No ticket - criminal record

Stigy

want2Bdebtfree wrote: »

I travelled without a ticket 25 yrs ago as a student. it was the first and only time I did it but was taken to court, admitted that I did not purchase a ticket was fined had my railcard taken away and have a criminal record for it. However, it has not prevented me from travelling abroad or getting a job or promotion. I do declare it on application forms, although I have not been to America. I was stupid and have had to pay the consequences. I still have not told my parents!!!

Indeed, these things rarely ruin lives, as many seem to think. A non-recorded conviction for a Byelaw breach won't be showing up on any CRBs or similar and a conviction for a Regulation of Railways Act 1889 breach, although recorded on the PNC and subsequently an enhanced CRB, they will usually be okay as long as there's not a string of them and as long as you declare them so as not to bring your integrity in to question!

Gordon_Hose

want2Bdebtfree wrote: »

I travelled without a ticket 25 yrs ago as a student. it was the first and only time I did it but was taken to court, admitted that I did not purchase a ticket was fined had my railcard taken away and have a criminal record for it. However, it has not prevented me from travelling abroad or getting a job or promotion. I do declare it on application forms, although I have not been to America. I was stupid and have had to pay the consequences. I still have not told my parents!!!

You still put a 25 year old conviction on application forms??

Why?

rdwarr

Gordon_Hose wrote: »

You still put a 25 year old conviction on application forms??

Why?

Exactly. Under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act the conviction is defined as "spent" after five years and need not be mentioned after that period.

So want2Bdebtfree has not had a criminal record for the past 20 years as much as they seem to cling on to the idea.

Gordon_Hose

Bad boys, chicks dig them!

timbo58

Very odd IME that a TOC would go straight to report for prosecution without some sort of strong reason why.

Firstly, although I am very familiar with TOC revenue protection after having been a middle manager in this for some years until 4 years ago, this does not mean I am an expert with this particular TOCs system, so please bear that in mind, I am trying to help and know more about what happens than most I suspect.

So, IMHO either this is just some sort of weird anomaly and a complete waste of time that will be dismissed in court OR

the OPs sister has some previous reports of fare evasion or penalty fares or she was in the ticket examiner/RPIs opinion attempting to avoid the fare in some other manner (i.e. hiding in the loo, pretending to have a ticket then admitting she didn't have the means to pay etc).

Frankly a TOC will normally only send it all the way to court if:
a) They are pretty sure of the facts and sure they'll get a conviction.
b) The original report was made properly by the member of staff and the prosecutions manager agrees with the report and it's suitability for prosecution.

The situation for a member of staff dealing with a 'no ticket scenario' tends to be:
a) No ticket & no opportunity to get one before travel: sell them a ticket with all normal discounts railcards accepted etc as long as they have a means of payment.

b) No ticket and opportunity to get one (no time/ ticket office busy not normally an acceptable reason for excuse) before travel: full single fare becomes payable or penalty fare if in a penalty fare area.

Outside of that, then pretty much everything else depends on whether the staff member believes there has been any intent to avoid the fare, this is the key here: the TOCs staff must believe strongly that they can prove intent to the magistrates satisfaction.

The prosecutions manager will be in court regularly and will know what level of evidence the magistrates will accept and if this matter has already reached the stage of a court summons, believe you me, no TOC will just go on the whim of ticketing staff: the prosecutions manager will be VERY sure of the facts before taking the matter all the way to court.

Consumer action Group is the place for proper unbiased advice: look under the public transport section and try to get advice from 'oldCodja' as his expertise in knowing the system and the likely outcome is legendary with good reason.

Stigy

rdwarr wrote: »

Exactly. Under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act the conviction is defined as "spent" after five years and need not be mentioned after that period.

So want2Bdebtfree has not had a criminal record for the past 20 years as much as they seem to cling on to the idea.

Some jobs are exempt from this act, such as that of a Police Officer. It's clear upon application what's a bar to appointment etc.

Stigy

timbo58 wrote: »

Outside of that, then pretty much everything else depends on whether the staff member believes there has been any intent to avoid the fare, this is the key here: the TOCs staff must believe strongly that they can prove intent to the magistrates satisfaction.

The prosecutions manager will be in court regularly and will know what level of evidence the magistrates will accept and if this matter has already reached the stage of a court summons, believe you me, no TOC will just go on the whim of ticketing staff: the prosecutions manager will be VERY sure of the facts before taking the matter all the way to court.

Consumer action Group is the place for proper unbiased advice: look under the public transport section and try to get advice from 'oldCodja' as his expertise in knowing the system and the likely outcome is legendary with good reason.

It's true that a lot of TOCs will not go to court for a first offence etc, and prefer settlements and PFs etc, but to say staff must believe intent can be proved is incorrect for Byelaw offence and only relevant to a Regulation of Railways Act offence. Byelaws are Strict Liability offences and as such the burden of proof needed by the TOC only stretches to them being able to prove the defendent didn't have a ticket, as long as there were facilities available to buy one.

mgdavid

cheesypop wrote: »

Hi everyone,

I wondered if someone could give me some advice.

My sister got caught on the train without a valid ticket and instead of giving her a fine they are taking her to a magistrates court. Does this mean if she is found guilty she will get a criminal record, and will this impact her life significantly (employment, travel, credit etc)?

She didnt have a ticket, for the reason below:

She was going to a really really important meeting but failed to leave early enough

fixed that for you

geordie_taxi

The quicker the protection of freedoms act 2012 comes into force the better. then minor offences ie fare dodging won't have any place on a CRB checks

Regulation of Railways Act is a draconian law from the Victorian times and gives unfair powers to train companies. who only use it to force unfortunate passengers to settle out of court to increase their profits

spikejrt

If you want very good advice, from people who know exactly what and what not to say, then go to this forum and post a query -

http://www.railforums.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?f=152

Incidentally, you can't get on a bus without first paying for it, so why should the railways be any different?