Received a Pre-court Action but would like to contest it

[gray1404]

This is interesting. I am expecting that if he had a ticket machine then I would epect he was a guard who was revenue trained.

If he also says he was a police officer then I wondering if he was a SPC. A special. If so, I am not sure how suitable it is that he acts in both roles at the same time i.e. guard one moment but trys to pull rank of policeman as it suits him a moment later. I wonder what the view of his company would be on this matter too? If he is acting as a police officer then his actions should be in line with the Police and Crimial Evidence Act.

If he is not in his police uniform then he must show his ID card on demand too. I do not believe a thing with a metal bade in the middle is such a document.

And you say it was him who called you on your phone? It was the same man?

 

[Miafey]

This is interesting. I am expecting that if he had a ticket machine then I would epect he was a guard who was revenue trained.

If he also says he was a police officer then I wondering if he was a SPC. A special. If so, I am not sure how suitable it is that he acts in both roles at the same time i.e. guard one moment but trys to pull rank of policeman as it suits him a moment later. I wonder what the view of his company would be on this matter too? If he is acting as a police officer then his actions should be in line with the Police and Crimial Evidence Act.

If he is not in his police uniform then he must show his ID card on demand too. I do not believe a thing with a metal bade in the middle is such a document.

And you say it was him who called you on your phone? It was the same man?

Yes he called me on my phone, from a mobile number. I still have my phone record showing this. It was the same man, he instroduced himself as the man who spoke to me on the train, and I also recognized his voice.

 

[gray1404]

Yes he called me on my phone, from a mobile number. I still have my phone record showing this. It was the same man, he instroduced himself as the man who spoke to me on the train, and I also recognized his voice.

This really doesn't sound right. This is the first I've ever heard of a TOC having the same person who encountered the passenger also do follow up.

 

[455driver]

A lot about this isn't right, can you post a picture of the letter you have received, delete or cover all personal information though.
Or post the address here you are supposed to respond to, it might not be the TOC or a revenue protection address.

 

[Miafey]

You will be told, and your time to put your side of the story (if you wish) is now before you, not then.

Thanks for your post - points taken and I apologize if I have been over sensitive and over-reacted.

With regards to your comments above, you said my time to put my side of the story is now before me. But this is where I get confused. This letter does not say that I have the opportunity to send in any statements or comments. As many others have suggested, the best way forward is to settle this matter with them first. It seems to me that it could not be called as a time to put my side of the story as it does not sound like whatever I say may make any difference at all. In a trial the judge or jury will listen to both parties before a decision is made. In this incidence he may be fully entitled to do whatever he liked and to report whatever he witnessed/concluded. But I was hoping that someone, either from the train company or from police but an independent third party, would contact me for a statement from my side. The result might well be the same but at least I would feel that I were given a chance to make my case. They have suggested on the letter that the situation has been reviewed. If only one side is listened to, what is the mechanism there to make sure that the system is not abused? I'm not saying that he is abusing the system in this case, but I'm wondering whether there is a system available to protect us. Like you said when a police officer talks to you at no point is that any kind of conversation of equals. So what is out there to ensure that we are not mistreated? The officer took my ticket away on that day and I would have no evidence if he had accused me of something I've never done? Again I'm not saying he is, but as I'm on this topic I'd like to make sure that I understand my rights and obligations.

Thanks

 

[gray1404]

A lot about this isn't right, can you post a picture of the letter you have received, delete or cover all personal information though.
Or post the address here you are supposed to respond to, it might not be the TOC or a revenue protection address.

Yes, please do what 455driver is suggesting. I think we need to check this is all above board as I too agreee a lot about this doesn't sound right.

 

[Miafey]

A lot about this isn't right, can you post a picture of the letter you have received, delete or cover all personal information though.
Or post the address here you are supposed to respond to, it might not be the TOC or a revenue protection address.

Sure. The letter is from Great Western Railway, Prosecutions Unit. And i've uploaded a picture of the letter.

 

[Miafey]

This really doesn't sound right. This is the first I've ever heard of a TOC having the same person who encountered the passenger also do follow up.

He gave me a caution when he got off the train with me when the train stopped at Keynsham. I have assumed therefore he is a police officer? I can't remember his exact words but I definately heard "caution".

 

[gray1404]

What is the address and phone number at the top of the letter?

Having looked at the letter, they are treating Oldfield Park to Keynsham as the journey under dispute. Not the OPs entire jourrney from Bath Spa. Given that we have established that it would not be possible for them to buy a ticket at that time of day at Oldfield Park then how can this letter make any sense.

If they were taking the view that the OP had traveled without a vaild ticket from Bath Spa, i.e. he should have brought the additional required ticket at Bath before he got on the train, then would the letter have to say Bath Spa to Keynsham rather then Oldfield Park to Keynsham in order for this notice of intent of pre court action to be served correctly?

 

[455driver]

What is the return address please.

I am not familiar with that phone number, is anyone else?

 

[Miafey]

The return address is:
First Great Western
Revenue Protection
RP004 Platform 9
Reading Station

The address at the top right corner of the letter:
Great Western Railway
Prosecutions Unit
1st Floor, Brunel Arcade
Reading Station
RG1 1LZ
Tel: 01189579073

 

[455driver]

I thought GWR prosecutions was based in Plymouth?

 

[DaveNewcastle]

It is difficult to separate the issues which arise from a sense of indignation and resentment, from the facts of ticketless travel.

In respect of the ticketless travel, then the 'independant third party' you refer to who might be able to consider both sides of a story is, of course, a Court of Law. It is a Criminal Offence, and that is the place where a Defence against a Crime is presented. But I haven't seen much evidence of any defence on here.

But the pragmatic Prosecutor will recognise that if there is an arguable and persuasive defence presented then they would not continue with the prosecution. It doesn't matter that you have not been invited to reply to the Investigations team - if you think you do have evidence of a persuasive defence, then let them see it sooner rather than later. If you have a letter, then you can reply to it.
But your friend's phone message story isn't that Defence.

I can't help you with the sense of indignation and resentment you feel.

 

[bb21]

Given that we have established that it would not be possible for them to buy a ticket at that time of day at Oldfield Park

I think we are still trying to find out.

 

[gray1404]

I think we are still trying to find out.

http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations/OLF/details.aspx

Ticket Office
Yes
Opening hours
Monday - Friday 06:30 - 10:30
Saturday - Sunday Closed

Ticket machines
No
Collection of pre-purchased tickets
Not possible from this station

I am assuming the OP was at the station either a weekend or after 10.30am on a weekday?

 

[Miafey]

Thanks everyone. I've read all replies and, whilst some are harsh, all are useful and informative. They help me to view this matter from a different angle.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations/OLF/details.aspx

Ticket Office
Yes
Opening hours
Monday - Friday 06:30 - 10:30
Saturday - Sunday Closed

Ticket machines
No
Collection of pre-purchased tickets
Not possible from this station

I am assuming the OP was at the station either a weekend or after 10.30am on a weekday?

It was around 6pm on a Tuesday.

 

[talltim]

Slightly OT
Even if a ticket machine has been fitted recently, if NRE says that there aren't any would you be justified in not looking for them (having looked it up beforehand).

 

[bb21]

http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations/OLF/details.aspx

Ticket Office
Yes
Opening hours
Monday - Friday 06:30 - 10:30
Saturday - Sunday Closed

Ticket machines
No
Collection of pre-purchased tickets
Not possible from this station

I am assuming the OP was at the station either a weekend or after 10.30am on a weekday?

See Post 15 and subsequent discussion from mikeg.

Until this can be confirmed I cannot say for sure what the exact situation is at Oldfield Park. NRE are not unknown for containing mistakes.

 

[gray1404]

See Post 15 and subsequent discussion from mikeg.

Until this can be confirmed I cannot say for sure what the exact situation is at Oldfield Park. NRE are not unknown for containing mistakes.

ah ok, so we have now been able to establish that there is in fact a TVM at Oldfield Park and NRE is in fact incorrect.

 

[furlong]

In terms of responding to the letter, one option you have is to send two cheques. One cheque would be for the fare due. The other cheque would be for the contribution towards their costs and you could set out the reasons why you believe the company should return this to you uncashed or settle for a lower amount.

 

[bb21]

ah ok, so we have now been able to establish that there is in fact a TVM at Oldfield Park and NRE is in fact incorrect.

No, we have not been able to confirm either way.

 

[furlong]

First Great Western
Revenue Protection
RP004 Platform 9
Reading Station

That address might need to be updated

 

[gray1404]

In terms of responding to the letter, one option you have is to send two cheques. One cheque would be for the fare due. The other cheque would be for the contribution towards their costs and you could set out the reasons why you believe the company should return this to you uncashed or settle for a lower amount.

Have we been able to establish that the letter is legit?

Also, do more questions need to be asked about the person who approached the OP on the day? I mean, acting as a guard one moment and a police officer the next is strange to say the least!

 

[Bayum]

I'm quite surprised that no-one has suggested you ask your friend for a screenshot of the Whatsapp messages that were sent that day.

Unless there is a large amount of bad luck, and your friend has also had to reinstall Whatsapp then I'd suggest asking them.

 

[Miafey]

I'm quite surprised that no-one has suggested you ask your friend for a screenshot of the Whatsapp messages that were sent that day.

Unless there is a large amount of bad luck, and your friend has also had to reinstall Whatsapp then I'd suggest asking them.

I thought about it when I read post #2 and he may well have it.

But from what I gathered from above, it seems that it is irrelevant/useless anyway. The reason why I did not have a ticket was not important. The fact that I did not is.

 

[najaB]

But from what I gathered from above, it seems that it is irrelevant/useless anyway. The reason why I did not have a ticket was not important. The fact that I did not is.

Pretty much, yes. It could be useful if you were trying to achieve a settlement but since you've already been offered one you're correct that it isn't really relevant.

 

[John Palmer]

The National Rail website currently indicates that Oldfield Park has no ticket machine, but does have a ticket office. Opening hours for this are given as Mon-Fri 0630 to 1030. The ticket office is not currently marked on the NR station plan, but a Google search of images of the station reveals that it takes the form of the small kiosk adjacent to the entry ramp on the down platform. No sign saying that the kiosk was a ticket office was visible to me on the images I found, but since the OP arrived at the station at about 1803 on Wednesday 29 September (date of the alleged irregularity, according to the scanned letter from GWR prosecutions dept.) the kiosk would presumably have been closed.

Unless the NR information is incorrect then it was not feasible for the OP to purchase on Oldfield Park station a ticket to Keynsham at the time he decided to make that journey. In those circumstances I would have expected him to be allowed to purchase his ticket on board the train, and I am having difficulty in seeing what offence he can be said to have committed.

I should be interested to know whether, on 29 September, the GWR Gloucester-Weymouth service (dep. Filton 1723, arr. Keynsham 1755) was, in fact, running 20 minutes late. This information appears to be no longer available on the Real Time Trains website, but presumably can be requisitioned from Network Rail if it has relevant evidential value.

 

[Camden]

Thanks for your post - points taken and I apologize if I have been over sensitive and over-reacted.

With regards to your comments above, you said my time to put my side of the story is now before me. But this is where I get confused. This letter does not say that I have the opportunity to send in any statements or comments. As many others have suggested, the best way forward is to settle this matter with them first. It seems to me that it could not be called as a time to put my side of the story as it does not sound like whatever I say may make any difference at all. In a trial the judge or jury will listen to both parties before a decision is made. In this incidence he may be fully entitled to do whatever he liked and to report whatever he witnessed/concluded. But I was hoping that someone, either from the train company or from police but an independent third party, would contact me for a statement from my side. The result might well be the same but at least I would feel that I were given a chance to make my case. They have suggested on the letter that the situation has been reviewed. If only one side is listened to, what is the mechanism there to make sure that the system is not abused? I'm not saying that he is abusing the system in this case, but I'm wondering whether there is a system available to protect us. Like you said when a police officer talks to you at no point is that any kind of conversation of equals. So what is out there to ensure that we are not mistreated? The officer took my ticket away on that day and I would have no evidence if he had accused me of something I've never done? Again I'm not saying he is, but as I'm on this topic I'd like to make sure that I understand my rights and obligations.

Thanks

In terms of your "what if" of being accused of something you've never done, you would have your day in court where the opposing party would have to prove your guilt. This is also what I refer to when I say "your time to tell your side of the story (if you wish)".

Alternatively, the company has given you an opportunity to settle the matter now (which it doesn't have to). I assume they haven't asked for your side of the story because they obviously feel it's not relevant to their decisions. By all means there is nothing stopping you writing to them if you want to, this is the UK and you're a free citizen, but I doubt it will make any difference and you may miss your opportunity to close the matter cost effectively. They've already offered you a "cheap" settlement.

While there are things about revenue protection many of us would like to change, in terms of protections from wrong-doing etc generally, the UK has got along just fine like this for a very long time, with systems that are widely envied and which usually get the balance right. I think it's beyond this forum to teach you about your rights and obligations, but it's generally pretty simple stuff in day to day operation, pretty much the same as (or more liberal than) other European countries, and regarding the railways the conditions of carriage are publicly available if you really wanted to get that much into it. Most people, though, don't bother as it's generally just things they do as a matter of course.

 

[Tetchytyke]

But from what I gathered from above, it seems that it is irrelevant/useless anyway. The reason why I did not have a ticket was not important. The fact that I did not is.

That is strictly true, but if your plans changed once you were on board the train then that may be mitigation.

If your intended journey was Bath Spa to Keynsham the rules state you must buy the Oldfield Park to Keynsham ticket before boarding at Bath Spa, even if Oldfield Park has no ticketing facilities.

However if you can show your intended journey was Bath Spa to Oldfield Park, and that your plans changed once on board, then it is possible to present this as mitigation. If Oldfield Park had no ticketing facilities then it would not have been possible for you to rebook there once your plans had changed. If Oldfield Park did have ticketing facilities (and the existence, or otherwise, of the TVM doesn't count if it doesn't accept cash IMHO) then you should have rebooked there and the mitigation would have no effect.

I would recommend paying the amount and then attempting to negotiate should you be able to prove both that your plans changed and that Oldfield Park did not have ticketing facilities.

 

[CheesyChips]

I'm wondering if the train guard/RPI actually said the words "I'm NOT a police officer" rather than claiming to actually be one. Perhaps the OP as a non-native speaker heard the words "police officer" whilst a badge was produced and made a reasonable assumption. When I was given PACE training we were told that when cautioning people it's good practice to tell them explicity that you're not a police officer, especially when there could be ambiguity.