agree with dx. if they look back they’ll see it wasn’t a one off decision. Additionally: if it was a one off decision that day : how come you had the 11-15 oyster already? You / your friend don’t have to tell them it has been for 2 months if they haven’t asked. That doesn’t mean it would be good to get caught in an obvious lie that this was a spur of the moment error.

You seem to be both suggesting: a) you didn’t know it was wrong / against the T’s and C’s, and b) made a poor choice because of your circumstances (which would imply you did know it was wrong). I’m not sure you should try and argue both, as they seem contradictory: which was it? (if it really was both, you might have to [briefly!!] explain how), whatever you state needs to ‘ring true’.

You can request a SAR (for “all documents” relating personally to you) leaving aside the prospect of the claim. Once into the claims process disclosure (and the degree to which it happens) is determined by the court, and would usually be dealt with at the “directions” stage once the case has been “allocated” to a “track” : This is because the disclosure process is different in the small claims track. CPR 31 deals with disclosure. https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part31#31.10 “standard disclosure” is likely to apply, except for in the small claims track (where the majority of CPR31 doesn’t apply, as stated in CPR 31.1(2) )

Can you ask the security guard (who knows who it is) to pass them a message?. "abc246 is looking for who damaged their car. Since no-one has approached them they've asked for the CCTV. I've told them it cant be released to abc246 (GDPR), but they've said that that the CCTV should be saved, and they've said they are going to their insurers' and the police (telling the police that as it was hit repeatedly, it is criminal damage [as done recklessly]), The police or insurers will be able to request the CCTV, which has been saved now we are aware there was an incident, so the CCTV will likely come out in the end. Up to you what you do, but thought you ought to know ........ " the security guard might not wish to get involved, but if you can persuade them it'll be a lot less hassle for all if it can be sorted informally, they just might, to come out of it looking better to all...........

Would it be correct to say that this (and your post) are statements, made to look like question(s) ? Why not, instead, post what has happened (are you the sender? recipient??), who the sender’s contract was with, and you might get some concrete advice (including on the role / applicability of third party rights), or if your redress is against the sender (if applicable)

Note on door telling him not to ring. If he then rings,wife should not open the door, and should call police on 999, stating: a) you won a county court case, b) have advised him you don't want to meet in person, c) told him not to attend your property, d) left a note on the door, e) he has rung despite that, and she is concerned for her safety / that there is a breach of the peace.

OK, fully confused now. Was the pass you were using, a student pass or full fare pass? if it was a full fare pass bought by you using the gift code supplied to you : why did the pass (or accompanying photocard) have someone else’s photo?

Edited : “Strong case” not “string case” Thanks, autocorrect!!

What sort of costs depends on how complex things get. Doctor handed £200,000 court bill after ripping down neighbour's fence in land row - Daily Record WWW.DAILYRECORD.CO.UK Respected doctor Veena Paes dragged her neighbours to court when she and her husband claimed land that was... If you have £200k on hand, and are convinced you have a strong case : consider engaging a solicitor. They can advise you on the strength of your case and recover (most of!) your costs if you win. To not use a solicitor on a non-small claims case risks losing (& incurring costs), potentially by making a procedural error (even on a strong case). Surely that would be an expensive lesson, avoidable if you have £200k to self fund legal advice.

Don’t use passes bearing other people’s photos. Buy your pass(es) from the official sources. If someone offers to gift you a pass and you aren’t sure they are buying it from a legitimate source: Explain you had a problem once, ask them to send you the money, saying you’ll buy it yourself to ensure you don’t have problems.

The hazard here is that it may not end up on the small claims track, and then, if you lose, you may end up on the hook for costs, which could be significant. QOCS (qualified one way costs shifting) applies for personal injury (PI) claims, but you have said you don’t want to use the PI head of claim, so won’t benefit from the protection of QOCS.

More importantly (for your situation) : were you asked for / did you give your details? To answer your question on how it can be a crime If Person A wants to buy a pass for Person B as a gift : 1) the pass needs to have the photo of person B, not person A. 2) if the pass is fraudulent, both A and B commit offences i) Person A if they knew (or should reasonably have known) it was fraudulent ii) Person B if they do not show a valid ticket on demand. They still commit the offence but might persuade the bus operator not to prosecute if they can convince the operator they didn’t know it wasn’t a valid ticket. That would be an uphill struggle for person B if the pass had person A’s photo associated with it.

You can defend their speculative invoice. The court can decide not to enforce payment of their speculative invoice if you send them a speculative invoice for your time: they too can defend it, and the court can decide not to allow it, too. Expect equality.

Why not? depends what you mean / expect by “equality” Lady Hale’s speech is available on the Supreme Court website: https://www.supremecourt.uk/docs/speech-181029.pdf Since your post is one line, and I don’t know if your expectations are reasonable / your understanding of “equality before the law” is correct, here’s an (oft cited) image to help. http://i2.wp.com/interactioninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/IISC_EqualityEquity.png?zoom=2&resize=730%2C547 expect equality. Expect some accomodation towards equity. Don’t expect full, unequivocal equity : especially in Small Claims Track (SCT) (So, they can waste time / money on the case, can use hours of a solicitor’s time, and can pay for that. You might not be able to pay for that. So, you might feel that is unequal. But [equality] : neither of you can recover the full cost of hours of solicitors time in the SCT. Equality for those costs is provided by the costs limits for SCT that apply to both sides.

If it says “without prejudice” or “without prejudice save as to costs” ; you can’t bring it to the judge’s attention with regard to whose favour the judgement gets made in, only after judgement (then regarding costs£