Summons for using a found freedom pass

[HelenKH]

Thanks Old-CodJA,

 

So what shall I write then? That is what I thought at that second. It is true two wrongs don not make a right. But I have done it now. what mitigation shall I write?

[Old-CodJA]

Thanks Old-CodJA,

 

So what shall I write then? That is what I thought at that second. It is true two wrongs don not make a right. But I have done it now. what mitigation shall I write?

 

It really is up to you what you write, we cannot tell you exactly what words to use, what we can help with is thoughts that might help a little and things that you should avoid saying too.

 

In all honesty I cannot suggest that you do anything but apologise, explain that you found an Oyster, picked it up and attempted to use it to travel.

 

You can say that you did hold an Oyster of your own, with stored credit on the account and that you recognise that you should not have used one that was not yours without the express permission of the owner.

 

You can say that you are aware that there are some types of Oyster that can be shared, but that you did not check the Oyster that you had found to ensure it was permissible and that you decided to use it on the spur of the moment.

 

You might say that you have learned a very valuable lesson, that you will never again repeat such a rash action and ask the Magistrates to take this into consideration when coming to their decision.

Edited October 28, 2012 by Old-CodJA

[honeybee13]

Helpful thoughts OC, thank you.

 

My best, HB

[HelenKH]

Thanks Old-CodJA,

 

I have written all those things in my letter already. I probably do some rewording. Will let you know what the result is.

 

Thanks to everybody else for the thoughts/comments.

[honeybee13]

Good luck Helen.

 

HB

[HelenKH]

Thank you HB,

 

If you can think of anything else that I can add, please let me know. I will probably print and send my stuff on Monday/Tue.

[HelenKH]

Hi Old-CodJA, HB,

 

I have another question. In my letter to the court I have written that TFL has refused my Out of Court Settlement request twice. Now I am thinking, is it better not to mention it at all or mention it?

 

We can look at it from two aspects.

 

1. I have tried to solve the problem between me and TFL (my intention is to show this)

2. TFL is too angry with me that they want to prosecute me and they expect the judge be as hard as he can be on me.

 

Thanks

[Old-CodJA]

Hi Old-CodJA, HB,

 

I have another question. In my letter to the court I have written that TFL has refused my Out of Court Settlement request twice. Now I am thinking, is it better not to mention it at all or mention it?

 

We can look at it from two aspects.

 

1. I have tried to solve the problem between me and TFL (my intention is to show this)

2. TFL is too angry with me that they want to prosecute me and they expect the judge be as hard as he can be on me.

 

Thanks

 

 

It is entirely up to you whether or not you believe me, but you really need to get out of your head any idea that TfL are being unfair.

 

There is a defined penalty for the alleged offence and the legislation does specify that the penalty is for conviction of a first offence.

 

It is true that in the case of some relatively minor offences that the rail operators (and TfL) may choose to allow an out of Court disposal, but the misuse of Freedom Passes by people not entitled to use them is considered to be stealing from the 'public purse' and therefore is considered a more serious matter than breach of Byelaw.

 

What we should never have is a system of 'justice' that is wholly based on whether someone can afford to buy themselves out of a prosecution and the transport operator is never obliged to accept such an offer.

 

For those reasons I think it is very important that you do not advise Magistrates that you think TfL are 'picking on you' because, although you admit using the pass, TfL will not let you pay to make the effects of your actions go-away

 

You can of course say that you have asked if the matter could be resolved by you paying any unpaid fare and all the costs incurred by TfL, but this offer was not accepted.

Edited October 28, 2012 by Old-CodJA

[HelenKH]

Hi There,

 

I need your help again. I plead guilty without attending the court session and today I got a letter which says they can't accept the plea. Here is what they have sent to me:

 

"The case has been adjourned because:

The court cannot accept your plea of guilty in view of what you have said about the offence. You Must attend the next hearing to clarify your pleas to the court. You may want to seek legal advice before then ...

 

If the court does not hear from you, or you do not attend the next hearing, the case can proceed against you in your absence."

 

The quick reminder: I found a freedom pass out of the station and without realising what the type of the card was, I used it but I was stopped at the at gate... The underground didn't accept OOC settlement and then I plead guilty and told the story as it was in a letter of mitigation. Now, what comes next? What should I do? Ask a solicitor for advice? Don't go to the court? Go to the court and plea not guilty? What...?

 

The summons is:

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

 

Thanks,

H

[honeybee13]

Hello again.

 

"The case has been adjourned because:

The court cannot accept your plea of guilty in view of what you have said about the offence. You Must attend the next hearing to clarify your pleas to the court. You may want to seek legal advice before then ...

 

If the court does not hear from you, or you do not attend the next hearing, the case can proceed against you in your absence."

 

I'm wondering if this is to do with how you worded your plea. OC said earlier that if you start arguing about the attitude of TfL it could prejudice the plea, if that's the right terms. Did you mention anything about TfL being unfair, for example?

 

I think OC mentioned possible problems about the way the plea is worded in post #47.

 

Would you be able to tell us the wording of your plea please?

 

My best, HB

[BazzaS]

Hi There,

 

I need your help again. I plead guilty without attending the court session and today I got a letter which says they can't accept the plea. Here is what they have sent to me:

 

"The case has been adjourned because:

The court cannot accept your plea of guilty in view of what you have said about the offence. You Must attend the next hearing to clarify your pleas to the court. You may want to seek legal advice before then ...

 

If the court does not hear from you, or you do not attend the next hearing, the case can proceed against you in your absence."

 

The quick reminder: I found a freedom pass out of the station and without realising what the type of the card was, I used it but I was stopped at the at gate... The underground didn't accept OOC settlement and then I plead guilty and told the story as it was in a letter of mitigation. Now, what comes next? What should I do? Ask a solicitor for advice? Don't go to the court? Go to the court and plea not guilty? What...?

 

The summons is:

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

 

Thanks,

H

 

 

What do you think you said that meant the court could not accept your guilty plea?

 

I'm wondering about OCJA's previous comment:

 

As I have previously explained, if you write and say 'I'm guilty', but send a letter saying 'I didn't know it was wrong and I didn't intend to do it' The Magistrates will not be able to accept the plea and you will end up either facing another Court hearing in person where your plea will be entered as 'not guilty' and a trial will ensue at a later date, or you will have to repeat your 'Guilty' plea and retract the assertion that you did not intend to avoid the fare.

[HelenKH]

Hi HB,

 

I am not sure what you are asking for. There were three options to sign and I signed the first one 'plea guilty and accept the charge...'. In my mitigation letter I just told them the story that I have written before in this forum. I found a card and used it but was stopped at the gate and after that I traveled with my own prepaid card. There was no travel involved.

[HelenKH]

Hi HB,

 

I didn't say anything about LU. I just mentioned my OOC settlement request was refused and nothing else

[HelenKH]

Hi BazzaS,

 

I told the story as how it was. I really didn't attempt to travel without paying but I tried a found card without understanding what it was. So I don't know if I am guilty or not guilty based on the regulation. What should I do now?

[BazzaS]

 

"The case has been adjourned because:

The court cannot accept your plea of guilty in view of what you have said about the offence."

 

The summons is:

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

 

 

Did you suggest in your letter:

a) that you didn't attempt to travel, or

b) that you didn't intend to avoid payment?

 

Either or both of these would mean that you would be pleading "guilty, but not guilty" .... Leading to the response you have described.

[BazzaS]

Did you swipe in with the Freedom Pass?

If so, how is that not "attempting to travel" : even if you got stopped before reaching a platform?

[HelenKH]

Hi Bazza,

 

The answer to your previous question. I didn't suggest any of those.

 

The answer to the second question. I thought it was a normal Oyster card and I used it (I had no idea what the freedom pass until that day). I think the judge has concluded that I didn't intend to avoid payment.

[BazzaS]

Hi Bazza,

 

The answer to your previous question. I didn't suggest any of those.

 

The answer to the second question. I thought it was a normal Oyster card and I used it (I had no idea what the freedom pass until that day). I think the judge has concluded that I didn't intend to avoid payment.

 

I think you assume too much.

It may be that the court feels you are claiming that you didn't intend to avoid payment, thus "vacating" your guilty plea.

 

That is a world away from the judge / bench concluding the same (that you didn't intend to avoid payment). That would be "an issue for trial" (so, to be heard at trial, where the prosecutor might refute it .... and the court would decide, based on the evidence, statute / byelaws, and precedent case law)

 

I've previously highlighted a risk to claiming "I thought I was paying, with the stored value on a PAYG Oyster I found"

 

You can't have it both ways!

[honeybee13]

Hi Bazza,

 

The answer to your previous question. I didn't suggest any of those.

 

The answer to the second question. I thought it was a normal Oyster card and I used it (I had no idea what the freedom pass until that day). I think the judge has concluded that I didn't intend to avoid payment.

 

Hello again.

 

I would suggest the judge may have concluded the opposite. I agree with Bazza, you seem to have pleaded guilty and not guilty, which OC called an equivocal plea earlier in the thread.

 

That could explain why the court wants to hear your explanation.

 

HB

[HelenKH]

I didn't intend to avoid the payment but I didn't want to go to the court and I am very concerned about the court cost and the UG cost escalating.

 

I have been called to court and so will this automatically escalate my potential costs etc

 

Now that I am going to court, is it better to stick with plea guilty or change it to not guilty and fight for it? I am told that they must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, so how can they prove my intent, when I thought the card was a pre-paid card?

[HelenKH]

II've previously highlighted a risk to claiming "I thought I was paying, with the stored value on a PAYG Oyster I found"

 

 

I have told the truth. I didn't want to risk anything. I plead guilty because I didn't understand the type of the card. What should I do next?

[honeybee13]

I have told the truth. I didn't want to risk anything. I plead guilty because I didn't understand the type of the card. What should I do next?

 

I don't think I can say anything else and hope that OC will be able to get here soon. I have a feeling, although I could be wrong, that the problem could lie with your perception of the type of card and that paying with a card that belongs to someone else is OK.

 

HB

[BazzaS]

I've little to add beyond what I've said before.

I doubt claiming "I didn't know what type of card it was & thought I was paying with a (stolen) PAYG Oyster" will get you much sympathy.

 

I accept you don't think it would have been a stolen PAYG Oyster, but:

a) it matters what the court thinks above what you think,

b) that may be moot : the court will look at if you attempted to travel, and if a reasonable person would have felt they had attempted to pay (or rather, intended to avoid payment of) THEIR fare.

 

It may be that you remain unhappy with my comments, and I'm not telling you what you appear to want to hear : that it will somehow go well for you and you'll avoid a conviction.

However, if you can't persuade me my comments are incorrect or unreasonable : do you feel you'll do better in court?

[HelenKH]

Thanks HB,

 

I didn't say that paying with somebody else's is right and I pleaded guilty for that reason but they didn't accept it because that is not the charge. The charge is one of INTENT and I didn't intend to avoid the payment. It is perfectly legitimate to use somebody elses pre-pay card. I thought I had found one. Unfortunately I now realise it was a non-transferable type of card. So I had intended to travel with a pre-paid card and didn't realise my mistake until it was too late. What should I do next? I have apologised for my mistake.

[HelenKH]

Thanks BazzaS,

 

How can I prove that I had no idea about the type of the card? It may not seem logical but that is the full story I can say. I can't change it to something else that is not true.