Rail Users Ireland Forum

Go Back   Rail Users Ireland Forum > General Information & Discussion > Events, Happenings and Media
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Unread 01-02-2018, 18:48   #1
Mark Gleeson
Technical Officer
 
Mark Gleeson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Coach C, Seat 33
Posts: 12,572
Default [article] Marketing executive awarded 16k after Trinity Ball revellers step into mid

https://www.independent.ie/irish-new...-36554981.html
Quote:
A 26-year-old marketing executive has been awarded 16,000 for being falsely imprisoned by Irish Rail staff after she demanded the name of one employee and took his photograph on the night of the Trinity Ball in 2013.
Mark Gleeson is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 02-02-2018, 11:26   #2
ACustomer
Really Regular Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 690
Default

I think the unfortunate Irish Rail employee should have got the monetary award, given the abuse directed at him. How can Irish Rail enforce compliance with ticketing requirements given (a) the lack of something like a railway police and (b) daft courts giving daft awards.
ACustomer is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-02-2018, 10:50   #3
Thomas J Stamp
Chairman/Publicity
 
Thomas J Stamp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: The Home of Hurling
Posts: 2,708
Default

I find it surprising that in this day and age of licenced security staff and full-time revenue collectors for Irish rail that this sort of case can still happen. the law on what constitutes illegal detention is not new and you would assume that its lesson one for these guys.

this person was illegally detained. then in its defence, the company tired to blacken her name instead of admitting liability, which the judge dismissed. what the other people were up to is not relevant to this case.

we are in constant e-mail correspondence with passengers who have suffered very heavy-handed actions from IE staff and we are in correspondence with IE itself on this issue. There appears to be a presumed guilty approach and when mixed with an odd sense from revenue protection staff that its literally their money things can get very emotional and be upsetting very quickly.

In almost every complaint we have seen there is simply a mix-up at work and honest mistakes by people who are long-standing users of the service and who pay their fares day in day out but who are treated like hardened criminals by staff. There is also a marked similarity in the nature of complainants, mostly women and female students (in fact I am trying hard to remember the last adult male one we had, perhaps Mark can jog my memory).

we are aware of several other court actions.
__________________
We are the passengers
Thomas J Stamp is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-02-2018, 08:39   #4
Jamie2k9
Really Really Regluar Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,078
Default

Case to be appealed on 5 March.
Jamie2k9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-02-2018, 16:44   #5
Mark Gleeson
Technical Officer
 
Mark Gleeson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Coach C, Seat 33
Posts: 12,572
Default

Have to say I wasn't paying attention to the emails enough to spot there is a heavy bias as to female vs male. Not enough data to suggest anything

However the emails we get a nearly always clear and detailed, yes I didn't have a ticket but I was treated poorly, shouted at and not given a fair hearing.

As Tom says can't say much more as several who have been in contact with us have indicated that they were planning to go the legal avenue with IE
Mark Gleeson is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 10-02-2018, 12:28   #6
Jamie2k9
Really Really Regluar Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,078
Default

Males are probally more than likely to just pay the fine and move on rather than make a major issue. Regardless of RPU actions in general, the ruling in this case for someone sticking her nose in a joke. No wonder insurance costs sky rocker when such foolish decisions are made.

On the subject of fines, I agree some are genuine mistakes. Perhaps IE should consider moving to a system like Luas where the majority get 45 as opposed to 100 fine which is usually at the discretion of the officers issuing the fine. From experience of seeing people on the Luas, more often than not people accept it and there is no attitude issues for the most part where as 100 causes problems.
Jamie2k9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 14-02-2018, 12:52   #7
Thomas J Stamp
Chairman/Publicity
 
Thomas J Stamp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: The Home of Hurling
Posts: 2,708
Default

believe it or not, you are allowed to "stick your nose in", as we often hear when there are stories of people being attacked followed by replies of "everyone just walked by, why didn't they help out"

in the case under appeal, the award was for false imprisonment as she was detained in an effort to get her to delete a photograph. Again, an irish rail official is an ordinary Joe same as you or I with the same powers and lack of them. if this isnt a false imprisonment then it means that i can pin you to a wall next time i see you taking a pic of me in the street and legally demand you delete it.

this isnt a case where the IE man was asking the lady for her ticket or other things he is lawfully entitled to do.

it would be interesting to see if this is to get to a high court hearing or is quietly settled.
__________________
We are the passengers
Thomas J Stamp is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 14-02-2018, 12:53   #8
Thomas J Stamp
Chairman/Publicity
 
Thomas J Stamp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: The Home of Hurling
Posts: 2,708
Default

Quote:
a system like Luas where the majority get 45 as opposed to 100 fine which is usually at the discretion of the officers issuing the fine. From experience of seeing people on the Luas, more often than not people accept it and there is no attitude issues for the most part where as 100 causes problems.
We get complaints about LUAS as well.

Speaking of which -and anecdotal evidence is the worst kind - there are a lot of complaints on twitter in the last month of fainting on the green line in the morning peak. Cant remember seeing that many before.
__________________
We are the passengers
Thomas J Stamp is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 14-02-2018, 16:59   #9
Jamie2k9
Really Really Regluar Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,078
Default

Quote:
believe it or not, you are allowed to "stick your nose in", as we often hear when there are stories of people being attacked followed by replies of "everyone just walked by, why didn't they help out"
I think a degree of reality here needed here, yes RPU will be harsh (perhaps a bit to much) but those people in the wrong (mistake or not) are often not as polite as they may be in an email to RUI.

Quote:
in the case under appeal, the award was for false imprisonment as she was detained in an effort to get her to delete a photograph. Again, an irish rail official is an ordinary Joe same as you or I with the same powers and lack of them. if this isnt a false imprisonment then it means that i can pin you to a wall next time i see you taking a pic of me in the street and legally demand you delete it.

this isnt a case where the IE man was asking the lady for her ticket or other things he is lawfully entitled to do.

it would be interesting to see if this is to get to a high court hearing or is quietly settled
Don't really care about the case but rather the 16,000, thankfully IE have decided to appeal and whatever happens hopefully the outcome will mean a much lower pay out.

Quote:
We get complaints about LUAS as well.
Of course you do. Reality is passengers are in the wrong 90% of the time so they just need to deal with it.

Quote:
Speaking of which -and anecdotal evidence is the worst kind - there are a lot of complaints on twitter in the last month of fainting on the green line in the morning peak. Cant remember seeing that many before.
Yes since the LCC opened G Line frequency has been reduced and extra trams are going into service only now.

If its not that its delays all day on one or both lines and they have had no real time in most stations for the last week or so.
Jamie2k9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 15-02-2018, 11:41   #10
Mark Gleeson
Technical Officer
 
Mark Gleeson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Coach C, Seat 33
Posts: 12,572
Default

I've witnessed the RPU try the heavy treatment routine, demand details of a third party etc.

While authorised officers (i.e. ticket inspectors, management and some others) have the power to detain under the transport act, this applies only to a very limited range of situations relating to the railway, trespass, fare evasion etc.

Staff are under very clear orders that while they legally are empowered to detain fare evaders they have been told by management not to. Staff have correctly detained persons on several occasions, two incidents in Bray come to mind, the guy who went on a window smashing binge was detained by a driver and station staff, also at Bray again a driver and station staff tackled 3 fare evaders who tried to make a run for it (driver ended up in hospital afterwards). In both cases the gardai arrested the individuals and there was a successful prosecution.
Mark Gleeson is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 15-02-2018, 18:55   #11
Jamie2k9
Really Really Regluar Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,078
Default

On third party, don't they usually do that if they feel they are been lied to?

It all comes back to the same problem and that is no Garda Transport Division to operate alongside RPU and security teams in the GDA. Body camera's wouldn't be a bad idea for RPU either.
Jamie2k9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 16-02-2018, 10:31   #12
Thomas J Stamp
Chairman/Publicity
 
Thomas J Stamp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: The Home of Hurling
Posts: 2,708
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamie2k9 View Post
On third party, don't they usually do that if they feel they are been lied to?

It all comes back to the same problem and that is no Garda Transport Division to operate alongside RPU and security teams in the GDA. Body camera's wouldn't be a bad idea for RPU either.

doesnt matter if they feel they ahve been lied to or not, they dont have the authority for a third party or mobile phone details or anything.

we have been campaigning for a transport police for a long time. its not beyond current resources.

Quote:
Don't really care about the case but rather the 16,000
well, there would have been no money if there hadnt been a false imprisonment.
__________________
We are the passengers
Thomas J Stamp is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 16-02-2018, 16:10   #13
James Shields
Member
 
James Shields's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Drogheda, Ireland
Posts: 1,221
Default

I'm all for transport police, but my understanding from other countries is that the purpose of transport police is passenger safety and crime prevention. Revenue protection would still be IE's responsibility, wouldn't it?

I'm sure transport police officers would work with RPU staff, but I suspect they would spend as much of their time telling RPU, "no, you're not allowed to do that", as they do detaining passengers who've broken the law.
James Shields is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 16-02-2018, 21:19   #14
Thomas J Stamp
Chairman/Publicity
 
Thomas J Stamp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: The Home of Hurling
Posts: 2,708
Default

The awareness that such a thing exists and could turn up randomly/at a moments notice would be the general deterrence and mood setter.

And the transport police could have validly arrested her under the public order act.
__________________
We are the passengers
Thomas J Stamp is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 15:53.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.