Provisional Prosecution

[Lydygold]

Hi,

I am really sad and scared at the same time. On Monday 22 November, I got on the train from St Albans station. I usually use my bank card to tap in at stations. For some reason, my bank card was not working. However, I had my 18+ Oyster card with me with was not functional at that station. I only had limited cash with me, so I decided to buy a ticket to the Next stop which was Radlet, there I could use my 18+ Oyster card. Unfortunately for me, I got on the train to Brighton which didn't call at Radlet. The next station the train called was London St Pancrease which was a long distance from Radlet. I made the mistake of remaining on the train until London Bridge where I changed to a train going to Plumstead without buying an additional ticket. However, on arrival at Plumstead station, I met some officers of the southeastern service who demanded to see my ticket. I panicked knowing fully well I didn't have a valid ticket. I initial lied to the officer that I had gotten on the train from a different station. I later apologized and told him the whole truth and requested to pay the penalty charge but the officer refused and told me I was supposed to get a ticket before the trip and not after. He took my details, and this morning the 25th of November, I received a mail from southeastern saying the matter has been provisionally authorized for prosecution. However. The letter also reads that I respond by completing my details at the bottom of the Letter ( NI) and also stating any comments about the incident at the back of the letter.
I really don't know how to respond to the letter. I don't want to go to court, I am willing to pay the penalty charge as I know I have Done something wrong.
Please I need advice on how to proceed on the matter.
Thanks

 

[Haywain]

Your error was compounded by the fact that Oyster is not valid at Radlett either, so if you had boarded a train which stopped there you still would not have been able to touch in. However, that is just a side issue now and dealing with the situation you've got into is the thing to concentrate on. Unfortunately, this is going to cost you and will probably be a sum in the region of £100 to £150 to settle the matter. Here is the excellent advice that @Hadders gives:

You might want to include the following in your reply:

- That you are sorry for what has happened
- What you have learned from the incident
- That you are keen to settle the matter without the need for court action
- Offer to pay the outstanding fare and the train company's administrative costs in dealing with the matter

Make sure your reply is short and concise, don't give a sob story - they've heard it all before. Most train companies are usually prepared to offer an administrative settlement (commonly known as an out of court settlement) for people who engage with the process and who haven't come to their attention before. There is no guarantee of this and the train company would be well within their rights to prosecute you in the magistrates court.

If you are offered a settlement the amount varies depending on the train company and circumstances but tend to be a few hundred pounds plus the outstanding fare. An out of court settlement might appear to be a fine, but it isn't and you won't have a criminal record as a result of accepting one.

Feel free to post a copy of the letter when it arrives (with personal details removed) and I'm sure members on here will be happy to assist in proof reading your reply.

Edited to highlight incorrect information.

 

[Lydygold]

Your error was compounded by the fact that Oyster is not valid at Radlett either, so if you had boarded a train which stopped there you still would not have been able to touch in. However, that is just a side issue now and dealing with the situation you've got into is the thing to concentrate on. Unfortunately, this is going to cost you and will probably be a sum in the region of £100 to £150 to settle the matter. Here is the excellent advice that @Hadders gives:

Thank You very much for your response. I am a bit worried if I should fill in my National insurance number on the letter as requested by the train company

 

[WesternLancer]

Thank You very much for your response. I am a bit worried if I should fill in my National insurance number on the letter as requested by the train company

I believe you do not have to give them your NI number so you may wish to leave it blank. But they may i suppose draw certain conclusions from that that may not be of help. If you have given then your correct postal address and you make sure you do not ignore the letter - ie you reply ASAP then you could probably not worry about detailing the NI number.

Others can correct me if I am wrong but you are under no obligation to give details like date of birth, NI number etc. Some people might not even have an NI number so they are probably used to people replying and not giving it.

You have to balance this against the risk of them not permitting you to settle out of court, and taking you to court where given what you have said you will be found guilty however, so getting settlement would seem to be in your best interests.

I suppose they may ask for it as a safeguard against a fraudster who has been caught and given your name and address for a ticketing offence that you did not carry out.

 

[Jan Mayen]

This thread answered some questions about what you should give if asked by an RPI:

What personal information should you give if stop by a Ticket Inspector?

Following on from another thread concerning use of the electoral roll in identification, I was wondering what information you should give if a ticket Inspecter (or RPI, or whatever the correct title is for someone who is reporting you for prosecution or Penalty Fare) asks for. I can understand...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[MikeWh]

Your error was compounded by the fact that Oyster is not valid at Radlett either, so if you had boarded a train which stopped there you still would not have been able to touch in.

Oyster is valid at Radlett.

 

[Haywain]

Oyster is valid at Radlett.

Thought that was only contactless.

 

[ChewChewTrain]

Am I right in believing that Plumstead station has no barriers, and that the OP was therefore caught by a revenue block?

The OP was unlucky to encounter such a measure on the one occasion they made this unfortunate succession of decisions. Might CCTV be checked to verify that it wasn’t a regular occurrence?

 

[AlterEgo]

Am I right in believing that Plumstead station has no barriers, and that the OP was therefore caught by a revenue block?

The OP was unlucky to encounter such a measure on the one occasion they made this unfortunate succession of decisions. Might CCTV be checked to verify that it wasn’t a regular occurrence?

We have heard Plumstead is now the scene of regular blocks. Indeed, when I arrived back at Woolwich Arsenal, the next station along, only yesterday…there was a large revenue block there too. About time.

 

[island]

Am I right in believing that Plumstead station has no barriers, and that the OP was therefore caught by a revenue block?

The OP was unlucky to encounter such a measure on the one occasion they made this unfortunate succession of decisions. Might CCTV be checked to verify that it wasn’t a regular occurrence?

This subforum has quite an obsession with CCTV as well as an overly broad opinion of what its capabilities are.

 

[AlterEgo]

Hi,

I am really sad and scared at the same time. On Monday 22 November, I got on the train from St Albans station. I usually use my bank card to tap in at stations. For some reason, my bank card was not working. However, I had my 18+ Oyster card with me with was not functional at that station. I only had limited cash with me, so I decided to buy a ticket to the Next stop which was Radlet, there I could use my 18+ Oyster card. Unfortunately for me, I got on the train to Brighton which didn't call at Radlet. The next station the train called was London St Pancrease which was a long distance from Radlet. I made the mistake of remaining on the train until London Bridge where I changed to a train going to Plumstead without buying an additional ticket. However, on arrival at Plumstead station, I met some officers of the southeastern service who demanded to see my ticket. I panicked knowing fully well I didn't have a valid ticket. I initial lied to the officer that I had gotten on the train from a different station. I later apologized and told him the whole truth and requested to pay the penalty charge but the officer refused and told me I was supposed to get a ticket before the trip and not after. He took my details, and this morning the 25th of November, I received a mail from southeastern saying the matter has been provisionally authorized for prosecution. However. The letter also reads that I respond by completing my details at the bottom of the Letter ( NI) and also stating any comments about the incident at the back of the letter.
I really don't know how to respond to the letter. I don't want to go to court, I am willing to pay the penalty charge as I know I have Done something wrong.
Please I need advice on how to proceed on the matter.
Thanks

I advise you not to respond to the letter with the story above. Yours is a classic case of someone purchasing a ticket to get through a barrier and then making a long journey to a station without barriers, one of the most entry-level fare evasion ruses.

Instead, apologise for only purchasing a ticket to Radlett, and for being unable to show a valid ticket when asked to. You should offer to pay the fare due plus "any administrative costs you have incurred in dealing with the matter". If you purchased your Radlett ticket at a station then you have no cause for further worry, but bear in mind the investigator can try to access your online booking history to see whether this is a one-off offence or something you do habitually. If there are multiple instances then the chances of settlement decrease a bit and it will invariably cost you more if you do manage to settle.

 

[Horizon22]

Thought that was only contactless.

There's a section here called "Oyster PAYG to Radlett"

Also: https://www.londontravelwatch.org.u...where-can-i-use-my-pay-as-you-go-oyster-card/

You can use Oyster Pay As You Go in London on all suburban trains stopping in Zones 1 – 9 and journeys to:

• Broxbourne, Rye House, St. Margarets, Ware and Hertford East
• Gatwick Airport
• Merstham, Redhill, Earlswood, Salfords and Horley
• Ockendon, Chafford Hundred, Purfleet and Grays
• Epsom
• Cuffley, Bayford and Hertford North
• Radlett and Potters Bar

 

[Watershed]

There's a section here called "Oyster PAYG to Radlett"

Also: https://www.londontravelwatch.org.u...where-can-i-use-my-pay-as-you-go-oyster-card/

Oyster is definitely valid to Radlett. See the TfL Rail and Tube map:

 

[Haywain]

Oyster is definitely valid to Radlett. See the TfL Rail and Tube map:

View attachment 106127

I found a Thameslink map that appeared to show Elstree as the limit and trusted that!

 

[MikeWh]

I found a Thameslink map that appeared to show Elstree as the limit and trusted that!

That'll be a pre-2019 map.

 

[reb0118]

Whether Oyster is or is not valid at Radlett is moot. Only an Oyster card that has been correctly tapped in would be valid.

 

[Lydygold]

Good day all. I want to sincerely thank you all for your concern and kind advice. I responded to the letter on the 26th of November stating my own account of the incident and apologize for my offense. I also offered to pay the fare and administrative charges as adviced on this platform.
Today I got a letter for settlement out of court, however I am to pay an administrative charge of 250 pounds and a missed fare of 15 pounds. Making a total of 265 pounds. Although it's a huge amount for me, I am happy they agreed to settle out of court.
Thank you all for your advise.

 

[30907]

Thanks for letting us know.

 

[furlong]

If this is genuinely the only time you ever did this, don't be afraid to try to phone them and see if you can persuade them to reduce the settlement amount if you feel it's too much. Southeastern has been known to negotiate some of its larger initial offers lower.

 

[jumble]

If this is genuinely the only time you ever did this, don't be afraid to try to phone them and see if you can persuade them to reduce the settlement amount if you feel it's too much. Southeastern has been known to negotiate some of its larger initial offers lower.

Funnily enough I was thinking abiut this yesterday for some reason
It had often been stated as fact on here that TOCs /TIL will not negotiate on settlements and if one tries they will move straight to prosecution
I wonder
How does the person posting this know it to be correct ?
Has it occurred to the poster that any offer would likely be conditional to agreeing a NDA so we would never hear about it here?

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Funnily enough I was thinking abiut this yesterday for some reason
It had often been stated as fact on here that TOCs /TIL will not negotiate on settlements and if one tries they will move straight to prosecution
I wonder
How does the person posting this know it to be correct ?

I'm one of the people who has been saying this. And I think you've got a point. If the matter comes up in future I'll moderate my phrasing to something like 'As far as I can make out, the railway does not negotiate (etc)'

Has it occurred to the poster that any offer would likely be conditional to agreeing a NDA so we would never hear about it here?

Again, if I'm the poster in question, no it hasn't occurred to me - but given that initial offers of settlement don't involve non-disclosure agreements (or at least the ones that we see here don't do so) it's a bit of a leap to assume that a second offer will do so.

To some extent it rather comes down to why people generally go quiet after seeking our advice. I tend to assume that it's not because they're banned from talking to us but because from their point of view they've solved their problem so there's no point in carrying on with the conversation.

 

[jumble]

Thanks for your considered answer
I always like to use the phrase "My Understanding is"

I can see imagine a scenario where a TOC/TIL would be happy to bandy about a suggested high settlement figure publicly but be far less willing to tell the world about the acceptance of a lower figure.
( I have had complementary first class travel vouchers from a TOC which were for goodwill because their website crashed and I could not get very good first class advances in their sale but was begged not to tell anyone else which I honoured)

As you say however neither of us know and it could well be down to which side of bed the prosecutions office got out of bed that morning

 

[30907]

To some extent it rather comes down to why people generally go quiet after seeking our advice. I tend to assume that it's not because they're banned from talking to us but because from their point of view they've solved their problem so there's no point in carrying on with the conversation.

...or that the advice they've been given isn't what they wanted to hear? I tend to suspect that when the thread "goes quiet" very quickly - but I might be wrong, and in any case we are getting OT