lxflyer wrote: » Just to revert to the query from L1011 above, a quick google search shows that 356 cases with regard to fare dodging were successfully prosecuted during 2014 in the courts (up from 170 in 2013).
lxflyer wrote: » Or maybe I just take the view that I should always have a ticket, unless it is impossible to do so. It tends to make life easier for everyone in the long run.
L1011 wrote: » My query was never how many cases were prosecuted in the courts, as you well know - meaning these figures are of zero relevance to the thread. It was how many were prosecuted when that specific reason has been given in an appeal. Can you find that out, rather than providing irrelevant side data?
L1011 wrote: » And TVMs often make it impossible to get a ticket that a booking office is perfectly capable of selling. You are incredibly determined to try push Irish Rails viewpoint here despite continually claiming to have no interest in doing so.
lxflyer wrote: » I'm pretty sure the ticket machines have a notice on them stating that they don't accept €50 - that's surely notice that you can't use them? Listen you're going around in rings here trying to come up with reasons not to have a ticket. It's somewhat pathetic - I have better things to do with my time than to bother continuing an extremely legalistic and pedantic argument. I think it's just far easier to make sure you have a ticket before you travel as I said above.
lxflyer wrote: » If there's a method of buying a ticket people should use it. It's a very simple view and I tend to stick to it.
L1011 wrote: » The ticket machines don't take €50 notes.
goingnowhere wrote: » Yes they do
psinno wrote: » Seems pretty simple.
Carawaystick wrote: » Unless you missed the whole argument about what the byelaws state, it's far from simple.
lxflyer wrote: » I'm surprised they took such a strong view if you had explained all of that to them? A little bit of common sense would need to be applied.
spurious wrote: » Sounds to me like her disability prevented her from accessing the only way she was provided with on the station of getting a ticket. If I was a PR person in Irish Rail, I would be dropping this case like the hot potato it is. Is there no-one sane left in positions of responsibility any more?
Wild Garlic wrote: » Spot on. Because of her disability she was unable to purchase a ticket. Which prevented her to legally use the service. Afaik Irish Rail have an obligation to provided a comparable service to all regardless of ability and in my view are discriminating if they don't provide this. This is what I would be arguing OP.
hmmm wrote: » There must be some limit on how far companies are expected to go to provide for disabled persons? (I don't know anything about this area, genuine question). I have sympathy for the OP, but I don't see why he is making any of this out to be Irish Rail's problem. Half the country would be claiming "mild dyslexia" to get out of fines the week after.
OisinDunne wrote: » I think I'll have to pay and then take them to small claims court to recover as they are undermining my authority as a parent under the constitution:
Wild Garlic wrote: » True enough but if it was my 16yr old daughter that had this disability(assuming dyslexia is classed as a disability) I would be able to provide proof and would forward this proof onto IR, case closed.
hmmm wrote: » What do blind people do?
hmmm wrote: There must be some limit on how far companies are expected to go to provide for disabled persons? (I don't know anything about this area, genuine question).
hmmm wrote: I have sympathy for the OP, but I don't see why he is making any of this out to be Irish Rail's problem. Half the country would be claiming "mild dyslexia" to get out of fines the week after.
L1011 wrote: » They would almost inevitably have a travel pass, which in case of a station without an open booking office you just board.
OisinDunne wrote: » But i was willing to pay at the other end. I was standing there with cash in hand and not allowed to. The issue i have is that i wasn't encouraging my child to fare evade but rather keep herself safe and the appeal process doesn't allow for child safety.
shodge wrote: All this discussion has done is establish dyslexia is not a classed as a disability, if it was the girl would have a free travel pass. This whole thing is just posters looking for a reason not to pay the fare, no doubt the same posters will complain the fare are to high, you can’t have it both ways, Either fare evasion is tackled or the fares will continue to rise.
OisinDunne wrote: » The only reason i mentioned her dydlexia is that that is why she finds it very hard to use the machines. Not trying to avoid the fare at all. Was willing to pay for her at Laytown but i wasn't allowed to
Shelflife wrote: I understand what you are saying but the inspectors would take the view that if they werent there that its unlikely that you would then buy a ticket and throw it away thus insuring that they lost no revenue.
Shelflife wrote: They have also no way of knowing that your daughter hasnt been doing this for years. (not suggesting that she has). Thats why a fine was issued.
shodge wrote: and if you where not caught she would have travel for free.
