Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi,   Having had a PM exchange with Shamrocker (thank you) I've been advised to upload the General Order/Judgement that was sent to me at the end of September.  Can someone (possibly Andy) clarify that I need to complete a WS for my "side of the bargain".   Obviously, I have just received and uploaded the claimant's WS so I suspect I do, but the actual order was "vague".    Many thanks B   General Order & Direction Oct19.pdf
    • Hmm, so.. basically have to rely on the default notice not containing all that it should and the claimant misleading the court for the reason for the application.. and judge lottery : /
    • Which would require a hearing....so the fee would be £255.00
    • When providing a copy of an executed agreement in response to a request under section 78(1) of the Act:   a.     must a creditor provide a photocopy (or other form of complete copy) of the original agreement that was signed by the debtor or at least provide a copy which is derived directly from the original agreement or complete copy thereof? or b.     can a creditor provide a document which is a reconstitution of the original agreement which may be from sources other than the actual signed agreement itself?   It was held that a creditor can satisfy its duty under section 78 by providing a reconstituted version of the executed agreement which may be from sources other than the actual signed agreement itself.   The judge accepted that as a matter of law, section 78 does not itself require any particular explanation as to how the copy was made. However, as a matter of good practice and so as not to mislead the debtor, it is desirable that the creditor should explain that it is providing a reconstituted as opposed to a physical copy of the executed agreement. This will also explain why the copy might otherwise look a little odd. The creditor can also explain in the letter that this procedure is satisfactory under the Act. The judge also provided that the following information needs to be included in the reconstituted copy agreement (assuming of course that it was present in the original):   1.     Heading: Credit Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 2.     Name and address of the debtor 3.     Name and address of the creditor 4.     Cancellation clause applicable to the executed agreement.   All of the above may be provided on a sheet which is separate from the full statement of terms and conditions which also forms part of the reconstituted agreement. The creditor may, however, decide to reconstitute the agreement in a different way so that, for example, the information above is populated electronically onto the same sheet as that which sets out the terms and conditions, or some of them. The judge stated that he did not intend to prescribe the precise form of the reconstituted agreement. The key point is what information it should contain, subject to the point that its format should not be such as to mislead the debtor as to what he agreed to.   The judge also considered whether a statement like the one appearing in the reconstructed application form in Carey referring to the agreement to the terms and conditions "attached" needs to be included in the reconstituted copy. Alternatively if the application form had said "I agree to the terms overleaf", should that statement be included. The judge held that this aspect of the form is not necessary for the purpose of the section 78 copy, although there is nothing to stop a bank from putting it in or indeed from furnishing a copy of the type of application form or signature page that the debtor would have signed, as some banks have done. The statement referring to terms and conditions is not itself prescribed information and the supply of the terms and conditions which were applicable at the time will tell the debtor what he needs to know in terms of the content of what he signed up to, including the presence (or otherwise) of the prescribed terms.   In practical terms what this is likely to mean is that if the creditor chooses to use as the section 78 copy the section 63 copy, which would have been provided to that particular debtor at the time following execution of the agreement, this will be sufficient provided that the information referred to above is supplied. This exercise is not a mere formality. The creditor will need to check carefully that the details of the debtor at the time are correct and that those are the particular terms (including prescribed terms) that he/she agreed to. This is to ensure that it is an honest and accurate copy.   Must a creditor provide a document which would comply (if signed) with the requirements of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (Regulations) as to form, as at the date the agreement was made in order to comply with section 78?   A creditor need not, in complying with section 78, provide a document which would comply (if signed) with the requirements of the Regulations as to form, as at the date the agreement was made.   Must the copy provided under section 78 include the debtor's name and address as at the date when the agreement was made, and if so in what form? The section 78 copy must contain the name and address of the debtor as it was at the time of the execution of the agreement. But the creditor can provide the name and address from whatever source it has of those details. It does not have to take them from the executed agreement itself.     If an agreement has been varied by the creditor under a unilateral power of variation, is a copy of the executed agreement as varied, a sufficient copy for the purposes of section 78(1), or must the creditor provide a copy of the original agreement as well?   If an agreement has been varied by the creditor under a unilateral power of variation, the creditor must still provide a copy of the original agreement, as well as the varied terms.     As your agreement is post April 2007  Section 61(1)(a) and 127(3)   Consumer Credit Act 1974 would not apply.   Andy
    • well start a new thread for the court claim.   as for this one i'd await the letter of claim  
  • Our picks

kayliecat

Bus penalty fare for transeferred pass

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2522 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

Hello, just wondering if any one could help.

 

I was fined £80 for a using a transferred pass on a bus monday because I didn't have my photocard. The pass was mine and I presented the inspector with ther forms of photo I.D and gave the inspector all my details to prove it was mine.

 

I can assume my son had removed my photocard from my purse with out me realising as it wasn't in my purse when the inspector got on and I found it at home. I even got on the bus at the same stop as the inspector! Something I certainly wouldn't do if I had a stolen pass or knew I didn't have mine in me.

 

You would think it would be obvious that it was an honest mistake and that it was my oyster card but despite everything he fined me but he told me I could send a copy of my photocard and the fine would be removed!

 

I appealed with a copy of my discount photocard to IRCA and they rejected my appeal saying it was my responsibility to carry my photocard. I agree, but surely the fact the fine was issued for a transferred pass and I proved I was the rightful owner they should remove the fine?

 

The fine was incorrectly issued, if it wasn't I would pay the very high price for an honest mistake and the tiny 65p discount but if anyone thinks I may have a chance at a second appeal please let me know how!

 

 

Thank you, Kaylie

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just like every other greeady slimey company, they have no interest at all in fairness or truth. No one will ever convince me they are not on a bonus for the amount of extra revenue they can bring in be it by lies or cheating. These companies are just ****.

 

Go see if it says in their T&Cs that you 'have' to have your picture with you at all times or any other such thing, they make this crap up as they go along. They are not better than bailiffs or debt collectors.

 

In all contracts, anything that affects you with some significance must be explained to you, did you even get a copy of their rip-off sheet (T&Cs) when you bought your cards?

 

Ask them to point out to you where it says what you were told.

Edited by Conniff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It does say it's only valid with photo I.D so I would have accepted the fine if it have been for not having a valid pass or something.

 

But the fact he issued a fine for a transferred pass (in other words calling me a thief and attracting everyone on the bus to stare at me) when it was clearly not stolen and I have proved it wasn't should remove the fine like he said it would. Surely there must be a way to avoid paying?

 

It's digusting that they can issue an £80 fine for a 65p discount that I was entitled to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I wouldn't pay it, I would let them take me to court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kayliecat

 

Perhaps, you can scan the notice that you were given and remove all personal identification and reference details then post for us all to see.

 

Maybe somebody can make suggestions if there is something that stands out as clearly wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have a scanner and it wont let me post a photo I took on my phone.

 

The explanation of reasons for issue are

1) Cash ticket not valid

3) No ticket or pass produced

4) Non validated oyster

5) Non validated saver oyster

6) Pass used outside valid dates

7) Pass or photocard altered

8) Adult travelling on a child pass

9) Transferred pass

10) Ticket or pass not available on TFL buses

12) Family travelcard with out adult

16) Pass or ticket used outside valid times

17) Pass or photocard numbers incompatable or photocard defaced

18) Failing to purchase a ticker before boarding

 

There are no numbers 2,11, 13 or 15.

 

The fine I was issued was for 9. I would have thought that 4 or 5 would be the reason for issuing the fine because the oyster isn't valid with out a photocard rather than a fine for a transferred pass. I have proved the pass wasn't transferred and I was advised the fine would be removed if I proved that.

 

I'm debating paying the fine as it's reduced to £40 if paid in 21 days to avoid giving them any more money and trying to do a second appeal on the grounds that the fine was incorrectly issued.

 

Thank you all for your kind responses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also just wondering if I have a valid point in that if I was believed to be travelling with a transferred pass, why wasn't it confiscated?

 

The inspector checked and must have been 100% sure it was my oyster card when I identified myself to have let me carry on using the oyster card, so why issue a fine?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You would think it would be obvious that it was an honest mistake and that it was my oyster card but despite everything he fined me but he told me I could send a copy of my photocard and the fine would be removed!

 

I appealed with a copy of my discount photocard to IRCA and they rejected my appeal saying it was my responsibility to carry my photocard. I agree, but surely the fact the fine was issued for a transferred pass and I proved I was the rightful owner they should remove the fine?

 

The fine was incorrectly issued,

 

 

Because there is no 'tick box' in the list on the penalty notice that says 'Missing photo-card', the only choice that would appear to fit the bill is 'Transferred pass'.

 

That is how it would appear to anyone making a check in these circumstances, because there is a strict liability requirement to show the pass & photocard together.

 

Why would you 'think it would be obvious that it was an honest mistake' ? Unless the inspector knew you and saw your pass on a very regular basis, how would he know it wasn't transferred? It isn't the inspectors' fault, you did not show a pass with photocard when asked.

 

Sadly, taking the strict liability requirement literally, this does mean that IRCAS have determined that the penalty was correctly issued, but I am of the opinion that you should take a clear photocopy of both the pass and photocard and appeal again advising that you will take this matter further if not satisfied.

 

Ask them in writing for the charge to be frozen at the 'within 21 day rate' until such time as a further independent assessment has looked at their refusal to acknowledge your justified appeal.

 

If they refuse to acknowledge that it should be cancelled, try asking Passenger Focus to intervene on your behalf.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because there is no 'tick box' in the list on the penalty notice that says 'Missing photo-card',

 

so no offence then. If it was an offence to not have the photocard with you, then surely there would be a tick box ??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
so no offence then. If it was an offence to not have the photocard with you, then surely there would be a tick box ??

 

 

 

Not so, the matter could simply be reported as an offence. The issue of a penalty fare notice is not the only sanction for all offences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because there is no 'tick box' in the list on the penalty notice that says 'Missing photo-card', the only choice that would appear to fit the bill is 'Transferred pass'.

 

That is how it would appear to anyone making a check in these circumstances, because there is a strict liability requirement to show the pass & photocard together.

 

Why would you 'think it would be obvious that it was an honest mistake' ? Unless the inspector knew you and saw your pass on a very regular basis, how would he know it wasn't transferred? It isn't the inspectors' fault, you did not show a pass with photocard when asked.

 

Sadly, taking the strict liability requirement literally, this does mean that IRCAS have determined that the penalty was correctly issued, but I am of the opinion that you should take a clear photocopy of both the pass and photocard and appeal again advising that you will take this matter further if not satisfied.

 

Ask them in writing for the charge to be frozen at the 'within 21 day rate' until such time as a further independent assessment has looked at their refusal to acknowledge your justified appeal.

 

If they refuse to acknowledge that it should be cancelled, try asking Passenger Focus to intervene on your behalf.

 

Thank you for your advice.

 

I thought maybe option 5 fitted my "offence" better because I accept the fact the dis**** was not valid with out a photocard.

 

I do think it's a bit harsh to dish out such a big fine for a 65p discount. I did have everything in my purse other than the photocard and had proved who I was with photo I.D and that the card was mine.

 

The fact that I actually go on the bus at the same time as the inspectors would probably show I had no idea I didn't have my photocard and had no intention of doing anything wrong. Personally I would have seen a mum with her child and seen it as an accident and just remind them to carry thier pass in the future. But I suppose he would have got commision for an easy target.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
so no offence then. If it was an offence to not have the photocard with you, then surely there would be a tick box ??

 

You have a good point there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not so, the matter could simply be reported as an offence. The issue of a penalty fare notice is not the only sanction for all offences.

 

So if the purse is a bit empty, they can just make up any offence? These things have to be laid down somewhere?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So if the purse is a bit empty, they can just make up any offence? These things have to be laid down somewhere?

 

There are other (non Penalty Fare) laws concerning public transport which are far more extensive and serious.

 

The Public Service Vehicles (Conduct of Drivers, Inspectors, Conductors and Passengers) Regulations 1990 - Regulation 7.

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1990/1020/regulation/7/made

 

Public Passenger Vehicles Act 1981 - Section 25

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/14

Edited by firstclassx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And they are.

In Law.

***************

 

I mean somewhere on a piece of paper so that customers can see them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do you need to see an actual law?

 

Tickets are issued subject to certain conditions, which are always available on request at point of sale. By using a ticket, you agree to the terms, regardless of whether you bothered to read them or not.

 

They aren't exactly hidden!

 

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/termsandconditions/899.aspx

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/termsandconditions/5004.aspx

 

And also printed on the ticket media, or at least details of where to locate the conditions.

 

Oyster_card_back.png

File:Oystercard.jpg

Edited by firstclassx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So that you will be aware if you have broken it.

 

I think you might find that the 'available on request' don't stand up any longer. Pertinent information must be given to each new customer especially any that affects them personally. This doesn' just apply to ppi.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So that you will be aware if you have broken it.

 

I think you might find that the 'available on request' don't stand up any longer. Pertinent information must be given to each new customer especially any that affects them personally. This doesn' just apply to ppi.

 

You are incorrect, sorry!

 

We are in the realms of criminal law, not civil.

 

How do you think millions of rail journeys are made each year? On the basis that the NRCoC is available on request and that is made clear.

 

You don't have to make a LAW available. Contracts etc, perhaps, but not legislation.

 

Your bank doesn't have to provide you a copy of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So show me, link please.

 

Take it to the extremes.

 

I commit a murder.

 

Sorry, officer. You can't do me for murder because I wasn't told of the law beforehand.

 

I commit a travel offence on a bus.

 

Sorry, officer. You can't do me for the offence because I wasn't told of the law beforehand.

 

Even staff/police are not required to KNOW the exact wording of an offence, e.g..

 

Railway Byelaw 23(2)

 

The authorised person asking for details under Byelaw 23(1) shall state the nature of the breach of any of these Byelaws in general terms at the time of the request.

 

Therefore, I could say, your ticket is invalid because you don't have a photocard and I want your details.

 

When, in actual fact, the offence is:

 

In any area not designated as a compulsory ticket area, no person shall enter any train for the purpose of travelling on the railway unless he has with him a valid ticket entitling him to travel.

Any person reasonably suspected by an authorised person of breaching or attempting to breach any of these Byelaws shall give his name and address when asked by an authorised person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Murder is not even in the same realms as the above and you are trying to turn the tables and that is not what I am saying and you know it.

 

If you don't have to tell customers anything about the service that are sold, then that must be laid down somewhere, I want to see it?

 

Is there or isn't there a condition that says you must carry your pic card at all times when travelling ??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Murder is not even in the same realms as the above and you are trying to turn the tables and that is not what I am saying and you know it.

 

If you don't have to tell customers anything about the service that are sold, then that must be laid down somewhere, I want to see it?

 

Is there or isn't there a condition that says you must carry your pic card at all times when travelling ??

 

But they ARE told, in writing, that it is issued to certain conditions and they can find them easily at xxx location.

 

It isn't about contracts/conditions/civil law.

 

It is about CRIMINAL LAW which (generally) does not require you to publish that something is an offence!

 

I genuinely don't know what you are trying to say! You are either saying that all laws must be made personally available, in writing, by anyone affected by that law or you are saying that by not being given a copy of the ticket conditions automatically, (i.e. without being asked), that, somehow, you don't have to comply with those conditions, despite it being made very clear how to access them?

 

For example, every ticket office (rail), can provide you a copy of the NRCoC. But they won't give you one unless you ask for a copy, but you are told they exist and how to get them, (by it being printed on your ticket/pass). Are you saying that is a problem?

Edited by firstclassx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What does 'Transfered Pass' mean,

 

And going by what you say - 'sorry judge, there is no tick box saying you can't drive at 200 years of age so I ticked the bald tyre box instead'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What does 'Transfered Pass' mean,

 

And going by what you say - 'sorry judge, there is no tick box saying you can't drive at 200 years of age so I ticked the bald tyre box instead'.

 

But you don't end up in court on the tick box.

 

In this case, the "Penalty Fare" is completely withdrawn after a period of time (if unpaid/unsuccessfully appealed), and a summons can be issued for the criminal offence instead. In that court case, the Penalty Fare has absolutely no bearing because it was withdrawn.

 

In all cases where a Penalty Fare is appropriate, there is a strong case for successful prosecution as an alternative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they don't know the relevent laws, then how do they know one has been commited.

 

If you want to advise people, then give them the proper facts. As you are obviously one of them and have admitted you don't know the transport regulations, I have done your job for you.

 

"If you have an Oyster photocard or Oyster card with a valid discount concession on it, you cannot transfer it to anyone else to use. If you have an Oyster card or Oyster photocard with a valid discount concession on it, you can only use it if you have the appropriate supporting photocard or National Railcard with you at all times, including when you are purchasing a ticket or topping up an Oyster card, irrespective of the service you are using."

 

If it's not Oyster card in the op, then you go and get the relevent regulations to post up.

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...