Summons for using a found freedom pass

[HelenKH]

Hi All,

 

Firstly, thank you for this great website and the useful info. I try to shorten my story. A few months ago I found a freedom pass outside of the station and without studying the card, I used it. I am not from this country and until that day I wasn't aware of this type of pass. I didn't even think this was illegal to use other people's Oyster because that one I have is a pay as you go and my colleagues have are not personal cards and people borrow each other's Oyster cards. The card I found was in a normal Oyster case (the black case with some red and yellow writing on it) and the back of the card was facing to me and in the first glance I didn't see there was a photo of a man and it took less than a minute since I found the card and got caught. So no time to go through the writings on the back of the card and 'Terms and Conditions'

 

Anyway, I got a letter from London Underground and I replied to them. Then I got a letter (summons) from the court for 8th of Nov. I sent an apologetic email to the Prosecutions Manager for an out of court settlement and his assistant got back to me and refused it. I emailed again and he said that they don't believe I was not aware of this and they want to proceed this in the court. Now I have to send the letter to the court and plead guilty. I am not sure what happens next and how can I persuade them I wasn't aware of the type of the card. And how I can get the minimum charge (if at all possible)

 

The other thing is, I didn't ever got on the train. They stopped me at the gate and they are claiming for the journey that I didn't make! £5.30 for one way ticket and 130 pounds for the admin cost so far + potential fine (which God knows how much it would be). The pay as you go one way ticket is £3.20 which I have already paid for.

 

Any advice on how I should write my mitigation letter is highly appreciated.

 

I have attached the Word doc that I have prepared for the court. Is it possible that somebody reads it and gives me a feedback please? I went to Citizen Advice but they didn't look at it. They are there just for people under benefits and debt not for the court cases.

 

Many thanks,

Helen

[honeybee13]

Hello and welcome to CAG.

 

I've moved your thread to the transport forum and hope the guys will be along later with advice for you.

 

I don't know if you can clarify something please? You are at Herriot Watt university, which I believe is in Scotland, I don't quite understand why there is such a heavy involvement with Oyster cards. I thought they happened around London, but maybe they've been extended.

 

My best, HB

[HelenKH]

Hi,

 

Thanks for moving my case to the right place. I used to be in H-W university in Edinburgh in 2008-2009 but I moved to London in Dec 2010 and that is a letter from somebody who knows me well as a reference.

[honeybee13]

Hi,

 

Thanks for moving my case to the right place. I used to be in H-W university in Edinburgh in 2008-2009 but I moved to London in Dec 2010 and that is a letter from somebody who knows me well as a reference.

 

Thank you for that.

 

I don't know how much TfL will know about you and I'm sorry to split hairs, but being here for 4 years and in London for 2 doesn't really make you a recent immigrant, does it?

 

You're obviously an intelligent person and I hope this works out for you, but I wonder if the court will also ask why you would use a card that wasn't yours. I'm afraid we hear this type of story all the time on the forum.

 

Hopefully the industry guys will be along later with advice for you.

 

HB

[HelenKH]

Thanks for your reply,

 

You are right that doesn't make sense but if you are from another country and in contact with very few people, there is no way to know these kinds of things. I still feel I am a recent imigrant. London underground doesn't know much about me apart from my name and home address. Not sure what to say to the court yet!.

[lookinforinfo]

The letter you are sending is a good one and might help persuade the Judge to be lenient especially as you did pay the correct fare at the time.

In the meantime, I suggest you write again to TFL pointing out that you didn't travel on the Freedom pass, but used your own oyster card to make the

journey. And ask them , if they do decide to go ahead with their Court case to please amend that part of their statement that says you did travel on

the freedom pass. I think it also pertinent to ask why you are being taken to Court for a first time offence over a Freedom pass which you had never,

heard of before, while the Chancellor of the Exchequer had been caught at least twice travelling on a second class ticket when in a first class compartment.

All he received was a fine for the second offence. His offences were surely greater than yours in every sense yet he is able to avoid a Court appearance.

 

I know that you were travelling with TFL and George Osborne was on a train but I don't imagine their rules and regulations differ to that degree.

 

If TFL still want to go ahead, I suggest that you add the Chancellor to your letter to the Court pointing out how unfair it is that people in high places can get

away with things that others cannot. And he was caught twice doing exactly the same thing.

[HelenKH]

Thanks for your quick reply. I have already emailed TFL twice and they refused settlement and want to proceed the case in the court.

 

 

The statement they have written is:

 

"Did attempt to travel on the Railway without having previously paid the fare and with intend to avoid payment thereof."

 

 

So they don't say I travelled but I still don't understand why are they taking me to the court for a journey that didn't happen.

 

Are you sure it is a good idea to talk about Chancellor of the Exchequer? I am not intending to go to the court. Does saying this make any difference in what TFL is asking for. They would probably say 'mind your own business'. I may use this for appealing on the charges.

 

I am stressed

[lookinforinfo]

 

The statement they have written is:

 

"Did attempt to travel on the Railway without having previously paid the fare and with intend to avoid payment thereof."

 

 

So they don't say I travelled but I still don't understand why are they taking me to the court for a journey that didn't happen.

 

You used a Freedom pass to get access to the underground. These are passes used by Pensioners and disabled people and allows them free travel. So when you used the pass that you

were not entitled to, you were attempting to travel without paying the fare. The fact that you were spotted as not being disabled or old was the reason you were stopped before you

could begin your journey.

However, it is interesting that they added "with intent to avoid payment thereof".

You didn't know that it was a Freedom pass, you thought it was an oyster cars just like yours. So when the card allowed you to enter, you thought that your fare had been paid-maybe not paid

by you, but there was no intent to travel for free. Had the Freedom pass not allowed entry, you had your own oyster card to make the payment which is what you did anyway. So it was

never your intention to avoid paying the fare as TFL allege. Try that as part of your argument in your letter to the Court. And yes, do mention the Chancellor.

 

Perhaps some one else reading would advise whether to include the piece about not intending to pay in your letter to TFL as I am unsure if they can amend their case to drop the part

that intended to avoid payment.

[honeybee13]

Hello lookinforinfo and Helen.

 

My advice would be to wait for the transport guys who understand the laws and byelaws involved to arrive before you send anything. They should be along soon.

 

I should have asked what TfL say the charge is please, Helen.

 

HB

[HelenKH]

Here is what they have written:

"Compensation for the outstanding fare avoided of £5.30 is claimed, together with the sum of £130 as a contribution towards prosecution costs."

[HelenKH]

Then it says:

"The court will be asked to order you to pay costs in addition to any fine or other penalty imposed"

[honeybee13]

Hello again.

 

Does it say which law or byelaw they are charging you with please?

 

HB

[HelenKH]

So many references here. on the first page it says: you attempt to travel...

 

and under that line it says:

"Contrary to S.5(3)(a) of the Regulation of Railways Act 1889 as amended by section 84 (2) of the Transport Act 1962 and Section 18 of the British Railways Act 1970"

 

and in a big box it says:

"Statements are served herewith under the provisions of the criminal justice act 1967."

[honeybee13]

Thank you again.

 

I copied and pasted this from a post that Old-CodJA made here a while back, it may help.

 

Section 5 (3) (a) If any person travels or attempts to travel on a railway without having previously paid his fare, and with intent to avoid payment thereof he shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine.

 

HB

[HelenKH]

Thank you. I looked for it on the internet but couldn't find it. Thanks a lot.

[HelenKH]

Just something else came to me. I have to plea guilty to get rid of the process but I have to defend my position and say 'I didn't attempt to travel for free' as lookinforinfo has suggested. What will the judge think? this girl has plead guilty and then says, I disagree! Should I plea guilty or not? I think I should because it is always cheaper and quicker but want to know what others think.

 

Thanks again

[lookinforinfo]

If you plead not guilty and win, there is no cost to you. But if you plead not guilty and lose, the fine may be higher than if you plead guilty from the outset.

If it were me, I would go to court and plead not guilty on the grounds that you hadn't intended to travel without paying. Yes, you used a freedom pass that didn't belong to you

but had it been a normal oyster card, your journey would have been paid. Plus you paid for the fare with your own oyster card. It would have been no different had you found a

£5 note in the street and used that instead.

It seems wrong that the Chancellor, who deliberately and knowingly attempted to avoid paying the correct fare, pays a fine without

having to go to Court for a second offence, while you get a criminal conviction when you had no intention of travelling without the correct payment being made for your journey.

 

I know you don't want to go to court, but if you want the Judge to see how seriously you view this affair, you stand a better chance of getting the Judge on your side by turning up.

And you never know, if TFL know you are there, they might drop the charge or allow you to settle out of Court.

[Nystagmite]

 

Are you sure it is a good idea to talk about Chancellor of the Exchequer? I am not intending to go to the court. Does saying this make any difference in what TFL is asking for. They would probably say 'mind your own business'. I may use this for appealing on the charges.

 

I am stressed

 

How is that case relevant to yours?

 

I have to defend my position and say 'I didn't attempt to travel for free' as lookinforinfo has suggested.

 

But you did attempt to travel for free.

[markl1987]

It seems wrong that the Chancellor, who deliberately and knowingly attempted to avoid paying the correct fare, pays a fine without

having to go to Court for a second offence, while you get a criminal conviction when you had no intention of travelling without the correct payment being made for your journey.

 

Lookinforinfo Yes the chancellor has done something wrong (in the eyes of a newspaper reporter) . . . its not going to help this person out in anyway so as much as you disagree with what Mr Chancellor has done, repeating it and mentioning it isnt going to help. Its a totally different case, different TOC and railway offences are looked at under strict liability, it doesnt matter what anyone else has done as they are not part of this prosecution. If you wish to read more info regarding the chancellor and his paid or unpaid fares then there is an open thread about this on the forum (which will give you a lot more info about the chancellors case) but you're really not helping the OP by mentioning it. As Nystagmite says, how is this relevant?

 

You didn't know that it was a Freedom pass, you thought it was an oyster cars just like yours. So when the card allowed you to enter, you thought that your fare had been paid-maybe not paid

by you, but there was no intent to travel for free. Had the Freedom pass not allowed entry, you had your own oyster card to make the payment which is what you did anyway. So it was

never your intention to avoid paying the fare as TFL allege.

 

Couldn't disagree more with you if I tried. The OP had their own oyster card with their own money on it that they would use to pay the fare on a normal day. On the day they were found to be using the freedom pass they were not using their own card, their own money and in fact if it was an oyster not a freedom pass they would have happily been spending someone else's money that day so they were intent on travelling without paying from their own money

 

HelenKH Im sure the more seasoned guys that are more familiar with TFL and prosecutions will be along soon to help with possible outcomes/costs etc. Regardless of whether you travelled, you attempted to use a pass that was not yours, I understand you say you did not know what but would it be any different to if you had found a standard oyster card loaded with someones annual season ticket? You would have also accessed an area that you have to hold a valid ticket to be in, your PAYG oyster was not valid at this time because you had use the found freedom pass to touch in.

 

I think the long and short of it is that you tried to use something you found, thinking that you were lucky enough to have found an oyster card and that it would be ok as you had previously lost cards yourself (you mention in your posts about this) and unfortunately you were caught with the freedom pass. Im not sure on what you will be looking at in terms of fine/costs etc but your best bet would be to go court, be open and honest, don't mention the chancellor issue as it is totally unrelated and as I said the more seasoned guys will be able to advise a bit further on the likely outcome

[BazzaS]

As others have said (in previous threads too) : these are publically funded concessionairy passes intended to benefit some of the more disadvantaged.

 

So, in my opinion, their abuse is disrespectful to their intended recipients while cheating those who fund them (which includes me!).

 

If you are innocent, CAG should help you robustly defend yourself.

If you admit you are guilty, CAG shouldn't be here to scold you, say "hah, you deserve all you get" or such, as if you come to CAG for reasonable help, CAG should help you mitigate the damage, bearing in mind you are accepting your guilt.

 

(Again, in my opinion: ) what I find as much of an abuse of CAG as I abhor intentional abuse of Freedom Passes is where it seems that someone has abused a freedom pass, based on what they have posted, and when caught 'bang to rights' wants to wriggle off the hook rather than accept they've done wrong.

 

"I found a freedom pass" and "I used it" :

If you 'touched in' with it and were stopped inside the ticket gates, how are you hoping to claim you weren't intending to use it for travel?

 

You mention you and your friends borrow each other's PAYG Oyster cards all the time : the key phrases are "PAYG" and "borrow". Even if you claim you didn't know the difference between PAYG and a Freedom Pass, borrowing a friend's pass is with their permission, or a prior agreement to swap passes : where was the permission to pick up and use a pass belonging to someone you don't know?

(BTW, you'd be in trouble even if the pass holder had given it to you, as it is for their exclusive use : I'm just highlighting why "My mates and I swap Oyster cards all the time" is an unconvincing excuse)

 

Stating "I'm an immigrant" as some sort of excuse or 'carte blanche' : since you've been in the UK a number of years, isn't this a bit rude to immigrants? You have had time to learn the social norms, and picking up and using something that isn't yours, without the owner's permission : in which cultures is this deemed acceptable, then?

I imagine in most cultures one is supposed to learn (usually at kindergarten stage) that this isn't acceptable behaviour.

 

If you are innocent : give us more details how / why, and let us help you prepare a robust defence, or help you persuade TFL not to proceed.

 

If, on reflection, you accept you were guilty : 'man up', accept responsibility, and let CAG help you minimise the damage. Would a recordable criminal conviction (which is what you are potentially facing) affect your immigration status? (you mention you are an immigrant).

 

If it is neither of these (if you are guilty as sin, but don't want to accept it) : I'll watch this thread with interest ....

Edited October 26, 2012 by BazzaS

[Old-CodJA]

As others have said (in previous threads too) : these are publically funded concessionairy passes intended to benefit some of the more disadvantaged.

 

So, in my opinion, their abuse is disrespectful to their intended recipients while cheating those who fund them (which includes me!).

 

If you are innocent, CAG should help you robustly defend yourself.

If you admit you are guilty, CAG shouldn't be here to scold you, say "hah, you deserve all you get" or such, as if you come to CAG for reasonable help, CAG should help you mitigate the damage, bearing in mind you are accepting your guilt.

 

(Again, in my opinion: ) what I find as much of an abuse of CAG as I abhor intentional abuse of Freedom Passes is where it seems that someone has abused a freedom pass, based on what they have posted, and when caught 'bang to rights' wants to wriggle off the hook rather than accept they've done wrong.

 

"I found a freedom pass" and "I used it" :

If you 'touched in' with it and were stopped inside the ticket gates, how are you hoping to claim you weren't intending to use it for travel?

 

Stating "I'm an immigrant" as some sort of excuse or 'carte blanche' : since you've been in the UK a number of years, isn't this a bit rude to immigrants? You have had time to learn the social norms, and picking up and using something that isn't yours, without the owner's permission : in which cultures is this deemed acceptable, then?

I imagine in most cultures one is supposed to learn (usually at kindergarten stage) that this isn't acceptable behaviour.

 

 

A excellent post in my opinion. I couldn't agree more.

 

The fact is that by her own admission the OP found a Freedom Pass, knew it was not hers, knew she had not touched-in with her own Oyster so as to give up the fare from her own electronic purse and attempted to use the found pass to travel rather than pay from her own resources.

 

All the rhetoric about A.N. Other traveller is wholly irrelevant

 

By offering suggestions as to how to respond we can help her to mitigate the effect of that action, but we cannot right her wrong

[BazzaS]

Thanks for the compliment, OCJa.

I was editing my post (I usually do, once I see it in in its posted format) and have added a few lines : but hope the ethos is still the same.

 

(I've added a bit to make it a bit less 'punchy' if the OP does in fact have reasons why she is innocent, and also to wonder, if she is an immigrant, if this might affect her immigration status)

[honeybee13]

Just something else came to me. I have to plea guilty to get rid of the process but I have to defend my position and say 'I didn't attempt to travel for free' as lookinforinfo has suggested. What will the judge think? this girl has plead guilty and then says, I disagree! Should I plea guilty or not? I think I should because it is always cheaper and quicker but want to know what others think.

 

Thanks again

 

I don't see any point trying to say you didn't do it, as I think TfL are going to find it very easy to prove that you did. And if you plead not guilty but are subsequently found guilty, I understand the fine is higher.

 

And as Bazza says, misuse of Freedom passes is not viewed well by magistrates, who will understand what one is and how it's funded.

 

From what you say, the possible criminal record doesn't seem to be a problem.

 

What I'm not clear about is why you couldn't tell that the pass was different from your normal Oyster card.

 

HB

[honeybee13]

Thank you OC, I'm glad you've seen this and that we're on the right track, so to speak.

 

Mitigation is the word I was thinking of too.

 

HB

[Old-CodJA]

Just something else came to me. I have to plea guilty to get rid of the process but I have to defend my position and say 'I didn't attempt to travel for free' as lookinforinfo has suggested. What will the judge think? this girl has plead guilty and then says, I disagree! Should I plea guilty or not? I think I should because it is always cheaper and quicker but want to know what others think.

 

Thanks again

 

 

Given your description of your intended response, I expect that the Court will not accept your guilty plea and you will be required to explain yourself to the Magistrates

 

You appear to have been charged with an 'intention to avoid a fare'

 

You cannot plead 'guilty' and in the same response say 'but I didn't intend to do it'. That will be considered to be an equivocal plea.

 

You will need to clarify this to the Court by saying either 'I plead guilty to intending to avoid a fare' or 'I am not guilty of the offence I have been charged with'. It cannot be both.

 

If you say to the Magistrates 'I am pleading guilty just because it's cheaper and quicker' they will not accept your plea.

 

If you genuinely believe that you are not guilty of an offence then you should plead 'Not Guilty' and have the allegation go to trial.