What triggers being investigated?

[Johnonatrain]

I was thinking about this the other day but what triggers getting a letter from a TOC, where they threaten to prosecute?

Is the trigger getting caught red handed in person, which causes the investigation to start i.e. being stopped at the station, and having your name and address taken (or photo of your ID/railcard taken), which gives them enough info to look you up and also check against Trainline/Uber for any repeated patterns of evasion (e..g buying many tickets without a railcard, short fare evasion etc.)

OR can they simply monitor people's ticket purchases patterns (maybe using ai?) on Trainline/Uber and use that to determine if fare evasion / repeat offences have taken place? (I know trainline monitor people who abuse the refund button and that has in the past opened up investigation).

 

[MarlowDonkey]

OR can they simply monitor people's ticket purchases patterns (maybe using ai?) on Trainline/Uber and use that to determine if fare evasion / repeat offences have taken place? (I know trainline monitor people who abuse the refund button and that has in the past opened up investigation).

It's probably unknown whether they have the resources to do this and they most likely wouldn't tell anyway.

You could perhaps envisage intelligence lead fare checking by looking for people who bought tickets between notorious short fare destinations on a regular basis. Then send out ticket inspectors to attempt an interception. Cases of settlements over £ 10,000 sometimes make the headlines. Was catching the perpetrators luck or cunning?

 

[John R]

I was thinking about this the other day but what triggers getting a letter from a TOC, where they threaten to prosecute?

Is the trigger getting caught red handed in person, which causes the investigation to start i.e. being stopped at the station, and having your name and address taken (or photo of your ID/railcard taken), which gives them enough info to look you up and also check against Trainline/Uber for any repeated patterns of evasion (e..g buying many tickets without a railcard, short fare evasion etc.)

OR can they simply monitor people's ticket purchases patterns (maybe using ai?) on Trainline/Uber and use that to determine if fare evasion / repeat offences have taken place? (I know trainline monitor people who abuse the refund button and that has in the past opened up investigation).

Noticing that this is your first post, it's quite an unusual topic to raise. You wouldn't happen to have had such a letter by any chance? If so, if you tell us more then posters here can give some advice on how to respond.

And yes, we have seen cases where a letter has gone out based on the type of monitoring you mention, without actually having stopped the person "in the act". So it's clear that at least some train companies are using these methods.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

OR can they simply monitor people's ticket purchases patterns (maybe using ai?) on Trainline/Uber and use that to determine if fare evasion / repeat offences have taken place? (I know trainline monitor people who abuse the refund button and that has in the past opened up investigation).

On the basis of what we see here, being caught without the right ticket may lead to an audit of online purchases - which in turn may lead to further action. I think (but have not gone to check) that it's also the case that the terms and conditions for Trainline etc. allow them to share data for the prevention and investigation of crime, and we have seen a few train companies (notably Greater Anglia) going through the data they hold to identify suspicious patterns of behaviour (although Greater Anglia's exercise a few years ago was mainly about Delay Repay abuse).

I think (again, on the basis of what I see here) that in practice audits of data come up with very few false positives, so when the railway write a stroppy letter it's highly likely that they are right - however they have decided to access the data.

What's the practical upshot of this? It must be that no one can be told not to worry if they haven't been picked up for fare dodging: it may be that the railway is about to go through the records and send a letter. And the obvious corollary of this is that anyone who has been fare dodging and getting away with it needs to stop immediately: they may be in a hole from what they've done in the past, but at least they can stop digging!

 

[30907]

We have come across investigations related to:
suspicious pattern/frequency of delay repay claims
suspicious patterns of ticket purchase/use (eg potential short-faring involving one barriered and one unbarriered station).
As Fawkes Cat has said, GA seem to have been an early adopter, but other operators are certainly doing similar things.

 

[MrJeeves]

OR can they simply monitor people's ticket purchases patterns (maybe using ai?) on Trainline/Uber and use that to determine if fare evasion / repeat offences have taken place? (I know trainline monitor people who abuse the refund button and that has in the past opened up investigation).

My understanding is that some large retailers have specific agreements with TOCs to do their own data analysis and report accounts with suspicious purchases to the TOCs for further investigation in exchange for a portion of any settlement or some other fixed fee.

 

[WesternLancer]

A common one on here seems to be Railcard irregularities - esp Railcards that have expired and the passenger has not noticed (genuine errors) get reported for investigation. I assume this is to ensure that back office can start looking at how often since the expiry date the passenger has used the Railcard discount without being entitled to it and seek payment of such other trips than the one caught on, which would not be something the staff on the day could resolve eg with a Penalty Fare.

Of course for people who have genuinely overlooked renewing their Railcard tis results in quite a harsh payment even if only an admin fee of £100 to £150 is included - not to mention the arrears of wrong tickets that may be required to be replaced at 'punitive' Anytime fare levels.

Suspected deliberate railcard related evasion (fake cards or discounts claimed by people who have never bought a Railcard) would also be obvious cases to report for investigation.

 

[Johnonatrain]

Noticing that this is your first post, it's quite an unusual topic to raise. You wouldn't happen to have had such a letter by any chance? If so, if you tell us more then posters here can give some advice on how to respond.

And yes, we have seen cases where a letter has gone out based on the type of monitoring you mention, without actually having stopped the person "in the act". So it's clear that at least some train companies are using these methods.

I've never received a letter. I live in London and mostly take the tube.

Just find it interesting how TfL prosecutes vs train companies who seem to be a bit more forgiving despite being able to prove repeat offences with hard data they access via Uber/TL (which obviously TfL can't use because it doesn't apply)

 

[signed]

Just find it interesting how TfL prosecutes

TfL has a very different fare system to the NR bunch, getting the wrong ticket is quite hard.

What we see on the forum is Freedom/Staff pass misuse and tailgating mostly, it's clear they are trying stop high-scale fraud and not targetting the low bunch (which is probably why we basically never hear about the Penalty Fares, despite at least 200k issued last financial year).

TFL recoup £1.3m despite spending £22m on fare dodging. A discussion.

Hi all, A recent article published in "The Standard" revealed the shocking ineffectiveness of prosecuting fare evaders. It appears that more money is spent on investigations than can be recouped from fare evaders themselves. Clearly, this seems like an unsustainable business plan and is likely...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[island]

I've never received a letter. I live in London and mostly take the tube.

Just find it interesting how TfL prosecutes vs train companies who seem to be a bit more forgiving despite being able to prove repeat offences with hard data they access via Uber/TL (which obviously TfL can't use because it doesn't apply)

TfL doesn't do settlement agreements (perhaps due to its structure as a local government body) whereas the TOCs do. TfL only does warning, penalty fare, or prosecution. The TOCs get more money from a settlement agreement than from a prosecution.

Also, TfL fare evasion tends to be rather more clear cut as there are few or no complexities and the vast majority of passengers just tapping in and out.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

How do Chiltern specifically target "short farers" who buy tickets from Wembley Stadium to London Marylebone, when they've actually travelled in from much further afield? Is it simply by setting the barriers at Marylebone to automatically reject all 'Wembley Stadium' tickets?

 

[AlterEgo]

How do Chiltern specifically target "short farers" who buy tickets from Wembley Stadium to London Marylebone, when they've actually travelled in from much further afield? Is it simply by setting the barriers at Marylebone to automatically reject all 'Wembley Stadium' tickets?

A lot of people simply buy online and then don't realise they have not been able to select it an an eticket, and arrive at the barrier ticketless.

 

[Surreytraveller]

TfL has a very different fare system to the NR bunch, getting the wrong ticket is quite hard.

What we see on the forum is Freedom/Staff pass misuse and tailgating mostly, it's clear they are trying stop high-scale fraud and not targetting the low bunch (which is probably why we basically never hear about the Penalty Fares, despite at least 200k issued last financial year).

TFL recoup £1.3m despite spending £22m on fare dodging. A discussion.

Hi all, A recent article published in "The Standard" revealed the shocking ineffectiveness of prosecuting fare evaders. It appears that more money is spent on investigations than can be recouped from fare evaders themselves. Clearly, this seems like an unsustainable business plan and is likely...

www.railforums.co.uk

I think TfL is state owned organisation, so is less interested in profit.
Whereas TOCs are interested in profit, and will take the easiest route to gain as much money as possible

 

[WesternLancer]

I think TfL is state owned organisation, so is less interested in profit.
Whereas TOCs are interested in profit, and will take the easiest route to gain as much money as possible

This might be a view if any of them actually made a profit! Both TfL and TOCs are all heavily subsidised by govt. Taking more money in fares or fines / settlements etc makes no difference to them as it all goes to govt in some form or another to offset the losses.

The private TOCs do not make their profits from the revenue they take, they make it from the money the govt pays them to operate the service. It will be the state that is on their case telling them to enforce revenue as harshly as they can manage I suspect.

 

[Surreytraveller]

This might be a view if any of them actually made a profit! Both TfL and TOCs are all heavily subsidised by govt. Taking more money in fares or fines / settlements etc makes no difference to them as it all goes to govt in some form or another to offset the losses.

The private TOCs do not make their profits from the revenue they take, they make it from the money the govt pays them to operate the service. It will be the state that is on their case telling them to enforce revenue as harshly as they can manage I suspect.

It depends upon their contract. If they get a slice of the money they collect from chasing fare dodgers, rather than the money direct from the farebox (which they do), then there is money to be made there.
It's not as simple as all money goes to the DfT, and the DfT pays them to operate the service

 

[John R]

It depends upon their contract. If they get a slice of the money they collect from chasing fare dodgers, rather than the money direct from the farebox (which they do), then there is money to be made there.
It's not as simple as all money goes to the DfT, and the DfT pays them to operate the service

Your first and second sentences appear to be speculative, whereas the third is in contrast more definitive. Do you have anything to support the view that last comment?

 

[signed]

I think TfL is state owned organisation, so is less interested in profit.

LNER, TfW and especially Northern are OLR, and do offer Out of Court Settlements

 

[Surreytraveller]

Your first and second sentences appear to be speculative, whereas the third is in contrast more definitive. Do you have anything to support the view that last comment?

The DfT offers incentives for TOCs to do certain things. There is currently a crack down on revenue. The DfT offers the TOCs a slice to incentivise them to do so. Perhaps the TOC keeps all the money from those who pay out of court settlements? Who knows.
But it isn't as simple as the TOC gets a lump sum payment and the DfT gets all the revenue.
The TOC will get advertising revenue. Car park revenue.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Aug 2024 ==

LNER, TfW and especially Northern are OLR, and do offer Out of Court Settlements

Its not the same as TfL. There is still profits to be made

 

[Hadders]

If you've come to the attention of a train company then this is likely to result in a data trawl. You could have come to their attention for:

- Having details taken because of a ticketing irregularity
- Being issued with a Penalty Fare
- Requesting excessive number of refunds
- Applying for a higher than average volume of delay repay claims (I think this is what Greater Anglia said in at least one letter that was posted on here)

In addition we have recently seen a case where ticket scans suggest something isn't right (eg purchase of a short distance ticket to enable fare evasion)

Just find it interesting how TfL prosecutes vs train companies who seem to be a bit more forgiving despite being able to prove repeat offences with hard data they access via Uber/TL (which obviously TfL can't use because it doesn't apply)

TfL issue a high number of very valuable passes (Zip Oyster and Freedom Passes) and misuse of these is very easy, consequenly I understand why TfL take a hard line in these cases. These make up the majority of cases we see on here.

I think TfL is state owned organisation, so is less interested in profit.
Whereas TOCs are interested in profit, and will take the easiest route to gain as much money as possible

I think there's more to it than that. TfL isn't a non-profit organisation and as pointed out upthread the state owned National Rail operators still issue out of court settlements.

 

[skyhigh]

There is currently a crack down on revenue. The DfT offers the TOCs a slice to incentivise them to do so.

Are you sure about that?

 

[Surreytraveller]

Are you sure about that?

Yes.

 

[signed]

Its not the same as TfL. There is still profits to be made

TfL does need to make as much profit as possible, else the network is just unsustainable. It's no more different to OLRs

 

[Mawkie]

I know TfL have their Irregular Travel Analysis Platform (ITAP) software - there is an excellent FOI here.

Do the mainline TOCs have something similar?