Sorry if this is an FAQ.

My partner has just been summonsed for fare evasion, for an incident in
November last year. She was worried about something important, got on an
R-route bus near Cannon St through the middle door & forgot to get her
pre-pay ticket (one of the hexagonal ones) validated by the driver. She was
asked for her ticket, realised that she'd forgotten, apologised, showed the
inspector her pre-pay voucher & offered to pay a penalty fare. He was
perfectly polite but wouldn't take this, & took her name & address.

The magistrates' court summons came today, almost 6 months after the
incident & she is very upset. It is totally unlike her - she really is very
honest & actually had bought a book of prepay tickets not long before. She's
no previous convictions for anything whatsoever. And she really did have a
lot on her mind that day.

A couple of people have frightened her about this & said she can get a fine
of up to £1000 & a criminal record - it's the criminal record bit she is
worried about. Is this likely? (as far as I can tell it's possible, but
that's not the same thing). Also, anyone any idea what the fine on a first
offence might be?

She admits she's in the wrong & plans to plead guilty, & was also wondering
if going to court herself to explain will have any affect on the penalty.

I can understand that they are trying to cut down fare dodging, but it seems
a bit over the top to me, given that she did have a ticket. However.

I've not been long enough in London to know what happens in these cases, so
any advice welcome.

IT.

--
Evan

remove certain words in address to email

On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 19:32:17 +0000 (UTC), evan wrote:

A couple of people have frightened her about this & said she can get a fine
of up to £1000 & a criminal record - it's the criminal record bit she is
worried about. Is this likely? (as far as I can tell it's possible, but
that's not the same thing). Also, anyone any idea what the fine on a first
offence might be?

A magistrate in a previous post puts it at £150 ish.


She admits she's in the wrong & plans to plead guilty, & was also wondering
if going to court herself to explain will have any affect on the penalty.

On the fine maybe, but by pleading guilty you get the criminal conviction.


I can understand that they are trying to cut down fare dodging, but it seems
a bit over the top to me, given that she did have a ticket. However.

You need a solicitor, they may tell you that pleading not-guilty is the
best bet (after all doing this will only increase the fine slightly if it
fails), it really depends on the text of the law if having a ticket but
forgetting to use it is a valid defence, it may well be.

Steve

"Steve Peake" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 19:32:17 +0000 (UTC), evan wrote:

A couple of people have frightened her about this & said she can get a
fine
of up to £1000 & a criminal record - it's the criminal record bit she is
worried about. Is this likely? (as far as I can tell it's possible, but
that's not the same thing). Also, anyone any idea what the fine on a
first
offence might be?

A magistrate in a previous post puts it at £150 ish.


She admits she's in the wrong & plans to plead guilty, & was also
wondering
if going to court herself to explain will have any affect on the
penalty.

On the fine maybe, but by pleading guilty you get the criminal conviction.


I can understand that they are trying to cut down fare dodging, but it
seems
a bit over the top to me, given that she did have a ticket. However.

You need a solicitor, they may tell you that pleading not-guilty is the
best bet (after all doing this will only increase the fine slightly if it
fails), it really depends on the text of the law if having a ticket but
forgetting to use it is a valid defence, it may well be.

To get a criminal conviction the prosecution have to show intent.
This is usually impossible unless the person confesses to deliberately
evading the fare, can be shown to have lied to the inspector or they
have been nabbed a few times.

It used to be that in a case like this they wouldn't even bother
with a prosecution (which is why the PF was brought in in the
first place so that they had a sanction when there was no chance
of a prosecution).

So ISTM that either there is something missing from the story
or they have no chance of winning.

See a solicitor prompto.

tim






Steve

"tim" wrote in message ...
"Steve Peake" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 19:32:17 +0000 (UTC), evan wrote:

A couple of people have frightened her about this & said she can get a
fine
of up to £1000 & a criminal record - it's the criminal record bit she is


So ISTM that either there is something missing from the story
or they have no chance of winning.

See a solicitor prompto.

tim






Steve

Whilist I think £1000 fine is a bit over the top I think anyone who
evades paying on the bendy buses should be proscuted for the sole
reason of the honest people who pay a pound to travel even though
there is little chance of anyone checking their ticket.
And it does seem strange that someone so innocent should be taken such
a hard line with. Possibly there is something that the poster "forgot"
to mention about the case as in my experince it doesn't matter how
honest the person when faced with being punished for something they
have done they are usually clean as a sheet but "forgot" certian
aspects of the case.

"CJG Now Thankfully Living In The North" wrote in
message om...
"tim" wrote in message
...
"Steve Peake" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 19:32:17 +0000 (UTC), evan wrote:

A couple of people have frightened her about this & said she can get
a
fine
of up to £1000 & a criminal record - it's the criminal record bit
she is


So ISTM that either there is something missing from the story
or they have no chance of winning.

See a solicitor prompto.

tim






Steve

Whilist I think £1000 fine is a bit over the top I think anyone who
evades paying on the bendy buses should be proscuted for the sole
reason of the honest people who pay a pound to travel even though
there is little chance of anyone checking their ticket.
And it does seem strange that someone so innocent should be taken such
a hard line with. Possibly there is something that the poster "forgot"
to mention about the case as in my experince it doesn't matter how
honest the person when faced with being punished for something they
have done they are usually clean as a sheet but "forgot" certian
aspects of the case.

I take the point, but I really don't think so. She is absolutely an honest
person all the time - I've seen her give back £10 change when she was given
a £20 note rather than a £10. This was a genuine mistake: she'd just be told
she had to come to a meeting at which she thought she was going to be made
redundant, she was thinking about that & she simply forgot to get her ticket
torn off. We went over it in a lot of detail several times as she was very
upset at the time.

Looking at what the summons says, the *inspector* has left something that
may be significant out of his statement - that she accepted she'd made a
mistake & offered to pay the penalty fare. He said "it doesn't work like
that" (exact words as far as she can remember).

She carries a book of tickets because she occasionally uses buses rather
than the tube or train.

--
Evan
remove certain words in address to email

On Sat, 1 May 2004 11:30:42 +0000 (UTC), "evan"
wrote:

Looking at what the summons says, the *inspector* has left something that
may be significant out of his statement - that she accepted she'd made a
mistake & offered to pay the penalty fare. He said "it doesn't work like
that" (exact words as far as she can remember).

So, basically you're saying that she offered to pay a penalty fare on
the spot and this was refused by the inspector, but that the latter
has omitted this detail from his statement? How exactly did he
describe the incident?
--
Nick Cooper

[Carefully remove the detonators from my e-mail address to reply!]

The London Underground at War:
http://www.cwgcuser.org.uk/personal/...ra/lu/tuaw.htm
625-Online - classic British television:
http://www.625.org.uk
'Things to Come' - An Incomplete Classic:
http://www.thingstocome.org.uk

evan wrote:
Sorry if this is an FAQ.

My partner has just been summonsed for fare evasion, for an
incident in November last year. She was worried about something
important, got on an R-route bus near Cannon St through the middle
door & forgot to get her pre-pay ticket (one of the hexagonal ones)
validated by the driver. She was asked for her ticket, realised
that she'd forgotten, apologised, showed the inspector her pre-pay
voucher & offered to pay a penalty fare. He was perfectly polite
but wouldn't take this, & took her name & address.

The magistrates' court summons came today, almost 6 months after the
incident & she is very upset. It is totally unlike her - she really
is very honest & actually had bought a book of prepay tickets not
long before. She's no previous convictions for anything whatsoever.
And she really did have a lot on her mind that day.

A couple of people have frightened her about this & said she can
get a fine of up to £1000 & a criminal record - it's the criminal
record bit she is worried about. Is this likely? (as far as I can
tell it's possible, but that's not the same thing). Also, anyone
any idea what the fine on a first offence might be?

According to a London Buses press release of 19 March 2004, which
announced an increase in the Penalty Fare on buses from £5 to £10:
"During the last 12 months alone London Buses has brought over 7,000
prosecutions, and issued 39,000 penalties. The average payment incurred
by prosecution is £100".

I don't understand why this wasn't dealt with by imposing a £10 penalty
fare. I can only assume that they've had a lot of fare evasion on that
route, and wanted a few prosecutions as a deterrent.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

In message , Richard J.
writes
I don't understand why this wasn't dealt with by imposing a £10 penalty
fare.
Yes I thought I was alone in this thread at being surprised that it
wasn't dealt with in this way. In fact I thought that imposing a £10
penalty was the automatic way to deal with such cases.

I can only assume that they've had a lot of fare evasion on that
route, and wanted a few prosecutions as a deterrent.
That makes sense, I suppose, especially since the "honesty" policy of
not checking every ticket/pass now being adopted is so "foreign" to the
average UK passenger. Certainly up here on Midland Metro the fare
evasion before the introduction of conductors appeared to reach dizzying
proportions, if the number of people caught when they *did* do check was
anything to go by.
--
Ian Jelf, MITG, Birmingham, UK
Registered "Blue Badge" Tourist Guide for
London & the Heart of England
http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk

I think it is a terrible waste of time and money and serves no real purpose.
People make mistakes, I have before and I think any londoner that uses
transport every single day will sympathise with this particular traveller.
They will look back at the time they thought their tc was valid and it
wasn't. It happens to people every single day and it seems that the only
difference between getting away with it and being prosecuted comes down to
luck and the discretion of the revenue protection officer. Why prosecute
people? I would have thought that the criminal justice system should only be
brought in where the person caught has be caught a number of times? If LT
want to recoup money why not simply employ more revenue protection officers,
I am sure they'll pay for themselves in the long run.


--
============
David Varnham

Sponsor me running the Windsor Half Marathon in September he
http://www.justgiving.co.uk/varnham
All sponsorship money goes to Mind.


"Ian Jelf" wrote in message
news
In message , Richard J.
writes
I don't understand why this wasn't dealt with by imposing a £10 penalty
fare.
Yes I thought I was alone in this thread at being surprised that it
wasn't dealt with in this way. In fact I thought that imposing a £10
penalty was the automatic way to deal with such cases.

I can only assume that they've had a lot of fare evasion on that
route, and wanted a few prosecutions as a deterrent.
That makes sense, I suppose, especially since the "honesty" policy of
not checking every ticket/pass now being adopted is so "foreign" to the
average UK passenger. Certainly up here on Midland Metro the fare
evasion before the introduction of conductors appeared to reach dizzying
proportions, if the number of people caught when they *did* do check was
anything to go by.
--
Ian Jelf, MITG, Birmingham, UK
Registered "Blue Badge" Tourist Guide for
London & the Heart of England
http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk

There are all types of evasion and without going right into this particular
case there is a lot of evasion on the tubes and buses.

The current estimate (this is only what I heard) is around £45 million a
year.

Ascertaining the difference between a genuine mistake and deliberate
avoidance is tricky but that is why we have the protection of the
Magistrates Court who can make the ultimate decision. Many countries on the
continent have a penalty system like parking fines or speed cameras. You
can end up with a spot fine of around £100.

Steve

"David Varnham" wrote in message
...
I think it is a terrible waste of time and money and serves no real
purpose.
People make mistakes, I have before and I think any londoner that uses
transport every single day will sympathise with this particular traveller.
They will look back at the time they thought their tc was valid and it
wasn't. It happens to people every single day and it seems that the only
difference between getting away with it and being prosecuted comes down to
luck and the discretion of the revenue protection officer. Why prosecute
people? I would have thought that the criminal justice system should only
be
brought in where the person caught has be caught a number of times? If LT
want to recoup money why not simply employ more revenue protection
officers,
I am sure they'll pay for themselves in the long run.


--
============
David Varnham

Sponsor me running the Windsor Half Marathon in September he
http://www.justgiving.co.uk/varnham
All sponsorship money goes to Mind.


"Ian Jelf" wrote in message
news
In message , Richard J.
writes
I don't understand why this wasn't dealt with by imposing a £10 penalty

fare.
Yes I thought I was alone in this thread at being surprised that it
wasn't dealt with in this way. In fact I thought that imposing a £10
penalty was the automatic way to deal with such cases.

I can only assume that they've had a lot of fare evasion on that
route, and wanted a few prosecutions as a deterrent.
That makes sense, I suppose, especially since the "honesty" policy of
not checking every ticket/pass now being adopted is so "foreign" to the
average UK passenger. Certainly up here on Midland Metro the fare
evasion before the introduction of conductors appeared to reach dizzying
proportions, if the number of people caught when they *did* do check was
anything to go by.
--
Ian Jelf, MITG, Birmingham, UK
Registered "Blue Badge" Tourist Guide for
London & the Heart of England
http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk