Greater Anglia Fining 16 Year Old for Wrong Ticket

[Carla Murrells]

My daughter was 16 in March, she recently travelled one stop on Great Anglia line, her 15 year old friend purchased 2 tickets for them, on arrival at the next stop (they were travelling to hand out CVs to get their first jobs potentially).

The ticket inspector stopped them and proceeded to fine my daughter £54 for having the wrong ticket. She pleaded with them to allow her to pay the additional £2 she should have done, not realising she should have paid the adult fare, but a fine was given anyway.

I appealed on her behalf (she really isn’t worldly wise), fully expecting this to be cancelled as an oversight, but have been told this still stands.

I have re-appealed (she’s never done anything wrong before and had not evaded a fare, just made a mistake), but she was still a secondary school student and does not have a job.

Would this seriously go to court if she doesn’t pay??

 

[Bletchleyite]

If the appeal has been decided (either way) she can't be prosecuted under the usual offences for this. However the TOC could sue in the civil court which could result in a CCJ. I'll let others comment on how likely this is.

 

[30907]

If the appeal has been decided (either way) she can't be prosecuted under the usual offences for this. However the TOC could sue in the civil court which could result in a CCJ. I'll let others comment on how likely this is.

As she's only 16 I think this scenario is extremely unlikely.

Unfortunately there is no valid ground for appeal here - a Penalty Fare is the correct (and minimum) remedy for an adult who travels on a child ticket.

She could (for future reference) buy a 16-17 Saver card which would entitle her to travel at child fares.

 

[ainsworth74]

She could (for future reference) buy a 16-17 Saver card which would entitle her to travel at child fares.

But just to make it explicitly clear, if she follows this good advice she would stilk need to search for an adult ticket but simply add the railcard as a discount which would bring the price down, not just buy a child ticket.

 

[furlong]

If you post a picture of the complete notice (all the text, but cover up names, reference numbers etc.) people can check it for errors. Look at the station where the journey began and take pictures of all the signs warning about penalty fares, showing where they are relative to surroundings as well as the text on each - many stations do not seem to comply with the regulations so that might give you additional grounds for appeal. (Personally, given the level of attention train companies' lazy practices are beginning to receive, I think it's within the bounds of possibility that at some point in the future large numbers of penalty fares might be deemed to have been issued unlawfully.)

It was always envisaged that penalty fares can be issued to children, although if the child doesn't pay up, realistically they don't have much in the way of options for enforcement.

Do purchase the 16/17 card and tell them, as, other than any possible technicalities, that's probably your best chance for an appeal then, that the railway has lost no money overall (if you buy a card next year it lasts only until the birthday, so buying them late the end date stays the same but you get less validity).

 

[Western Gaffer]

If you post a picture of the complete notice (all the text, but cover up names, reference numbers etc.) people can check it for errors.

Probably worth avoiding personally identifiable information in the choice of forum user name and specific location too....

 

[ikcdab]

So there are three stages of appeal. It is normal for the first two to get rejected.
However, the third stage is looked at by an independent body who usually look at these things in a different way.
Whilst technically you have no grounds for appeal, this is a case where you could appeal on "humanitarian" grounds. The board does have a certain amount of discretion in these sorts of cases.
Draft something up and post it here for feedback.

 

[Carla Murrells]

Thank you all. I haven’t been to the station to know how well guidance is posted for purchasing tickets. I thought that the company was independent already (IRCAS) independent revenue collection and support? I’m guessing most parents just pay the fine but I wasn’t with her to check what she was doing, it isn’t technically anything do with me so therefore her fine and without wishing to sound like I’m pleading poverty, my husband decided to leave last year so I am one year in to trying to juggle emotionally and financially being a single parent. I just can’t be paying £50 for something so unreasonable.. I’ll see how the second appeal goes and then try the third time if I need to. I noticed another post from last year, someone said ‘kids, don’t tell porkies’ and I think this is what has got to me most - if my daughter had told a porkie about her age, none of this would have happened but instead she chose to be honest (surely indicating that she definitely was not trying to avoid the proper payment?) and now we’re here ‍♀️.

 

[AlbertBeale]

Did her 15-y-o friend know that your daughter was now 16? If so, then she's as culpable as your daughter for buying her a child's ticket. (Did your daughter not look at her ticket and see that it said it was a child ticket? Turning 16 is a big thing for lots of kids, so she'd hardly have forgotten, surely...)

A penalty fare is not "a fine"; it's a fare which is higher because the rule - about buying the right ticket before you travel - was broken. This is normal for not having the right ticket when the ticket checker gives the benefit of the doubt and accepts that it was probably a mistake and not someone trying to fiddle their ticket. So saying that she obviously wasn't trying to fiddle her fare isn't relevant - that's precisely what's been taken into account. If anyone is thought to be unticketed for dishonest reasons, then they're reported for a potentially more serious response than a penalty fare (which, when paid, is the end of the matter).

You say your daughter isn't worldy wise. But she's clearly wordly wise enough to be traveling around without an older family member on hand, so surely she's worldy wise enough to know that she's not a child and can't pay a child's fare any more. Has she explained how come she thought a child's ticket was appropriate?

Having said all that, then - as others have pointed out - a well-crafted third appeal might get the penalty fare cancelled, despite what she did.

 

[gray1404]

You need to appeal to the third stage stating that the Penalty Fare must be cancelled because it is not been issued in accordance with the regulations. Namely, the grounds for it's issue printed on the notice are incorrect and it is therefore invalid.

 

[Carla Murrells]

Did her 15-y-o friend know that your daughter was now 16? If so, then she's as culpable as your daughter for buying her a child's ticket. (Did your daughter not look at her ticket and see that it said it was a child ticket? Turning 16 is a big thing for lots of kids, so she'd hardly have forgotten, surely...)

A penalty fare is not "a fine"; it's a fare which is higher because the rule - about buying the right ticket before you travel - was broken. This is normal for not having the right ticket when the ticket checker gives the benefit of the doubt and accepts that it was probably a mistake and not someone trying to fiddle their ticket. So saying that she obviously wasn't trying to fiddle her fare isn't relevant - that's precisely what's been taken into account. If anyone is thought to be unticketed for dishonest reasons, then they're reported for a potentially more serious response than a penalty fare (which, when paid, is the end of the matter).

You say your daughter isn't worldy wise. But she's clearly wordly wise enough to be traveling around without an older family member on hand, so surely she's worldy wise enough to know that she's not a child and can't pay a child's fare any more. Has she explained how come she thought a child's ticket was appropriate?

Having said all that, then - as others have pointed out - a well-crafted third appeal might get the penalty fare cancelled, despite what she did.

My daughter didn’t actually ‘see’ the ticket, her friend paid on her phone so they were not in hand. It was just 2 kids going one stop and her friend bought her ticket with a view to her paying the fare back. She just knew she had a ticket but didn’t question the details. I wouldn’t describe travelling one stop on a train worthy of being called worldly wise, there are kids travelling to senior school on the train from age 11, trying to deal with hurdles like this one is slightly more trying I would have thought! If £50 is only a penalty fare not a fine - I just can’t believe that is warranted for a minor. She is at school, doesn’t have a job, how is she supposed to pay for that? I can’t pay it myself. I’m hoping the appeal works in any case or we’ll find out what the next steps are for a 16 year old who can’t pay a penalty fare

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 1 Jul 2024 ==

You need to appeal to the third stage stating that the Penalty Fare must be cancelled because it is not been issued in accordance with the regulations. Namely, the grounds for it's issue printed on the notice are incorrect and it is therefore invalid.

What are the grounds for its issue, I thought it was because she didn’t have a valid adult ticket and she didn’t - it was a child’s ticket?

 

[furlong]

Please post a picture of the rest of the text. We need to see it in full - text on the reverse side too if there is any. Don't assume the company is fully complying with the regulations when you are searching for grounds for appeal!

 

[Carla Murrells]

Please post a picture of the rest of the text. We need to see it in full - text on the reverse side too if there is any. Don't assume the company is fully complying with the regulations when you are searching for grounds for appeal!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 1 Jul 2024 ==

No writing on the back of the ticket.

 

[AlterEgo]

The notice is invalid because it doesn’t describe the grounds on which it was issued. “Mtickets” is not the reason it was issued, and the appeal is bound to succeed on this reason alone.

 

[Carla Murrells]

The notice is invalid because it doesn’t describe the grounds on which it was issued. “Mtickets” is not the reason it was issued, and the appeal is bound to succeed on this reason alone.

Thank you. I don’t know what mtickets means…? I guess thats your point anyway.

 

[AlterEgo]

Thank you. I don’t know what mtickets means…? I guess thats your point anyway.

It relates to a mobile ticket, a nearly defunct ticket medium, which is not the reason the Notice was issued.

 

[Carla Murrells]

It relates to a mobile ticket, a nearly defunct ticket medium, which is not the reason the Notice was issued.

Perfect, thank you kindly

 

[Islineclear3_1]

How many "children" aged 16-17 believe adulthood starts at 18 years given that they are still at school (Years 12/13 in new money)?

 

[30907]

Perfect, thank you kindly

Just to say that you should make this the sole ground of appeal (don't suggest that the staff member should have showed discretion or anything like that) - post a draft and someone who knows the detail will I am sure help.

Regulation 5.2.b of the Penalty Fares Regulations is the relevant one.

 

[Carla Murrells]

How many "children" aged 16-17 believe adulthood starts at 18 years given that they are still at school (Years 12/13 in new money)?

Personally, I don’t think my daughter ‘thought’ at all. I know other children who seem to be much more astute, she

Just to say that you should make this the sole ground of appeal (don't suggest that the staff member should have showed discretion or anything like that) - post a draft and someone who knows the detail will I am sure help.

Regulation 5.2.b of the Penalty Fares Regulations is the relevant one.

Ok thank you. Perhaps I should wait for the result of the second appeal before this.

 

[AlterEgo]

In any case, if the penalty fare appeals all fail (I can’t see why they wouldn’t, if they uphold the law), a train company is not going to sue a minor for non payment of the debt either.

 

[Carla Murrells]

Personally, I don’t think my daughter ‘thought’ at all. I know other children who seem to be much more astute, she

Ok thank you. Perhaps I should wait for the result of the second appeal before this.

Sorry, didn’t finish the initial response! My daughter just seems to be in a world of her own, a bit dreamy and not aware, I’m honestly not being horrible but I just don’t think she’s aware like she needs to be. I suppose she is just starting out, I am trying to make her aware and glad that’s she’s made a move to get out into the wider world, just didn’t expect to have to deal with such a major thing (for a minor in any case) so soon.

 

[AlbertBeale]

How many "children" aged 16-17 believe adulthood starts at 18 years given that they are still at school (Years 12/13 in new money)?

Most 16-year-olds are well aware that it's one of the ages that gives them new rights; but they sometimes choose not to remember that it's also one of the ages which gives them more responsibilities. If someone aged 16 or 17 with a child ticket tries to say they didn't know, they can be asked whether they think they're still just a child. Will many say yes? It doesn't wash. Wrongly buying a child ticket must be one of the easiest ways to fiddle your fare - it's no wonder that railway companies don't show much leniency. (Though in this case, relatively speaking, they did.)

 

[Carla Murrells]

I appreciate all the support and will draft a response if the second appeal is no good.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 1 Jul 2024 ==

How many "children" aged 16-17 believe adulthood starts at 18 years given that they are still at school (Years 12/13 in new money)?

I’ve only just recently learned that you can’t buy a lottery ticket or scratch card until you’re 18 now - that’s changed from 16 too.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Just to say that you should make this the sole ground of appeal

I’m not convinced that this is the best approach. We might be certain that the ground of appeal is perfect - but what if the railway disagrees?

It’s more work for the appellant, but my suggestion would be to say something like ‘my grounds of appeal are <argument A>. Further or alternatively, I say <argument B> (and so on, through all the arguments)’.

Obviously you start with your strongest argument and work your way down, but the message you give is that you have looked thoroughly at the matter and there are lots of problems - so if the railway has any doubt about its position then they would do best to concede.

 

[Snow1964]

How many "children" aged 16-17 believe adulthood starts at 18 years given that they are still at school (Years 12/13 in new money)?

Without going off topic the use of term child, (as in child ticket) tends be someone of school age or under 18 in normal use.

The railway doesn't help by using a non standard definition, and not clearly advertising the ages on the button of its TVMs or app drop-downs.

But I would consider multiple reasons in an appeal, listed starting with MTICKET, further reasons others have mentioned, then at end of list, a lack of warning to a classmate that 2 tickets required age check. However I am in 2 minds on this, and maybe should stick to single reason until a third appeal.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Jul 2024 ==

I’ve only just recently learned that you can’t buy a lottery ticket or scratch card until you’re 18 now - that’s changed from 16 too.

Because the Government changed definition and added two extra school years.
Again the railway just hasn't caught up and amended definition.

 

[gray1404]

You have to wait for the result of the second appeal before you can proceed to the third. You must ensure that you submit your third appeal in time as well so read the response to the second appeal carefully.

What would your other reasons for appeal being? Maybe you could park this until you hear back.

 

[Carla Murrells]

Good Evening All,

The second appeal has not been allowed. Please could you confirm if the following would suffice as a third response:


To whom it may concern,

This Penalty Fare must be cancelled because it has not been issued in accordance with the regulations. Persuant to regulation 5.2b of the Penalty Fares Regulation, the grounds for it's issue ‘MTickets’ is not self explanatory/incorrect and is therefore invalid.

In addition to the above:

According to www.gov.uk from the Youth Justice Board for England and Wales (updated 31/01/2024) the definition of children:

We define a child as anyone who has not yet reached their 18th Birthday. This is in line with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and civil legislation in England and Wales. The fact that a child has reached 16 years of age, is living independently or is in further education, is a member of the armed forces, is in hospital or in custody in the secure estate, does not change their status or entitlements to services or protection.

UNICEF Convention on the Rights of the Child:

Article 40 2(b) Every child alleged as or accused of having infringed the penal law has at least the following guarantees:

(i) To be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law.

Yours faithfully,
Carla Fendt

 

[Haywain]

In addition to the above:

According to www.gov.uk from the Youth Justice Board for England and Wales (updated 31/01/2024) the definition of children:

We define a child as anyone who has not yet reached their 18th Birthday. This is in line with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and civil legislation in England and Wales. The fact that a child has reached 16 years of age, is living independently or is in further education, is a member of the armed forces, is in hospital or in custody in the secure estate, does not change their status or entitlements to services or protection.

UNICEF Convention on the Rights of the Child:

Article 40 2(b) Every child alleged as or accused of having infringed the penal law has at least the following guarantees:

(i) To be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law.

What’s that all about? I can’t see that it has any impact on the issue of a Penalty Fare and whether it was correctly issued.

 

[gray1404]

Keep the first paragraph and cut out the rest. Please upload a copy of the rejection from the second appeal.