Travel Irregularity - Payment Demand

[Dad_Protector]

Hi, I am new to the forum and have joined as I was advised this is the place to get advice from its expert members.

I have received a letter today [not recorded delivery] concerning my teenage child, it states that their details were taken by an RPI for the offence of:

-Entering a train for the purpose of travelling without a ticket entitling travel
-Altering a ticket with intent

The second allegation appears vague and isn't substantiated in any way.

The letter goes on to say that it is not their intention to go to court, but that I must pay £75 within 21 days or face certain death [ok that may be an exaggeration, but the tone is rather nasty].

Can anyone advise on how legally binding this is? The letter was addressed to 'The Parent/Guardian of' and not a specific person. Am I entitled to request evidence that the alleged offence even took place before coughing up?

My concern is that this appears to waive any rights we have in law, the notion that we are innocent until proven guilty and that any details were allegedly taken from a minor, by an adult without an officer of the law being present. What is to say that some other child didn't give false details, or any number of other possibilities.

This smacks of corporate bullying; and as such has got my back up. If what they are saying is true and can be proved, then I would pay. I do feel an arbitrary fine of £75 [there is no explanation on what they base it] is thoroughly unfair. I will always abide by the law, but I expect those that threaten to use it against me to do the same.

Thank you in advance.

 

[bb21]

Is the letter asking you for your child's version of events? How old is he/she?

What is your child's account of the (non-)event?

 

[yorkie]

I suspect the Train Company concerned is FCC. Am I right?

Nowhere near enough information to reply though.

The age (and in particular if they are 18, or will be 18 within 6 months) could be significant, in addition to knowing what actually happened would be useful!

 

[DaveNewcastle]

The reference to 'altering a ticket' suggests that their might have been evidence of a fraudulent use of a carnet ticket or of some other attempt to manipulate one of the crucial fields printed on the ticket.

I agree with others that we'd need some more clarity to advise, but I will answer your question of "is this legally binding" by cautioning that the letter will qualify as adequate notice that an investigation (into potentially Criminal proceedings) is in progress, and also, that any statement made in response will be used as Evidence in that investigation.

 

[High Dyke]

I may have missed the point here... However if the letter states both:

-Entering a train for the purpose of travelling without a ticket entitling travel
-Altering a ticket with intent

Doesn't that contradict itself? Would travelling with a ticket that has 'alledgedly' been altered be considered the same as not actually having a ticket (whether valid or not)?

Hopefully the OP can get the matter resolved correctly.

 

[jon0844]

A modified or faked ticket wouldn't entitle you to travel, so I don't see the contradiction.

 

[Greenback]

I may have missed the point here... However if the letter states both:


Doesn't that contradict itself? Would travelling with a ticket that has 'alledgedly' been altered be considered the same as not actually having a ticket (whether valid or not)?

Hopefully the OP can get the matter resolved correctly.

Trying to amend ot alter a ticket to make it appear valid does not actually make it valid. So yes, it's possible to be guilty of the two offences.

If you don't have a valid ticket, then you don't have a ticket.

 

[reb0118]

The letter was addressed to 'The Parent/Guardian of' and not a specific person.

Your child may not have given your name to the inspector when questioned. In law a parent may be held vicariously liable for the actions of their offspring - depending on the age of said offspring.

Am I entitled to request evidence that the alleged offence even took place before coughing up?

I'm not sure on this one but don't see why not. There will be the inspector's report with a description of the alleged offender and possibly CCTV evidence - NB if your child was the guilty party then querying this may up the anti, so to speak, as the TOC may decide to withdraw their offer not to prosecute. (Unlikely in my experience though)

This smacks of corporate bullying; and as such has got my back up. If what they are saying is true and can be proved, then I would pay. I do feel an arbitrary fine of £75 [there is no explanation on what they base it] is thoroughly unfair. I will always abide by the law, but I expect those that threaten to use it against me to do the same.

Thank you in advance.

Then you should also accept that your offspring must abide by the law too (no allegation intended) and that also the railway has a right to investigate alleged offences against it. The £75 is not a fine in the true sense of the word but an administrative penalty to discharge the matter at hand so it does not proceed to court.

You have the right not to pay and to have your day at court if you feel strongly about the matter.

You have not stated that your child was not the alleged offender but if you are sure that another person gave false details then you should arrange to attend court so your child can make a statutory declaration that they were not the party involved.

 

[En4orc3R]

You can only make a Statutory Declaration if you have been convicted of an offence which you were not aware of, this does not count in this case because there had not been a conviction (and you would have known about the court date).

Ask for more information and a break down of what the £75 is for and is there any chance of further action later.

 

[Dad_Protector]

Thanks for all the replies. To try and cover the questions that have been raised;

-The child in question is 16 [and was at the time of the alleged offence]
-The letter isn't asking for any further information or statement, just money.
- It was FCC

Having spoken to the accused, they are saying that [excuses aside] they got on the train without buying a ticket. When challenged, they panicked and attempted to show an old ticket. They then attempted to purchase a child ticket from the RPI. The RPI challenged them and demanded to see the school books in their bag [this bit really concerns me] and ascertained from this that they were in fact in year 12. The accused says they were never told they were under caution and wouldn't have known what that means anyway. They were made to complete and sign a form; and this and the old ticket were taken by the RPI.

My query isn't about whether my child has committed an offence, but rather the nature of how things were [and are being] handled. I am sure the easiest thing to do would be to shut up and pay the 'fine', but I am not convinced that anything that was done on that day was legal. If my child was in fact illegally searched by an RPI, then I would expect the person in question to made accountable for their actions too.

 

[MrsDavidCaruso]

Did he actually physically search them, touch them, go into their bag themselves? or just demand they show proof that they were entitled to a childs fare IE school books, after all the 'child' (although you could call a 16 year old a young person or young adult) had already attempted to evade their fare by not getting a ticket before they boarded the train and then showing a ticket they knew was not valid.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Dad Protector, I understand your concern and possible anger at any injustice, but I suspect that it's not going to be productive.
The Railways are, despite common misapprehensions, private property, and have the benefit of their own legislation and Byelaws which give Officers of th Railway considerable authority in regulating the use of their property and assets and the conduct of passengers.

Without looking at all the details and deliberately searching for any wrongdoing, I'll hazard a good guess and say that the Inspector was acting within his/her authority.

There's probably bigger injustices worth fighting !

 

[alex595]

Thanks for all the replies. To try and cover the questions that have been raised;

-The child in question is 16 [and was at the time of the alleged offence]
-The letter isn't asking for any further information or statement, just money.
- It was FCC

Having spoken to the accused, they are saying that [excuses aside] they got on the train without buying a ticket. When challenged, they panicked and attempted to show an old ticket. They then attempted to purchase a child ticket from the RPI. The RPI challenged them and demanded to see the school books in their bag [this bit really concerns me] and ascertained from this that they were in fact in year 12. The accused says they were never told they were under caution and wouldn't have known what that means anyway. They were made to complete and sign a form; and this and the old ticket were taken by the RPI.

My query isn't about whether my child has committed an offence, but rather the nature of how things were [and are being] handled. I am sure the easiest thing to do would be to shut up and pay the 'fine', but I am not convinced that anything that was done on that day was legal. If my child was in fact illegally searched by an RPI, then I would expect the person in question to made accountable for their actions too.

Hey,

As im aware, maybe its just my TOC, We are unable to report anyone under the age of 17 years 8months and therefore cant caution them. The only actions we could take would be a penalty fare.

No revenue officer is allowed to search any person, but maybe the officer asked to see school books and the child said yes. If he said no the officer would have to take that answer.

Maybe ths form the child is reffering to is a name and address form. This is simply a piece of paper for the child to give the following details:
Name
Address
Phone number
Date of birth
Age
Occupation
Signature

These detail are needed to so it can be confirmed. Also so they know where to send letters.

The information is my TOC procedues so they may vary or be difficult for FCC.

By the sounds of what you stated ( requesting of money and nothing else) seems that he was given a penalty fare. And the fare has not been paid within the 21 days of then notice being given. I believe it then increases from the penalty fare amount as a result of it being paid which is how I believe its gone to 75.

The above paragraph is my assumption as a result of the information being given.

Sorry if I have missed anything

 

[Dad_Protector]

As anyone with teenagers will hopefully appreciate, getting straight answers from a child [and for the purposes of the law, a 16-year-old is still a child] isn't always easy.

The RPI didn't attempt a physical search, rather asked to see the contents of my child's bag. Being scared and not knowing his rights, my child showed them.

There has been no other representation to pay a penalty fare, either on the day or by letter. The demand for £75 is the first we have heard about it.

And as far as "There's probably bigger injustices worth fighting", you may well be right; but as a father, it's my job to defend my children if they are wronged. Equally as it is to punish them if they do wrong.

I will probably just pay the money on this occasion, but I do have concerns about how the RPI has conducted himself. Whilst my child has done wrong, I don't think anything warrants the massively inflated and unexplained punishment. Given the opportunity I would have paid the penalty fare without question, but as is so often the case in this world companies are able to make arbitrary demands and unless we are prepared to go to court, there isn't any protection for us little folk.

I will chalk this one up to experience, but will not forget how FCC conduct themselves.

Thanks to everyone for your time.

 

[yorkie]

You have every right to be concerned about how FCC conduct themselves, but believe me there are far, far, FAR, worse cases than this involving FCC.

Your child needs to be very careful when travelling on FCC, even a genuine innocent passenger can be at risk of prosecution, but in this case your child's actions were a clear breach of the Regulation of Railways Act. If he/she was to repeat this when aged 18+ they could get a criminal record.