15 year old denied travel due to smoking

[CarterUSM]

IIndeed, in Scotland I'd be half expecting a 15-year-old to have a can of Special Brew in hand too....I digress!

Tennents Super I'll have you know! .....

I don't really take a hard line with half fares myself, if they look borderline then they generally get what they ask for, it's not really worth the hassle generally just for a few quid. Sure, ask for a D.O.B , if they answer correctly, cool. It's no concern of mine if they have cigarettes either, lots of under age folk smoke. Issues with alcohol consumption are probably
best left to BTP.

 

[AlterEgo]

And at what point did the railway agree to provide supervision for this person's children?

It didn't, but it did agree to transport the child from A to B when the child bought that ticket. The Railway also has a legal duty of care to children to ensure that they are kept safe and not stranded. The Railway has been unable to prove that the child broke the contract between the Railway and the child, so it should carry the child from A to B, or at least supply an alternative resolution than just denying travel point-blank.

 

[CarterUSM]

Central Edinburgh is hardly a a dangerous place to be. Certainly no more dangerous for a 15yo than travelling on a train.

It's not like he was put off the train in Briech......



And at what point did the railway agree to provide supervision for this person's children?
The railway is not a public nursery if his parents felt he was not able to look after himself on his own, why was he on his own?

I agree that if he had actually been stranded in an isolated location there would be a case to answer here - but being refused entry to private property in the middle of a busy city is hardly a death sentence. It would be in no means difficult for his parents to get him home safely from Central Edinburgh.

You've hit the nail on the head here, he wasn't put off a train, which would've been wrong, just denied entry, which although might seem morally questionable, happens regularly. Though to be fair, it seems a mistake was made on this occasion.

 

[island]

I thought CitizenCards and cards carrying the PASS hologram were accepted pretty much everywhere.

 

[WelshBluebird]

I thought CitizenCards and cards carrying the PASS hologram were accepted pretty much everywhere.

Of course, it depends on where you are and the place in question.
However many many places will not accept them at all.

When you consider how many places even question passports / driving licences (I have had a few times where a bouncer or a barman has complained that my licence was a provisional or that it is a Welsh licence), it isn't a surprise that they cannot get their heads around other types of ID too.

 

[CarterUSM]

When you consider how many places even question passports / driving licences (I have had a few times where a bouncer or a barman has complained that my licence was a provisional or that it is a Welsh licence), it isn't a surprise that they cannot get their heads around other types of ID too.

Why did they complain it was Welsh?!?

 

[wintonian]

Of course, it depends on where you are and the place in question.
However many many places will not accept them at all.

When you consider how many places even question passports / driving licences (I have had a few times where a bouncer or a barman has complained that my licence was a provisional or that it is a Welsh licence), it isn't a surprise that they cannot get their heads around other types of ID too.

If you try showing them an SIA licence as ID and your almost guaranteed to get "whats that?" in return. :-x

 

[richw]

I thought CitizenCards and cards carrying the PASS hologram were accepted pretty much everywhere.

The citizencard I had when I was 16/17, if you heated it up the numbers scraped off on the D.O.B, and then go to a craft shop and put new D.O.B on, if you were clever enough.
Cornwall Council Licencing people issued a poster to all licensed establishments showing acceptable I.Ds and this had to be displayed at the bar, and also on the entrances.
The citizencards are on the council licencing poster, so acceptable.

 

[WelshBluebird]

Why did they complain it was Welsh?!?

Because some of the text on it is in Welsh.
Even though right next to that it has the english too.
What you tend to find is that bouncers do not like anything that is at all different to the normal. No matter how valid the ID may actually be.

The citizencard I had when I was 16/17, if you heated it up the numbers scraped off on the D.O.B, and then go to a craft shop and put new D.O.B on, if you were clever enough.
Cornwall Council Licencing people issued a poster to all licensed establishments showing acceptable I.Ds and this had to be displayed at the bar, and also on the entrances.
The citizencards are on the council licencing poster, so acceptable.

Of course, what places show on the posters is very different to what they actually accept.
With the railways, you may get a better chance at arguing your case. But certainly when it comes to bars / clubs and stuff, you have no chance arguing with the bouncers.

 

[Stigy]

Seems reasonable to me. I always say to them, "if you're old enough to smoke you're obviously over 16, so what will it be, me seizing the cigs, or dealing with the fare evasion?"

 

[AlterEgo]

Seems reasonable to me. I always say to them, "if you're old enough to smoke you're obviously over 16, so what will it be, me seizing the cigs, or dealing with the fare evasion?"

What gives you the right to confiscate cigarettes?

 

[Stigy]

What gives you the right to confiscate cigarettes?

The Police Reform Act 2002

 

[MikeWh]

What gives you the right to confiscate cigarettes?

The Police Reform Act 2002

For the avoidance of confusion, please can you expand on this a bit. Are you a police officer? If not, what role do you carry out, and what section of the act allows people in that role to confiscate property?

 

[Mojo]

The Police Reform Act 2002 Section 43 established the Railway safety accreditation scheme, allowing after a series of checks and balances the BTP to establish and maintain such a scheme. Depending on the set-up of that scheme Accredited persons are able to exercise a number of powers as set out in Schedule 5, one of which could be:

6(1)An accredited person whose accreditation specifies that this paragraph applies to him shall, within the relevant police area, have—
(a)the power to seize anything that a constable in uniform has a duty to seize under subsection (3) of section 7 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 (c. 12) (seizure of tobacco etc. from young persons);
and(b)the power to dispose of anything that a constable may dispose of under that subsection;and the power to dispose of anything shall be a power to dispose of it in such manner as the relevant employer of the accredited person may direct.

Just another one of our civil liberties sold off by Labour...

 

[Stigy]

For the avoidance of confusion, please can you expand on this a bit. Are you a police officer? If not, what role do you carry out, and what section of the act allows people in that role to confiscate property?

I do apologise. No, not a Police Officer. I'm an Accreditted Person, Accredited to the British Transport Police under the Railway Safety Accreditation Scheme. Accreditation forms part of the Police Reform Act 2002 and is the same legislation that PCSOs use etc. The link below is the relevant section of this Act.

Sec. 6(1)

 

[AlterEgo]

How do you become an "accredited person" then? Frankly I am appalled that staff employed by private enterprises have the right to confiscate cigarettes from a child.

 

[bnm]

Just another one of our civil liberties sold off by Labour...

Who did they sell it to and how much did they get for it? :roll:

 

[Stigy]

How do you become an "accredited person" then? Frankly I am appalled that staff employed by private enterprises have the right to confiscate cigarettes from a child.

You have to be employed in an accredited role by a TOC that uses accredited staff. Why are you appalled? 'children' shouldn't be smoking in the first place!

 

[AlterEgo]

I find it pretty unpalatable that staff employed by private companies are able to legally confiscate items from children. That is the police's job. Not a comment on you, but rather a comment on the government and the fact they are so keen for the police to abdicate their responsibilities.

 

[Bayum]

Quite simply i'm shocked yet amazed that some of you on here think you are within your rights and morals to approve of this behaviour.


If someone was smoking outside the local school up the road - no-one 'assumes' that they're actually overage hiding in a school uniform. If you believe that 'most smokers' or 'all people who smoke' are over 16 and therefore 'should' pay the adult fare, then you're just as bad as the fat cats providing our rail services today.


Absolutely outrageous.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

If someone was smoking outside the local school up the road - no-one 'assumes' that they're actually overage hiding in a school uniform.

Nobody assumes that because it would be ridiculous. It is quite fair to assume that if someone is smoking on a train then they might be over 16.

 

[Stigy]

I find it pretty unpalatable that staff employed by private companies are able to legally confiscate items from children. That is the police's job. Not a comment on you, but rather a comment on the government and the fact they are so keen for the police to abdicate their responsibilities.

Well it's been the case for a fair few years now. Bear in mind, from a Railway point of view, and items seized from these little darlings would be done so on railway property, and usually only if the little darlings had come to the staff's attention due to their anti-social behaviour etc. I think ANY rail staff should be legally allowed to confiscate age restricted items on their company's property. If fags and booze didn't contribute so much to anti-social behaviour, I certainly wouldn't have so much of an issue with it in minors. As far as this thread goes though, as far as I'm concerned, if they're old enough to smoke, then they're old enough to by an adult ticket.

 

[Robinson]

Speaking for myself, I spent a few years arousing the suspicion of clerks and conductors regarding my age, because I looked older than I was (I don't smoke and didn't drink at that age); the first time someone queried my eligibility for a "half" fare was when I was aged 13! As this began to happen more regularly I sometimes carried I.D. with me just in case, although I sometimes felt annoyed about the whole thing...

Now, as a 16-25 railcard holder, I can sort of see it from the TOC's point of view as well, and have to accept that they realise not everyone is as honest (I actually had to travel on a child ticket the day before my 16th birthday, but didn't really appreciate how often they must hear that from fraudsters!) So I can appreciate the difficult situation the staff dealing with this sort of thing must face...

 

[HH]

If you stand by automatic ticket barriers you'll find that they beep when someone uses a child ticket. There must be some very old children out there.

 

[tony_mac]

How do you become an "accredited person" then? Frankly I am appalled that staff employed by private enterprises have the right to confiscate cigarettes from a child.

I am appalled that these private enterprises have the right to bring prosecutions against members of the public, but they can.

As far as I can see, 'park-keepers' have had this duty (not a right!), to confiscate cigarettes from children who are smoking for decades.

If someone was smoking outside the local school up the road - no-one 'assumes' that they're actually overage hiding in a school uniform.

Attending school does not automatically mean you must be under 16, buying a child rail ticket does.
They should either pay the adult fare, if they are over 16, or risk having the cigarettes confiscated if they are not.

If you are under 16, then just don't smoke on railway premises (or near a policeman or park-keeper) and you won't have a problem!

 

[MichaelAMW]

I think ANY rail staff should be legally allowed to confiscate age restricted items on their company's property. If fags and booze didn't contribute so much to anti-social behaviour, I certainly wouldn't have so much of an issue with it in minors. As far as this thread goes though, as far as I'm concerned, if they're old enough to smoke, then they're old enough to by an adult ticket.

I think the thing that bothers me here is the connection being made between smoking and refusal of child fares. I say this as someone who loathes smoking more than words can express. Even if the child were committing an offence, any action and punishment for that is for the police and not for a semi-random member of TOC staff; it is not the case that there exists a penalty of paying adult fares for the act of smoking. I have no problem with confiscation of bits and bobs, ordering off the premises in accordance with the byelaws etc., but to 'define' someone as 16+ on account of something we all know under-16s do is not the right way to act. The two issues are not linked to the extent that you are allowed to engage in a a bit of on-the-spot byelaw amendment, however far you might happen to be concerned.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I think the thing that bothers me here is the connection being made between smoking and refusal of child fares. I say this as someone who loathes smoking more than words can express.

I fully agree with this concern over the connection between smoking and the refusal to honour a child fare (and the rest of your post). That is axactly my own view on the topic here.
But what is more interesting now, is that I reach that same concern by starting from the opposed point of view of yours towards smoking in general (towards which I have a very accommodating and permissive response)!


The two matters are quite unconnected, though I will acknowledge that a Guard or RPI who already has grounds to suspect that a passenger who does not qualify for a child fare but who is travelling on a 'child ticket', might find it helpful to refer to having seen the person smoking as an element of their questionning. But that's not the same situation as the OP.

 

[MichaelAMW]

But what is more interesting now, is that I reach that same concern by starting from the opposed point of view of yours towards smoking in general (towards which I have a very accommodating and permissive response)!

I think I was attempting to stay that even with my depth of intolerance I felt some sympathy for the lad in question!

 

[Urban Gateline]

If you stand by automatic ticket barriers you'll find that they beep when someone uses a child ticket. There must be some very old children out there.

That has to be set up though, quite a few gatelines probably don't bother setting it so people get away with it. It doesn't help much anyway because anyone exiting on a child ticket who obviously isn't a child, will still get away as there is nobody on the other side of the barriers to stop them. I have stopped people coming in with child tickets who are obviously older, I give them the chance to provide ID, otherwise it's "buy an adult ticket or you can't travel"! Ohh how I love blocking child tickets

As for the topic, I too think you cannot link someone smoking to what ticket type they should hold, but I don't see the problem with denying boarding if byelaws are broken.

 

[trc666]

I've lost count of the Friday / Saturday lates where we've had groups of drunk girls in short skirts, heavy makeup etc trying it on with child tickets, it's the same old thing, they're 15 for the train and 18 for the clubs. Last night we stopped a group of them on child travelcards and one of them turned out to be 21 when she pulled her ID out!