Proof of past railcard purchases requested by Northern

[walkingcactus5]

Hi there,


Earlier this year I travelled using my friends railcard and I got caught out by an inspector. I gave my details to the inspector, received a letter through the post (pleaded guilty in the letter) and paid my fine for using his railcard. I receieved confirmation from Northern that the matter was settled.

Recently I received an email from Northern stating they have done further investigations into my trainline account and have found around 100 journeys where I have used a railcard in the past 4 years. I have had a railcard for about 90% of these journeys, however between my railcard expiring and renewing the card I have taken a handful of journeys over the past 4 years without a railcard.

Also the email states I have used a childs ticket a handful of times. These tickets are for my younger sister, however I do not know how I can prove this.

The email/letter from Northern states

"Alternatively, if you are unable to provide proof of that you were entitled to the discounts
applied then on this occasion, you have the opportunity to dispose of this by way of
compensation of £239.90 made payable Northern Trains Ltd along with an investigation fee
of £250.00."

If the amount of £489.90 is repaid, then no criminal proceedings will be instigated against
you.

Now I can provide around 90% of these railcards but proving I bought a ticket for my younger sister is where I am struggling here. Is it likely the £489 fee will be reduced if I provide proof for the majority of tickets or is it ideal to just pay the settlement and move on from this?

 

[Watershed]

Welcome to the forum.

Can you clarify what happened when you "paid a fine" earlier this year? If you have a copy of the paperwork, this would be very useful.

In relation to your previous purchasing history, it would appear Northern have no evidence that it was you who travelled on those tickets. Tickets have been transferable for a number of years (i.e. you can give or sell them to others), and you have always been allowed to buy tickets on behalf of others. So the mere fact you bought them, and even any records they may have of the tickets being scanned, does not prove that it was you that travelled on them, which would be necessary to prove an offence. Nor is there any obligation to keep records of Railcard purchases to prove you were historically entitled to the discount - it need only be produced when travelling, not afterwards.

If anything, Northern should be taking the same effort to search Railcard records (which they could access if they wanted to), as they are in searching purchasing records. Of course it doesn't quite work that way; they are only interested in finding incriminating evidence!

If you can provide Railcard purchase evidence to disprove their allegations in relation to the journeys where you did have a valid Railcard, then it is possible they will accept this and reduce the amount they want for the fares. But it is unlikely they will budge on the clearly inflated investigation fee. It is effectively the "bribe" you need to pay if you want this issue to properly go away. Re: the child fares we do not have much in the way of experience to say whether they will accept your explanation. To verify it, they may ask for your sister's details and ID, and possibly to speak to her (or obtain a written statement from her).

The risk, by not accepting their settlement offer, is that they will try and prosecute you for their allegations of having travelled without a Railcard in the past. Based on a number of threads we've seen on the forum, Northern certainly aren't the first train company to make such allegations based on "fishing expeditions". I don't think we have heard of any accounts of these going to Court where the person receiving the allegations has neither confirmed nor denied anything. That being said I also don't think we have heard of any cases of someone in your position - i.e. where you have already been convicted of an offence.

It is a tricky decision to make, although Northern can only prosecute you for offences dating back more than 6 months if they did so on the basis of allegations of fraud - this is a much more serious offence which could be heard in the Crown Court, and the possibility of imprisonment (though unlikely in the circumstances you describe) may mean you'd be eligible for Legal Aid.

 

[spotify95]

I'm sure others will be along to shed some light, but if the one earlier this year has already been settled, then surely they can't prosecute after an out of court settlement has been reached, agreed and paid?
And as for the past offences, they're past the 6 month timeline for prosecution.

I'd personally be tempted to work out how many of those railcarded journeys were invalid, calculate the full fares for such journeys, and send Northern a cheque for that amount.

 

[SuspectUsual]

I'm sure others will be along to shed some light, but if the one earlier this year has already been settled, then surely they can't prosecute after an out of court settlement has been reached, agreed and paid?
And as for the past offences, they're past the 6 month timeline for prosecution.

I'd personally be tempted to work out how many of those railcarded journeys were invalid, calculate the full fares for such journeys, and send Northern a cheque for that amount.

....and some sort of proof of you younger sister's existence and age, and anything that corroborates the journeys you bought for her

 

[furlong]

The original incident is resolved - it can't realistically be reopened

Is there any pattern to the purchases of the child tickets, such as, based on your own purchases, happening at a time when you might have been expected to buy a ticket for yourself but did not?

They talk of criminal proceedings, so they have to prove offences "beyond reasonable doubt".
They have to prove the allegations. You don't have to disprove them, although when it is easy for you to do so, it can makes things simpler if you do.
If your younger sister truly made the journeys how could they ever meet that burden of proof?

How long ago were the journeys without a railcard? Beyond 6 months it's even harder to prosecute.

The level of the investigation fee seems preposterous. If you decide to engage with this, you might ask for a detailed breakdown, with justification, of how those costs were incurred. How many hours of work at what hourly cost have they really put into this? Why didn't they write to you first in a bid to avoid incurring such a disproportionate cost? You might just make a counter-offer, of what you consider to be reasonable costs plus the difference in fares that you think you owe. Or in other words, no more than what you consider a criminal court would award them in compensation.

 

[scrapy]

When you say you pleaded guilty for the offence and paid a fine, can you confirm whether this was:-

A) at court
B) a single justice procedure notice (many of these issued by Northern have been ruled unlawful)
C) a fixed penalty notice (not actually requiring a plea or technically a fine)

On the latest contact from northern i'd be tempted to reply back, saying the following:-

Dear Sir/madam

I previously held a railcard. As my Railcards have now expired, I no longer have them or proof of them. I have taken advice and I do not believe I am required to keep hold of my Railcard beyond it's expiry date or keep my proof of purchase so I am unable to produce to this for you. Under railway bylaws and NRCOT I am only required to produce a Railcard upon request when travelling and not retrospectively.

As for the child tickets, they were bought by me and used by someone under the age of 16.

I was previously caught by one of your inspectors travelling without a Railcard. I paid the amount outstanding and have confirmation from you that the matter is closed. Therefore I see no further reason for contact from your office

Yours sincerely

 

[Haywain]

The original incident is resolved - it can't realistically be reopened

It could form part of the evidence for another case though.

 

[jacksonbang]

This seems preposterous. I buy tickets for my parents with Senior Railcards often - am I to expect a letter soon? If you feel the need to engage with them and send them what you think you owe, well, that's up to you but by adding up all of your "questionable purchases" into one big settlement pie you have been given an all or nothing option. If I was in your situation there is no way i would pay this. It's actually offensive. I would not engage.

 

[jamiearmley]

Perhaps the initial incident, where the passenger travelled using HIS FRIENDS Railcard is the key here.

It's perfectly reasonable to assume that there is a probability that their entire ticket history reflects not having a Railcard.

It's also perfectly reasonable to ask the passenger about this.

Given the disparate methods which exist to purchase Railcards, some of which do not keep centralised records, it's better to ask the passenger than rely on a search. When searching for ticket history, if you miss some tickets due to the large amount of purchase methods, you don't do an injustice to the passenger - if anything, missing some is a passenger benefit!!

If you rely on a search of Railcards which misses some history, there's a chance that an injustice will be done. Much better to ask.

Reply or don't reply - that's up to you.

But do take this opportunity to check, and update, your records.

In terms of retailers, contact the retailer you purchased from.

Railcard.co.uk will show your entire Railcard history. Trainline will provide history on request, but they are slow to reply. Santander will do the same.

 

[Y Ddraig Coch]

It could form part of the evidence for another case though.

You have the right to remain silent. Phishing expeditions are definitely times to do this, if they think you have done something wrong, let them build a case, you are innocent until proven guilty. Don't drop yourself in it.

If they send a letter with times dates and accusations that's different.

 

[Haywain]

You have the right to remain silent.

And courts have the right to draw negative conclusions from silence.

 

[scrapy]

Perhaps the initial incident, where the passenger travelled using HIS FRIENDS Railcard is the key here.

It's perfectly reasonable to assume that there is a probability that their entire ticket history reflects not having a Railcard.

It's also perfectly reasonable to ask the passenger about this

It's never reasonable to assume guilt. That's what they appear to be doing in this case. They also are expecting evidence that the OP probably won't have (even if they did have a valid Railcard).

 

[Y Ddraig Coch]

And courts have the right to draw negative conclusions from silence.

Again, if there was a court case looming I would suggest different, this is about closed case if I have it correct, currently traveling and trying to keep up, but it seems they have had their cake and are now trying to eat it, whilst scaring people, nobody has to prove anything from their past without a legal charge being forthcoming, this isnt (as far as I can see) the cased here.

 

[AlterEgo]

And courts have the right to draw negative conclusions from silence.

The prosecution would need to provide some pretty good evidence to substantiate any charge beyond "hey look, they bought tickets with railcards". The accused is under no compulsion to answer any allegation.

I wouldn't respond to the email if I was the OP. The initial allegation has been disposed of and silence will likely ensure a dead end to the TOC's investigation.

 

[Haywain]

this is about closed case

It’s about matters that were not covered by the closed case.

The prosecution would need to provide some pretty good evidence to substantiate any charge beyond "hey look, they bought tickets with railcards".

I don’t disagree, I’m just pointing out that the ‘right’ to silence doesn’t mean as much as it used to.

 

[walkingcactus5]

Hello All,
Thankyou for all the prompt comments/responses. All these comments have helped me understand my legal rights in this situation.

Before going further I would like to answer a few questions that have been asked from the replies above to give more clarity on the situation.

The email/letter I received recently regarding this issue, this was the opening sentence.

"On ** ***** 2024 you were spoken to by an authorised member of staff in relation to you
travelling on a discounted ticket whilst being unable to produce a valid accompanying
Railcard. Further investigation into your Trainline account has shown **
other journeys where you have applied a 16-25 Railcard discount".
(date is in *) and (journey numbers)

The issue earlier this year which lead to them investigating my trainline account was settled. I paid a £256 fine after admitting I was in the wrong for travelling on a friends railcard. I received a email from the company saying "We can confirm this matter has now been paid and therefore no further action is required". I do not know why they are involving this matter into this "investigation". Per the various replies above, they should not be able to include this as it has been settled.

There is also not a pattern on the child tickets, so this should not be an issue either. I genuinely do not see how this can be proved in any way.

The fine I paid previously was an out of court settlement and was paid online after admitting I was in the wrong for using my friends railcard.

Overall I have not entirely decided what steps to take from here as of yet. Something in the recent email that caught my eye was this
"If, within 28 days of this letter, you do not make payment or provide satisfactory evidence
disproving the facts set out, NTL reserves the right to instigate criminal proceedings against
you under the Fraud Act 2006".

This makes me reluctant to just ignore this letter, I believe that Northern assume I am a prolific fare dodger which I am not. As stated earlier I have had a railcard for the majority of the journeys that have been taken.

If I am not entitled to show proof of my railcards when not travelling this seems like the best option at the moment. However, I do not fancy refusing to show my railcards and then having a fraud case put against me. I have always bought my railcards online but never connected them to my account so I am assuming they cannot trace previous railcards back to specific journeys.

Lastly would it be a terrible scenario to reply with the railcards that I have had previousley to cover the majority of journeys. My issue with this approach is the £250 investigation fee will not be lowered and I am basically admitting to Northern that I have travelled without a railcard and then they may assume I have been travelling on my friends railcard for these journeys which is "fraudulent".

I look forward to peoples responses to guide me through this situation.

Thanks guys.

 

[AlterEgo]

Overall I have not entirely decided what steps to take from here as of yet. Something in the recent email that caught my eye was this
"If, within 28 days of this letter, you do not make payment or provide satisfactory evidence
disproving the facts set out, NTL reserves the right to instigate criminal proceedings against
you under the Fraud Act 2006".

This makes me reluctant to just ignore this letter, I believe that Northern assume I am a prolific fare dodger which I am not. As stated earlier I have had a railcard for the majority of the journeys that have been taken.

Well they’ve rattled you. They don’t have any evidence of fraud and it’s fishing for more money off you.

Don’t reply to the email; it is unlikely to be in your interests. Anything you say can be used against you.

However, I do not fancy refusing to show my railcards and then having a fraud case put against me.

That’s not going to happen.

Keep quiet and this will go away. Northern do not prosecute people for fraud and if they did, they’d need some proper evidence, not just a list of tickets you’ve bought.

 

[Snow1964]

If you have a mix of tickets for family members on one account then simplest thing is to reply saying so, (basically use account for whole family), and saying child tickets were for younger sister born (state just year of birth, not whole date of birth). Don't attach any evidence (eg scan of passport, which actually would show whole date of birth). Remember they need to find evidence, not you counter them.

Do not reply with any of the railcard history (even if you still have physical railcards lingering in a drawer at home, so don't scan them or find a digital history). You are not required to incriminate yourself. In the unlikely event they continue their requesting further evidence, just ignore it.

This is a slightly better option than completely ignoring and not replying, because it means they can't tie any history to one person, they have it confirmed that it covers multiple people, some of which might legitimately have child tickets, or hold different railcards.

 

[Haywain]

Per the various replies above, they should not be able to include this as it has been settled.

What they have agreed when you settled with them is not to prosecute that case. It doesn't mean that they cannot refer to it ever again.

 

[robbeech]

There’s nothing to suggest that a ticket purchased on the Trainline app needs to be used by yourself, so they would need evidence that YOU travelled using any of those tickets in the first place. After securing this evidence they would need to prove no railcard was held at the time. You’re not obliged to give them this information, although if you do have evidence it would be good to keep hold of it for now.

You’ve admitted on here that there ARE instances of fare evasion that you’ve committed aside from the one you were penalised for, you mustn’t lose sight of the fact you are guilty of fare evasion on “a handful of journeys”.

How you respond (if you respond) should take all this into account.

In this instance if they have no evidence you travelled on any of those dates and at that time didn’t hold a railcard then there is no case to answer. Whether you choose to ignore it or to reply telling them you’ve done nothing wrong is up to you and should be a decision based on your own thoughts and the advice you receive here.

 

[talldave]

This looks like extortion, based on an empty threat for which they have no evidence and would not progress to court. Section 4 of their own Revenue Protection Policy confirms this. It's a very questionable business practice for a government owned company.

 

[AlterEgo]

If you have a mix of tickets for family members on one account then simplest thing is to reply saying so, (basically use account for whole family), and saying child tickets were for younger sister born (state just year of birth, not whole date of birth). Don't attach any evidence (eg scan of passport, which actually would show whole date of birth). Remember they need to find evidence, not you counter them.

Nope, do not do this. Don't play their game.

Simply ignore the email as if you never received it or it went to junk.

Once you start a dialogue, this invites follow up questions like "And how often does your younger sister travel?" "What was this journey for?" "Are you the only person who buys tickets for her?" "Can you evidence her journeys, given you are responsible for purchasing her tickets?" "Does she travel alone?" - and your silence to those, more specific questions, will be far more damning.

If you plan to use your right to say nothing, do so from the outset.

The OP gains nothing whatsoever from engaging with them. I bet half of Northern's emails get junked or just never read.

 

[walkingcactus5]

Hi all,

I appreciate all the responses regarding this.

I have made my decision on how I am going to proceed with this case.

I will update as this develops.

 

[jacksonbang]

Good luck. Truly awful way for these companies to act.

 

[walkingcactus5]

Hello all,

I have some updates on this case and some misinformation that I would like to clarify.

The misinformation is perhaps me being too vague when I said I used my friends rail card. The rail card that I used was in fact my friends rail card but with a photo of myself on it. I am not sure if this makes a difference to the case but it is something I would like to mention as it may impact the responses. The conductor that caught me has a photo of this "rail card". This has me concerned about the fraud charges as it is honestly blatant fraud from my end and I was foolish to think such a thing would work.

Furthermore I have received another email from Northern regarding this case. The letter is titled "final reminder" and is basically an extension of 14 days where they have given me the chance again to settle out of court for £489. The letter talks about how fraudulent activity comes with court proceedings and that sort of thing and again is a threat from Northern that they have a right to take criminal proceedings if found guilty.

I would like appreciate any further guidance on this and especially if the misinformation clarified above makes a significant distance. Up until now I have not sent any replies or had contact with Northern. I will also copy and paste the original message I sent in this forum below to make it easier for people to understand the situation. Thanks, I appreciate everyone's advice so far.


****ORIGINAL MESSAGE****
Hi there,


Earlier this year I travelled using my friends railcard and I got caught out by an inspector. I gave my details to the inspector, received a letter through the post (pleaded guilty in the letter) and paid my fine for using his railcard. I receieved confirmation from Northern that the matter was settled.

Recently I received an email from Northern stating they have done further investigations into my trainline account and have found around 100 journeys where I have used a railcard in the past 4 years. I have had a railcard for about 90% of these journeys, however between my railcard expiring and renewing the card I have taken a handful of journeys over the past 4 years without a railcard.

Also the email states I have used a childs ticket a handful of times. These tickets are for my younger sister, however I do not know how I can prove this.

The email/letter from Northern states

"Alternatively, if you are unable to provide proof of that you were entitled to the discounts
applied then on this occasion, you have the opportunity to dispose of this by way of
compensation of £239.90 made payable Northern Trains Ltd along with an investigation fee
of £250.00."

If the amount of £489.90 is repaid, then no criminal proceedings will be instigated against
you.

Now I can provide around 90% of these railcards but proving I bought a ticket for my younger sister is where I am struggling here. Is it likely the £489 fee will be reduced if I provide proof for the majority of tickets or is it ideal to just pay the settlement and move on from this?

 

[Bletchleyite]

If you feel that things could get much worse due to your dishonesty (by doctoring a Railcard you have laid yourself open to a possible charge of fraud, which is a very serious offence that would have a significant effect on your life), best advice would probably be just to cough up. You can't guarantee they won't find what you've done anyway, but it probably carries the highest chance of them not doing just to pay what is asked and ensure you never travel without a valid ticket again.

The more you dig into it, the more likely they are to dig into it.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

If you feel that things could get much worse due to your dishonesty (by doctoring a Railcard you have laid yourself open to a possible charge of fraud, which is a very serious offence that would have a significant effect on your life), best advice would probably be just to cough up. You can't guarantee they won't find what you've done anyway, but it probably carries the highest chance of them not doing just to pay what is asked and ensure you never travel without a valid ticket again.

The more you dig into it, the more likely they are to dig into it.

This has got to be the best advice. So far, you don't seem to have responded to the railway at all (so they won't be seeing you as someone who is trying to co-operate), and it turns out that what you have done is more serious than the Railway have realised. So your best bet is to do what it takes to close the matter down now i.e. paying the £489.

 

[walkingcactus5]

I understand.

Could it be possible to co operate now and show them the proof of rail cards for 90% of journeys and cut the fine down slightly lower and then state I do not have proof of a railcard for the remaining 10% of journeys?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Oct 2024 ==

This has got to be the best advice. So far, you don't seem to have responded to the railway at all (so they won't be seeing you as someone who is trying to co-operate), and it turns out that what you have done is more serious than the Railway have realised. So your best bet is to do what it takes to close the matter down now i.e. paying the £489.

By doing what I stated in the above message, surely this would show northern I am not a serial fare dodger and it will show them I have had a valid rail card for over 3 years? Any guidance would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I understand.

Could it be possible to co operate now and show them the proof of rail cards for 90% of journeys and cut the fine down slightly lower and then state I do not have proof of a railcard for the remaining 10% of journeys?

That's down to your own view on risk-benefit analysis. If you do that then there's more chance they'll notice what actually happened, which is a very serious criminal matter. Claiming you had a Railcard when you didn't is generally treated (despite being technically fraud) as a fairly petty crime which tends to get a settlement of £100ish plus fares evaded (which is what you've got here) - actual falsification is much more serious.

If it were me I'd cough up as the lowest-risk option, but that's your decision and yours alone.

 

[Haywain]

Could it be possible to co operate now and show them the proof of rail cards for 90% of journeys and cut the fine down slightly lower and then state I do not have proof of a railcard for the remaining 10% of journeys?

There is no way for us to know if that would result in Northern amending their figures, but it might be worth a try. However, they are not going to reduce the "investigation fee" element so the effect will be limited to some extent. And, as pointed out, they may choose to look more closely at why the railcards you can provide evidence of do not match the one you were carrying. I think, on balance, that I would recommend paying the amount requested and putting an end to the matter.