FCC Train fine..

[honeybee13]

Hello again ABC.

 

Enchiridion has spelled out what they think you should write. I don't know if you think it's appropriate for your case?

 

Otherwise, I hope the guys from the forum will be along to advise what they think you should do, as an alternative.

 

Ench, as a lot hangs on this case, may I be so bold as to ask what qualifications you have to advise our OP on this problem please? If I were about to make a submission to the court, I would want to understand what knowledge the person advising me had.

 

My best, HB

[dx100uk]

quite honestly i would write a letter to the prosecution office or wherever

 

we will help you

 

just put down what you have here.

 

can you get your college to help you?

 

dx

[ABC12]

ill have to write to the clerk/judge as i only got the letter that there taking me to court and the court date is thursday 7th so i wont have time to write to the prosection office and im writing the letter for a mitigation but im pleading guilty as i did have the wrong ticket but hopefully with the sitution i have ill be given some remorse and allowed mitigation on the penalty but it more about proving my point to the court also even if i am fined and after reading trough the documents sent by the court i think my fine will be around £130 witch isnt that bad considering the worse but still alot of money to a apprentice carpenter >

[dx100uk]

can we use this w/end to help you with the Mit?

 

i'll pull some strings and get help on this thread with the letter.

 

is your college still open and are you in on monday there?

 

dx

[ABC12]

Yes that would be great, my college is more and likey open on monday and i will be there. I would be very greatful with help on the letter.

[dx100uk]

sorry for pushing on things that are none of my business

 

but are you 'a part' of the special needs provision at the college?

 

i understand and am willing to be 'guided' by those that operate

on this forum, that know far better than me about the 'worth' of mentioning your issues.

but at present i think it is worthy of a mention.

 

do you often travel by train on a regular basis?

 

if you do, then p'haps it might not be a good idea though?

 

just throwing things in the melting pot here.

 

dx

[ABC12]

im not part of a group but any help i do need ect... computer in class, extra time,a reader, headphones and software witch can read words for me is given.

and i rarely use the train and at the time i only used it probss once every weeks for about 2 months.

[Enchiridion]

ABC12,

 

The first decision which you have to make is whether you are prepared to appear at the court or want to do everything by post. Is it the City of London Magistrates Court, which is next to Bank underground station? If so, you're looking at £20 - £30 in fares and a half-day trip to London for each appearance. I say "each appearance" because you should expect at least 2 appearances, one to set a date for the trial and the second for the trial. You could easily find yourself making a third appearance if matters are adjourned for any reason.

 

Check what it says on the letter you have received. I suspect that the date which you have been given will be a date for the matter to be dealt with if you plead guilty. If you plead not guilty, I suspect that they won't want to see you on that date. Instead they will set a different date. You might try telephoning the clerk to the court to find out what your options are.

 

Only if you do go to court will you have the chance to get your case dismissed. I consider that you do have grounds for asking the court to dismiss the case. Quite simply, it's a sledge-hammer to crack a nut. Given your learning difficulties and the fact that you didn't have an opportunity to buy your ticket from a ticket clerk, I don't think that it's in the public interest to be using the courts to prosecute you. The trouble is that it will cost you almost as much in fares to make this case as you are likely to have to pay if you plead guilty now. And there is the risk that if you do appear in person, they will find you guilty and it will cost you much more than they are asking for now.

 

If this sounds unfair, it is. The dice are loaded heavily against you. That's because the railway companies have succeeded in getting the law changed to make life easy for them and hard for you. You can only challenge them effectively if you can afford the time and money to appear at court.

 

I should make it clear that I'm not advising you what to do. I'm just trying to explain what I think the options are, where they lead and what they are likely to cost. You need to make up your own mind as to what to do. One thing: I wouldn't be ashamed to write to the court in your own words. I would get the letter printed out so that they can read it, but I think that you should write the letter yourself. Ask friends or people at your college to comment on it and suggest where it needs to be made clearer, but keep it in your own words and with your own spelling.

 

If you feel bitter about this, you do have one way of retaliating. That is to go to the police about their falsification of the witness statement. It won't help your case and may well cause you further trouble. But it might help to bring these people to recognise that the law applies just as much to them as it does to you or me. So in the long term, others in a similar situation to yours might benefit.

 

Best wishes,

 

Enchiridion

[honeybee13]

Hello again ABC. Is this helping you at all? I can see all the arguments could be pretty confusing for someone who doesn't understand the rail system, like myself for instance.

 

Ench: I had vowed I wouldn't answer another of your posts, but I feel really sorry for ABC who as we know has special needs. I'm sure what you say is very clever and possibly fuelled by your grudge against the TOCs, but we're here to try and help ABC or anyone else who needs it.

 

I should make it clear that I'm not advising you what to do. Quote.

 

Well it sounds like advice to me. Hell, I'm confused and I don't have special needs.

 

ABC, please let us know how you feel about all this and how we can help.

 

My best, HB

[ABC12]

the court send me 2 letters to sign the frist letter gave me 3 options saying...

guilty and accept the evidence given and the court can decide what to do with the witness.

Or guilty accept the evidence but want the wittness to be present

third option was i plead not guilty i sign the frist opion but crossed out where it said i accecpt the evidence.

 

second letter to sign was saying

do you accept the wittness evidence

OR

you do not accepct the witness evidence which i signed

 

also i form of my wages and out going/ savings to see if i can pay the fine

 

i then wrote letter as a stement as i plead guilty i dont have to attend court and will hear and deal with the case on my absence under section 12 of the magistrates court act 1980. and the following satments and facts will be read out before the court witch decides weather to accept my plea.The court will not, unless it adjourns the case after convicting me and before sentencing me.

 

i then wrote a letter to the court clerk/judge saying...

 

Dear sir or madam

I am writing this letter as although i accept i am guilty of having the wrong ticket this was a mistake on my part due to the following,

On monday the twenty third of february i purchased the ticket at Sandy station from the machine the screen was very difficult to see this did not help me as i have reading difficuities (I include proof of this which has been written by the dyslexia co-ordinator at my college this has also been shown to the train company since the event), I intended to buy an off-peak return from Sandy to kings Lynn but by mistake i purchased an off peak day return, when i was approuched by the ticket inspector I produced my ticket when asked, it was then i was informed i had the wrong ticket, i explained to The ticket inspector i what had happened he said "can you pay the fine of £20 now, i said " i had no money".this was because i thought my ticket would get me home, as i assumed it was an off peak return and had spend my money on my trip, i also told The ticket inspector i was dyslexic,

 

When i received a copy of The ticket inspectors (the wittness) statement i was dumbfounded as it dose not indicate the term of events of our conversation as it happened i would like to cover the differing points now,

The first Question on the statment do you have a vaild ticket or authority to travel for your rail jorney at this time, the answer written is "No-i have a ticket from yesterday" This was not my reply, i actually said yes i brought it yesterday.

 

The question, " was it your intention to avoid your rail fare today" was not asked, The ticket inspector actually said "do you have any money" which i answered "no"

The section 'passenger comments' that i answer "i have a return from Sandy to Kings Lynn from yesterday" was due to my learning difficulities i sometimes express my self poorly,( This is also on the proof of my lerning difficuilties attached. When i signed the statement it was not filled in to the extent it was when i recieved the copy and The ticket inspector told me he would put down i was willing but unable to pay.

I signed the statement due to my processing speed abilities, which caused me to react without really quite know what was going on till afterwards.

 

I am sorry i mde this mistake, it has caused me nothing but worry since i have reccently found the confidence to do alot more with myself and this event has knocked my condidence greatly it is difficult when you cannot express yourself correctly or red very well, i do hope you understand this.

Edited July 3, 2011 by ABC12
please do not post pers info - dx siteteam

[SRPO]

The court may see your response in either of 2 ways:

1) A guilty plea with mitigation. Or

2) An equivocal plea which will require clarification, this may mean you attending court on another day or writing a clearer response to the allegation.

[Old-CodJA]

In my opinion, if that is the actual letter that you have sent with your plea form, the Court will almost certainly treat that as equivocal. Your reply is a 'Not Guilty' plea.

 

You have crossed out the line that says 'I accept the evidence' and you have gone on to challenge the inspectors' statement in writing yourself.

 

That being the case the Magistrates are unlikely to accept that as a guilty plea and the case will be adjourned to a later date when you will have to attend Court and FCC will have to produce the inspector and their evidence (unless they discontinue which seems unlikely if they have already turned down your appeal.)

 

.

[ABC12]

ive challenged the inspectors statment becuase it was false and his is perverting the court of justice.

i wrote the letter for a mitagation and i have pleaded guilty so why wouldnt they accpect my plea as guilty as ive said i am guilty of the offense. but the sitution was a misstake so my lead to a mitigation

[Old-CodJA]

ive challenged the inspectors statment becuase it was false and his is perverting the court of justice.

i wrote the letter for a mitagation and i have pleaded guilty so why wouldnt they accpect my plea as guilty as ive said i am guilty of the offense. but the sitution was a misstake so my lead to a mitigation

 

If you have been charged with 'intent to avoid a fare' (S.5.3.a Regulation of Railways Act (1889)), the Court will need to be satisfied that you knew that you were intending not to pay. Your reply alleges that the inspector has misrepresented the facts and using the phrase given to you by Endchirion, has attempted to 'pervert the course of justice'. In those circumstances, your allegation is much more serious than that put by FCC and the Court are likely to want to see your evidence to support this.

 

If you have been charged with 'fail to show a valid ticket' (Byelaw 18.2 (2005)), it will be noted that you have referred to 'learning difficulties'. The plea might be accepted, but the Court may well want to be sure that you understand what you are pleading guilty to and why.

 

.

[ABC12]

nope there not charging me with evither of those this is what it said on the letter...

That you on thursday 24th Febuary 2001 en route near kings lynn: having entered a train for the purpose of travling. did not have a ticket entitling travel

 

byelaw 18 (1) of the railway byelaws made under section 219 of transport Act 2000 by the strategic rail authority and comfirmed under schedule 20 of transport act 2000 by secretary of state for trnsport on 22 june 2005

 

i think its the same thing?

[Enchiridion]

ABC12,

 

In your post of 3rd July you said:

The ticket inspector ... said "can you pay the fine of £20 now

I think that this is the first time that you have mentioned that the ticket inspector asked for £20. I thought that he just asked you for the £3.50 difference between the off-peak return and the off-peak day return. Please can you clarify what happened on the train? Did the ticket inspector tell you that you could pay the £20 later if you paid the £3.50 then? Did you have £3.50 or were you completely out of money?

 

The offence which you have been charged with is the least serious railway offence. It is also the easiest for the railway company to prove. But because it is the least serious railway offence, I think that you may be able to "trump" the byelaw by invoking the Equality Act 2010. This says that "service providers" have to make due allowance for various groups, one of which is people with learning difficulties.

 

It seems to me that FCC should either

 

• make it possible for someone with learning difficulties to buy a ticket from a ticket clerk; or
  
• accept that such a person may make a mistake when required to use a ticket machine.
  

This is why I think that it is important for you to tell the court the time of day that you went to Sandy station and that there was no ticket clerk on duty. If you had the option to buy your ticket from a clerk but chose to use a machine, then, to some extent, it's your own fault. But if (as is the case) FCC man the ticket office only in the morning, they are requiring you to use the ticket machines if you turn up in the afternoon.

 

If a person with learning difficulties makes a mistake when he has been required to use a ticket machine, I think that the Equality Act 2010 means that they should only charge you the difference between the fares and not charge you a penalty fare of £20. They should not be prosecuting you.

 

There is a body, the Equalities and Human Rights Commission, which exists to police the Equality Act 2010. I suggest that you telephone them on 0845 604 6610, explain what has happened and try to get them interested in your case. They are far more powerful than you or I and can make a real difference.

 

Ticket inspectors are issued with a "revenue protection handbook". This includes guidelines for when they should use their discretion not to issue penalty fares. One of the groups towards whom they are meant to use discretion is:

 

• passengers who are not aware of the scheme because they are blind or partially sighted, are foreign visitors who live abroad, do not speak English very well, or have learning difficulties;
  

I suggest that you write to the Prosecutions Manager at FCC and ask him to send you a copy of that section of the revenue protection handbook about people with learning difficulties. Say that you want to use it in court. It's relevant to your case and the court will take a dim view of FCC's case if he won't send it to you.

 

I'm sorry that there's a lot to do. The most important things to do are to respond to the court promptly when they write to you and to get in touch with the Equalities and Human Rights Commission.

 

Best wishes,

 

 

Enchiridion

[Enchiridion]

ABC12,

 

I have looked further into the Equality Act 2010. There is a useful summary, the Disability Quick Start Guide, on the Equalities website. This sets out how people with disabilities, including those with learning difficulties, should be treated. Here are some key points:

Who has responsibilities?

 

The Act applies to all service providers and those providing goods and facilities in Great Britain...

 

Who is protected?

 

The Act protects anyone who has, or has had, a disability...

 

What is a disability?

 

Disability has a broad meaning. It is defined as a physical or mental impairment that has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on the ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities... A mental impairment includes mental health conditions (such as bipolar disorder or depression), learning difficulties (such as dyslexia) and learning disabilities (such as autism and Down’s syndrome)...

 

What is indirect disability discrimination?

 

Indirect disability discrimination happens when there is a rule, a policy or even a practice that applies to everyone but which particularly disadvantages people with a particular disability compared with people who do not have that disability, and it cannot be shown to be justified as being intended to meet a legitimate objective in a fair, balanced and reasonable way.

It appears to me that FCC's prosecution of you is indirect disability discrimination and is therefore unlawful. Write to the FCC Prosecution Manager and:

 

1. offer him the £3.50 difference between the fare you paid and the fare you should have paid;
   
2. tell him that if he doesn't drop the prosecution, you will report FCC to the Equality and Human Rights Commission for indirect disability discrimination.
   

Best wishes,

 

 

Enchiridion

[Old-CodJA]

ABC12, what happened last Thursday???

 

I think you are being deflected a bit by many of these posts.

 

You stated in an earlier post that your Court date was 7th. Was the case adjourned?

 

.