Confiscated ticket and How to deal with GTR Prosecutions

[andy.shilton]

Advice if available.

While on Holiday in August my son used my Annual Season ticket without consent and it was confiscated by a Revenue Protection Officer.

It now appears I am unable to get my ticket back.

I rang the GTR Prosecutions office in Kings Cross and was advised to apply for a duplicate - which I did.

I have received a notice back stating that I can't have a duplicate because the Conditions of Carriage state that you can't get a replacement if the original was misused (no reference to where it states this)

I now cannot seem to raise any reply from the GTR office as their phone now does not work and letters are unanswered and no email address is published.

Advice appreciated.

 

[Llanigraham]

I presume you got sight of a set of Terms & Conditions when you bought your season ticket? It will be in those, but like most people they don't actually get read.

Harsh, but I suggest you make your son pay for a new one and perhaps he will then learn not to steal from you.

 

[SWTCommuter]

I have received a notice back stating that I can't have a duplicate because the Conditions of Carriage state that you can't get a replacement if the original was misused (no reference to where it states this)

National Rail Conditions of Carriage

32. Improper use
A Train Company may refuse to sell a new Season Ticket, or renew or replace an existing
Season Ticket if it has reason to suspect that it has, or will be, used for fraudulent or
improper purposes.

http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/static/documents/content/NRCOC.pdf

 

[Camden]

edited

 

[furlong]

You'll need to get through to the prosecutions office again somehow. In some situations they might wish to interview you. If there is no evidence that you were aware your son might do this and you are not at fault then you ought to be able to persuade them to let you have the ticket back or a duplicate, hopefully with an allowance made for any tickets you had to purchase during the period it was in their possession. (I doubt that reporting a "theft" to the police would serve any useful purpose in these sorts of circumstances.)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Are you certain he hasn't dropped you in it by something he said when he was caught? ("My dad said it was OK to use it.")

 

[andy.shilton]

Thanks for comments guys,

He tells me that he specifically said I did not know (which I didn't).

It's difficult to deal with them as I can't communicate with them.

I've emailed Customer Services asking for contact details but no reply (though they say allow 20 working days).

Meanwhile I am forking out close to £150 a week on weekly tickets... knowing that getting that money back is likely to be impossible.

 

[clagmonster]

Just being pedantic here, but was the season ticket the only thing your son took? If so, then as the ticket remains the property of the railway companies concerned (not necessarily just GTR), Andy has not actually been a victim of the theft, GTR and possibly other TOCs have. In this instance, seeing as the incident is clearly being dealt with by GTR, would it actually be appropriate to report the son to the rozzers?

 

[najaB]

In this instance, seeing as the incident is clearly being dealt with by GTR, would it actually be appropriate to report the son to the rozzers?

There was once a very long thread about a similar situation - naturally for RailUK there was a lot of discussion and very little agreement.

I held the opinion that it would be appropriate for the OP to report the theft, since fraudulent use of a railcard renders it liable to seizure. Failure to report such use makes the OP complicit in the misuse.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I believe that in motor insurance, where a . . . . .

. . .

. . . have you asked the TOC if you were to do so whether they would recognise that you weren't at fault and therefore supply you with a duplicate ticket?

I'm not entirely sure if this is intended as 'advice' within the terms of reference of this forum, but just in case it is, I must advise you to disregard it.

Meanwhile I am forking out close to £150 a week on weekly tickets... knowing that getting that money back is likely to be impossible.

You will not receive a refund.

. . . it would be appropriate for the OP to report the theft, . . . .

No. Not among family members, in England or Wales.

 

[island]

GTR has acted correctly and in line with the NRCoC, if a little harshly. It is under no obligation to return or reissue the ticket nor to refund anything.

The OP has not been a victim of theft, as the ticket was the property of the railway.

The cost of replacement tickets is as between father and son.

 

[Greenback]

The cost of replacement tickets is as between father and son.

I agree with this, and with DaveNewcastle's earlier comments.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I agree with this, and with DaveNewcastle's earlier comments.

I'm not entirely clear (correct me if I'm wrong) why appealing to GTR's discretion to return the ticket based on an explanation of what happened would do any harm at all, unless there is significant evidence that the father told the son he could use the season ticket, in which case there is a possible case for a prosecution (of both parties?) and asking might stir them up to follow this route?

The answer is likely to be no, but if you don't ask you don't get.

 

[bb21]

Always worth asking imo. As Neil says, there isn't really anything to lose by asking, although I agree that the chance of seeing it again is small.

 

[Greenback]

Indeed. While the TOC is under no obligation to return it, they may agree to do so if asked. It's no more than a slight possibility in my view.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Indeed. While the TOC is under no obligation to return it, they may agree to do so if asked. It's no more than a slight possibility in my view.

Might it be worth possibly offering to cover their costs in dealing with the incident if it is returned? (Of course, you having to purchase a full new ticket will do this anyway, and some, so one can see why they are reluctant to do so).

 

[Greenback]

If what my TOC used to do is anything to go by, they won't even consider returning the ticket until they are satisfied that their investigation is complete and they have made a decision on whether to proceed further, and if so, how. that can have a bearing on whether they will return the ticket or not. In my experience, it's more likely to be not.

 

[MichaelAMW]

What bothers me about this case, in the light of that all-encompassing condition 32 quoted earlier, is that the TOC is, in effect, without any kind of restriction able to fine the ticket holder an amount that is far more than any prosecution would achieve. The OP has paid for his travel and he is entitled to that or to a refund. If his wayward son pinched a 6 grand ticket after two months of validity then the TOC has "fined" the OP 5 grand. I don't care for a self-righteous quoting of the relevant condition because that outcome for the OP is not reasonable.

They should return the ticket, as long as they believe the OP is innocent, refund the cost of tickets bought meanwhile and then take the son to the cleaners.

 

[najaB]

If his wayward son pinched a 6 grand ticket after two months of validity then the TOC has "fined" the OP 5 grand. I don't care for a self-righteous quoting of the relevant condition because that outcome for the OP is not reasonable.

But the T&C's are relevant - if the TOC had made an error to the detriment of the season ticket holder you would likely be banging on about their responsibilities to the OP. It works both ways.

They should return the ticket, as long as they believe the OP is innocent, refund the cost of tickets bought meanwhile and then take the son to the cleaners.

The OP has no right to get their ticket back, but I agree that it would be reasonable to return the ticket after they have completed their investigations and are satisfied that the OP wasn't complicit in the misuse. Expecting them to refund the cost of additional tickets is a bit much though since the TOC isn't to blame for the misuse of the ticket.

 

[Llanigraham]

What bothers me about this case, in the light of that all-encompassing condition 32 quoted earlier, is that the TOC is, in effect, without any kind of restriction able to fine the ticket holder an amount that is far more than any prosecution would achieve. The OP has paid for his travel and he is entitled to that or to a refund. If his wayward son pinched a 6 grand ticket after two months of validity then the TOC has "fined" the OP 5 grand. I don't care for a self-righteous quoting of the relevant condition because that outcome for the OP is not reasonable.

They should return the ticket, as long as they believe the OP is innocent, refund the cost of tickets bought meanwhile and then take the son to the cleaners.

Why?
Whether you like it or not the Terms & Conditions are there, and the gentleman agreed to abide by them, which means he should have kept his ticket secure. He didn't, therefore he broke those T & C's.
End of story.

 

[34D]

What bothers me about this case, in the light of that all-encompassing condition 32 quoted earlier, is that the TOC is, in effect, without any kind of restriction able to fine the ticket holder an amount that is far more than any prosecution would achieve. The OP has paid for his travel and he is entitled to that or to a refund. If his wayward son pinched a 6 grand ticket after two months of validity then the TOC has "fined" the OP 5 grand. I don't care for a self-righteous quoting of the relevant condition because that outcome for the OP is not reasonable.

They should return the ticket, as long as they believe the OP is innocent, refund the cost of tickets bought meanwhile and then take the son to the cleaners.

I privately agree with you.

If consumer law applied to rail tickets, this would not be allowed, and a chargeback would probably succeed. It may still do so.

 

[MichaelAMW]

But the T&C's are relevant - if the TOC had made an error to the detriment of the season ticket holder you would likely be banging on about their responsibilities to the OP. It works both ways.

Absolutely agree that the T&C are important and that they work both ways. What I do not think it right is the idea that a manifestly excessive effect on someone in the OP's position can be defended merely by reference to the T&C, without considering whether it's reasonable.

The OP has no right to get their ticket back, but I agree that it would be reasonable to return the ticket after they have completed their investigations and are satisfied that the OP wasn't complicit in the misuse. Expecting them to refund the cost of additional tickets is a bit much though since the TOC isn't to blame for the misuse of the ticket.

I probably ultimately agree with you there. The OP isn't to blame for the misuse, of course, if we keep with the assumption he's presented the whole truth, but as you say obviously neither is the TOC.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Why?
Whether you like it or not the Terms & Conditions are there, and the gentleman agreed to abide by them, which means he should have kept his ticket secure. He didn't, therefore he broke those T & C's.
End of story.

End of a story that merely quotes the T&C and doesn't bother to reflect on the effect? Apparently. Your average father would not expect to need to lock away his wallet from his family - I would say that the requirement in condition 24 to keep a ticket safe (not "secure") is met by keeping it at home. The son did wrong, not the OP.

I was just trying to suggest that there are ways of looking at a situation in addition to the one based on the black and white of the T&C. You are obviously free to stick to the narrower view, which is perfectly legitimate.

 

[Elecman]

Could the OP not claim on his house contents insurance for the "loss" of his ticket on the grounds that his son stole the ticket, if he's paying £150 per week that will far outweigh the excess on the policy? The insurance company may well insist on the police becoming involved though.

 

[island]

Could the OP not claim on his house contents insurance for the "loss" of his ticket on the grounds that his son stole the ticket, if he's paying £150 per week that will far outweigh the excess on the policy? The insurance company may well insist on the police becoming involved though.

As I mentioned above, the father has not had his property stolen. The ticket is the property of the railway.

 

[455driver]

Could the OP not claim on his house contents insurance for the "loss" of his ticket on the grounds that his son stole the ticket, if he's paying £150 per week that will far outweigh the excess on the policy? The insurance company may well insist on the police becoming involved though.

So now you want the OP to commit insurance fraud!
The pass has not been stolen, it was misused and then withdrawn.

 

[Elecman]

If the OP didn't give permission for his son to use his ticket then he is innocent and shouldn't be punished. The TOC should prosecute the son using his own admission that he stole the ticket (as that is what he has done) the actual ownership of the ticket being the TOC is irrelevant to the insurance company.

 

[najaB]

...the actual ownership of the ticket being the TOC is irrelevant to the insurance company.

However the insurance company may take a dim view of a theft claim when the insured party has full knowledge of where the 'stolen' item is and how it came to be there.

 

[tony6499]

The ticket was misused and in the terms that you agree to when you buy it then it has now been withdrawn and a duplicate refused.

Best thing is to buy another season and chalk it up to having a wayward son.

 

[34D]

Best thing is to buy another season and chalk it up to having a wayward son.

This is a little harsh.

 

[tony_mac]

If they aren't responding to letters, a letter from a solicitor may prompt them to reply.
If the cost is a problem, perhaps a letter before action will focus them a little.

It's often the case here that things end up with a forensic examination of exact wording of terms and conditions; it usually has little relevance to how the case is actually dealt with.

 

[455driver]

The season ticket was being used fraudulently and was withdrawn in line with the terms and conditions the OP agreed to, why should the TOC return it?