Train ticket punishment for 16yo

Stigy

Jeff_Bridges_hair wrote: »

What exactly were they given? a PF in PF areas is either £20 or twice the single fare to the next station, which ever is the greater.

you need to clarify so that stigy and others can give you better advice.

Given that the OP said he was charged the full fare in post 46, I'm assuming now that it was an Unpaid Fare Notice. That being the case, this, in my opinion and in the eyes of the law should they eventually chose to prosecute no doubt, is more reason than ever NOT to ignore this on the off-chance that it'll promptly disappear. The TOC is giving this person the chance to pay JUST the fare that they have avoided in the first place! Magistrates will no doubt, as lay people, see it from this point of view, too!

Not really any need to ask further advice on other forums etc, as it'll mirror all of what's been said here I'm sure, right down to cigarette-gate!

chambta

opinions4u wrote: »

If the lad is on your Christmas pressie buying list, I suggest a railcard as a suitable thought.

If you're referring to me I don't even know his name!

timbo58

Stigy wrote: »

Given that the OP said he was charged the full fare in post 46, I'm assuming now that it was an Unpaid Fare Notice. That being the case, this, in my opinion and in the eyes of the law should they eventually chose to prosecute no doubt, is more reason than ever NOT to ignore this on the off-chance that it'll promptly disappear. The TOC is giving this person the chance to pay JUST the fare that they have avoided in the first place! Magistrates will no doubt, as lay people, see it from this point of view, too!

Not really any need to ask further advice on other forums etc, as it'll mirror all of what's been said here I'm sure, right down to cigarette-gate!

All True and good advice: however IME ignored UPFNs are dealt with by RPSS and just escalate the debt until it's a)enormous and b)the debt is taken to court and turned into a CCJ.
i.e. not prosecuted under rail byelaws as as soon as RPSS are involved it becomes a debt they chase on behalf of the TOC and add their own costs to every so many days it goes unpaid.

POPPYOSCAR

Livingthedream wrote: »

True, but that's MSE for you.



Remember it's the 16 yr old that's accountable and not the parents, the TOC can't demand anything from the parents, if the bank of mum and dad wants to pay that their choice. (for the record I wound pay for my child to keep him out of trouble, then his xbox goes on ebay:D)



The only thing the guard/RPI can demand is name and address, but if he feels that someone is lying to him in order to defraud the train company the guard can get the police to lift said person at the next station.

I say again, why do they send correspondence to 'parent/guardian of' then?

Livingthedream

POPPYOSCAR wrote: »

I say again, why do they send correspondence to 'parent/guardian of' then?

Well because most kids these days will just bin the demand letter, forcing the train company to start a prosecution via the youth court system. Also 9 times out of ten 'the parent/guardian of' will cough up the cash, not because they have to, but because it's the right thing to do as a parent/guardian and the train company relies on this appeasement.

If however, the 1 time the 'parent/guardian of' say it's nothing to do with me and I'm not paying, then the train company have only one option, the youth courts as the parents/guardians ain't accountable.

Which is a lot of hassle and costs money which the train company won't get back from the youth court, so send a letter to the parents/guardians and hope they will pay.

Stigy

timbo58 wrote: »

All True and good advice: however IME ignored UPFNs are dealt with by RPSS and just escalate the debt until it's a)enormous and b)the debt is taken to court and turned into a CCJ.
i.e. not prosecuted under rail byelaws as as soon as RPSS are involved it becomes a debt they chase on behalf of the TOC and add their own costs to every so many days it goes unpaid.

I've never known RPSS, IRCAS or similar prosecute their own, civil debts, using the County Court, instead, they return them to the TOC and the TOC cancels the UFN or PFN and prosecute it in the Magistrates' Court, usually using Byelaw 18(1).

RPSS or IRCAS etc. do chase the unpaid amount for a while, but then simply return it to the TOC for them to deal with. Countless times I have received internal summonses for unpaid UFNs from the TOC I work for (never had to attend for one mind you, probably because the defendant either ignores it or pleads guilty!).

The TOC I work for use IRCAS, but from experience with other TOCs too, I recall most, if not all, working the same way.

thelawnet

The debt is unenforceable as aged under 18. If he was 17 and a half the train company has the option of waiting till he turns 18.

But for a 16 year old this can't be done because there's a six-month time limit.

So I suspect if you ignore it they will do absolutely nothing.

Stigy

thelawnet wrote: »

The debt is unenforceable as aged under 18. If he was 17 and a half the train company has the option of waiting till he turns 18.

But for a 16 year old this can't be done because there's a six-month time limit.

So I suspect if you ignore it they will do absolutely nothing.

Not unenforceable, just unlikely to amount to much, as I believe I said earlier. All I'd be ignoring, unfortunately, is your advice.