A police log shows that the call for help described "two drunk and disorderly passengers". It also reveals officers found the travelers to be sober and cooperative.
I wasn't aware of any commuter trains going from New York to Florida...It may seem like getting kicked off a commuter train only happens in the movies, but a South Florida woman recently found out the hard way that it happens in real life.
haha I thought the same thing.From the newspaper article:
I wasn't aware of any commuter trains going from New York to Florida...It may seem like getting kicked off a commuter train only happens in the movies, but a South Florida woman recently found out the hard way that it happens in real life.
Not so. Being a troublemaker and unruly is sufficient, whether drunk or sober.It'll be interesting to see the details on this. If they were intoxicated, then the conductor did have the right to give them the boot if they were disturbing the other passengers. IF they weren't...well then obviously the conductor didn't have that right.
This is where your confuse me. Unruly only = should have been allowed to stay on train. Kicked off for being unruly = should have been required to pay another fare to be let back on. What am I missing?IF they were being unruly, then they don't deserve anything, and in fact Amtrak was being nice by letting them board the next day without having to pay anything extra . . . .
But if they weren't being unruly, then yes Amtrak should compensate them.
Because it was the Meteor, train 97, not the Card, train 51.I don't think anybody has mentioned it, but how could the passengers have gotten back on the next day in the same direction if the Card is tri-weekly? Did they go back the other way?
Yes, I apologize as that was what I meant. Typically those intoxicated can be quite annoying to the rest of us, however all they have to do is disrupt the public to have grounds for dismissal.Not so. Being a troublemaker and unruly is sufficient, whether drunk or sober.It'll be interesting to see the details on this. If they were intoxicated, then the conductor did have the right to give them the boot if they were disturbing the other passengers. IF they weren't...well then obviously the conductor didn't have that right.
I was saying that if we find out that they were disrupting the public, then the conductor had just means to boot them. If they weren't disrupting the public then they should get the compensation they're seeking for being kicked off a train and forced to spend extra money to stay somewhere they weren't expecting.This is where your confuse me. Unruly only = should have been allowed to stay on train. Kicked off for being unruly = should have been required to pay another fare to be let back on. What am I missing?IF they were being unruly, then they don't deserve anything, and in fact Amtrak was being nice by letting them board the next day without having to pay anything extra . . . .
But if they weren't being unruly, then yes Amtrak should compensate them.
Sorry... I didn't actually read the article, just relied on the OP's infoBecause it was the Meteor, train 97, not the Card, train 51.I don't think anybody has mentioned it, but how could the passengers have gotten back on the next day in the same direction if the Card is tri-weekly? Did they go back the other way?
This incident occurred over a month ago. You can read the victims detailed version of it here http://www.getpayback.com/railroads-trains/amtrak/Passenger put off in "rural" Ashland, VA
If I was a personal injury lawyer, I would not take the case. Most PI lawyers take cases on a contingency and accept a percentage of the recovery as their attorney fee. Attorneys generally evaluate the case based on the amount of damages and liability. I do not see a large amount of damages suffered by the complaints, but then again, I am not privy to all the facts and I am not a personal injury lawyer.Is Ashland "in the middle of nowhere"? Id think not since its so close to Richmond and they were able to get a hotel and catch the Train the next day! Be interesting to see all the facts, my natural skepticism makes me think a lawyer wouldnt take a case over a few hundred dollars unless they thought they could settle the case! Ive known a few power tripping conductors and OBS myself, but doubt if this one will go anywhere, might be worth Amtraks while to just settle this nusciance suit for a thousand bucks or so and have it go away!(maybe one of our attorney members in Florida will have some insight on this matter as pertains to Florida Law versus Federal Law since it happened in Virginia in Interstate Commerce?? :unsure: ) We dont want to encourage Fortune Hunters and Ambulance Chasers to file more suits against Amtrak, there's already enough of those IF this is the case here!! :help:
No, but if they get a "good" venue, they might be able to get a lot of money on the punitive side of things. And there's a case for the venue to be:If I was a personal injury lawyer, I would not take the case. Most PI lawyers take cases on a contingency and accept a percentage of the recovery as their attorney fee. Attorneys generally evaluate the case based on the amount of damages and liability. I do not see a large amount of damages suffered by the complaints, but then again, I am not privy to all the facts and I am not a personal injury lawyer.Is Ashland "in the middle of nowhere"? Id think not since its so close to Richmond and they were able to get a hotel and catch the Train the next day! Be interesting to see all the facts, my natural skepticism makes me think a lawyer wouldnt take a case over a few hundred dollars unless they thought they could settle the case! Ive known a few power tripping conductors and OBS myself, but doubt if this one will go anywhere, might be worth Amtraks while to just settle this nusciance suit for a thousand bucks or so and have it go away!(maybe one of our attorney members in Florida will have some insight on this matter as pertains to Florida Law versus Federal Law since it happened in Virginia in Interstate Commerce?? :unsure: ) We dont want to encourage Fortune Hunters and Ambulance Chasers to file more suits against Amtrak, there's already enough of those IF this is the case here!! :help:
However making a false police report is a felony so Just cause the attendant thinks they can abuse their power they can't abuse the law. Attendant says to police the passengers are drunk unruly etc police say different that can be classified as making a false report or lying to police.The type of Amtrak attendants I have seen on coach on some LD trains, I wouldn't be surprised if this was a case of one of them deciding to use his power to win an argument with a passenger and deciding to eject passenger midway just because s/he can. Sounds unlikely when thought of in vacuum, but in Amtrak context, I have seen they do have staff that is capable of doing something like this.
Enter your email address to join: