Luas Standard Fare Notice - Court Summons

deepriver

I got a standard fare notice during the summer for travelling outside the zone my luas ticket was valid for - I appealed the fine, but it got rejected.

It slipped my mind to pay the €45 fine and I just got a summons in the post. Quite suprised as it seems a small amount to bring someone to court over.

Does anyone have experience of going to court on such an offence and what to expect? Will they be looking for a large fine, is there any documentation on set fines etc or is it just down to the judge.

I rang customer care and offered to pay, but they told me no...

goingnowhere

Why on earth people cannot take these fines seriously drives me nuts. Why people cannot buy the correct ticket in the first place? Luas is hardly complex

Max fine is 1000 euro and or 3 months jail time and nearly all cases before the court are successful so expect a bad day.

monument

goingnowhere wrote: »

...nearly all cases before the court are successful...

What are you basing that on?

foggy_lad

deepriver wrote: »

I got a standard fare notice during the summer for travelling outside the zone my luas ticket was valid for - I appealed the fine, but it got rejected.

It slipped my mind to pay the €45 fine and I just got a summons in the post. Quite suprised as it seems a small amount to bring someone to court over.

Does anyone have experience of going to court on such an offence and what to expect? Will they be looking for a large fine, is there any documentation on set fines etc or is it just down to the judge.

I rang customer care and offered to pay, but they told me no...

The fact that you rang them and offered to pay will go in your favour.

robd

foggy_lad wrote: »

The fact that you rang them and offered to pay will go in your favour.

Also if you plead guilty, stating that you simply forgot to pay fine, and apologise for wasting the courts time the charge will be near to the original fine.

How near, depends on the judges mood. It's entirely at his discretion. Dress appropriately.

deepriver

goingnowhere wrote: »

Max fine is 1000 euro and or 3 months jail time and nearly all cases before the court are successful so expect a bad day.

Is this outlined in legislation / an act / bye laws etc?

I'm truly surprised to be summoned to court for a €45 ticket..

Losty Dublin

deepriver wrote: »

Is this outlined in legislation / an act / bye laws etc?

I'm truly surprised to be summoned to court for a €45 ticket..

Your summons should refer to the relevant law on it that they are prosecuting you under.

Quite why you are suprised that you are being prosecuted is another story unless you want to go on a "it's not a real crime and they should be out there chasing rapists et al" type rant; after all you did break the law

schemingbohemia

deepriver wrote: »

Is this outlined in legislation / an act / bye laws etc?

I'm truly surprised to be summoned to court for a €45 ticket..

How do you expect them to get the money from you otherwise? You ignored paying the fine, this is the next step. It tends to concentrate the mind as you've found out.

AlekSmart

deepriver wrote: »

Is this outlined in legislation / an act / bye laws etc?

I'm truly surprised to be summoned to court for a €45 ticket..

Oh dear,Deepriver,I'm afraid this kinda underlines the Irish malaise to a T.

However,it's probably good to get the actualité sorted as in the answer to the first question.....

Yes the responsibility of the operator to administer it's bye-laws is indeed contained in the baseline leglislation setting up the entire sheebang...

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2001/en/act/pub/0055/sec0066.html#sec66

Sec66 (1) (e) the fixing, altering, charging and recovery of fares, fees, tolls and charges in respect of the travelling upon or use of railway vehicles,

Particular note should be paid to the last sentence in this section....

(3) A person who contravenes a bye-law under this section is guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding €600.

Otherwise,it's back to the basics...

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2004/en/si/0100.html

(c) Use or attempt to use a ticket for more journeys than permitted by the ticket,

So hopefully,the above will demonstrate that LUAS is'nt some fly-by-night scam operation designed to rob you blind.

It's equally worth remembering that when you you buy a ticket for any Public Transport service you are accepting the T's & C's attached to it...and voluntarily at that.

Hopefully Deepriver,your true surprise at a Public Transport Operator actually enforcing any of it's conditions of carriage will be replaced by a acceptance that doing stuff has certain responsibilities attached and paying a €45 Standard Fare is but one of them....

Good Luck with the Court Appearance,as other posters have said....regard it from here on in as a Damage Limitation exercise,don't (please) get Rumpole'ish about it,as the hard pressed Judge will more than likely take a dim view of that....contrite,explanatory and brief should be yout mantras....:)

mydiscworld

They are taking you to court for a few hundred euro. Not €45.

Wouldn't be surprised if they preferred all customers forgot to pay the €45 fine as they make way more in court!

Losty Dublin

mydiscworld wrote: »

They are taking you to court for a few hundred euro. Not €45.

Wouldn't be surprised if they preferred all customers forgot to pay the €45 fine as they make way more in court!

Wrong, the State coffers gets the fine. Luas will get costs and the standard fare awarded to them by the judge at best.

mydiscworld

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Wrong, the State coffers gets the fine. Luas will get costs and the standard fare awarded to them by the judge at best.

Interesting. I suppose those €45 fines all add up but seems a lot of hassle in that case for such a tiny sum!

Losty Dublin

mydiscworld wrote: »

Interesting. I suppose those €45 fines all add up but seems a lot of hassle in that case for such a tiny sum!

It's more so the principle of being seen to be enforcing their ticketing arrangements and by laws. Let's face it, when there is no comeback for not purchasing a ticket then there is no point in purchasing said ticket to begin with, same way if we ignore parking tickets or speeding tickets or that they will end up in the courts as well.

n97 mini

I forgot to pay a €20 parking fine. Went to court, got a €100 fine.

My wife forgot to pay a €20 parking fine. She didn't go to court as we had moved house and the summons was missed. The court just upheld the original fine.

mydiscworld

I suppose it really depends on the judge.

My ex housemate parked on double yellow lines outside our house. The lines had been newly put in place a fortnight or so earlier. A few neighbours were also caught out & all appeared in court on the same day.

The judge threw all the fines out!

robd

mydiscworld wrote: »

Interesting. I suppose those €45 fines all add up but seems a lot of hassle in that case for such a tiny sum!

Penalty fare on DART is €100 so €45 is a good deal if you bother to pay it. It's nothing to do with the amount. It's to do with revenue protection. All operators in Ireland loss a huge amount due to over stoppers, non payment, and fake passes etc. They have to be seen to be vigilant. Luas has no barriers so only way is ticket inspector presence and fines followed by court appearance of non payment. Contrast to Irish rail who use barriers more and more to try to control fare evasion and over stoppers. However, if you arrive in city centre without ticket you now get €100 fine rather than being allowed to pay as you used to be.

mikemac

mydiscworld wrote: »

Interesting. I suppose those €45 fines all add up but seems a lot of hassle in that case for such a tiny sum!

They'll race through the cases, the OP will be one of many there

Well at least when I was in court for the TV licence , there were two courts in Dolphin House set aside for the morning and they lashed through the cases, from your name called, the inspector speaking, An Post solicitor speaking, you saying your piece and then the judge took about three to four minutes.
Very efficient

So it's not a big deal, they probably set aside all these Luas cases for one morning and will race through them in no time

Be sure to show up OP, judges take it personally and an insult to them if you don't bother to show up in their court

Cookie_Monster

mydiscworld wrote: »

I suppose it really depends on the judge.

My ex housemate parked on double yellow lines outside our house. The lines had been newly put in place a fortnight or so earlier. A few neighbours were also caught out & all appeared in court on the same day.

The judge threw all the fines out!

OT but that's ridiculous. It's not like they aren't easily visible and obvious in meaning.

foggy_lad

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Your summons should refer to the relevant law on it that they are prosecuting you under.

Quite why you are suprised that you are being prosecuted is another story unless you want to go on a "it's not a real crime and they should be out there chasing rapists et al" type rant; after all you did break the law

schemingbohemia wrote: »

How do you expect them to get the money from you otherwise? You ignored paying the fine, this is the next step. It tends to concentrate the mind as you've found out.

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Wrong, the State coffers gets the fine. Luas will get costs and the standard fare awarded to them by the judge at best.

deepriver wrote: »

I rang customer care and offered to pay, but they told me no...

It seems astonishing that this company would bring the op to court after they have offered to pay the fine, not only are they ensuring their costs in this rise far above what they can ever hope to recover from the op, it also shows them as rather vindictive and petty by ensuring the op's costs are also much higher from a day off work etc

The company are also wasting the time of the courts as well as wasting state money in these challenging times as the court procedure will probably cost more than the fine & costs especially if the op shows an inability to pay a large fine or high costs.

Cop on Veolia and take the €45 and get on with business instead of trying to punish the op for an offence they have offered to pay the fine for.

Losty Dublin

foggy_lad wrote: »

It seems astonishing that this company would bring the op to court after they have offered to pay the fine,

OP had three chances to pay their fare; when they first used the Luas, when they got issued a Standard Fare and when they had their appeal rejected. There is no justification why he should get yet another chance to pay up, especially when the courts come knocking.

foggy_lad wrote: »

The company are also wasting the time of the courts as well as wasting state money in these challenging times as the court procedure will probably cost more than the fine & costs especially if the op shows an inability to pay a large fine or high costs.

If they win, they will most likely win their fare plus legal fees by way of costs; the State will pick up the fine money. The court still has to sit so it's not costing much more to hear this case than it is not to hear it or to strike it out. The alternative is to not bother chasing fare evaders thus effectively make it legal not to pay your fare and rendering fares pointless in the first place.

foggy_lad wrote: »

Cop on Veolia and take the €45 and get on with business instead of trying to punish the op for an offence they have offered to pay the fine for.

:rolleyes:

foggy_lad

Losty Dublin wrote: »

OP had three chances to pay their fare; when they first used the Luas, when they got issued a Standard Fare and when they had their appeal rejected. There is no justification why he should get yet another chance to pay up, especially when the courts come knocking.



If they win, they will most likely win their fare plus legal fees by way of costs; the State will pick up the fine money. The court still has to sit so it's not costing much more to hear this case than it is not to hear it or to strike it out. The alternative is to not bother chasing fare evaders thus effectively make it legal not to pay your fare and rendering fares pointless in the first place.



:rolleyes:

The most they can hope for is the initial €45 and I doubt very much they would get any costs as it is their own decision to pursue the op through the courts for a fare the op is willing to pay!

Afaik the option to pay the €45 should be there for the op right up to the courthouse steps, it is the same with any other payment.

Losty Dublin

foggy_lad wrote: »

The most they can hope for is the initial €45 and I doubt very much they would get any costs as it is their own decision to pursue the op through the courts for a fare the op is willing to pay!

Afaik the option to pay the €45 should be there for the op right up to the courthouse steps, it is the same with any other payment.

They will and do get costs as per the order of the judge; it's the case with most prosecutions to compensate their case expenses; why else would you think that costs are awarded?:rolleyes: I don't know where you get the idea that you can make other payments to avoid a summons and prosecution. It may well be the case with civil cases related to debts but it's certainly not the case with motoring offences, parking fines, etc.

n97 mini

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

OT but that's ridiculous. It's not like they aren't easily visible and obvious in meaning.

How do you know?

I got a parking fine in Mullingar for parking partially on a yellow box that I didn't know was there as it was covered in snow!

The clerk, a young wan about 20 got all confused when I tried to argue so it was just easier to pay it and be gone.

deepriver

I believe everyone's opinion on this is valid it is both harsh and fair, its both a waste of the courts time and public tax payers money and also necessary to ensure people pay their fare.

Hopefully some diligent civil servants will put aside similar amounts of time to compose detailed and far reaching legal acts to catch some white collar criminals who get away with the big ticket crimes..p

Yes the fine appears to be €600 according to section 66 of the railway act.

I have now written to the operators of the luas with a cheque enclosed and asked very nicely would they accept the money

.. here is hoping common sense prevails..

monument

deepriver wrote: »

I believe everyone's opinion on this is valid it is both harsh and fair, its both a waste of the courts time and public tax payers money and also necessary to ensure people pay their fare.

Hopefully some diligent civil servants will put aside similar amounts of time to compose detailed and far reaching legal acts to catch some white collar criminals who get away with the big ticket crimes..p

Yes the fine appears to be €600 according to section 66 of the railway act.

I have now written to the operators of the luas with a cheque enclosed and asked very nicely would they accept the money

.. here is hoping common sense prevails..

If you do this, and, they say no or don't reply, keep proof of such for court.

Any right minded judge should dismiss the case.

Losty Dublin

monument wrote: »

If you do this, and, they say no or don't reply, keep proof of such for court.

Any right minded judge should dismiss the case.

Why would you reckon that "any right minded judge" dismiss a prosecution by way of accused trying to pay up a long outstanding fine months and months after the event? Sure, the case is up in court because the fine wasn't paid in the first place

markpb

deepriver wrote: »

I believe everyone's opinion on this is valid it is both harsh and fair, its both a waste of the courts time and public tax payers money and also necessary to ensure people pay their fare.

What method would you suggest that RPA use for ensuring that people pay for their travel?

They let the OP buy a ticket before his trip, they let him pay a fine after being caught. What next? They could use the same method as M50/NRA and offer a sliding scale of fines culminating in legal action but people would still complain.

monument

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Why would you reckon that "any right minded judge" dismiss a prosecution by way of accused trying to pay up a long outstanding fine months and months after the event? Sure, the case is up in court because the fine wasn't paid in the first place

I may have misread their post, if they are now just offering the normal standard fare of €45 then the judge may not dismiss the case outright, but even offering that amount is a good idea and will be looked on favorablly in court.

Losty Dublin

monument wrote: »

I may have misread their post, if they are now just offering the normal standard fare of €45 then the judge may not dismiss the case outright, but even offering that amount is a good idea and will be looked on favorablly in court.

No hassle about misreading it, I can see it that OP made it out as if he was willing to pay the full fine.

That said I still don't see why a judge would be favourable about you making good a long outstanding fine. If anything, from the bits and pieces I see in some of the local papers I would almost expect some district court judges to take it badly and throw the book at the accused but there you go

OP, what date is your hearing for?

foggy_lad

Losty Dublin wrote: »

No hassle about misreading it, I can see it that OP made it out as if he was willing to pay the full fine.

That said I still don't see why a judge would be favourable about you making good a long outstanding fine. If anything, from the bits and pieces I see in some of the local papers I would almost expect some district court judges to take it badly and throw the book at the accused but there you go

OP, what date is your hearing for?

Anything I have read about such cases in papers involves judges dismissing case after case because they are seen as wasting the courts time, because they could and should have been settled out of court.

How can you say so categorically what any judge might do in these cases? You seem to be answering posts as some kind of authority on the workings of the courts.

Losty Dublin

foggy_lad wrote: »

Anything I have read about such cases in papers involves judges dismissing case after case because they are seen as wasting the courts time, because they could and should have been settled out of court.

What papers are you reading said reports from? A few examples of cases of non payment of ticket fines would prove helpful, if indeed such exist.

foggy_lad wrote: »

How can you say so categorically what any judge might do in these cases? You seem to be answering posts as some kind of authority on the workings of the courts.

When I was studying in college (media), some of us went to the district courts to watch cases in action to learn a little about how cases came and went. As a general rule, judges took no crap from people who tried to waste the courts time by offering to pay small fines, give to poor box, etc after the event unless there was clear circumstances to justify same; "forgetting" to pay fine was not justification.

deepriver

I think its fair to say if you engage with the company trying to bring you to court in a meaningful way and try to settle the issue outside the courts, any judge would look on that in a more positive light rather than ignoring the fine and not turning up in court etc

There is no legitimate excuse not to pay the fine but a person may have a reason as to why they didnt comply so quickly again this may stand in your favour.

A lot of people on this post seem to have zero tolerance towards this kind of situation but if you compare the Luas system to say the Dublin Bus system and the TV license system..

Quite often a bus conductor / driver would let common sense and humanity prevail and allow the offender to pay the difference in the ticket .ie 20 cents.. the operators of Luas declined this offer in my case

With the TV license you are sent several reminders of the outstanding amount before court action is taken, again a common sense approach.. on rejecting my appeal the next communication I received from the Luas operators was a court summons.. also in none of their communications did they point out that I could possibly face court and fines.. another failing in my opinion..

Either of these two approaches might have avoided courts, fines and legal costs for all parties..

I'm also slightly bemused as to how the Rail Infrastructure Act is so comprehensive with very clear offences and fines structures but our legislation around white collar crime is very weak.. If the Anglo executives had been brought to court with the same efficiency as Luas ticket offenders, there would be a lot of happy people in Ireland!

bk

deepriver wrote: »

I'm also slightly bemused as to how the Rail Infrastructure Act is so comprehensive with very clear offences and fines structures but our legislation around white collar crime is very weak.. If the Anglo executives had been brought to court with the same efficiency as Luas ticket offenders, there would be a lot of happy people in Ireland!

Completely irrelevant. It is such an Irish thing when people get caught doing something wrong to whine that bigger criminals are getting away.

Irish people seem to have such little respect for the law. It is exactly this attitude that many Irish people have, that lead to Anglo, etc. Everyone seems to think they are above the law.

We all need to abide by the law, big or small and we should all face the consequences of our actions, big or small.

Having said that, Luas's approach to fines does seem sub-optimal. They should make it clear that it will go to court if the fine isn't paid in x days and the possible penalties faced in court.

They should also have a graduated fine if you call up to pay after x days but before the court case. Something like perhaps three times the standard fine, for administrative costs, etc.

deepriver

bk wrote: »

Completely irrelevant. It is such an Irish thing when people get caught doing something wrong to whine that bigger criminals are getting away.

Irish people seem to have such little respect for the law. It is exactly this attitude that many Irish people have, that lead to Anglo, etc. Everyone seems to think they are above the law.

We all need to abide by the law, big or small and we should all face the consequences of our actions, big or small.

Having said that, Luas's approach to fines does seem sub-optimal. They should make it clear that it will go to court if the fine isn't paid in x days and the possible penalties faced in court.

They should also have a graduated fine if you call up to pay after x days but before the court case. Something like perhaps three times the standard fine, for administrative costs, etc.

The law is designed by the ruling classes to punish those below them.. unfortunately little or no law exists to lock up the ruling classes.. that is inequitable and unjust to have a two tier law system and somebody needs to do something about it.. anyway off topic

agree with your point that the operators of the luas have a below par system for dealing with these issues.. I also found there customer care staff confrontational.. they hung up on me when I offered to pay the fine

Losty Dublin

You don't seem to get it at all, do you?

deepriver wrote: »

I think its fair to say if you engage with the company trying to bring you to court in a meaningful way and try to settle the issue outside the courts, any judge would look on that in a more positive light rather than ignoring the fine and not turning up in court etc

How many chances should you get here?

You forgot to

1. pay the correct fare on the day
2. the fixed fare having been caught on the Luas
3. having appealed and lost and prsumably getting word that you failed and still had to pay, you still didn't pay up as it "slipped your mind".

Now that it is going to court you reckon you deserve a 4th chance to pay up to avoid your day in the dock with no consequence yet Luas are the ones wasting time and money, according to you.

deepriver wrote: »

There is no legitimate excuse not to pay the fine but a person may have a reason as to why they didnt comply so quickly again this may stand in your favour.

What's the difference between an excuse and a reason here? In your case, it "slipped your mind" , will a judge look favourably on that?

deepriver wrote: »

A lot of people on this post seem to have zero tolerance towards this kind of situation but if you compare the Luas system to say the Dublin Bus system and the TV license system..

Quite often a bus conductor / driver would let common sense and humanity prevail and allow the offender to pay the difference in the ticket .ie 20 cents.. the operators of Luas declined this offer in my case

Luas works on a system of honour in that it trusts us to buy the right ticket before we board. You didn't buy the right ticket and you didn't honour the system so why should it honour you?

deepriver wrote: »

With the TV license you are sent several reminders of the outstanding amount before court action is taken, again a common sense approach.. on rejecting my appeal the next communication I received from the Luas operators was a court summons.. also in none of their communications did they point out that I could possibly face court and fines.. another failing in my opinion..

Your fixed fare would have mention the threat of prosecution should you not pay it, as do the ads on board plus your letter rejectiong appeal.

deepriver wrote: »

Either of these two approaches might have avoided courts, fines and legal costs for all parties..

As would paying the right fare on the day or the fixed fare on time. Sin sceal eile.

Oasis_Dublin

deepriver wrote: »

The law is designed by the ruling classes to punish those below them.. unfortunately little or no law exists to lock up the ruling classes.. that is inequitable and unjust to have a two tier law system and somebody needs to do something about it.. anyway off topic

I'm pretty certain the law regarding the payment of luas fares, and fines related to failures to pay said luas fares, is exactly the same for everyone, regardless of class or profession.

If not, can someone please tell me where I pick up my middle-class certificate which allows me to ride public transport for free!

AlekSmart

deepriver wrote: »

I'm also slightly bemused as to how the Rail Infrastructure Act is so comprehensive with very clear offences and fines structures but our legislation around white collar crime is very weak.. If the Anglo executives had been brought to court with the same efficiency as Luas ticket offenders, there would be a lot of happy people in Ireland!

Legislation surrounding so-called white-collar crime in Ireland is so weak largely because it is a relatively new area for Ireland to be involved in.

Non-Payment of Fares and other breaches of Railway Bye-Laws have been with us for a century and a half and have thus been well and truly proven.

The Anglo executives,whos'e hides Deepriver so assidiously seeks to tan,have not broken any of the laws,simply because there were no laws to break.

That situation was deliberately brought about by our elected Governments policy of "Light-Touch Regulation" in the Financial Sector,a policy which up until late 2008 had proven to be spectacularly successful at attracting inward foreign investment as well as beefing up the national stock of Range-Rover Vogue's.....:D

It's sod all to do with some Class-War,Oppress the Worker scenario but rather more to do with opportunistic profit taking amongst a VERY wide range of Irish Society....Butchers,Bakers,Candlestick Makers and the rest !!!!

AlekSmart

foggy_lad wrote: »

Anything I have read about such cases in papers involves judges dismissing case after case because they are seen as wasting the courts time, because they could and should have been settled out of court.

How can you say so categorically what any judge might do in these cases? You seem to be answering posts as some kind of authority on the workings of the courts.

Well said Foggy_Lad...this place is chock full authorative postings on such important stuff like The Courts...and even Public Transport Operations....;)

deepriver

AlekSmart wrote: »

Legislation surrounding so-called white-collar crime in Ireland is so weak largely because it is a relatively new area for Ireland to be involved in.

Non-Payment of Fares and other breaches of Railway Bye-Laws have been with us for a century and a half and have thus been well and truly proven.

The Anglo executives,whos'e hides Deepriver so assidiously seeks to tan,have not broken any of the laws,simply because there were no laws to break.

That situation was deliberately brought about by our elected Governments policy of "Light-Touch Regulation" in the Financial Sector,a policy which up until late 2008 had proven to be spectacularly successful at attracting inward foreign investment as well as beefing up the national stock of Range-Rover Vogue's.....:D

It's sod all to do with some Class-War,Oppress the Worker scenario but rather more to do with opportunistic profit taking amongst a VERY wide range of Irish Society....Butchers,Bakers,Candlestick Makers and the rest !!!!

agree... the legal system needs to catch up... however the fixing of share prices (the golden 10) was illegal and also the hiding of large director loans on the balance sheet was also.. it just seems we are unable to bring charges?

thanks to those for the positive & helpful feedback...

endacl

mydiscworld wrote: »

They are taking you to court for a few hundred euro. Not €45.

Wouldn't be surprised if they preferred all customers forgot to pay the €45 fine as they make way more in court!

Could be argued that all of this hassle is realistically over cents. The difference between the two fares? Lesson to be learned here?

schemingbohemia

Any chance of staying on-topic and dealing with your fare evasion rather than the ills of the country?

AlekSmart

endacl wrote: »

Could be argued that all of this hassle is realistically over cents. The difference between the two fares? Lesson to be learned here?

Dublin Bus are currently running a high-profile on-bus poster campaign which runs something like this...

"Whats the Difference between €1.20 and €1.65 ?.........€50 !!"

That's about it in a nutshell really...?

deepriver

update:

Luas operators accepted a cheque in the post for the standard fare amount after issuing the summons, this was after I called customer care and they refused to take a credit card payment

monument

They know that there was a good chance the case and fine would been outright dismissed if it went to court.

And, in any case, the main goals of all revenue protection is to get people to buy tickets and, failing that, to get them to pay the fine and have as few as possible cases to bring to court.

deepriver

monument wrote: »

They know that there was a good chance the case and fine would been outright dismissed if it went to court.

And, in any case, the main goals of all revenue protection is to get people to buy tickets and, failing that, to get them to pay the fine and have as few as possible cases to bring to court.

Agree, the whole point is to get the money, I don't think a judge would look favourably on a situation where the they refused to accept payment of the fine...

Still going to court as far as I know, I havent been informed its been struct off the court roster..

foggy_lad

deepriver wrote: »

Agree, the whole point is to get the money, I don't think a judge would look favourably on a situation where the they refused to accept payment of the fine...

Still going to court as far as I know, I havent been informed its been struct off the court roster..

The case will most likely be listed for the day either morning or afternoon and veolia will inform the court clerk that it has been dealt with so it will be crossed off the list.

Victor

deepriver wrote: »

Still going to court as far as I know, I havent been informed its been struct off the court roster..

Don't rely on someone else to make sure that it has been struck out. Get it in writing and/or go yourself / be represented.

deepriver

Update on this:

Luas operators confirmed in writing the summons to court is no longer necessary.

Just to recap, I got a summons to court for a standard fare notice, I immediately rang customer care and asked them to accept a credit card payment which they refused, I then put down the phone and sent them a cheque in the post with a very polite letter, they accepted the cheque and the case was removed from the courts roster.. hope that helps someone else who runs into the same problem.. they must engage with you on a reasonable basis and make efforts to settle outside the courts, equally so must the offender!

eim

Hey, just wondering what happened in the end. The exact same thing happened to me. How much did they fine you in the end?