Advice Only for Greater Anglia - Delay Repay Fraud

[Undiscovered]

I think what some posters are missing here is that GA have sent a very punchy template letter to a number of 'customers' about a few claims made many months ago, adding that there are more. GA do not share the full details of the claims so it is therefore difficult for the 'customer' to determine their travel patterns and how the delay, or even cancellation, impacted them. When this is queried, GA simply reply with a total amount to settle. The details of the other claims they refer to, and that are included in this sum, are not disclosed at all.
What is not being considered is that these claims could all be valid. But GA don't share the information.
Guilty until proven innocent?
So will that stand up in court?

I think you're ignoring the fact that people have sat down and taken the time, at the time of incident, or certainly in the recent past of the incident, to fill in a form with a lot of information and then submit it as a true and accurate account of their journey. The form was filled, accurately and truthfully, at the time of the claim. If it was true and accurate then, it'll be true and accurate now, yes? No need to remember details.

If everything is true and accurate in peoples claims, then the answer to GAs letter is "No, there are no fraudulent claims here". If people suspect phishing, then contact your MP.

efit- Titfield beat me to it.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Feb 2021 ==

This reminds me - I had a fair few DR claims with Northern because I physically couldn’t get on a short formed train. Every time I took a photo; every time the claim was rejected; every time appealing with the photo as evidence worked

Yeah, I've been bobbing about the network in a 2car, which control think should be much longer, and they've only found out when they've called me up to detatch a portion I don't have!

 

[357]

I think what some posters are missing here is that GA have sent a very punchy template letter to a number of 'customers' about a few claims made many months ago, adding that there are more. GA do not share the full details of the claims so it is therefore difficult for the 'customer' to determine their travel patterns and how the delay, or even cancellation, impacted them. When this is queried, GA simply reply with a total amount to settle. The details of the other claims they refer to, and that are included in this sum, are not disclosed at all.
What is not being considered is that these claims could all be valid. But GA don't share the information.
Guilty until proven innocent?
So will that stand up in court?

Exactly this 100%

I still think this is a revenue generating exercise.

 

[Haywain]

What is not being considered is that these claims could all be valid. But GA don't share the information.
Guilty until proven innocent?
So will that stand up in court?

GA have asked for further information, so must be open to the possibility that the claims are valid. However, as an investigator they will assume guilt until satisfied otherwise (if they assume innocence there is nothing to investigate) - it is in court that innocence is the presumption that must be overturned by the weight of evidence.

 

[FenMan]

Would GA also be looking at the timing of the claims? I would have assumed claims submitted individually within 24 hours of the delay would be considered low risk from GA's perspective. Bundles of claims submitted more than a week after the first delay, not so much?

 

[Beazer]

GA have asked for further information, so must be open to the possibility that the claims are valid. However, as an investigator they will assume guilt until satisfied otherwise (if they assume innocence there is nothing to investigate) - it is in court that innocence is the presumption that must be overturned by the weight of evidence.

No. The 'customers' have asked for further information, which GA don't supply, and instead send a total sum for payment, without any backup.

GA don't ask for further information and ignore any information given to them.

GA thinks you are guilty, this is the money GA wants to settle, or else...

 

[Jo78]

I personally think they will write to everyone who has ever made a claim. Why not, they have plenty of time on their hands and if they have success with a few they won’t stop as they’ll see it as easy cash. Asking people to remember their journeys from a year to 18 months ago is impossible. It costs them a stamp and especially as the letter is intimidating and threatening the police is going to work in their favour and bearing in mind the long time lapse. I’m going to write to my MP about it nevertheless and if others do so too.

 

[Undiscovered]

Exactly this 100%

I still think this is a revenue generating exercise.

And how do you think this will play out in court?

"Your Honour, we think the defendant made false accusations to profit from delay repay claims."
"Your evidence?"
"We think its true."
"Can you prove it?"
"Not really..."
"Oh well, defendant guilty."

I know that TOCs do make terrible mistakes on Penalty Fares, Customer Service and a myriad of things, but they're alleging criminal fraud here.

Criminal Fraud.

You must suspect they have evidence, else some high up in GA is going to lose his job and his pension if he's wrong and incur a massive amount of bollockings from the judiciary too.

 

[Haywain]

GA don't ask for further information and ignore any information given to them.

They provide you with an opportunity to engage with them. If you are innocent of having made any claims for trains you weren't on then don't pay them anything as you have nothing to fear.

I personally think they will write to everyone who has ever made a claim.

I look forward to receiving my letter in respect of the one claim I have ever made. However, I think they will struggle to establish any sort of pattern from that.

 

[robbeech]

GA have asked for further information, so must be open to the possibility that the claims are valid. However, as an investigator they will assume guilt until satisfied otherwise (if they assume innocence there is nothing to investigate) - it is in court that innocence is the presumption that must be overturned by the weight of evidence.

Weight of evidence, or weight of knowledge and/or power.

Most people prosecuted by the railway are guilty of the offence, so why would any case ever be any different? It's only when someone successfully proves their innocence that a court will consider this.

If the railway said, this person is guilty of fraudulently claiming delay repay on this date, but offered zero evidence to prove the person was not on the train in question, and the passenger said, "i didn't do it", but similarly couldn't prove they actually took that train on that day, then what will the verdict be? I'd suggest anyone who thinks that here in the real world the verdict would be not guilty is misguided at best.

 

[island]

Most people prosecuted by the railway are guilty of the offence, so why would any case ever be any different? It's only when someone successfully proves their innocence that a court will consider this.

If the railway said, this person is guilty of fraudulently claiming delay repay on this date, but offered zero evidence to prove the person was not on the train in question, and the passenger said, "i didn't do it", but similarly couldn't prove they actually took that train on that day, then what will the verdict be? I'd suggest anyone who thinks that here in the real world the verdict would be not guilty is misguided at best.

I am quite sure this is an inaccurate depiction of the UK’s legal process.

However, we should focus on the matter at hand and assisting the OP and other recipients of these letters.

 

[Undiscovered]

Weight of evidence, or weight of knowledge and/or power.

Most people prosecuted by the railway are guilty of the offence, so why would any case ever be any different? It's only when someone successfully proves their innocence that a court will consider this.

If the railway said, this person is guilty of fraudulently claiming delay repay on this date, but offered zero evidence to prove the person was not on the train in question, and the passenger said, "i didn't do it", but similarly couldn't prove they actually took that train on that day, then what will the verdict be? I'd suggest anyone who thinks that here in the real world the verdict would be not guilty is misguided at best.

The majority of cases the Railway brings are Civil cases, where the onus of proof is different.

The timing and nature of these cases, and that they've mentioned involving BTP, means it's a Criminal Case. The onus of proof changes.

In this situation, the Railway must prove, beyond all reasonable doubt, that the defendant is guilty.

In your example, me just saying you nicked my car would be evidence enough, even if you were in Tenerife, to get you banged up.

 

[robbeech]

And how do you think this will play out in court?

"Your Honour, we think the defendant made false accusations to profit from delay repay claims."
"Your evidence?"
"We think its true."
"Can you prove it?"
"Not really..."
"Oh well, defendant guilty."

I know that TOCs do make terrible mistakes on Penalty Fares, Customer Service and a myriad of things, but they're alleging criminal fraud here.

Criminal Fraud.

You must suspect they have evidence, else some high up in GA is going to lose his job and his pension if he's wrong and incur a massive amount of bollockings from the judiciary too.

Strongly disagree with parts of this i'm afraid. Your (said in jest) Diaglogue above is, the outcome in reality, although it is not addressed from this angle.

I wouldn't suspect they have evidence at all, why would they need evidence? many of the people they've sent these letters to will have just paid because they're too frightened to not do so. Only those that CAN PROVE THEIR INNOCENCE and are brave enough to take this further will let it escalate.

Why would they receive a telling off to put it politely? They're bringing forward cases that have potential to bring money in. In many cases, they'll do just that with 1 simple letter. In some cases it'll go to court and they'll win because the passenger could not prove they were on that train. In cases where GA feel threatened in return by a knowledgeable person, they'll just drop it and no more will be said.

 

[Jo78]

They provide you with an opportunity to engage with them. If you are innocent of having made any claims for trains you weren't on then don't pay them anything as you have nothing to fear.

I look forward to receiving my letter in respect of the one claim I have ever made. However, I think they will struggle to establish any sort of pattern from that.

You must be very lucky as I use a branch line and it’s 100% disruptions on Mondays due to overrun engineering works, trains terminated early as they don’t want the train to become late on its next journey. Almost weekly occurrences. I’ve spent so much money on taxis I can’t tell you and all for a lousy 45 minute voucher. Journeys over to stansted are too numerous too to actually get to work.

 

[robbeech]

The majority of cases the Railway brings are Civil cases, where the onus of proof is different.

The timing and nature of these cases, and that they've mentioned involving BTP, means it's a Criminal Case. The onus of proof changes.

In this situation, the Railway must prove, beyond all reasonable doubt, that the defendant is guilty.

In your example, me just saying you nicked my car would be evidence enough, even if you were in Tenerife, to get you banged up.

The "who" and the "where" and the "when" are fixed in the railway case, this is not the case in a car theft.

The fact remains (to keep on topic which i for one am guilty of straying from) that people who have genuinely been delayed and have claimed delay repay (and been paid) are now being asked to prove their innocence. If they fail to do that to the railway, they'll have to do exactly that in court, and if they can't prove it to the railway, how can they prove it to anyone else.

 

[Undiscovered]

Strongly disagree with parts of this i'm afraid. Your (said in jest) Diaglogue above is, the outcome in reality, although it is not addressed from this angle.

I wouldn't suspect they have evidence at all, why would they need evidence? many of the people they've sent these letters to will have just paid because they're too frightened to not do so. Only those that CAN PROVE THEIR INNOCENCE and are brave enough to take this further will let it escalate.

Why would they receive a telling off to put it politely? They're bringing forward cases that have potential to bring money in. In many cases, they'll do just that with 1 simple letter. In some cases it'll go to court and they'll win because the passenger could not prove they were on that train. In cases where GA feel threatened in return by a knowledgeable person, they'll just drop it and no more will be

The "who" and the "where" and the "when" are fixed in the railway case, this is not the case in a car theft.

The fact remains (to keep on topic which i for one am guilty of straying from) that people who have genuinely been delayed and have claimed delay repay (and been paid) are now being asked to prove their innocence. If they fail to do that to the railway, they'll have to do exactly that in court, and if they can't prove it to the railway, how can they prove it.

Ok. This is a Criminal Case. Fraud. Criminal. Criminal Fraud. Not civil. If I'm missing something here, please, someone PM me and I'll publicly apologise on here.

If the delay repay form was accurately completed, truthfully, then that will suffice. GA must have evidence to prove guilt. The Police and Crown Prosecution Service and criminal barristers, not GA, will try this case before the court. If you are truely innocent, then you have nothing to fear by going to court.

If you are innocent, properly innocent, then you have a duty to bring this extortion racket to light by informing MPs and reputable print media.

 

[Jo78]

My branch line has 1 train every 45 minutes and off peak only 1 an hour and always delays.

 

[reb0118]

The majority of cases the Railway brings are Civil cases.......

I suspect the majority of cases that railway prosecutors instigate would be criminal matters.

 

[47421]

The "who" and the "where" and the "when" are fixed in the railway case, this is not the case in a car theft.

The fact remains (to keep on topic which i for one am guilty of straying from) that people who have genuinely been delayed and have claimed delay repay (and been paid) are now being asked to prove their innocence. If they fail to do that to the railway, they'll have to do exactly that in court, and if they can't prove it to the railway, how can they prove it to anyone else.

This is in my view a very misguided comment. There are no actual legal proceedings ongoing here, and it is only when actual proceedings are being pursued that we can consider the legal aspects in detail, because you need to know the charge that the alledged facts are supporting, and only when you know the charge can you consider for example which facts have to be proved, which court will hear it, whether it is a strict liablity offence etc etc. We also dont know whether GA may wish to pursue the matter via civil recovery proceedings, which changes standard of proof, type of court, what evidence can be admitted, potential for costs awards etc.

 

[robbeech]

Ok. This is a Criminal Case. Fraud. Criminal. Criminal Fraud. Not civil. If I'm missing something here, please, someone PM me and I'll publicly apologise on here.

If the delay repay form was accurately completed, truthfully, then that will suffice. GA must have evidence to prove guilt. The Police and Crown Prosecution Service and criminal barristers, not GA, will try this case before the court. If you are truely innocent, then you have nothing to fear by going to court.

If you are innocent, properly innocent, then you have a duty to bring this extortion racket to light by informing MPs and reputable print media.

You're not missing anything at all, you are absolutely correct on how the law should work. However, in reality, you'd be taking a risk going to court not armed with evidence.

 

[AlterEgo]

I personally think they will write to everyone who has ever made a claim. Why not, they have plenty of time on their hands and if they have success with a few they won’t stop as they’ll see it as easy cash. Asking people to remember their journeys from a year to 18 months ago is impossible. It costs them a stamp and especially as the letter is intimidating and threatening the police is going to work in their favour and bearing in mind the long time lapse. I’m going to write to my MP about it nevertheless and if others do so too.

GA will be writing to everyone whom they reasonably suspect of making false claims. I worked for a TOC and we had a good 25-50 customers who were very suspicious. Some of the posters here need a reality check about how this stuff works - GA aren’t going to write to the hundreds of thousands of claimants they had. They’re writing to YOU because there’s something they’d like clarification on about YOUR journeys. I strongly recommend getting a solicitor.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

Anyone who thinks it is helpful writing to their MP at this critical stage is deluded beyond belief. You are in the midst of a criminal investigation, and your words and actions need to be carefully considered. You do not want to escalate the situation. The only person you should be talking to is a qualified legal professional. I doubt any reputable MP will interfere in a criminal investigation anyway, but say they do, I think you will find that it can have the opposite desired effect, and make a prosecutor even more determined to stand their ground.

Any potential abuse of a consumer rights scheme to elicit unlawful compensation, especially when the public are highly invested in our railways, either as taxpayers or fare payers, deserves to be investigated fully, and where issues are identified, appropriate remedial action taken against that offender.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Feb 2021 ==

Some forum members here seem to think you should only ever investigate the guilty!

The world doesn't work like that unfortunately, innocent people are investigated all the time. It's not always a pleasant experience, but that is the nature of justice. When the investigation is finished, your innocence will be reaffirmed or sent to an independent court to consider.

However, and this is where caution is needed, even the most innocent person can be found to have committed wrong doing if you look long and hard enough. Don't give prosecutors or law enforcement any motivation to spend any more time than is necessary resolving the matter at hand. Your attitude and behaviour will play a major role in determining how everything plays out. Yes, it is frustrating to be innocent and under investigation, but it is far from uncommon, and you must understand it is not personal.

 

[swt_passenger]

I think you're ignoring the fact that people have sat down and taken the time, at the time of incident, or certainly in the recent past of the incident, to fill in a form with a lot of information and then submit it as a true and accurate account of their journey. The form was filled, accurately and truthfully, at the time of the claim. If it was true and accurate then, it'll be true and accurate now, yes? No need to remember details.

I think you have missed where people have been using “claim assistance software”, which trawls open data and proposes a list of trains you might have used. eg from post #28:
“i have replied explaining i used a website called Delay Repay Genie which i paid a subscription to they would then email me delays i could claim on as i have a season ticket”

 

[Undiscovered]

Any potential abuse of a consumer rights scheme to elicit unlawful compensation, especially when the public are highly invested in our railways, either as taxpayers or fare payers, deserves to be investigated fully, and where issues are identified, appropriate remedial action taken against that offender.

Absolutely.

Likewise, I expect the innocent folks on here to shine a light on the abuse of rights by TOCs who demand reimbersment from passengers who have, rightfully, received delay repay compensation.

For those passengers to then be accused of unfounded fraud is shocking.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

There is also a useful comparison.

When a driver is suspected of committing a traffic offence, e.g. speeding, the police will send a letter asking you to name the driver.

The driver will then usually receive a choice of options:

1) Fixed Penalty Notice, say £100 and 3 points or
2) Contest it at court

The police will not usually provide any evidence unless you choose to contest it at court. Often, even the request for evidence itself will immediately result in the fixed penalty being withdrawn.

Absolutely.

Likewise, I expect the innocent folks on here to shine a light on the abuse of rights by TOCs who demand reimbersment from passengers who have, rightfully, received delay repay compensation.

For those passengers to the be accused of unfounded fraud is shocking.

But at this time, there is no suggestion whatsoever that has occurred.

Clearly there must be a genuine belief that there is some foundation, because Greater Anglia have sent a letter. They will have hardly done so at random. They may not have shared their evidence, or only shared some of it, but just because a forum member claims total innocence, does not make it unfounded.

 

[Bertie the bus]

Weight of evidence, or weight of knowledge and/or power.

Most people prosecuted by the railway are guilty of the offence, so why would any case ever be any different? It's only when someone successfully proves their innocence that a court will consider this.

If the railway said, this person is guilty of fraudulently claiming delay repay on this date, but offered zero evidence to prove the person was not on the train in question, and the passenger said, "i didn't do it", but similarly couldn't prove they actually took that train on that day, then what will the verdict be? I'd suggest anyone who thinks that here in the real world the verdict would be not guilty is misguided at best.

Cases don’t go straight to court. The TOC itself prosecutes ticket irregularities but what is alleged here is fraud and that involves the police and the CPS. I struggle to believe a case would get past the CPS and even reach court if the TOC’s only evidence was the defendant’s travel patterns don’t quite conform to what they consider typical behaviour. If they could prove a pattern that might be different but saying people should be worried because they might be prosecuted and convicted based on nothing is in my opinion scaremongering.

 

[Titfield]

Cases don’t go straight to court. The TOC itself prosecutes ticket irregularities but what is alleged here is fraud and that involves the police and the CPS. I struggle to believe a case would get past the CPS and even reach court if the TOC’s only evidence was the defendant’s travel patterns don’t quite conform to what they consider typical behaviour. If they could prove a pattern that might be different but saying people should be worried because they might be prosecuted and convicted based on nothing is in my opinion scaremongering.

GA's own lawyers would certainly take a view before proceeding to involving the police and cps alleging fraud.

Every case is unique and turns on the facts. GA must have identified something in the claims made by the recipients of these letters for them to take the action they have. Contrary to what has been alleged I doubt that they would engage in a speculative fishing exercise. Nevertheless it is not beyond the bounds of possibility that some who have been written to have indeed made only legitimate claims simply because their innocent behaviour also has the characteristics of something not so innocent.

 

[Andrew S]

I think you have missed where people have been using “claim assistance software”, which trawls open data and proposes a list of trains you might have used. eg from post #28:
“i have replied explaining i used a website called Delay Repay Genie which i paid a subscription to they would then email me delays i could claim on as i have a season ticket”

I've been following this thread with interest. I had a look at Delay Repay Genie out of curiosity, and I can't help thinking that it does have potential to lead people to make illegitimate claims, and leaves the onus on the individual user to work out whether their claim is valid or not.

For example, I entered my typical commuting journey from pre covid times, when I travelled from Abbey Wood to Charing Cross and return four times a week, or sometimes five. I bought a monthly season on Southeastern's keycard, for around £142. The site told me it could save me up to a projected £52 per month, based on typical delay statistics for this route. This sounded far too good to be true, because it is. In 18 months of regular commuting here I've had to claim delay repay three times, and received a total of around £8. I wasn't planning to sign up to this service anyway, but the implausibility of this claim would make me suspicious of the whole thing. Filling in the delay repay claim online myself is pretty easy anyway, so why bother paying a monthly subscription for something like this?

I do wonder, though, if some are tempted by that "too good to be true" saving? It will be easy to be persuaded to join this site as the potential "savings" are more that enough to cover the monthly subscription. Then, as post #28 states above, claim delay repay on everything the site tells them they can, assuming it is correct, and legitimate, as it has real train delay data so must be somehow linked to and endorsed by the rail industry. I didn't bother to go as far as signing up even for the free trial week, but I assume it just emails a list of delayed trains on your route, with the idea being that you will see if you were on one of those trains and then submit your claim through the site. Maybe there is nothing in the process to make the person actually check whether they were on the train(s) highlighted for delays and claims.

 

[NSB2017]

Distinction has been made but as these will be criminal cases, the burden of proof is much higher than it would be in a civil case - beyond reasonable doubt (so 99% or so) versus on the balance of possibilities (50.1% or so).

Some may take that as proof that these cases will fall apart. Others that the TOC has a heck of a lot of evidence that they consider to be watertight.

If the TOC doesn't have such evidence and this is a fishing trip. then there is a heck of a story here about victimising innocents. Alternatively, there are lessons to be learnt for those who diddle the delay repay system for a few more quid than they deserve.

 

[Titfield]

This subject has certainly been discussed at great length.

I think we are now at the point where it is a case of "we will see" as GA and the passengers contacted will react / respond as they choose.

It will certainly be interesting to see the outcomes.

 

[357]

I think some people are not grasping what I was trying to say earlier.

Saying they will take you to court is different to actually doing it.

They say they have evidence, say they will take you to court - and offer you a settlement.

If you know for sure you're innocent, then contest it. See if they actually take you to court.

In various lines of work I've been involved with legal cases and the attitude was always "see if they actually take it to court, if they do we will start talking".

Remember that you can still settle out of court after they issue proceedings.

I'm not saying anyone here is guilty or innocent - but if innocent, tell them you are and see what happens. I'm not a fan of people paying large sums of money because they are scared when they feel they are innocent.