Contesting a LUAS ticket?

Dub4747 · 13-11-2017 11:42pm #1

Hi,

Just wondering has anyone done this successfully? My husband is the most annoyingly honest person you'll ever meet and would never willingly break the law. He takes the LUAS to work and home 5 days a week and has a Leapcard that he has set up to automatically top up through our bank account and he tags on and off the LUAS on his way to work and home every Monday to Friday.

However a week ago on his way home he was walking to the LUAS with a friend from work who has an annual ticket (and thus does not have to tag on) instead of alone like he normally would and he forgot to tag on. Then an inspector came on and he handed his Leapcard to be checked and realised he had forgotten to tag on. He explained the situation and apologised but the inspector still gave him a ticket. My husband said he thought it was a bit harsh and that if he checked his payment and travel history he could see that he had tagged on and off on this same journey to and from work every Monday-Friday for the previous 11 months without fail. The inspector said he could see that he had credit on the ticket and that if my husband just emailed the relevant address and explained the situation it should be ok - he made it seem like if he appealed it would be cleared.

However they sent a letter today saying the fine still stands. We're both really annoyed as this seems unduly harsh and if they just checked his payment history they'd see he's telling the truth. It's just such BS as when these ticket inspectors get on the people who are trying not to pay and are swindling the system just walk to the other end of the train and get off at the next stop and don't get caught or the scumbags cause a fuss and just refuse to give any information and walk away. Yet people like my husband comply and explain honestly and get screwed. I think he should appeal as I can't see how a judge could not see how this was an innocent mistake? Any experience with this or has anyone successfully gone to court to appeal a ticket like this? Thanks

Losty Dublin · 14-11-2017 12:30am

Did he pay his fare on the Luas at the time of travel, yes or no?

If the answer is no then unfortunately he hasn't any defence here.

Dub4747 · 14-11-2017 12:42am

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Did he pay his fare on the Luas at the time of travel, yes or no?

If the answer is no then unfortunately he hasn't any defence here.

Well seeing as I explained in my post that he forgot, clearly he didn't pay, although he had a Leapcard with credit on it at the time and an 11-month history of always tagging on and off to pay with no missed tags. People can make mistakes and sometimes that can be taken into account which is why I asked the question here. The letter LUAS sent him said that in 72% of cases like my husband's they win in court so that means in 28% the person wins even though they were ticketed so there must be some defence?

Gardai pull people over for speeding and make decisions not to ticket them and that's without any proof of consistent, law-abiding behaviour like we have in this situation?

Losty Dublin · 14-11-2017 12:53am

Dub4747 wrote: »

Well seeing as I explained in my post that he forgot, clearly he didn't pay, although he had a Leapcard with credit on it at the time and an 11-month history of always tagging on and off to pay with no missed tags. People can make mistakes and sometimes that can be taken into account which is why I asked the question here. The letter LUAS sent him said that in 72% of cases like my husband's they win in court so that means in 28% the person wins even though they were ticketed so there must be some defence?

All his tag on record proves is that he tagged on on those occasions shown.

Hilly Bill · 14-11-2017 1:01am

It's your hubbys fault end of. His honesty isn't in question but unfortunately he forgot to tag on and got fined and it's a case of paying for his mistake and moving on.
You couldn't walk out of a shop with unpaid goods and claim that you have money and paid last week.

Dub4747 · 14-11-2017 3:03am

Hilly Bill wrote: »

It's your hubbys fault end of. His honesty isn't in question but unfortunately he forgot to tag on and got fined and it's a case of paying for his mistake and moving on.
You couldn't walk out of a shop with unpaid goods and claim that you have money and paid last week.

So how exactly do 28% of people in his situation get their cases thrown out in court? It's obviously not just a straight forward case? :rolleyes:

And your analogy doesn't relate at all - he isn't actively *taking* anything. A better analogy would be if a person went into the same shop 5 days a week for 11 months and bought an apple each time with a pre-paid card that only purchased apples but one day they accidentally forgot to swipe that card to pay for it...just once. I would surely bet the shop owner might be understanding and realise that was totally out of character?

Rubberchikken · 14-11-2017 3:09am

He has nothing to lose by appealing.
The record of him always using the tag system.should stand to him. A fair minded judge could see that a genuine error was made.

The inspector on the luas may mot have the leeway to accept your husbands reason for not tagging.

knowledge88888 · 14-11-2017 5:40am

I believe ur husband is an honest man. But your wasting ur time and seem to harming yourselfs with unnessary stress. Just pay fine and move on. Fine about 45 euro. Is it really worth stress. It is so annoying watching people time and time again get away with not paying and walking off. Luas inspectors are cowardly if a group of teenagers are on luas they just laugh and get off. But an honest person is fined for simple mistake.

Peregrinus · 14-11-2017 6:37am

Dub4747 wrote: »

Well seeing as I explained in my post that he forgot, clearly he didn't pay, although he had a Leapcard with credit on it at the time and an 11-month history of always tagging on and off to pay with no missed tags . . .

When the accusation is that someone broke the law on this occasion, the fact that he didn't break the law on other occasions isn't really relevant. It's the kind of detail that might affect a decision about what sentence to impose, but it has no bearing on guilt or innocence.

And I entirely accept that your husband is honest. But the offence he is charged with is not that he dishonestly travelled without logging on; just that he travelled without logging on. It's perfectly possible to commit this offence through carelessness or oversight or being a bit distracted; no dishonesty is required. So, again, his honesty does not provide a defence here.

He was very unlucky to be inspected on the one occasion when he forgot to log on but, once more, "I was unlucky" is not a defence to this charge.

If he takes it to court and gets a sympathetic judge he might end up with a conditional discharge and no fine. But, as others have pointed out, the costs in time and expenses of going to court at all exceed the amount of the fixed penalty, so in economic terms he's better off if he just pays the fixed penalty. However if he wants the psychological comfort of having his honesty acknowledged then he might choose to go to court anyway.

magicbastarder · 14-11-2017 9:06am

Dub4747 wrote: »

Well seeing as I explained in my post that he forgot, clearly he didn't pay, although he had a Leapcard with credit on it at the time and an 11-month history of always tagging on and off to pay with no missed tags.

there's an obvious counter-argument to this. just because someone has a history of paying on the luas, is *not* the same as being able to show a history of *always* paying on the luas.
in theory, i could take 20 luas journeys a week, and pay for 10 consistently, and then point to my history of 10 per week as being proof i'm honest.

i got done once - was using my ticket as a bookmark, and it obviously fell out. paid the fine and that was that (albeit a different situation to your husband's as it was a paper ticket so no history at all to point to).

Stoner · 14-11-2017 9:21am

magicbastarder wrote:

there's an obvious counter-argument to this. just because someone has a history of paying on the luas, is *not* the same as being able to show a history of *always* paying on the luas. in theory, i could take 20 luas journeys a week, and pay for 10 consistently, and then point to my history of 10 per week as being proof i'm honest.

Or better again, if you had evidence that you retrospectively paying for a journey that you forgot to pay for at the time.

That would be better evidence of honesty

Losty Dublin · 14-11-2017 9:55am

Dub4747 wrote: »

So how exactly do 28% of people in his situation get their cases thrown out in court? It's obviously not just a straight forward case? :rolleyes:

I don't know how they got their cases thrown out. I could harbour guesses but here's the more important question; do you know how or why they were thrown out, or what sort of cases they were (They need not all be ticketing cases being tried.) even if this stat is correct atall atall atall?

Either way, if your OH reckon that it's a viable defence to secure an aquittal in a court of law against then he would want to be very sure of the facts before relying on the "but the man said" defence. And, as Luas will be represented by at least one Solicitor (And sometimes more and even the odd barrister.) it may be prudent for your OH to obtain one as well.

Personally were it me I'd swallow the lesser of the two evils.

Hilly Bill · 14-11-2017 11:06am

Dub4747 wrote: »

So how exactly do 28% of people in his situation get their cases thrown out in court? It's obviously not just a straight forward case? :rolleyes:

And your analogy doesn't relate at all - he isn't actively *taking* anything. A better analogy would be if a person went into the same shop 5 days a week for 11 months and bought an apple each time with a pre-paid card that only purchased apples but one day they accidentally forgot to swipe that card to pay for it...just once. I would surely bet the shop owner might be understanding and realise that was totally out of character?

They still would get done for stealing an apple. It's simple, your hubby made the mistake so should pay the consequences instead of getting his wife to go online to look for a way to not pay.

It always seems to be an honest mistake when caught.

Hilly Bill · 14-11-2017 11:08am

Rubberchikken wrote: »

He has nothing to lose by appealing.
The record of him always using the tag system.should stand to him. A fair minded judge could see that a genuine error was made.

The inspector on the luas may mot have the leeway to accept your husbands reason for not tagging.

That opens it up to deliberately not tagging on every now and then in the know that they will get away with it.

Fian · 14-11-2017 1:06pm

There is no chance you will succeed in overturning this - put it down to experience.

Dub4747 · 14-11-2017 2:10pm

Fian wrote: »

There is no chance you will succeed in overturning this - put it down to experience.

Well 28% so success so there is certainly a chance :rolleyes:

Dub4747 · 14-11-2017 2:17pm

Thanks everyone for the replies. Lots of good points here. You’re right that it’s a case of weighing up whether it’s worth the time and effort to contest what is just a €45 fee but I think it’s more the principle of it that it’s not the habitual cheats who get done with these fines. They leg it or cause a scene and don’t pay a cent.

Initially I was more annoyed about this and my husband was of the mind that it was his mistake but he wasn’t that bothered as the inspector made it seem as if they’d overturn it based on him having credit and a consistent paying history every day in that journey. When that didn’t happen he got annoyed. I just wanted to ask on here to see has anyone experience with something similar.

We’ll weigh up the pros and cons but is it with the hassle to contest it? I’m not sure ðŸ˜’

messrs · 14-11-2017 2:19pm

Dub4747 wrote: »

Hi,

Just wondering has anyone done this successfully? My husband is the most annoyingly honest person you'll ever meet and would never willingly break the law. He takes the LUAS to work and home 5 days a week and has a Leapcard that he has set up to automatically top up through our bank account and he tags on and off the LUAS on his way to work and home every Monday to Friday.

However a week ago on his way home he was walking to the LUAS with a friend from work who has an annual ticket (and thus does not have to tag on) instead of alone like he normally would and he forgot to tag on. Then an inspector came on and he handed his Leapcard to be checked and realised he had forgotten to tag on. He explained the situation and apologised but the inspector still gave him a ticket. My husband said he thought it was a bit harsh and that if he checked his payment and travel history he could see that he had tagged on and off on this same journey to and from work every Monday-Friday for the previous 11 months without fail. The inspector said he could see that he had credit on the ticket and that if my husband just emailed the relevant address and explained the situation it should be ok - he made it seem like if he appealed it would be cleared.

However they sent a letter today saying the fine still stands. We're both really annoyed as this seems unduly harsh and if they just checked his payment history they'd see he's telling the truth. It's just such BS as when these ticket inspectors get on the people who are trying not to pay and are swindling the system just walk to the other end of the train and get off at the next stop and don't get caught or the scumbags cause a fuss and just refuse to give any information and walk away. Yet people like my husband comply and explain honestly and get screwed. I think he should appeal as I can't see how a judge could not see how this was an innocent mistake? Any experience with this or has anyone successfully gone to court to appeal a ticket like this? Thanks

OP - I get combination of bus/luas, one morning about a year ago i had got off my bus and was crossing over to get my luas when i saw it coming, i wanted to get on it and not wait on the next one, ran to the leap card reader, held my card too it and got on luas, turns out i didnt hold it against the reader properly and i didnt actually tag on - only found out when inspector got on to check, i got a fine, appealed to luas customer services & explained what happened and they cancelled my fine for me. what email add did you appeal to? i can search back through my emails and find the one i used if it helps?

Dub4747 · 14-11-2017 2:19pm

Hilly Bill wrote: »

They still would get done for stealing an apple. It's simple, your hubby made the mistake so should pay the consequences instead of getting his wife to go online to look for a way to not pay.

It always seems to be an honest mistake when caught.

Ha ha, he didn’t ask me to go online to try and help him get out of it! That would involve effort on his part ;-)‚ It’s just what I’m like - I wanted to know other people’s experiences.

TheShow · 14-11-2017 2:20pm

Honestly I can’t see this going in his favour. At the end of the day he didn’t tag on, by honest mistake, but he was on the Luas without paying the valid fare.
Also, when they charge the fine; they will also charge the fare that he didn’t pay.

Wife had a similar situation on the train using a leap card, she had tagged on but unbeknownst to her the final destination was outside of the leap card zone by one stop. She didn’t get the train regularly and wasn’t aware of the limitations. So despite having actually paid a fare on the leap card by the initial tagging on at the gate, she was fined 100 + 8 euro I think it was. She appealed 3 or 4 times but no joy.

On the flip side, I was waiting for a luas at Bus Aras one day when a tram going the other way pulled in and fairly unsavoury character alighted. The ticket inspector asked him for a his ticket to which he replied Fcuk Off, in a fairly menacing voice. And the matter was not perused further. An interesting method of fare evasion, but only recommended if you look like a scary bstard.

jimmycrackcorm · 14-11-2017 4:02pm

Dub4747 wrote:

Thanks everyone for the replies. Lots of good points here. Youâ€™re right that itâ€™s a case of weighing up whether itâ€™s worth the time and effort to contest what is just a â‚¬45 fee but I think itâ€™s more the principle of it that itâ€™s not the habitual cheats who get done with these fines. They leg it or cause a scene and donâ€™t pay a cent.

Tell your husband to wear a tracksuit traveling on the List and to simply say story bud in a non cultured accent and he won't have to use his leap card at all.

Dub4747 · 14-11-2017 4:10pm

messrs wrote: »

OP - I get combination of bus/luas, one morning about a year ago i had got off my bus and was crossing over to get my luas when i saw it coming, i wanted to get on it and not wait on the next one, ran to the leap card reader, held my card too it and got on luas, turns out i didnt hold it against the reader properly and i didnt actually tag on - only found out when inspector got on to check, i got a fine, appealed to luas customer services & explained what happened and they cancelled my fine for me. what email add did you appeal to? i can search back through my emails and find the one i used if it helps?

Thanks! I’ll check what email address he used! 😊

Victor · 14-11-2017 4:15pm

Rubberchikken wrote: »

He has nothing to lose by appealing.

Losing in court means being convicted.

How stupid will it look to immigration when asked if he has any convictions and what for?

magicbastarder · 14-11-2017 6:49pm

Dub4747 wrote: »

Well 28% so success so there is certainly a chance :rolleyes:

but you already know he got on without paying; the 28% you mention may have resulted that way because of some grey area with a ticket or equipment malfunction. there's no such issue with your husband, you say he simply got on the tram without tagging on.

Dub4747 · 14-11-2017 9:10pm

magicbastarder wrote: »

but you already know he got on without paying; the 28% you mention may have resulted that way because of some grey area with a ticket or equipment malfunction. there's no such issue with your husband, you say he simply got on the tram without tagging on.

No I don’t think so. The letter from the LUAS says “Our success rate for prosecutions similar to your case in the district courts for 2015 was 72%.”

yosser hughes · 14-11-2017 9:17pm

OP, I had the exact same issue as your husband.I genuinely forgot to tag on one morning. I have a personalised Leap card, was able to produce months and months of tag on/off history and pleaded my case.
It made no difference. They helpfully provided a map to the courthouse should I need it; as they said they would bring me to court.Not so subtle intimidation.
It's galling when you see so many fare dodgers and your husband is clearly an honest law abiding passenger, however they were not for turning in my case either. Like your husband the inspector gave me the impression that if I appealed my case, I would likely succeed. Not how it turned out.
I paid it and moved on. Lesson learned.

Dub4747 · 14-11-2017 9:21pm

yosser hughes wrote: »

OP, I had the exact same issue as your husband.I genuinely forgot to tag on one morning. I have a personalised Leap card, was able to produce months and months of tag on/off history and pleaded my case.
It made no difference. They helpfully provided a map to the courthouse should I need it; as they said they would bring me to court.
It's galling when you see so many fare dodgers and your husband is clearly an honest law abiding passenger, however they were not for turning in my case either. Like your husband the inspector gave me the impression that if I appealed my case, I would likely succeed. Not how it turned out.
I paid it and moved on. Lesson learned.

Thanks for sharing your experience. It’s just so infuriating to see the people who never pay get away with it time after time by being rude, aggressive and just walking away. They make the rest of us pay for their avoidance by not having any leniency no matter what the situation :-(

Dub4747 · 15-11-2017 1:28am

messrs wrote: »

OP - I get combination of bus/luas, one morning about a year ago i had got off my bus and was crossing over to get my luas when i saw it coming, i wanted to get on it and not wait on the next one, ran to the leap card reader, held my card too it and got on luas, turns out i didnt hold it against the reader properly and i didnt actually tag on - only found out when inspector got on to check, i got a fine, appealed to luas customer services & explained what happened and they cancelled my fine for me. what email add did you appeal to? i can search back through my emails and find the one i used if it helps?

My husband says he emailed customer service first and they told him he had to do the appeal through their official online appeal system so that’s what he used? What email did you use if you can find it?

Peregrinus · 15-11-2017 2:37am

Dub4747 wrote: »

No I don’t think so. The letter from the LUAS says “Our success rate for prosecutions similar to your case in the district courts for 2015 was 72%.”

How is that in any way inconsistent with what Magicbastarder said?

The 28% who were acquitted must have had some kind of defence (or in some cases the prosecution may have stuffed up and failed to present necessary evidence to the court).

On the facts you give us, your husband doesn't appear to have any defence. All the circumstances you point to which attract our sympathy would to to reducing his sentence, not to securing his acquittal.

He could take this to court in the hope that the prosecution would stuff up - say, the ticket inspector fails to attend to give evidence. That would result in an acquittal. But it would be a gamble, and in any case that's nto the kind of acquittal that would secure the vindication of his honesty that I sense you are looking for.

magicbastarder · 15-11-2017 8:34am

Peregrinus wrote: »

On the facts you give us, your husband doesn't appear to have any defence.

i think the defence being advanced is 'but he doesn't deserve this'.
i cannot easily see a judge being lenient on this - whatever about not wanting to set a precedent of allowing a clearly guilty person off; (s)he may be rightfully annoyed about your husband wasting the courts time appealing while admitting guilt.

messrs · 15-11-2017 9:32am

Dub4747 wrote: »

My husband says he emailed customer service first and they told him he had to do the appeal through their official online appeal system so that’s what he used? What email did you use if you can find it?

Hi On looking back through my emails i just sent my mail to info@luas.ie & from there they passed it on and gave me a reference number for my case

GM228 · 15-11-2017 9:50am

I see this 28% constantly being mentioned, first of all what you need to know is the 72% applies to successful convictions, as someone who has been present in the DC for a lot of these cases it is worth pointing out that in many of these cases, due to various circumstances the Probation Act is applied and a fine to the so called poor box. Application of the Act is not a conviction and is therefore not recorded as a successful prosecution obviously as the Probation Act is in lieu of a conviction.

For example, out of 100 people you could have 72 convictions, and say a further 10 poor box fines, that's basically 88 people paying fines, but only a 72% successful conviction rate. 72 of those people have a conviction, 28 do not - but 82 still have a fine, meaning only 18 out of 100 left without having to pay some sort of fine.

GM228 · 15-11-2017 9:57am

Peregrinus wrote: »

The 28% who were acquitted must have had some kind of defence (or in some cases the prosecution may have stuffed up and failed to present necessary evidence to the court).

+1, also worth noting, a valid defence or stuffed up evidence aside there can be other factors at play which sees a case dismissed, technical issues etc.

Minor note Peregrinus, we dismiss in the DC, not acquit.

Dub4747 · 15-11-2017 3:11pm

GM228 wrote: »

I see this 28% constantly being mentioned, first of all what you need to know is the 72% applies to successful convictions, as someone who has been present in the DC for a lot of these cases it is worth pointing out that in many of these cases, due to various circumstances the Probation Act is applied and a fine to the so called poor box. Application of the Act is not a conviction and is therefore not recorded as a successful prosecution obviously as the Probation Act is in lieu of a conviction.

For example, out of 100 people you could have 72 convictions, and say a further 10 poor box fines, that's basically 88 people paying fines, but only a 72% successful conviction rate. 72 of those people have a conviction, 28 do not - but 82 still have a fine, meaning only 18 out of 100 left without having to pay some sort of fine.

Thanks for that info - it helps a lot to understand it better. It probably isn’t worth pursuing.

Someone previously mentioned though that they think I want this to go to court to vindicate my husband’s honesty but that’s not it at all. It doesn’t bother me what an inspector or people here think as it’s a very minor issue. After reading the responses here and thinking about it more I realise that what I actually wanted was some sort of vindication from a sh*t justice system that might show that it’s not just the scumbags and repeat offenders with no regard for the law that walk away without paying a fine or being ticketed. They flout the law and are rarely ever penalised. I’m just angry that it’s law abiding citizens who may have made an honest mistake who get penalised and never have lenience shown.

As a back story here my husband and I had to suffer through the so called justice system here for 5 years trying to get some sort of justice for what should have been a cut and dry case. We were car jacked when I was 8 months pregnant by two scumbags (with 25+ previous convictions) who threatened to kill us/blow our brains out, stole and totalled my car and scared the sh*t out of us and caused extreme PTSD and left me afraid to leave our home as it happens outside our house.

They were caught at the scene of the accident around the corner. We thought it was a cut and dry case but the entire process was focused on the criminal and how tough his life was and he was given every opportunity, every delay, never penalised when he didn’t show up for court and when he was proven to have lied about another no show by pretending he’d had a doctors’ appointment. My husband even showed up for one of the court dates which was on the date I was going into hospital to have my second child. The scumbag never even showed. So our experience with the system is a very negative one and I suppose we both feel it’s heavily weighted in favour of the criminals and the constant law breakers so even for something as minor as this LUAS Ticket it just annoys us both so much to see people like my husband and others on this thread who made genuine mistakes get penalised with what seems like no recourse or hope of leniency while the scumbags just trot on, never being called up and held accountable for what they do. Going to court over the LUAS ticket won’t fix all that but it probably helps explain why we were considering it.

Hilly Bill · 15-11-2017 3:27pm

Best of luck anyway.

billybonkers · 16-11-2017 9:58am

I usually pay and display a parking ticket on my car but yesterday I forgot and got clamped, do you think they will/should pay me back for the de-clamping fee?

Dub4747 · 16-11-2017 10:39am

billybonkers wrote: »

I usually pay and display a parking ticket on my car but yesterday I forgot and got clamped, do you think they will/should pay me back for the de-clamping fee?

Yawn. Is your input even relevant at this stage? We’ve been through it all. That’s not a good comparable situation.

Thanks everyone else for the feedback/advice 👍🏻

Hilly Bill · 16-11-2017 1:09pm

billybonkers wrote: »

I usually pay and display a parking ticket on my car but yesterday I forgot and got clamped, do you think they will/should pay me back for the de-clamping fee?

No because you have already paid it.

Wheety · 16-11-2017 2:23pm

My opinion is to let it go too. Pain in the ar** but technically he did not have a ticket for his journey.

Also, technically, neither did his friend.

https://www.luas.ie/assets/files/RPA%20Marketing%20Campaign/LeapcardFAQ.pdf

XPS_Zero · 16-11-2017 4:07pm

If you bring this to court it will all come down to intent, that's the key part of the law, if either:

1. You were careless
2. Intentionally dodged fare

Then you broke the law, forgetting IS carelessness

I won an appeal (at Luas level) once but it was VERY unique circumstances and they key thing was I had tried to tag on, repeatedly, right after topping up, and there was camera footage to show this, and to show me getting off the luas specifically to try to tag on before the tram left, so the wins in court would be unique circumstances like those

THey can't accept "i forgot" if they accepted that as an excuse the entire system would break down.

XPS_Zero · 16-11-2017 4:18pm

messrs wrote: »

OP - I get combination of bus/luas, one morning about a year ago i had got off my bus and was crossing over to get my luas when i saw it coming, i wanted to get on it and not wait on the next one, ran to the leap card reader, held my card too it and got on luas, turns out i didnt hold it against the reader properly and i didnt actually tag on - only found out when inspector got on to check, i got a fine, appealed to luas customer services & explained what happened and they cancelled my fine for me. what email add did you appeal to? i can search back through my emails and find the one i used if it helps?

The critical difference in law there is INTENT, you tried to tag on, similar to my situation, that's why they let you off, they knew they'd not win in court if you pushed it, thats very different from not trying to tag on and forgetting.

Intend is central, recklessness comes next, the OP comes under the latter. If I am pushing a buggy through a supermarket and I stuff a box of chocolates under it im intending to steal, that's theft. If something small falls off the shelf into the buggy down the side and I don't see it and I walk out with it, while im over at another shelf looking for something, that's not theft. If I walk out to the car park with something still in my trolley that I forgot to pay for that's theft because there was a reasonable expectation on me to check the trolley to make sure everything was out of it, so I was careless.

Lets be honest what the OP really means (If i may be so bold ) is: were not skangers , were decent people who usually pay, these laws are meant only for skangers who break the law. Sure, it's primarily targeted at them BUT if we let the OP's husband off in this case for forgetting, then every knacktastic member of the tracksuit brigade will be saying to inspectors "ah sarry dere bud but I fargot, usually tag on n all". I'm sure at this point someone is thinking "but what about the tag history", true, but if word is out (and it would get out) that you forgot is an ok excuse if you have some kind of tag history then it's a reasonable calculation for any halfway intelligent person "if I just tag on now and then I can make a killer saving", then the Luas revenue base is undermined and it = higher fares for more passengers..like you.

That's the reason, it would annoy me too if I honestly forgot (and I have, been lucky to not get caught), but that's the way it has to be.

Dub4747 · 16-11-2017 10:00pm

XPS_Zero wrote: »

The critical difference in law there is INTENT, you tried to tag on, similar to my situation, that's why they let you off, they knew they'd not win in court if you pushed it, thats very different from not trying to tag on and forgetting.

Intend is central, recklessness comes next, the OP comes under the latter. If I am pushing a buggy through a supermarket and I stuff a box of chocolates under it im intending to steal, that's theft. If something small falls off the shelf into the buggy down the side and I don't see it and I walk out with it, while im over at another shelf looking for something, that's not theft. If I walk out to the car park with something still in my trolley that I forgot to pay for that's theft because there was a reasonable expectation on me to check the trolley to make sure everything was out of it, so I was careless.

Lets be honest what the OP really means (If i may be so bold ) is: were not skangers , were decent people who usually pay, these laws are meant only for skangers who break the law. Sure, it's primarily targeted at them BUT if we let the OP's husband off in this case for forgetting, then every knacktastic member of the tracksuit brigade will be saying to inspectors "ah sarry dere bud but I fargot, usually tag on n all". I'm sure at this point someone is thinking "but what about the tag history", true, but if word is out (and it would get out) that you forgot is an ok excuse if you have some kind of tag history then it's a reasonable calculation for any halfway intelligent person "if I just tag on now and then I can make a killer saving", then the Luas revenue base is undermined and it = higher fares for more passengers..like you.

That's the reason, it would annoy me too if I honestly forgot (and I have, been lucky to not get caught), but that's the way it has to be.

I totally get your points. The most frustrating thing is that the people who habitually abuse the system are not the ones paying these fines. I think I'd be less annoyed if they were genuinely getting caught and being made to pay rather than swearing and being abusive then running off or just legging it to the top of the train and disembarking.

I think my husband is just going to pay the fine but it's still frustrating! I'm sure he won't forget again!

XPS_Zero · 16-11-2017 10:21pm

Dub4747 wrote: »

I totally get your points. The most frustrating thing is that the people who habitually abuse the system are not the ones paying these fines. I think I'd be less annoyed if they were genuinely getting caught and being made to pay rather than swearing and being abusive then running off or just legging it to the top of the train and disembarking.

I think my husband is just going to pay the fine but it's still frustrating! I'm sure he won't forget again!

This is why we need a TransitPolice, some people on here go "but how can we afford it WERE NOT NEW YORK" the same bs excuse we always used for not having a Metro. We have the room in the budget you can fund nearly anything as the bank bailouts proved, if you have your priorities right, it's a matter of what way you stack your priorities. We can have an AIrport Police, a Port Police, no reason we can't merge those two then do some recruitment and create a TransitPolice with limited jurisdiction. You don't wanna give your info or pay the fine? 3 days in a cell. We coddle the tracksuit brigade far too much they get away with absolute murder especially on public transport it's about time we did something about it instead of listing reasons why we can't.
The success of the new PS card in all but erasing FT pass fraud has proved this shower can be tackled if the will is there.

Contesting a LUAS ticket?

Comments