LONDON—For
5 years he regularly commuted for an hour and 22 minutes from the English
countryside to the city of London finance district. His journey started in
Stonegate—a rural station with no ticket barriers. He boarded the train without
a ticket, then used an Oyster card to exit the station in London, paying
£7.20—the maximum fare assessed for an intra-London journey. The fare from
Stonegate was £21.50.
Last November, a ticket inspector in one of London’s main rail stations spotted him passing through a gate having paid a questionable fare. He admitted to evading his rail fare on a number of occasions and to knowing he was breaking the law
Southeastern trains, the company that carried him to and from work, offered an out-of-court settlement—of £43,000. He chose to pay the settlement fee because he wanted to protect his identity and to avoid a trial.
The tale of the unidentified fare-dodger made especially good reading for the hundreds of thousands of commuters who travel each day to the City of London. “Who is Stonegate’s great train robber?” newspapers asked.
It took just a few months for Britain’s tabloids to get their man: Mr. Jonathan Burrows, who held a senior position within the financial services industry and whose job reportedly brought him £1 million a year. A month later, Britain's financial regulator deemed Mr Burrows "not fit and proper" and banned him from the industry for life.
And so ended a 20-year career in finance.
“His conduct fell short of the standards we expect,” Tracey McDermott, the Financial Conduct Authority’s director of enforcement and financial crime, said in a statement. “Approved persons must act with honesty and integrity at all times and, where they do not, we will take action.”
The FCA has banned more than 250 people from finance for life since 2009, for actions such as concealing losses from investors and defrauding customers.
The decision to bar Mr. Burrows from the City of London for what he did on the train surprised Peter Hahn, a former Citigroup Inc. banker who lectures on finance at London’s Cass Business School.
“The lifetime ban decision raises questions about what parts of peoples’ lives outside of their professional activity should become relevant to their careers,” Mr. Hahn said in an interview. “This is an extreme case. However, if you asked me what fit and proper means I would say honesty, integrity and competence in business affairs and personal finances. I would never have dreamt they involved your train fare.”
In a statement issued through a public-relations company, Mr. Burrows said he respects the FCA’s decision but also regrets it, “coming as it did after a 20-year career in the City that was without blemish.”
He apologized and said, “I have always recognized that what I did was foolish.” He added: “I recognize that the FCA has on its plate more profound wrongdoing than mine in the financial services sector, and I am sorry that my case has taken up its time at this critical juncture for the future of the City and its reputation.”
In his statement, Mr. Burrows said he only dodged the fare on a “small number of occasions” and that the settlement was “for an amount significantly in excess of the value of fares not paid by me. Indeed the size of the settlement could be said to have led to a distorted perception of the scale of my wrongdoing. However, that does not change the fact that what I did was wrong, and I accept that.”
Southeastern’s penalty is high, but so are London rail tickets. The train company multiplied the cost of a standard day single fare by two, as Mr. Burrows would be traveling in and out of London each day. It multiplied that sum by five to get a week’s worth of journeys and then by 48—the average four-week holiday period being deducted from the full year. The calculation took into consideration that historical fares were lower due to inflation. (The train company didn’t base its calculation on the lower price of an annual pass.)
Section 17(1) of the U.K.’s Railway Byelaw states that “no person should enter a compulsory ticket area on the railway unless he has with him a valid ticket.” The Regulation of Railways Act 1889 makes traveling without payment an offense, and prosecutors can also bring charges under the Fraud Act 2006 for persistent, repeat offending.
Mr. Burrows is still able to use Southeastern trains. “Provided he buys his ticket, yes, he is,” said Michelle Ulyatt, a spokeswoman for the train operator.
Edited from The Wall Street Journal
