Southwest trains/ TFL Prosecution advice?

[timjones3185]

Hi everyone, firstly thanks in advance for any advice or experience you're able to draw on

 

About 8 months ago my friend started catching a train to and from outside zone 6 by 1 stop.

 

He has been travelling using an oyster card on a zone 1-2, and because he has not needed to swipe in or out at his local station, it's never caused him any issues. He has therefore also been paying £112 a month.

 

This morning he was caught by southwesttrains inspectors (he assumes thats what they were) who took him off the train and cautioned him, then asked him a lot of questions (in quite a forceful manner), without showing him a badge or ID, and always remaining adamant that he should answer, even when asked if he could remain silent. They took various details and essentially tricked him into admitting guilt or fair evasion because he hasn't paid the full amount for over a month. They took his home address details, phone number, oyster card number. Through stupidity and ignorance (which apparently never go down well) he was genuinely unaware he needed a larger zone oyster because he actually only swipes in and out within zone 1 and 2.

 

After the caution he was told it would be given to prosecutions dept and he would receive a letter asking him to come in for questioning, likely followed by a court summons. We sat together just now and worked out that in total (again through accident) he has evaded about 650 pounds (the difference between a zone 1-6 monthly and a zone 1-2 monthly, multiplied by the amount of months he has been living at that address.

 

They apparently made it sound very serious, throwing words like 'fraud evasion' round and also suggesting they may have to go through CCTV to get records of him not paying.

 

I know it's taken on a case by case basis, but has anyone had any experience of anything like this? He technically is guilty I guess, but being young (22), ignorant, and with a career ahead of him, is there no way of avoiding a criminal record? The most we could find online was 'penalty fair of up to £1000 and criminal record'- I'm fairly sure he'd gladly take out a loan to avoid criminal record because it would destroy his career.

 

How bleak is this situation for him?

 

(Please don't just reply saying he was an ignorant idiot because even though Ive now told him that, he could be in real trouble here and is freaking out a little! Many thanks

Edited October 31, 2012 by timjones3185

[honeybee13]

Hello and welcome to CAG. I'm afraid the rail guys don't seem to be around at the moment, but they should be along later. I'll try to start this off if I can.

 

I won't say your friend's an idiot, but it doesn't look great, does it? It's a lot of money and having seen a TV program about the Oyster technology, it does seem pretty clever. The information about travel zones is freely available and I understand zones are still posted up in stations, so it's hard to see how this eluded him. Is there are reason that you're aware of please?

 

Was your friend travelling from zone 6 into zone 1 please? I think it might be better not to mention station names at this stage.

 

Hopefully someone with a fuller understanding of Oyster card intrinsics will be along to help and advise later on.

 

I have one other comment, if I may. You're new here and we're hearing this story second hand, which makes things harder for us. Is it possible that your friend could sign up to CAG and tell us his story direct?

 

My best, HB

[honeybee13]

Sorry, just to add. The penalties you've read about are the maximum which would be levied. For a first offence, often it's less.

 

Also, we'll be limited in what we can advise until the letter arrives from SWT and we know what the charge is.

 

HB

[timjones3185]

Thanks honeybee- my friend is sat next to me, he doesnt want to post directly because he's a little paranoid about information online being seen and somehow used against him (rare, but has happened!)

 

Whilst it is quite a lot of money, as I mentioned he would rather pay the full penalty (which seems to be £1000 on TFLs website) than face a criminal record because that could really screen him up at a bad time in life.

 

He's also a bit worried about prison, that's not a common ending for fare evasion first offences is it?

 

He's also just told me he only actually admitted he's been doing it for a month, again due to pressure and him at first thinking it wasn't a big deal (he didn't realise he'd done anything wrong!)

 

He's never lived or worked in London before so he isn't that familiar wit the oyster system's intricacies. Also from my personal experience the only signs which are prevalent are the yellow signs regarding a £50(?) penalty fair for not showing a valid card- which seems a little less serious than what happened to him.

 

It may also be worth mentioning at this point that he was actually called up on a southwest train going in to London, rather than on a London underground train, so we're not sure if the prosecution system will be the same as with TFL?

 

His point of defence (again, he's less than observant about things like this) is that he is able to swipe in and out fine, so he was uncertain as to why it didn't just stop him at the gates.

 

In answer to your question he was travelling from 1 stop outside zone 6, so technically not even in the zones, but again this didnt occur to him.

 

Many thanks again

[honeybee13]

It may also be worth mentioning at this point that he was actually called up on a southwest train going in to London, rather than on a London underground train, so we're not sure if the prosecution system will be the same as with TFL?

 

You're right, I did know that as per your title, and thought TfL because they had Oyster cards first, from memory. The guys will know if SWT might be slightly less hardline than TfL.

 

I don't think prison is an option, even though I'm not an expert. I haven't heard of anyone from the forum that this happened to.

 

It might be worth bearing in mind the difference between a penalty and a fine. A penalty can be imposed by a rail company and would normally happen on the spot, as I understand it. A fine can only be imposed by a court once a case has been heard.

 

I think your friend is likely to struggle to explain why he bought a ticket and didn't read the terms and conditions. Even if they didn't come with the ticket [i don't know either way], I imagine they're published online.

 

I really hope the guys will be here soon because I'm reaching the extent of my knowledge.

 

I do know that they will say he needs to wait for the letter to arrive and see which offence they're talking about and then compose his letter, which the guys should be able to give some pointers on.

 

HB

[timjones3185]

Thanks again HB,

My friend is mostly concerned with the amount of time it's been happening for. He only told them about doing it for a month under pressure, but if the letter asks him to go in for further questioning and asks how long he has been at his address, its been 8 months at that address, so presumably they will assume he's been doing it for that long? And there are also records of him buying only zones 1 and 2 tickets for that long (we had a look on oyster online)- even through journey records are only kept for 8 weeks.

It certainly seems like he could be in more trouble than a lot of the other posters here- if he replied to the letter when it came through from the prosecutions dept, do you think it would be a good idea to respond suggesting an amount to try and settle it early? (ie without it going to court). For a lot of the cases here it seems people think about £200 may be enough, if he were to offer £700 (to cover the amount avoided unintentionally), and maybe even send a cheque with the reply letter, do you think that would help at all?

I think he's mostly concerned with going to jail as it's been such a long time, we are assuming ignorance wont go down well in this case and will be assumed to be lies as there is no proof of ignorance.

[Bandit127]

How long has he had the Oyster Card for? That unique card ID will have a full history of swipes at that station. Difficult to maintain that he has been doing this for a month when they might have a history for far more than that...

 

My experience of magistrates courts is that ignorance of the law is no defence. I don't think your friend will get any allowance for not knowing the system.

[timjones3185]

Hi Bandit,

 

We did a bit of research and apparently after 8 weeks the swipe data become anonymous and not attached to a card?

If ignorance of law is no defence (which we understand now, having read a lot of forums) how bad do you think it looks? Sorry, as you can imagine I'm dealing with a pretty stressed guy here, and it doesnt help we apparently may not hear from them for up to 2 months!

 

Thanks again.

[Bandit127]

You really need the advice of people like HoneyBee13, Firstcalssx and Old-CodJA here.

 

I also think you need to wait until you get the letter. Their advice will determine the best repsonse, based on what you have been accused of. And they won't know what that is until the letter arrives.

 

Also - your first post states that your friend travels from 1 stop OUTSIDE zone 6. I think you need to recalculate based on what a daily return ticket would cost, for the times he actually travelled for the full 8 months, from the station he travels from to the station he alights from, based on SWT prices (since it was them that picked him up).

 

You could recalculate that for the 8 weeks you think the Oyster data is held for.

 

And then take him down the pub (or coffee shop) to try to take his mind off it. There are no quick solutions here.

[Old-CodJA]

I also think you need to wait until you get the letter. Their advice will determine the best repsonse, based on what you have been accused of. And they won't know what that is until the letter arrives.

 

There are no quick solutions here.

 

 

Absolutely spot-on Bandit.

 

There is absolutely no point in offering advice on how to avoid 'ifs, buts and maybes'

 

This is a serious matter. In the main it is quite easy to build a case for persistent fare evasion when there is a documented record such as that allowed by Oyster monitoring.

 

Once you receive the letter from the TOC come back and tell us exactly what they are alleging.

 

Then you will have the correct case reference allocated to your incident and we will be able to offer suggestions based on the allegation that the TOC are making rather than guesswork.

[firstclassx]

Is this still called "donut" ticketing down in London?

 

Regarding the history, I suspect the customer may only be able to see 8 weeks, but it is quite possible the "back-end" computer/servers retain a lot more detailed information, particularly in light of this terrorism culture.

[Old-CodJA]

Is this still called "donut" ticketing down in London?

 

 

 

'Dumbell' is more commonly used by the 'old-hands', although 'Donut' is sometimes used too

[music79]

Can I ask what happened to your friend?