Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Heavy handedness of DART ticket inspectors

Options
  • 17-11-2005 5:28pm
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,124 ✭✭✭


    ***Long story but please read all to understand the situation***

    My mother regularly uses and pays for the DART in the mornings from Bayside to Howth station.

    Currently at Bayside station there is building works so there is no proper ticket selling facilities or ticket turnstiles in the station. They currently use a portakabin to sell tickets from. There is a window they sell the tickets from and there is a small half circular gap in this window they exchange money and tickets through.

    Ok my mother goes to the station this morning and sees that there is a wooden plank lowered covering the gap. I have seen this on many occasions (including around the 9 am period) This is a signal that no one is selling tickets or there to sell tickets as 99% of people would comprehend this. I have never once seen anyone go and knock on this window when the wooden plank is down. Anyone would interpret that they aren't open for business. There is also no one ever checking that people have purchased their tickets in the morning so I can only presume that many people take the DART from here without a valid ticket.

    So my mother goes over just before 9 to take the DART to Howth and the wooden plank is down. Anyone would interpret that this means no one is there so pay at your destination. My mother knows that the DART is due in 2 minutes so she is left with no other choice but to enter the station (no one checking tickets once again). She takes the DART to Howth and plans to pay at the station. (I have seen countless amounts of people pay the ticket inspectors on arrival at Tara Stret station)

    So there about 3 inspectors there. They ask her for her ticket and she tells them about the situation which I mentioned above and offers to pay here fare. One of the inspectors takes her to one side and asks for her name and address. (They had a book with people's names and adresses so to prevent people giving false names but surely having private information like this is a violation of people's privacy and personal information) So she asks what is going on and this inspector accuses my mother of being a fare evader! :mad: She told them what exactly what the situation was but they ignored. They stated that this portakabin is always opened (with a plank covering the opening of the sales booth regularly we all know who's telling the truth here). They phone Bayside station and ask them were they there and they say ''yes''. (They are well known for being slack at Bayside station and being hardly there on many occasions to note)

    So after this phone call Mr. Ticket Inspector says as that my mother is a ''fare evader''. :mad: My mother got hugely upset over this for obvious reasons and this ticket inspector insinuates my mother of hallucinating over the booth not being open! :mad: He also suggests to my mother ''are you suffering from any worries?'' My mother is in tears and embarrased as people are walking by and looking at the situation. She pleads the situation looking for some common sense to no avail. He also strangley asks my mother for a ticket she have had from yesterday. My mother thankfully did because she isn't a regular ''fare evader'' like that inspector likes to make out. This ticket inspector takes my mother's details from this mysterious book of people's names and says he is going down to Bayside station. My mother rightly stands up for herself and says she wants to go down.

    So they go down to Bayside, my mother being horded around as if she was ''criminal''. When they arrive at Bayside station guess what? Wooden plank is covering the gap again! My mother points this out to Mr. Inspector. So they go in and there is the sellers inside the booth but gap not open to sell tickets? They say that they were there in the morning and make excuses such as that gap is down because it ''gets too cold'' etc crap like that (surely working in inappropriate cold conditions is against workers right isn't it not?) If people or a shop are doing business they make themselves look open, they didn't.

    My mother is told that her name has been taken and she will be fined. My mother states an hour of her time has been wasted and she is late for work. Mr Ticket Inspector again wrongly accuses my mother of being a ''fare evader'' by saying she shouldn't tell her employer over quote ''what she has done'' :mad:

    My mother is not a ''fare evader'' as anyone with any cop on or knowledge would realise after reading this. Bayside station is far too easily open to fare evasion and my mother is a victim of Bayside station's inept ticket selling and the ticket inspectors egotistical attiude and picking on of my mother. His treatment of her I find absolutely dispicable and if I was there I would have hit the roof!

    My mother is understandably refusing to pay her unwarranted fine. I have been on DARTs before and i have seen inspectors catch people without tickets and letting these individuals pay on the train. I've seen people pay the inspectors at Connolly Station and Tara Street on endless occassions. Surely the couldn't have as good logical reason as my mother could they? They have picked on and bullied my mother this morning to make it look they are doing their jobs. Any person with cop on, coomon sense and a bit of intelligent understanding would easily realise that my mother is not a fare evader and is a victim of circumstances.

    My mother is not paying the fine and if taken to court will fight her case for which I believe DART have absolutely NOTHING ON HER. My mother is considering taking the dispicable and unwarranted treatment of her further.

    What are your opinions on this situation? From what I have said (and every single word the truth) there is only one conclusion anyone can come to to.
    So do you think DART has a case?
    Does my mother have anything to take this further?
    What about this book/records of people's personal information? Is that legal?
    What about Bayside stations poor conditions regards to ticket selling/policing and workers working in insatisfactory conditions which results in them shutting down their selling booth?

    I am outraged and I want DART shamed to the highest degree.


«13

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 5,327 ✭✭✭dowlingm


    A letter to Dick Fearn and , cc your local TDs, would be the way I would go if taking it further.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,331 ✭✭✭MarkoP11


    No need for long story

    Simple summary

    Got to station
    Booking office appears closed for unknown reason
    Boarded
    Got hassle destination
    Fought back got serious ignorant agro

    Under these exact conditions CIE do not have a case, however failure to approach the ticket window to confirm it was indeed closed may be an issue, as IE will be able to show it was staffed and given no sign shown indicating closure (YES this is a sign I've seen used and it clearly states closed pay at destination)

    SI 109/1984, CORAS IOMPAIR ÉIREANN BYE-LAWS (CONFIRMATION) ORDER, 1984.
    4. Where the Board gives notice that a station is unattended or the booking office is closed, or where any person is instructed by an authorised person to board a train at a station without purchasing a ticket at the booking office so as not to delay the departure of the train from the station, any person not in possession of a valid ticket entitling him or her to travel may enter a vehicle at that station for the purpose of travelling but that person must obtain a ticket or other authority from an authorised person on the train as soon as practicable after entering any vehicle or from an authorised person on arrival at the station to which such person is travelling by the train.

    Yes the book is 100% legal its big red and called Toms directory and is well known in the legal and banking business, I've used it and it can be purchased, for reference anyone can view the electoral register and access the land registry

    There is a case with respect to a simlar scenario but that case was different to the extent the booking office was open but the queue was too long

    A major crack down was launched several months ago and a very large number of people have got caught and the majority put there hands up and pay the fine

    What you describe is unacceptable and you should file a case through the civil courts against CIE for the distress good name etc however CIE will fight the case on fact the ticket office was open and that there was no clear indication either way. On the balance of probailities was the office open it would appear so so a civil case might be shaky

    On the other hand the onus with repect to the fine is for CIE to show beyond a reasonable doubt that the office was open which doesnt look possible

    The game plan with CIE is they won't fight they settle but in this case

    A) Dont pay the 80 euro, inform CIE of this (CIE are the legal entity)
    B) Demand a formal apology and disciplinary proceedures against member of staff
    C) Threaten the legal

    If you want the CIE group solicitors name and address I can dig it up


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,519 ✭✭✭✭dudara


    Get on to Joe Duffy, or a suitable equivalent annoying DJ.

    Technically your mother is guilty as letter, according to the letter of the law, but leniancy should be shown here


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,082 ✭✭✭lostexpectation


    Why are they going so gung-ho over prosecuting everyone they need to make sure that there outlying stations are properly manned at all times! Or perhaps they should do that first!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,331 ✭✭✭MarkoP11


    They lost a case recently and changed approach to remove the inconsistency they got caught on

    I've no problem with throwing the book at someone who has been caught red handed

    It this case they crossed the line

    They won't fight it the case will be dropped the second a nasty letter lands in there office, but in this case this clearly isn't sufficent

    I'm tempted to board from a certain unstaffed station and see how far I get

    One point is if you are going the legal route it might not do your case any favours to be all over a cheap talkshow


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 242 ✭✭bungeecork


    OP - read the first few posts on this thread and then skip to post number 95.

    While the ticket inspector you write about did sound very very very rude, I am impressed with the fact that he was willing to check out the Bayside station then and there with your Mum. Even though he proceeded with the fine etc. it did give your Mum the evidence she needed to prove her story was correct as she had given it.

    The letter mentioned in the thread above did the trick (good luck getting it done pro bono though :) )

    And it sounds like your Mum had a stressful day - maybe a box of choccies and some flowers???


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,331 ✭✭✭MarkoP11


    Shove the solicitor at this stage a carefully worded letter with SI 109/1984 quoted will do more than enough. If they admit they are wrong in response thenn you can have some real fun


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 49 gerrydublin


    CIE you say have a crappy ticket office at Bayside,
    presumably because the footfall there does not warrant a large ticket office,
    am I missing something,
    but why the hell don't CIE they have automatic ticket machine with CCTV around it so it's not vandalised!
    Why do they need to employ someone in such crap conditions?
    I wonder if they did a cost benefit analysis of employing a ticket seller in Bayside and other small stations against having ticket machines at these stations, and individuals in a central location looking at the CCTV,
    why they still employ staff in these stations.
    I'm sure there is a good reason for the current situation...but


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,331 ✭✭✭MarkoP11


    Station is being rebuilt currently and will have ticket vending machines


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,951 ✭✭✭L5


    MarkoP11 wrote:
    No need for long story

    If you want the CIE group solicitors name and address I can dig it up


    Michael Carrol
    Bridgewater House
    Islandbridge
    Dublin ?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,331 ✭✭✭MarkoP11


    Dublin 8 of course


  • Registered Users Posts: 242 ✭✭bungeecork


    MarkoP11 wrote:
    (...) a carefully worded letter with SI 109/1984 quoted will do more than enough. If they admit they are wrong in response thenn you can have some real fun

    What fun do you mean - Joe Duffy fun?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,331 ✭✭✭MarkoP11


    admission they were wrong on paper means what happened shouldn't have happened and thence the staff member shoudl be disciplined and your solicitor would have a very easy job if you wished to push further because they have admitted they were wrong


  • Registered Users Posts: 656 ✭✭✭davidoco


    CIE you say have a crappy ticket office at Bayside,
    presumably because the footfall there does not warrant a large ticket office,
    am I missing something,
    but why the hell don't CIE they have automatic ticket machine with CCTV around it so it's not vandalised!
    Why do they need to employ someone in such crap conditions?
    I wonder if they did a cost benefit analysis of employing a ticket seller in Bayside and other small stations against having ticket machines at these stations, and individuals in a central location looking at the CCTV,
    why they still employ staff in these stations.
    I'm sure there is a good reason for the current situation...but

    The ticket office is a steel portacabin outside a new €250,000 1000 sq ft station, which has yet to be commissioned. My guess is that a couple of thousand people use Bayside each day.

    I saw those clickies one morning last week. Literally jumped out in front of me coming up the stairs looking for my ticket. As soon as I went to my pocket to take out the ticket he went "uuuuuuggggg" or something like that and turned away - extremely ignorant in my opinion.


    You definitely have a case for a letter to the inspector's supervisor at the very least.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,031 ✭✭✭MorningStar


    davidoco wrote:
    You definitely have a case for a letter to the inspector's supervisor at the very least.

    What ever you can say about the facts of the case the inspector did nothing wrong at all. For him to actually go to the station is beyond noraml measures and he could have easily just said "I have verified the station is open".

    She choose to go to the station with him and waste her own time. Technically speaking he had a every right to call her a fare evader as all evidence still points to that.

    The one thing I will say that was completely inappropriate was this womans crying. If a grown adult can't handle being accused of something with out flying in to a rage the same applies to crying. The same inability to control an emotional response and not acceptable from an adult. For all those that will say well she was upset big deal. I think the inspector asking if she was OK mentally made a lot of sense and showed a lot of compasion.

    The inspector as far as I can see went above and beyond the call of duty.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,029 ✭✭✭John_C


    When the inspector saw that a genuine mistake had been made which was, at least, partially the fault of the company he should have let the matter rest there.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,163 ✭✭✭Slash/ED


    John_C wrote:
    When the inspector saw that a genuine mistake had been made which was, at least, partially the fault of the company he should have let the matter rest there.

    Agreed, common sense should be applied in that situation.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 350 ✭✭Ray777


    Technically speaking he had a every right to call her a fare evader as all evidence still points to that.

    Common sense doesn't point towards that though, does it? I mean, most ticket inspectors have enough experience to know when they're faced with a chancer. It's the idiots who take that kind of black & white approach, who give the majority of fair and decent inspectors a bad name.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,585 ✭✭✭HelterSkelter


    I think the inspector asking if she was OK mentally made a lot of sense and showed a lot of compasion.

    The inspector as far as I can see went above and beyond the call of duty.
    He also suggests to my mother ''are you suffering from any worries?'' My mother is in tears
    I think this is a disgrace. The inspector is a bully and should face disiplinary action. If it was my mother I would find out who he is and pay him a visit to see if he is as brave when he is facing a man.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,315 ✭✭✭ballooba


    I remember arriving into Tara St station one day having stupidly left my ticket on the train. I just told my little sister that I was going to walk a little bit ahead given the situation. I calmly walked past the inspector without even looking at him. As my sis got to him she saw him look after me and mutter under his breath about me being a fúcking prick.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,331 ✭✭✭MarkoP11


    The advice in this situation is remain calm since you are a win win scenario, I'll explain

    There is no common sense to be applied, booking office appeared closed (thats the only questionable element) I am willing to pay the correct fare at the destination this is legally correct under SI109/1984

    If you do get issued with a fine where you clearly are in the right don't get angry if they persist do the following,

    Ask to be shown under what authority the fine is being issued i.e. show the section under which you are in breech of.

    Get the name of the inspector if its not clear on the docket you are issued and inform him that your solicitor will be in touch with CIE to contest the fine.

    Write a nasty letter quoting the law indicating that you will contest through the courts, if you can get a solicitor to do it for free do but remember you don't want to be out of pocket

    You should then get an apology not to mention a free trip for the journey you undertook if not get a solicitor remember it will cost CIE to go to court and the fines for real fare evaders rarely break €250 so its going to be loss making experience as the inspector has to be dragged in to give evidence and you will be awarded costs as the case you be thrown out

    You then have the statisfaction of victory over the machine


  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 39,238 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    Technically speaking he had a every right to call her a fare evader as all evidence still points to that.
    What is CIE's definition of a fare evader given that it is possible & allowed for someone to board a train without a valid ticket as long as they pay at the first opportunity? The OP's mother was willing to pay up so as far as I can see she satisfied the companys rules but was in fact stopped from doing so by the inspector.
    Furthermore, the inspector didn't seem to accept the fact that the office could have been closed even though he saw with his own eyes that it does in fact close during open hours. Anyhow if he truly believed that she was not being truthful then why go to the effort of proving his percieved point of view by going back to Bayside.
    Also as closures are a frequent occurence at many stations (it used to be common at confey befoire I realised that paying to stand in an overcrowded train was stupid). Surely he has come across this situation before.


  • Registered Users Posts: 916 ✭✭✭MicraBoy


    What is CIE's definition of a fare evader given that it is possible & allowed for someone to board a train without a valid ticket as long as they pay at the first opportunity?

    It's not possible and allowed if the ticket office at the station they boarded at was open. This rule only applies if the ticket office is closed.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,331 ✭✭✭MarkoP11


    MicraBoy wrote:
    It's not possible and allowed if the ticket office at the station they boarded at was open. This rule only applies if the ticket office is closed.
    Or if a member of IE staff in the interest of ensuring the train departs promtly is authorised to tell passengers to board and pay on board or at destination, but that is their call, highly rare and to be fair only occured where you had a situation where the ticket issurer was also in charge of train eg acting signalman


  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 39,238 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    MicraBoy wrote:
    It's not possible and allowed if the ticket office at the station they boarded at was open. This rule only applies if the ticket office is closed.
    Hold on.
    Looking at SI 109/1984, CORAS IOMPAIR ÉIREANN BYE-LAWS (CONFIRMATION) ORDER, 1984.
    4. Where the Board gives notice that a station is unattended or the booking office is closed, or where any person is instructed by an authorised person to board a train at a station without purchasing a ticket at the booking office so as not to delay the departure of the train from the station, any person not in possession of a valid ticket entitling him or her to travel may enter a vehicle at that station for the purpose of travelling but that person must obtain a ticket or other authority from an authorised person on the train as soon as practicable after entering any vehicle or from an authorised person on arrival at the station to which such person is travelling by the train.
    The station office was for all intents closed or possibly unattended. What else was the OPs mother to do? Should she have rung directory enquiries for CIE HQ's number, and then phoned someone up there just to clarify what she should do?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,031 ✭✭✭MorningStar


    I think this is a disgrace. The inspector is a bully and should face disiplinary action. If it was my mother I would find out who he is and pay him a visit to see if he is as brave when he is facing a man.

    Just becasue she was crying doesn't mean he did anything wrong. ASking if she was menatlly stable sounds reasonable. What suggests he did anything wrong and there was absolutely no need for him to go to the station with her which I take he did as a way to cailm her.
    She was crying from embarrasment is sugggested here nothing else.
    Ray777 wrote:
    Common sense doesn't point towards that though, does it? I mean, most ticket inspectors have enough experience to know when they're faced with a chancer. It's the idiots who take that kind of black & white approach, who give the majority of fair and decent inspectors a bad name.

    Being very basic about it, station open,verified, person cliams it was closed they are either lying or made a mistake. Not paid to work it out easiest cheapest solution to fare problem is not to believe anyone. Greater good is worth a few mistakes and also makes people be more aware of the importance of paying. Common sense say this is the correct approach for best overall results. She should have accepted what he said and proceeded to complain later. She wasted her own time and his.


  • Registered Users Posts: 916 ✭✭✭MicraBoy


    What else was the OPs mother to do?

    Knock on the portacabin wall or the plank of wood? Simple. I bet she'll do it in future.

    The office was open from IE's point of view. Anyway I wasn't criticising her, just pointing out that your interpretation of the rule was a bit open ended.

    It's beyond me why the inspector didn't drop the issue when he saw the plank over the hole :confused:

    I think following MarkoP11's advice is the best course of action and will sort the problem out.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,585 ✭✭✭HelterSkelter


    ASking if she was menatlly stable sounds reasonable.

    First of all, he didn't say anything about her being mentally stable so why do you keep saying this? Are you suggesting the OP's mother is mentally unstable? As the OP said:
    He also suggests to my mother ''are you suffering from any worries?'' My mother is in tears

    What right has he to ask a question like that? His job is to determine if she had a valid ticket or not, he has no right to ask patronising questions especially as the woman was obviously upset. How insensitive can someone be? I can't believe you are defending these bully boy tatics. What a coward he is. I bet he wouldn't have the balls to challenge a group of lads drinking cider on the train. He sounds to me like someone who once they put on a uniform and given any form of authority it goes straight to their head. I seriously hope the OP takes legal action against the inspector and company.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,585 ✭✭✭HelterSkelter


    MicraBoy wrote:
    It's beyond me why the inspector didn't drop the issue when he saw the plank over the hole :confused:
    Bouncer mentality, that's why. He couldn't bear to admit the OP's mother was in the right and he was WRONG.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,082 ✭✭✭lostexpectation


    ms has just won a job om my ignore list for being a fulltime **** anyone adding hhim too?


Advertisement