Written by John Kruse, one of the leading experts on Bailiff Law, this consumer friendly guide is essential reading for anyone who comes into contact with a bailiff.
The book is easy to understand and clearly explains the rights
a bailiff has, and also what they cannot do when collecting debts and repossessing goods etc.
Why do so many people come on this forum with the same old excuses, I forgot my travel card, I accidently used my nans freedom pass, I dont speak English very well, how can I appeal against this unjust nasty fine, the ticket collector just wanted to rip me off, the fares are too dear I cant afford the fare as I am a student, low paid worker, need to spend money on beer etc
I dont work on the railway or tube system I am just an ordinary commuter
who pays £44 a week on a 1-5 zone travel card, yes its expensive but its my choice to work so far from home.
If I was stupid enough to lose my card which is difficult bearing in mind I travel on a bus, two tube lines, overground then another bus, I woudnt expect some hard pressed ticket collector who has heard the same story 100 times that day already to have any sympathy for me and why should he?, I would expect to be treated as a potential fare dodger and get a fine
How many people here whould expect to take a chicken from Tesco without paying and expect the store to let you off as you forgot your purse, fare evasion for what ever reason is the same, it's stealing, FGS most of us use the travel network everyday we know we need to pay for it
So sorry I have no sympathy for yet another whiner caught in the act and trying to wriggle out of it
Let me elaborate
Last Tuesday Clapham to Hayes Middx and back again
1. Bus to Brixton - no problem as I was the only one getting on the bus and I have a ticket
Victoria Line Brixton
guy went into the barrier before me, stopped - no ticket or Oystercard stood there hoping I would be stupid enough to scan my Oyster so he could go through barrier ( I aint that dumb) Fare Dodger 1
Bakerloo line to Paddington
Ticket inspectors on train, girl in carriage had child ticket ( was about 19) got caught Fare Dodger 2
Paddington to Hayes
group of young lads thrown of train no tickets Fare dodgers 3-6
Bus from Station
2 school boys ( about 14) jumped on bus through middle doors - no oyster cards FD 7-9
Journey back
Bus to station young couple with buggy used middle doors to get on bus, no attempt to go to the front and produce tickets until driver calls them possible FD 10-11 ( I didnt include the baby)
Now I know its a long journey I have but possible 11 fare dodgers in one day? its not typical I grant you but almost everyday I see at least one person stopped for fare evasion
And how many of these people are on boards like this complaining they are being picked on or bellyaching about fines
Next time you are waiting for a train at a gated station, just watch how many people double-up behind ticket holding passengers.....most of them will be wearing suits.
MadamFluff, it is incredibly refreshing to read such a post from someone who has to use these services every day.
I have worked in this industry for 30 years and still in revenue & prosecutions, I just feel compelled to thank you for putting into words publicly what those of us involved already know and what it seems likely that the vast majority of commuters must see every day, but either turn a blind eye to or, many actually condone.
Fare Evasion is a serious and costly anti-social activity. It is not a socially acceptable, victimless crime as so many people seem to imagine.
It is sheer hypocrisy for so many to rightly condemn our MPs for ripping off the expenses system and then to go out intending to travel on public transport without paying, day after day.
It's time all of our society stopped constantly passing the buck and making excuses for every little individual failure and got back to taking responsibility for all of our own actions.
Of course, we all do make mistakes and in my experience, with rare exceptions, rail staff do generally allow discretion when a genuine error occurs.
After 15 years doing a revenue protection role, in part or in whole, I have to concur.
As a RP manager I lost count on a weekly basis of the number of people who tried to excuse their blatant thievery with lamentations to whomever was listening of how diabolically ****e the train service is/was in their humble opinion and how their theft was in some way legitimised in a 'robin hood stylee'.
Yes, of course it is/was, perhaps you'd like to tell us all about it WHEN and IF you ever become a 'customer'?
Of course, the problem here is that 'legitimate' grievances where occasionally, the RP/Prosecution system inevitably fails are inevitably biased and influenced by the vast majority of instances where out and out theft is clear.
I am of the opinion that, whilst I realise the level of evidence required is much, much higher and costs also, that prosecution of persistent offenders should be done under the theft act and not the railway byelaws, therefore actually giving a real disincentive to what is commonly and wrongly IMHO regarded as low level victimless crime.
...I am of the opinion that, whilst I realise the level of evidence required is much, much higher and costs also, that prosecution of persistent offenders should be done under the theft act and not the railway byelaws, therefore actually giving a real disincentive to what is commonly and wrongly IMHO regarded as low level victimless crime.
I'm no expert on the theft act per se, but would have thought that the far higher penalties upon conviction would deter?
i.e. up to 5 years imprisonment?
I'm thinking of mainly those who forge season tickets or whom regularly and persistently avoid payment, perhaps the fraud act would be more appropriate?
Your original post related to persistant offenders, in real terms the penalties imposed under the RR Act are a bit higher than retail theft offences, and there is the option of imprisonment on both.
The theft act requires a substantial level of proof for a conviction, there are a number of points to prove.
S5,3 of the RR Act is almost a strict liabilty offence, although intent to avoid needs to be proved, Lord Justice Woolf said in Corbyn -v- Saunders that the intent that must be proved is the intent to avoid the obligation to buy a ticket prior to travelling. This in effect means that as long as facilities were available, if you dont buy a ticket before travelling you can get done for Fare Evasion, even if you fully intended to pay on the train or at your destination.
It is a powerful piece of legislation.
I just had to 'bump' this thread, it is so different from all the others in this forum.
An old friend of mine, now no longer with us, used to tell the story of 'the last bus from Grays to Tilbury'. During the 2nd World War, in the blackout, there was a bus that left Grays after the 'pictures'. (In those days, Grays had two cinemas, that is a whole different story, read about Morrisons & the State Cinema)
All the passengers on the crowded last (and blacked out bus) gave the 'clippie' the short answer, and didn't pay fares. As the financial record showed that no one used the bus, the company stopped running it.
If people want a service, one way or another, it has to be paid for. People who do not pay fares are simply not customers.
Yes, I've heard that story before and it is mirrored by more local examples right across the public transport network.
Before Reading barriers were introduced less than 15% of passengers using the 23.39 Reading to Gatwick service actually paid for their fares.
This was initially an estimate: but after a large revenue protection programme of checks it was proved and this wasn't a just one off either, it was checked on a random basis throughout most months of the year and at various stations throughout the journey and on train, it varied between 7% at worst and 30% at best.
A lot of this was not helped by the normal ticket checking staff getting so much routine abuse, & threats of violence they simply stayed in the van for the entire journey, and the train became largely the domain for drunken louts on their way home after a night out in Reading and woe betide anyone using it with their families to catch a plane from Gatwick!
Frankly a notice being put up at all stations along the line was a suggestion made at that time with the threat of withdrawing this 'service' due to it's 'non use'.
Unfortunately/fortunately the regulators don't allow withdrawal of services even if non use is proven to a large extent.
However this example gave a good incentive to those who had to approve the expense and manning of the barriers.
I did however work a train which had a 'one door stop' (ie only one door would be platformed) at a local station once, after checking all the tickets and getting told to 'f**k off and mind your own business' by 3 nasty little chavs, I pulled into said station and seeing no-one on the platform and knowing no one had shown me a ticket to this stop, I signalled the driver to depart, as we were on time.
Guess what? the three rude little f**kwits wanted this particular stop and got off at the next station some 8 miles further on, one of them came to the window (HST droplight) as were pulling out again and said 'whens the next train back?'
Childish I know.......I thoroughly enjoyed it when I replied '7.30.................a.m .!' (it was 22.20!)
I've "heard" that when the new barriers at London Waterloo went live in January 2009, there was something stupid like an 800% increase in single tickets to Vauxhall being sold, as well as Child Tickets. This prompted some action...
Blimming ada I had forgotton about this - I am so pleased to say that I no longer have to travel from Clapham to Hayes having moved to sunny ( but not today) Isle of Wight
where I now walk to work and admire the sea views as I do so.
Blimming ada I had forgotton about this - I am so pleased to say that I no longer have to travel from Clapham to Hayes having moved to sunny ( but not today) Isle of Wight
where I now walk to work and admire the sea views as I do so.
I can vouch for that!
Please Note
The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.
I would always urge to seek professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.
Please click my reputation button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.
I would just like to point out, that at the moment the government are saying if you get found with a knife, you will walk away with a caution, however not paying your tube fare will get you a criminal conviction...highly disproportionate don't you think?
A caution is in effect a criminal conviction as it will show on CRB checks.
As for the Justice Secretary deciding its too expensive to jail knife carrying thugs, well its ok for him as he has half a dozen armed police around him 24/7.
Knife crime is an 'interesting' subject. The original position that 'carry a knife and go to jail' was itself one of those political knee jerks that wasn't properly thought out in the first place. The cost of 'binning people up' is huge, and there does need to be some differentiation between 'carrying', 'intending to use' and 'using'.
About 18 months ago, I found myself in the unlikley situation with the prosecutor for my local railway and an off duty policeman in refereeing a matter between an Inspector and a noisy kid fare dodger. (aged about 16) He was a weeny (if loud) numpty, and during the 'discussion', he was found to have a knife on him. He would not have had the nerve to 'pull' his knife, it would have been difficult to open, and if he had done his best to stab me, it probably would not have gone through my jacket, much less the layer of fat that protects my vital organs. (I claim that it is relaxed muscle, you know how it is)
The constable took the knife, used some stern words, job done. The idea of putting said Numpty into one of Her Majsties hotels for the young and wayward was simply not a sensible choice for him. He would have come out, knowing how to make a better blade, and how to use it, as well as having more than a few chips on his miniscule shoulders.
Moaning minnies
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by UNDERGROUND
LOWELL DETESTER AND
Re: Moaning minnies
