Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm trying to work this out as I go along. The first thing to do is to think about this not as a car – but simply as a £value. This is especially so as you have said that it is not a rare BMW. This means that you could purchase another one and it would mean just the same to you. You bought the car for £16,000 – and presumably that was the value you gave to the insurance when you bought the policy – is that correct? If that is the value you gave to the insurer then on my understanding of these things, that is the maximum you would be entitled to claim. This is the amount you got so although you lost the car (£16,000), it was fully replaced by the payment of £16,000 – minus, of course, the excess – but that was part of the deal anyway. I've looked at the RAC website for the meaning of the various categories - https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/advice/buying-and-selling-guides/changes-to-insurance-write-off-categories/   I see that a Cat S means that there could be structural damage. Cat B means that the car must be broken for parts. You say you would like to get the car back because you consider that it can be repaired. Personally I think I would be very worried about this because if there has been one inspection which is rated it as a breaker and the second one rates it as having possible structural damage – but repairable – it seems to me that there is a huge risk involved. Supposing you got the car back and proceeded to repair it but in fact found that there was some structural distortion so that the geometry of the car made it difficult to drive. You would then have a real lemon on your hands – and of course you would have allowed a fair amount of money and trouble into getting it going. Apart from the fact that Hastings behaviour is all rather suspicious – I'm struggling to see what loss you have taken on this. You would have had to pay the excess anyway – in any event. You have now received £16,000 payment so you are in a zero-loss situation and you could simply go out and hunt around for another car for the same money. The only thing that I could see which could complicate matters is if you come back and tell us that in fact the car was a huge bargain and that it would cost you more than £16,000 to replace it. But in that case I would have to ask why did you only insure it for £16,000? The second complicating factor might be that in the four months that you had it, he spent a lot of money on improvements and you have managed to recover that. Maybe you could let us have your comments on this and also let me know if there is anything which I've misunderstood  
    • Well today is the 20th so let us know if you have had a disclosure by the end of the day.   Of course you can bring a claim for breach of statutory duty – but in order for it to be a small claim you would have to claim an amount in financial compensation. Luckily under the data protection laws you can claim for distress without having to prove any physical damage or economic loss. I happen to know that you have some experience of bringing a successful data protection claim in the past - which was settled quite advantageously out-of-court. If you want to bring a small claim then I would suggest that you would have to alleged the distress and claim for, say, £50 – but it is a bit early to do this. You certainly would have to send them a letter of claim and give them 14 days.
    • What is the name of the car dealership please – I think you have already been asked this. Also, didn't you record the call? You've been here since 2006 and our customer services guide has been around since almost that time. It is always going to be very difficult to get hold of a recording of a conversation which Incriminates the company that you are trying to retrieve it from.
    • Hi.   While we're waiting for the experts, can I ask a couple of questions please?   Can you tell us which documents you've returned to the police? I assume you've admitted to being the driver.   Are you saying you were never asked to produce your licence and insurance at a police station? I don't know if it's still called an HORT/1 but that's what I was given when I needed to show documentation.   I've put some numbering into your first post for the various points you've raised.   HB
    • 😮  £ 3551!!!!  she  needed loan for a headstone for her daughter and      a   car as hers  has had it
  • Our picks

ABC1

Caught using my husband's annual Travelcard

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 500 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
'Penalty Fare' was part of the website address, I wasn't referring to anything.

 

Well, you have forced a further response there rebel11.

 

As I said, an old article previously discussed two months ago on this and other forums.

 

The whole article was concerned with Penalty fares and if you had actually read and understood it fully, you would have taken note of the last paragraph, which made clear the distinction concerning fare evasion, which is an entirely separate and more serious matter.

Edited by Old-CodJA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Firstly I haven to say that to have 'experts' opinion on certain topics within CAG is invaluable, so thanks to Old-Codja.

 

I also found the link to the newspaper article quite interesting, especially the part about not buying a ticket as machines broken, huge queues, etc. i found myself in this situation recently and the inspector was telling me allsorts of rubbish, however she was called away to deal with a troublesome passenger and we didnt discuss it any more and I continued my journey without a ticket.

 

The part about using it purely as revenue raising was interesting, i do believe that Ken Livingstone touched on this when he was 'caught' without a ticket.

 

Could someone point to the thread on here (or another site) that discusses it in more detail as Old-Codja mentioned.

 

Thanks

 

Andy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Firstly I haven to say that to have 'experts' opinion on certain topics within CAG is invaluable, so thanks to Old-Codja.

 

I also found the link to the newspaper article quite interesting, especially the part about not buying a ticket as machines broken, huge queues, etc. i found myself in this situation recently and the inspector was telling me allsorts of rubbish, however she was called away to deal with a troublesome passenger and we didnt discuss it any more and I continued my journey without a ticket.

 

The part about using it purely as revenue raising was interesting, i do believe that Ken Livingstone touched on this when he was 'caught' without a ticket.

 

Could someone point to the thread on here (or another site) that discusses it in more detail as Old-Codja mentioned.

 

Thanks

 

Andy

 

There certainly are issues that were worthy of further exploration, but as I recall, the publisher of the original article advised that CAG were required to remove the discussion & link.

 

I'm sure that the site team will correct me if I'm wrong and I apologise if that is the case, but that is how I remember it.

 

I recall a thread on MSE too. but I've just had a look and can find nothing on there now either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There certainly are issues that were worthy of further exploration, but as I recall, the publisher of the original article advised that CAG were required to remove the discussion & link.

 

I'm sure that the site team will correct me if I'm wrong and I apologise if that is the case, but that is how I remember it.

 

I recall a thread on MSE too. but I've just had a look and can find nothing on there now either.

 

Aha..That what the earlier posts were refering to...Didnt know about the legal action. Its a pity when stuff like that happens, especially when it concerns the previously uncensored Internet.

 

Andy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The article that was in the paper actually contained some errors, with regards to queueing times etc you could still be "done" for byelaw 18.

 

As for TOC's using PF's as a revenue raising tool I don't agree, Penalty fares and UPFN's are all dealt with by a third party and it certainly isn't free, I do recall a manager once saying that it cost's the TOC £5.00 to process a UPFN about 10 years ago, so it would probably cost the same for a Penalty fare which are usually processed by the same company as UPFN's, bear in mind at that time the Penalty fare was only £10.00.

 

Each TOC i've worked for has always maintained that Penalty fares are a deterrent.


Views expressed in this forum by me are my own personal opinion and you take it on face value! I make any comments to the best of my knowledge but you take my advice at your own risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The article that was in the paper actually contained some errors, with regards to queueing times etc you could still be "done" for byelaw 18.

 

As for TOC's using PF's as a revenue raising tool I don't agree, Penalty fares and UPFN's are all dealt with by a third party and it certainly isn't free, I do recall a manager once saying that it cost's the TOC £5.00 to process a UPFN about 10 years ago, so it would probably cost the same for a Penalty fare which are usually processed by the same company as UPFN's, bear in mind at that time the Penalty fare was only £10.00.

 

Each TOC i've worked for has always maintained that Penalty fares are a deterrent.

 

These are good points, but Penalty Fares are entirely unconnected with the OP on this thread.

 

I would be very happy to see a sensible debate on the subject, without referring to links to the article that caused CAG a problem.

 

Perhaps, if people want to air their views on whether PFs are a legitimate revenue stream in their own right, this should be a wholly new thread thereby avoiding confusing penalty fares with fare evasion and avoiding the likelihood of giving the OP innaccurate advice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi ABC

 

I've been reading your post about you geting caught using your husband's travel pass and wanted to know what the outcome was in the end.

 

I gave my husbnad my monthly pass to use with his photo ID and he got caught with it this morning. The inspector said to expect a letter soon with a fine and that he will get a criminal record.

 

We will of course pay the fine but want to avoid a criminal record. Your advice on this is much appreciated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Season tickets are not transferable.

 

If this is a first offence, it may be that you will be able to pay an out of court settlement.

 

But: The Train operator has a strong position on this one, 'husband' seems to have committed an offence which can be prosecuted in a Magistrates Court, and on the face of it, you could be prosecuted for aiding and abetting the offence.

 

I dare say that the Inspector will have done some research, and looked at both your season ticket histories, as well as any known 'previous'. (penalty fares, previous reported offences, dubious season refunds and so on)

 

Wait and see what sort of letter you get, and answer it as best you can. I also guess that they will want to interview you when you want a replacement monthly ticket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wriggler7 - Thank you for responding back, much appreciated. I will wait and see what the letter says and take it from there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent advice by Wriggler and pretty well mirrors the response I have given on your other thread regarding the same case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks both Old-CodJA and Wriggler7 for taking the time to reply. Reading various posts and your responses to this type of case has been most helpful. All I can do is expect the worst and hope for the best!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has this matter reached a conclusion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We were very very lucky, the rail company decided to settle out of court, giving us a fine plus administration charges which we have now paid and the whole issue is now resolved. I will never ever being doing this again and will think before doing anything rash!!

 

Again, thank you for all your advice much appreciated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you give more detail about the procedure and what you have written to TFL? Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SkiesTheLimit,

 

I'm glad to hear that you were able to avoid going to court.

 

How did you manage to reach a settlement with the train operating company?

 

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SkiesTheLimit

 

I would be very interested to hear what you wrote in your letter.

 

I was recently caught using my sister-in-law's annual travel card and have received a letter from the prosecution. I'll looking at moving to Australia and really want to avoid a criminal record.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every case will have unique features, and therefore will be looked at differently by the 'prosecuting authority'. Indeed, each prosecuting authority will have it's own priorities. As such, responses will need to be tailored according to the nature of the case, and the way that the train company indicates that it wishes to deal with the matter.

 

Without giving us details that identify you, please tel us more about the matter. What train company is it? What happened when you were caught?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your reply Wriggler7.

 

I was traveling from Kings Cross back to Harpenden after attending a job interview when the inspector requested a ticket so I presented him with the travel card. He then requested the photo ID card that accompanied the ticket to which I replied that the ticket was not mine and was unaware that the ticket had to be accompanied by the ID card. I offered the pay the fare and fine at that moment in time but was told because I had present a ticket that was not mine it would be reported.

 

Obviously he retained the ticket and having been paying my sister in law's train fare since.

 

Let me know if you need anymore details.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for your reply Wriggler7.

 

He then requested the photo ID card that accompanied the ticket to which I replied that the ticket was not mine and was unaware that the ticket had to be accompanied by the ID card.

 

Printed on the face of all these tickets you will normally find the instruction 'Valid only when shown with Photocard number XXXXX' and on the Photo card 'Valid only when shown with a ticket bearing this number XXXXX'

 

A season ticket is valid only for use by the person to whom it is issued.

 

Any prejudicial breach of the conditions of issue may result in the ticket being withdrawn and it is a matter for the TOC whether they will reissue it.

 

You will receive a verification letter from FCC and you should wait until then before you reply, quoting their reference number and send a prompt response to the address from whence you have received their letter. Your best bet is to write an entirely truthful account of the incident and be aware that the reporting inspector will have made notes of what you said at the time.

 

Dependent on what you told them, you will be trying to persuade the prosecution manager to allow you to settle the matter without Court action.

 

When you get the letter and know what their intentions are, come back and let us know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Their intentions are as below:

 

travelling without a valid ticket

receiving a ticket with intent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Their intentions are as below:

 

travelling without a valid ticket

receiving a ticket with intent

 

 

 

It seems likely that they are going for two strict liability charges there

 

1. Travelling without a valid ticket:

'fail to show a valid ticket when asked' contrary to National Railway Byelaw 18.2 (2005),

 

2. Receive a ticket with intent:

'receiving a transfered ticket with the intention of not paying the correct fare' contrary National Railway Byelaw 22.2 (2005)

 

Both carry the same penalty if convicted, a fine up to a maximum of £1000.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We were very very lucky, the rail company decided to settle out of court, giving us a fine plus administration charges which we have now paid and the whole issue is now resolved. I will never ever being doing this again and will think before doing anything rash!!

 

Again, thank you for all your advice much appreciated.

 

 

Hi even I am in same situation.

How did you manage to reach a settlement with the train operating company?

 

could you please post your letter so that it would b very helpful for me deleting your personal details.

 

Thank You

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...