Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • In their draft application to the court they state that their Letter of Claim listed the proper three invoices.  Is this true, or are they lying?   As for replying to them, hang fire for the moment, see what people who have dealt with this sort of thing before have to say, there may be a way to oppose their application or at least make them pay a hefty sum to the court for granting it.
    • but the other debts are part of this big picture and its eventual solution a rough idea will help.   if if if they ever get another powerless repo/dca involved, they will tell you well in advance.   help us please
    • to do what they are powerless...   you like 10'00'000 of other s jump because a dca says this or that a DCA is not a bailiff and has zero legal powers on any debt no matter what its type.   another one of your issues is following stupid freeman of the land twaddle. very dangerous.don't   moorcroft dont by debts they only act for clients.   as long as you don't run from debt and insure the debt owners or 'the client' has from you a letter which states your correct and current address or you did so to the Original creditor before any sale or your haven't moved since taking 'the credit' out you are safe from backdoor CCJ's to an old address.   sit on your hands and see if the owner of the debt want to issue a letter of claim. if they do  you return here   A CCJ - which is the only tool they have - because just like us joe public, its the only thing we can legally do if we claim someone owes us money - they have no more powers that you or me
    • That is why I (specifically) said "the lender".
    • eeeh i see ... I just really need a little help, that's why I am here. Being funny does not mean that I am a troll or something and English is not my native language. I just don`t know what to do next, that`s all
  • Our picks

    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

unter 18 Lost ticket - return ticket confiscated


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3152 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

My 16 yr old son was travelling between Hertford North and Stevenage. He bought a return ticket using his 16-25 railcard which cost £4.20.

When he got to Stevenage he couldn't find his outward ticket, although he did have it to get through the ticket barrier at Hertford North.

 

The ticket inspector at Stevenage said that the return part of the ticket wasn't enough proof that he had bought the ticket and that he could have given the outward part to someone else. He was with his girlfriend who had both parts of her ticket.

 

He was fined £20 although he didn't have the money on him, but they insisted on taking £6.20 the price of a normal single right there and then using his connect card, his account had no money in it that day but they said it wasn't a live system and it would be taken the next day. The price with a 16-25 card is £4.10 single and £4.20 return.

 

Then they took the return ticket, which meant that he had no way of returning home as he did not have the money to buy another single ticket to get home.

 

They also didn't bother to ascertain his age and did not tick the under 18 box on the penalty notice nor include details of parents etc

I have appealed but not sure where we stand.

Edited by christywhisty
spelling
Link to post
Share on other sites

The fare for a person over 16 years, who cannot show a valid ticket at the time of travel is the adult single fare. If a person has already travelled without, or is on the railway and cannot produce a valid ticket when asked, no discount will be given to a railcard holder as per the T&Cs accepted at the time of purchase

 

Whilst I understand that to some people it may seem a bit harsh in some respects, an inspector does not have to accept the 'wrong half' of a two-part return ticket as evidence that a valid ticket is held for the very reason given.

 

Having said that, you should appeal and your son needs to explain exactly what happened.

 

How did your son pay for his original ticket?

Link to post
Share on other sites

He paid by cash

 

I am also concerned that they took the return part of the ticket off him, so that he would have had to pay again for that part of the journey, if we had not gone and collected him.

Link to post
Share on other sites
He paid by cash

 

I am also concerned that they took the return part of the ticket off him, so that he would have had to pay again for that part of the journey, if we had not gone and collected him.

 

It seems a little more information might be needed to offer any more suggestion as it is unusual for a return half that would still be valid to be siezed unless there are factors that have not been disclosed. Perhaps your son can help?

Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I can gather my son showed him the return ticket as well as other tickets he had bought that day.

We live in Cheshunt and to get to stevenage he goes to hertford east then walks across town to Hertford North station, so he had a return ticket for that journey as well.

He showed the inspector all 3 tickets, but the inspector kept the return ticket from stevenage to hertford north and handed back the Cheshunt tickets.

I spoke to an inspector at Cheshunt this morning and he said it was standard practice to keep the return ticket and it is illegal to travel with only one part of the ticket., which sounds nonsense to me.

They did say to my son at stevenage that he could have given the outward ticket to someone else, but he was traveling with his girlfriend who had her own full set of tickets from hn to s.

Son says there is no more information, he is upset because he feels he is being accused of fraud, when all he did was lose his ticket. I suspect he didn't pick up his ticket when he put it through the barrier when they were at hertford north.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I suspect he didn't pick up his ticket when he put it through the barrier when they were at hertford north.

 

Impossible im afraid, the barrier wont open unless you take the ticket back.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I spoke to an inspector at Cheshunt this morning and he said it was standard practice to keep the return ticket and it is illegal to travel with only one part of the ticket., which sounds nonsense to me.

 

The inspector is correct in that, he is referring to the condition which says you cannot use the outward half of a two part return ticket if you cannot also produce the unused return portion of that ticket.

 

SRPO is right too, your son could not inadvertently have left the outward half of the ticket in the gate reader as the gate would not open to allow him access to the train until he took it out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also just to add although he was travelling with his girlfriend and she had her tickets what's to say there. Wasn't a 3rd friend who had that portion of the ticket and went through the exit barrier a few moments before

 

Not saying that's the case but that's what the RCI\RPI would be thinking

Link to post
Share on other sites
Also just to add although he was travelling with his girlfriend and she had her tickets what's to say there. Wasn't a 3rd friend who had that portion of the ticket and went through the exit barrier a few moments before

 

Not saying that's the case but that's what the RCI\RPI would be thinking

But how would two of them got through the ticket barrier at the start of the journey with just one ticket.

Link to post
Share on other sites
But how would two of them got through the ticket barrier at the start of the journey with just one ticket.

 

It seems to happen regularly from what we read on the forum.......

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@ christywhisty ... It is easy to double up and go through the gateline ticket barriers with one ticket

 

Without complicating matters they coould have had the friend get on at a station in between with no gateline barriers and met them on the train or even the station they got the ticket the wheelchair barrier might have been left open due to staff shortagen way too many variables and happens all the time

Link to post
Share on other sites

He honestly didn't have anyone else with him other than girlfriend. I was told by the inspector at my station that they may look at the cctv camera.

It's fair enough, he shouldn't have lost his ticket, but I am still annoyed they took a ticket he had paid for from him

Also does anyone if they should have treated him differently as a minor under the age of 18. They did not fill in the penalty form in correctly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't implying there was anyone 3rd person with him or thinking something was amiss just explaining to you that although he was only with his girlfriend the RCI\RPI would not have assumed that. They take a hard line with everyone regardless

 

I do think it is incorrect the way they dealt with him and also to put him in a precarious position in possibly not being able to get home, that would concern me more and yes they should have filled it in correctly.

 

I would be inclined to email FCC regarding this especially the preventing him getting home. Post back to let us know

Link to post
Share on other sites
He honestly didn't have anyone else with him other than girlfriend. I was told by the inspector at my station that they may look at the cctv camera.

It's fair enough, he shouldn't have lost his ticket, but I am still annoyed they took a ticket he had paid for from him

Also does anyone if they should have treated him differently as a minor under the age of 18. They did not fill in the penalty form in correctly.

 

An adult in public transport ticketing terms is 'over 16', which is when the adult fare becomes payable at a 16th birthday.

 

All rail tickets remain the property of the company at all times though I am surprised that the inspector felt it necessary to retain the return half if there was no other factor that we are unaware of. I'm sure the inspector will have made a note on the counterfoil copy that goes to the processing office if that is the case.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

An update

After letters back and forth to rpss, who finally referred me to first capital connect. I paid my sons penalty fare because i didn't want to incur any more costs.

Fcc admitted that my son was not trying to defraud the company, but basically they have to treat everyone as guilty. Still couldn't really come up with an adequate reason for withholding his return ticket other than to prevent further fraud.

They sent us a voucher for the price of a return ticket.

I involved travelwatch who couldn't get a straight answer either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Amazing in the Country that treats even one as innocent until proved guilty, the Railways (that we pay for) can presume everyone as guilty!

 

MADNESS!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Penalty fares are not issued to fare evaders, had the RPI suspected that your son was committing any kind of fraud then a Travel Irregularity Report would have been completed with the facts being reported to FCC prosecutions unit, basically a Penalty Fare is issued to anyone who cannot show a valid ticket and the rules apply to everybody, sometimes people do make genuine mistakes but then thats life. As for having the ticket withdrawn, this is common practice amongst all TOC's, if your son was under 16 then a "Zero fare" ticket may have been issued in order fo him to get home but in these circumstances he was not stranded as he was at a manned station and had you not being able to pick him up then you could have arranged a SILK payment from the station, this is when someone such as yourself rings up a number and pays for a ticket by card the ticket details are then sent to the station where the stranded individual is and the tickets printed and given to the stranded individual then hey presto.

 

SILK actually stands for Stranded Individual Location Known beofore anyone asks.

Views expressed in this forum by me are my own personal opinion and you take it on face value! I make any comments to the best of my knowledge but you take my advice at your own risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If he approached a member of staff saying that he was stranded then he would have been adviced of this.

Views expressed in this forum by me are my own personal opinion and you take it on face value! I make any comments to the best of my knowledge but you take my advice at your own risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Why is it that in such situations, people always try to find any way possible to blame the TOC. Your son is a big boy now, and needs to take responsibility for his own actions. Nobody else is to blame here.

 

Sorry it's not a helpful post, but these things just annoy me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...