14 Year Old School Pupil accused of lying about her age

[Krokodil]

The zip card schemes cover all National Rail operators in London, as well as LU and DLR. Not forgetting bus travel as well.

I know that, but TfL is a devolved body, beyond the DfT straitjacket. Quite different to trying to persuade Whitehall to implement things nationwide.

 

[Bluejays]

Admittedly I'm a guard not an rpi, but when ticket checking (as In most life situations) you have to pick your battles.

Wondering what was going through their heads when they decided to pursue this.

 

[Nym]

Wondering what was going through their heads when they decided to pursue this.

Soft target.

 

[AlterEgo]

Soft target.

Indeed. See also the large number of non-UK nationals who come on this forum when problems too.

 

[Bluejays]

Soft target.

Could be, but not sure I agree entirely with that. Surely anyone with even a modicum of sense would realise the potential implications of going after such 'soft targets'.

Indeed. See also the large number of non-UK nationals who come on this forum when problems too.

Very off topic now. But surely this would only be true if the majority of foreign nationals on the forum were involved in spurious prosecutions. I can't think of that many cases on this forum involving foreign nationals that seemed grossly unfair. I think a lot more factors would need to be looked at and considered before making the statement that you have.

 

[richw]

Very off topic now. But surely this would only be true if the majority of foreign nationals on the forum were involved in spurious prosecutions. I can't think of that many cases on this forum involving foreign nationals that seemed grossly unfair. I think a lot more factors would need to be looked at and considered before making the statement that you have.

Most have done wrong, but may not have understood the rules due to language difficulties etc. discretion necessary

Wondering what was going through their heads when they decided to pursue this.

Power trips to bully a youngster

 

[AlterEgo]

Very off topic now. But surely this would only be true if the majority of foreign nationals on the forum were involved in spurious prosecutions. I can't think of that many cases on this forum involving foreign nationals that seemed grossly unfair. I think a lot more factors would need to be looked at and considered before making the statement that you have.

The point is, there is an inherent bias towards people who are less likely to know their way around the system.

Every day I look at this forum and think “wouldn’t happen to me”. And I don’t claim to have been faultless when it comes to ticketed travel.

 

[Bluejays]

The point is, there is an inherent bias towards people who are less likely to know their way around the system.

Every day I look at this forum and think “wouldn’t happen to me”. And I don’t claim to have been faultless when it comes to ticketed travel.

There's always going to be an element of luck in who gets caught. There are also different motivations for why people may or may not choose to come to the forum for advice. Still think your initial call was a big one to make considering the evidence available

 

[AlterEgo]

There's always going to be an element of luck in who gets caught. There are also different motivations for why people may or may not choose to come to the forum for advice. Still think your initial call was a big one to make considering the evidence available

Not at all: go and have a look at every thread, see how many people are “here on a visa”, see how many clearly have English as a second language and then figure out what a small sliver of the population that is.

You would have a much more difficult job trying to convince anyone any sort of bias, conscious or otherwise, doesn’t exist.

 

[robbeech]

Nothing more than a typical railway (or third party acting on behalf of the railway) power trip.

You could ask their employer to ensure they receive more training for situations like this, and you can have stern words with their employer for allowing this to happen but it won’t make a blind bit of difference. The railway could have got away with a nice little earner, the staff may have (official or unofficial) targets they have to make so there’s no incentive to provide costly training to staff if the result is almost certainly a reduction in revenue.

Whilst it could be argued it’s unfair on staff if they have not been trained adequately there must be an argument for dismissal and allowing them to take it up with their union rep. That would surely provide a more reliable way to ensure adequate training it given moving forwards.

 

[Bluejays]

Not at all: go and have a look at every thread, see how many people are “here on a visa”, see how many clearly have English as a second language and then figure out what a small sliver of the population that is.

You would have a much more difficult job trying to convince anyone any sort of bias, conscious or otherwise, doesn’t exist.

Which may be related to the fact that many on a visa have the additional worry of losing their visa, so are therefore more interested in getting advice than people who don't have the additional stress of potential visa issues hanging over them. I think it's highly unlikely we are ever going to agree on this (hardly unusual for the disputes section). But I know from first hand experience of checking tickets, that myself and most others tend to offer more discretion if it seems people don't really understand or are obviously tourists etc. So I'd argue that a lot of the time foreign nationals actually get more discretion

 

[AdamWW]

Which may be related to the fact that many on a visa have the additional worry of losing their visa, so are therefore more interested in getting advice than people who don't have the additional stress of potential visa issues hanging over them.

We are also looking at a self-selected sample and it may also be that such people often have less opportunity to get advice from friends in the UK than British nationals do and therefore going to a web forum for help is more likely.

 

[infobleep]

It's quite likely her mother posted a rant (that may not have been entirely accurate) on social media, and a "journalist" saw it and decided to make it into a story.

They do this quite a lot these days.

Meanwhile, the only facts are that the girl was under 16 but wasn't believed and therefore issued with a fine - which was subsequently cancelled. Everything else (including what she was wearing*) is unverified.

* if she had been bunking off school and wasn't in uniform, would she have admitted that to her mother? For example. Not saying that was the case, but we don't even know if the mother has been given the true story of events.

There is also the statement from SouthEastern unless you are saying the Daily Fail made it up.

If it was taken out of context then SouthEastern have a simple solution to this. Put their full statement on their Web Site under press statements/releases. I'd they don't want to be that transparent, then I'd think they have something to hide.

Problem is that one 18 year old looks like a 14 year old and another 14 year old looks like an 18 year old. Children mature at very different rates. That's why we have "Challenge 25", because very f25-year-oldslds genuinely look like kids.

The only way to be 100% is to say "adult fare unless you have a child fare card", which TfL is getting very close to these days.

A friend, similar age to myself, while wearing a baseball cap, got asked for their age when they were 40! They look younger than me and I don't look my age either. I got asked for ID in my late 20s and early 30s. I had to go away and get some ID as I didn't have any on me at the time. I looked over 18 but under 21 was their view.

I also got asked when in fancy dress when even older but fancy dress might change things.

So there are exceptions to everything.

Back to this case, it feels wrong and they certainly shouldn't ring the school.

I hope the mum goes through the right channels to follow this up.

 

[Nym]

Could be, but not sure I agree entirely with that. Surely anyone with even a modicum of sense would realise the potential implications of going after such 'soft targets'.

Seems you don't tend to deal much with the types that become plastic coppers to lord authority over others.

Of course there are implications, but they either don't consider them or simply don't care, usually because their employer simply doesn't care either.

 

[RogerOut]

But how exactly is a 14 year old supposed to prove their age? She’s obviously a child. She doesn’t have photo ID and her parents probably wouldn’t want her to carry her passport around, even if she had one.
Shame on them.

 

[Parham Wood]

What puzzles me is that she apparently had her school ID on her therefore the situation could have been sorted quite quickly by phoning the school. I know from my own days as a teacher most schools have staff on premises until 17:30 / 18:00 even if the children are heading home at 15:30.

When I was at school myself 60s into the 70s quite a few pupils used to commute using bus and / or train.

On the very rare occasion if there were any incidents on public transport they would get called in either by the head master or their house master and dealt with via the school disciplinary procedure.

I don't think the school should confirm a pupil's age. This is personal information and is confidential even if they say under 14.

 

[richw]

I don't think the school should confirm a pupil's age. This is personal information and is confidential even if they say under 14.

It’s also a safeguarding fail. Maybe an absent parent banned from being near the child for whatever reason trying to find their child’s whereabouts?

To add to another previous comment, there is no way my teenage daughter is carrying her passport about. She’s got an oyster 11-15 which needed me to show her passport to acquire so hopefully other rail bodies would recognise it.

 

[ianBR]

Let’s hope the parents do go to the police… and ideally sue Southeastern for the distress caused and illegal access of the phone.

Every time I see RPI’s in action they seem to delight in throwing the book at easy cases of children, tourists or middle class professionals whilst allowing those (typically blokes) that argue back or refuse to engage off scot free.

 

[Tetchytyke]

But I know from first hand experience of checking tickets, that myself and most others tend to offer more discretion if it seems people don't really understand or are obviously tourists etc.

I think guards/TEs are generally sensible, for all the reasons you mention. Although not all are. I can name a couple of examples from when I used to use EC/VTEC/LNER regularly from London to Newcastle who appeared to revel in bolstering their commission by picking on softer targets.

My experience is that there is a different attitude when it comes to RPIs. Certainly in Northern-land I see RPIs going after “softer” targets- young women, foreign students, etc- in a way they really don’t when it’s a 6’3 bloke with tattooed hands. And it was similar when I used to use London Midland.

Getting slightly more on topic, the comments from SouthEastern are the most troubling thing in all of this. Shows the attitude of the whole company. If management are like that, it’s no wonder you get incidents like this (and the schoolboy getting choke-held) as effectively it’s being endorsed.

 

[PeterC]

But how exactly is a 14 year old supposed to prove their age? She’s obviously a child. She doesn’t have photo ID and her parents probably wouldn’t want her to carry her passport around, even if she had one.
Shame on them.

From commentary here it appears that the girl did have ID issued by the school which indicated which year group she was in. The 16th birthday falls in year 11, she was in year 9 (third form in old money)

 

[island]

I would not expect a member of railway staff to know that year X implies age Y-Z; for example, they may not have children, or their children may be grown up and have gone through the system under the old form names, or they may be from abroad where the system is different.

 

[zwk500]

I would not expect a member of railway staff to know that year X implies age Y-Z; for example, they may not have children, or their children may be grown up and have gone through the system under the old form names, or they may be from abroad where the system is different.

I agree (I went through school not that long ago and couldnt tell you what the numerical grades mean), but that is something that training could quite easily address. Barring a few edge cases of children stepping up or down a year, you have to be in Year 11 to have a chance of being 16, and therefore it should be relatively straightforward to brief staff that a school ID for year 9 is valid proof of child rate.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I would not expect a member of railway staff to know that year X implies age Y-Z; for example, they may not have children, or their children may be grown up and have gone through the system under the old form names, or they may be from abroad where the system is different.

If they don't know that, and haven't retained information that they should have been told, they shouldn't be working in a role that gives them the power to issue penalty fares and the like. That would be like employing a checkout operator and not training them adequately on the law regarding alcohol sales, or how to detect counterfeit banknotes.

Though as myself and others have said, in order to be liable to pay an "adult" fare you should have to be, well, an adult. It was really confusing in my youth, that on buses and trains within the PTE area full-fare started at 14(!) but on cross-boundary trains it started at 16. The PTE issued passes (with a photo) that entitled those aged 14-16 (and up to 18 if in full-time further education which wasn't compulsory at the time) to continue to pay half-fare, but again this was only valid within the PTE area.

 

[island]

If they don't know that, and haven't retained information that they should have been told, they shouldn't be working in a role that gives them the power to issue penalty fares and the like. That would be like employing a checkout operator and not training them adequately on the law regarding alcohol sales, or how to detect counterfeit banknotes.

I completely disagree. These are totally different comparisons.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I completely disagree. These are totally different comparisons.

You're entitled to. I agree it isn't a perfect comparison, but it's up to an employer to ensure that their employees know what they can and cannot do as per their role (and what their responsibilities are). It’s up to the employee themselves to ensure they learn the parameters in which they can operate (and the implications of not doing so), and to act in accordance with them.

 

[zwk500]

I completely disagree. These are totally different comparisons.

Counterfeit banknotes maybe slightly different, but there's nothing different about training an RPI to recognise various proofs of being under 16 and training a cashier to recognise various proofs of being over 18.

'School years' would be 1 slide on the training course. It would not take very long to explain.

 

[Krokodil]

I would not expect a member of railway staff to know that year X implies age Y-Z; for example, they may not have children, or their children may be grown up and have gone through the system under the old form names, or they may be from abroad where the system is different.

I would expect a member of railway staff to err on the side of caution and assume that someone wearing a school uniform is probably entitled to the child's ticket they have in their possession, unless they have very good grounds to believe otherwise.

 

[Western Sunset]

Having worked in schools, just a few thoughts if I may. Bear in mind that safeguarding is a real "biggie" in a school and Ofsted will (and do) downgrade the school on just that aspect, even if everything else is considered excellent.

The "phone the school" thing is thus a bit of a red herring. Office staff wouldn't divulge info about individual children to a third party. They've probably gone home after 4pm anyway, and teachers wouldn't necessarily be able (or inclined) to answer (or hear) the 'phone ringing. There would be procedures for parents/carers to contact a school, but usually, it was us ringing them if something was amiss.

We used to get a visit from the railway once a year about trespass dangers, playing "chicken", etc. This seems to have fallen a bit by the wayside with all the separate TOCs around nowadays, rather than one central body. We also used to take one year group to a place where they taught the children about dangers on the road and railway - I remember they had a Pendolino cab there. But funding (or the lack of it) reduced all that. Maybe GBR will be more proactive.

Is safeguarding a part of training for guards/RPIs I wonder? Does part of the course include how to interact with children? Doesn't sound like it's sufficient or effective if it even does take place.

As many have mentioned, the response from SouthEastern was dire, let alone the attitude and behaviour of the RPIs. Something has to change.

 

[richw]

Is safeguarding a part of training for guards/RPIs I wonder? Does part of the course include how to interact with children? Doesn't sound like it's sufficient or effective if it even does take place.

It’s got to be part of training. Whilst ‘on the buses’ I’ve worked for both First Group and Stagecoach and both have done half a day during induction programs specifically about children and safeguarding them.
I’d be fairly certain the rail operators would do similar during induction.

 

[Cloud Strife]

Indeed. See also the large number of non-UK nationals who come on this forum when problems too.

Weirdly, as a dual citizen, I have the impression that I'm anything but a soft target. I don't have a UK address, my ID card identifies me as Polish, and I don't even remember my UK National Insurance number. Of course, being born and brought up in the UK means I don't have any problems with the language.

Is safeguarding a part of training for guards/RPIs I wonder? Does part of the course include how to interact with children? Doesn't sound like it's sufficient or effective if it even does take place.

They certainly should be trained. In this specific case, they need to be given the boot for behaving like this.

With regard to the points a few have made about how students in year 11 can be over sixteen, perhaps the issue there is that the cut-off for child fares is an age rather than education status.

The Polish system is... a bit ridiculous, but works like this:

All school children have an ID card (used to be a bit of paper with a photo and stamps, now they're moving towards plastic cards) which confirms that they're entitled to school discounts, up until the age of 24 and as long as they remain in education. High school kids here frequently don't finish school until they're 19-20, so this is proof of them being entitled to discounts. They're also increasingly available on a mobile app that citizens can have.

Under the age of 7 (compulsory age of school), you have to carry some kind of document proving their age: a national ID card (which is free), a birth certificate or something else. There are plenty of cases of idiotic conductors/guards on trains demanding ID from small children, so it's just as bad here.