Irish Rail- Annual Ticket Confiscated

erica74

AnnieM240 wrote: »

I'm not sure if this has happened to anyone else but I'm looking fro some advise. ( Sorry this is a long post)

Myself and my husband were travelling on the 17:31 train from Pearce to Naas on Tuesday last week and missed our stop so ended up in Newbridge ( he fell asleep and I was engrossed in a journal.ie article) When we got off the train there was about 10 revenue officers on the platform checking tickets and as both of us have short hop tickets to Naas we explained what had happened but were advised we would still be fined E116.35 ( E100 on the stop fine plus E16.35 the difference between Naas and Newbridge) He then took our tickets from us and advised they would be sent to the Connelly office and we would need to call and pay the fine to get them back.

I called on Thursday to pay this as it was our fault we missed our stop but was told my fine was now E1600 and my husbands E1800, when I asked why they said it was because we had an address in Newbridge andthe presumption is that we have always got off at Newbridge train station sine we both reveived our tickets in January 2017. This is not the case, we drive to Naas each morning, park at a friends house and get the train from Naas train station. We don't tag on as our tickets are paid in full via our jobs ( we probably should be tagging on) and there is no barrier from the large car park where we walk through into the station in Naas.

My question is can they really fine us these amounts just due to the fact we have an address in Newbridge? We are 100% willing to take responsibility for the E116.35 each as we did miss our stop but can Irish Rail really just presume this?

Just on this point - I assume IE are aware of this occurrence and it is something many rail users do everyday, surely it is up to IE to block off this entrance or install a barrier to ensure all rail users tag on/off if it is a requirement of ticket holders? Assuming they are aware that rail users use this entrance without tagging on/off, they have created a situation whereby they allow rail users to use the train without tagging on/off.

n97 mini

XPS_Zero wrote: »

Theres only a handful of those old cardboard passes left and soon they'll all be void. The new card is chipped and comes with a photo which, when taken, runs your face through a database to ensure you've only one card.

It's been years since passes indicated by color what the circumstances of the owner was, they scrapped that as it was basically giving peoples private health information out by default. The new cards don't show it, they only show vaid or not on the computer.

I know all that. Said chap got off and waited at the bus stop, presumably for the next bus, where the driver wouldn't be so vigilant.

n97 mini

erica74 wrote: »

Just on this point - I assume IE are aware of this occurrence and it is something many rail users do everyday, surely it is up to IE to block off this entrance or install a barrier to ensure all rail users tag on/off if it is a requirement of ticket holders? Assuming they are aware that rail users use this entrance without tagging on/off, they have created a situation whereby they allow rail users to use the train without tagging on/off.

There is no requirement to tag on/off at nearly all the Maynooth line stations. With only one reader and a queue of people just off an arriving train looking to tag off their Leap cards I doubt people would bother tagging off if they didn't have to.

XPS_Zero

n97 mini wrote: »

I know all that. Said chap got off and waited at the bus stop, presumably for the next bus, where the driver wouldn't be so vigilant.

He's supposed to take the pass, not hand it back to him.

Another big myth I constantly see on this board is "they just mail the passes straight back to them". I heard this so often I decided to check it out and surprise surprise, most passes confiscated are not returned.

People let their anecdotal experiences run away with them and assume it represents the general situation, we all do it. I used to look at those grey train tickets and seeing "social welfare return" on them thought you got those on Jobseekers it really used to bug me when I couldn't even get a student discount (student leap does sweet FA for you unless you're going to the country, though it does have a lower weekly cap there is no per journey discount)

The drivers don't even look at the new passes when you tag them on the machine, if the machine says it's valid then they'll assume it's valid. If you try to use someone elses you'll eventually get caught by an inspector, if it's stolen it will be killed within the hour with a phone call, another benefit of the chip cards.

There is no way to know just looking at someone if they are legitimately in possession of a card. If the photo matches and a green light comes up it's valid. I've only seen one of the old paper passes in the last 2 years

punisher5112

XPS_Zero wrote: »

Your anecdotal experience is not evidence, so unless you have official figures that show the majority of drug addicts in the country are on disability allowance (which you could not have since it's not true) I'd just leave that alone.

I'm not sure what you mean by the last comment but you can work on Disability Allowance if you want, there are just income limits.

Not all fall under disabilities there is a section with other also.

Go ask veradkar as what you interpret is wrong.

The old paper pass had different colours and in the end red band were given to all eligible persons.

They may not give out full figures but if you were to go and look into it you would have to dig deep.

If they are on methadone they will have a pass if applied for.

Hilly Bill

XPS_Zero wrote: »

Just to clarify, contrary to popular myth you don't get an FT pass "because" you're an addict (not suggesting Victor was saying that, just taking the opportunity to explain this), there is no illness or condition that automatically entitles you to Disability Allowance (thus an FT pass) just by having that condition, it doesn't work that way. It's based on a medical assessment and report that assesses how a condition affects your basic daily function (work, socializing etc) If the condition is interfering with those basics and that's apparent in your exam and recent medical history is consistent with that, then you might get it. The vast majority of addicts do not have one. Nobody has a pass "because" they're an addict, they may have a pass because of other conditions, related or unrelated to their having an addiction, impair basic daily function. Addicts usually have a myriad of other medical conditions that come along with the addiction.

We could never give disability allowance to people just based on a medical condition alone. Cancer could be an easy to treat stage 1 cancer treatable with some meds. Many people have some form of anxiety disorder and can still work because it's only triggered in certain situations and is managable with CBT. An addiction could be a housewife popping too many Oxicontin. If we gave disability payments based on just the condition alone the bill for it would explode.

I've seen it mentioned quite a few times on here that either

A) A bus driver did not ask to see a pass when an FT user fumbled the tag-on
Inspectors didn't check the person

As Victor said it may be obvious (physically) that they have a disability or serious illness or more likely they know them as they get the same bus/train/luas to the same hospital appointments or job the same times each week.

Has zero to do with the OP being fined though.

exaisle

OP....you haven't said how you got your car on the relevant evening?

exaisle

AnnieM240 wrote: »

We drive to Naas as it is now in the Dublin area short hop zone and our annual ticket prices were reduced by nearly E1000 ( we paid E2700 each for 2016) The Naas station is only a 10 minute drive for us and we can park for free at the friends house.

Why bother? You already said that "We don't tag on as our tickets are paid in full via our jobs" so it's no skin off your nose if you got the correct annual ticket to allow you to travel all the way to Newbridge.

Hilly Bill

How they got back doesn't prove anything. All they have to do is say they got a taxi or the next train back regardless if the op is telling the truth or not.

STB.

Ben D Bus wrote: »

But there IS evidence. They were caught travelling outside the SHZ. Even if only once. There is circumstantial evidence based on their address.

The obvious defence of previous usage via tag-on/off is not present.

In civil cases, it often IS a case of proving you are innocent. Think of a libel case where you have to prove, on balance, that what was said of you isn't true. Maybe not proof, but balance of probability. I think that's the phrase used. Criminal cases need guilt to be proven beyond reasonable doubt which is a much higher standard.

Nonsense.

Presumption of innocence extends to civil proceedings.

The person and their partner have a yearly travel pass that they have paid for. They are a customer of Irish Rail. They missed their stop. Mistakes happen, sometimes costly. In this case the rigid reading of not having a valid ticket results in a fine.

Not happy with that, the company have billed them for multiples of that which in itself alleges that the couple are repeat offenders whilst confiscating their yearly tickets. Thats a very long reach. So I hope Iarnroid Eireann have evidence to back up such strong allegations. I presume they are not chancing their arm here.

Presumption of innocence and the individuals rights to their good name ?

As they have now framed it, assuming this is 100% ie was a once off mistake, and given two yearly tickets have now been confiscated, with those customers out of pocket, where a fine was dished out that has now extended fines that might have no sound basis, I'd consider this very much defamatory.

Victor

STB. wrote: »

I'd consider this very much defamatory.

Defamation needs publication of an incorrect and damaging statement.

You're barking up the wrong telephone pole.

STB.

Victor wrote: »

Defamation needs publication of an incorrect and damaging statement.

You're barking up the wrong telephone pole.

Publication by any means. Communication of a statement that makes a false claim, expressively stated or implied to be factual which in turn may harm the reputation of an individual. To constitute defamation the statement must falsely accuse the plaintiff of immoral, illegal or unethical conduct.

There are many forms of defamation.

The 7.5K type.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/woman-gets-7500-over-petrol-station-defamation-34519856.html

The 38k type
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/38000-case-over-185-bus-ticket-settled-29434778.html

The 75k type
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/mum-and-daughter-settle-75k-defamation-case-392450.html

I can go on barking if you wish.

Victor

STB. wrote: »

Publication by any means.

But if it is just a letter to the individual involved, what publication is there?

dalta5billion

exaisle wrote: »

Why bother? You already said that "We don't tag on as our tickets are paid in full via our jobs" so it's no skin off your nose if you got the correct annual ticket to allow you to travel all the way to Newbridge.

"How Taxsaver works"

https://www.taxsaver.ie/Employers/

Seve OB

exaisle wrote: »

Why bother? You already said that "We don't tag on as our tickets are paid in full via our jobs" so it's no skin off your nose if you got the correct annual ticket to allow you to travel all the way to Newbridge.

Says ticket is paid through their jobs. It doesn't say their jobs pay for the tickets. And even if they did, they are still liable for BIK

Seve OB

Am I the only one here who thinks the OP might be telling tall tales and got caught on the hop...........

weldoninhio

n97 mini wrote: »

There is no requirement to tag on/off at nearly all the Maynooth line stations. With only one reader and a queue of people just off an arriving train looking to tag off their Leap cards I doubt people would bother tagging off if they didn't have to.

I was in Frankfurt recently. They've no barriers at all in any of the stations I used. Everyone still knew you needed to tag on or buy a ticket to travel. What is it about the Irish that certain sections feel if there's no need to follow the rules and shure everything will be grand.


From Leap Website: You must have a valid ticket to travel. This means you must Touch On with your Leap Card at the start of each journey - See more at: https://about.leapcard.ie/faqs#sthash.OxuUhhqC.dpuf

beauf

When I was in Munich many years they had a pretty hard core ticket enforcement team, the ticket inspectors were backed up with a dog team and I think one or two armed police. They would sweep the train and catch any 'runners' I don't know if that is still the case.

Trampas

There are plenty of places to tag on and off in sallins. Only place where there's a barrier is where you buy a ticket off a employee. You'd have to walk by a tag on to get on train. Pay the fine and move on. If you'd tagged on and off each day you'd probably get off but it down as lesson learned

Mrs OBumble

Seve OB wrote: »

Am I the only one here who thinks the OP might be telling tall tales and got caught on the hop...........

No, you are not.

jimmycrackcorm

STB. wrote:

Publication by any means. Communication of a statement that makes a false claim, expressively stated or implied to be factual which in turn may harm the reputation of an individual. To constitute defamation the statement must falsely accuse the plaintiff of immoral, illegal or unethical conduct.

All the examples you quoted were in front of third parties (I.e. other customers) which is key to harming the reputation.

In any case the op would have difficulty when it comes to explaining how they were to get their car back.

GM228

Seve OB wrote: »

Says ticket is paid through their jobs. It doesn't say their jobs pay for the tickets. And even if they did, they are still liable for BIK

Such tickets can be paid for in full by the employer as a BIK and are exempt from BIK taxation.

n97 mini

Victor wrote: »

But if it is just a letter to the individual involved, what publication is there?

Correct. If it's "under cover", ie in a letter, it's not applicable. It has to have been heard or seen by a third party.

Spanish Eyes

But I bet the inspectors will dodge the obvious messers, and go for the normally compliant who might have a blip. The fear is palpable WRT obvious messers. So go for those who will pay the fines and will actually care. A blip maybe.

Having said that, OP may have been taking a chance.

But at least they paid for their yearly ticket anyway. I just put it out there in contrast to the almost constant misuse of tickets on DB, LUAS and DART that are rarely found out.

Or challenged. The inspectors know the score I think.

XPS_Zero

STB. wrote: »

Nonsense.

Presumption of innocence extends to civil proceedings.

The person and their partner have a yearly travel pass that they have paid for. They are a customer of Irish Rail. They missed their stop. Mistakes happen, sometimes costly. In this case the rigid reading of not having a valid ticket results in a fine.

Not happy with that, the company have billed them for multiples of that which in itself alleges that the couple are repeat offenders whilst confiscating their yearly tickets. Thats a very long reach. So I hope Iarnroid Eireann have evidence to back up such strong allegations. I presume they are not chancing their arm here.

Presumption of innocence and the individuals rights to their good name ?

As they have now framed it, assuming this is 100% ie was a once off mistake, and given two yearly tickets have now been confiscated, with those customers out of pocket, where a fine was dished out that has now extended fines that might have no sound basis, I'd consider this very much defamatory.

Gotta agree. I've been thinking about this and it strikes me that the OP may be lying, chancing their arm and seeing how well the argument stacks up here before trying it on appeal, ie if we laughed it out of the room they'd know theres no hope.

So I'd advise this:

• If you really did miss the stop just once, and have not been playing games with the SHZ, pay your fine for that one time (it's your responsibility to stay awake and get off at the right stop) and fight the other ones in court, there is no guilty until proven innocent, they have to affirmatively prove you screwed the system, if they've no proof of that, they can't force you to pay and no judge will make you.
• If you have been playing games with the SHZ, take your medicine and don't challenge it because they WILL find proof somehow, they'll search hours of CCTV if they have to but they'll get you and you'll look really bad in court and might get a massive hiked up fine.

punisher5112 wrote: »

Not all fall under disabilities there is a section with other also.

I hate to veer off topic but this is how urban legends are born and fed, when assertions are made that are without foundation and because nobody questions them they enter peoples mindset as fact...

if they are on methadone they will have a pass applied for

There is no way to apply for a free travel pass separate to the welfare programs FT is attached to, it's impossible. You won't find a mention of the word "drugs" or "addiction" on any online guide to free travel or any of the booklets about it or any of the forms for the same reason you won't find a box to tick that says "cancer" or "depression", because it's not about the condition it's about how that condition interferes with your daily living. There is no section on the FT1 or DA1 forms where there is a list of medical conditions where you tick a box. If you take a look at the forms you'll see that's not how it's done. There are two medical report sections on a Disability Application.

• On one, your doctor gives the code for a specific diagnosis, how long it's lasted and expected to last, what treatment your'e getting etc
• On the other, you have to go into detail about how your condition affects you on an hour by hour, day by day basis, and why it would stop you from working, socializing, engaging in normal activity. The emphasis is on how the condition affects your ability to engage in normal activity NOT that you merely have the condition. Just having a particular condition is not enough. Plenty of people have say an anxiety disorder, but it might have very specific triggers that can be avoided most of the time, so does not interfere with day to day activity, only in certain situations, so that person would not qualify. If I am popping a bottle of pills every day, but otherwise still going to work and socializing, I may be an addict but that won't get me Disability or a Travel Pass because it's not interfering with my daily living.
  

The mere fact of drinking a cup of codeine once a day so you don't get withdrawl symptoms isn't going to get you free bloody travel ffsake. Why would it?

Go ask veradkar as what you interpret is wrong.

It's not what I interprit, it's facts and reality there in black and white for anyone to read online. The criteria and guidelines are not a state secret they're public and there for anyone to read. Getting the figures and micro-detail is harder, I know them because I was a social policy student, but if you want them they are not secret either.

They may not give out full figures but if you were to go and look into it you would have to dig deep.

I know the figures. There are 800,000 FT Cards, more than in the past because of our aging population which is why the schemes funding is being increaced. 101,000 attached to Disability Allowance, about 50,000 carers and about 500,000+ pensioners. The "others" group is a motley collection of old expired / changed benefits not taking new people like 'deserted wives' and smaller more limited schemes like injury benefit (less than 100 people on that one), blind pension, widows and a very big part of the "other" is retired civil servants who are allowed the card despite not getting a DSP pension, an exception made for them since they are, obviously, getting a state pension just a different kind (gold plated in some cases) of pension.





I did a rough calculation based on official figures of the number of alcoholics and drug addicts in Ireland. I had to just include crack and heroin in the drug numbers because the figures (stupidly) did not account for a difference between recreational use and abuse of things like cocaine (80% of all drug use is recreational so they really ought to break this up). So this is an underestimate. The numbers just under half a million. About 430,000. Anyone applying for a welfare scheme due to drug addiction stopping them working and having a normal life would be applying for one of two things:

• Illness Benefit (which the FT card is not attached to)
• Disability Allowance.

In the case of Disability there are 101,000 recipients , 50% of those have some kind of mental health condition, the rest are physical conditions. So if you toss addiction in with mental health you're talking around 50,000 people....out of half a million addicts. So we can quite easily see the "vast majority" do not have a travel pass.


Anecdotal experience is not evidence.
Plurality of anecdote is not evidence either.

You can't take your personal subjective view (even if it's shared by other people) of something and make conclusions about 100s of 1000s of people based on just that.

This is a big problem with this program, leaping to absurd conclusions based on anecdotal observation. We constantly hear, every time this comes up, people calling into radio shows, including bus drivers and CIE staff (who ought to know better) saying they constantly see people "who have nothing wrong with them" producing a pass. How the hell do you know theres nothing wrong with them?


There are of course drug addicts who have a pass. Some because their addictions at such a stage they couldn't work, can barely do anything else, and are essentially a walking corpse who will never escape their addiction and wont' live past 40. Some because of medical conditions that preceded the addiction and may be a contributing factor to it (mental health issues). We've all seen the ones who are a pain in the ass on a Luas or DART, we all wish they didn't have a pass, and anyone who engages in antisocial behavior or has any criminal convictions should not, IMO, get to have one. That is a long way from saying they all have one and one is easy to obtain.

Hilly Bill wrote: »

Has zero to do with the OP being fined though.

No, but it was brought up and people respond to side points made all the time, it would kind of ruin the ebb and flow of the conversation if we could not. When blatant misinformation I know to be factually incorrect appears I like to correct it. The internet is a great invention for spreading knowlege, unfortunately it also puts a magnifying glass up to every medical quck, conspiracy theorist and proponent of urban legends as in this case.

punisher5112

You are indeed going totally off.

Its well known and they do get free travel.

n97 mini

Seve OB wrote: »

Am I the only one here who thinks the OP might be telling tall tales and got caught on the hop...........

Am I the only one here who thinks this isn't a forum for putting posters on trial?

Dodge

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

But I bet the inspectors will dodge the obvious messers, and go for the normally compliant who might have a blip. The fear is palpable WRT obvious messers. So go for those who will pay the fines and will actually care. A blip maybe.

Having said that, OP may have been taking a chance.

But at least they paid for their yearly ticket anyway. I just put it out there in contrast to the almost constant misuse of tickets on DB, LUAS and DART that are rarely found out.

Or challenged. The inspectors know the score I think.

Didn't they say the difference in price was €1,600? Or did I read that wrong?

That's a helluva lot of messing...

thomasj

n97 mini wrote:

Am I the only one here who thinks this isn't a forum for putting posters on trial?

I know the saying "the Irish have wrote the book on swindling " but there are some people out there that have morals and this could be a genuine mistake.

magicbastarder

interesting theory @1:40 in:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTnluIGH2Qo