Irish Rail - Fine Protocol

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Losty Dublin

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

At a stretch it may go into a file for cancelled penalty fares and forgotten about. More likely that it's noted and duly shredded once it's all sorted.

Carawaystick

I presume we could easily check IÉ's data retention policy:rolleyes:

Seth Brundle

Carawaystick wrote: »

I presume we could easily check IÉ's data retention policy:rolleyes:

It possibly changed after a data breach...
http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/private-eye-illegally-got-into-irish-rail-staff-bank-accounts-26818287.html

bruno1x

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Obviously it will go on to the blackmarket, the KGB and Mossad will pay top dollar for for a photo copy of a Irish passport.

Prediction: The parents will go to court on their high horse, once the Judge finds out it could have been sorted out easily with a photocopy of a passport and the price of a stamp , the Judge will blow a fuse for the parents wasting the courts time and hit them will a bigger fine.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

howiya

bruno1x wrote: »

Obviously it will go on to the blackmarket, the KGB and Mossad will pay top dollar for for a photo copy of a Irish passport.

Prediction: The parents will go to court on their high horse, once the Judge finds out it could have been sorted out easily with a photocopy of a passport and the price of a stamp , the Judge will blow a fuse for the parents wasting the courts time and hit them will a bigger fine.

I would be extremely worried for the future of Irish Rail if they had employees that thought this specific case was worthy of spending the company's resources on going to court.

bruno1x

howiya wrote: »

I would be extremely worried for the future of Irish Rail if they had employees that thought this specific case was worthy of spending the company's resources on going to court.

Over 4,000 views this discussion.
The advice of many is forget about it, ignore the fine and you will get away with it.
No doubt IE would have someone take a look here every now and again to see what people are chatting about.
So the OP by coming here and seeking advice , and been told don't pay and it will go away, has forced the hand of IE, if they did let the OP get away with it, everyone would take the same action when caught and fined.
The OP is in a hole and should stop digging.
As for spending resources in court , many fare evaders will be there on the day, it won't just be the court sitting to deal with one case, so the cost for IE won't matter if its 10 or 11 people on the day.

dalta5billion

Passports contain a huge array of personal data which is irrelevant in proving or disproving the presence of the accused on the train - and the girl's parents are right to be unwilling to give such information to a private company that most likely doesn't have a formal policy for handling and protecting this data. The potential for identity theft is unacceptable.

In Germany and other countries they would blow their tops at such an unnecessary privacy invasion.

Irish Rail are entitled to prosecute offenders. It is up to them to gather the evidence for this however. It is not required of a falsely accused person to sacrifice all privacy rights at the discretion of a private company - that is for a court to decide.

dalta5billion

bruno1x wrote: »

Over 4,000 views this discussion.
The advice of many is forget about it, ignore the fine and you will get away with it.
No doubt IE would have someone take a look here every now and again to see what people are chatting about.
So the OP by coming here and seeking advice , and been told don't pay and it will go away, has forced the hand of IE, if they did let the OP get away with it, everyone would take the same action when caught and fined.
The OP is in a hole and should stop digging.
As for spending resources in court , many fare evaders will be there on the day, it won't just be the court sitting to deal with one case, so the cost for IE won't matter if its 10 or 11 people on the day.

Eh did you read the original post at all?

bruno1x

dalta5billion wrote: »

Passports contain a huge array of personal data which is irrelevant in proving or disproving the presence of the accused on the train - and the girl's parents are right to be unwilling to give such information to a private company that most likely doesn't have a formal policy for handling and protecting this data. The potential for identity theft is unacceptable.

In Germany and other countries they would blow their tops at such an unnecessary privacy invasion.

Irish Rail are entitled to prosecute offenders. It is up to them to gather the evidence for this however. It is not required of a falsely accused person to sacrifice all privacy rights at the discretion of a private company - that is for a court to decide.

Identity theft my ass, people put EVERYTHING online about them selves, a 17 year old girl will no doubt have a Facebook with every detail of her life for all to see,
Redact everything but the name,photo and DOB on the passport, no big deal. Pop it in a envelope and thats it done and dusted, or get on your high horse, hire a solicitor take a day of work and take you daughter out of school to spend a day in court where most likely you will lose and the Judge will be pissed at you for wasting the courts time, when you could have sorted it out very easily.

bruno1x

dalta5billion wrote: »

Eh did you read the original post at all?

I sure did, and many say just ignore it and it will go away.

Seth Brundle

bruno1x wrote: »

Identity theft my ass, people put EVERYTHING online about them selves, a 17 year old girl will no doubt have a Facebook with every detail of her life for all to see,

Completely irrelevant.

bruno1x wrote: »

IRedact everything but the name,photo and DOB on the passport, no big deal. Pop it in a envelope and thats it done and dusted

As IR have stated to the OP that they don't have a picture, what use is this?
Doesn't prove that the OP's kid isn't a fare evader.

bruno1x wrote: »

or get on your high horse, hire a solicitor take a day of work and take you daughter out of school to spend a day in court where most likely you will lose and the Judge will be pissed at you for wasting the courts time, when you could have sorted it out very easily.

They still could end up in court - it all depends on how IR feel about it!

markpb

schemingbohemia wrote:

As far as I can see on this thread, no-one is providing a solution.

In Germany you pay the fine on the spot.

GM228

markpb wrote: »

In Germany you pay the fine on the spot.

And if you don't pay on the spot? (i.e you refuse or genuinely have no money).

markpb

GM228 wrote:

And if you don't pay on the spot? (i.e you refuse or genuinely have no money).

If you have no money, they'll accompany you to an ATM. Not sure what happens if there's none near by or you've no cash. I suspect the police might be involved.

Grab All Association

Letter stamped from school should be sufficient evidence in court. DO NOT SEND A COPY OF HER PASSPORT TO Iarnród Éireann. The onus is on them to prove it was her and they'll have the opportunity to do this on the day and will fail miserably.

Now on to counterclaiming

2) A defendant who wishes to counterclaim under paragraph (1) hereof shall give, or send by ordinary post, to the plaintiff or solicitor for the plaintiff a notice in the Form 41.3, Schedule C, setting out particulars of the counterclaim. Such notice shall be so given or sent as soon as possible after the service upon the defendant of the civil summons, but shall in every case be given to the plaintiff or solicitor (or sent by post so soon as to reach him or her) not later than four days before the date of sitting of the Court to which the civil summons is returnable. A copy of the notice shall at the same time be lodged with the Clerk. Except where the plaintiff agrees to accept shorter notice, no notice of a counterclaim shall be given or sent under this rule later than the time specified herein save by leave of the Court granted under paragraph (3) hereof.

Costs, loss of wages, fuel/transport and reasonable food expenses.

It's the only way they'll learn.

devnull

Heaven forbid someone might use their passport (a form of Identification) for identification purposes, that would be far too logical.

Surprised nobody mentioned civil liberties yet

TheChizler

devnull wrote: »

Heaven forbid someone might use their passport (a form of Identification) for identification purposes, that would be far too logical.

Surprised nobody mentioned civil liberties yet

I don't think using it as ID is the issue, there seems to be no problem with just showing it to them. There's an understandable reluctance to give IR a copy of it.

I'm not sure what showing the passport would achieve though. The OP's sister's defence is that the name and address has been lied about. In that case why would you expect the culprit to have been truthful about the DOB? If you're just relying on name, address, and DOB, from the OP's perspective the fare evader lied about the name, address and may have been truthful about the DOB, while from IR's perspective the fare evader may have lied about the DOB but may have been truthful about name and address. I'm not sure what supplying proof of age would do when all the evidence IR have is compromised anyway (apart from proving that at least one of their pieces of information is incorrect, which I suppose is useful).

The letter from the school is probably the best piece of evidence here. I'd get them to give a time for your parents to meet them that suits your parents, show them the passport to prove that the information they have isn't 100% accurate (don't let them make a copy!) and show them the letter from the school.

devnull

Irish Rail staff have been known to ask for ID when fining someone, on occasion it is bank cards on other occasions it is passports etc. If the RPO took down the passport number it explains both why the RPO wants to see a copy and why the OP won't give it.

The OP said that his sister did not evade, it is not a proven fact. Just because someone says something doesn't mean it is true. But it's great that some people on here are happy to hear one side of a story and automatically presume IE are guilty and the OP is not.

Therefore why don't we just abolish the court system and just ask the defendant what happened and take their word for it without hearing the other side? It would save the country an awful lot of money and since the defendent always tells the truth courts are a waste of time anyway

Grab All Association

devnull wrote: »

Irish Rail staff have been known to ask for ID when fining someone, on occasion it is bank cards on other occasions it is passports etc. If the RPO took down the passport number it explains both why the RPO wants to see a copy and why the OP won't give it.

The OP said that his sister did not evade, it is not a proven fact. Just because someone says something doesn't mean it is true. But it's great that some people on here are happy to hear one side of a story and automatically presume IE are guilty and the OP is not.

Therefore why don't we just abolish the court system and just ask the defendant what happened and take their word for it without hearing the other side? It would save the country an awful lot of money and since the defendent always tells the truth courts are a waste of time anyway

Why admit her address but give an incorrect DOB?
Why would a schoolgirl have her passport on her person?
Why would a secondary school type up and stamp a letter confirming her attendance if she wasn't there?

Iarnród Éireann make mistakes all the time. Recent thread on here a guys neighbour gave the OP name and address. He was caught out by the CCTV footage in the station.

Del2005

dalta5billion wrote: »

Passports contain a huge array of personal data which is irrelevant in proving or disproving the presence of the accused on the train - and the girl's parents are right to be unwilling to give such information to a private company that most likely doesn't have a formal policy for handling and protecting this data. The potential for identity theft is unacceptable.

In Germany and other countries they would blow their tops at such an unnecessary privacy invasion.

Irish Rail are entitled to prosecute offenders. It is up to them to gather the evidence for this however. It is not required of a falsely accused person to sacrifice all privacy rights at the discretion of a private company - that is for a court to decide.

It's mandatory to carry ID in Germany and IIRC you have to be registered to your current address. Don't the German's also stop between stations and hold all people without fares and I'D? Unless they make ID compulsory here incidents like this will continue.

Isn't fare evasion a civil matter, so you aren't innocent till proven guilty it's on the balance of probability. If IE are offering an easy way out and the person goes to court I highly doubt that costs would be awarded against IE. So you can take a day off work, take a person out of school to spend a day bored to tears waiting for the case to be called all to protect something which she'll be showing to hundreds of random strangers in less than a year.

Carawaystick

kbannon wrote: »

It possibly changed after a data breach...
http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/private-eye-illegally-got-into-irish-rail-staff-bank-accounts-26818287.html

Neither Iarnróid Eireann nor Irish Rail are on the Data protection commissioner's public register of data controllers. So any processing of data collected would be contrary to the law.

devnull

Grab All Association wrote: »

Why admit her address but give an incorrect DOB?
Why would a schoolgirl have her passport on her person?
Why would a secondary school type up and stamp a letter confirming her attendance if she wasn't there?
.

Why won't the person send a copy of her passport
Why would they prefer a day out in court?

I agree that there is some element of doubt in this case, but when a figure in authority makes a request I always tend to try and comply with it, especially when there is a chance of going to court.

If the OP is being brought up this way I can only imagine how they will cope when they get a job and their boss asks them something and they say they are not going t comply and instead start making alternative suggestions.

Also I find it strange that it is a relation who is posting this on the board, maybe they are sisters, identical twins, which would make the whole thing really obvious.

I know people who work in revenue protection in other places, and believe me people on this board are very naive, 99/100 people who don't comply with requests normally have something to hide.

traprunner

devnull wrote: »

I agree that there is some element of doubt in this case, but when a figure in authority makes a request I always tend to try and comply with it, especially when there is a chance of going to court.

What authority does an Irish Rail revenue protection officer have over anyone that didn't use Irish Rail? I'd guess none.

plodder

Carawaystick wrote: »

Neither Iarnróid Eireann nor Irish Rail are on the Data protection commissioner's public register of data controllers. So any processing of data collected would be contrary to the law.

Not all data controllers need to register. Why do you think they would need to?

On the question of whether case would be civil or criminal, I'm not a lawyer, but I would imagine fare evasion is covered by transport bye-laws making it an offence, but that wouldn't stop them from pursuing fare recovery as a civil matter.

Just looking at the CIE bye-laws, it seems the fine for offences is "ten pounds" max. There's something quite quaint about these regulations from another era, but surely the NTA should be looking at revamping all of this, and getting serious about fare evasion.

Carawaystick

plodder wrote: »

Not all data controllers need to register. Why do you think they would need to?

DataProtectionCommissioner wrote:

Who is required to register?

The main categories of data controller required to register with the Data Protection Commissioner (if they hold personal data on computer) are:

Government Bodies / Public Authorities
...

If IÉ are prosecuting people, then they are a Public Authority/ govt body.

plodder

Carawaystick wrote: »

If IÉ are prosecuting people, then they are a Public Authority/ govt body.

They are a semi-state body. Is that the same as a public authority? I'd be surprised if they overlooked this tbh..

Update again. Last one not correct

Corvo Attano

schemingbohemia wrote: »

What exactly is your problem with giving them a copy of the passport though? Seems a lot easier than going into a Garda station or any of the other "solutions" you're proposing.

My parents are reluctant to start handing out their daughters information. Go figure. We asked them what the passport would prove and they refused to give a reason.

bruno1x wrote: »

Prediction: The parents will go to court on their high horse, once the Judge finds out it could have been sorted out easily with a photocopy of a passport and the price of a stamp , the Judge will blow a fuse for the parents wasting the courts time and hit them will a bigger fine.

What high horse? Do you see me crusading in here?
Why wont he blow a fuse at IR refusing to answer a few questions to put my parents mind at ease? Or try sort an alternative in which my parents would but in all the effort?

TheChizler wrote: »

I don't think using it as ID is the issue, there seems to be no problem with just showing it to them. There's an understandable reluctance to give IR a copy of it.

I'm not sure what showing the passport would achieve though. The OP's sister's defence is that the name and address has been lied about. In that case why would you expect the culprit to have been truthful about the DOB? If you're just relying on name, address, and DOB, from the OP's perspective the fare evader lied about the name, address and may have been truthful about the DOB, while from IR's perspective the fare evader may have lied about the DOB but may have been truthful about name and address. I'm not sure what supplying proof of age would do when all the evidence IR have is compromised anyway (apart from proving that at least one of their pieces of information is incorrect, which I suppose is useful).

The letter from the school is probably the best piece of evidence here. I'd get them to give a time for your parents to meet them that suits your parents, show them the passport to prove that the information they have isn't 100% accurate (don't let them make a copy!) and show them the letter from the school.

Grab All Association wrote: »

Letter stamped from school should be sufficient evidence in court. DO NOT SEND A COPY OF HER PASSPORT TO Iarnród Éireann. The onus is on them to prove it was her and they'll have the opportunity to do this on the day and will fail miserably.

Now on to counterclaiming

Costs, loss of wages, fuel/transport and reasonable food expenses.

It's the only way they'll learn.

Thank you guys.

devnull wrote: »

Irish Rail staff have been known to ask for ID when fining someone, on occasion it is bank cards on other occasions it is passports etc. If the RPO took down the passport number it explains both why the RPO wants to see a copy and why the OP won't give it.

The OP said that his sister did not evade, it is not a proven fact. Just because someone says something doesn't mean it is true. But it's great that some people on here are happy to hear one side of a story and automatically presume IE are guilty and the OP is not.

If they had the persons Passport theyd know it wasnt by sister therefore showing the passport does nothing.

I understand your skepticism. People make all sorts of claims. But what would I gain spinning a false story here? Lying to ye wouldnt change the reality and I would get no helpful contributions. Naturally people have to go off the information and hope that im telling the truth.

devnull wrote: »

Why won't the person send a copy of her passport
Why would they prefer a day out in court?

If the OP is being brought up this way I can only imagine how they will cope when they get a job and their boss asks them something and they say they are not going t comply and instead start making alternative suggestions.

Also I find it strange that it is a relation who is posting this on the board, maybe they are sisters, identical twins, which would make the whole thing really obvious.

I know people who work in revenue protection in other places, and believe me people on this board are very naive, 99/100 people who don't comply with requests normally have something to hide.

We asked what it would prove. They refused to give a reason.
If we did I wouldnt be asking for help in resolving the issue beforehand.

You make me out to be some overly cautious nutjob. I assure you this isnt the case. My parents tried to work with IR but didnt want handing out personal documents of their daughter without reason.

Im a semi-regular member on boards. Figured Id find some good advice from the people here. But if your insinuating that I impersonated my sister then again you are off the mark.

Again we didnt shut them down. We looked for clarification and alternatives.

GM228

plodder wrote: »

On the question of whether case would be civil or criminal, I'm not a lawyer, but I would imagine fare evasion is covered by transport bye-laws making it an offence, but that wouldn't stop them from pursuing fare recovery as a civil matter.

Just looking at the CIE bye-laws, it seems the fine for offences is "ten pounds" max. There's something quite quaint about these regulations from another era, but surely the NTA should be looking at revamping all of this, and getting serious about fare evasion.

It is a criminal offence, not a civil offence.

The maximum fine has been upped since and is €1000.

Carawaystick wrote: »

If IÉ are prosecuting people, then they are a Public Authority/ govt body.

IE are not a public authority or a government body.

GM228

Corvo Attano wrote: »

We asked them what the passport would prove and they refused to give a reason.

One thing it would prove is your sisters age is 17 in which case they would have to drop any case as they don't take cases in the Childrens Court.

Carawaystick

GM228 wrote: »

It is a criminal offence, not a civil offence.

The maximum fine has been upped since and is £400 (whatever the € equivalent is).



IE are not a public authority or a government body.

How do they
a) Make laws
b) prosecute people

if they are not?

GM228

Carawaystick wrote: »

How do they
a) Make laws
b) prosecute people

if they are not?

They make laws under a power given to them to do so under the Transport Act 1950.

Carawaystick

GM228 wrote: »

They make laws under a power given to them to do so under the Transport Act 1950.

and are public authorithies

Data protection act 1988 s16.1.a wrote:

This section applies to the following persons, that is to say:

data controllers, being public authorities and other bodies and persons referred to in the Third Schedule to this Act,

Third schedule wrote:

7. A company the majority of the shares in which are held by or on behalf of a Minister of the Government.

GM228

Carawaystick wrote: »

and are public authorithies

CIE/IE/DB and BE are not public authorities, a public authority can't have a commercial character. CIE is a statutory body, whilst IE, DB and BE are companies.

CIE has no issued share capital or equity invested in it and as such has no major shareholder (or any shareholder).

Carawaystick wrote: »

If IÉ are prosecuting people, then they are a Public Authority/ govt body.

IE/DB and BE are limited companies registered as per the Companies Act but which are exempted from carrying "limited" in their registered names, they are fully owned subsidiary companies of a statutory body (CIE) and not any minister.

Any legal action is actually taken by "CIE" and not the individual companies.

Data protection act 1988 s16.1.a wrote:

This section applies to the following persons, that is to say:

data controllers, being public authorities and other bodies and persons referred to in the Third Schedule to this Act,

Third Schedule wrote:

7. A company the majority of the shares in which are held by or on behalf of a Minister of the Government.

In either case it dosn't matter as both your quotes above from The Data Protection Act no longer apply and havn't since 2003.

CIE/IE/DB and BE do not have to register their data controllers.

devnull

Corvo Attano wrote: »

If they had the persons Passport theyd know it wasnt by sister therefore showing the passport does nothing.

If they had a copy of your sisters passport they'd know if it was or wasn't her. They wouldn't ask for is unless there was a reason for it and likewise you wouldn't refuse to give it unless there was a reason for that also.

My parents tried to work with IR but didnt want handing out personal documents of their daughter without reason.

So let me get this right, you are claiming that they mistook the identity of said evader, but you are not willing to show them that you are not the person who they said was you?

Bit of a strange thing to do. Many places have asked for my passport over the years to prove who I am and various other reasons, I've never had an issue with doing it but then again I'm not paranoid.

Again we didnt shut them down. We looked for clarification and alternatives.

TBH I have trouble believing your story, it looks like you are trying to find a way to get off on some kind of technicality, passport is proof of ID, much harder to fake a passport than it is to get someone to write a letter at school that may have connections to the family etc.

traprunner

devnull wrote: »

If they had a copy of your sisters passport they'd know if it was or wasn't her. They wouldn't ask for is unless there was a reason for it and likewise you wouldn't refuse to give it unless there was a reason for that also.

Why should they get a copy of it? A glance would be enough but they appear to be insisting on a copy. If they wanted a copy of mine I would refuse too. Not everyone is like you. Some of us care about our personal information and identity.

devnull

traprunner wrote: »

Why should they get a copy of it? A glance would be enough but they appear to be insisting on a copy. If they wanted a copy of mine I would refuse too. Not everyone is like you. Some of us care about our personal information and identity.

A passport is aform of ID

If you don't want to use it for ID purposes then that defeats the purpose of having forms of ID in the first place.

traprunner

devnull wrote: »

A passport is aform of ID

If you don't want to use it for ID purposes then that defeats the purpose of having forms of ID in the first place.

It's a document required for most international travel and not everyone has one. It can be used as a form of ID too but it still does not explain why Irish Rail should obtain a copy of it. They could request to see it but no more than that.

hmmm

You have to admit OP it sounds fishy. Your parents are "reluctant to hand out their daughters information" to a public sector body, using a government issued ID. Meanwhile they are coming up with a half dozen other ways to get information (including school name and photographs) which they will happily hand over - and they are quite willing to stress their daughter out with having to go to court and stand up in front of a judge.

You come on here looking for "advice" - I'm not sure what you are expecting to hear. IR have asked for a document, and you have refused to give it to them. You can explain why in court. There's no "advice" to be given, unless you want to approach a solicitor.

I'm not surprised IR have stopped dealing with you, they probably assume you are trying to hide something.

Seth Brundle

devnull wrote: »

Why won't the person send a copy of her passport

In what way exactly will showing the passport prove or disprove that the OPs sister is a fare evader?
* IR have apparently confirmed that they don't have a picture of the person caught.
* The inspector will not remember clearly.
* The person caught provided details which were not the same as the OP's sister indicating that the little information provided cannot be relied upon.

Seth Brundle

devnull wrote: »

Why won't the person send a copy of her passport

In what way exactly will showing the passport prove or disprove that the OPs sister is a fare evader?
* IR have apparently confirmed that they don't have a picture of the person caught.
* The inspector will not remember clearly.
* The person caught provided details which were not the same as the OP's sister indicating that the little information provided cannot be relied upon.

hmmm

kbannon wrote: »

In what way exactly will showing the passport prove or disprove that the OPs sister is a fare evader?

Who knows and who cares, it's what IR have asked for.

traprunner

hmmm wrote: »

Who knows and who cares, it's what IR have asked for.

So a random company that you've not used the services of contacts you and asks you for a copy of (not just a look at) your passport would you send it in?

Del2005

traprunner wrote: »

So a random company that you've not used the services of contacts you and asks you for a copy of (not just a look at) your passport would you send it in?

It's that or a day in court.

Losty Dublin

kbannon wrote: »

In what way exactly will showing the passport prove or disprove that the OPs sister is a fare evader?

The RPU inspectors will see the copy passport, look at the photo and will probably arrive at one of two conclusions.

1) The girl in the passport port is the one that they caught on the day.

Or....

2) The girl in the passport is not the one that they caught on the day.

Real Columbo stuff, isn't it?

traprunner

Del2005 wrote: »

It's that or a day in court.

If only the Israelis knee the Irish will just send them passport details instead of having to steal them they'd save themselves a lot of risk.

Seth Brundle

Losty Dublin wrote: »

The RPU inspectors will see the copy passport, look at the photo and will probably arrive at one of two conclusions.

1) The girl in the passport port is the one that they caught on the day.

Or....

2) The girl in the passport is not the one that they caught on the day.

Real Columbo stuff, isn't it?

That are not likely to remember what she looked like so the process is flawed and unfair.
Columbo worked with evidence. IR don't!

GM228

kbannon wrote: »

That are not likely to remember what she looked like so the process is flawed and unfair.
Columbo worked with evidence. IR don't!

You could argue the same for any case where there is a witness/Guard/authorised person etc testifying in any sort of a case.

Some people would be great at remembering faces and some wouldn't, if there is any doubt a judge would throw out a case I would imagine.

I'd guess an RPU inspector would better remember someone who they had a specific dealing with than say a witness who seen someone in passing testifying in another type of case.


Also just a note on the quote below about counterclaims, that is in relation to the District Court Personal Injuries Rules 2005 Act and does not apply to fare evasion or any other alleged offence.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2005/si/257/made/en/print

Grab All Association wrote: »

Now on to counterclaiming



Costs, loss of wages, fuel/transport and reasonable food expenses.

It's the only way they'll learn.

Corvo Attano

hmmm wrote: »

You have to admit OP it sounds fishy. Your parents are "reluctant to hand out their daughters information" to a public sector body, using a government issued ID. Meanwhile they are coming up with a half dozen other ways to get information (including school name and photographs) which they will happily hand over - and they are quite willing to stress their daughter out with having to go to court and stand up in front of a judge.

You come on here looking for "advice" - I'm not sure what you are expecting to hear. IR have asked for a document, and you have refused to give it to them. You can explain why in court. There's no "advice" to be given, unless you want to approach a solicitor.

I'm not surprised IR have stopped dealing with you, they probably assume you are trying to hide something.

I mean I guess it can sound fishy but the easy way to dispel that is that there is no easy access to trains where were from. Its not like she coulda skipped school and walked to the station. If people are just going to come along and say I could be lying then they are very right. I could be. But id gain nothing from it.


But I do think Ive gotten everything out of this thread that it could have produced. I was at best hoping for someone who was asked to do the same and hear what they had to say but ive gotten a lot of fresh perspectives and alternate inputs which have helped greatly.

Id like to thank everyone for their input into the thread all the same. Its been interesting