NYC Subway - "doubling up" two tickets issued

[CitizenJ200]

Brooklyn, NY

My wife and I each received "non-payment of fare" $100 tickets for "doubling up on the high wheel" at an NYC Subway Station, (we both slipped through on my pass card swipe). Certainly one of us deserves the non-payment ticket, but do we both?

I see nothing in any of the Rules of Conduct (21 NYCRR Part 1050) [ [url=http://www.mta.info/nyct/rules/rules.htm]MTA NYC Transit - Rules of Conduct[/url] ] regarding doubling up. Has anyone every successfully contested a non-payment ticket related to doubling up based on the fact that he/she DID in fact pay, but were aiding someone else pass through the turnstile without payment?

I have seen other threads address the Transit Adjudication Bureau (TAB), most people view contesting it as futile, the NYCLU is currently suing the city for its closed door hearings. It has an 83% guilt finding rate. So I will probably just pay, but I thought I would ask.What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

[You Are Guilty]

Originally Posted by CitizenJ200

Brooklyn, NY

My wife and I each received "non-payment of fare" $100 tickets for "doubling up on the high wheel" at an NYC Subway Station, (we both slipped through on my pass card swipe). Certainly one of us deserves the non-payment ticket, but do we both?

I see nothing in any of the Rules of Conduct (21 NYCRR Part 1050) [ [url=http://www.mta.info/nyct/rules/rules.htm]MTA NYC Transit - Rules of Conduct[/url] ] regarding doubling up. Has anyone every successfully contested a non-payment ticket related to doubling up based on the fact that he/she DID in fact pay, but were aiding someone else pass through the turnstile without payment?

I have seen other threads address the Transit Adjudication Bureau (TAB), most people view contesting it as futile, the NYCLU is currently suing the city for its closed door hearings. It has an 83% guilt finding rate. So I will probably just pay, but I thought I would ask.What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

It makes logical sense, so you may as well give it a shot as you have nothing to lose. The only potential (legal) catch is here:

No person shall use or enter upon the facilities or conveyances of the Authority, for any purpose, without the payment of the fare or tender of other valid fare media used in accordance with any conditions and restrictions imposed by the Authority.

There may be an "additional" restriction that would be applicable here (although I don't know of any, that's certainly not dispositive).


Good luck. Just don't hold your breath, as the stories about TAB are there for a reason.

[ElvinMelvin]

Originally Posted by You Are Guilty

I The only potential (legal) catch is here:

I guess it could also hinge on the interpretation of this:

No person shall, for purposes of gaining entry into a facility, proceed over or under any turnstile or otherwise proceed in any other unauthorized manner through an exit gate or through or past any other point at which a fare is required or collected

It could be argued that by allowing another person to go through with you, even though you swiped the metrocard, you were proceeding in an unauthorized manner.

[You Are Guilty]

Originally Posted by ElvinMelvin

I guess it could also hinge on the interpretation of this:



It could be argued that by allowing another person to go through with you, even though you swiped the metrocard, you were proceeding in an unauthorized manner.

If you have the interest in searching, there was a post by someone who received a similar ticket when a stranger "doubled up" with them through the turnstile. Ignoring the likelihood of the story being true, how well do you think your argument would hold up when the "doublers" are not husband and wife?

(It's all immaterial anyway, as all the TAB probably wants is the $200.)

[HighwayMan]

It can't hurt to try to fight it, but I am not optimistic about your chances.

In recent years little mercy has been shown to people who try to beat the system, especially if it involves fare evasion.

You are lucky one (or both) of you didn't get arrested for Theft of Service, a Penal Law misdemeanor. Those nights in Brooklyn Central Booking can be VERY long.

[HighwayMan]

By the way, your issue has nothing to do with traffic law. (obviously)

It would help others (and help yourself get information quicker) if you post in the right place.

[You Are Guilty]

Originally Posted by HighwayMan

You are lucky one (or both) of you didn't get arrested for Theft of Service, a Penal Law misdemeanor. Those nights in Brooklyn Central Booking can be VERY long.

Because the Tombs are such a pleasant place to visit in comparison?

[ElvinMelvin]

Originally Posted by You Are Guilty

I Ignoring the likelihood of the story being true, how well do you think your argument would hold up when the "doublers" are not husband and wife?

If it were a stranger? There's no way to get through the subway turnstiles doubled up without contact, so I suppose the defense would be that a battery had been committed. This is assuming, of course, that the person with the metrocard was not a willing participant.

[You Are Guilty]

Originally Posted by ElvinMelvin

If it were a stranger? There's no way to get through the subway turnstiles doubled up without contact, so I suppose the defense would be that a battery had been committed. This is assuming, of course, that the person with the metrocard was not a willing participant.

While true, how does the existence of a battery change anything? The commission of one crime (battery) doesn't excuse the other (fare beating). Otherwise, the next time someone gets mugged, they could go mug someone else and claim "I was just getting the money I lost back!"

[ElvinMelvin]

Originally Posted by You Are Guilty

While true, how does the existence of a battery change anything? The commission of one crime (battery) doesn't excuse the other (fare beating). Otherwise, the next time someone gets mugged, they could go mug someone else and claim "I was just getting the money I lost back!"

Wait a minute.

I'm going through the turnstile after having swiped my Metrocard, minding my own business.

Suddenly, a stranger swoops in behind me--touching me without permission--and goes through the turnstile with me without my consent.

How am I a fare beater? I paid my fare and was going through the turnstile properly when I became the victim of a battery. I did not conspire with the stranger to let him beat the fare--quite the contrary he committed a crime (battery) in order to illegally pass through as I was passing through legally.

[HighwayMan]

Originally Posted by ElvinMelvin

I'm going through the turnstile after having swiped my Metrocard, minding my own business.

Suddenly, a stranger swoops in behind me--touching me without permission--and goes through the turnstile with me without my consent.

First of all, I'm not sure if that's physically possible. The timing would have to be too perfect. Doing this would require co-operation between both parties as far as I'm concerned.

Secondly, that's not a crime. There is no such thing as "battery" in New York State - that offense does not exist.

[You Are Guilty]

Originally Posted by HighwayMan

First of all, I'm not sure if that's physically possible. The timing would have to be too perfect. Doing this would require co-operation between both parties as far as I'm concerned.

I agree, which is the point I was trying to make (apparently not very successfully).

Secondly, that's not a crime. There is no such thing as "battery" in New York State - that offense does not exist.

That's just nitpicky, you knew what he meant. (And just because NY likes to call it assault doesn't mean that it isn't a commonlaw battery).

[HighwayMan]

Originally Posted by You Are Guilty

Because the Tombs are such a pleasant place to visit in comparison?

Hmmm, depends. Good thing about MCB is those excellent baloney sandwiches!

I don't like any of the borough booking facilities. It's unpleasant enough dropping prisoners off there, can only imagine what it's like there for an overnight.

[HighwayMan]

Originally Posted by You Are Guilty

I agree, which is the point I was trying to make (apparently not very successfully).

Apparently.

Originally Posted by You Are Guilty

That's just nitpicky, you knew what he meant. (And just because NY likes to call it assault doesn't mean that it isn't a commonlaw battery).

But that's not an assault either. Apparently "battery" can equate to NY assault, but encompasses other offenses as well (again, NY), so it really does not apply here.

[You Are Guilty]

Originally Posted by HighwayMan

But that's not an assault either. Apparently "battery" can equate to NY assault, but encompasses other offenses as well (again, NY), so it really does not apply here.

True, I suppose we should have distinguished between civil and criminal assault, but either way, I doubt our poster gives a rat's ass.

Incidentally, I have heard the dinner menu at MCB was expanded to include peanut butter sandwiches as well as the green baloney. Then again, the person I heard that from is a lawyer (who accidentally forgot to pay quite a few parking tickets), so I suppose he may have been put into one of the "Luxury Suites" where they serve the good food )