On train CCTV is rarely kept for very long - 7 days at my TOC last time I dealt with it - and it rarely records sound. I’m not sure what it would demonstrate if it were available.

Make your case to Cross Country, see if they’ll settle.

 

[furlong]

Hi Furlong - thanks. I saw that page but on the public interest test it is very vague.

I think you should be looking at 'abuse of process' rather than 'public interest'. In simple terms, a train company encouraging you to act in a particular way, then trying to prosecute you for doing exactly that. But the threshold for this is necessarily very high, and you might find the train company has plenty of paperwork on its side while all you have is unverifiable anecdote, and even if proven, the court might still not agree that it amounts to an abuse.

Wouldnt affect this probably but a few weeks later a conductor told me I could buy on the train.

On that one specific occasion only? (The law makes provision for that - not an offence if you were given permission - but always sensible to get that in writing or to note details of who gave it, in case you are not believed.)

 

[6Gman]

Hi Furlong - thanks. I saw that page but on the public interest test it is very vague. Wouldnt affect this probably but a few weeks later a conductor told me I could buy on the train. Would this have been captured on CCTV? And would they share it if I could name the service?

Very unlikely that they'd still have cctv or that it would help. In any case the circumstances (operator, service, time of day, where you were travelling from etc) could have been different. Also being told "a few weeks later" can't mitigate an offence which has already taken place.

 

[Sleeper]

Have changed my statement and uploaded a new one.

I would suggest a couple of changes to your draft.

(1) In the second line I would replace “to a journey on 16/07/18” by “to travel from Stockport to Macclesfield on 16/07/18”.

This is to help ensure that in computing their losses XC do not inadvertently regard your whole journey from Stockport to Bristol as ticketless. I assume here that your onward travel from Macclesfield was properly covered by your advance ticket, and that you adhered to all the conditions, e.g. you travelled on the nominated train(s).

(2) I would amend the second paragraph, from the word “incorrect” onwards to say: “…incorrect, and from now on will always ensure my ticket is purchased before boarding. I appreciate the need to pay the fare to cover my journey”.

The principal change is to remove the statement that you are a regular rail user, as this may make XC wonder how many times you have done this (i.e. travelled ticketless) in the past and how much revenue they have lost on other occasions. I realise that you have not said that this is the case, but there is no point in planting the thought in their minds.

 

[furlong]

This is to help ensure that in computing their losses XC do not inadvertently regard your whole journey from Stockport to Bristol as ticketless.

The key word is 'inadvertently'. There could still be circumstances in which they might argue that the full fare to Bristol is due.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The key word is 'inadvertently'. There could still be circumstances in which they might argue that the full fare to Bristol is due.

Such as?

 

[Sleeper]

The key word is 'inadvertently'. There could still be circumstances in which they might argue that the full fare to Bristol is due.

Indeed. Though if the OP's travel onwards was properly ticketed, I can't think of a reason why the unpaid fare element would extend beyond Stockport to Macclesfield. The cost of investigation to be recovered would be considerably more than that anyway. In the case of an out-of-court settlement I believe that just a simple amount of money is suggested, and so the make-up of that amount is hidden from view, albeit guessable at by someone with experience of several cases for comparison.

 

[boxy321]

"Never been a problem before so assumed it wouldn't this time."

This was not a first offence so how many times has the OP tried to save £5.30?

 

[londonboi198o5]

The op has still not answered a very good question posted above. .

How did you get through the barriers at Stockport

 

[JN114]

The op has still not answered a very good question posted above. .

How did you get through the barriers at Stockport

Although to be fair that’s immaterial to the advice they have sought.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The op has still not answered a very good question posted above. .

How did you get through the barriers at Stockport

It doesn't massively matter how they did; it doesn't change the offence that has been committed. Odds on they were open; VTWC are not very good at consistently manning their barriers.

 

[CHAPS2034]

The op has still not answered a very good question posted above. .

How did you get through the barriers at Stockport

The barriers at Stockport are often unmanned especially in the evening and also at lunchtime.

However there is a ticket office on the eastern side which shuts at 8.30pm weekdays and 7.30pm on weekends. There are also a couple of ticket machines here and also at the western entrance on the Edgeley side, so there seems to be no excuse for buying a ticket unless the office was closed and all the ticket machines were u/s...

 

[dcbwhaley]

The barriers at Stockport are often unmanned especially in the evening and also at lunchtime.

However there is a ticket office on the eastern side which shuts at 8.30pm weekdays and 7.30pm on weekends. There are also a couple of ticket machines here and also at the western entrance on the Edgeley side, so there seems to be no excuse for buying a ticket unless the office was closed and all the ticket machines were u/s...

The underpass at Stockport station has been used as a public thoroughfare since time immemorial. When the tickets barriers were first mooted we negotiated a concession that it would continue to open to people wishing to walk from the Grand Central side to the Edgeley side.
Had they not not given that concession we would have started proceedings to have it dedicated under common law as a Public Right of Way. Given the overwhelming amount of user evidence success would have been certain.

 

[island]

Hi Furlong - thanks. I saw that page but on the public interest test it is very vague. Wouldnt affect this probably but a few weeks later a conductor told me I could buy on the train. Would this have been captured on CCTV? And would they share it if I could name the service?

Just don't want my life ruined by a criminal record - even if it was easily avoidable. Will pay amy size fine tbh.

I am not aware of any public interest test applying to private prosecutions; that is usually relevant to CPS and police only.

Looking for CCTV is a red herring. If it hasn’t been deleted, if you were in view of a camera, and if it recorded clearly, it will still not have recorded what the train guard said to you. Even if you could prove all that, it still only gives you permission for that one occasion to buy on board.

Why didn’t you buy a ticket at Stockport? How did you get through the ticket gates there?

 

[furlong]

I am not aware of any public interest test applying to private prosecutions; that is usually relevant to CPS and police only.

XC states it will only prosecute if it would be in the public interest and the interest of justice. (And anyway, the DPP could take over a private prosecution and then apply it.)

 

[NoOnesFool]

OP - why didn't you buy a ticket from Stockport to Macclesfield at the ticket office or ticket machine at Stockport? It seems to me like you were clearly trying to "get away with it" i.e. pay when challenged, and the railway knows this well and is looking to rein it in.

Agreed.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

XC states it will only prosecute if it would be in the public interest and the interest of justice. (And anyway, the DPP could take over a private prosecution and then apply it.)

Pigs could fly... In all seriousness, it is very rare indeed for the DPP to take over a prosecution. Not unheard of, but very rare. I don't know if there has ever been a reported case of this in relation to a prosecution by a TOC.

 

[Skymonster]

Would this have been captured on CCTV? And would they share it if I could name the service?

Was on an XC Voyager this evening and the guard (talking to a passenger nearby about some rowdy football fans who had recently left the train) said there was no CCTV in the carriages - and a cursory glance around appeared to back this up - as the company wouldn't fund it and DfT refused to assist with costs.