Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About TomT72

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. I wanted to give you all an update to to thank you again for the earlier posts, when I noticed that two more Caggers added new posts (to whom I am grateful) and to whom I'd lke to respond: i) the strict liability still stands - indefensible ii) I do not see 'the RPI had originally offered an opportunity to accept a Penalty Fare Notice' as an offer nor an opportunity. [However, if that is the legal terminology used, it seems 'skewed' in favour of the company]. Instead, I perceived the that RPI had made a foregone conclusion that he was issuing me a penalty.... end of/without discussion
  2. I accept the strict liability type of the offences now. And yes, I did say "no" when he asked for my address (since I'd already shown my named photo id) once he said that the issue was no longer a penalty notice, but rather a report . However, I said "no" to the report and pleaded to pay the penalty fine, to which he replied "It's too late for that" - his behavior tantamount to bullying and scare-mongering. That is when a passenger intervened and asked the RPI take the matter elsewhere. Thank you for all of your posts. Also, after reding posts on several other threads, I have a much
  3. Thank you for your replies thus far and, yes, if asking questions about process and what the RPI was doing, you can safely assume that I had become awkward. As an aside - I admit, when someone challenges or charges me (as in this case), I feel I have a right to know a) under what reasons they are charging me and b) what the procedure is. Even the police have to expressly state such reasons and procedure - along with the challengee/ chargees rights and obligations. I received none of that, until begged answers to the questions. Importantly, does that mean that both byelaws (ie. 19 and 2
  4. Thank you Honeybee13 and RPI. Yes, it would appear that by asking questions I became awkward. I appreciate the point about taking first class abuse very seriously. Does this mean that both byelaws are strict liability. If so then I don't think that I have a 'leg to stand on'. Question: What about mitigating circumstances for the court? Can the abrupt and menacing behaviour of the RPI be such a circumstance? 1) In relation to Byelaw No. 19 - I had no choice but to remain in the seat whilst the RPI was answering and questioning me - he was blocking me in so that I couldn't get up;
  5. Hi folks, I dearly need some advice. Yesterday, I received a letter, summoning me to appear before the Magistrates Court on Monday to answer alleged offences under Byelaws No. 19 and No. 23 (1). I'm very worried. I had previously correspondended with the Prosecutions department (i.e. confirming my details and listing mitigating factors) but heard nothing back, until the summons. The background to the summons was that I was travelling in the First Class cabin without a valid ticket, hoping that I could get an upgrade. The carriage was empty when I got on [and for 10 stops, thereafter]
  • Create New...