14 Year Old School Pupil accused of lying about her age

[DeeGee]

We appear to have lost a lot of trust in recent years. Personally I tend to believe people unless I have reason not to. The police do phone people. Back in 2015 I had to report that some IT equipment has gone missing from work during a move to a new site.

The whereabouts or existence of stolen IT equipment are not subject to the General Data Protection Regulations, and don't have any potential ramifications regarding the safeguarding of a vulnerable person.

Whereas telling someone - identifying themselves on the phone as a random goon in the employ of a private company - where a vulnerable individual can be found is subject to GDPR and could have safeguarding ramifications.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why can't ToC's partner with local schools to either accept school ID's or to issue all pupils with one of the railway proof of age cards when the start in one of the local schools? Seems an easy way to sort the issue for the most part, and means you aren't relying on kids to take the initiative to get an ID the moment they start looking a bit older.

Just get one from a booking office, they can all issue them. If booking offices close there'll need to be a new process for obtaining season ticket photocards, but for now that's how you get one.

It reads to me in the article like she had one. I can't see what else a "Southeastern ID card" would be, and nobody else has come up with an explanation for that.

 

[John Luxton]

>As someone who used to work in a school I'm a bit worried you're safeguarding training wasn't up to scratch!

As chalkface staff we certainly had a lot of safeguarding training in terms of our contact with the children, responsibilities and procedures if a child made a disclosure, appeared with injuries, or was behaving in a manner which suggested anything was amiss.

However, to be honest data protection didn't really feature at all, presumably that was seen as an admin office staff responsibility?

As for trust well, yeah, we are less trusting. Because it turns out phones are a great way of scamming people and scammers gets lots of money out of people every day over the phone. Or worse. Perhaps it's a generational thing but these days you'd be mad to trust someone who rang you out of the blue and started asking for personal information about you or someone else you had data about.

That is rather different - I am pretty good at spotting scammers. Not been caught out yet and I, like most, has had a fair share of phone and email attempts. I basically do check back if I suspect it might be genuine, otherwise I work on the basis that if it is that important they will put it in writing and send it through the post.

Only one such call, which surprisingly did come from a well known high street bank credit card department was genuine.

But I ascertained that by phoning back using a number on a statement rather than following instructions contained in message left on my landline answer phone.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

I was lucky when I was 16, I was caught using a child ticket because I thought "child" meant "anyone under 18". The RPI either was lenient or couldn't be bothered to explain to a dopey 16 year old the definition of "child" in railway bylaw. Always make sure I can hurry past RPIs on stations if I can because I know things like this in the article can happen.

 

[WelshBluebird]

Just get one from a booking office, they can all issue them. If booking offices close there'll need to be a new process for obtaining season ticket photocards, but for now that's how you get one.

My point was more about making it automatic so the kids (or their parents) don't actively have to do anything and so railway staff can make the assumption that they will have proof of age. Especially as in some areas the nearest staffed booking office may be a decent distance away (or staffed at inconvenient times).

 

[zwk500]

Personally I tend to believe people unless I have reason not to. The police do phone people.

If somebody rings you and claims to be from Windows support and that you urgently need a security upgrade what would you do?

 

[Haywain]

I can't see what else a "Southeastern ID card" would be, and nobody else has come up with an explanation for that.

Could be a child smartcard. Child rate tickets cannot be loaded to a standard smartcard, that card has to be loaded with the child discount. The process for issuing such smartcards varies, but should always involve seeing proof of age so the the expiry of the entitlement is on the card.

 

[John Luxton]

If somebody rings you and claims to be from Windows support and that you urgently need a security upgrade what would you do?

Hang up as I have already done several times. I know when to sppt a scam. Besides my computer is regularly updated and has security installed.

 

[Tetchytyke]

There are always two sides to any story, but I’ve seen it too often in Northern-land where RPIs will throw their weight around when it’s a young woman or a foreign tourist and strangely enough won’t when it’s a big bloke with tattoos.

If half of what was reported is true then those RPIs should be getting a P45. But SouthEastern’s response was pathetic and so nothing will change. It was SouthEastern RPIs who were beating up a black schoolboy not so long ago, clearly they have no control and that starts with management.

But the whole railway industry seems to be going this way, huge penalties for minor transgressions but when the industry gets it wrong you get tumbleweed.

 

[Dave W]

Hang up as I have already done several times. I know when to sppt a scam. Besides my computer is regularly updated and has security installed.

So you recognise when something sounds dodgy and decline to engage with it.

Just like the school receptionist.

 

[Energy]

a 21yo who looks younger may need to provide ID before being allowed to buy cigarettes or alcohol.

Check 25, if you look 25 or younger they can ask for ID. There isn't a requirement to have age ID on the railway so you shouldn't expect a passenger to have sufficient ID to prove their age.

To the layman, guards and RPI's are essentially the same thing.

RPIs tend to get commission while guards usually don't.

Well I'm sorry - I usually have much sympathy for RPIs and other staff in dealing with fare-dodging scrotes - but if you're going to engage a child in something like this then your familiarity absolutely should be watertight. Yes there's a whole school year they could be 16 in school uniform and yes some sixth forms are uniformed (although it's rare, most ask for "business" style dress these days).

But let's take a step back from all the "could be, maybes" here. It surely has to be rock solid ground to accuse someone in school uniform claiming to be 14 of being over 16.

Fully agreed.

So the chain of events is now, our receptionist has received a phone call from someone purporting to be an RPI on a train wanting to verify the age of a pupil. The receptionist is now expected to separately contact the organisation which the RPI claims to work for to confirm that the RPI works there and is carrying out their duties. Then phone the RPI back to confirm the age of the child? This is getting quite lengthy and I'm fairly sure most people wouldn't be willing to do that to be quite honest and nor would I blame them!

All of this to check if one passenger is just over the line.

Most have 16-17 railcards anyway, the £30 a year for 50% of is more attractive to most than potentially being challenged.

 

[43066]

Check 25, if you look 25 or younger they can ask for ID.

There’s no law against anyone asking anybody else for ID at anytime. What does that have to do with the discussion?

There isn't a requirement to have age ID on the railway so you shouldn't expect a passenger to have sufficient ID to prove their age.

There isn’t a blanket requirement to carry ID anywhere. But you might need it if you want to access certain services, and in particular you might need it if you’re close to an important age threshold and look older or younger than your years. Or should RPIs just accept middle aged adults brandishing child tickets at them and saying “sorry I don’t have any ID on me”.

Perhaps the solution is simply to remove child fares entirely.

 

[Essan]

The motivation behind the parent's decision to go to the papers.... Well.

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.

 

[John Luxton]

So you recognise when something sounds dodgy and decline to engage with it.

Just like the school receptionist.

To be fair there are more financial scammers about than there are railway RPIs making enquiries.

Just being asked if someone is old enough to benefit from a concessionary fair is hardly in the same league is it. It is a simple yes / no answer with no personal info being divulged.

 

[43066]

I used to carry my birth certificate, though obviously that lacks a photo.

As did I, or at least a photocopy thereof.

Sadly I don’t get asked to prove my age much these days .

 

[zwk500]

To be fair there are more financial scammers about than there are railway RPIs making enquiries.

Just being asked if someone is old enough to benefit from a concessionary fair is hardly in the same league is it. It is a simple yes / no answer with no personal info being divulged.

Apart from confirming a person's name, age, and school they attend?

 

[John Luxton]

Apart from confirming a person's name, age, and school they attend?

The pupil had already divulged their name and school from their uniform and school ID badge and probably also her age, even though they didn't believe her.

 

[zwk500]

The pupil had already divulged their name and school from their uniform and school ID badge and probably also her age, even though they didn't believe her.

But the whole point is they didn't have confirmation of the school or age, because they didn't believe her. Presumably they accepted her name. And the person on the other end of the phone has no way of knowing what the caller already knows or suspects.

It's still information that shouldn't be divulged without permission to just anybody ringing up and claiming to have a need to verify the information.

 

[Energy]

There’s no law against anyone asking anybody else for ID at anytime. What does that have to do with the discussion?

There isn't a law against asking for ID but if you are under 25 and wanting to buy alcohol or tobacco you can expect to need ID, a 14 year old child wearing school uniform and with their school id shouldn't be expected to need ID. I didn't bother until I could get my provisional...

Or should RPIs just accept middle aged adults brandishing child tickets at them and saying “sorry I don’t have any ID on me”.

There's a difference between and obviously middle aged adult and a child in school uniform.

Perhaps the solution is simply to remove child fares entirely.

Or bump it up to 18? Most around 17 years old will already carry a provisional drivers licence to buy energy drinks.

The pupil had already divulged their name and school from their uniform and school ID badge and probably also her age, even though they didn't believe her.

How does the school know the person on the other end is a rail inspector and not a random person phoning round the local schools?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Or bump it up to 18? Most around 17 years old will already carry a provisional drivers licence to buy energy drinks.

Or once you start looking like an adult, carry some appropriate ID e.g. a railway child photocard which is free. Perhaps these should be promoted better.

 

[Energy]

Or once you start looking like an adult, carry some appropriate ID e.g. a railway child photocard which is free. Perhaps these should be promoted better.

I wasn't aware that they existed till this thread . Maybe child tickets till 18 but expectation to bring ID (and railway child photocards should remain free) if 16 or over?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I wasn't aware that they existed till this thread . Maybe child tickets till 18 but expectation to bring ID (and railway child photocards should remain free) if 16 or over?

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 few 25 year olds 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.

 

[ainsworth74]

The pupil had already divulged their name and school from their uniform and school ID badge and probably also her age, even though they didn't believe her.

But you're sat in reception miles away. You have no-way of knowing that the pupil they're asking about is actually there or that they're in uniform.

 

[AdamWW]

My point was more about making it automatic so the kids (or their parents) don't actively have to do anything and so railway staff can make the assumption that they will have proof of age. Especially as in some areas the nearest staffed booking office may be a decent distance away (or staffed at inconvenient times).

Or once you start looking like an adult, carry some appropriate ID e.g. a railway child photocard which is free. Perhaps these should be promoted better.

In my experience the railway works largely on trust for this and perhaps asking for date of birth as a check.

I assume child photocards aren't promoted because in general they aren't required.

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 few 25 year olds 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.

Some bus companies have a rule that you need child ID above a certain age and they recommend it if you look like you might be above that age.

The railway doesn't historically seem to have gone down that route.

 

[yorkie]

If anyone would like to propose changes to child fares, photocard or railcard/saver schemes, please use the Speculative Discussion section, thanks

There is already a thread to discuss whether or not child rate fares could discontinued, in favour of Railcard discounts

 

[Energy]

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 few 25 year olds 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.

Fair enough.

 

[Wolfie]

There are always two sides to any story, but I’ve seen it too often in Northern-land where RPIs will throw their weight around when it’s a young woman or a foreign tourist and strangely enough won’t when it’s a big bloke with tattoos.

If half of what was reported is true then those RPIs should be getting a P45. But SouthEastern’s response was pathetic and so nothing will change. It was SouthEastern RPIs who were beating up a black schoolboy not so long ago, clearly they have no control and that starts with management.

But the whole railway industry seems to be going this way, huge penalties for minor transgressions but when the industry gets it wrong you get tumbleweed.

Re your last para the only solution that will change things is litigation every damned time...

As did I, or at least a photocopy thereof.

Sadly I don’t get asked to prove my age much these days .

Re your last sentence, indeed my ego would be deeply flattered was someone to chose to card me lol...

Or once you start looking like an adult, carry some appropriate ID e.g. a railway child photocard which is free. Perhaps these should be promoted better.

Except, of course, it appears that she was but the RPI (I removed all pejorative descriptors but...) chose to disbelieve it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Except, of course, it appears that she was but the RPI (I removed all pejorative descriptors but...) chose to disbelieve it.

If that is the case, and added to the search of her personal mobile device, the RPI should probably be summarily dismissed for gross misconduct.

 

[Energy]

Except, of course, it appears that she was but the RPI (I removed all pejorative descriptors but...) chose to disbelieve it.

Article says she had school ID which said she was in year 9 and a SouthEastern id card.

 

[Dave W]

"Two sides to the story" and "facts" aside a minute, let's take the story at face value - we have no reason not to bar the publication's track record. What troubles me about this is the staff's thought process. Again I reiterate I very often support the position of the railway and revenue protection staff, but I have two bones of contention:

1. What's the thinking behind walking up to a schoolgirl in uniform, asking for a ticket, being produced a valid one and - with no justification other than a hunch - accusing her of being 2 years older and then when she's re-asserted she's 14, telling her they don't believe her and going down the route of fining her? I am assuming - although don't know - that staff are trained that school children aren't to be treated the same as your average common garden fare dodger. Where is the common sense, the discretion and the judgement?

2. Perhaps more controversially... it seems to me that even if this girl was 16, the solution is not slapping her with a 105 quid fine. She's still a schoolgirl, which they know by way of her being in uniform. Would some form of education not be preferable?

As I said before - for these lines of thinking to be valid, I would expect a member of staff to have an absolutely rock solid case. Clearly they didn't. Monumental misjudgement at best.