wrote:
On Fri, 02 Oct 2015 14:58:38 +0100
e27002 aurora wrote:
On Fri, 2 Oct 2015 06:16:58 -0700 (PDT), Offramp
wrote:

The fare dodger was described as a barrister but he was also given the title
Dr. He must be very clever!

Perhaps he has a PhD in Law? Or, he may have studied multiple
disciplines.

He was certainly smart enough to scam the idiotic Oyster system. You have to
hand it to the guy - he saved himself 20K. The only reason he was caught is
because he handed himself in. I doubt they'd have bothered to trace him
otherwise - after all, at the time as far as they were concerned he'd simply
been charged maximum fare for not touching in.

He didn't scam Oyster. As you say, he paid more on Oyster than he needed
to. He scammed Chiltern, and it was Chiltern staff who spotted it.

On Friday, 2 October 2015 16:04:38 UTC+1, wrote:
On Fri, 02 Oct 2015 14:58:38 +0100
e27002 aurora wrote:
On Fri, 2 Oct 2015 06:16:58 -0700 (PDT), Offramp
wrote:

The fare dodger was described as a barrister but he was also given the title
Dr. He must be very clever!

Perhaps he has a PhD in Law? Or, he may have studied multiple
disciplines.

He was certainly smart enough to scam the idiotic Oyster system. You have to
hand it to the guy - he saved himself 20K. The only reason he was caught is
because he handed himself in. I doubt they'd have bothered to trace him
otherwise - after all, at the time as far as they were concerned he'd simply
been charged maximum fare for not touching in.

It wasn't REALLY 20,000£, as the judge spotted. Chiltern, as they are entitled to, were basing the fare avoided on a standard return fare for every journey. The eventual comp was based, more realistically, on the amount evaded if weekly tickets were involved.