Request ID: FOI-1521-2223 Date published: 26 October 2022
You asked
1. The number of out-of-court settlements made by TFL in the last 5 years.
I AM ENQUIRING ABOUT SETTLEMENTS AFTER REPRESENTATIONS ARE MADE BY LAW FIRMS ON BEHALF OF INDIVIDUALS TO TFL RE FARE EVASION STRICT LIABILITY OFFENCES.
2. Re point 1. How many were made on medical grounds.
3. Re point 2 how many were professionals, specifically members of professions such as legal and accountancy.
THESE QUESTIONS RELATE TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC IN THE SAME SCENARIO ABOVE WHERE THERE HAS BEEN AN OUT-OF-COURT SETTLEMENT FOR FARE EVASION STRICT LIABILITY OFFENDING.
4. How many hearings in the last 2-5 years resulted in
A) criminal convictions or
B) no criminal convictions based on mitigating factors
THESE QUESTIONS ALL RELATE TO FARE EVASION STRICT LIABILITY OFFENDING
5. Re your diversity and anti discrimination policies, what training is provided to the prosecution department?
Please confirm whether you are asking what training is provided to the team that deals with fare evasion CORRECT.
6. Do you have any statistics on councils making representations?
6. Any information on council responses or lack of it generally would be inciteful.
I AM AWARE THAT TFL SENDS A 'HOT LIST' TO COUNCILS WITH INDIVIDUAL NAMES ON IT. MY QUESTION IS WHAT ARE THE INCIDENTS, IF ANY, OF SOME COUNCILS BECOMING INVOLVED IN PARTICULAR CASES OR MAKIING ANY COMMENTS OR REPRESENTATIONS ABOUT ANY CASES OR NAMES ON A HOT LIST.
DO YOU HAVE ANY CASES WHERE COUNCILS HAVE BECOME INVOLVED OR TRIED TO INFLUENCE TFL'S DECISIONMAKING
IT HAS BEEN STATED ON VARIOUS LAW FIRM WEBSITES THAT TFL HAS 'AN AGGRESSIVE PROSECUTION POLICY' FOR FARE EVASION. ACCORDINGLY, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO HAVE YOUR PROSECUTION STATISTICS, FOR SAY THE LAST 5 YEARS (AS THE PANDEMIC IMPACTED TRAVELLING AND NUMBERS SO THE FIGURES MIGHT BE DOWN).
HAVE THERE BEEN ANY APPEALS, IN SAY THE LAST 5 YEARS, WHEN REPRESENTATIONS WERE UNSUCCESSFUL, AND IF SO, HOW MANY APPEALS WERE SUCCESSFUL, I.E TEHRE WAS NO PROSECUTION.
WHAT IS THE INTERNAL PROCESS FOR CONSIDERING REPRESENTATIONS INCLUDING WHO REVIEWS THEM (NOT NAMES BUT JOB TITLES/POSITONS/ROLES), AND IN WHAT CAPACITY AND WHO HAS THE ULTIMATE DECISION? IS IT BY A COMMITTEE OR BOARD OR MADE BY A DEPARTMENT HEAD?
DOES THE TFL BOARD HAVE ANYTHINGTO DO WITH IT?
DOES IDAG (THE INDEPENDENT DISABILTY ADVISORY GROUP) FOR TFL HAVE ANY INVOLVEMENT? IF SO, HOW?
We answered
Our Ref: FOI-1521-2223
Thank you for your request received on 29 September 2022 asking for information about out-of-court settlements in relation to fare evasion cases.
Your request has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act and our information access policy. I can confirm we hold some of the information you require. You asked for:
1. The number of out-of-court settlements made by TFL in the last 5 years.
I am enquiring about settlements after representations are made by law firms on behalf of individuals to TfL RE fare evasion strict liability offences
TfL does not offer out of court settlement in criminal cases such as fare evasion, but cases may be reviewed on evidential or public interest grounds following representations on behalf of the defendant. In such situations, if considered appropriate depending on the facts of each case, the case will be discontinued in accordance with The Code for Crown Prosecutors.
2. Re point 1. How many were made on medical grounds.
Matters discontinued due to medical grounds are not referred to as out of court settlement. They are discontinued on public interest grounds.
3. Re point 2 how many were professionals, specifically members of professions such as legal and accountancy.
Please refer to our responses in questions one and two above.
These questions relate to members of the public in the same scenario above where there has been an out-of-court settlement for fare evasion strict liability offending.
4. How many hearings in the last 2-5 years resulted in a. criminal convictions or b. no criminal convictions based on mitigating factors
Year
Conviction
Year
Withdrawn
2018/19
29,663
2018/19
1,079
2019/20
22,540
2019/20
1,112
2020/21*
5,212
2020/21*
360
2021/22*
1,529
2021/22*
150
2022/23**
2,960
2022/23**
249
*Country in lockdown & partial lockdown **To October 2022
These questions all relate to fare evasion strict liability offending
5. Re your diversity and anti discrimination policies, what training is provided to the prosecution department?
TfL is aware of its duties and obligations under s.149 of the Equalities Act 2010 relating to prescribed persons with protected characteristics under the Act. [PLEASE STATE IF YOUR TEAM MEMBERS HAVE HAD EQUALTIES TRAINING].
The following training is provided to staff:
• Staff undertake internal training on discrimination, unconscious bias etc. • All prosecutors have must act in accordance with the TfL Revenue Enforcement and Prosecutions policy • All prosecutors give due regard to The Code for Crown Prosecutors
6. Do you have any statistics on councils making representations? 6. Any information on council responses or lack of it generally would be inciteful. • I am aware that TfL sends out a ‘Hot List’ to councils with individual names on it. My question is what are the incidents, if any, of some councils becoming involved in particular cases or making any comments or representations about any cases or names on a hot list. • Do you have any cases where councils have become involved or tried to influence TfL’s decision making?
London Councils and TfL have a Service Level Agreement (SLA) in place which allows the sharing of information between both parties if a freedom pass or any other form of concessionary travel has been misused. However, TfL does not hold information on the number of times London Councils may have been in contact. If a pass is within TfL’s possession the relevant council will be notified by the hot-listing procedure. Councils may also contact TfL requesting a withdrawn freedom pass that is in TfL’s possession. The sharing agreement allows reasons for the withdrawal of the freedom pass to be given, allowing the council to conduct their own internal investigations. Most withdrawn freedom passes are of a transferred nature which is not permitted. There are occasions where the pass has been found and handed to an inspector and efforts may be made to reunite the pass with the entitled owner. The council has no influence in TfL’s decision making processes but can inform it of any fraudulent activities.
• It has been stated on various law firm websites that TfL has ‘an aggressive prosecution policy’ for fare evasion. Accordingly, it would be helpful to have your prosecution statistics, for say the last 5 years (as the pandemic impacted travelling and numbers so the figures might be down).
Please see the response to question four above.
• Have there been any appeals, in say the last 5 years, when representations were unsuccessful, and if so, how many appeals were successful, i.e. there was no prosecution.
Each case is considered on its own merits and whether it meets the public and evidential tests. The figures supplied above indicate those cases that were withdrawn from prosecution due to not being in the public interest.
To provide the information you have requested would exceed the ‘appropriate limit’ of £450 set by the Freedom of Information (Appropriate Limit and Fees) Regulations 2004.
Under section 12 of the FOI Act, we are not obliged to comply with a request if we estimate that the cost of determining whether we hold the information, locating and retrieving it and extracting it from other information would exceed the appropriate limit. This is calculated at £25 per hour for every hour spent on the activities described.
We have estimated that it would cost over £450 to provide a response to your current request. This is because it is estimated that it would take in excess of 18 working hours to retrieve and compile the information you have requested. Our database cannot breakdown cases to show where an appeal has or has not been successful, so we would need to manually review each case.
• What is the internal process for considering representations including who reviews them (not names but job titles/positions/roles), and in what capacity and who has the ultimate decision? Is it by a committee or board or made by a department head?
All representations, mitigating circumstances are dealt with by our investigators/prosecutors in the first instance. Any subsequence appeals are considered by the Appeals & Prosecution Manager.
• Does the TfL Board have anything to do with it?
No, the TfL Board is not involved in fare evasion appeals.
• Does IDAG (The Independent Disability Advisory Group) for TfL have any involvement? If so, how?
No, IDAG does not have any involvement but TfL understands its responsibility under the Equalities Act 2010 in relation to protected groups.
If this is not the information you are looking for please feel free to contact me.
Please see the attached information sheet for details of your right to appeal.
Yours sincerely
Gemma Jacob Senior FOI Case Officer FOI Case Management Team General Counsel Transport for London
