Out of court settlements

[Tetchytyke]

A while ago we were discussing Out of Court Settlements and whether younger people were more often targeted with these. I said I could feel an FOI coming on, and I could.

This is what I got back from Northern Trains:


There's quite a lot to unpack from this. Firstly, I'm surprised at just how few are offered to people over the age of 65. Some of this may relate to PTE travel arrangements for pensioners, but not all of it will.

I also doubt that the fare evasion rates on over-35s are markedly different from those of younger people, yet 10,352 settlements were issued to under-35s and only 3,739 were issued to over-35s. Of those, only 233 were issued to over-55s.

I'm also surprised at the remarkably low number of people who actually pay up. But even this is skewed towards younger people: 18% of under-25s and 15% of under-35s cough up, but only 10% of over-35s do.

I've long suspected that TOCs are targeting young professionals with these 'offers', and it's interesting to see the stats back this up so clearly.

 

[Undiscovered]

It could also suggest that youngsters are more prone to trying fare evasion, while those who are older have a bit more sense? Or that older folks were caught younger and don't fancy getting caught again?

Edit: figures may be skewed as youngsters might not have access to a car, therefore need to travel by train? Older folks get their tickets bought by their tech-savvy kids, or purchase from ticket offices, so less likely to have incorrect tickets?

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Thanks for getting this. I don't suppose there's any way of knowing how many reports are made by age bracket? Because one reason for the high figures for 18-24 and 25-34 could be the number of reports made.

Even once we know that, we don't know if that accurately reflects fare-dodging by age bracket - it could be that RPIs focus on one bracket more than others. But it would give us a better view.

(Edited to add) It would also be interesting to know what happens to the cases where an OOS isn't paid: I imagine that they proceed to court - but in how many cases does the customer engage in the process then? In other words, how many of the OOS offers not taken up are people ignoring the process in the hope that it will go away? And how successful is that as a strategy?

 

[MadMarsupial]

These figures could well reflect when RPIs are most often working e.g if that is before 1000 when you would expect far fewer over 65s . The figures offered settlements could also reflect the age profile of rail users in general. It could also be that older people are more likely to pay their fare?
To me the most unusual thing is the high proportion who don't take up the offer - I realise some will contest their case and be found not guilty or have the case dropped but that number is likely to be small.

 

[John R]

Unless you know the number of cases which went to court you can't draw much of a conclusion from these figures in terms of how many get offered in contrast to being taken to court. For one example, I suspect that fare evasion amongst the younger age groups is much more prevalent than older ones.

 

[30907]

A while ago we were discussing Out of Court Settlements and whether younger people were more often targeted with these. I said I could feel an FOI coming on, and I could.

This is what I got back from Northern Trains:
View attachment 149327

There's quite a lot to unpack from this. Firstly, I'm surprised at just how few are offered to people over the age of 65. Some of this may relate to PTE travel arrangements for pensioners, but not all of it will.

I also doubt that the fare evasion rates on over-35s are markedly different from those of younger people, yet 10,352 settlements were issued to under-35s and only 3,739 were issued to over-35s. Of those, only 233 were issued to over-55s.
...
I've long suspected that TOCs are targeting young professionals with these 'offers', and it's interesting to see the stats back this up so clearly.

Unless you know the number of travellers in each age bracket, you can't validly compare. It seems highly likely that Northern has a large number of younger travellers (professional or not).

I'm also surprised at the remarkably low number of people who actually pay up. But even this is skewed towards younger people: 18% of under-25s and 15% of under-35s cough up, but only 10% of over-35s do.

It would appear from your figures that the 35-44 age group (9.5%) are least likely to pay up - are they hardened evaders?

 

[MadMarsupial]

Younger people are far more avid users of social media. There are numerous examples of social media hosting ideas on how to fare dodge and share techniques. For example I do not believe many young people have worked out how to doughnut by themselves.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Unless you know the number of cases which went to court you can't draw much of a conclusion from these figures in terms of how many get offered in contrast to being taken to court.

IME Northern Trains don't tend to go straight to Court- they make these offers first. So one can assume that the c.85% of people who don't accept the offers do get taken to Court.

I suspect that fare evasion amongst the younger age groups is much more prevalent than older ones.

It could also suggest that youngsters are more prone to trying fare evasion, while those who are older have a bit more sense?

I'd honestly be incredibly surprised if fare evasion was markedly more prevalent amongst younger people. Especially as the biggest fare evaders, such as him and him, were both well into their 40s.

 

[Buzby]

I’m with @Brissle Girl - I cannot divine anything useful from the figures they supply. With no clue as to how many folk are challenged for ticket irregularities, you cannot extrapolate the supposed trends suggested here. Indeed, it’s as if the starting total dropped off the data grid!

 

[alholmes]

I suspect the reason for more younger people being offered settlements is because they make up a greater proportion of fare evaders.

if you look at the enquiries on this forum we see loads of students, loads of people just starting their careers worried about DBS checks, and loads of instances where there are issues with 16-17 railcards and 16-25 railcards. Can’t recall ever reading about an issue with a 60+ railcard.

 

[Egg Centric]

Did your FOI cover ultimate disposal? That'd be far more interesting. How many of those 4400 18-24 year olds ended up in court with a conviction?

 

[John R]

I'd honestly be incredibly surprised if fare evasion was markedly more prevalent amongst younger people. Especially as the biggest fare evaders, such as him and him, were both well into their 40s.

You don't know that. It's a presumption, and to base it on two high profile cases (which inevitably are in the press because of the size and type of person involved) is extremely misguided. My hunch is that younger people are more prone to fare dodge, but it's just that, and I wouldn't draw any conclusions from the data on a hunch either.

An analysis that doesn't include the denominator (in this case, how many people were stopped for ticket irregularities by age profile) can't tell you anything about whether young people are more targeted with OOC settlements than other age groups.

 

[Deafdoggie]

Northern claim:

"In the 2022-23 financial year, the team investigated 108,681 reports of attempted fare evasion and its in-house prosecutors attended 301 court sittings. Overall, the team helped to secure 14,072 convictions and recoup early [sic] £2.9m (£2,851,883) of lost revenue for the taxpayer."

I haven't done the maths to see if the number of convictions adds up to the same as those who didn't pay out of court settlements.

 

[Egg Centric]

Northern claim:

"In the 2022-23 financial year, the team investigated 108,681 reports of attempted fare evasion and its in-house prosecutors attended 301 court sittings. Overall, the team helped to secure 14,072 convictions and recoup early [sic] £2.9m (£2,851,883) of lost revenue for the taxpayer."

I haven't done the maths to see if the number of convictions adds up to the same as those who didn't pay out of court settlements.

You would also need to know that they offered everyone (or near as damnit) an out of court settlement and that it was same time period. Both are likely to be approximately true but not certainly.

 

[MadMarsupial]

Northern claim:

"In the 2022-23 financial year, the team investigated 108,681 reports of attempted fare evasion and its in-house prosecutors attended 301 court sittings. Overall, the team helped to secure 14,072 convictions and recoup early [sic] £2.9m (£2,851,883) of lost revenue for the taxpayer."

I haven't done the maths to see if the number of convictions adds up to the same as those who didn't pay out of court settlements.

Maths matches. OOC offered - OOC paid = 13422 that were offered and didn't pay.
Some of the most serious cases wouldn't have been offered OOC and so 14,072 sounds in keeping with the figures. ( Obviously a small number being found not guilty, some cases where a decision not to prosecute was made and some slippage between financial years )

 

[Tetchytyke]

You don't know that. It's a presumption

There’s no real way of knowing, though. It’s not something you admit to unless you get caught.

If RPIs deliberately target younger people (as I have long suspected, based on experience*) then the fare evasion figures will indicate a prevalence of younger fare evaders. The PF numbers will also show a similar trend. However it isn’t that older people aren’t evading, it’s that they’re not being caught.

(*countless examples travelling in West Yorkshire, including on the Leeds-Shipley line where I watched a 18yo get given a PF for not buying at the station and then watched an older couple get sold tickets by the exact same RPI).

I suspect the reason for more younger people being offered settlements is because they make up a greater proportion of fare evaders

Now you see I don’t- I think they are seen as low hanging fruit.

With no clue as to how many folk are challenged for ticket irregularities, you cannot extrapolate the supposed trends suggested here

I specifically asked how many settlements were offered and how many were paid, broken down by age range.

I am very surprised that more are not paid. I am not surprised by the demographic range- it was what I was expecting to see.

I may repeat the question with Penalty Fares when I get chance.

 

[Richardr]

I am very surprised that more are not paid.

It does seem a very low proportion. Unless I'm missing something, isn't it the case that an out of court settlement is only offered where someone has responded to the company, so its not applicable to people who ignore the first letter?

 

[MrJeeves]

Following off of this, I've now put in an FOI request to TPE: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/travel_incident_reports_settleme

 

[furlong]

isn't it the case that an out of court settlement is only offered where someone has responded to the company, so its not applicable to people who ignore the first letter?

No.

 

[Hadders]

A while ago we were discussing Out of Court Settlements and whether younger people were more often targeted with these. I said I could feel an FOI coming on, and I could.

This is what I got back from Northern Trains:
View attachment 149327

There's quite a lot to unpack from this. Firstly, I'm surprised at just how few are offered to people over the age of 65. Some of this may relate to PTE travel arrangements for pensioners, but not all of it will.

I also doubt that the fare evasion rates on over-35s are markedly different from those of younger people, yet 10,352 settlements were issued to under-35s and only 3,739 were issued to over-35s. Of those, only 233 were issued to over-55s.

I'm also surprised at the remarkably low number of people who actually pay up. But even this is skewed towards younger people: 18% of under-25s and 15% of under-35s cough up, but only 10% of over-35s do.

I've long suspected that TOCs are targeting young professionals with these 'offers', and it's interesting to see the stats back this up so clearly.

Some interesting information here.

Clearly more younger people being caught. To get the full picture we'd need to know many younger people make up the ridership and it would be interesting to cross-reference the above figures with the ticketless travel survey, if that breaks down people by age.

Like @Tetchytyke I suspect revenue staff target 'low hanging fruit'. The might not deliberately be doing this but there's bound to be some unconcsious bias in there. As people 'grow up' I suspect they become a bit more law abiding and savvy about how to deal with the challenge from an RPI so I suspect they tend to be shown more discretion than younger people.

I'm surprised at the number of people who don't pay out of court settlements. They probably think it'll go away but we know it doesn't. This must create a huge workload and cost for Northern as they put these cases through the court system so I'm not surprised that anyone engaging positively with them is offered a settlement.

 

[John R]

I'm surprised at the number of people who don't pay out of court settlements. They probably think it'll go away but we know it doesn't. This must create a huge workload and cost for Northern as they put these cases through the court system so I'm not surprised that anyone engaging positively with them is offered a settlement.

I agree that it’s surprising that around 13,000 people had convictions in one year from just one TOC. Multiply that up by the rest of the TOCs and you’ve probably got over 100,000 who could have had a cheaper settlement, and no criminal conviction, in just one year, had they bothered to engage with the process.

 

[fandroid]

The requests for assistance we get here are heavily biased towards the age group eligible for young persons railcards of one sort or another.

That might be because they're more likely to seek help via social media but I suspect that part of growing up is (1) learning to take responsibility for organising their lives properly (2) realising how surprisingly serious the consequences can be if caught trying play the system.

That growing up process means that they tend to learn from experience and not repeat their mistakes when they're older.

As for the 65+, they might be benefitting from rather more discretion on the part of railway staff of all types, but they will also have learnt from the mistakes of their younger days.


If anyone has the time and patience, some stats on the help requests we get here would also be enlightening


A final thought: Does the fairly close correlation of the numbers of prosecutions and the number of offers not accepted indicate that Northern policy is to make an offer even if they get no response from the first letter?

 

[Fawkes Cat]

That growing up process means that they tend to learn from experience and not repeat their mistakes when they're older.

If we're moving on from the 'how many' to the 'why', I 'd add that now, in my fifties, I am a lot more risk-averse than I was when younger. I might tell myself that this is from an increased respect for the law but there's at least an element of wanting to avoid hassle. As it happens I have never intentionally fare dodged, but I am not going to start now and have the hassle of a difficult interview, even if I ultimately walk away without penalty.

Ok, I am working from a sample of one which isn't significant - but I suspect that I am fairly typical in this respect.

 

[Snow1964]

The requests for assistance we get here are heavily biased towards the age group eligible for young persons railcards of one sort or another.

As for the 65+, they might be benefitting from rather more discretion on the part of railway staff of all types, but they will also have learnt from the mistakes of their younger days.

It might also be the potential confusion of railcards

16-17 and 16-25 which with similar names increases chance of selecting wrong ticket

There isn't a senior (60+) and another type of senior with different discounts so can't muddle them

 

[Titfield]

Some interesting information here.

Clearly more younger people being caught. To get the full picture we'd need to know many younger people make up the ridership and it would be interesting to cross-reference the above figures with the ticketless travel survey, if that breaks down people by age.

Like @Tetchytyke I suspect revenue staff target 'low hanging fruit'. The might not deliberately be doing this but there's bound to be some unconcsious bias in there. As people 'grow up' I suspect they become a bit more law abiding and savvy about how to deal with the challenge from an RPI so I suspect they tend to be shown more discretion than younger people.

I'm surprised at the number of people who don't pay out of court settlements. They probably think it'll go away but we know it doesn't. This must create a huge workload and cost for Northern as they put these cases through the court system so I'm not surprised that anyone engaging positively with them is offered a settlement.

Unconscious bias or deliberately checking younger travellers because previous experience and outcomes show these are the market demographic to prioritise for checking.

As others have said there are many factors in play here and it would be interesting to see if there has been research done into why people decide to evade their fare and if any insights can be drawn as to how to deter this behaviour.

 

[swt_passenger]

It might also be the potential confusion of railcards

16-17 and 16-25 which with similar names increases chance of selecting wrong ticket

But I suspect nobody ever seems to confuse them the other way, so as to accidentally pay too much. Funny that…

 

[Fawkes Cat]

But I suspect nobody ever seems to confuse them the other way, so as to accidentally pay too much. Funny that…

I agree that we see a remarkable number of customer mistakes which turned out to be in their favour and few where the mistake (rather than a penalty on being caught) causes them to lose out but in fairness, to penalise using a16-25 discount when 16-18 should have been used would be extremely harsh, so it may be that discretion is exercised.

Another mistake which would effectively penalise the customer making it is a single traveller using a pair of tickets bought with a Two Together card. Although we warn against doing this, I don’t recall seeing many (any?) reports of that being penalised. That would support my discretion theory.

 

[Deafdoggie]

But I suspect nobody ever seems to confuse them the other way, so as to accidentally pay too much. Funny that…

I know the railways aren't good at customer service, but surely even they wouldn't prosecute someone for paying too much would they?

 

[Fawkes Cat]

I know the railways aren't good at customer service, but surely even they wouldn't prosecute someone for paying too much would they?

Formally, the customer wouldn't have a valid ticket and so would be liable to the usual charges. But as @Deafdoggie suggests, it would seem absurd and I would think that such a charge could be fought, either by a halfway decent brief, or by taking it to the court of public opinion Via the local press

 

[Llanigraham]

From experience and observation there is also an "attitude problem" that varies with age. The younger element are far more likely to fail the "attitude test" than the older generation.