Court case for not swiping my oyster card on a London bus...please advise....should I attend court???

Question

I was on a london bus last August & although I had an oyster card on me I didn't swipe it in the machine.
my mind was on meeting my little girl to take her to the hospital as she wasn't well. anyhow a ticket inspecter got on & saw I hadn't swiped my card, he took it from me & I have now had a letter saying I must go to court. The letter says I can attend or not, the choice is mine. Will it go worse for me if I just fill out the papers & don't go or do you think I should go to court. I'm pleading guilty anyhow.
Has this happened to anyone else & if so what was the outcome?

London transport is asking for £95 towards costs, will I get fined on top of that? at the moment I'm unemployed & wondering how much they may fine me. I had money on my oyster card but the inspecter wouldn't allow me to swipe it when he got on the bus.
Please advise if you can, I can't get legal aid for this & can't afford a solicitor..

Why is it that when a question is asked certain people have to get all moralistic about it in their answers.....I'm pleading guilty & I'm quite prepared to face whatever...if you can't just answer the question with a normal answer then why answer at all?

Answer 1

I am not familiar with an oyster card or how it works, but I do know about summonses. You have obviously been sent a summons with a pre-determined court date. On the rear of the summons there will be a portion for you to fill out as to whether or not you will be pleading guilty. Also there is a space where you can add your 'mitigating circumstances'. There is no need for you to attend court or get legal representation. I would however fill out any mitigating circumstances, stating that your mind was on other things such as your little girl attending hospital. (Try to enclose proof of your attendance at the hospital.) Tell them that this has never happened before and that you will ensure that it will not happen again. Tell them that you are unemployed and that a fine will cause you a great deal of hardship. The £95 costs seems rather a lot of money, I would also ask if they could consider reducing this amount. The fact that you are pleading guilty, but with mitigating circumstances may help your case, but don't hold your breath. I have known of cases where magistrates' will waive the costs, but they are in the minority. You never know, they may take pity on you. If you feel that by attending the court and speaking to the magistrates' personally will help you, then do that, but the fact that you are pleading guilty by post, I think will make no difference.

Answer 2

As a previous answerer said, phone the number on the letter for answers to this and any other questions you have.

I'm glad you're pleading guilty - it is your responsibility and no-one elses, and too many people try to put the responsibility on someone else. Unfortunately when systems are in place to prevent fraudulent use of a service, those rules have to be enforced, otherwise they mean nothing at all.

If you don't go to court, I am sure it won't affect the outcome either way - and I'm sure the court will be lenient, unless of course you have previous convictions. Perhaps you would like to go along anyway, I know I'd like to be there for any case involving myself!

Answer 3

Generally, I would say everyone should attend court when they are given a summons.
By not attending, the court will find you guilty in your absence.
But if you are pleading guilty anyway, maybe you should save the cost of attending and plead by post.
I agree with others that maybe you should ring the number on the form and see what they say.
Also, get yourself to your nearest Citizens Advice Bureau to advise you.

PS: Congratulations to everyone who has never done anything wrong in their lives. I'm sure if the rest of us try hard enough, one day we'll all be perfect!

Answer 4

If you have been given the option of not attending, then I assume you are being asked to plead guilty by post? If you're going to plead guilty anyway then I would just do it by post and not attend.

However, if you wish to raise mitigation in person (rather than with your plea) then go to court for what good it will do (I'm not sure the little daughter story will wash with the magistrates).

You say you are unemployed and unless you are generally well-off, you should qualify for legal aid. That said, if you committed the offence then please save all us hard working tax payers some money by not pointlessly appointing an expensive solicitor at our expense, only to plead guilty. Trust me, he will cost far more to us than your measly fine will to you.

Answer 5

Administrator Johnson is obviously trying to drag his feet until the next administration. The interesting question is how CO2 will be regulated from now on. The possible next step would be to require a company to conduct a New Source Review (NSR) or Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) review whenever they modify their process to increase CO2 above a certain threshold. Currently, the other criteria pollutants have fairly small thresholds (e.g. sulfur dioxide has a 40 ton per year threshold). What threshold would we establish for CO2? 1000 tons per year? Remember, a coal power plant spews a million tons of CO2 per year. Any change at all would trigger a PSD or NSR review for CO2 (if the threshold is set at 1000 tons per year). If you set the threshold too high (say 100,000 tons per year of CO2), many smaller plants would never trigger NSR/PSD. Also, let's say an NSR or PSD analysis is done on CO2. So what? There aren't any options for add-on controls to facilities. The PSD/NSR analysis wouldn't reduce CO2 at all, if the regulations are implemented as they are currently written. By the way, industry hates PSD/NSR because it delays them from making changes to their plants. If an PSD/NSR permit is required at a very low CO2 threshold, it delays a project by more than a year before it can get started. If you add CO2 to the mix, it would create significant red tape that companies want to avoid. That being said, the EPA has to figure out something. This is why the Supreme Court ruling was such a big decision.

Answer 6

Ignore the 'get everything right' morans on here, they are saddled with less than half a brain.

Go to Court, explain to the Judge that it was human error, an oversight, your mind was on another thing, it happens, and you had, instantly, on realising your mistake, offered to pay and make good on your error.

Explain that you are unemployed, which the Judge will take into account. Be wise, be deferrential to the Judge, kind in words about your accusers, honest in your remarks and reasonalby well dresses and shaved.

They say these things do not matter before a Judge, but trust me, they do.

Good luck.

Answer 7

Yes you should attend court whether pleading or not the court have requested you and can give an arrest warrant for you to attend usually with two police men either side to help you get there. Also if you cannot afford a solicitor then you should be able to receive legal.

Answer 8

Your story is woeful..but how many times had you got away with not swiping your card? Time had caught up with you so I think you just have to take all this on the chin.
If you are pleading guilty, it won't matter if you don't go to court.

Answer 9

Serves you right for not swiping! Having your mind on others things is not an excuse - before the bendy buses came did you ever forget to show the driver your pass or to buy a ticket? No! So how come now you 'forget' to swipe your card, when it is so easy to get on the bus now without paying!!

Damn right the inspector didn't allow you to swipe your card after he got on!! That is the point you are supposed to swipe your card when YOU get on, not the inspector. What if the inspector did not get on the bus? You would have had a free ride!

With regards to answering your question why don't you just ring the phone number on the letter - I am sure they can answer your question for you!!

Answer 10

Transport for London have heard all the excuses and will accept none of them, sorry to say.

The only people who are probably not going to be fined for failing to swipe are school kids, who travel free and us pensioners with our Freedom Pass.