15 year old denied travel due to smoking

[Squaddie]

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!

What action did you take? Was it severe enough to dissuade them from doing it again, or just a slap on the wrist?

 

[trc666]

They were on the concourse side, I just made the over age ones in the group buy adult tickets and funnily enough they actually went and did it without kicking up a fuss.

 

[ian13]

If someone is on railway property with both a child ticket and cigarettes/alcohol:

They are travelling/attempting to travel with an invalid ticket (they are 16 or over), an offence
and/or
They are underage and in possession of a controlled substance (they are under 18), an offence

Regardless, they are breaking the law in some way - why shouldn't action be taken?

 

[AlterEgo]

They are underage and in possession of a controlled substance (they are under 18), an offence

It is not illegal for someone under 18 to possess or even to buy tobacco.

 

[Squaddie]

They were on the concourse side, I just made the over age ones in the group buy adult tickets and funnily enough they actually went and did it without kicking up a fuss.

Well, if the only consequence of being caught trying to defraud the railway is to be made to buy the correct ticket, why shouldn't they comply? They probably get away with it nine times out of ten.

 

[Urban Gateline]

Well, if the only consequence of being caught trying to defraud the railway is to be made to buy the correct ticket, why shouldn't they comply? They probably get away with it nine times out of ten.

I quite agree, but the problem is that without BTP backup, not much will be done. Alot of the time, Gateline staff do not have revenue staff with them, so they are powerless to do anything other than refuse to let the person in.

If someone is exiting, and is caught with a child ticket to which they are not entitled to, it might be lucky for revenue staff (if present) to issue a penalty fare or an MG11 if it's a repeat offender, many revenue staff will not care and just let the person go.

The best satisfaction is when someone with a child ticket, then has to buy an adult ticket in addition, so they will have paid more for the fare than if they had just purchased an adult ticket in the first place. That sometimes teaches people but many will continue to try it on!

 

[trc666]

At the time there were no Revenue Protection staff that was my only option anyway, I refused to let the ones who were 16+ in until they bought adult tickets. If they were on platform side (ie just got off a train trying to exit the barriers) I would have to had just let them go through as that's the policy when no RP staff are available.

 

[Stigy]

If someone is on railway property with both a child ticket and cigarettes/alcohol:

They are travelling/attempting to travel with an invalid ticket (they are 16 or over), an offence
and/or
They are underage and in possession of a controlled substance (they are under 18), an offence

Regardless, they are breaking the law in some way - why shouldn't action be taken?

Which is why I always ask them when they provide a child rate ticket and are smoking/drinking, whether they're travelling illegally or smoking/drinking in public illegally. Either way I'll be dealinbg with some sort of offence. Strangely (or not?) most youths would rather keep there fags and/or booze and be reported for the ticket offence, than lose the fags and/or booze.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I quite agree, but the problem is that without BTP backup, not much will be done. Alot of the time, Gateline staff do not have revenue staff with them, so they are powerless to do anything other than refuse to let the person in.

If someone is exiting, and is caught with a child ticket to which they are not entitled to, it might be lucky for revenue staff (if present) to issue a penalty fare or an MG11 if it's a repeat offender, many revenue staff will not care and just let the person go.

The best satisfaction is when someone with a child ticket, then has to buy an adult ticket in addition, so they will have paid more for the fare than if they had just purchased an adult ticket in the first place. That sometimes teaches people but many will continue to try it on!

It's not that Gateline staff are powerless, it's that the TOC dont train them to be able to report people for offences and thus they assumed they weren't allowed. ANY member of TOC staff or Agent of the railway can report for offences, and no training is required. it's just PFs that only authorised collectors can issue. You only need training to be able to Caution/question people, and even that training is more a day in a classroom.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Well, if the only consequence of being caught trying to defraud the railway is to be made to buy the correct ticket, why shouldn't they comply? They probably get away with it nine times out of ten.

They could still have been reported for the offence under S.5(3).a Regulation of Railways Act 1889, even if they had yet to travel. Granted the closer they are to an actual train the better, but lets fact it, if they have child tickets on them and are going to travel there and then, I fail to see how they'd be able to wriggle out of it! It all boils down to whether the relevant staff are available I guess.

 

[bb21]

Strangely (or not?) most youths would rather keep there fags and/or booze and be reported for the ticket offence, than lose the fags and/or booze.

That's probably because they know there is not much the police can do about them.

 

[Stigy]

That's probably because they know there is not much the police can do about them.

There's still the possibility of prosecution or a penalty for the ticketing offence though, which will equate to a lot more financially than the fags or booze!

 

[bb21]

There's still the possibility of prosecution or a penalty for the ticketing offence though, which will equate to a lot more financially than the fags or booze!

Let me reword this then.

They think that there is not much the police can do about them.

 

[Wolfie]

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?"

Stigy What that SHOULD get you is a session with the BTP then an arrest for theft of the cigarettes! What rights (clue ZERO!) do you have to do this.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Just seen later posts which contain key information not originally provided....

Two problems:
a Such powers are not widely known about to the general public, hopefully you have ID clearly advising what your powers are;
b Unfortunately you should not at all surprised if it all "kicks off" when you try to do this....

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Of course he will have his ID visible. It's a requirement of the SIA.


Sent from my iPhone 4 using Tapatalk

 

[Stigy]

Stigy What that SHOULD get you is a session with the BTP then an arrest for theft of the cigarettes! What rights (clue ZERO!) do you have to do this.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Just seen later posts which contain key information not originally provided....

Two problems:
a Such powers are not widely known about to the general public, hopefully you have ID clearly advising what your powers are;
b Unfortunately you should not at all surprised if it all "kicks off" when you try to do this....

I have visible ID, but it's not a requirement for the ID to contain the powers. I have a card that I show on request, which contains my powers. It is a requirement that I have this card to hand.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Of course he will have his ID visible. It's a requirement of the SIA.

If I was Security it would be a requirement to have my SIA Licence displayed, yes. I'm not, so the SIA doesn't come in to it. It's a requirement under The Police Reform Act 2002. The same act that permits the powers.