On 27 Oct 2005 13:28:27 -0700, ribonucleotide
wrote in . com:

let me go. I was quite relieved as I thought the inspector was
reasonable and understood my circumstances. I went to the tube
station and bought the day travel card (yes, including the zones where
I was on the bus), and soon forgot about the incident.

Something doesn't ring true. Any travelcard is valid on (almost)
any bus[1], so you need pay no extra for "zones on the bus".

[1]] And had been for much more than 12 miooonths.

--
Ivan Reid, Electronic & Computer Engineering, ___ CMS Collaboration,
Brunel University. ] Room 40-1-B12, CERN
KotPT -- "for stupidity above and beyond the call of duty".

Hello,

Are you talking about a bus pass? I bought a day travel card to
continue my travel on the tube inside central London, but the bus route
was actually outside this zone, and the bus stop was on the boarder
between the zones. So, what I realised now, is that I could have
"saved" by buying just a tube return ticket if I wanted to. But thanks
for the question.

I do not need to convince myself about my intentions, but obviously I
am now paranoid about my ability to proove them. I simply cannot
afford thinking that anyone will simply "believe me".

thanks!

R

ribonucleotide wrote:
Hello,

Are you talking about a bus pass? I bought a day travel card to
continue my travel on the tube inside central London, but the bus
route was actually outside this zone, and the bus stop was on the
boarder between the zones. So, what I realised now, is that I
could have "saved" by buying just a tube return ticket if I wanted
to.

I don't understand that last sentence. A tube return ticket has no
validity on buses, but any Travelcard, whatever zones it is valid for,
gives you unlimited bus travel for that day in all zones.

I am very surprised that your solicitor advised you to plead not guilty.
You travelled on a bendy bus without a valid ticket, without the means
to buy one at the bus stop, and without the means to pay a penalty fare
to a revenue inspector (as they don't take credit cards). So not only is
that a clear violation of regulations, but your mitigating plea that you
offered to pay a penalty fare is worthless because you had no cash to
pay it. I am not a lawyer, but I would have thought a not-guilty plea
in those circumstances would be likely to attract a heavier fine.

My advice would be to plead guilty, briefly explain the circumstances,
demonstrate that you normally bought Travelcards (and did so afterwards
on this occasion), and give a grovelling apology.

Does your solicitor have any experience of such cases? You *did* evade
payment at the time you boarded the bus, and your offer to pay the
penalty fare "on the spot" could not have been fulfilled, so his
reasoning is crazy.

--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Thank you, Richard, this is a useful advice. First, I did not know that
a travel card in any zone is also valid on buses in all zones. This
will save me money in the future!

Second, I am actually inclined to agree with you, as my first reaction
to this letter was that I should plead guilty, but explain my
circumstances, attach the tickets I've had on the day and before and
other documents, and ask for a smaller fine. But when I called the
solicitor up, he said that it should be an administrative charge, not
criminal, because for a criminal offence you have to have aslo the
intention. And I intended to buy a ticket for the whole day. Now,
this maybe considered as nonsence (you are right to say, I also boarded
the bus without a ticket). As far as I remember, the logic I had was
"I rather pay extra £10 penalty to TFL, than 50p to the local shop for
nothing". At the time, for me, the expected utility of the first
outcome seemed greater. So, when "caught", I was happy to pay the
£10, and I would have bought the travel card anyway. Unfortunately, I
find myself being suspected of trying to "play the system". Ok, I can
prove in court I did not. But I need to decide my response. I'll talk
to another solicotor tomorrow.

many thanks!

R

ribonucleotide wrote:
Thank you, Richard, this is a useful advice.

You're welcome. Another piece of advice: I've just gone into
uk.transport.london to read any new messages, and am faced with four of
them from you with no indication of which messages you are replying to,
except that you included my name in one of them. Please quote
sufficient context of the message you are replying to, as many of us use
newsreaders which don't display the messages in the same way as Google
Groups.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

On 27 Oct 2005 17:12:29 -0700, "ribonucleotide"
wrote:

As far as I remember, the logic I had was
"I rather pay extra £10 penalty to TFL, than 50p to the local shop for
nothing". At the time, for me, the expected utility of the first
outcome seemed greater. So, when "caught", I was happy to pay the
£10, and I would have bought the travel card anyway. Unfortunately, I
find myself being suspected of trying to "play the system". Ok, I can
prove in court I did not. But I need to decide my response. I'll talk
to another solicotor tomorrow.

No. Your logic was "I'll gamble a sure 50p loss against a lower
chance of a £10 penalty". That was not your option to choose. You
weren't "caught" in cute inverted commas. You were caught, period.

Aren't all these solicitors getting rather expensive? They may offer
a cheap initial consultation, but if you fight the case they won't
work for free.

You maybe right that he did not take the payment becuase he could not
process a plastic card. I can't remember exactly now. I know the
conductors on the train have the facility. So, why can't the
inspectors have one? This is a bit strange, as I've just read the "new
fares" plan by Livingstone, where he is basically trying to discourage
cash payments. In US, not being able to accept a credit card would be
their problem, not mine. Well, the algorithm of how the inspectirs
work here and process fines seems to me a bit draconian, really.

R

Dr Ivan D. Reid ) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying :

let me go. I was quite relieved as I thought the inspector was
reasonable and understood my circumstances. I went to the tube
station and bought the day travel card (yes, including the zones
where I was on the bus), and soon forgot about the incident.

Something doesn't ring true. Any travelcard is valid on (almost)
any bus[1], so you need pay no extra for "zones on the bus".

IRTA having got the bus from (say) Zone 4 to a Zone 3 tube station and then
buying a travelcard including Zone 4.

Would a Z1-2-3 travelcard cover bus to Z4?

Adrian ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying :

Would a Z1-2-3 travelcard cover bus to Z4?

reads rest of thread
Well, I never.. Live and learn.

"Adrian" wrote in message
. 244.170...
Adrian ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying :

Would a Z1-2-3 travelcard cover bus to Z4?

reads rest of thread
Well, I never.. Live and learn.

I think it changed in 2003 when Oyster came out. Before then you did need
all the zones you travelled through. TfL do not go out of their way to make this
fact clear, possibly because of the potential for lost revenue from those who
do not know and continue to buy zones they don't need.

This means that a single zone travelcard is also a bus pass for *all zones* despite
being only marginally more expensive than a bus pass. Anyone who uses the
buses regularly and may on occasion use the tube would probably be better off
with the single zone travelcard rather than the bus pass.

From January the single zone travelcard is withdrawn but the difference in price
between a two zone weekly travelcard and the bus pass will still only be 50p.
i.e. 50p extra a week to able to use all tube, DLR and National Rail in zones 2
and 3 (or whatever two adjacent zones you choose other than zone 1)