Rail Ticketing Issue
Discussion
I would get legal advice, as one or two more knowledgeable types have already suggested.
Some years ago a friend of mine was a secondary school teacher - still is, for that matter. I happened to see a job application form that she was writing, and noticed that she had ticked 'yes' to the question about criminal convictions. I laughed in disbelief, and asked her for the story.
At the age of 17 (so in 1988 or so!), she had used a friend's Young Person's Railcard for a short journey to a nearby town. She had been caught, prosecuted successfully, and thus had a conviction for conspiracy to defraud on her record for ever more.
As others have said, I would try to avoid prosecution.
Some years ago a friend of mine was a secondary school teacher - still is, for that matter. I happened to see a job application form that she was writing, and noticed that she had ticked 'yes' to the question about criminal convictions. I laughed in disbelief, and asked her for the story.
At the age of 17 (so in 1988 or so!), she had used a friend's Young Person's Railcard for a short journey to a nearby town. She had been caught, prosecuted successfully, and thus had a conviction for conspiracy to defraud on her record for ever more.
As others have said, I would try to avoid prosecution.
elanfan said:
The mitigation is that she very rarely travels by train but here in Cardiff you can travel on a junior ticket by BUS up until your 19th birthday, a facility she used daily to get to college.
There are many reasons why I don't like to travel by train and reading this story by OP adds to them. It is quite likely that if the person had been a burly lager lout rather than a diminutive 18 year old woman, the inspector would not have tried to get an address and gone down this route that has been gone down. OP I am not an expert, however most criminal matters are not strict liability, ie it is necessary to prove intent to commit a crime, not just prove that a law has been broken. The junior bus tickets would open an avenue for this to be dismissed.
I'd get legal advice, you really do not want a criminal record esp over a £1 difference in train ticket fare.
N Dentressangle said:
I would get legal advice, as one or two more knowledgeable types have already suggested.
Some years ago a friend of mine was a secondary school teacher - still is, for that matter. I happened to see a job application form that she was writing, and noticed that she had ticked 'yes' to the question about criminal convictions. I laughed in disbelief, and asked her for the story.
At the age of 17 (so in 1988 or so!), she had used a friend's Young Person's Railcard for a short journey to a nearby town. She had been caught, prosecuted successfully, and thus had a conviction for conspiracy to defraud on her record for ever more.
As others have said, I would try to avoid prosecution.
Sorry, a little off topic, but surely this type of conviction and the one in question would be subject to the ROA and be spent after a number of years? Some years ago a friend of mine was a secondary school teacher - still is, for that matter. I happened to see a job application form that she was writing, and noticed that she had ticked 'yes' to the question about criminal convictions. I laughed in disbelief, and asked her for the story.
At the age of 17 (so in 1988 or so!), she had used a friend's Young Person's Railcard for a short journey to a nearby town. She had been caught, prosecuted successfully, and thus had a conviction for conspiracy to defraud on her record for ever more.
As others have said, I would try to avoid prosecution.
To the OP, it certainly sounds that these guys aren't your usual fly by night parking company. If nothing else a solicitors letter would imply you are taking this seriously and make them think twice about how they handle the the case.
madjules said:
Sorry, a little off topic, but surely this type of conviction and the one in question would be subject to the ROA and be spent after a number of years?
Jobs which involve work with children or other vulnerable people, such as school teaching, are not subject to the Rehabilitation of Offenders legislation. Therefore convictions never become 'spent' and must always be declared.Bummer for my mate, eh? I don't think it ever made any real difference to her career though - more of a comedy talking point once she'd explained that she hadn't brought down Barings or anything like that.
Worth thinking about though, for any younger person who thinks they might fancy a career in medicine, nursing, teaching etc in years to come.
creampuff said:
...
OP I am not an expert, however most criminal matters are not strict liability, ie it is necessary to prove intent to commit a crime, not just prove that a law has been broken. The junior bus tickets would open an avenue for this to be dismissed.
The facts stated disclose a strict liability offence under the Railway Byelaws. No intent to evade payment is required. OP I am not an expert, however most criminal matters are not strict liability, ie it is necessary to prove intent to commit a crime, not just prove that a law has been broken. The junior bus tickets would open an avenue for this to be dismissed.
Also, failing to give your name and address if you do not have a valid ticket renders you liable to be detained by a ticket officer under section 5 of the Regulation of Railways Act 1889.
elanfan said:
CTE said:
Why did she try and save "£1"??
She didn't - have you actually read the initial postWhat bit are some of us missing, it says she bought the junior fare but was made to forfeit is and pay the adult fare, the difference being a quid.
So please explain what you mean or clarify how much she was trying to save it is wasn't a quid?
Breadvan72 said:
The OP's daughter wasn't trying to save anything. She mistakenly thought she was able to use a junior ticket up to age nineteen, as she could on the local bus services.
Ok, that's not exactly clear, he says that is the mitigation to the action now, but doesn't say that she told that to the inspector. If she had have done, ie told him how old she is, why would he need to snatch her ID or whatever? OP, did you daughter tell the inspector she was 18 when he questioned her about her age? Surely if she was polite, and had innocently done this, and was therefore surprised by the non valid ticket, and paid up the difference willingly, that would be the end of the matter? However, if she lied to him or was not too pleasant about it, I can see why they may persue it. Are you 100pcent sure you know what went on? Was she not asked her age when she bought the ticket? Did she buy it at a machine or online, or from a person? I think all this will have to be taken into account at any Court proceedings, and may have a bearing on the action now.
People make mistakes and despite laws being absolute, I'm surprised that this has gone this far unless there is some aggravating factor that has got their backs up.
My daughter is one of life's 'innocents' in this sadly streetwise world. There was no intent to deceive nor were there any aggravating features except on the part of the inspector who snatched an NI card from her purse. I will not answer any more queries in this regard as there is NO more to the story other than what you have been told.
The motivation here is money - TIL see themselves as crusaders against fare avoidance (and I am not saying action should not be taken against those who deliberately avoid paying). I'm not at this stage aware of how they are funded - whether they get the 'costs' from cases brought or whether they are paid by the train companies they represent I do not know. What you can be sure of is that it is all about money.
It doesn't seem right to me that PRIVATE companies can bring about a CRIMINAL conviction against an individual for which their is no possibility of a 'not guilty' verdict - the offence being absolute (strict liability).
The motivation here is money - TIL see themselves as crusaders against fare avoidance (and I am not saying action should not be taken against those who deliberately avoid paying). I'm not at this stage aware of how they are funded - whether they get the 'costs' from cases brought or whether they are paid by the train companies they represent I do not know. What you can be sure of is that it is all about money.
It doesn't seem right to me that PRIVATE companies can bring about a CRIMINAL conviction against an individual for which their is no possibility of a 'not guilty' verdict - the offence being absolute (strict liability).
s3fella said:
People make mistakes and despite laws being absolute, I'm surprised that this has gone this far unless there is some aggravating factor that has got their backs up.
The trouble is that the press is full of stories of innocent mistakes and not-so-innocent mistakes being made by railway passengers, and of the Train Operating Companies pursuing each and every one.I suppose the problem is of the "full swing of the pendulum" variety. When the railways were nationalised, all you had to do was pay up the difference and that was the end of the matter. Of course, you only paid up when you actually got caught, so there was a section of society who thought (or acted like) train travel was free.
In a way you could draw a parallel with shoplifting. A number of "innocent old ladies" have "inadvertently" put some stuff in their bag and walked out without paying, and the likes of Sainsburys and Tesco etc have little truck with that sort of excuse.
Whilst I have some degree of sympathy with the OP, it doesn't take a degree in law to suss out that some companies have different rules than others when it comes to children's fares.
This post is not very helpful I know, but perhaps the matter also needs to be looked at from the other perspective. There are many on PH who criticise the level of subsidy that many railway companies are getting and, when the companies try to get the money out of people that is due to them, they get criticised for that as well.
rs1952 said:
This post is not very helpful I know, but perhaps the matter also needs to be looked at from the other perspective. There are many on PH who criticise the level of subsidy that many railway companies are getting and, when the companies try to get the money out of people that is due to them, they get criticised for that as well.
Just as an FYI I have seen ticket inspectors handing out penalty fares to passengers who were unable to buy a ticket as the ticketing machine availablity at the unstaffed station was totally inadequate, ie if the passengers had continued to queue up to buy a ticket from the one solitary functioning machine, they would have missed their infrequent running train. I do not have a lot of sympathy for rail operators and infact I was quite happy to take a short domestic flight instead of the train recently, I'd be quite happy never to take a train (except the underground) in the UK again.
streaky said:
N Dentressangle said:
... once she'd explained that she hadn't brought down Barings or anything like that.
Well, nothing happened to the man who did "bring down Barings Bank". He retired to his estate in Wiltshire.Streaky
Ex77
Sadly the attitude of railway employee is all to familiar. I drive trains and find it takes a certain type to be an RPI(Revenue Protection Inspector) they certainly like to collect scalps! Here is another regular which catches people out, Person buys ticket online ticket for another individual, prints or collects ticket. Person travelling has a valid ticket but they don't, as the card used for purchase should also be presented for inspection. Most guards are either not bothered or not aware but for RPI's it's an easy catch again because this quite often involves a young person. Oh and having the card doesn't always avoid trouble because it's not in your name so you must have nicked it!
W124Bob said:
Sadly the attitude of railway employee is all to familiar. I drive trains and find it takes a certain type to be an RPI(Revenue Protection Inspector) they certainly like to collect scalps! Here is another regular which catches people out, Person buys ticket online ticket for another individual, prints or collects ticket. Person travelling has a valid ticket but they don't, as the card used for purchase should also be presented for inspection. Most guards are either not bothered or not aware but for RPI's it's an easy catch again because this quite often involves a young person. Oh and having the card doesn't always avoid trouble because it's not in your name so you must have nicked it!
So, if I buy 4 tickets for my Wife and kids online, but I don't travel with them, their tickets are invalid? That cant be right surely?fuzzypicture said:
So, if I buy 4 tickets for my Wife and kids online, but I don't travel with them, their tickets are invalid? That cant be right surely?
Isn't that just appalling so not only does a private company have the power to give you a criminal conviction without the Police or CPS being involved but they can do so on some jumped probably internal rule they have made up.Next my insurance won't be valid next time I am stopped by the Police unless I have the credit card or DD slip that I paid with, with me at the time. It's time these jumped up twerps were stopped!
Edit: just realised I haven't used the word 'twerp' for years - had forgotten what a great word it is, so again Twerp!
creampuff said:
There are many reasons why I don't like to travel by train and reading this story by OP adds to them. It is quite likely that if the person had been a burly lager lout rather than a diminutive 18 year old woman, the inspector would not have tried to get an address and gone down this route that has been gone down
You'd be surprised - I'm a fairly well built young guy, and I've clashed with ticket inspectors on trains in the UK on three occasions. They've been unpleasant, aggressive, and on two out of the three occasions, willing to threaten me with the police for having the audacity to challenge them. Funnily enough, they all had RMT badges on their jackets......The most remarkable experience I had was on a train from London to Edinburgh. A Spanish tourist got on at Newcastle, ticket inspector came round, told him he had bought a ticket for the next train and now he had to pay IRO 150 quid or he would get arrested. He didn't really understand what was happening (his english was not the best), and the inspector raised her voice and got fairly aggressive. At this point, I suggested she was being a bit unreasonable. She turned on me, and told me to go into the bit between the carriages (where there were no cameras) because 'she wanted to have a word with me in private'. I declined, explaining that if I was going to deal with a bully on a power trip, I'd rather do it in front of witnesses. Was told I would get arrested if I didn't obey. This went back and forth for 2 or 3 minutes until I took out my credit card and told her I'd pay his fare, providing she gave me her name, the train manager's name and who I should send a written complaint to. She got very, very angry, even trying to snatch the credit card out of my hand, and threatened to have me thrown off the train, arrested etc etc because there were laws against 'threatening train conductors'. To which I said 'b
ks' and she went properly nuts, finger in my face, shouting etc and accusing me of assault. Another passenger, who introduced himself as a solicitor, stepped in and told her if she wanted to get the police involved, that was her prerogative, but there was a carriage full of witnesses who might take a different view. He took out a legal pad and asked her for her name, complaint address etc., and she repeated her threat before turning round and flouncing out of the carriage accompanied by applause from the other passengers. Bottom line is that the train companies seem happy to employ bullies, use ticketing systems so complicated you need a PhD to understand them, and blame the customer for everything. They mercilessly abuse the system for their own gain whilst screwing ever more money from passengers and taking fat subsidies from the state. They are, by and large, a disgrace.
If I were you, I'd be asking the solicitor if your daughter can report the conductor to the police for snatching the card from her purse (I presume that will be on the CCTV), and writing to your local MP asking whether it is appropriate for a young person to get a criminal record for this. I'd also CC Private Eye - they do a fairly good line sticking it to the train operators. It sounds like they'll get your daughter if it's done on the law, but if you make it about their PR, they might back off.
There are several pages on FB about these guys - just search 'Transport Investigations Ltd want to take me to court'. Copy and paste your OP, and spread the word to as many people as possible. You could even start a petition on change.org or similar calling for their franchise not to be renewed. I bet you'd get plenty of signatures....
Exige77 said:
streaky said:
N Dentressangle said:
... once she'd explained that she hadn't brought down Barings or anything like that.
Well, nothing happened to the man who did "bring down Barings Bank". He retired to his estate in Wiltshire.Streaky
Ex77
Streaky
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff