Irish Rail Fixed Penalty notice

JCX BXC

This sounds absolutely shocking for someone who made an honest mistake. The complete lack of empathy from the users on here is completely surprising, 10k is half of the OP's wage!

GM228

XPS_Zero wrote: »

There is intent and action in a crime (yes it's a crime, not a civil thing it's a criminal offence) but recklessness can replace intent in the crime

Just a small point, recklessness can't replace intent. When intent is required in law for a criminal offence it still needs to be shown either way using evidence of such.

The inference of intent can be drawn from the evidence of recklessness or foresight and that is how intent is proven objectively in these cases.


With so much focus on intent I forgot to mention that S132 of the Railway Safety Act 2005 does not actually require intent to take a charge against someone for failing to produce a valid ticket showing the fair has been paid. S132 (2)(a) is a strict liability offence.

Also worth noting that S3(2) of the Coras Iompair Éireann Bye-Laws (Confirmation) Order 1984 also makes it a strict liability offence if they prefer to charge you under the Transport Act 1950 instead of the Railway Safety Act 2005.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

punisher5112

JCX BXC wrote: »

This sounds absolutely shocking for someone who made an honest mistake. The complete lack of empathy from the users on here is completely surprising, 10k is half of the OP's wage!

Its a 1k fine not 10k

GM228

Fred Swanson wrote: »

Do RPU persons have the power to search a person if they fail to produce a ticket or leap card?

No.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

GM228

Fred Swanson wrote: »

That is very interesting. So a person with a leap card containing incriminating evidence of a history of fare evasion can keep it hidden and only suffer 1 penalty fare?

Correct.

goingnowhere

1 penalty fare yes

Nothing in law stopping civil proceedings for fares unpaid

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

n97 mini

Hilly Bill wrote: »

I got a fine for going over the speed limit recently, i didnt mean to but i still got fined. Should i appeal based on the fact that i didnt mean to go over the limit.?

Was the speed limit clearly indicated? If not then I would say you have grounds for an appeal.

GM228

n97 mini wrote: »

Was the speed limit clearly indicated? If not then I would say you have grounds for an appeal.

Have seen it tried unsuccessfully here.

Whilst motorists in the UK have had similar results.

http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/crime/motorist_loses_dereham_road_camera_battle_1_1989651

There was a UK High Court case on the issue in 2006 which didn't address the issue properly though.

n97 mini

GM228 wrote: »

Have seen it tried unsuccessfully here.

Whilst motorists in the UK have had similar results.

http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/crime/motorist_loses_dereham_road_camera_battle_1_1989651

There was a UK High Court case on the issue in 2006 which didn't address the issue properly though.

District Judge Peter Veits agreed that the signs were covered by foliage but he questioned why the driver did not see a 30mph sign on the right-hand side of the city-bound road which was not covered by bushes and trees.

Clearly indicated.

GM228

n97 mini wrote: »

Clearly indicated.

Fair enough, I assumed you were raising the defence of simply not seeing the sign rather than poor position/viewing etc, but again this is something I have never seen successfully tested in an Irish court and also an area where UK and Irish law for example divert.

In the UK for example you can successfully apply that defence because statute requires a prosecution for speeding to fail where the Council have not adequately maintained a sign. But no such defence is provided for in Irish law.

I would imagine it would be difficult if not impossible to apply such a defence to speeding especially when you consider speeding to be a strict liability offence, no mental element is required, you don't need to know you have done wrong or acted wilfully to be guilty so the provision of a sign or not could be irrelevant.

Add to that the fact that speed limits are set either by an act of the Oireachtas in the case of ordinary speed limits, bye-laws for special speed limits and road work speed limit orders for roadworks speed limits - this would prevent a valid defence of a poorly indicated sign under the principles of ignorantia legis neminem excusat. Would make a very interesting test case in the High Court though.

That said however statute does provide a defence of the wrong speed limit sign being applied.

n97 mini

My sister used the same defence about 2 years ago. All signs were obscured by foliage, both sides of the road. It worked for her, but her argument admittedly was with the garda that that caught her. She told him she was willing to contest in court and took photos to support her argument.

Hilly Bill

Here is the clincher, the OP told the job that they would be travelling from maynooth since that's where they had moved to so was given a card / ticket based on the info they were given. The op then decided to drive to a station further away from maynooth just because the parking was better and it wasn't manned and they wouldn't be challenged.
It doesn't sound like an honest mistake to me as the op knew that they were travelling outside the limit of the ticket that they were given.

n97 mini

Hilly Bill wrote: »

Here is the clincher, the OP told the job that they would be travelling from maynooth since that's where they had moved to so was given a card / ticket based on the info they were given. The op then decided to drive to a station further away from maynooth just because the parking was better and it wasn't manned and they wouldn't be challenged.
It doesn't sound like an honest mistake to me as the op knew that they were travelling outside the limit of the ticket that they were given.

Have you considered applying to the bar association?

Hilly Bill

n97 mini wrote: »

Have you considered applying to the bar association?

I've been in many bars :-). You don't need to be a legal wizz here, just the ability to read what the op posted in the first post.

Laura4193

Hilly Bill wrote: »

Here is the clincher, the OP told the job that they would be travelling from maynooth since that's where they had moved to so was given a card / ticket based on the info they were given. The op then decided to drive to a station further away from maynooth just because the parking was better and it wasn't manned and they wouldn't be challenged.
It doesn't sound like an honest mistake to me as the op knew that they were travelling outside the limit of the ticket that they were given.

Hilly Bill, I had no idea what exact ticket I was given, I was told "Bus and Rail" that was it. Yes I told work Maynooth because that's my address but I'm not aware of the Short Hop Zone out that way as i've only moved and I certainly wasn't aware of my ticket being a "Short Hop Zone" ticket.

I had thought "TaxSaver" was done differently, it was my first time getting transport paid for me and public transport tickets for work, I had always driven in previous jobs.

Laura4193

Okay since all this happened I've been keeping an eye on their Fixed Payment Notice website to see the figure they were going to charge (the original fine and the "unpaid fares") and the system has always told me that my fine wasn't on record yet.
Assuming this meant the fares hadn't been calculated.

Then last Wednesday it finally showed up for €108.10. I called them the day after just to be sure and they only charged me €108.10 and told me my pass would be posted back out to me.
That was on the 16th March.

Since then I received a letter dated 14th March saying I actually owed €696.60 plus the fine and fare of €108.10.
Apparently they had calculated that I had used the train 86 times, which I couldn't even admit to if I wanted to because there's been plenty of times I may have gone through a gate at Maynooth that was open or anything!

Would I have more of a chance now that I've paid the original fare, I was told by staff I was paid up and their penalty online system tells me I'm paid too?

GM228

Laura4193 wrote: »

Okay since all this happened I've been keeping an eye on their Fixed Payment Notice website to see the figure they were going to charge (the original fine and the "unpaid fares") and the system has always told me that my fine wasn't on record yet.
Assuming this meant the fares hadn't been calculated.

Then last Wednesday it finally showed up for €108.10. I called them the day after just to be sure and they only charged me €108.10 and told me my pass would be posted back out to me.
That was on the 16th March.

Since then I received a letter dated 14th March saying I actually owed €696.60 plus the fine and fare of €108.10.
Apparently they had calculated that I had used the train 86 times, which I couldn't even admit to if I wanted to because there's been plenty of times I may have gone through a gate at Maynooth that was open or anything!

Would I have more of a chance now that I've paid the original fare, I was told by staff I was paid up and their penalty online system tells me I'm paid too?

The reason why the system says you are paid up is because it's for the original fine and fare for which you received the penalty notice for under the Railway Safety Act.

The new figure is a seperate issue to the fixed penalty and can't be shown on the system as it's a civil issue, only the fine and appropriate fare as per the penalty notice can be shown on the system.

Laura4193

GM228 wrote: »

The reason why the system says you are paid up is because it's for the original fine and fare for which you received the penalty notice for under the Railway Safety Act.

The new figure is a seperate issue to the fixed penalty and can't be shown on the system as it's a civil issue, only the fine and appropriate fare as per the penalty notice can be shown on the system.

Okay but what I don't understand is the letter puts the two together, i.e. the "unpaid fares" and the fine and tells me that I can call their number and pay over the phone the total amount.

Which, two days after the letter was written I did and I was only quoted for the €108.10??

n97 mini

The 2nd one is for 86 times €8.10, but you're already covered for Maynooth to Connolly so surely that should be 86 x €5.95?

Laura4193

n97 mini wrote: »

The 2nd one is for 86 times €8.10, but you're already covered for Maynooth to Connolly so surely that should be 86 x €5.95?

It should technically yes but I've heard if you argue it that they threaten to charge the €100 fine per trip, so 86 x €100

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Hilly Bill

Laura4193 wrote: »

Hilly Bill, I had no idea what exact ticket I was given, I was told "Bus and Rail" that was it. Yes I told work Maynooth because that's my address but I'm not aware of the Short Hop Zone out that way as i've only moved and I certainly wasn't aware of my ticket being a "Short Hop Zone" ticket.

I had thought "TaxSaver" was done differently, it was my first time getting transport paid for me and public transport tickets for work, I had always driven in previous jobs.

That's fair enough, and i sympathy with you but the main word there is Maynooth and you drove to a station in the opposite direction. Hope you get sorted.

Hilly Bill

Laura4193 wrote: »

Okay since all this happened I've been keeping an eye on their Fixed Payment Notice website to see the figure they were going to charge (the original fine and the "unpaid fares") and the system has always told me that my fine wasn't on record yet.
Assuming this meant the fares hadn't been calculated.

Then last Wednesday it finally showed up for €108.10. I called them the day after just to be sure and they only charged me €108.10 and told me my pass would be posted back out to me.
That was on the 16th March.

Since then I received a letter dated 14th March saying I actually owed €696.60 plus the fine and fare of €108.10.
Apparently they had calculated that I had used the train 86 times, which I couldn't even admit to if I wanted to because there's been plenty of times I may have gone through a gate at Maynooth that was open or anything!

Would I have more of a chance now that I've paid the original fare, I was told by staff I was paid up and their penalty online system tells me I'm paid too?

I'd appeal the second one and ask them how they came up with 86 and on what date and time They caught you once and you have paid it so I can't see how they can prove that you have travelled before from kilcock when you didn't tag on there unless they checked cctv.

punisher5112

Hilly Bill wrote: »

I'd appeal the second one and ask them how they came up with 86 and on what date and time They caught you once and you have paid it so I can't see how they can prove that you have travelled before from kilcock when you didn't tag on there unless they checked cctv.

They will look at leap card transaction and see only tagged at one end.

Isambard

punisher5112 wrote: »

They will look at leap card transaction and see only tagged at one end.

that's a reasonable assumption, being as it has already been admitted that this occurred.

MOH

Hilly Bill wrote: »

I've been in many bars :-). You don't need to be a legal wizz here, just the ability to read what the op posted in the first post.

... And pick and choose which parts to believe

Hilly Bill

MOH wrote: »

... And pick and choose which parts to believe

That's what you do on a discussion forum or do you believe it all?