Summons for using a found freedom pass

[HelenKH]

How is this?

I have previously asked for Out of Court settlement which was refused. I pleaded guilty to the court which wasn't accepted and I have another hearing day next week. After looking at the result of the pleading guilty I see that my future is in your hands. If I get a conviction, I will lose my job and I won't be able to renew my work visa. I am happy to pay all the admin and other relevant costs. I admit I made a mistake by trying the found card which will never happen again and I apologise to what has happened and hope you accept my apology. There is a difference between people who make a mistake and people who really plan to avoid the payment.

[*RainbowTears*]

Hi,

I think Old-CodJA has given you excellent advice HelenKH. I do hope that instead of trying to justify your actions (I.E. Stories of lost passes etc etc) that you concentrate on getting your plea sorted out once & for all. As it's not anyone of us you have to convince its the Court.

 

I do suggest that you re read Old-CodJA suggestions & the different scenarios he has given you. Then take the time you have left before going to the Court & write in your own words what it is you want to say to them.

 

I would also advise you get Legal advice. As I did appear for myself in my Court case & it was very nerve racking, not something I want to do again despite my winning my case. (It wasn't Transport related)

 

I do feel you have had the best advice given on here & that it is resolved for you soon.

[HelenKH]

Hi Rainbow,

 

in none of my previous posts I have disagreed with OC and I have read every single one of them. I don't want to get a conviction so I am trying to find a way out of it. my previous post is an email is to LU not to the court. I asked all people who can read it to leave me a feedback. do you think this can change their mind? I never wanted to go to the court and for that reason I pleaded guilty. I know it is not going to be fun! However, I don't want to pay to a legal adviser to plead guilty for me and charge me £1000 plus all other expenses and on top of the conviction. Am I mad?!

 

What do you suggest? Plead guilty?

[Old-CodJA]

There is a difference between people who make a mistake and people who really plan to avoid the payment.

 

Right, for the last time. REMOVE THAT LINE FROM YOUR MESSAGE.

 

Please do not tell TfL what to think and they may just consider your request in a different light. No guarantee, but it's worth a try.

 

Put it in writing, hard copy, signed and sent by recorded delivery.

[HelenKH]

Thanks a lot OC. I appreciate all your help and advice.

[*RainbowTears*]

Hi HelenKH,

I will be honest with you as going back over all the ground Old-CodJA has covered will just lead us all going in circles.

 

No one can tell you how you should or shouldn't plead as it's not about us. Also still being honest with you, you got yourself into this by attempting to use a pass that wasn't yours to use.

 

So I suggest 'stop trying to excuse your actions to find a way out' & face this head on. Be honest & truthful to the Court, show remorse regarding attempting to use this pass. Then they can make their judgement based on the facts.

 

This ultimately is up to you. I've stated above Old-CodJA has given you the best advice as he's years of experience in these matters. Try CAB if you cannot afford Legal representation.

 

Regards

[HelenKH]

If you have read all the previous posts, you would have noticed I am not making excuses and I am here to get help and don't want people keep saying 'you got yourself into it'. Of course I know this but saying that doesn't help me. unfortunately the CAB services are not for the people who are paying for it (like me). It is for the people who don't contribute anything to the system.

 

OC has given me good advices, no doubt about it.

[BazzaS]

Helen, I usually cover certain other sections of the forum than this one and am bound to say that with the exception of the Old-Codga, the rest seem more interested in saying you are guilty

rather than trying to help you.

None of them can know what you intended to do when you used the Freedom Pass. And you are charged"with intent to avoid payment". You have to show that you did not intend to avoid payment

and throughout the thread you have stuck to that assertion.

Interestingly, and no one appears to have picked up on this section5 [1] of the Railways act 1889 which states

(1)Every passenger by a railway shall, on request by an officer or servant of a railway company, either produce, and if so requested deliver up, a ticket showing that his fare is paid, or pay his fare from the place whence he started, or give the officer or servant his name and address; and in case of default shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding [F1level 1 on the standard scale][F2[F3level 2 on the standard scale]].

 

You did use your own oyster card to pay for the whole journey so you satisfied section 1. I guess that they are still pursuing the matter since it was a Freedom pass but I think that you should point that out to the Court. I know noone on this thread appears to believe that you did not know what a FP was, but I have read on other threads within this sector that other people living outside of London do not know what they are. Indeed Bazza seems to think it is for disadvantaged people. Although I have not got a FP, I am entitled to one as I am a Pensioner but am certainly not disadvantaged.

 

So you should tell the Court that you had no idea that you had a Freedom Pass when you checked in at the gate and so you genuinely believed that your fare had been paid.

I understand from reading the Old-Codja's posts that even if you had used someone else's pass, that as it did not belong to you you were deemed not to have paid the fare since it was

not your money that had paid the fare.

It cannot have been the intention of Parliament to insist that everyone who travelled on a train had to pay their own fare-that would be absurd. It would mean that a father could not buy tickets

for all his family, nor a Company could not pay for their employees to travel.

 

OC has already replied (with his greater knowledge as 'an industry expert')

 

A few points, though:

1) The OP is charged under S5.3, so your citing of S5.1 is at best irrelevant, and at worst misleading.

 

2) The Freedom Pass scheme is funded by local councils, and is intended to benefit the disadvantaged. Not all pensioners are disadvantaged, and if you are well enough off that you feel you don't need to apply for one, "bully for you!".

However that doesn't alter (& to some extent it reinforces) "publically funded" & "intended for some of the most disadvantaged"

 

3) As for respondents "wanting to say the OP is guilty, rather than helping" : giving her false hope of avoiding conviction is equally unhelpful.

 

She faces an uphill struggle. OC, who is an industry expert and prosecutor, has said that were he prosecuting, he'd expect from the details stated so far to succeed in prosecuting.

 

4) While "intent" is notoriously nebulous (how can we really know what another was thinking / intending") it is likely if the OP says "I never intended to avoid my fare" that the Magistrates will consider if that stated intent was reasonable.

Otherwise it would be rare for any charge involving "intent" to be proven.

 

I might say "I never intended to crash my car" but contrast between me driving it at 200+ MPH on the runway of a disused airfield , with driving it at 200+ MPH on a motorway in use by the public .... One might be a realistic example of lack of intent, while the other would be "no reasonable person could believe they could do so without risk", where claims of "I never intended to ....." would be rightly dismissed.

[lookinforinfo]

I understand your thinking lookinforinfo, but have to point out two relevant factors.

 

The OP may have used her own Oyster after having been stopped and questioned when attempting to use the freedom pass, but the legislation that you rightly refer to (Section 5.3 Regulation of Railways Act [1889]) says 'Travels or attempts to travel....' and 'having not previously paid....'.

.'.with the intent to avoid payment'. And that part of the charge is the crucial one]

 

Payment of a fare after being detected in the act of the alleged offence does not prevent a correctly brought prosecution.

I understand that of course. But the authorities did have that option for a first offender]

 

Secondly, the judgment in the Appeal case of Browning & Floyd (1946) to which I also referred earlier is particularly clear. That judgment ruled that in the case of a traveller using a ticket that is issued for the sole use of another named traveller, the rail company might not have lost money, but that user has not paid his/her fare and therefore the intent to avoid his/her fare is proven

thank you for that clarification. I was unable to find the relevant case online and took your summary of the verdict rather than the judge's actual summing up.

 

Please remember that the Freedom pass is expressly issued for the sole use of the named traveller identified on it by photographic image.

I appreciate that but I don't think the OP knew]

 

This is nothing like me going to the station with my daughter and payuing for her ticket to travel to University and there has never been legislation in force to prevent that from happeningI did think that couldn't be right but that seemed to be the way it read/

Edited November 16, 2012 by lookinforinfo

[Old-CodJA]

The OP may have used her own Oyster after having been stopped and questioned when attempting to use the freedom pass, but the legislation that you rightly refer to (Section 5.3 Regulation of Railways Act [1889]) says 'Travels or attempts to travel....' and 'having not previously paid....'. .'.with the intent to avoid payment'. And that part of the charge is the crucial one]

 

That is indeed crucial to the intent element, but your comment was in relation to whether or not the OP actually used the pass. I was drawing attention to the fact that she did not need to travel, merely attempt to do so using that pass for which she had not previously paid for the offence to be complete.

 

Please remember that the Freedom pass is expressly issued for the sole use of the named traveller identified on it by photographic image.

I appreciate that but I don't think the OP knew]

 

I agree that she may not have known, but having discovered that the object she had found was a pass she did try to use it. As we all know, ignorance of a law is not a defence.

[HelenKH]

Hello All,

 

Thing are not going well. I asked TFL for OOC settlement for the third time explaining how this can affect my work, visa, and life. But they have not accepted it. I posted it to the name on the letter I have and somebody else replied through email.

 

Here is what they say:

 

"Thank you for your letter dated xth November 2012, I have read and noted your comments in regards to your pending hearing at x Magistrates court on xth November 2012.

 

I appreciate your concerns regarding the matter however fare evasion is a widespread problem on the London Underground system. I have reviewed your case once more and I can confirm that London Underground intends to proceed with its decision to prosecute in accordance with its Prosecution policy.

 

Fare evasion on London Underground is taken very seriously, particularly as it amounts to a gross annual revenue loss of approximately £22m. We feel that you deliberately and with intention to defraud London Underground attempted to travel from x station with a ticket you were not permitted to use.

 

I note from your correspondence that you have previously sent to London Underground, that on the day of the incident you found the Freedom pass and only looked at the back of it therefore you did not realise what type of pass it was. London Underground does not accept the credibility of your account and we note that it seems a coincidence that you had no ticket of your own on the day.

 

Under the circumstances we intend to proceed with the matter as listed."

 

I had my oyster card with me and I don't know why they think I didn't have my Oyster card! I suppose they can look at the CCTV records , can't they?

 

 

OC,

 

What should they insist that I didn't have my card with me? How could I possibly get up that morning and decide not to carry my card in hope of finding a card to avoid payment? I have replied to their email saying this.

 

BTW, in the prosecution policy sections 8 and 10 there are some lines that say they can avoid prosecution under some circumstances. Can I use any of those in my mitigation?

 

Thanks

[honeybee13]

Hello All,

 

Thing are not going well. I asked TFL for OOC settlement for the third time explaining how this can affect my work, visa, and life. But they have not accepted it. I posted it to the name on the letter I have and somebody else replied through email.

 

Here is what they say:

 

"Thank you for your letter dated xth November 2012, I have read and noted your comments in regards to your pending hearing at x Magistrates court on xth November 2012.

 

I appreciate your concerns regarding the matter however fare evasion is a widespread problem on the London Underground system. I have reviewed your case once more and I can confirm that London Underground intends to proceed with its decision to prosecute in accordance with its Prosecution policy.

 

Fare evasion on London Underground is taken very seriously, particularly as it amounts to a gross annual revenue loss of approximately £22m. We feel that you deliberately and with intention to defraud London Underground attempted to travel from x station with a ticket you were not permitted to use.

 

I note from your correspondence that you have previously sent to London Underground, that on the day of the incident you found the Freedom pass and only looked at the back of it therefore you did not realise what type of pass it was. London Underground does not accept the credibility of your account and we note that it seems a coincidence that you had no ticket of your own on the day.

 

Under the circumstances we intend to proceed with the matter as listed."

 

I had my oyster card with me and I don't know why they think I didn't have my Oyster card! I suppose they can look at the CCTV records , can't they?

 

 

OC,

 

What should they insist that I didn't have my card with me? How could I possibly get up that morning and decide not to carry my card in hope of finding a card to avoid payment? I have replied to their email saying this.

 

BTW, in the prosecution policy sections 8 and 10 there are some lines that say they can avoid prosecution under some circumstances. Can I use any of those in my mitigation?

 

Thanks

 

Hello again. I'm sorry it's not going well.

 

Are you able to give us an idea of what you said when you wrote please? It might help the guys to advise you.

 

HB

[HelenKH]

I didn't talk about that day and ticket anymore. I said I am so sorry and apologised about what has happened. Then explained I didn't know what the consequences of the conviction could be before I pleases guilty to the court. Now I know what can happen to me I ask for OOC settlement and then explained how that could that affect my work and life. I explained in details that how could this ruin my life.

 

I didn't tell them I am an exception but I mentioned the consequences for me will be worse than for anybody else's. On that day I told the inspector that I had a card but not sure why he has written I didn't have a card. He watched me go out and reenter with my own card without going to the ticket office to buy a new ticket.

[honeybee13]

I didn't talk about that day and ticket anymore. I said I am so sorry and apologised about what has happened. Then explained I didn't know what the consequences of the conviction could be before I pleases guilty to the court. Now I know what can happen to me I ask for OOC settlement and then explained how that could that affect my work and life. I explained in details that how could this ruin my life.

 

I didn't tell them I am an exception but I mentioned the consequences for me will be worse than for anybody else's. On that day I told the inspector that I had a card but not sure why he has written I didn't have a card. He watched me go out and reenter with my own card without going to the ticket office to buy a new ticket.

 

Thank you for that.

 

I hope the guys will be along soon with advice or thoughts for you.

 

HB

[HelenKH]

Thanks a lot

[Old-CodJA]

I didn't talk about that day and ticket anymore. I said I am so sorry and apologised about what has happened. Then explained I didn't know what the consequences of the conviction could be before I pleases guilty to the court. Now I know what can happen to me I ask for OOC settlement and then explained how that could that affect my work and life. I explained in details that how could this ruin my life.

 

I didn't tell them I am an exception but I mentioned the consequences for me will be worse than for anybody else's. On that day I told the inspector that I had a card but not sure why he has written I didn't have a card. He watched me go out and reenter with my own card without going to the ticket office to buy a new ticket.

 

 

It is unfortunate, but perhaps not surprising that TfL have taken this view. I know it may be going over old ground, but I did try to prepare you for this. The misuse of Freedom Passes is a very serious issue and continues to be treated as such because they are funded by public money.

 

Sadly, the use of your own Oyster after being reported has no bearing on the offence I'm afraid. I think that I explained earlier that the section of the relevant Act says '...having not previously paid...and this means that paying a fare afterwards does not alter the fact that the '...attempt to travel..' using the Freedom Pass was detected and reported.

 

Whether or not you had an Oyster of your own with you does not alter the act of attempting to use the Freedom Pass until caught out. You may mention this at the Court hearing of course, but depending on the mood of the Magistrates and the powers of persuasion of the prosecutor, I'm afraid it might actually be counter-productive. It could be argued that by attempting to use the pass that you picked up and knowing that you had a means to pay, you were attempting to avoid giving up the stored value that you held on your own Oyster, clearly therefore intending to avoid paying from your own funds.

 

Again, explaining that you didn't know what the consequences of being caught were has no relevence, because as we have already explained, ignorance is not a defence.

 

I am sorry that you have been unable to persuade TfL to allow this to be disposed of out of Court, but it seems clear that they are set on exercising their right to prosecute the alleged offence. You really need to focus on how you deal with the Court hearing now.

 

If you decide that you are going to plead 'not-guilty' to this charge I strongly suggest that you do consider again the value of engaging properly qualified legal representation.

 

If you decide to plead 'guilty' with mitigation, then I think it essential that you attend this time. The Magistrates have already rejected your written plea of guilty because the considered your comments equivocal unless you simply enter a further written plea of guilty, saying something like 'I apologise unreservedly for my out of character act, I accept the evidence and I wish the Court to deal with the matter in my absence. I am very sorry for this one-off misjudgement and untertake not to travel without a valid rail ticket in future'.

 

I'm sorry, but I cannot offer any further suggestion that might offer you better hope.

[honeybee13]

Hello OC. It's very kind of you to offer further advice.

 

My best, HB

[HelenKH]

Thanks a lot OC for your kind advice,

 

I remember you saying all those things but I don't know why LU mentioned this:

 

"I note from your correspondence that you have previously sent to London Underground, that on the day of the incident you found the Freedom pass and only looked at the back of it therefore you did not realise what type of pass it was. London Underground does not accept the credibility of your account and we note that it seems a coincidence that you had no ticket of your own on the day."

 

This time I didn't talk about the problem and didn't explain myself. Just mentioned what a trouble I will be in if I get a conviction. I know using my ticket afterwards doesn't change anything but why do they mention I wasn't carrying my own ticket on the day and for that reason they don't want an OOC settlement? Maybe I am misunderstanding what they are telling me/implying in that last line.

 

Oh well I am in a big trouble

[Old-CodJA]

A Pay-As-You-Go Oyster card is not a travel ticket. It is an electronic purse, a means of carrying credit to pay for the fare.

 

It is only considered to be a travel ticket after it has been touched-in at the start of a journey.

 

It appears that what they are saying is that you had not previously touched-in using your own Oyster card and therefore did not hold a valid ticket of your own before attempting to travel

[HelenKH]

Hi OC, Others,

 

I am not sure what happens in this hearing (the hearing is to clarify my plea)? If I plead guilty on the day, is it the last date and they decide the rest on the same day or will they have another date to hear the case/decide? Can you tell me what form the hearing will take? Will there be a magistrate, and will it be the same magistrate that will hear the case? Do I have to finalise my plea at the hearing, or will I have to enter a plea following the hearing? Do I need to write another mitigation letter for this hearing or for the case? Does it make any difference how to dress?

 

Thanks

[lookinforinfo]

Please remember that the Freedom pass is expressly issued for the sole use of the named traveller identified on it by photographic image.

I appreciate that but I don't think the OP knew]

I agree that she may not have known, but having discovered that the object she had found was a pass she did try to use it. As we all know, ignorance of a law is not a defence.

Ignorance of the law is not a defence per se, but in this case it would indicate that there was not an intention to avoid payment.

 

 

 

Helen,OC is right that you should go to Court. The effects of a "Guilty" charge could have serious repercussions for you afterwards so you have to do your utmost to prevent it happening. Not to appear in Court would appear to the Court that you don't care about the outcome. It also gives you the chance not only to convince the Judge that you did not know that it was a Freedom Pass nor how it differed from a normal oyster

card. You can also state that whilst you did enter using the FP, you did not travel on it but used your own oyster card for the whole journey after being challenged, thereby qualifying for the possibility of section [1] of the Railways Act. You can therefore correct any implication by the Transport Authorities that you travelled without paying for your journey.

 

Not for one minute am I suggesting that you will not be found guilty, but if you don't go then the result is inevitable. If you go, use every

piece of evidence in your favour plus the excellent advice by the Old-Codja over the whole thread, there is a small chance that you may be lucky

and get a sympathetic Judge who can see that you are a genuine person.

[HelenKH]

Thanks Lookintoinfo,

 

I am intending to the court but not sure what to expect. OC said there is something on top of the page that tells me what happens in the court but I can't find it. Probably I am looking at the wrong place.

 

I am reading about magistrate's court process (in general) from other websites but need to know more specific details about similar cases.

[honeybee13]

Hello Helen.

 

Here's OC's sticky about attending court. It doesn't answer all your questions, but it tells you what to expect.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?313909-What-happens-when-you-get-to-court-by-Old-CodJA

 

HB

[HelenKH]

Thanks

[lookinforinfo]

Helen, I am pleased you have decided to attend. You may end up being found guilty, but at least you know that will have given it your best shot. Remember stranger things have happened in Court.

Who would have thought that OJ Simpson would have been found not guilty?