Don't fare dodge if you work in the City

MABLE

Perhaps he did it for the excitement.

MABLE

weatherlobe wrote: »

No sympathy but on the other hand it is monstrous that he should be 'banned for life to work in the financial services industry'. Its one thing punishment and quite another to take away a fellow's livelihood!! How dare they do this! I hope it gets overturned after his appeal.

How can you have trust in someone who does this type of thing and the punishment needs to be hard to send a warning to other bankers who may be thinking of doing the same thing.

dandelionclock30

What about how the banks and the rail companies behaviour?, this guys fiddling is nothing compared to these.Banking is based on lies and deceit in this country and asked for the rail companies well, they are just screwing the public over with constant overcharging anyway.

trukdiver

dandelionclock30 wrote: »

What about how the banks and the rail companies behaviour?, this guys fiddling is nothing compared to these.Banking is based on lies and deceit in this country and asked for the rail companies well, they are just screwing the public over with constant overcharging anyway.

He was a fund manager. What kind of behaviour do you expect?

SW17

Cornucopia wrote: »

I used to have a long-distance commute, and the penalty fare was simply the single fare (because it was so expensive). So not really a great disincentive to avoid paying.

Well, not for a single occasion, but if you are caught 3 or more times it can be time to see the court from the wrong seat, and the punishments and criminal record associated with that are presumably a greater disincentive to most people.

This chap avoided the criminal record because in this case the TOC was more interested in getting its money than anything else (like banks, if you owe them a few quid it's your problem, if you owe them a lot it's theirs). The FCA has basically treated him as if he had got the criminal record that serial fare evasion would often result in.

It's a personal view whether fare evasion is a crime "morally" (legally there isn't much doubt). However, you can be sure that train operators build the cost of fare evasion into pricing, so all the paying customers are funding it, just like they do with insurance fraud. It's not a victimless crime.

timbo58

I simply can't believe that anyone thinks it's anywhere near OK for this guy to have regularly not paid what he should have done.

He was stealing on a regular basis by using 'a system' and he meant (intended) to do so every time he did it.

The only thing I am gobsmacked by is the the train operating company allowed him to simply repay the fares they thought he had not paid, this is very clearly a by product of allowing private companies to run trains: i.e. they are only motivated by the profits that can be made.

Had he been prosecuted by a true public service provider they would clearly have argued that this sort of out & out theft he had committed asked for only one sort of reaction -a proper prosecution for theft (or it's equivalent under the railways own bylaws).

This chap could easily (note that: not 'struggled' like a growing minority of commuters, not 'tolerated' like most commuters but EASILY) afford to have paid for the journeys being made, he treated this like a game and no doubt sneered at his fellow travellers month after month, year after year when he 'got away with it' he probably thinks that a lot of people who are now sympathising with him are 'mugs' and wouldn't give them the time of day.

!!!!!!, how much does someone have to steal right under your own noses before you say 'enough is enough', or do you think simply because the privatised TOCs (that some of you voted for perhaps?) make a profit that you don't agree with, it's fair play?

This chap deserves at LEAST the situation he is now in, he actually deserved to be jailed for this -just as the people who steal benefits cash year after year and get away with 'paying it back at tuppence a week' -Magistrates & judges need the support of the 'victims' (even if public or corporate) to make sure someone who steals with the intent of stealing is treated the same way whether they steal from a bank, a persons home, the taxpayer or a business.

Perhaps if every time you got a receipt from a petrol station, a supermarket or a rail company it included a surcharge at the bottom of the summing up to show how much you were paying for those who simply decide to steal you'd have less sympathy for them.

This chap has done very well indeed, he had a lovely game for 3 years, he kept cash owed to others without paying interest on it and only paying when caught and ended up with no criminal record due to the train company preferring a payback rather than a jail sentence, he had that as he had earnings making such an amount owed as laughable, one law for the rich -you betcha!

yorkie2

Drunk_Monkey wrote: »

TFL prices are criminal.

You seem to have posted on the wrong thread?

Greeniron wrote: »

I don't disagree, but BBC news say it's a loophole too:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-27011497.

The BBC are generally good, but they do make mistakes, such as this one.

It's not a loophole.

JReacher1 wrote: »

I just used the BBC terminology

The BBC are incorrect; it's not a loophole.

trukdiver wrote: »

It might not even be that much. If he used his Oyster both ways he would have been charged twice, or capped at the peak rate.

Unresolved journeys don't contribute towards any caps.

trukdiver wrote: »

It would have been a lot cheaper for him to have bought an annual Oyster for Zone 1.

Agreed. And it is possible that he did hold a Travelcard. The details have not been published, so we can only speculate.

trukdiver wrote: »

I used to work with a guy who commuted from Peterborough to London. He used to brag that paying the penalty fare was a lot cheaper than buying a ticket every day. He managed to avoid having his ticket checked most days.

A Penalty Fare is charge made by some Train Companies when a passenger has made an honest mistake (see quote below), under certain circumstances.

yorkie2

Cornucopia wrote: »

I used to have a long-distance commute, and the penalty farewas simply the single fare (because it was so expensive).

A Penalty Fare is twice the single fare (subject to a minimum amount, typically £20 at present) to the next station, plus the single fare from that station to your destination

Cornucopia wrote: »

So not really a great disincentive to avoid paying.

A penalty fare is not supposed to be charged if a person is caught avoiding paying. I think this penalty fare FAQ helps clarify this common misconception:

"A penalty fare is simply a charge that [a Train Company] is allowed to make under the Penalty Fare Regulations and Rules. It is not a fine and anyone who is charged one is not being accused of avoiding, or attempting to avoid, paying his or her fare.

‘Fare dodging’ is a completely different matter. It is a criminal offence and we treat it as such by prosecuting offenders under criminal law. "

Some people mistakenly think that if they are caught dodging the worst that can happen is they will be charged a Penalty Fare.

In fact, if a Train Company has evidence that a passenger was intending to avoid payment, they can - and routinely do - prosecute, instead of charging a fare (Penalty or otherwise).

timbo58

IME a Toc that has issued more than a few PFs to any individual will be looking out for said person and those who think they can get away with repeated fare evasion by paying PFs will get a very rude awakening sooner or later.

As yorkie2 says PFs are for persons making a genuine mistake, prosecution is there for the thieves.

Avoriaz

Is there any reason why the Police and CPS can not prosecute this fare dodger?

A burglar doesn't get immunity from prosecution even if he returns the goods he stole.

It would be in the public interest to charge this man. It should be an easy case to win.