fare evasion

[strange6]

Playing devils advocate here
What would happen if.. someone asked for a ticket from further along the line than they got on as they wanted to return there later, but the further station had a block on. Could they be accused of fare evasion?

Eg, giving a Manchester example.. I get on the train at Ashburys, and at the barrier ask for a return from Guide Bridge (as I want to go back there later), but Guide Bridge has a block on. How could I prove I got on at Ashburys?

No need to prove it if you got yourself a GMPTE rail ranger ticket. Could hop on and off as often as you like after 09:30

 

[mathmo]

If I had been returning or was buying a single ticket from Station X yet I blatantly lied to the inspector at Piccadilly by telling him I had boarded and was due to return to Station Y to get the fare cheapened I can totally understand why I may be in trouble.

In fact, I can understand why I may in trouble anyway since I guess its my responsibility to provide accurate travel information to the inspector but I in no way set out to deceive him of the 50p, I just made a mistake. If the inspector had followed up my request for 'a return to Station Y' by probing me where it was I joined the line I would have answered Station X and the correct fare would have been paid.

Considering the circumstances of that day however, I am very surprised Northern didn't exercise extra caution but then again, from Northern's view, a request for a return to Station Y suggests I have boarded there... logically. So I feel a bit stuck in it all really

Your case sounds pretty similar to this one (often quoted on here): http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bradford/4697212.stm . You may stand a chance if it goes to court (but decisions in Magistrates' Courts don't make precedents, as far as I know). But it's probably best to hope it doesn't get that far.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I would recommend attempting to make a settlement (and an apology with an assurance never to be so foolish again). If it DOES go to Court, then I'm sure even an inexperienced Solicitor from Northern will know a little Law, and will not hesitate to cite the relevant precedent, which in this case will be Bremme v Dubery (1964). I don't think you want to be facing that.

You may stand a chance if it goes to court (but decisions in Magistrates' Courts don't make precedents, as far as I know). But it's probably best to hope it doesn't get that far.

Magistrates' decisions don't create Precedents, but in taking evidence they may hear Precedents.