View Single Post
  #29   Report Post  
Old May 7th 04, 10:34 AM posted to uk.transport.london
David Varnham David Varnham is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: May 2004
Posts: 2
Default fare evasion penalties

Then bring in higher penalties. I am sure it would recoup more money AND
provide a greater disincentive for those not simply being forgetful. Then
they pay rather than incurring the expense of prsecututing someone who
really shouldn't be before a court. I don't know how much a magistrates
court costs to mount but I would imagine that it is inefficient in terms of
net gain to LT.

And what deterrent effect can it have, it's not like it's a high profile
murder case. The person convicted will probably take the morning off work
and never mention it again. Granted, they will probably never do it again
but it will have xero affect on others...

David

--
============
David Varnham

Sponsor me running the Windsor Half Marathon in September he
http://www.justgiving.co.uk/varnham
All sponsorship money goes to Mind.
"SJCWHUK" wrote in message
news:cRAmc.4829$7S2.1456@newsfe1-win...
There are all types of evasion and without going right into this

particular
case there is a lot of evasion on the tubes and buses.

The current estimate (this is only what I heard) is around £45 million a
year.

Ascertaining the difference between a genuine mistake and deliberate
avoidance is tricky but that is why we have the protection of the
Magistrates Court who can make the ultimate decision. Many countries on

the
continent have a penalty system like parking fines or speed cameras. You
can end up with a spot fine of around £100.

Steve

"David Varnham" wrote in message
...
I think it is a terrible waste of time and money and serves no real

purpose.
People make mistakes, I have before and I think any londoner that uses
transport every single day will sympathise with this particular

traveller.
They will look back at the time they thought their tc was valid and it
wasn't. It happens to people every single day and it seems that the

only
difference between getting away with it and being prosecuted comes down

to
luck and the discretion of the revenue protection officer. Why

prosecute
people? I would have thought that the criminal justice system should

only
be
brought in where the person caught has be caught a number of times? If

LT
want to recoup money why not simply employ more revenue protection

officers,
I am sure they'll pay for themselves in the long run.


--
============
David Varnham

Sponsor me running the Windsor Half Marathon in September he
http://www.justgiving.co.uk/varnham
All sponsorship money goes to Mind.


"Ian Jelf" wrote in message
news
In message , Richard

J.
writes
I don't understand why this wasn't dealt with by imposing a £10

penalty

fare.
Yes I thought I was alone in this thread at being surprised that it
wasn't dealt with in this way. In fact I thought that imposing a £10
penalty was the automatic way to deal with such cases.

I can only assume that they've had a lot of fare evasion on that
route, and wanted a few prosecutions as a deterrent.
That makes sense, I suppose, especially since the "honesty" policy of
not checking every ticket/pass now being adopted is so "foreign" to

the
average UK passenger. Certainly up here on Midland Metro the fare
evasion before the introduction of conductors appeared to reach

dizzying
proportions, if the number of people caught when they *did* do check

was
anything to go by.
--
Ian Jelf, MITG, Birmingham, UK
Registered "Blue Badge" Tourist Guide for
London & the Heart of England
http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk