Transpennine Express Fare Evasion

[gatoc]

Today I bought a child return ticket from Leeds to Manchester Piccadilly although being 17. Exiting the platform I was asked my age and DOB to which I replied 15, ././2002. I was then told I looked older and admitted my real age. My details were recorded and I was given a paper ticket free of charge that would allow me to return to Leeds. I was told to expect a letter in the coming weeks.

Was curious if the case is likely to lead to prosecution which I expect it will and if so will this result in a criminal record? Also how much is the usual fine for this kind of offence?

Thank you

 

[najaB]

Was curious if the case is likely to lead to prosecution (though I know it can and am expecting the worst) and how much is the usual fine for this kind of offence?

Yes, it can lead to prosecution. If it was to go as far as that I wouldn't expect the fine to exceed £400.

However you may well be able to get an out of court settlement for less than half of that amount.

 

[gatoc]

But do you think it is likely to lead to prosecution?

 

[Master29]

As NajaB says your best bet now is to take the out of court offer if it is offered and except this as a slap on the wrist.

 

[island]

Will you turn 18 within 6 months of the day you committed the offence?

 

[gatoc]

No I've got a fair while before i turn 18

 

[northwichcat]

Today I bought a child return ticket from Leeds to Manchester Piccadilly although being 17. Exiting the platform I was asked my age and DOB to which I replied 15

Some 16 and 17 year olds might be able to successfully argue they are legally a child and were unaware that you needed an adult ticket from age 16. However, you've clearly demonstrated you knew the oldest you're allowed to travel on a child ticket is 15, so you'll have to admit you knowingly purchased a cheaper ticket than the one you need for travel.

TPE's process of dealing with passengers who traveled on the wrong type of ticket is detailed here: https://www.tpexpress.co.uk/mediafile/100532893/revenue-protection-policy-january-version-2.pdf

The important thing to note is if they send you an Unpaid Fares Notice then pay it straight away, as that way it'll avoid going to court.

 

[Darandio]

Some 16 and 17 year olds might be able to successfully argue they are legally a child and were unaware that you needed an adult ticket from age 16.

So by playing dumb you might be able to make a successful argument against any case brought against you? Sorry, not buying that.

 

[MikeWh]

Posts 3, 4 and 6 have just been approved.

 

[northwichcat]

So by playing dumb you might be able to make a successful argument against any case brought against you? Sorry, not buying that.

:roll:

I was making the point gatoc obviously knew the rule that someone who is legally a 16 or 17 year old child must buy an adult ticket to travel on a train from what he or she said.

If a 16 year old who genuinely didn't realise they needed an adult ticket gets accused of fare evasion does an internet search and finds this thread then it won't be a case of them 'playing dumb', it'll be case of them 'not understanding complex rules.'

 

[Darandio]

it'll be case of them 'not understanding complex rules.'

Complex rules?

Children aged five to fifteen inclusive get a 50% discount on most tickets. In addition, children under five can travel free with fare paying passenger.

If the child looks 16 or over, it may be appropriate for proof of age to be carried when purchasing the ticket and also when travelling to avoid embarrassment.

That is the rule. What is complex about it?

 

[roversfan2001]

Complex rules?



That is the rule. What is complex about it?

This isn't applicable here, but it isn't that simple. Someone who is 16 and 364 days could travel on a child ticket if it is Family and Friends Railcard discounted and the Railcard was bought when they were under 16.

 

[najaB]

But do you think it is likely to lead to prosecution?

Given your age, it is possible but unlikely. They're more likely to give you a stern warning and ask for any fare due plus costs.

 

[northwichcat]

Complex rules?

Some children have to buy adult tickets despite not yet being adults, while some adults can get a senior's discount with a railcard, despite not yet being senior citizens. Very straightforward isn't it, especially when bus and light rail systems have different rules to the railway. A 16 year old might be allowed to buy a child ticket on a bus to get to the station, at which point they become an adult! They don't say the rail ticketing system in the UK is overly complex for no reason!

 

[najaB]

A 16 year old might be allowed to buy a child ticket on a bus to get to the station, at which point they become an adult! They don't say the rail ticketing system in the UK is overly complex for no reason!

What do bus ticket rules have to do with rail ticketing being complex?

 

[northwichcat]

What do bus ticket rules have to do with rail ticketing being complex?

Saying someone aged 16 years and 1 day must buy an adult ticket is illogical as the law states they are a child. However, if all transport operators followed the same cut off as the railways then it would be less confusing for those under 18.

 

[najaB]

Saying someone aged 16 years and 1 day must buy an adult ticket is illogical as the law states they are a child. However, if all transport operators followed the same cut off as the railways then it would be less confusing for those under 18.

I don't deny that, but it doesn't make the rail fares system complex, it makes the overall transportation ticketing system (to the extent that one exists) complex.

 

[Darandio]

A 16 year old might be allowed to buy a child ticket on a bus to get to the station, at which point they become an adult! They don't say the rail ticketing system in the UK is overly complex for no reason!

Equally, 15 year old may get off the train here at Redcar after having paid a child fare and then get on a bus to travel outside the boundary and have to pay the full fare because the maximum age is 14.

Or in another example, they get on the bus at Darlington with the same company and want to travel within the Darlington boundary, the age limit then becomes 16. But if they want to travel a few miles further to Ferryhill on the very same bus, the age limit is only 14.

So you are saying that rail ticketing is complex for no reason and making comparisons with buses, yet bus travel is often more complex!

 

[Greenback]

This thread is a good example of how a discussion can end up looking as if it's trying to find justifications for getting someone off on some kind of technicality.

I don't think that a discussion of whether the railway rules are complex or not is going to add anything useful to the OP's situation. They have admitted that they lied about their age, so it seems quite obvious that there was no misunderstanding involved.

Let's keep on topic now and leave this side chat for another time and another place. Thanks.

 

[gatoc]

Haha I agree. I appreciate the input but I think maybe the subject would be best on a seperate thread. I'm not looking for technicalities just advice on what will come from the situation.

 

[yorkie]

If anyone wishes to discuss matters unrelated directly to the OP's query, such as the morals or logic of charging 16/17 year olds child fares, or anything else, please create a separate thread for that. Thank you.

 

[gatoc]

Have just received a letter addressed to my parents saying the matter has been provisionally authorised for prosecution. I then need to give my details and make any comments about the incident on the back within days. What does this mean exactly?

 

[Hadders]

You (or your parents) should respond with a brief letter of apology, saying that you have learned from this incident. You could also state that you are keen to settle the matter without the needing to go to court and would be willing to pay the train company's administrative costs in dealing with this incident as well as the outstanding fare.

 

[gatoc]

So does this mean I'm going to court?

 

[northwichcat]

So does this mean I'm going to court?

'Provisionally authorised for prosecution' is not the same as saying 'we will prosecute you.' It's usually less hassle for the train operator to settle out-of-court.

Out of interest is the letter from TransPennine Express or Northern?

 

[najaB]

So does this mean I'm going to court?

No. Nothing has been decided as yet. You and your parents need to write a letter of apology to TPW. In it, you need to make it clear that you want to take responsibility for your actions, and offer to repay the costs they have incurred so far.

There is every possibility this will be resolved without having to go anywhere near the court.

 

[gatoc]

The letter is from TransPennine Express.

 

[gatoc]

I don't know if it is worth the risk though. People have been saying that if you seem desperate to avoid responsibility then it can make them suspicious. If they were to send a letter stating that I were to go to court, could I then state that I'd pay costs or would that be too late?

 

[najaB]

People have been saying that if you seem desperate to avoid responsibility then it can make them suspicious.

Which is why you state in your letter that you do take responsibility for your actions and aren't trying to put the blame on anybody or anything else.

 

[northwichcat]

I don't know if it is worth the risk though. People have been saying that if you seem desperate to avoid responsibility then it can make them suspicious. If they were to send a letter stating that I were to go to court, could I then state that I'd pay costs or would that be too late?

It'd probably be too late by then. You wouldn't have to attend court in person but if you don't you will almost certainly be found guilty in absence and even if you can go what defence do you have for saying you were 15 when you are 17? If it goes to court the train operator's costs will increase significantly and if you're found guilty then you'd be ordered to pay their costs. It's not unknown for costs of up to £400 be incurred on cases which go to court so if you settle out of court for under £100 it's a no brainer.