Caught by an Inspector - HELP/advice needed

Stigy

diable wrote: »

They can levy any fine now and she won't have a leg to stand on.

If you mean an out of court settlement, then the company has their set costs etc, although aren't obliged to settle the case out of court. At court the cost depends on the defendents means. I really don't see your point here. She has admitted to the offence, presumably under caution, what's there to dispute?

Livingthedream

taffy056 wrote: »

Its only a criminal offence if a court says it is, train companies don't have authority to issue one even if they say they do, really you should not have sent anything to them until they wrote to you, I would have thought that the person she spoke would have to issue some kind of paperwork to her for this, so if he didn't issue anything that could be used as a technical mistake ??

Hi taffy, totally agree with what you have said, however, I think the OP has sold herself down the river with everything she has done.

As to a paperwork technicality, once the RPI has correctly ascertained the passengers name and address by telephone, then no paperwork has to be issued as she will get an exact copy in the post with what the train company intends to do. If you give a false name/address you gets some paperwork then, down the Police station:eek:

So unfortunately this is a criminal case, but as the OP co-operated with the RPI and IRCAS, hopefully the Train company will offer an out of court deal (basically the Train company gets more money this way as well) only time will tell.

Stigy

taffy056 wrote: »

Its only a criminal offence if a court says it is, train companies don't have authority to issue one even if they say they do, really you should not have sent anything to them until they wrote to you, I would have thought that the person she spoke would have to issue some kind of paperwork to her for this, so if he didn't issue anything that could be used as a technical mistake ??

Erm, no, a criminal offence is a criminal offence, laid down by Government. The court just sanctions the relevent punishment when they find an offender guilty of an offence. A court can't dictate what's criminal and what's not, otherwise the justice system would be rife, surely?

CountryGoose

Stigy wrote: »

Erm, no, a criminal offence is a criminal offence, laid down by Government. The court just sanctions the relevent punishment when they find an offender guilty of an offence. A court can't dictate what's criminal and what's not, otherwise the justice system would be rife, surely?

Not exactly. If you commit an offence, it may be taken to court, or you may be offered a formal caution, a Penalty Notice (On the spot fine), or a conditional caution.

If it does go to court it is up to you: plead guilty and you are convicted and sentenced. Plead not guilty and have a trial - you may be found not guilty. If you are convicted, the court will sentence based on its guidleines.

And no, there is no way that you would go to Jail for fare dodging for a first offence. You would have to work really hard to get a custodial sentence.

Gavin83

She should never have admitted she does it on a regular basis, he'd have just issued a £25 fine if she'd said it was a one off.

Hammyman

taffy056 wrote: »

Its only a criminal offence if a court says it is, train companies don't have authority to issue one even if they say they do, really you should not have sent anything to them until they wrote to you, I would have thought that the person she spoke would have to issue some kind of paperwork to her for this, so if he didn't issue anything that could be used as a technical mistake ??

She has deliberately and fraudulently used an Oyster card in a zone it wasn't valid for for pretty much every journey she'd taken in Zone 3 and she knew she had been doing wrong. She has committed an offence under the Regulation of Railways Act 1889 as there has been deliberate intent to avoid payment so she is out of the scope of the penalty fare system under the Railways Act 1993 Section 130.

taffy056

Hammyman wrote: »

She has deliberately and fraudulently used an Oyster card in a zone it wasn't valid for for pretty much every journey she'd taken in Zone 3 and she knew she had been doing wrong. She has committed an offence under the Regulation of Railways Act 1889 as there has been deliberate intent to avoid payment so she is out of the scope of the penalty fare system under the Railways Act 1993 Section 130.

But its still not a criminal offence until a court says so, sorry but until she is convicted its an alleged offence, and as you don't know the intensions of the train company you cannot say its out of the scope of the fare system, really it depends what has been written to the train company in the letter.

taffy056

Stigy wrote: »

Erm, no, a criminal offence is a criminal offence, laid down by Government. The court just sanctions the relevent punishment when they find an offender guilty of an offence. A court can't dictate what's criminal and what's not, otherwise the justice system would be rife, surely?

How can it be criminal offence until you have been found guilty ? The court determines if an offence has been committed or not, so of course they determine what is criminal or not, once as its determined if said person is guilty then a punishment is given.

sassy_one

She will not go to prison, advise her of this.

She will NOT get any custody for the offence/issue you have explained!

Should you wish to confirm this, contact a criminal defence solicitor.


Hope she gets it sorted

spiro

taffy056 wrote: »

How can it be criminal offence until you have been found guilty ?

A criminal offence is something that is illegal, a criminal conviction is what you get when you have been found guilty of committing a criminal offence.