Can't get through to FCC prosecution tel no - should my son go in person?

[JMAO]

Help, my son received a notice of prosecution for incorrectly using a child ticket (he's just 18!) from First Capital Connect.

 

He admitted the offence and wrote a sincere letter of apology for his actions and asked to not be prosecuted because of extenuating circumstances,

reading difficulties, youth, stupidity and never having committed an offence previously.

 

A letter arrived today dated 3 days ago asking for him to get in contact at his earliest convenience.

 

I have tried the number all day on his behalf, because I wanted the Prosecutions department to know that he was away,

could not be contacted and would be in touch as soon as he got back on Monday. I've left messages on the answerphone, but no-one has got back.

 

I then rang FCC customer relations and the man I spoke to said that if I can't get through he should go and see them in person. Does anyone know whether this would help reduce the possibility of him being prosecuted? I am very afraid for him, he is not the sharpest knife in the box and a criminal conviction will reduce his already small chances in life.

 

We don't live near the Prosecutions Department so it will be a big time and expense cost for him to go - which I'm happy for him to do if it's not a waste of time.

 

Would it help if I went with him?

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Hi welcome to CAG,

Is your son now considered a vulnerable adult?

I would guess that nothing is going to go forward

until Monday so get in touch early on then.

[JMAO]

Hi and thank you

 

No, gormless, immature and dyslexic, but not what would be described as a vulnerable adult.

 

I'm not sure they answer the phones at all, having looked around this website and we don't have a fax machine. So I don't know whether after trying the phone for a couple of hours he should just turn up?

[dx100uk]

dont worry

 

if they are writing to ask him to contact them

 

them 9/10 they've accepted his apology

 

good news me thinks

 

dx

[JMAO]

I hope so. But I still don't know what he should do if they continue to not answer the phone on monday

[dx100uk]

thy are diff to get through to at the best of times.

 

keep at it, but dont worry

it wont harm the case at all if it takes a few days or even a week.

 

dx

[Old-CodJA]

The best way to deal with all of these things is actually in writing. There are no misunderstandings then.

 

It is possible that as he is over 18 they will not talk to you about the case anyway, but if you are just trying to let them know that he's away and will deal with his mail on his return, then a note to that effect will be fine. If he will be back on Monday I wouldn't worry, they are not going to take action over the weekend.

 

That is a very, very unusual comment from customer services, there is a tight security on the offices and the prosecutions staff will not normally accept personal callers at all unless someone is called in for interview under P.A.C.E.

[JMAO]

Thanks Old-CodJA

 

The customer services guy gave the impression that unless he got in touch as soon as possible by whatever means (including turning up at the offices) he would put himself in a more difficult position.

 

It just seems a bit odd to me to respond with a letter, to a letter acknowledging a letter and asking to get in touch at the earliest convenience.

 

Anyway I'll get him to dial constantly on Monday and maybe if we can find someone with a fax machine he could fax as well and as he has now come home earlier than expected I'll get him to write a letter as well and send it in the post this morning.

[JMAO]

Thanks for your support and advice

 

AN UPDATE

 

It's worth leaving a message and contact details on the answerphone, because they got in touch today.

My son was very grateful that they took his remorseful letter into account and they decided to fine him on this occasion.

 

So good news. And he's learned a valuable lesson.

 

I am quite shocked looking around these forums at how easy it seems for innocent people to be criminalised or to receive out of proportion penalties, when the rules seem to be very complicated and differ from one provider to the next. It seems to me that as commercial private companies, much of this should be dealt with in the civil courts.

 

I feel very wistful for British Rail, which provided an excellent value for money service with straightforward tickets.

[Grotesque]

 

I feel very wistful for British Rail, which provided an excellent value for money service with straightforward tickets.

 

...and who, until its final years, didn't have Penalty Fares so took people to Court as a matter of course!!! :violin:lol

[Old-CodJA]

Thanks for your support and advice

 

AN UPDATE

 

It's worth leaving a message and contact details on the answerphone, because they got in touch today.

My son was very grateful that they took his remorseful letter into account and they decided to fine him on this occasion.

 

So good news. And he's learned a valuable lesson.

 

I am quite shocked looking around these forums at how easy it seems for innocent people to be criminalised or to receive out of proportion penalties, when the rules seem to be very complicated and differ from one provider to the next. It seems to me that as commercial private companies, much of this should be dealt with in the civil courts.

 

I feel very wistful for British Rail, which provided an excellent value for money service with straightforward tickets.

 

 

 

 

Like Grotesque, I can confirm that BR went straight to prosecution for these matters prior to 1989 when the first penalty fare legislation was framed.

 

I also have to say I think it is worth recognising that there is nothing complicated about the rule that, in effect says ' You are over 18, you know that you are old enough to vote and do all those other grown-up things by choice, therefore choosing to pay only half your fare by claiming to be a child is cheating.'

 

'Intending to avoid a fare or part thereof' is a criminal offence contrary to an Act of parliament that has been on the statute book for over 120 years, it is not a rule invented by private companies.

 

I am genuinely pleased for your son, he has avoided prosecution at a very important time in his life and I am sure that he will have learned a valuable lesson. Thank you for letting us know.