Re: A Stunning example of the inbalance of the Rail Safety Act 1993 (NSW)

["Ivan Smith" <ivsmith11@hotmail.nospam.com>]

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
3acc3be1@news.iprimus.com.au">news:3acc3be1@news.iprimus.com.au...
> > Rod Speed wrote

> > > I gave you the url to read it online.

Funny that I already had the act in tangible form, printed well before your
electronic reference to it.

> > >
> > > They cant give a warning when they dont have the info.

They can improve their efficiency though instead of running around like
headless chooks, as they inevitably do.

It'd be quite amusing if I weren't so annoyed at being stranded by their
lack of a working procedure in these situations.

The left hand doesn't know what the right is doing when this happens and
unless you're there experiencing it, you have no idea of what I'm talking
about.


> > > Poor widdle diddums. You get a substantial reduction with a
> > > weekly ticket and thats one of the downsides with them, stupid.

I don't give a rats arse what your stance is on this. I paid for a service
which wasn't delivered. Discounted or not.

> > > Thats life. The SRA is fresh out of magic wands to wave.

That's not life. I will not lay down and accept that. They are a government
beurocracy which needs to be brough seriously into line and do their job as
per the description.
> > >
> > > > All I could think of "where's my refund on my ticket, for a trip you
> > > > would gladly fine me for, $100, if I didn't have a valid ticket to
travel?"
> > >
> > > More fool you.

No.
> > >
> > > > - Failure to deliver a service, which is completely
> > > > covered in the SRA's favour, in the Act.
> > >
> > > Because thats the only possible way to run a railway, stupid.

No, because, the assumtption in the legislation is that passengers are
little more than units fullfilling the requirements of the act.

> > >
> > > We aint interested in paying an even bigger subsidy to
> > > the railways so the likes of you get what you demand.

Hey, dick. I pay taxes and fees too and I'm a contributing member of the
community just as you perceive yourself to be. I don't want to pay extra
either. I just want them to perform the way they should, and even the
balance up a bit.

> > >
> > > You dont like the deal ? Dont use the railway. Its as basic as that.

It's crossed my mind.
> > >
> > > > So my point is that the Rail Safety Act 1993 is stacked.
> > > > It's stacked against the commuters and for the SRA.
> > >
> > > You dont like the deal ? Dont use the railway. Its as basic as that.

It's crossed mmy mind.
> > >
> > > > The clauses which pertain to last nights (all too common)
> > > > situation are clearly letting the SRA off the hook
> > > > with their obligation to service they must provide.
> > >
> > > Because thats the only viable way to run a railway, stupid.

No, because, the assumtption in the legislation is that passengers are
little more than units fullfilling the requirements of the act.

> > >
> > > > What is the mechanism for a fare refund claim??
> > >
> > > Ask them, stupid.

No I'm asking you lot in here. I wouldn't be asking in here if it were
common knowledge would I???

> > >
> > > > If they can fine me for an innocent circumstantial
> > > > incident according to their legislation, then there
> > > > must be a mechanism for us to claim back off them.
> > >
> > > Wrong.

Obviously.
> > >
> > > > There isn't though because the Rail Safety Act 1993
> > > > is stacked against commuters in the most part.
> > >
> > > Complete pack of lies.

I beg to differ as usual with you.

Ivan