Irish rail.withdrew application day of court,any recourse?

lifeandtimes

Hey everyone,

A few months ago I started a thread regarding a fine by irish rail and a broken validator

http://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057505194/1/#post97302078

Long story short the validator didn't tag me on right as it was broke and an inspector found the leap card not to be tagged on,I argued this and appealed however they denied the appwall, further to this I discovered the same validation broken 3 days after the incident with me,I notified irish rail but they ignored my emails for 2 weeks.

Fast forward i refused to pay the fine and I received a court date for Monday a few weeks back,I took a days annual leave and showed up the court to argue my case, before the judge had even done a call over a barrister for irish rail came to me and said they were withdrawing their application and I could leave,I asked why and she said because my story was confirmed. I left as obviously there was going to be no case

Does anything happen now? Is it standard practive for irish rail to reimburse me for a day iv taken from work as they did inform at the last minute when they could have told me ages ago it wasn't going ahead,even back in October when I gave them all the information they needed and they just ignored me,would it be even worth my whole taken this further?

Pro Hoc Vice

lifeandtimes wrote: »

Hey everyone,

A few months ago I started a thread regarding a fine by irish rail and a broken validator

http://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057505194/1/#post97302078

Long story short the validator didn't tag me on right as it was broke and an inspector found the leap card not to be tagged on,I argued this and appealed however they denied the appwall, further to this I discovered the same validation broken 3 days after the incident with me,I notified irish rail but they ignored my emails for 2 weeks.

Fast forward i refused to pay the fine and I received a court date for Monday a few weeks back,I took a days annual leave and showed up the court to argue my case, before the judge had even done a call over a barrister for irish rail came to me and said they were withdrawing their application and I could leave,I asked why and she said because my story was confirmed. I left as obviously there was going to be no case

Does anything happen now? Is it standard practive for irish rail to reimburse me for a day iv taken from work as they did inform at the last minute when they could have told me ages ago it wasn't going ahead,even back in October when I gave them all the information they needed and they just ignored me,would it be even worth my whole taken this further?

You could have sought your costs and expenses on the day as the order to strike out has now been made don't think you can do anything at this stage. As you had not engaged solicitor you would not have hot costs just expenses.

lifeandtimes

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

You could have sought your costs and expenses on the day as the order to strike out has now been made don't think you can do anything at this stage. As you had not engaged solicitor you would not have hot costs just expenses.

really? i didnt know that,ive never been to a court case regarding a criminal matter and as soon as they said they werent going a head i thought that was it, im just thinking this could have been resolved months ago when i brought it too their attention but only becuase i fought them, an older person may not have had the fight in them and would have gone to court and been rail roaded by them.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

plodder

So, how much did it cost IR to hire a barrister for the day, and which jobsworth will be held accountable for the waste?

No need to answer the second part of the question.

Pro Hoc Vice

lifeandtimes wrote: »

really? i didnt know that,ive never been to a court case regarding a criminal matter and as soon as they said they werent going a head i thought that was it, im just thinking this could have been resolved months ago when i brought it too their attention but only becuase i fought them, an older person may not have had the fight in them and would have gone to court and been rail roaded by them.

AGS and DPP or AG can not in the DC have a cost order against them for a prosecution but anyone else under the rules is fair game.

randy hickey

If ever there was legitimate cause for a call to Liveline OP, this one qualifies. Even if the only upshot of it is that the next poor unfortunate who gets treated like this is educated on how to get his expenses out of IE.
It would be also interesting to hear Barry Kenny defend this ballsup.

ohnonotgmail

plodder wrote: »

So, how much did it cost IR to hire a barrister for the day, and which jobsworth will be held accountable for the waste?

No need to answer the second part of the question.

probably very little for that one case. the same barrister probably covered all of the irish rail prosecutions for the day.

plodder

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

probably very little for that one case. the same barrister probably covered all of the irish rail prosecutions for the day.

Fair enough. So, it's merely an outrageous way to treat a paying customer, rather than a waste of their own funds.

I think I'd still write to them at this stage and ask them if that is how they always manage these cases (apparently ignoring all communication until the day of the court case). See what they have to say about it..

Pro Hoc Vice

plodder wrote: »

Fair enough. So, it's merely an outrageous way to treat a paying customer, rather than a waste of their own funds.

I think I'd still write to them at this stage and ask them if that is how they always manage these cases (apparently ignoring all communication until the day of the court case). See what they have to say about it..

In reality many companies deal with things this way, when a independent solicitor or Barrister gets involved he tells whoever that the case going no where, and best to withdraw.

lifeandtimes

plodder wrote: »

Fair enough. So, it's merely an outrageous way to treat a paying customer, rather than a waste of their own funds.

I think I'd still write to them at this stage and ask them if that is how they always manage these cases (apparently ignoring all communication until the day of the court case). See what they have to say about it..

i have,iv written to them to get my leap card back as it had my months rail fare on it and to see why the were ignoring my emails when i was explaining how i was right with evidence and to see if they wany to give a good will gesture or compensation for being so wrong and making it worse up until the last minute, iv cotnacted live line to see if they would like to hear my story hopefully to warn other people who may be effected by similar events, expecially old ad young naive people.

Im aware irish rail are losing a million euro a month and will fight to get as much money from fines as possible so hopefully this helps people

plodder

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

In reality many companies deal with things this way, when a independent solicitor or Barrister gets involved he tells whoever that the case going no where, and best to withdraw.

In a lot of cases I could understand that, where it comes down to knowing whether the evidence to hand is likely to get a result, and you might need to put the case to the barrister to know that. This one should have been shot down long before that stage though, going by what the poster is saying.

It's not in Irish Rail's interest either to (be seen to) treat customers like this. They should be keeping the fare paying passengers on their side.

Having said that, I once took Ryanair to the small claims court and I'm convinced that is exactly how they work. They basically use the court to do the investigation work for them, and when the court clerk comes back, and says it looks like there is a case against you, then they pay up.

Carawaystick

lifeandtimes wrote: »

i have,iv written to them to get my leap card back as it had my months rail fare on it and to see why the were ignoring my emails when i was explaining how i was right with evidence and to see if they wany to give a good will gesture or compensation for being so wrong and making it worse up until the last minute, iv cotnacted live line to see if they would like to hear my story hopefully to warn other people who may be effected by similar events, expecially old ad young naive people.

Im aware irish rail are losing a million euro a month and will fight to get as much money from fines as possible so hopefully this helps people

I'd look at their customer charter and see what points there they have failed.
I'd then look at the NTA contract with IÉ to see what response they are supposed to give to customers with a grievance.

I'd then complain to the consumer complaints commission about the unfair terms the leapcard imposes on you vs leap/cie.

I'd include in any complaint that you feel your leapcard and ticket & any cash /credit stored on the card were
" dishonestly appropriated without your consent oand with the intention of depriving you of them."
Which is the definition of Theft in S4 of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act, 2001

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

ohnonotgmail

Carawaystick wrote: »

I'd look at their customer charter and see what points there they have failed.
I'd then look at the NTA contract with IÉ to see what response they are supposed to give to customers with a grievance.

I'd then complain to the consumer complaints commission about the unfair terms the leapcard imposes on you vs leap/cie.

I'd include in any complaint that you feel your leapcard and ticket & any cash /credit stored on the card were
" dishonestly appropriated without your consent oand with the intention of depriving you of them."
Which is the definition of Theft in S4 of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act, 2001

the key word there being "dishonestly"

GM228

Carawaystick wrote: »

I'd include in any complaint that you feel your leapcard and ticket & any cash /credit stored on the card were
" dishonestly appropriated without your consent oand with the intention of depriving you of them."
Which is the definition of Theft in S4 of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act, 2001

A leap card remains the property of the NTA, not the card holder so IE don't need the card holders consent to confiscate the card and as such no theft has taken place from the card holder. The NTA authorities any transport operators personnel to confiscate the cards for suspected misuse or fraud so the permission of the "owner" is satisfied.

plodder

I presume they'll have to compensate the OP for the lost days of his monthly ticket though? The card may be the property of Irish Rail, but the value of the tickets on it certainly aren't.

Carawaystick

Why do leapcard advertise that I can buy a leapcard so?

Anyway the ticket and any cash would be the property of the op.
There might be dishonesty as the ticket checker took the card and decided to let someone else figure it out

GM228

Carawaystick wrote: »

Why do leapcard advertise that I can buy a leapcard so?

As per the terms and conditions of the Leap card when you "buy" your leap card actual ownership of the card remains with the NTA.

Carawaystick wrote: »

Anyway the ticket and any cash would be the property of the op.

Incorrect, tickets remain the property of the relevant transport operator, not the card holder.

There is no "cash" on a ticket, just credit which may not be returned to the card holder again as per the T&Cs.

Remember you don't own any money (credit) on a card as you paid your money to the NTA for a purchase of a service, you have purchased a "travel right" in the form of credit which at the time of a suspected abuse can be fortified.

Obviously now the OP has been cleared of any suspected misuse the card and credit should be returned, but confiscated Leap cards are AFAIK returned to the NTA so it would be a matter between the NTA and the card holder to get the card back not IE and the card holder.

Carawaystick wrote: »

There might be dishonesty as the ticket checker took the card and decided to let someone else figure it out

That's their job so how is there dishonesty?

dats_right

The answer to the original query, from a legal perspective, is no. Any forms of redress the OP wishes to pursue are therefore more properly categorised as consumer issues.