Help done something stupid on a train

Quentin

yorkie2 wrote: »

That's libel. Please remove your remark, and apologise, or I will consider what action to take.

Calm down dear.

He's entitled to ask a question and express his opinion in reply to a post without all that threatening talk!

yorkie2

ninja99boy wrote: »

Let me explain why I said that remark. Before I posted here I did my research on where would be the best place to post where people would listen to my side of the story and not just give me a lecture; MSE or Railuk or Cag. What put me off Railuk was the thread on megatrain tickets where everybody seemed to gang up on the person who started the thread and not listen to his side of the story.

That may be your perception but it is not the reality, IMO.

I do have concerns about that thread, though I disagree that "everybody" ganged up.

The OP did ask if it would be "a problem" and it would be irresponsible of us to say "No, there won't be, it's fine". The OP was not insulted, and accusations of acting "illegally" were dealt with and rebutted. An excellent legal interpretation and excellent advice was posted by one of our best advisers, and no-one was able to challenge this interpretation.

I gave accurate information regarding what the charge could be, and several people expressed concern that, while the terms may not allow the OP to do what he wanted to do, there was doubt over the terms and also doubt over the fairness of them, and doubt over whether it could be enforced.

While I admit not every post was of a standard I'd hope for on that thread, I feel that the OP was given good advice by several members, and their question was comprehensively answered by myself and other forum members.

On the other side of the coin, I had someone PM me telling me I was "a disgrace" and "shame on [me]" for allowing the OP to even ask the question! So, I can't win...

But your comments are noted and I will bear this perception in mind for future reference.

ninja99boy wrote: »

I didnt think i would be safe as a newbie on there. But your right I shouldn't have made such unfounded comment without evidence to which I apologise. But to be honest Ive got the info I need so wont be posting again.

That's absolutely fine, I accept your apology

Quentin wrote: »

Calm down dear.

I'm perfectly calm, thanks!

Quentin wrote: »

He's entitled to ask a question and express his opinion in reply to a post without all that threatening talk!

If I said you treated people in the manner described, I'm sure you'd have something to say about that. It was completely inaccurate and it was a statement of fact, rather than opinion. The OP has apologised and retracted the remark, so I consider the matter closed.

yorkie2

Happychappy wrote: »

...Wrong, all your were thinking about is getting away with it....

That is a possibility (perhaps even a strong one!), but you can't state this as 'fact', unless you are a mindreader. Also, it doesn't help the OP, and completely fails to answer the question.

To be fair though, we are not in possession of enough facts to assist the OP much. A judge may well have to make a decision regarding this case, if it goes to court. I'll let the judge deal with judging the OP.

ninja99boy wrote: »

...and would happily pay any fine due for my stupidity, and to avoid a criminal record....

What I will add is that, if found guilty, then you are highly likely to receive a fine, rather than a custodial sentence, if it's a first offence. But the criminal record would come with the fine.

You could, however, offer to settle out of court. If it's a first offence, then this has more chance of success. If it's a subsequent offence, then the chances of this being accepted are very unlikely.

As a rough guide, a sum of between £100 and £200 may suffice, but it does depend on the conversation that took place in the interview under caution.

If you admitted intent to avoid payment, or your replies suggested that the TOC has grounds to believe you intended to avoid payment, then that's an open-and-shut case, and a high chance of the TOC securing a conviction against you.

You may wish to seek legal advice...

Stigy

ninja99boy wrote: »

Hi All,

I recently did something really stupid, which I sincerely regret and was wondering if anyone had any advice for me.

I know it's no excuse but I'm on JSA and money is tight so without thinking I jumped on the train without paying, everything went ok until I was leaving the station then I was caught by a plain-clothes Revenue Protection Officer without a ticket. I panicked, worried stiff that I would end up in a police station that I gave a false name and address, he then questioned me under caution and said that I'd get a letter in due course.

I realise that I've been a complete idiot, and would happily pay any fine due for my stupidity, and to avoid a criminal record. However, I am not sure whether to contact the train company and explain everything or whether that would make things worse and it would be better to keep quiet and hope it all goes away...

I realise I've been stupid and don't deserve help, but if anyone has any suggestions.

Thanks,

I'll reply to your post directly, so as to eradicate the tripe that seems to have been posted with the exception of one or two posts.

Although in your last paragraph it suggests that the RPI didn't ascertain correct details for you, I'd like clarification on that. The bottom line is that fare evasion and breach of railway Byelaws are criminal offences and as such are heard at Magistrates' Courts. If the RPI didn't ascertain your correct details, chances are you'll be okay. However, if for whatever reason the truth comes out, you'll be looking at two breaches of s.5.3 of the Regulation of Railways Act 1889 (a and c more than likely). These offences, if proved, carry a maximum fine of £1,000 and/or 3-months imprisonment. Realistically you'll be looking at a £350 fine, plus costs, plus the fare due, plus £15 surcharge. If as you say, you're on JSA, this will probably be much less (Court will give you a means form to fill out). Convictions of this offence are recordable on the Police National Computer.

I certainly wouldn't do ANYTHING until the Train Operating Company concerned contact you. You really don't want to tell them something that they otherwise wouldn't find out, surely? If you tell them that you gave them incorrect details, they'll more than likely look to prosecute you for that offence as well as the initial offence. I say wait and see what happens, it could take a few weeks, so be prepared for a long wait! Bear in mind also, that if they were initially looking to prosecute under the Railway Byelaws (18.1 more than likely) which are altogether less of a serious matter, if it comes to light that you gave incorrect details when requested, the TOC would have enough evidence to suggest that it was your intention to avoid any further contact with them, and as such, could easily go with the more serious offence I mentioned earlier.

yorkie2

lalaland11 wrote: »

get over it an move on im sure your not the first person to avoid paying a train ticket

Not sure what you mean by that. He faces a possible criminal record, if traced and convicted.

lalaland11 wrote: »

infact me and sister almost got in trouble the other day, on the way we had a lovely bloke selling the tickets used a family railcard paid all was fine

What did you ask for, what were you sold, and how old are the kids?

lalaland11 wrote: »

on the way back how ever there was a new bloke who told us we didnt pay for the kids so we shouldnt have been able to use the railcard.

The minimum group size is 1 adult and 1 child, you can add more adults and/or more children up to a maximum of 4 adults and 4 children. But you must have at least 1 child (and, on a child ticket) in the group. The child(ren) can be of any age providing they were under 16 years old on the date the Railcard was purchased.

lalaland11 wrote: »

after explaining that we told the bloke before there were 2 adults 2 children and he sold us the tickets he just stood there like he was expecting us to pay HE HAD NO CHANCE

If you refuse to pay the correct fare, you could be prosecuted.

lalaland11 wrote: »

my little lad doesnt feel guilty for jumping on the train without a ticket - he may just be one of the chav underclass :rotfl:

Is this the same incident, or a different incident? What happened?

I would advise this posted as a separate topic as it bears no relation to the OPs issue.

cyclonebri1

ninja99boy wrote: »

That's the funny thing, he seemed to do a check on his mobile then started to caution me. I know they can't trace me but was worried about if I use the train again he might recognise me? or is it the case that as he didn't do his job properly nothing won't be said?

.

:rotfl::rotfl:Or photographing you????, from now on :rotfl::rotfl:


Now appearing on Crimestoppers.




I'm not condoning or condeming your actions, we've all cocked up at some time, but what I find very strange is that after coolly giving false details and knowing you're in the clear, you feel the need to ask on here as if to guage the wind so to speak. Very strange indeed.

Send them the fair in a brown envelope if it will make you feel more "honest".

ninja99boy

yorkie2 wrote: »

You may wish to seek legal advice...

If I get a letter I will but chances are I wont get a letter as they dont know where to send it to. As to your other request about more info as this is a public forum I think it's better to keep other parties guessing. Dont want to give the hangman his rope

Stigy wrote: »

I'll reply to your post directly, so as to eradicate the tripe that seems to have been posted with the exception of one or two posts.

Although in your last paragraph it suggests that the RPI didn't ascertain correct details for you, I'd like clarification on that.

Thank you I feel honoured that you have take the time to wade through the tripe to help me direct. But your suggestion is correct.

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

Now appearing on Crimestoppers.

I hope not those back and white mug shoots dont do me any credit

Also I wasnt to sure on what the word 'condoning' meant so I looked it up on google and I'm a bit confused to what my granny, 2 nude men and an onion have to do with this thread?

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

but what I find very strange is that after coolly giving false details and knowing you're in the clear, you feel the need to ask on here as if to guage the wind so to speak. Very strange indeed.

After I had time to reflect on my crime I sudden realised 'on no what if I need to use the train again, could the train detective get me arrested for the for false details if he recognises me' hence the question.

cyclonebri1

ninja99boy wrote: »

If I get a letter I will but chances are I wont get a letter as they dont know where to send it to. As to your other request about more info as this is a public forum I think it's better to keep other parties guessing. Dont want to give the hangman his rope



Thank you I feel honoured that you have take the time to wade through the tripe to help me direct. But your suggestion is correct.



I hope not those back and white mug shoots dont do me any credit

Also I wasnt to sure on what the word 'condoning' meant so I looked it up on google and I'm a bit confused to what my granny, 2 nude men and an onion have to do with this thread?



After I had time to reflect on my crime I sudden realised 'on no what if I need to use the train again, could the train detective get me arrested for the for false details if he recognises me' hence the question.

I can't expand the word "condone" any further for you, as my signature explains, PS it has nothing to do with condoms, however one over you head may be needed in future, , ;)

wealdroam

Wig wrote: »

I didn't see what he wrote, so I don't know what all the fuss was about.

It's been quoted in post #31.

Wig

Ok, so the comment was against railUK forums not Yorkie, fair enough, but I don't see that any damage would have resulted from this one persons opinion of that forum.