Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2659 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi all.

 

A few days ago I was travelling on a train and caught without a ticket.

 

it was not by a normal inspector and instead an enforcer of some kind who took matters more seriously.

 

I had come from a small station where the ticket machine often does not work and so I said that was the reason i didn't have a ticket and was not intending to complete the journey without paying.

 

He said that I had ample time at the station where I changed to go and buy a ticket.

He also said that because the station i got on at and the one i would leave at did not have barriers that i could have intended to do the journey without paying.

I apologised and said that i had planned on paying on the train,

but after research its clear this isnt good enough.

 

The whole conversation was recorded and he asked my details etc and i think he said i would be receiving a letter with an admin fee.

 

I have done some research

my question is

will the letter offer an admin fee because i'm quite scared of the prospect of a court hearing and potential criminal record?

 

Is there a way they could find out the ticket machine was in fact working (i'm not sure it was) and prosecute further or will they just want a quick penalty fee?

 

Thanks in advance for you help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

moved to the transport forum from general motoring..

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

welcome aboard.

 

your post initially appears to be rather short of the actual truth of what might have happened?

hoping that it might mitigate the possible implications of what you might suffer ?

 

so...can we please have the true story....

 

this 'enforcer' you speak of...

did you give him your correct name and address?

and have you to date received anything in the post regarding this event yet...............???

 

to answer some of your issues.....

 

yes they will know if the machine was operational

and yes you should have by your own initiative sought the 'guard' and purchased a valid ticket..

not await train staff to track you down to attain payment/ticket....

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Is there a way they could find out the ticket machine was in fact working (i'm not sure it was) and prosecute further or will they just want a quick penalty fee?"

 

They'll know (for sure!) if the machine was working or not.

The machines keep records, plus if they can see ticket sales from the machine before and after when you state it wasn't working - you'll be caught in a lie.

 

Plus : "I had come from a small station where the ticket machine often does not work and so I said that was the reason i didn't have a ticket" - so have you already said it wasn't working or not? !.

 

The report the member of staff will make would almost certainly note your reply on this point if they were trained in Revenue Protection.

 

If you were thinking of claiming it wasn't working (when it might have been!) merely in the hope that it wasn't working : if they can show you were lying it would likely scupper any plans for you to seek an alternative to prosecution.

 

You'll likely receive a letter from the TOC asking for your comments / version of events.

They don't have to tell you what evidence they already have.

If you get caught in a lie : likely they'll prosecute.

 

Best advice is to tell the truth

(and answer what they have asked : if you have dodged a fare previously you don't have to mention it unless asked!) :

but don't get caught in a lie.

 

If you are hoping you'll get to

"practice what fibs you might get away with"

- you'll get litttle sympathy when you get caught out & they decide to prosecute.

 

How old are you? (If under 18 they are less likely to prosecute)

Have you been caught ticketless previously? (They would be more likely to prosecute).

 

If you had opportunities

(on 2 trains, and at the interchange station)

to seek out staff & buy a ticket

it wouldn't be hard for them to show you intended not to pay your fare ......

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all.

 

A few days ago I was travelling on a train and caught without a ticket.

 

it was not by a normal inspector and instead an enforcer of some kind who took matters more seriously.

 

I had come from a small station where the ticket machine often does not work and so I said that was the reason i didn't have a ticket and was not intending to complete the journey without paying.

 

He said that I had ample time at the station where I changed to go and buy a ticket.

He also said that because the station i got on at and the one i would leave at did not have barriers that i could have intended to do the journey without paying.

I apologised and said that i had planned on paying on the train,

but after research its clear this isnt good enough.

 

The whole conversation was recorded and he asked my details etc and i think he said i would be receiving a letter with an admin fee.

 

I have done some research

my question is

will the letter offer an admin fee because i'm quite scared of the prospect of a court hearing and potential criminal record?

 

Is there a way they could find out the ticket machine was in fact working (i'm not sure it was) and prosecute further or will they just want a quick penalty fee?

 

Thanks in advance for you help.

 

My local station only has a ticket office open to 10am and one ticket machine that is often broken. The inspectors on the trains therefore have no problems issuing tickets.

 

It depends on your station and what the train operator provides. If there is no reason not to have bought a ticket, then you should negotiate to pay an admin fee to avoid a prosecution.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all very much for your replies, appreciated.

 

@dx100uk:

Yes i have him all the correct information and was polite as I could be and apologised etc, and said i was sorry i didn't seek out a ticket at the change but rather expected to get one on the train.

 

 

In his statement he did write that i would 'wait' for a ticket inspector on the train rather than actively seek on out so I suppose that makes me sound passive in the process.

 

 

I haven't received anythign yet as it only happened a few days ago,

I'm just really hoping i get the chance to pay an admin fee rather than straight prosecution or anything!

 

 

It is my first time offence so he did say that was good, and he implied I would get an admin fee but who knows. He kept in future I should I should actively seek a ticket which of course I said i would.

 

@BazzaS: I said it wasn't working yes.

This machine more often than not isn't actually working but on that day I stupidly didn't check for sure, idiot..!

 

 

I am 20 and yes because he said i haven't received a warning before he said that was good.

The only opportunity i had was the 15 minute window of change as there definitely wasn't an inspector on my first train. So you think if they can prove that machine was working then it's very unlikely I'll get a chance to settle it out of court?

 

@unclebulgaria67: Yes that is what normally happens when the machine is down - unfortunately this wasn't a normal inspector!

Link to post
Share on other sites

great well done.

 

just await the letter

it will ask for your side of the story

 

should be easy to sort out

 

and no its very unlikely you'll get a record nor be going to court either

 

a good grovelling letter should sort it

 

pop back when/if you get a letter.

 

I see you've been reading other threads

so you now know the score.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

What of the fact the OP told the RP staff that the ticket machine was broken?, IF it wasn't!.

 

dx, the TOC MIGHT agree an administrative settlement, but don't have to.

 

If the OP gets caught in a lie, they may decide to prosecute.

 

OP, are you planning on repeating the lie (that you tried to buy a ticket but couldn't) when they ask for your version of events??

If not, what do you plan to say instead??

 

A Bylaw 18 prosecution would be a "slam dunk", and a RRA 1889 S5(3) prosecution wouldn't be too hard (if the reason given to the RP staff for not buying a ticket was "ticket machine broken" and if it wasn't broken, and the OP was on their 2nd train and hadn't tried to buy a ticket prior to being stopped .......)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only opportunity i had was the 15 minute window of change as there definitely wasn't an inspector on my first train.

 

No staff other than the driver on the first train?. Or just "no 'inspector' came round".

There wasn't a guard / conductor / train manager ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

What of the fact the OP told the RP staff that the ticket machine was broken?, IF it wasn't!.

 

dx, the TOC MIGHT agree an administrative settlement, but don't have to.

 

If the OP gets caught in a lie, they may decide to prosecute.

 

OP, are you planning on repeating the lie (that you tried to buy a ticket but couldn't) when they ask for your version of events??

If not, what do you plan to say instead??

 

A Bylaw 18 prosecution would be a "slam dunk", and a RRA 1889 S5(3) prosecution wouldn't be too hard (if the reason given to the RP staff for not buying a ticket was "ticket machine broken" and if it wasn't broken, and the OP was on their 2nd train and hadn't tried to buy a ticket prior to being stopped .......)

 

Hi thanks for your response.

Saying it was broken was done in a state of panic but it very well could have been broken as normally it is.

 

 

However, I realise if it wasn't this could look very bad!

Do you think it's in their interest to press charges or would they rather settle it out of court?

Of course I want to do whatever I can do to that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Those ticket machines at stations can stop working at any point. There is a light on the side that starts flashing when they are not working. At my local station, the light is viewable from the track side, so it is viewable by train staff as they are passing. Last time i got om a train, the machine was playing up. The ticket inspector said the machines are often not working, so they just issue tickets when asked.

 

If you get on a train without a ticket, you have to buy a ticket a first opportunity. So this means asking for a ticket when you see the guard or seeking out the guard or buying before exiting your arrival station.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

No staff other than the driver on the first train?. Or just "no 'inspector' came round".

There wasn't a guard / conductor / train manager ?

 

Definitely no staff on the first train. It was a tiny train. However, there were staff at the station i changed at, which i was at for 15 minutes (ample time to get a ticket and I'm kicking myself for not having done that!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would try not to get to anxious about this and get yourself into a state.

 

In this situation, i would not think i had done anything wrong. If they don't provide ticket facilities and kick up a fuss when you tried to buy a ticket when approached, then the train operator has questions to answer as well.

 

You are best to put forward a positive defence, rather than admit or appear to admit any wrong doing.

 

E.g if you were an elderly person, they would most likely have shown understanding and just sold you a ticket.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely no staff on the first train. It was a tiny train. However, there were staff at the station i changed at, which i was at for 15 minutes (ample time to get a ticket and I'm kicking myself for not having done that!)

 

I can understand you not wanting to identify the exact line,

but is it one that has DOO (Driver Only Operation)?.

 

These are listed at:

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-man_operation#Current_Driver_Only_.2F_One_Man_Operations

 

(Accepting that Wikipedia is only ever "as good as its last edit"!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah well, you could have said if it was one of the DOO lines, but have chosen not to.

 

Why does that matter?

 

If not DOO, and you say in your reply "there were no staff on the train", and they check and there was a conductor (even if they were sat in the conductor's cabin!)

 

; it'd be another reason for the TOC to doubt you are telling the whole truth / doubt how hard you tried to buy a ticket when you could have done so........

 

The TOC is entitled to say

 

"it is the traveller's responsibility to buy a ticket at the first station, prior to travel, or if not able to buy a ticket there to seek out the staff"

: they don't have to let you wait until the staff approach you .....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again for your useful response!

 

 

Really appreciate the insight.

 

 

I guess for me it's just a matter of waiting for the letter now

but I'll be sure to let you know how I get on.

 

 

Just had a job offer which is why I'm especially intrigued about the implications for criminal record

Link to post
Share on other sites

What Train Operating Company (TOC) this occurred on is probably much more important than the actual line of route because although some lines are 'shared routes' and the actual legislation is the same for all the TOCs, unfortunately some are more likely to prosecute first time offences than others.

 

Knowing which TOC will also make clear whether the service was DOO or whether a conductor / guard would have been on the train.

 

You've been given good advice by Honeybee13 and I suggest that you wait to see what any letter actually alleges before trying to formulate any reply.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No its not a fine its a settlement out of court!!!

 

Well done!!

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...