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

On Wed, 5 May 2004 at 16:01:52, Ian Jelf
wrote:

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.

Years ago (about 1972, I think), when they first abolished the
"tricoteuses" on the Paris Metro - the people, usually women, who would
clip a hole in your tickets as you passed through - they replaced them
with a system whereby you introduced your ticket into an automatic
machine which just printed a stamp on it, and then the gates would open
to let you through.

Within six months, they were replacing it by the magnetic-strip system
familiar to us today! They hadn't realised, unlike the punters, that
you could use the same ticket over and over and over and over
again.......
--
Annabel Smyth
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/index.html
Website updated 8 March 2004

On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 19:32:17 +0000 (UTC), "evan"
wrote:

Sorry if this is an FAQ.

My partner has just been summonsed for fare evasion, for an incident in
November last year. She was worried about something important, got on an
R-route bus near Cannon St through the middle door & forgot to get her
pre-pay ticket (one of the hexagonal ones) validated by the driver. She was
asked for her ticket, realised that she'd forgotten, apologised, showed the
inspector her pre-pay voucher & offered to pay a penalty fare. He was
perfectly polite but wouldn't take this, & took her name & address.

[snip]

on the basis of what you have written the decision does seem to be a
little over the top to me. As others have suggested the non issuing of
the Penalty Fare seems odd - there must have been something your partner
said in response to the inspector's questions that made him conclude
that there was an intent to defraud London Buses. They do have
discretion as to what they do and their questioning technique is
designed to flush out the facts and intent behind the action. I should
point out that people carrying a £10 note or book of tickets "just in
case" can be seen as a sign of having "a back up" in your pocket in case
you are intercepted even though you are a determined and regular fare
evader (note that I am not casting aspersions here).

I assume you mean she was on a Red Arrow route - the 521? Did the
driver actually open the front doors? Many of them don't in order to
force people to use the other doors. Given the route can get
extraordinarily packed it can become impossible to offer a ticket to the
driver as you physically cannot get to the front. Your partner should
try to remember the journey in detail.

I understand that a conviction for fare evasion will result in a
criminal record because of the way the legislation works with regard to
public transport. Again as others have suggested you should enlist the
services of a solicitor.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 19:32:17 +0000 (UTC), "evan"
wrote:

Sorry if this is an FAQ.

My partner has just been summonsed for fare evasion, for an incident in
November last year. She was worried about something important, got on an
R-route bus near Cannon St through the middle door & forgot to get her
pre-pay ticket (one of the hexagonal ones) validated by the driver. She
was
asked for her ticket, realised that she'd forgotten, apologised, showed
the
inspector her pre-pay voucher & offered to pay a penalty fare. He was
perfectly polite but wouldn't take this, & took her name & address.

[snip]

on the basis of what you have written the decision does seem to be a
little over the top to me. As others have suggested the non issuing of
the Penalty Fare seems odd - there must have been something your partner
said in response to the inspector's questions that made him conclude
that there was an intent to defraud London Buses. They do have
discretion as to what they do and their questioning technique is
designed to flush out the facts and intent behind the action. I should
point out that people carrying a £10 note or book of tickets "just in
case" can be seen as a sign of having "a back up" in your pocket in case
you are intercepted even though you are a determined and regular fare
evader (note that I am not casting aspersions here).

I assume you mean she was on a Red Arrow route - the 521? Did the
driver actually open the front doors? Many of them don't in order to
force people to use the other doors. Given the route can get
extraordinarily packed it can become impossible to offer a ticket to the
driver as you physically cannot get to the front. Your partner should
try to remember the journey in detail.

I understand that a conviction for fare evasion will result in a
criminal record because of the way the legislation works with regard to
public transport. Again as others have suggested you should enlist the
services of a solicitor.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!


That's helpful, thanks - especially the issue of intent. We're going to see
a solicitor, specifically because we need to find out how strongly the case
agaist her has to prove "intent" - as far as I understand it's a valid issue
in some areas of the law, but not in others. And also whether the refusal to
accept her offer to pay a penalty affects things.

She didn't notice if the driver opened the front doors or not - she got on
at the middle because she was worried & upset about a meeting at which she
expected to be made redundant, & simply wasn't paying enough attention at
the time. If she'd got on at the front as normal then she'd have got her
voucher torn & been issued with a ticket.

My feeling is still that this is over the top - I think you may be right
about that particular route, which was indeed the 521.

--
Evan

remove certain words in address to email