Recent content by martybabes

Right, I get you, thanks. But having the option of criminal or civil proceedings is a useful thing for TOCs. You can threaten criminal proceedings (and frighten the bejabers out of Joe Public) but settle for an o-o-c lump sum when Joe Public realises he would otherwise get a criminal record...

Why's that? (Out of interest, not being funny)

Right, let me try again. Firstly, let me not only iterate but reiterate that I have no axe to grind against drivers, train managers or anyone connected - or not connected - with the railway. I have in the past made some comments which have been critical of the industry where I have felt it...

I have no particular gripe about drivers any more than any other group within the industry. I don't doubt the professionalism and integrity of drivers, tho some of them are, on here, somewhat robust in their responses to others not in the business. Another thread made a reference to CCTV not...

You'd see whether the driver was applying the brakes or applying his make-up!

This, I think, is what was meant.

In-cab CCTV would assist the investigation!

I have seen the term "prosecution" used which, to me, clearly indicates criminal proceedings in the Magistrates Court. If this is the case, rather than terms being wrongly used and a civil claim being meant rather than stated, it is still possible for the prosecution to be halted at this late...

But in-cab CCTV does not do that so there should be no objection to its presence. To have a recording of events as they ocurred will allow an examination to be undertaken for later assessment rather than having to rely on the fallible or skewed memory of witnesses, independent or otherwise...

The whole point of a forum is discussion. And I can see that, from what I wrote earlier, it has generated an opportunity for us to consider our prejudices (should we have any) and our preconceptions. Quite often the choices we make are based on things we can't quite put our finger on (and...

While it wasn't me who made the comment earlier, I don't think it creates a very good impression for a driver or, indeed, anybody to have their foot up on the dashboard. It shows a very casual approach to his responsibilities, and one can only wonder whether he discharges that responsibility...

I seem to recall that the term "defamation" covers both slander (spoken) and libel (printed) tho I may be wrong...

I think PACE says that you can't generally compel a spouse to give evidence against the other. My memory, like these new energy efficient bulbs, is a bit dim.

Ah hah! Thanks Fare-Cop.

This PF before travel business - can someone explain to me how you can be penalised before you have even travelled? Is the very fact you are on the station concourse enough to warrant a penalty? There may well be a logical explanation for this, but it escapes me at the moment.