By adamg on Wed., 11/1/2017 - 1:18 pm
The Globe reports a fed-up Fitchburg Line rider decided he'd rather make a point and get arrested than comply with a "Fare is Fair" order that he go to the ticket window to get a replacement for his valid, if faded, monthly pass.
Topics:
Neighborhoods:
Free tagging:
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
Question
By anon
Wed, 11/01/2017 - 1:29pm
When will drivers with those illegible green letter plates have to turn them in?
Until then, this is utterly stupid.
My buddy lost his green plate
By anon
Wed, 11/01/2017 - 2:03pm
My buddy lost his green plate 10 years ago when the inspection station failed him. It's a shame.
Why is that a shame?
By anon
Wed, 11/01/2017 - 3:34pm
They don't meet modern standards. Just get a new plate. Big deal. If you can't memorize a new number, you shouldn't be driving.
Why should people be forced to get a new registration number
By roadman
Wed, 11/01/2017 - 8:34pm
just because the state decides to update their license plate design? Other states seem to have no problem with both updating plate designs on a regular basis, and allowing people with existing plates to retain their registration number on the new plates.
As an example, my uncle - who lived in New Hampshire - had a general issue plate number (not vanity or 'special.'). From the mid-1960s until he died in 1993, he had the same plate number, even though the plate design was changed three or four times.
If a very frugal state like New Hampshire can manage to do that, why can't Massachusetts?
Why is that an issue?
By SwirlyGrrl
Wed, 11/01/2017 - 9:39pm
In Oregon, where I grew up, you can't transfer a plate - the plate goes with the car, not the owner. Each time you change cars, you change plates and change numbers.
I've had a bunch of different plate numbers in my life - it has never been a big deal. When we turned in the Jetta Diesel, we had already purchased another vehicle (it was January), so we turned in the plates that we had had for 16 years. No biggie.
Are you saying that everyone is too mentally challenged to handle a change in plate number? That would be odd. And sad.
Why shouldn't a person be given the option
By roadman
Thu, 11/02/2017 - 10:28am
to keep their registration number when plate design changes, even if they have to pay a fee (as is the case in NJ, CT, IL, and MN, among other states.
Of all the people I know who still have green plates, everyone has stated that they woul be willing to upgrade to Spirit plates if they could keep their current registration number, even if they had to pay a fee to do it.
If the RMV can spend all that time and money playing musical branch offices every year, surely they can figure a way to let people who want to keep their old number at a plate change if they want to.
Either that, or go to the "plate stays with the car" system used in Oregon, California, and the UK.
Because
By anon
Thu, 11/02/2017 - 11:26am
That is costly and silly.
Costly?
By roadman
Fri, 11/03/2017 - 8:28am
Not if you charge a fee for it.
Silly? I know several people who would disagree with ypu.
Oh there is a way
By anon
Thu, 11/02/2017 - 3:17pm
It is called a vanity plate.
Because that is what it would be - a vanity plate, custom printed for you, and paid for as a vanity plate.
Except that the RMV rules will not allow
By roadman
Fri, 11/03/2017 - 8:25am
you to reserve a number-letter combination that is in a general issue series. They also require that vanity plates be either all letters or all numbers.
How do I know this? Because, before I opted for my current ham radio plates, I investigated both options. Was shooting for either 961-SCT (general issue) or SCT-961 (vanity).
New Hampshire policy change
By Charles Bahne
Wed, 11/01/2017 - 9:38pm
New Hampshire changed their license plate numbering system at some point in the 1990s and must have eventually required all holders of the old numbers to change over to the new system. It used to be a combination of letters and numbers, now all numbers, issued sequentially so they're now up to somewhere above 400 0000.
No front plate required
By Steve557
Wed, 11/01/2017 - 10:03pm
Having no front plate requirement for green plates is the ticket. Unless you have a truck who wants one of those ugly brackets on the front of a nice car.
Do you ever take the Pike?
By SwirlyGrrl
Thu, 11/02/2017 - 8:26am
How do you manage that with an unreadable rear plate?
Oh the Horrors!!!!!
By roadman
Thu, 11/02/2017 - 10:37am
I have to have a license plate on the front of my car. Call out the WAAAHHHHbulance.
And have you looked at cars lately? Because they all have accommodations for front license plates neatly built into the bumper or grill.
We're not talking your parent's 1971 Skylark with the cheesy frame attached to an equally cheesy bumper here.
Whaaambulence is held up in traffic
By anon
Thu, 11/02/2017 - 11:27am
Some guy had a heart attack over being "forced" to change plate numbers.
As I've said in other posts
By roadman
Fri, 11/03/2017 - 9:20am
There is a demand among people to keep their current number when upgrading plates;
These people are willing to pay a fee to keep their current plate number;
Other states seem to have no problems with allowing car owners to keep their current plate number (usually for a fee) when changing plate design;
Allowing this option to people is consistent with the RMV's goal of phasing out "greenies" in a positive manner, as opposed to the current manner of threatening failure of the annual inspection.
In short, introducing a program whereby drivers can keep their existing number when plate design changes, provided they specifically request it AND are willing to pay a fee for it, is consistent with the RMV's stated goals of improved customer service.
If the RMV can spend time and resources on their annual "low number license plate" lottery, they should be able to figure out how to allow people to keep a registration number.
hm
By tape
Wed, 11/01/2017 - 4:00pm
Is it though?
There are solutions to this too
By AMCoffee
Wed, 11/01/2017 - 4:00pm
Registry will not exchange single green plate for same numbers (mine all numbers) in new red plates; I would have done that for my previously faded green plate, if offered.
Therefore, to keep my numbers from a faded plate, I found a helpful person who repaints them in a manner satisfactory to law enforcement and inspection stations. Problem solved.
Another foolish RMV "rule"
By roadman
Wed, 11/01/2017 - 5:46pm
Most other states (including New Hampshire) routinely change number plate design, and will issue people new plates with their existing license number.
Everyone I know who still has a "greenie" has cited the fact they cannot retain their current number if they upgrade to the new plate design as the reason they haven't done so.
But once again, the RMV puts their convenience above the demands of the people they serve.
Holy shit dude
By Cutriss
Wed, 11/01/2017 - 7:38pm
Citation please.
Maybe this is true in the quaint realm of New England, but outside of your idyllic paradise, this is not the case at all. When the plate design changes, congrats, you just got new plate numbers.
How often do you actually need to know your plate number and can't just go look it up somewhere? Is it such a gross inconvenience that you need for the state to spend thousands of dollars manually sorting/shipping out all the plates to the RMV office nearest to where each number owner lives? Can you possibly imagine how much of a burden that would be, how easy it is to get wrong, and how much someone like yourself would howl at the government for wasting tax dollars when that happens?
Give me a break.
Yeah, since I'm from another
By anon
Thu, 11/02/2017 - 12:23pm
Yeah, since I'm from another state, I really don't get this obsession with keeping your license plate number. Even if it's one of those hereditary low numbers, which gets you absolutely nothing except self-declared prestige.
In other states, every few years you get a new plate with a new number.
Seems like a lot of effort
By anon
Thu, 11/02/2017 - 9:16am
For something so utterly trivial.
ps - get a new car and you will have to turn it in.
Nope
By roadman
Thu, 11/02/2017 - 10:41am
Ever hear of transferring a registration? For one thing, it's cheaper. For another thing, a faded plate may flunk you at inspection, but it won't prevent you from transferring the plates when you buy a new car.
The numbers have changed
By Scratchie
Thu, 11/02/2017 - 10:59am
The official government-approved designation for your vehicle's registration plate number has changed. Stop living in the past and accept the new designation.
It's a moot point for me
By roadman
Thu, 11/02/2017 - 11:33am
As I traded my greenie in for ham operator plates in 2003.
But, as silly as it may sound, it IS an issue for enough other people. So perhaps the RMV should come up with a way to accommodate their requests instead of demanding blind obedience. As I've pointed out, other states manage to do this - the RMV should be able to as well.
"blind obedience"?
By Scratchie
Thu, 11/02/2017 - 12:52pm
Is that like demanding blind obedience to the government-approved highway designation numbers, even if you've been using a different, more specific highway designation for decades?
Continuing to refer to the old route number
By roadman
Fri, 11/03/2017 - 9:29am
after the roadway has been redesignated for over FOUR decades is the blind obedience here. Especially when the exit numbers, mileposts, and highway signs have long since been updated to reflect the current designation.
I think he got you there
By Waquiot
Fri, 11/03/2017 - 11:39am
Since there are only a few things that need updating when you change your plate.
Which reminds me. I should probably tell the insurance company that my plate number changed. 4 years ago. And yes the plate was green before and yes I was bummed (except they for some reason let me keep the old plate) but it isn't worth my getting worked up about. As opposed to when the federal government made me start referring to Route 128 as I-95. I will never, ever, ever get over that.
There are dozens of us...DOZENS.
By Cutriss
Thu, 11/02/2017 - 3:26pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKie-vgUGdI
Green plate
By anon
Thu, 11/02/2017 - 11:29am
Cannot be transferred. That's how I ended up with new plates years ago.
when you buy a new (or used) car-
By Beanzzz
Thu, 11/02/2017 - 8:05pm
-you have to get it inspected when you purchase it.
Car dealers on the RMV's Drive Plan will not pass a greenie, because the Registry is on a mission for everyone to have red plates (so they can track you coming and going). The Drive Plan rules are quite tough, dealers are subject to spot checks and absolutely no dealer wants to be banned from the Drive Plan, which enables them to issue plates, stickers and registrations from the dealership so the customer (or the dealer) doesn't have to go to the Registry.
Source: I used to sell cars, the RMV didn't even want the salesperson to pull the car into the inspection bay. Even attaching new or transfer plates on the car while it was in the inspection bay was a big no-no as well.
The quasi legit ticket controller...
By Lee
Wed, 11/01/2017 - 1:33pm
.... should have advised the rider to exchange his ticket as soon as possible and let him board if he preferred to exchange it another time. If the rider wanted to take a chance the legitimate ticket taker on board would refuse it, that was his choice.
This only demonstrates that Keolis is not in the business of providing service or maintaining good relations with the public. Keolis is about making money without any investment in good business practices.
The clueless judge should have dismissed the case. No where have I seen any sign at North Station stating that one cannot be on a public transit platform without a ticket. Riders descending from the trains generally do not have tickets because the ticket takers usually punch them and take them on the trains.
The MBTA's claim that he
By DTP
Wed, 11/01/2017 - 1:34pm
The MBTA's claim that he could have obtained a replacement pass at the North Station ticket window is inconsistent with their own fare tariff, which states:
And then from the tariff's glossary:
So the tariff is inconsistent about whether he could do so at the ticket window or only at the CharlieCard Store, but the MBTA's official policy is that he would have needed a receipt, which I highly doubt he had. I know I don't ever bother getting receipts from the machines.
When CharlieCards were new, I
By anon
Wed, 11/01/2017 - 2:05pm
When CharlieCards were new, I didn't trust that mine would keep working all month. Since it wasn't human-readable, I'd have no proof of anything if it stopped working at the turnstile. So I kept the receipt in my wallet.
I think it's time to start doing this if you ride the Commuter Rail.
statement of fare
By Saul
Wed, 11/01/2017 - 3:35pm
Here is the latest version of the statement of fares, dated December 19, 2016:
https://d3044s2alrsxog.cloudfront.net/uploadedfile...
"Fare is fair" violates the T's published fare rules.
No mention of having to show a valid ticket or pass before boarding.
I also have to wonder if these "ticket verification agents"
By roadman
Wed, 11/01/2017 - 6:08pm
actually have the legal authority to challenge those trying to board a train. Last I knew, the only people who can actually challenge the validity of a fare, or challenge those who try to ride without paying, are the conductor and his/her assistants on the train itself.
The transit police arrested a
By Kinopio
Wed, 11/01/2017 - 1:42pm
The transit police arrested a paying customer for trespassing, yet if a driver goes onto the tracks and hits a green line train and causes damage and delays hundreds of people they are not arrested. Such dumb priorities around here.
Perhaps if their 35 do-nothing
By roadman
Wed, 11/01/2017 - 1:51pm
"ticket verification agents" (official MBTA term) weren't allowed to act like they are the sole authority and presume that every commuter is trying to cheat the system out of a ride, it wouldn't have come to this.
When a lowly "agent" thinks they can override a conductor and block passengers from boarding a train (as happened to me and others a couple of weeks ago), there is something seriously wrong with your "verification" system.
And don't even get me started about the time that some of these "agents" went and got pizza, then sat down at the bar in the North Station waiting area after the train they were screening left.
Time to end this wasteful, pointless, and insulting farce now.
Not allowed to have lunch/ break
By anon
Wed, 11/01/2017 - 6:57pm
I believe these people work split shifts, and like you, are entitled to breaks at a certain frequency. Does your boss complain when you get something to St?
Recognize that these are people trying to do what they have been hired to do. They are generally not the real decision makers.
Fair point
By roadman
Thu, 11/02/2017 - 8:54am
However, when I go to break or lunch, I notify my boss that I'm doing so. There was no evidence these "agents" did so , as they just walked away immediately after the train left.
OK, I'll conced they were on an authorized break. However, perhaps they should have been a little more discreet about it - like not all seven going to get pizza at the same time. After all, they are in a very public place and being observed doing a job that many commuters consider to be a needless waste of time and resources.
You have no idea if they did anything wrong.
By section77
Thu, 11/02/2017 - 9:31pm
I very well may be that their break was scheduled for after that train left. (You like to complain that there aren't enough trains in the middle of the day when you go home.) How else are they supposed to have breaks but where the train schedules allow? Somehow you think an entire crew walked off the job unauthorized, or are galled that they had the temerity to eat in front of you. We all have our problems with the CR, but come on man.
So, if someone sees a half dozen police
By anon
Thu, 11/02/2017 - 10:11am
on detail for a parade or a Bruins game or whatever walk away from their posts and go into a Dunkin Donuts, do you honestly think their first reaction would be "That's OK, they're all on break."
Similar situation here.
Making fares as inconvenient as possible
By notloggedinnow
Wed, 11/01/2017 - 1:55pm
I generally agree with the idea of checking commuter rail fares more frequently, but this is a great example of the T being as cumbersome as possible. To clarify: we have a CharlieCard system that doesn't work on the commuter rail (or ferry). Instead you have the option of paper ticket, printed plastic card, or app. If you order online, you can get a printed card that won't fade. But if you walk up to the T's very own commuter rail kiosk, you can't get a printed card.
He seems to have become a bit dramatic, but I'd be equally aggravated if I was told to go to the booth with a few minutes before the train left. Let me guess, there was probably one window open and a long line. Come to think of it, shouldn't this be an option at the ticket machines? (Reprint your pass; just put in your old one as long as magnetic stripe is still readable). Last Friday, at South Station at 5 PM, there was one working fare machine and a line of about 20 people at the window.
And let's not get started on the train probably having only two coaches open and those being located at the far end of the train from the station... (I don't take the commuter rail regularly, which perhaps makes me notice the ridiculousness of these arrangement each time I do ride.)
I ride the commuter rail five days a week
By roadman
Wed, 11/01/2017 - 2:34pm
And trust me, these arrangements are no less ridiculous to me.
There's also another issue that most people don't consider here. Because of the placement of the outbound platforms at many stations, the "board at the locomotive end of the the train" policy results in trains unnecessarily blocking adjacent street crossings as well. Melrose Highlands and Greenwood are particularly prone to this problem.
I would not agree to go to a
By anon
Wed, 11/01/2017 - 2:01pm
I would not agree to go to a ticket window in this situation unless the staff agreed to hold the train for me.
What exactly should he have done differently, if he wanted to get home on time?
joke of fare evasion
By Bobp
Wed, 11/01/2017 - 2:06pm
Could the T be at least consistent on fare evasion. They are all hyped about Keolis checking fares yet every day I see fare theft. I have tweeted, complained via web form and in person to no avail. Again this morning 3 people strolled through the open gate at DTX in front of the spiffy red shirted customer service no less as the gate beeped.. I asked is that okay and his reply was I can’t stop them. So I guess they are just there to say good morning? I counted last week and I saw 15 fare evasions on the orange line during my 5-day week. At least 30 dollars in un collected fares and a lot more in fines for fare jumping. Too bad no one at the T cares….
Green Street means free rides
By Daan
Wed, 11/01/2017 - 3:19pm
Green Street on the Orange Line is a regular place for fare evasion. No T staff. So folks just wave a bag on the other side causing the gate to respond as though someone is exiting.
But then the last time T staff was at the station regularly one staff person spent her time in the oval booth that replaced the original booth reading her bible. Apparently she was paid to read a bible instead of helping riders.
Another question: Why were the oval booths installed? To make fare attendants seem like customer service agents? Customer service agents who read bibles and then subsequently were not longer assigned to stations.
MBTA is a run by odd people. They spend money on projects that are used little or never. Such as the objects that were attached to the original booths (one is at Green Street) and then are left covered. So spending money to install objects that are not used.
Strange group of people.
Gee
By Will LaTulippe
Wed, 11/01/2017 - 5:48pm
No wonder the governor wants to privatize them.
Vote Democrat again.
Regarding the oval booths a.k.a Customer Information Centers
By roadman
Wed, 11/01/2017 - 7:21pm
Originally, the electronic fare collection plan was supposed to be totally customer driven, and did not include provisions for the Customer Service Agents (CSAs). By the time MBTA management added the CSAs, principally as a concession to the union representing the collectors/token sellers, the seller booths had already been designated as the locations for the guts controlling the faregates and sales machines.
Because of this, adding the "Customer Information Centers" (to use the term that's emblazoned on the front of every one) at stations was the quickest and least expensive way to provide a location for the CSA to
hide from passengershang out at when not actually serving people.And of course, they goofed it up. At several stations (such as Boylston), the CIC is actually inside the faregates, and not adjacent to the Charlie machines. Of course, this doesn't make any difference at locations where the T no longer provides CSAs.
You seem more obsessed
By Waquiot
Wed, 11/01/2017 - 7:36pm
With what she read than the fact she was not doing her job. Would it have been better if she read romance novels?
The T should have know what the end result would be when they installed the oval booths. When they got rid of the old booths, the line was that the people who staffed the booths would be more visible and thereby more helpful. To be frank, that didn’t happen. I remember being at Downtown Crossing on a Sunday morning and needing some help (okay, I was looking to get a Charlie Card). There was no one around but a sign that said (and this is from memory from 4 years ago) staff came in at noon. I feel for the good customer service agents that are being replaced by contractors, but the others made their own beds.
Pages
Add comment