Appealing DART fine due to inadequate ticket machine + unmanned station: Advice?

hatrickpatrick

First off, I realize completely that this has been utterly done to death on this forum, and based on my reading of a previous thread in which it was stated that the machine is irrelevant in the first place, I reckon I have a good case. But I'd value people's input on this, as it's an unusual one which I haven't seen anyone commenting on here before, regarding the limitations of a ticket machine itself.

I got fined on the DART yesterday morning, I was travelling from Sandycove & Glasthule to Tara Street in order to get the bus to Electric Picnic.

Sandycove station is always unmanned on Saturday and Sunday, and has been for at least the last year (if not possibly longer than that). The notice on the ticket office says the station is closed and to please buy a ticket from the Vending Machine.

Now, these vending machines frequently break down (or perhaps it's more likely that they break down as often as others, but are serviced less due to it being a smaller station next to a huge one such as Dun Laoghaire). When this has happened to me in the past, I have boarded the train and paid for my journey at my destination (those who frequent the city centre will know that Pearse and Tara street almost always have someone waiting there to collect such fares).

Yesterday was an interesting one. I was in a rush heading out of my house and grabbed my €2.50 fare from the jar I keep my dart / bus change in. Upon arriving at the station, I attempted to buy my ticket.
I was going to pay with a €2 coin, two 20c coins and five 2c coins. The only other money I had on me were two €50 notes, for the EP bus and for the actual festival.
On attempting to buy my ticket, the machine kept spitting out the smaller coppers, this happened repeatedly, so I had no option but to board and pay at the destination. When talking to the ticket inspector I explained that the machine seemed to be broken and he was very nice about it, told me he had no choice but to give me the fine slip and take my details, but I could appeal and they'd check out the machine.

This was all grand and I paid for the journey at Tara Street, as usual.

However, getting the dart home this morning from town I had another look at the screen of the ticket machine, and noticed that it actually only lists change from 5c upwards as acceptable payment in the machine, and that it won't accept €50 notes for journeys under €31. Evidently this wasn't actually a fault, the machine simply isn't designed to accept small coppers.

Do I have a case to appeal here? First of all having read the other threads here it would seem that there is no legal obligation to use the machine in the first place, seeing as it isn't mentioned in the bye law. Furthermore however, I would argue that it is entirely not my fault that the machine doesn't accept coins which are in every way valid legal tender in this country. I actually thought it'd be a good opportunity to get rid of the small coppers since I was unlikely to use them for anything else!

So I'm planning to appeal on two grounds, one being the fact that legally the ticket booth was closed anyway, but secondly on the grounds that I fully intended to pay, and did pay with those coins at the destination - and it is not the consumer's fault if Irish Rail's vending machines do not accept valid legal tender.

My question is, do you think they'll give me some BS that I should have known in advance that the machine wouldn't accept my small change? I'm anticipating something along these lines, but it's an interesting one since I regularly pay at the ticket booth with the aforementioned small coins and I've never had a problem - and I paid for the ticket at Tara Street using the same small coins, again without there being any problem.

Does this fall legitimately under "The ticket machine was unable to give me the ticket I required", or will they simply tell me to feck off?

n97 mini

You didn't set out to defraud the company, so therefore you have a case. Bye-laws allow for boarding of a train without a ticket in certain circumstances, and one of them is when the booking office is closed (so long as you intend to pay at the destination).

mdebets

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I would argue that it is entirely not my fault that the machine doesn't accept coins which are in every way valid legal tender in this country. I actually thought it'd be a good opportunity to get rid of the small coppers since I was unlikely to use them for anything else!

So I'm planning to appeal on two grounds, one being the fact that legally the ticket booth was closed anyway, but secondly on the grounds that I fully intended to pay, and did pay with those coins at the destination - and it is not the consumer's fault if Irish Rail's vending machines do not accept valid legal tender.

Can't give you an answer on the other points, but your legal tender argument is a non-runner.
Legal tender comes only into play when repaying a debt. Any retailer can choose which money to accept or not accept (he could for example state that he only accept German Euro coins and nothing else).

Funnily enough, if the ticket machine were really broken and you were allowed to pay at your destination and they wouldn't accept your 1 and 2 cent coins, you would have a case, as at that point a debt existed (you took the Dart) and they were legally obliged to accept legal tender.

CatFromHue

I don't know the technicalities but you had the money to pay and tried to pay so I hope they see sense!

Regarding paying with notes. Any time I'd paid for a 2.50 fair with a 20e note I always get my change in coins.

goingnowhere

The machines don't accept 1c and 2c coins, so the machine was not defective

This is indicated clearly on the coin slot and also on the screen when the payment options are shown

Luas machines don't accept any copper at all.

You were afforded reason opportunity to pay and didn't, so the fine is legit

CatFromHue

goingnowhere wrote: »

You were afforded reason opportunity to pay and didn't, so the fine is legit

But he says that he had money but the machine wouldn't accept it.

hatrickpatrick

^Interesting, and a little bizarre

One other question then, who should I address my letter to? Is there a specific person or will sir/madam have to do?

corktina

i would not expect any machine to accept coppers, Im actually surprised it takes 5c coins!

dowlingm

I don't think many machines accept even 5c coins - maybe chocolate/tayto vending machines. Ask yourself how many other automatic machines you can put a 2c coin into and get a result. That said the TVM should display on it which coins it does accept so that people don't have to put in coins and hope.

Riesen_Meal

corktina wrote: »

i would not expect any machine to accept coppers, Im actually surprised it takes 5c coins!

Toll machines take 5c coins also, they don't take 1s and 2s though..

areyawell

If the machine didn't accept coppers then why didn't you put in a fiver or other money into it. If you were on the way to electric picnic you could have easily gone to a shop to get change. You are acting like a baby. Seriously how thick are you? Its up to you to get the change to use the service they provide. Its the same as if you are trying to buy a car and you want to pay by cheque but the garage wont accept cheques so then you drive away without paying them. Doesnt make much sense does it?

Losty Dublin

You didn't have no other option but to pay elsewhere; you could have gotten change from a shop or a leap card, which is what you'd have done if you didn't have the coins on you to begin with. Whatever about the in's and outs of the machine not accepting coins that it normal does, vending machines are fickle at the best of times. You did knowingly get onto the Dart without a ticket when the TVM was working so you are on thin ice.

Oh and don't try that line about TVM's not being in the Bye Laws; the courts have their fair share of people who lost that argument

corktina

i kind of doubt an appeal would suceed, after all your explanation could sound like a jolly good excuse dreamed up having got a fine for no ticket.

CatFromHue

areyawell wrote: »

If the machine didn't accept coppers then why didn't you put in a fiver or other money into it. If you were on the way to electric picnic you could have easily gone to a shop to get change. You are acting like a baby. Seriously how thick are you? Its up to you to get the change to use the service they provide. Its the same as if you are trying to buy a car and you want to pay by cheque but the garage wont accept cheques so then you drive away without paying them. Doesnt make much sense does it?

It's nothing like that at all. He had the money and would have paid at the other end. As mentioned elsewhere above alot of vending machines take 5c coins so how was he to know that the DART ones don't?

Also yesterday was a Sunday so the frequency of trains is reduced, I think they only run every 30 mins. By going off to another shop would mean he'd have missed his train and also his follow on bus in town.

corktina

it was the 2c coins it wouldn't accept, and of course we only have his word of that anyway. If you don't have the right money, presumably it's up to you to go get the right money rather than board the train in contrvention of the bylaws.

hatrickpatrick

Think I'll ask for advice elsewhere seeing as Boardsies have this habit of calling people thick for politely asking a reasonable question. Good day to you, sirs!

If my appeal happens to succeed I'll be sure to let ye know, lest you bite your tongue next time someone asks for a simple opinion.

corktina

take no notice of that guy, we might not give the opinion you want but most of us are civil even if we disagree with you.

hatrickpatrick

corktina wrote: »

it was the 2c coins it wouldn't accept, and of course we only have his word of that anyway. If you don't have the right money, presumably it's up to you to go get the right money rather than board the train in contrvention of the bylaws.

This was all discussed in another thread so I have no intention of opening another debate about it here, particularly seeing as the likes of areyawell are likely to bring it down to the level of personal brawling, but the bye law in question actually does allow you to board if the ticket office is closed. Vending machine argument is open to interpretation but of course there's nothing to lose by appealing except the cost of a postage stamp. If I lose, I lose.

The Board shall be entitled to recover the full fare for the distance actually travelled by the offender without a ticket or other authority.

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.

As stated, I did in fact pay for the journey at Tara Street station.
Was fun chatting to ye anyway, I'll update the thread when I know what happens.

Hilly Bill

Quick question OP,

Which coins did you put into the machine first?

Victor

areyawell wrote: »

You are acting like a baby. Seriously how thick are you?

While the OP may have made imprudent decisions, there is no need for such comments.

Moderator

Hungerford

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Vending machine argument is open to interpretation but of course there's nothing to lose by appealing except the cost of a postage stamp. If I lose, I lose.

I am surprised that the vending machine argument is still ongoing. Until the bye-laws governing IÉ are actually updated, you do not have to purchase a ticket from a vending machine.

As you pointed out, Section 4 of SI 109 of 1984 only refers to a booking office. It's not even down to the technology not being invented then, there were primitive vending machines in use at some stations in 1984.

I think that IÉ will quietly drop the issue upon appeal. I don't think SI 109 has ever been tested in the courts.

hatrickpatrick

Hilly Bill wrote: »

Quick question OP,

Which coins did you put into the machine first?

€2, 20c, 20c, 2c in that order.
Then just said "I'll pay at Tara Street" since I regularly do this, for example on Friday and Saturday nights when the entire station is closed (including the area with the machines) for the last two trains of the night. And as I say... I did indeed pay in Tara Street. Going to have a look in my EP bag later on, sometimes they give you a yellow slip to prove you've paid at the destination, if I have one of those I'll include it in my appeal letter.

As I say, the ticket inspector was pretty sound about the whole thing and told me how and where I could appeal the fine. Ironically enough, I got my head chewed off far more on Boards than I did on the train!

bk

Might I recommend you get a leap card. Cheaper and you'll never have this problem again.

davebuck

bk wrote: »

Might I recommend you get a leap card. Cheaper and you'll never have this problem again.

How do the ticket inspectors know if your leap card has been swiped at the train station of departure only asking as a lot of the times the readers are broken....

bk

davebuck wrote: »

How do the ticket inspectors know if your leap card has been swiped at the train station of departure only asking as a lot of the times the readers are broken....

They have hand held devices that can read the leap card.

Most stations have multiple readers, usually at least one of them work.

If it doesn't then it is usually relatively easy to prove as they can see that no leap cards were used at the time and you would therefore get off any fine.

foggy_lad

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Oh and don't try that line about TVM's not being in the Bye Laws; the courts have their fair share of people who lost that argument

Please list the cases where people have used that line about TVM's not being in the Bye Laws and lost in the courts!

n97 mini

Plenty of low quality replies, to be expected I suppose.

Back OT, as I said before ticket office was closed and the OP did not intend to defraud the company. Under the bye-laws he was therefore entitled to board the train and pay either the ticket inspector on board, or at the station on the other end. Everything else (Leap cards, coppers, IQ levels etc) is irrelevant.

Losty Dublin

n97 mini wrote: »

Plenty of low quality replies, to be expected I suppose.

Back OT, as I said before ticket office was closed and the OP did not intend to defraud the company. Under the bye-laws he was therefore entitled to board the train and pay either the ticket inspector on board, or at the station on the other end. Everything else (Leap cards, coppers, IQ levels etc) is irrelevant.

OP could have got a ticket but he didn't as he hadn't the fare on hand yet he traveled regardless of this. He admits that he saw afterwards that machines don't take 2 cent coins so he knows why the coins were refused; what would he have done had his other larger coins had have been refused as well? Yes, it's hard luck as he is genuine but he knows the score here and that his isn't a hard done by case.


This "ticket office is closed so you don't have to buy a ticket" etc etc is bunkum otherwise a lot of convictions by Irish Rail for far evasion wouldn't be secure; it's as bad as hearing about gardai needing to wear their hats nicking you or Freeman law. Even RUI, who love picking holes in Irish Rail's rules state on their website that if you can, you must get a valid ticket before you travel subject to a few exceptions; a TVM being your only means of purchasing a ticket isn't one of them.

Best he can do is write in a civil appeal, make his points clear and accept some responsibility and maybe some good with come his way.

zagmund

"Where the Board gives notice that a station is unattended [snippety snip] 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"

According to the OP, the board did indeed give notice that the station was unattended on weekends, therefore he hasn't broken any of the rules, regulations or standing orders. Regardless of whether the TVMs are working or not, if there's a sign saying "this station is manned between the hours of <blah>" and you are outside those hours then the board has effectively given notice that it is unmanned.

On a side note . . . I don't know whether anyone has spotted this, but on weekends when stations are unmanned and they leave gates open there is a message displayed on the gates saying "no ticket required". In my books, this is authority to enter the station and take a journey without swiping on. It doesn't get much clearer than "no ticket required" . . .

z

foggy_lad

Losty Dublin wrote: »

OP could have got a ticket but he didn't as he hadn't the fare on hand yet he traveled regardless of this. He admits that he saw afterwards that machines don't take 2 cent coins so he knows why the coins were refused; what would he have done had his other larger coins had have been refused as well? Yes, it's hard luck as he is genuine but he knows the score here and that his isn't a hard done by case.


This "ticket office is closed so you don't have to buy a ticket" etc etc is bunkum otherwise a lot of convictions by Irish Rail for far evasion wouldn't be secure; it's as bad as hearing about gardai needing to wear their hats nicking you or Freeman law. Even RUI, who love picking holes in Irish Rail's rules state on their website that if you can, you must get a valid ticket before you travel subject to a few exceptions; a TVM being your only means of purchasing a ticket isn't one of them.

Best he can do is write in a civil appeal, make his points clear and accept some responsibility and maybe some good with come his way.

But you can't list any case where a passenger was convicted despite using the defence that the ticket office was closed and in the bye-laws it states you may pay at your destination?

Can you/anyone list even one case? Has there been one case where this has happened? I am not interested in people's opinion or what the RPU agent you may have spoken with says about it but would like some facts.

Losty Dublin

zagmund wrote: »

"Where the Board gives notice that a station is unattended [snippety snip] 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"

According to the OP, the board did indeed give notice that the station was unattended on weekends, therefore he hasn't broken any of the rules, regulations or standing orders. Regardless of whether the TVMs are working or not, if there's a sign saying "this station is manned between the hours of <blah>" and you are outside those hours then the board has effectively given notice that it is unmanned.

On a side note . . . I don't know whether anyone has spotted this, but on weekends when stations are unmanned and they leave gates open there is a message displayed on the gates saying "no ticket required". In my books, this is authority to enter the station and take a journey without swiping on. It doesn't get much clearer than "no ticket required" . . .

z

No, OP actually said that the station is unmanned at the weekend and a sign was put up directing you to a ticket machine. In any case, he was unable to pay in his case, there wasn't a case of a machine acting up. The guys working at Tara Street, Pearse etc know generally where is and isn't open; if there wasn't an obligation to buy a ticket under circumstances like these then they wouldn't have the legal basis to issue fixed charge tickets.

If you have a swipe card or pass then you'd be rather silly not to swipe it out of hours for the want of it

foggy_lad

foggy_lad wrote: »

But you can't list any case where a passenger was convicted despite using the defence that the ticket office was closed and in the bye-laws it states you may pay at your destination?

Can you/anyone list even one case? Has there been one case where this has happened? I am not interested in people's opinion or what the RPU agent you may have spoken with says about it but would like some facts.

Losty Dublin wrote: »

In any case, he was unable to pay in his case, there wasn't a case of a machine acting up. The guys working at Tara Street, Pearse etc know generally where is and isn't open; if there wasn't an obligation to buy a ticket under circumstances like these then they wouldn't have the legal basis to issue fixed charge tickets.

you have yet to show where this has been tested in the courts. You have not proven any obligation to buy a ticket from a vending machine when the board has given notice that a booking office is closed or unmanned.

One further point is that the op was able to pay in this case and had the money ready to pay and subsequently bought and paid for their ticket at their destination but the vending machine was unable to take or accept the payment.

n97 mini

Losty Dublin wrote: »

OP could have got a ticket but he didn't as he hadn't the fare on hand yet he traveled regardless of this. He admits that he saw afterwards that machines don't take 2 cent coins so he knows why the coins were refused; what would he have done had his other larger coins had have been refused as well? Yes, it's hard luck as he is genuine but he knows the score here and that his isn't a hard done by case.

The bye-laws is the bye-laws. As already mentioned, until they're updated to include TVMs and Leap cards and so on, they don't exist.

A judge would laugh IE out of court on this one.

Losty Dublin

n97 mini wrote: »

The bye-laws is the bye-laws. As already mentioned, until they're updated to include TVMs and Leap cards and so on, they don't exist.

A judge would laugh IE out of court on this one.

Except they're not laughing them out of court on this one. Both Luas and CIE companies are claiming a 80%+ conviction rate for fare evasion cases.

n97 mini

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Except they're not laughing them out of court on this one. Both Luas and CIE companies are claiming a 80%+ conviction rate for fare evasion cases.

Luas is irrelevant as it's not covered under the same bye-laws.

Proof of these figures has not been forthcoming, so for now they're a figment of someone's imagination.

gimli2112

What gets me was the IE employee @ Tara Street didn't or wasn't allowed apply common sense to the situation. The guy is trying to legitmately pay the fare and gets slapped with a fine...ffs? A real disincentive to honesty imo.

L1011

goingnowhere wrote: »

T
You were afforded reason opportunity to pay and didn't, so the fine is legit

The booking office was not open. The CIE bye-laws are very specific about requiring a booking office to be open and yes, they were written after TVMs had been introduced.

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Oh and don't try that line about TVM's not being in the Bye Laws; the courts have their fair share of people who lost that argument

Losty - as said above - prove that. "80% of cases are sucessful" neither takes in to account the customer success rate on appeal or WHY the cases were succesful. Its zero evidence for your claim.

Provide proof of even ONE case before continuing to make what is otherwise a baseless claim. Specifically a case where someone's defence was that only a TVM was available, and they lost on that.

hatrickpatrick

Sorry I just want to clarify something seeing as people are misinterpreting the Tara Street end: I got fined on the train by an on-train ticket inspector, who I offered to pay for the ticket - as I have done before on other occasions when Sandycove is closed. After this I disembarked at Tara Street and paid at the gate before leaving the station. The Tara Street guys were perfectly decent about it.

foggy_lad

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Sorry I just want to clarify something seeing as people are misinterpreting the Tara Street end: I got fined on the train by an on-train ticket inspector, who I offered to pay for the ticket - as I have done before on other occasions when Sandycove is closed. After this I disembarked at Tara Street and paid at the gate before leaving the station. The Tara Street guys were perfectly decent about it.

You have paid twice for that journey then as the fine you are issued would also include a standard fare ticket! otherwise another inspector could get on at the next stop and fine you again for not having a ticket and i doubt the diligent staff would have let you continue your journey without a valid ticket??

Losty Dublin

MYOB wrote: »

The booking office was not open. The CIE bye-laws are very specific about requiring a booking office to be open and yes, they were written after TVMs had been introduced.



Losty - as said above - prove that. "80% of cases are sucessful" neither takes in to account the customer success rate on appeal or WHY the cases were succesful. Its zero evidence for your claim.

Provide proof of even ONE case before continuing to make what is otherwise a baseless claim. Specifically a case where someone's defence was that only a TVM was available, and they lost on that.

Ask Irish Rail ticket staff for yourself; this is what what a revenue inspect told me about a year ago; when I asked him what about TVM's he told me that if they are there then they much be used if a booking counter is closed. On the other hand, you are welcome to vouch of cases whereby a judge has decreed counter to this.

L1011

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Ask Irish Rail ticket staff for yourself; this is what what a revenue inspect told me about a year ago; when I asked him what about TVM's he told me that if they are there then they much be used if a booking counter is closed. On the other hand, you are welcome to vouch of cases whereby a judge has decreed counter to this.

So you can't prove it at all, then. Thought as much.

foggy_lad

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Ask Irish Rail ticket staff for yourself; this is what what a revenue inspect told me about a year ago; when I asked him what about TVM's he told me that if they are there then they much be used if a booking counter is closed. On the other hand, you are welcome to vouch of cases whereby a judge has decreed counter to this.

Try going into the carphone warehouse and telling them you are entitled to a repair or replacement and they will lie to you and tell you they must send the phone away at least three times before even considering a replacement, RPU are similar in that they will happily trot out the company policy even if it is contrary to the company's own bye-laws.

You have been asked to show at least one case where the passenger used the defence that the booking office was closed and they were not obliged to buy a ticket from a machine as per the bye-laws but you seem unable to show even one solitary case.

zagmund

Losty Dublin wrote: »

No, OP actually said that the station is unmanned at the weekend and a sign was put up directing you to a ticket machine.

And the byelaws say "Where the Board gives notice that a station is unattended" . . . which it is when it's unmanned and there's a sign saying "this station is unmanned".

That's unattended. Or at least it is until IE roll out the ED209 TVM units.

z

hatrickpatrick

foggy_lad wrote: »

You have paid twice for that journey then as the fine you are issued would also include a standard fare ticket! otherwise another inspector could get on at the next stop and fine you again for not having a ticket and i doubt the diligent staff would have let you continue your journey without a valid ticket??

It's not an on the spot fine, they issue you with a slip saying you have 21 days to either forward payment to Irish Rail or write to them to appeal the fine. So I was given this on board the train, and subsequently I paid for the journey at Tara Street, as normal.

Hungerford

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Ask Irish Rail ticket staff for yourself; this is what what a revenue inspect told me about a year ago; when I asked him what about TVM's he told me that if they are there then they much be used if a booking counter is closed.

Of course, the revenue inspector is going to tell you that - in fact, he probably wouldn't know what the relevant SI actually stated if it came up and bit him.

The issue about fare dodging conviction rates is a red herring as there are a lot of ways in which people can dodge fares. In addition, are those figures limited to court cases or do they include people who just don't appeal?

Hungerford

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Sorry I just want to clarify something seeing as people are misinterpreting the Tara Street end: I got fined on the train by an on-train ticket inspector, who I offered to pay for the ticket - as I have done before on other occasions when Sandycove is closed. After this I disembarked at Tara Street and paid at the gate before leaving the station. The Tara Street guys were perfectly decent about it.

You really need to complain to IÉ about this. The inspector can't have it both ways: he can't fine you and then not issue you with a valid ticket. Otherwise, as foggy points out, one of his colleagues could get onto the train at another stop and fine you again.

n97 mini

Hungerford wrote: »

Of course, the revenue inspector is going to tell you that

In addition the IE website bleats out No Ticket, No Travel, No Excuses, which is clearly based in marketing and not law, so it's not surprising the staff are indoctrinated with company policy even where it contradicts reality.

LXFlyer

Frankly none of us know what the court's view is on this as no one here would appear to have been in court (or witnessed a case) for not having a ticket (nice to know the regulars all buy tickets!).

Perhaps one of the posters who do not view a TVM as a booking office might like to take a test case and resolve the issue for all of us in the name of the common good?

L1011

lxflyer wrote: »

Perhaps one of the posters who do not view a TVM as a booking office might like to take a test case and resolve the issue for all of us in the name of the common good?

I would consider spending money to find out whether a judge is insane enough to consider a machine to be an "office" up there on the waste scale with buying Anglo shares.

Its pretty clear the reason nobody can cite a case that's gone to court and gone either way - because CIE are never, ever going to bring one.

LXFlyer

Well neither of us know that for definite. I certainly don't know if it has or not, but I wouldn't start suggesting to people that they try to put it to the test in a court of law.

Perhaps it might be more advisable to qualify your statements.

L1011

lxflyer wrote: »

Well neither of us know that for definite. I certainly don't know if it has or not, but I wouldn't start suggesting to people that they try to put it to the test in a court of law.

Perhaps it might be more advisable to qualify your statements.

I think with the fact that this thread comes up probably once a month, and we have *never* had someone return to say the fine has been withheld, should provide enough surety.

I don't see any of the "machine=office" people even attempting to qualify their rather odd claims.