Contesting a LUAS ticket?

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.

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!