How does a passport prove someone stopped for fare evasion was not you?

[matt_world2004]

You’re missing the fact that they did have accurate records. If someone gave your address, that’s not their fault, they simply recorded the information they were given correctly.

And who is more responcible for that situation Northern rail or the person they are writing to.

 

[matt_world2004]

Quite possibly. If you're happy to take a day out of your life to attend an unnecessary court appearance, I hope you enjoy the experience.

And I would pursue northern for costs of that court appearance.

 

[AlterEgo]

And I would pursue northern for costs of that court appearance.

You’re unlikely to be able to claim costs once it becomes apparent you took pretty much no reasonable action to resolve the situation quickly before it got to court.

 

[Puffing Devil]

And who is more responcible for that situation Northern rail or the person they are writing to.

And I would pursue northern for costs of that court appearance.

You clearly have no idea of how the legal system works in respect of this kind of issue, despite some patient comments. I'm out.

 

[matt_world2004]

You’re unlikely to be able to claim costs once it becomes apparent you took pretty much no reasonable action to resolve the situation quickly before it got to court.

So telling northern they could verify that I was not person in question by visiting me knocking on the door. Is not "reasonable"?

 

[AlterEgo]

So telling northern they could verify that I was not person in question by visiting me knocking on the door. Is not "reasonable"?

No, that’s not likely to be reasonable given it incurs them significant cost and time to unnecessarily send someone to look at your face in person.

They had already offered options to prove your identity. You claim it’s a pain to get your passport out (20 mins? Where do you keep it?). You’d still have to get your passport or photo ID out on the doorstep to prove your identity anyway.

You have absolutely no clue, do you?

 

[matt_world2004]

No, that’s not likely to be reasonable given it incurs them significant cost and time to unnecessarily send someone to look at your face in person.

They had already offered options to prove your identity. You claim it’s a pain to get your passport out (20 mins? Where do you keep it?). You’d still have to get your passport or photo ID out on the doorstep to prove your identity anyway.

You have absolutely no clue, do you?

Why would I need to get the passport out all the revenue inspector would have to do is take one look at the person to decide weather it is them or not. And why would Northern incur a significant cost visiting me , are train tickets that expensive?

 

[AlterEgo]

Why would I need to get the passport out all the revenue inspector would have to do is take one look at the person to decide weather it is them or not. And why would Northern incure a significant cost visiting me , are train tickets that expensive?

I’m surprised I even have to spell this out.

Because how do they know the person they are visiting, and showing their face, is the person they’ve been liaising with and whose details they have? You still need ID.

As far as the cost reason goes, yes, it costs Northern to send a staff member somewhere, even if the train ticket is free. Try and think for yourself about what sorts of costs might be incurred. I’m not going to fill in the whole puzzle for you.

 

[matt_world2004]

I’m surprised I even have to spell this out.

Because how do they know the person they are visiting, and showing their face, is the person they’ve been liaising with and whose details they have? You still need ID.

As far as the cost reason goes, yes, it costs Northern to send a staff member somewhere, even if the train ticket is free. Try and think for yourself about what sorts of costs might be incurred. I’m not going to fill in the whole puzzle for you.

What wage costs? So if they are reinbursing their staff for the time investigating the issue, they can reinburse the complainant the same rate in retrieving the information they need. The typical administration fee is £80 for Northern Penalty fakes, for that I would send the passport recorded delivery.

 

[AlterEgo]

What wage costs? So if they are reinbursing their staff for the time investigating the issue, they can reinburse the complainant the same rate in retrieving the information they need. The typical administration fee is £80 for Northern Penalty fakes, for that I would send the passport recorded delivery.

Yeah, you’ve not got a clue. I think I’m done as well.

 

[Llanigraham]

And a case that would be throne out in minutes

Would it?
Firstly you would have to personally attend the Court and be questioned.
Then quite likely the Court would demand evidence that it wasn't you. From experience I'm afraid that you just stating "It wasn't me" wouldn't go down well.

I do wonder how many people on this forum have actually attended a Magistrates Court just to see how our legal system works; it might prove very enlightening and alter some of the incorrect notions often stated on here.
And it's even more fun when you are the Prosecution Presenting Officer!

 

[Llanigraham]

And I would pursue northern for costs of that court appearance.

See my comment above!!
In fact it could well end the other way around!

 

[Llanigraham]

So telling northern they could verify that I was not person in question by visiting me knocking on the door. Is not "reasonable"?

No it isn't, especially when other methods have been offered to you.

 

[Mathew S]

So telling northern they could verify that I was not person in question by visiting me knocking on the door. Is not "reasonable"?

No, it's blatantly not reasonable in my opinion and I'm confident a court would agree. In this example, you were given an opportunity to prove your identity by sending them your passport. To insist they visit you in person is pretty obviously unreasonable on your part.

Having been given that opportunity, I would say there's more chance of me winning the lottery than there is that a court would make a costs order against Northern.

You really don't get it. Reasonableness works both ways, and in this example, the only person being unreasonable, and unnecessarily obstreperous, is you.

I'm done. Enjoy your day in court if it ever comes to that.

 

[Wombat]

If a company wants a copy of my password, I'd want them to provide a secure transfer mechanism, a description of what they propose to do with it and a link to their information governance policy. If their representative just says "Bung it over in an email" I'd be disinclined to do so - is it just the rep that's blasé about information security or is it the organisation? The place I currently work for was recently giving a sound kicking by the ICO for being cavalier with customer data; an awful lot of people don't take such things sufficiently seriously.

Is there any reason why someone in receipt of one of these letters couldn't just take some photo ID to a station?

 

[matt_world2004]

No, it's blatantly not reasonable in my opinion and I'm confident a court would agree. In this example, you were given an opportunity to prove your identity by sending them your passport. To insist they visit you in person is pretty obviously unreasonable on your part.

Having been given that opportunity, I would say there's more chance of me winning the lottery than there is that a court would make a costs order against Northern.

You really don't get it. Reasonableness works both ways, and in this example, the only person being unreasonable, and unnecessarily obstreperous, is you.

I'm done. Enjoy your day in court if it ever comes to that.

Northern define the administration fee as £80 they claim that is the cost of processing unpaid fare notices conducting an investigation, why would it be any different for a normal person? I am not the person being requested for a passport, I denied my household insurance provider continoous payment authority, They wrote to me claiming they would sue if I didnt prove that I had another insurer to which I replied that I had denied them continous payment authority and they backed down, The council backed down as well when they had the offer to visit my house to prove I was the only one living there

 

[Mathew S]

Is there any reason why someone in receipt of one of these letters couldn't just take some photo ID to a station?

I think that sounds like a very fair compromise to me. Or as a last resort a photocopy by special delivery, but it would be a last resort.

 

[Mathew S]

Northern define the administration fee as £80 they claim that is the cost of processing unpaid fare notices conducting an investigation, why would it be any different for a normal person? I am not the person being requested for a passport, I denied my household insurance provider continoous payment authority, They wrote to me claiming they would sue if I didnt prove that I had another insurer to which I replied that I had denied them continous payment authority and they backed down, The council backed down as well when they had the offer to visit my house to prove I was the only one living there

Bully for you, but this is a very different situation.

 

[najaB]

I'd still be reluctant to send a passport copy though. if I did, I'd obscure all identifying information (name, passport number, date & place of birth, etc).

You'd probably want to leave the name unobscured if you're trying to prove your identity.

 

[baz962]

Would it?
Firstly you would have to personally attend the Court and be questioned.
Then quite likely the Court would demand evidence that it wasn't you. From experience I'm afraid that you just stating "It wasn't me" wouldn't go down well.

I do wonder how many people on this forum have actually attended a Magistrates Court just to see how our legal system works; it might prove very enlightening and alter some of the incorrect notions often stated on here.
And it's even more fun when you are the Prosecution Presenting Officer!

I do not pretend to know and am just asking, would he then at court prove it is not him, assuming he could and it would have to be thrown out.

 

[AlterEgo]

I do not pretend to know and am just asking, would he then at court prove it is not him, assuming he could and it would have to be thrown out.

He could dig his passport out.

 

[Llanigraham]

I do not pretend to know and am just asking, would he then at court prove it is not him, assuming he could and it would have to be thrown out.

I suspect that the Court would be asking for more than just the passport if it has gone that far. They will now want far greater evidence of his whereabouts elsewhere.
He could also be questioned as to why he refused to supply the evidence when first requested, and it could easily be considered as unreasonable (and damning) when told that he had refused to do so.
And I'm sorry to say it, but Magistrates will often pay more creed to the words of an "expert", such as in this case the Railway Company's Presenting Officer, over the unproven word of a stroppy, obstructing defendant who has refused a reasonable request.

 

[baz962]

I suspect that the Court would be asking for more than just the passport if it has gone that far. They will now want far greater evidence of his whereabouts elsewhere.
He could also be questioned as to why he refused to supply the evidence when first requested, and it could easily be considered as unreasonable (and damning) when told that he had refused to do so.
And I'm sorry to say it, but Magistrates will often pay more creed to the words of an "expert", such as in this case the Railway Company's Presenting Officer, over the unproven word of a stroppy, obstructing defendant who has refused a reasonable request.

Does burden of proof not apply though, don't Northern have to prove it was him, rather than him prove not.

 

[sheff1]

Having raised the original question, I was amazed to find the discussion still going on weeks later. Reading through, I thought the answer had been given in post #34:

My niece is a lawyer, and without going into the details, I asked how a passport can prove you aren't someone. The short answer is, it can't.

I have no reason to disbelieve Deafgoggie's lawyer niece, but it would seem many posters do not believe her.

 

[farleigh]

Excellent post Llanigraham

 

[Llanigraham]

As far as the railway company is concerned they have the accused and have served notice of that.
The accused has said "Not me"
Justifiably the railway company have said "Thank you. Prove it by supplying identification, such as your passport, please", which is a reasonable and common request.
The accused has refused to do this, and therefore could be considered as being unreasonable.
The railway company therefore have no option but to continue to Court action.

What has happened here is not unusual and is a situation I know has happened in other (non-railway) cases. At Court the Magistrates have not been best pleased that a case could have been "solved" by some simple actions of the accused, therefore the burden of proof is greater and the accused has to provide even greater evidence, even to the calling of employers as witnesses, which can be highly embarassing and expensive.
As for the accused getting expenses, forget it. If the Court think that they were wasting the Court's time by not acting in a reasonable manner then costs could be awarded against them. That can be very expensive!

As said earlier, more people should attend the public galleries at Court to see what really happens. They might be quite shocked as how wrong they are sometimes

 

[Llanigraham]

And to add.
Many people think that cases can only be presented by solicitors. In fact many cases at Magistrates Courts are presented by ordinary people trained to do so, with no actual "legal" training. I presented cases for a government department before I joined the railway, many Council cases are done the same way, as are many cases by other bodies, such as the railway.

 

[AlterEgo]

Having raised the original question, I was amazed to find the discussion still going on weeks later. Reading through, I thought the answer had been given in post #34:

I have no reason to disbelieve Deafgoggie's lawyer niece, but it would seem many posters do not believe her.

It would seem you just haven’t read the reasonable responses posted by others framed around the original case.

If it’s a 50-year old black man that was stopped and I provide my passport showing I’m a 30-year old white man, then they get off my case. It’s as simple as that.

If it’s someone of a similar description to me, they might ask me for something else in lieu of that, since it wouldn’t be sufficient proof.

A passport will not prove where you were or weren’t, but in the case you refer to, it will in many cases satisfy the people coming after you.

 

[Clip]

Having raised the original question, I was amazed to find the discussion still going on weeks later. Reading through, I thought the answer had been given in post #34:



I have no reason to disbelieve Deafgoggie's lawyer niece, but it would seem many posters do not believe her.

She is quite right - it cant prove you are not someone.

What it can do IS prove you ARE someone.

 

[najaB]

She is quite right - it cant prove you are not someone.

What it can do IS prove you ARE someone.

And, in so doing, prove that you aren't someone else.