Metro Penalty Fare Notice

Coupon-mad

bigturnip wrote: »

Quite, I was talking about how they have acted, not how they should act. The train company have deemed that the child is old enough to take responsibility for the penalty on their own, yet when the penalty was increased they deemed that she wasn't. I was merely questioning all the people defending the train company as to why they think this an acceptable position for the train company to take.

That's a good succinct way of summing the situation up, bigturnip - and I see you are still waiting for a reply.

geordieracer, over to you if you can answer the specific question above please?

Fergie76

If I was the OP, I wouldn't pay and risk taking it to court and see what the courts think. Maybe not fair on the child, but I'm too stubborn to give in.

Hadeon

Hadeon wrote: »

I take it then, that in principle, some contributors to this thread would consider it ok for the police to interview little Johnny or little Sarah for an offence, issue them with an FPN & keep the parents out of the loop?

dizzybuff wrote: »

An offender under the age of 17 and over the age of 10 can be issued with a FPN ( Of which this penalty is not ) FPNS are issued to Offenders who have committed an offence under criminal law and they would be arrested before their parents were contacted.

This Offence is covered by a by law , the same as urinating in public ( However the police would probably contact the parents again)

This was NOT enforced by the police. She was not arrested as it is is unlawful and punishable but not recordable under HOCR.

The revenue protecter obviously thought the child was olfd enough and responsible enough to take the ticket home to their parents .

Yes its not an ideal way , if the OP is so bothered complain, but I seriously doubt the OP will be sucessful. Plus I really do not think the op WOULD have wanted her daughter to be arrested and taken to a police station , popped into a cell untill she could get there, then interviewed under caution and eventually issued the fine by a police officer , all this scaring the hell of of her daughter , wasting valuable police resources and her time equally.

Paying the fine ( even if you disagree with it ) it the best form of resolution . Make the daughter pay ( at the OPs discression , but mine may possibly be down the mines or chimney sweep) for the duration , with a payment plan would be adequate so the daughter can see actually how much work it would take to earn the money , along with a few more luxeries removed from her posession.

What ever the OP decides to do , please make up your mind soon and let us know the outcome as this its now hurting my head .

Diz

You appear to have entirely missed the intended point & message behind my post; the clue is in the phrase 'that in principle'.
I happen to be more than well acquainted with the law governing police practice & procedures relating to their dealings with juveniles/young persons thank-you.

king100

Coupon-mad wrote: »

That's a good succinct way of summing the situation up, bigturnip - and I see you are still waiting for a reply.

geordieracer, over to you if you can answer the specific question above please?

Very Unlikely.

As regards to the speeding issue read

Vehicles speeding along Ffordd Anwyl & Ffordd Elan
vehicles speeding along ffordd Anwyl & ffordd Elan, particularly during school runs and during tea time rush hour.
Update
UPDATES-********** APRIL- Letters were distributed to residents re. speed enforcement. Speed checks were carried out with DCC but no action was required as all vehicles at this time were travelling at the legal speed. Towards the end of April, more speed checks were conduted. 2 vehicles were stopped due to travelling at 35mph- verbal warnings were given to the drivers.

NO FPN

1 vehicle was travelling at 41 mph. This driver failed to stop but enquiries have been made. MAY/JUNE/JULY- Speed checks and footpatrols on Ffordd Anwyl and Ffordd Elan- All vehicles driving carefully. Arrangements have been made to conduct further speed checks with DCC in all hotspot areas. Speeding issue discussed briefly at recent Neighbourhood meeting. Residents are still concerned about this issue. Checks to commence shortly with the calibrated speed gun with a view to issuing tickets to offending drivers. Unfortunately there ahs been a technical problem with the speed gun which we are hoping will be rectified by mid November. As soon as this is completed, action will be taken. PC Spencer and PCSO Fiona Davies have attended on the estate on a number of occasions in order to monitor vehicles using the speed monitoring gun. There has been a technical fault with the Speed enforcement camaera as of late, which has resulted in the unit once again being sent off for repair. It is hoped that this will be returned soon for use by the officers. No speeding issues raised regarding this action plan area at the community meeting on 01/12/09. The intention is to utilise the speed gun in all problem areas of the ward more extensively in the New year. Action plan to remain on pending these actions. Following complaint 1 male spoken to re manner of driving. Police meeting to discuss road traffic safety issues to take place this Friday (8th) January. Update to follow. A Rhyl neighbouhood staff meeting took place on Friday 8th Jan where the issues of Road safety around all wards were discussed. There is to be a re-newed focus on all aspects of Road safety including speeding, seat-belt and mobile phone offences throughout the new year and beyond. location attended 18/02/2010 in company with PCSO 2606 and 2966. One vehicle stopped and issued section 59 notice for anti social driving, in excess of 30mph. Go-Safe van was carrying out speed checks on Dyserth Road 24/02/2010. PCSO 2966 and 2606 carried out speeding checks on Ffordd Anwyl and Dyserth Road 02/03/2010. All vehicles were remaining within the legal limit. 10/03/2010 - Go Safe have been in the South East ward today monitoring the speed of vehicles along Dyserth Road and surrounding areas. Attended FFORDD ANNWYL 30/03/10 between 13:45 and 14:45. One sec 59 issued to driver travelling in excess of 30 mph for anti social driving. Most vehicles travelling between 29 an 32 mph. Roads policing unit visited BRYN CWNIN road today between 13:00 and 14:00 hours, reported majority of vehicles travelling 30 to 32 mph. 2 vehicles dealt with re travelling 38 mph.attended ffordd annwyl 15/04/2010 between 3 amd 3:30 pm. All vehicles travelling 33 mph and below16/04/2010 by 72437 - visited location on 22/04/2010 with marc musgrave safer roads officer DCC. All vehicles noted to be travelling 33 mph and below. Following meeting on 01/06/2010 at Llewelyn School, it has been agreed that this is to be continues as an action plan for the ward. Bridgegate Road, also to be considered as part of the patrols. Foot patrols have continued on the estate with visible patrols a priority. The plan will remain on for the summer months. Attended location 04/07/2010 between 16:00 and 16:30 hours. One vehicle advised and warned in respect of travelling in excess of 30 mph. Throughout August several speed checks undertaken with 2 drivers stopped and warned re driving-1 section 59 issued. Meeting with AM and local residents to discuss dangerous parking on FFordd Elan. Parking letters to be issued to those regularly parking on blind spot on road.

Oh did I read that its 30 +10% and a verbal warning. Its not an urban myth its fact a policy


http://www.pepipoo.com/files/ACPO/ACPO_enforcement_guidelines.htm

geordieracer

Coupon-mad wrote: »

That's a good succinct way of summing the situation up, bigturnip - and I see you are still waiting for a reply.

geordieracer, over to you if you can answer the specific question above please?

They probably still deemed she was old enough to pay the penalty fare on her own but because of the FACT that had not paid the original Penalty Fare then its quite obvious that she had no intention of paying so now they escalate it to her parents.. Though without seeing the letter i am actually surprised it was addressed to her parents. Or maybe just Miss OP. and her parents then opened it? Of course we wont get told that will we.

And Fergie - We take thousands of people each year to court for fare evasion and its very very very rare that the courts do not see it in our favour.


Dizzybuff - The BTP can arrest you for not having a ticket - thats why there are lots of them alongside enforcement officers on the southern region now.

Fergie76

geordieracer wrote: »

They probably still deemed she was old enough to pay the penalty fare on her own but because of the FACT that had not paid the original Penalty Fare then its quite obvious that she had no intention of paying so now they escalate it to her parents.. Though without seeing the letter i am actually surprised it was addressed to her parents. Or maybe just Miss OP. and her parents then opened it? Of course we wont get told that will we.

But as you have been telling us all along, it's not the parents fault it's the daughters, so why write to the parents at all???

geordieracer wrote: »

And Fergie - We take thousands of people each year to court for fare evasion and its very very very rare that the courts do not see it in our favour.

Good, and as I said before, I would let this go to court and the can so do a financial assessment on the childs affairs and then they could pay it back 50p a week from their pocket money, but I don't think they would take a child to court, as the company would look rather silly, just like you are here.

bigturnip

geordieracer wrote: »

They probably still deemed she was old enough to pay the penalty fare on her own but because of the FACT that had not paid the original Penalty Fare then its quite obvious that she had no intention of paying so now they escalate it to her parents.. Though without seeing the letter i am actually surprised it was addressed to her parents.

But if somebody over 18 got a penalty fare you wouldn't write to their parents if they didn't pay the fine, you can't have it both ways, either she's old enough or not, you can't just pick and choose when you feel like it.

geordieracer wrote: »

Or maybe just Miss OP. and her parents then opened it? Of course we wont get told that will we.

You are told that in the first post.

geordieracer wrote: »

And Fergie - We take thousands of people each year to court for fare evasion and its very very very rare that the courts do not see it in our favour.

How many children do you take to court each year?

geordieracer wrote: »

Dizzybuff - The BTP can arrest you for not having a ticket - thats why there are lots of them alongside enforcement officers on the southern region now.

They can, but do they? I actually suspect the reason they are there is because the ticket inspectors get abuse off people without tickets and are given inaccurate information, I highly doubt they are there as a matter of course to arrest fare dodgers.

Freddie_Snowbits

I am fed up with this post so i suggest to OP, raid DD piggy bank to pay the penalty fare.

king100

Freddie_Snowbits wrote: »

I am fed up with this post so i suggest to OP, raid DD piggy bank to pay the penalty fare.

I suggest you jog on then.

Fergie76

Freddie_Snowbits wrote: »

I am fed up with this post so i suggest to OP, raid DD piggy bank to pay the penalty fare.

I missed the bit where they said it was compulsory to read and post in this thread???