[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: New logic on Metcard

Subject: Re: New logic on Metcard
From: David Johnson <trainman@ozemail.com.au>
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 13:39:13 +1100
Newsgroups: aus.rail
References: <7c4q1c$lqj$1@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> <19990310015546.29664.00000383@ng-fx1.aol.com> <7c6stv$aub$1@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> <7c70ne$eaj$1@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>
Reply-To: trainman@ozemail.com.au

Christopher_Martin GORDON wrote:

>  (however I am still in breach of reg 206, for not validation my ticket each time, but I would
> happly go to court to prove I don't need to validate a valid ticket)

I would be interested to see the exact wording of Regulation 206.

--
David Johnson
CityRail Guard
trainman@ozemail.com.au
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~trainman/

Follow-Ups:
- Re: New logic on Metcard
  - From: cmgord@ecr.mu.oz.au (Christopher_Martin GORDON)

References:
- Re: New logic on Metcard
  - From: paul@xenu.ee.mu.oz.au (Paul Dwerryhouse)
- Re: New logic on Metcard
  - From: markbau1@aol.comQQQQyuk (MarkBau1)
- Re: New logic on Metcard
  - From: paul@xenu.ee.mu.oz.au (Paul Dwerryhouse)
- Re: New logic on Metcard
  - From: cmgord@ecr.mu.oz.au (Christopher_Martin GORDON)

Prev by Date: Re: Victoria...it begins!
Next by Date: Re: 520 or 621
Prev by thread: Re: New logic on Metcard
Next by thread: Re: New logic on Metcard
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread