Court Proceddings for someone using my name in a pentalty fare

jonesMUFCforever

Jamie_98fernandes said:

.

Yeah there are people I have fallen out with, that have the information.

Interesting - can you think of anybody in particular or do a little detective work to see who the culprit is?
If you could single out  one person perhaps write back with a photo from say social media to see if it matches the picture of the one they have?

Hasbeen

Stigy said:

Hasbeen said:

The op mentioned "bodyworn cameras," that some train staff wear even though he has no knowledge of travelling on trains? I would think whoever impersonated the Op provided the ticket inspector with proof of ID, letter with address, Driving license. etc. If not then there is no proof!

Would not think that any "evidence" provided by cctv would be applicable but perhaps wrong?

The Op has provided proof that it was him, not travelling at that time/date. So he should be asking what proof they have that he is the one travelling?

Also Op as others have mentioned this impersonation is by someone who knows you.

Op perhaps better advice from railway "experts" would be available in this forum?

I would post there, but let us know eventual outcome. Good luck!

https://www.railforums.co.uk/forums/disputes-prosecutions.152/

He's already posted in that forum (I replied in both). I agree about the Bodycam part to an extent, however loads of TOCs use Body Worn Video now, so it's often an assumption to be honest. What I mentioned "over there" that I didn't here though, is; Even for someone to know you, requires the actual perpetrator to know the OP's name, (full) address and date of birth, and be able to relay this, in the heat of the moment, whilst off-guard. Most people wouldn't be able to give smaller details such as door number/post code and the OP's actual DoB, let alone get the details correct. This is all assuming that the RPI is professional/experienced enough to be able to pull someone up who is hesitant about 'their' details, rather than just assuming they're correct and indeed assuming the original penalty fare notice was completed in its entirety (sometimes DoB could be left off for example, as a passenger is not obliged to supply it in the same way they are their name and address).

Thank you. Did not know Op had also posted there. Have looked at the thread on the railforms site and a few of OP quotes, as below:

"Well I go to University in Colchester and there are people at the uni who will not pay for a ticket take train and give other peoples details."

"I believe that someone I used to know has my details, I did ask them but they dennied it and we are not really on speaking terms. He is someone who has done it before and at that time aswell. But I have no evidence to support that, unless GA could match the CCTV to my passport photo which would prove it was not me."

Op also appears to state that he is willing to pay the penalty rather than get record against him.

This would be a mistake, Op states that he was not the person travelling, so it would be up to the Train company to provide proof.

If someone the OP knew has impersonated him just my saying my name is "Micky mouse and my address is Disney land" then without any evidence, Driving license, letter with address, passport, any document that states name, address etc. Then when the PF arrives at Disney land should Mickey just pay it?

My not very expert view anyway, so sorry. Op has been given some good advice here and also on the Rail forum.

Op. Please get back with any outcome for others in any similar future posts.

Stigy

ThunderHoof said:

Prosecution have to prove beyond reasonable doubt, don't see how they are going to do that without any evidence

Ive re-read the original post and to be honest, we don’t actually know definitively what evidence they have against the OP to be honest. If they were shown ID when the notice was issued, it would naturally be easier for the TOC to prove beyond all reasonable doubt. Likewise if there was a description listed of the defendant which points out distinguishing features, this could easily prove that the OP is telling the truth (And if they’re not telling the truth, again, it could easily prove the TOC’s case.

martindow

Greater Anglia - it's not Kiko is it …?

vitaweat

jonesMUFCforever said:

Jamie_98fernandes said:

.

Yeah there are people I have fallen out with, that have the information.

Interesting - can you think of anybody in particular or do a little detective work to see who the culprit is?
If you could single out  one person perhaps write back with a photo from say social media to see if it matches the picture of the one they have?

It's not for the OP to show who the offender is, just to present enough evidence that there is reasonable doubt that they were the person fare avoiding.  I'd be very careful about slinging around accusations as slander and libel can be expensive to defend.

Johnersh

I would defend this.  The TOC should have cautioned the offender and obtained his photo ID to confirm identity.  If the revenue enforcement officer (ticket inspector) is unable to produce witness evidence to confirm that step was taken and details of any interview notes, then it seems that this could indeed be a case of submitting a claim to just about anybody. 

If they had none of that information, then that is their failure to take even basic steps to identify who they detained.  If the revenue protection officer going to be present at court to give oral evidence (and be cross examined) that it was actually you that he detained?  Did they record any interview or retain the train CCTV - this is all evidence that is in their control.  The court should be invited to draw an adverse inference and to strike out the prosecution in the event of failure to provide it.

You need to introduce only doubt that it was you.  There is no duty to show who it might have been or why.

FWIW my google location tracking does show time.  Go into the settings via google maps on a desktop, not your mobile.

Hasbeen

Yes!! Finally great advice from someone who knows about railway procedures, Laws and Bylaws etc. And revenue protection.

But the OP has not been back in the last 8 Days?? And perhaps is seeking more advice from the "experts" on the RailUK forum?  

Stigy

Hasbeen said:

Yes!! Finally great advice from someone who knows about railway procedures, Laws and Bylaws etc. And revenue protection.

But the OP has not been back in the last 8 Days?? And perhaps is seeking more advice from the "experts" on the RailUK forum?  

I did 13 odd years working in railway legislation, enforcement and prosecutions before becoming a trainee driver last year. I can also tell you that there’s no requirement to caution somebody. If this was a penalty fare matter originally, there would definitely be no requirement to caution because it’s a civil remedy at the time.

I do however agree that staff at the time should have made sure they had the right person to the best of their abilities. Unfortunately,  a lot of the time they don’t even request ID.