On 30 Oct, 14:38, wrote:
2. He decides to issue you with a penalty fare. *Once he has gone down
this route then you cannot be taken to court for fare evasion as this
would be considered double jepody

And if you refuse to pay? I was under the impression you'd be done for
evading the penalty fare.

U

On Thu, 30 Oct 2008 05:26:05 -0700 (PDT),
MIG wrote:

I can't remember any sob stories about people found guilty in court
though. *The press stories are usually about people being hassled for
extra money on trains. *It's demanding money on the spot rather than
prosecution that leads to press stories.

I'm talking about the "TfL wastes thousands prosecuting [photogenic
sympathetic white-collar worker] over a 90p bus fare" type stories.

(usually coupled with gripes about Oyster touching in, which I believe
is a cause you're sympathetic too)

I do have objections to Oyster, but they are only relevant if you
agree with me (which many don't) that Oyster unresolved journey fares
etc are penalty fares. I don't know if my objections to Oyster rules
have any bearing on potential prosecution cases.

My fear with Oyster is that it's almost impossible to work out why it
goes wrong when it does.

I've had three failures, one was definitely an oyster problem because it
let me through the barrier but didn't register the entry (I've also
witnessed this happen with someone else not registering an exit but
opening the barrier). One might have been my mistake, again an entry
didn't register, but I was using the manual barrier. One was because I
didn't understand how oyster worked - there were problems with the
manual barrier at Watford Junction so I'd been using the thing at the
bottom of platform 9 to touch in an out. When the manual barrier was
fixed I touched out at the bottom of platform 9 and then again (because
I was asked to) at the manual barrier which registered as an entry.

I've also had a huge number of missing entries on the online journey
history. The balance has ended up correct but entries or exits (or both)
are completely missing.

I have wondered about building a little device to interrogate the oyster
card so you can tell whether an entry or exit has actually been
registered on the card. But that's going to take a lot of round tuits
that I can't see me having in the forseeable future.

Tim.

--
God said, "div D = rho, div B = 0, curl E = - @B/@t, curl H = J + @D/@t,"
and there was light.

http://www.woodall.me.uk/

On Oct 30, 2:44*pm, Mr Thant
wrote:
On 30 Oct, 14:38, wrote:

2. He decides to issue you with a penalty fare. *Once he has gone down
this route then you cannot be taken to court for fare evasion as this
would be considered double jepody

And if you refuse to pay? I was under the impression you'd be done for
evading the penalty fare.

That's my impression too, but not that you'd be faced with an explicit
option on the spot.

On Thu, 30 Oct 2008 03:14:27 -0700 (PDT), MIG
wrote:

They only make sense if one assumes that the authorities don't really
care about fare-evasion, but want to find a way of getting a bit of
extra cash from a set of passengers which partly overlaps with the
fare-evaders.

Certainly on the mainline, though, it only overlaps so far as people
who aren't paying enough attention. A PF cannot be issued for a
ticket that would be valid other than that it's the wrong time of day
- the only thing that can be done there is an excess. It might well
be the same for a route issue as well. That leaves people who travel
beyond their destination, with no ticket or in the wrong class, all of
whom should really be paying more attention.

The only one I'd think needs leniency as well (but doesn't currently
get it) is someone travelling on a season ticket that's one day out of
date from a station with no barriers, as that would be quite easily
done. Perhaps a way to handle that in a sensible world would be to
issue a PF which would be refunded against the renewal of the ticket,
if this was to be done that day.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

wrote:
Hang on - you can refuse a penalty fare and go to court, can't you?

No. When an inspector finds you with an invalid / no ticket he has
two options.

1. He thinks that you are deliberately avoiding the fare. He will
not issue you with a penalty fare but report your details to the
prosecution office who decide if there is enough evidence to take you
to court.

2. He decides to issue you with a penalty fare. Once he has gone down
this route then you cannot be taken to court for fare evasion as this
would be considered double jepody

So you can see that is either court or penalty fare but not both. In
the penalty fare case you can appeal to an independent adjudicator but
you will not get a criminal record whatever the outcome.

You will get a criminal record if it is successfully prosecuted as a
theft offence. It is IIRC when you are prosecuted for breaching an
appropriate byelaw that you don't get a criminal record.

On Oct 30, 9:30*pm, (Neil Williams)
wrote:
On Thu, 30 Oct 2008 03:14:27 -0700 (PDT), MIG

wrote:
They only make sense if one assumes that the authorities don't really
care about fare-evasion, but want to find a way of getting a bit of
extra cash from a set of passengers which partly overlaps with the
fare-evaders.

Certainly on the mainline, though, it only overlaps so far as people
who aren't paying enough attention. *A PF cannot be issued for a
ticket that would be valid other than that it's the wrong time of day
- the only thing that can be done there is an excess. *It might well
be the same for a route issue as well. *That leaves people who travel
beyond their destination, with no ticket or in the wrong class, all of
whom should really be paying more attention.

Isn't that because penalty fare areas generally don't correspond to
routes on which the only affordable fares are limited to specific
trains?

In both cases there is a high "fare" which people wouldn't normally
pay, and which they have to pay when caught out, but it'd defined in a
different way.


The only one I'd think needs leniency as well (but doesn't currently
get it) is someone travelling on a season ticket that's one day out of
date from a station with no barriers, as that would be quite easily
done. *Perhaps a way to handle that in a sensible world would be to
issue a PF which would be refunded against the renewal of the ticket,
if this was to be done that day.

I am not in favour of leniency as such, but I'd like to decriminalise
day-to-day travel. Ticketing systems that are a test of ordinary
folks' knowledge of complicated regulations and where ten times as
many staff check tickets as sell them do not do anything for the
competitiveness of the railways.

In message , at 21:30:34 on Thu,
30 Oct 2008, Neil Williams remarked:
They only make sense if one assumes that the authorities don't really
care about fare-evasion, but want to find a way of getting a bit of
extra cash from a set of passengers which partly overlaps with the
fare-evaders.

Certainly on the mainline, though, it only overlaps so far as people
who aren't paying enough attention. A PF cannot be issued for a
ticket that would be valid other than that it's the wrong time of day
- the only thing that can be done there is an excess. It might well
be the same for a route issue as well. That leaves people who travel
beyond their destination, with no ticket or in the wrong class, all of
whom should really be paying more attention.

What about people travelling with the wrong ToC? [eg on a NXEC train
with a Hull-trains-only ticket] Or do you count that as a "Route issue"?

In that sort of case, is the excess going to be any less than the cost
of a whole new ticket?
--
Roland Perry

On Thu, 30 Oct 2008 22:25:17 +0000, Charles Ellson
wrote:

You will get a criminal record if it is successfully prosecuted as a
theft offence. It is IIRC when you are prosecuted for breaching an
appropriate byelaw that you don't get a criminal record.

Fare-dodging isn't theft, as it doesn't deprive someone of the travel
you have "taken".

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

Neil Williams wrote:

Fare-dodging isn't theft, as it doesn't deprive someone of the travel
you have "taken".

What I find curious is that you can end up with a criminal record for
fare-dodging, but not for avoiding parking charges.

On Oct 30, 3:38*pm, wrote:

2. He decides to issue you with a penalty fare. *Once he has gone down
this route then you cannot be taken to court for fare evasion as this
would be considered double jepody

So you can see that is either court or penalty fare but not both. *In
the penalty fare case you can appeal to an independent adjudicator but
you will not get a criminal record whatever the outcome.

Isn't it actually the case that in 2. you can't be taken to court
because you've bought a valid ticket? Isn't that what a penalty fare
is - a hugely overpriced single ticket, that the rail companies "dress
up" as a fine? All you're actaully doing is buying an on-board single.