Small Claims - Do I have a case?

[Duff McCartney]

I fought the law and the law won.

[Notorious H.O.P.]

A possible loophole might be that the officer checked "No Fare" instead of "Invalid Fare" on the ticket, but I don't know if that would fly.

Do they have a different cost for students/senior citizens/children? Because if they do, that is probably why the officer checked the "No Fare" instead of "Invalid Fare".

I would think that an Invalid Fare would be attempting to use some type of discounted fare for which you don't qualify. You have paid "A" fare, just not "THE" fare you were supposed to pay, therefore it is an "invalid fare".

If this is the case, then the officer was correct in issuing you a "No Fare" ticket because, technically, you didn't pay any type of fare for that day.

If there are "other fares" available then this is not your loophole. At this point, the only thing that will save you is a sympathetic judge and even that is a gamble if you can't produce the type of evidence timvp suggested.

Basically because of cost and time involved, you're better off paying. Even a victory in Fantasy Court might not be forthcoming.

[Kori Ellis]

Dude, I'd fight it. In exactly the way LJ says above. I hate the way people just roll over and take whatever is handed to them in this manner as illustrated by this thread.

I hate the way municipalities treat these violations as an extra source of income. It really pisses me off, because they don't want to stop the "crime", they want to profit from it.

How is paying a fine when you break a law considered "rolling over"? Spurminator did something wrong and intentionally broke the rules. He knew that his pass wasn't good on that day; he was just trying to coast. I don't see that he has any grounds to fight it in this case.

[ShoogarBear]

Did you tell her you were the Spurminator?

[scott]

I'd try to get off with probation or something - but I don't see you getting off on this one.

You could try a "I bought a weekly/monthly/whatever pass, and thought I had it in my bag... but I lost it. Look... I have a June and August... and I had a July, I just lost it" and they may give you a reduced fine.

Of course, you'd be lying in court...

[Chris]

If you go to court to fight the case and the ticket issuing officer doesn't show up then its dismissed. Represent yourself with no lawyer and the court costs will pale in comparison to the fine. 90% of the time the officer WILL NOT show up. It's a way around the system which I am all for.

[MannyIsGod]

How is paying a fine when you break a law considered "rolling over"? Spurminator did something wrong and intentionally broke the rules. He knew that his pass wasn't good on that day; he was just trying to coast. I don't see that he has any grounds to fight it in this case.

Laws have a reason for their implimentation and violation of the laws may not be related to the origional reason for the law being in place. Also, the penalties for the breaking of such laws are rarely designed to punish or deter the law breaker but rather to gain the maximum benefit for the law enforcement body/municipality.

For example, while speed laws are in place for our safety, many small municipalities implement and enforce the these laws with no regards to safety but rather as a means of generating revenue. That amounts to a form of taxation. If there was a genuine intent to protect citzens safety, an effective method of actually deturring the breaking of the law would be put into place. But rather, cities and other governing bodies model their laws to grain the maximum financial benefit. That is an entirely different agenda than the intent of laws should be. Laws should not be enacted by governing bodies in profit making schemes.

The laws are what they are and while Spurminator violated the law, he was obviously not trying to screw the transit authority out of fares. He purchases fares on a regular basis and if he bought a daily passes 15 days out of the month he paid an amount equal to the monthly pass. All of those items are something that a judge should take into consideration before deciding whether or not he should have to pay the entire fine.

But, the transit authority is obviously not interested in a "fair" fine/punishment because they have a policy that makes challenging a ticket a more expensive option, encouraging the ticketed person to simply accept their blanket fine.

That policy, combined with the way muncipalties use these offense as a secondary form of taxation is why I believe paying those fines without fighting back is just rolling over.

[MannyIsGod]

If you go to court to fight the case and the ticket issuing officer doesn't show up then its dismissed. Represent yourself with no lawyer and the court costs will pale in comparison to the fine. 90% of the time the officer WILL NOT show up. It's a way around the system which I am all for.

I dont know how it is in other places, but I know thats not the case here in San Antonio. Officers get paid overtime for their court apperences and that is usually a damn good incentive for them to show up.

[Kori Ellis]

The laws are what they are and while Spurminator violated the law, he was obviously not trying to screw the transit authority out of fares

Yes he was. He didn't pay for the day that he was trying to travel. That's the bottomline. It doesn't matter what he paid for prior or since. He didn't pay to travel that day.

[MannyIsGod]

Yes he was. He didn't pay for the day that he was trying to travel. That's the bottomline. It doesn't matter what he paid for prior or since. He didn't pay to travel that day.

I disagree. If he wasn't trying to pay his share, he woudln't purchase the pass each month. He'd try to screw the transit authority. He bought daily passes, and had probably paid the price of a monthly pass for the month.

Either way, if he goes to court I think the judge will take that into consideration and lower his fine. But then again, he could be a hard ass and hand down the maximum fee.

[Kori Ellis]

I disagree. If he wasn't trying to pay his share, he woudln't purchase the pass each month. He'd try to screw the transit authority. He bought daily passes, and had probably paid the price of a monthly pass for the month.

Either way, if he goes to court I think the judge will take that into consideration and lower his fine. But then again, he could be a hard ass and hand down the maximum fee.

Why are you posting? You are supposed to be at Trinity.

[Spurminator]

As silly as it may sound (and it does in hindsight) I actually didn't think I was cheating the system at the time. Since the August passes were available, I really thought this was an acceptable form of fare for the remainder of July... If I'd had any doubts I probably would have contacted DART or bought daily passes the rest of the week. But quite frankly, it never occurred to me that it would be an issue.

Not that I'm banking on that as a defense, that's my own fault for not thinking.

I'm going to go ahead and pay it... My anger has subsided a bit and I've weighed the cost of the ticket vs. the stress of wondering how challenging it would turn out, and I'd rather just not think about it anymore.

[Kori Ellis]

How much is the ticket (if you don't mind saying)?

[Spurminator]

$75 (in the next 30 days).

Like I said, not really a money issue. (Although it's not like I wipe my ass with $75 checks every day either.)

[MannyIsGod]

Why are you posting? You are supposed to be at Trinity.

That was at 10:24. I'm 2 minutes away from Trinity.

[MannyIsGod]

I have to admit, $75 vs losing a day of work and having to pay a fine as well probably means I would just pay the fine as well. That is not really an excessive fine by any means.

[TDMVPDPOY]

You could write a letter, and if they are considerate they will let you off, but in this case just take them too court. Its always the ppl who get pushed around by these ppl. Same here in australia we got public transport inpectors who issue fines to fare invaders without valid tickets, if you have money but no coins to buy a ticket they will fine you, even if you bought the wrong class of ticket when ur money short, they will still fine you. One time my bro n his friends beated up 4 inspectors and ran away to be found by cops in the next suburb hahaha, next thing you know it they were in the courts fightin a compensation case, and guess who won, WE WON. Those ppl just push ppl around, we got a really good lawyer to represent us, and he wanted to make the case state news but we said its ok we only wanna win the case cose we had a legitimate case against their claims.

Anyway just my 2cents.

[MaNuMaNiAc]

I really don't see what everyone is complaining about! The rules are simple, if you don't have a ticket that covers the day in question the inspector has every right to fine you. It doesn't matter if you bought a ticket every day for the past 20 years, you don't buy a ticket today, YOU CAN'T USE THE TRAIN TODAY! Why is it so hard to understand? Just because you're a regular customer does not mean you get free ride days.

Furthermore, it wasn't a mistake, Spurminator bought an August ticket thinking that by doing so, he wouldn't have to pay the ticket for the 29 of July. That is against the rules. Tickets bought for August only apply for AUGUST! Now, I'm not saying the guy shouldn't have cut you some slack, maybe he should have, but to claim the agent did anything wrong is preposterous. Spurminator has absolutely no legal claim whatsoever.

[Marcus Bryant]

I really don't see what everyone is complaining about! The rules are simple, if you don't have a ticket that covers the day in question the inspector has every right to fine you. It doesn't matter if you bought a ticket every day for the past 20 years, you don't buy a ticket today, YOU CAN'T USE THE TRAIN TODAY! Why is it so hard to understand? Just because you're a regular customer does not mean you get free ride days.

Furthermore, it wasn't a mistake, Spurminator bought an August ticket thinking that by doing so, he wouldn't have to pay the ticket for the 29 of July. That is against the rules. Tickets bought for August only apply for AUGUST! Now, I'm not saying the guy shouldn't have cut you some slack, maybe he should have, but to claim the agent did anything wrong is preposterous. Spurminator has absolutely no legal claim whatsoever.

Inspector Javert is in the house.

You're right, it doesn't matter legally if he had a pass for every other day until eternity. Yet, he was a regular user of the service. Now if this was a private enterprise and not a public one I am sure the law of common sense would have prevailed and he could have purchased a one day pass and have been done with it.

To me it's like a driver with a spotless driving record who is hit with a speeding ticket by an asshole cop when they were simply trying to pass another car.

Anyways, the next time you get penalized by someone following the absolute letter of the law, don't complain about it. It's amazing how many perfect individuals read this forum.

[MaNuMaNiAc]

Inspector Javert is in the house.

You're right, it doesn't matter legally if he had a pass for every other day until eternity. Yet, he was a regular user of the service. Now if this was a private enterprise and not a public one I am sure the law of common sense would have prevailed and he could have purchased a one day pass and have been done with it.

To me it's like a driver with a spotless driving record who is hit with a speeding ticket by an asshole cop when they were simply trying to pass another car.

Anyways, the next time you get penalized by someone following the absolute letter of the law, don't complain about it. It's amazing how many perfect individuals read this forum.

Look smartass, I didn't criticise him alright. I simply don't see how anyone can think he has a case from the legal point of view. You want to argue that the inspector was an ass because he didn't cut him some slack, be my guest, but he did nothing wrong, he was just enforcing the rules, a bit harshy maybe, but completely within the rules.

[MannyIsGod]

Look smartass, I didn't criticise him alright. I simply don't see how anyone can think he has a case from the legal point of view. You want to argue that the inspector was an ass because he didn't cut him some slack, be my guest, but he did nothing wrong, he was just enforcing the rules, a bit harshy maybe, but completely within the rules.

I can see easily how he has a case from a very legal point of view. Not every situation is created equal, and there are things in place in our legal system to account for that.