Very heavy fine for first time offence

[steffyweffy87]

At this point Avanti have sent an email to a female thinking it has gone to the male who travelled and their train manager spoke to who didn't have a valid ticket and was using their sister's Railcard (as stated in the email). Avanti are clearly after the traveller here. They do not have the travellers details and unknowingly to them they have sent the email to the wrong person. The email is not intended for the sister and that is not who Avanti are after.

Yes that is what it looks like indeed. The brother did not give up his details to the train manager. Does this actually affect anything though?

 

[some bloke]

One option is for the brother to write "I believe this was intended for me" and either pay up or ask to pay over a period as they mention.

 

[steffyweffy87]

One option is for the brother to write "I believe this was intended for me" and either pay up or ask to pay over a period as they mention.

But then if the brother manifests himself doesn’t that implicate both of them?

The sister for providing the means to commit the fraud with intent
The brother for travelling without a valid ticket?

Avanti now having a point of contact for both of them, could they not then prosecute both?

 

[some bloke]

But then if the brother manifests himself doesn’t that implicate both of them?

The sister for providing the means to commit the fraud with intent
The brother for travelling without a valid ticket?

Avanti now having a point of contact for both of them, could they not then prosecute both?

Well, what's the alternative? Settling while pretending to be the male person stopped?

 

[Peter Sarf]

Well, what's the alternative? Settling while pretending to be the male person stopped?

Fine etc paid by parent (of one or other but not both - brainstorming).

 

[AlterEgo]

If you pay the money the matter will go away. I wouldn’t think too hard about this.

 

[gray1404]

Yes that is what it looks like indeed. The brother did not give up his details to the train manager. Does this actually affect anything though?

There is the possibility Avanti might back off once they realise they are not emailed the person that travelled and was spoken to on the day of travel.

 

[John R]

If you pay the money the matter will go away. I wouldn’t think too hard about this.

Exactly what I was thinking.

 

[WesternLancer]

Hi all and thank you for your comments - could you please let me know if you think the below is an appropriate and acceptable response from the daughter:

Dear Lucy,





I am writing in response to your letter regarding the travel incident on 28/11/2024. I would like to clarify the circumstances surrounding this matter and request your consideration regarding the settlement terms.





I purchased the ticket in question but did not travel on that day. Instead, I gave the ticket to my brother, unaware that the railcard discount had been applied. Unfortunately, he was also unaware that he was not permitted to travel using a ticket purchased with my railcard until informed by the Train Manager. I acknowledge that this was a mistake on my part, and I fully understand the importance of adhering to rail travel policies.





I would like to settle this matter and am willing to pay the full price of a Standard Anytime Single ticket to resolve it out of court. However, I would like to respectfully request whether the £250 administrative fee could be reconsidered or reduced. This was an honest mistake and misunderstanding, and I have never previously committed any travel-related offence.





Additionally, as I am a student based in London, I would like to request an extension or installment plan for the payment if possible. I would appreciate any flexibility you could provide in this regard.





Please let me know if my request can be considered and the next steps I should take. Thank you for your time and understanding.

I would say that you NOW fully understand the importance of….

Ie you have now learned from your mistake. The e siting draft implies you may have understood before and still did what you did.

Edit. Tho I now see other posts suggesting different approaches to sending that draft at all etc, eg simply paying it what is asked etc. so my suggestion to amend may not be relevant.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

It's perhaps worth considering what the railway know; that is that
- they stopped a male travelling
- that male presented a ticket validated by a screenshot of the Railcard: that Railcard showed a female
- the ticket can be linked to an email account

What the railway do NOT seem to know is who owns that email account. And we know (although the railway may not know) that the sister provided the screenshot of the Railcard to her brother.

On the basis of what the railway know, they have sufficient evidence that the brother has committed an offence but don't seem to have a reliable way to contact him. Depending on whether they know that the sister provided the screenshot of the Railcard they may or may not have sufficient evidence to know that the daughter also committed an offence. But if the railway were to stop and think about matters they would realise that there is enough evidence to make it worth investigating whether the sister had committed an offence - that is, the railway would want to check whether the sister had voluntarily provided the screenshot.

At this point, however, note that the OP has more facts than the railway: the OP knows that the sister gave the brother the screenshot. So the OP and their family know that both sister and brother have committed offences.

The practical upshot of this is that it's in the OP 's interest (strictly, the interest of the brother and sister) to not do anything to encourage the railway to look at this in any more detail. It seems to me that the practical way to get the railway off the OP 's back is to pay the railway what they ask for.

Of course, £450 (or so) is a non-negligible amount that the OP and their family may not have to hand. It might be appropriate for everyone involved to think about the risks of prosecution to both brother and sister, and contribute to the settlement.

 

[SuspectUsual]

Brother had ticket controlled on train and obviously could not produce railcard

She did however supply her brother with a screenshot of her railcard which is what he produced to the train manager

Dear Lucy,

I am writing in response to your letter regarding the travel incident on 28/11/2024. I would like to clarify the circumstances surrounding this matter and request your consideration regarding the settlement terms.

I purchased the ticket in question but did not travel on that day. Instead, I gave the ticket to my brother, unaware that the railcard discount had been applied. Unfortunately, he was also unaware that he was not permitted to travel using a ticket purchased with my railcard until informed by the Train Manager. I acknowledge that this was a mistake on my part, and I fully understand the importance of adhering to rail travel policies.

I would like to settle this matter and am willing to pay the full price of a Standard Anytime Single ticket to resolve it out of court. However, I would like to respectfully request whether the £250 administrative fee could be reconsidered or reduced. This was an honest mistake and misunderstanding, and I have never previously committed any travel-related offence.

Additionally, as I am a student based in London, I would like to request an extension or installment plan for the payment if possible. I would appreciate any flexibility you could provide in this regard.

Please let me know if my request can be considered and the next steps I should take. Thank you for your time and understanding

(my bold above)

The bit in bold isn't true, is it? If she wasn't aware the railcard discount had been applied, she wouldn't have given him a screenshot of her railcard would she? (Or at the very least, it's a manipulation of the truth - possibly she gave him the ticket unaware of the discount, then one of them noticed it, then she sent the screenshot). To me, that sentence reads as an attempt to mislead Avanti and I'd be surprised if it worked

Also, bear in mind that the offer of a settlement can be withdrawn at any time, and being anything other than fully cooperative might cause this to happen.

 

[dazzler17]

As far as I can see, both of them have committed offences (different ones but they both are guilty of them)

At the moment they are only looking at the son, albeit in the wrong place. Surely the best thing would to pay and settle the matter without them looking any closer and ending up with both in bother?

£250 seems steep but it will save the hassle, stress and heartache of a criminal conviction (which both of the children could end up with if avanti look hard enough and if it ended up in court they are both guilty).

 

[gray1404]

So the railway receives an out of court settlement from one of the two people involved. It then doesn't stop them then going after the other person if they wanted.

 

[Gloster]

I am NOT an expert, but two points occur to me that I don’t think have been mentioned above:

It is my understanding that when you complete the form (or whatever you do) to buy a railcard you are deemed to have read and understood the regulations that apply to it. I am sure that somewhere in the verbiage of these regulations it states that you can’t pass it on to others or buy tickets for others. This probably also contravenes one of the Railway Byelaws or RoRA.

Secondly, surely the brother was asked for his name when stopped and if he did not give it, then he has contravened Byelaw 23.1. And I would think that if he merely let the railway employee take the details off the card and failed to advise him or her that they were the sister’s details, then that would be seen as the same offence.

Ignore this if I have got it all wrong.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

So the railway receives an out of court settlement from one of the two people involved. It then doesn't stop them then going after the other person if they wanted.

This might make sense if there was a realistic strategy that would lead to the railway walking away without a settlement. But I don't see any such strategy as available. If (whether through no response or stonewalling 'not me' response from the sister) the railway realise that they will need to research the brother harder, it seems to me to be near inevitable that they will find out about the sister. That means two prosecutions instead of one out of court settlement.

There can be no guarantee that paying the settlement now will make everything go away. But in my view paying up now is by far the most likely route to bring this matter to an end.

 

[Hadders]

Based on what we know know, i.e. a screenshot of the railcard was sent to the brother I would pay the settlement in full as soon as possible to prevent the matter escalating.

£250 admin fee is a high amount, given what we see from other train companies. Once the katter is settled I would complain to Avanti about the admin fee, maybe even consider contacting your MP about it.

 

[Gloster]

I wonder if Avanti’s explanation could be that they have been put to extra expense in trying to identify and contact the person who was actually using the card. What was actually said when he was stopped may be crucial to this.

 

[aron2smith]

I can't be the only one who thinks the fines are unnecessarily punitive, they clearly don't act as a deterrent, just seems like a money making exercise. The brother paid a fare he was not entitled to as he doesn't have a railcard, so why is it so hard to not just make him pay the difference by excessing the fare? £55 or so if the full fare was £170? It's 1/3 the fare he tried to evade, not the same as no fare at all! In either case, why don't they sell the correct ticket or excess the fare when this sort of thing happens? The rest of it seems so unnecessary. This is just my opinion but to me it feels like the railway gets a kick out of the confusing ticket system that is a rip off and that actively traps people. Seems to be a lot of issues around railcards lately. It doesn't help that some lines you can buy a ticket on the train and others you get fined for trying to do so. A bit of consistency is needed across the whole system and not by applying penalty fares everywhere! The law should be changed. Also as a disabled railcard holder, I'm asked maybe once a year for it and I use trains regularly, it's always the young railcards I noticed they ask people for.

 

[Hadders]

why is it so hard to not just make him pay the difference by excessing the fare?

Because otherwise everyone would just travel with a railcard discounted ticket they're not entitled to and just pay the excess when challenged.

 

[methecooldude]

I can't be the only one who thinks the fines are unnecessarily punitive

There has to be a punitive element to it, otherwise, like @Hadders has noted, everyone would just attach a railcard knowing that if they got caught, the worse would be an excess. Also, it's not a fine, it's an out of court settlement

IThe brother paid a fare he was not entitled to as he doesn't have a railcard, so why is it so hard to not just make him pay the difference by excessing the fare?

As quite clearly noted by the OP and others, there was an intent for the brother to not pay the full fare. This is slam dunk fare evasion.

This is just my opinion but to me it feels like the railway gets a kick out of the confusing ticket system that is a rip off and that actively traps people.

You are buying a ticket for someone else... 'Do you have a railcard?', no, so remove it. That's not really a trap...

Also as a disabled railcard holder, I'm asked maybe once a year for it and I use trains regularly, it's always the young railcards I noticed they ask people for.

Speaking anecdotally, the young persons ones are the ones that are messed around with the most... at least in my experience.

 

[Spaceship323]

So the railway receives an out of court settlement from one of the two people involved. It then doesn't stop them then going after the other person if they wanted.

They don't know who the other person is so they can't go after them

 

[Hadders]

This thread is to give @steffyweffy87 advice about their case. Discussion about whether the amount being asked for are too punative and how these incidents should be dealt with should take place in a separate thread.

Thanks.

 

[AlterEgo]

So the railway receives an out of court settlement from one of the two people involved. It then doesn't stop them then going after the other person if they wanted.

They don't care. They just want the fare and their admin fee. They aren't the police.

 

[Peter Sarf]

So the railway receives an out of court settlement from one of the two people involved. It then doesn't stop them then going after the other person if they wanted.

This is my fear.

This might make sense if there was a realistic strategy that would lead to the railway walking away without a settlement. But I don't see any such strategy as available. If (whether through no response or stonewalling 'not me' response from the sister) the railway realise that they will need to research the brother harder, it seems to me to be near inevitable that they will find out about the sister. That means two prosecutions instead of one out of court settlement.

There can be no guarantee that paying the settlement now will make everything go away. But in my view paying up now is by far the most likely route to bring this matter to an end.

I do think it is obvious that they should pay up. What ever comes next is a maybe,

I can't be the only one who thinks the fines are unnecessarily punitive, they clearly don't act as a deterrent, just seems like a money making exercise. The brother paid a fare he was not entitled to as he doesn't have a railcard, so why is it so hard to not just make him pay the difference by excessing the fare? £55 or so if the full fare was £170? It's 1/3 the fare he tried to evade, not the same as no fare at all! In either case, why don't they sell the correct ticket or excess the fare when this sort of thing happens? The rest of it seems so unnecessary. This is just my opinion but to me it feels like the railway gets a kick out of the confusing ticket system that is a rip off and that actively traps people. Seems to be a lot of issues around railcards lately. It doesn't help that some lines you can buy a ticket on the train and others you get fined for trying to do so. A bit of consistency is needed across the whole system and not by applying penalty fares everywhere! The law should be changed. Also as a disabled railcard holder, I'm asked maybe once a year for it and I use trains regularly, it's always the young railcards I noticed they ask people for.

Buty in this case is is rather more intentional that inadvertent.

They don't care. They just want the fare and their admin fee. They aren't the police.

Hopefully and likely correct.

 

[WesternLancer]

They don't care. They just want the fare and their admin fee. They aren't the police.

I agree with this analysis.

The op and son and daughter have my genuine sympathies but the kids messed up. A railcard bought at the ticket office over the counter before boarding the train for £30 would have prevented this had son realised.

I know their admin fee is harsh but under circs best to just pay it and hope sleeping dogs lie.

We don’t see avanti cases on here very often So hard to see patterns of their approach ref charges or propensity to enforce in court (don’t they have plenty of evaders just like every other train operator?).

I’d even avoid asking for instalments if that’s affordable as it possibly draws more attention to things. Hiding in plain sight can be worthwhile.

 

[Gonzoiku]

I agree with this analysis.

The op and son and daughter have my genuine sympathies but the kids messed up. A railcard bought at the ticket office over the counter before boarding the train for £30 would have prevented this had son realised.

I know their admin fee is harsh but under circs best to just pay it and hope sleeping dogs lie.

We don’t see avanti cases on here very often So hard to see patterns of their approach ref charges or propensity to enforce in court (don’t they have plenty of evaders just like every other train operator?).

I’d even avoid asking for instalments if that’s affordable as it possibly draws more attention to things. Hiding in plain sight can be worthwhile.

I agree too, but would add a further perspective: the traveller presented a photo if a Railcard which is not acceptable. The Railcard was very likely not inspected in any detail - no need, it isn't a real Railcard. The railway very possibly does not know that two individuals are implicated and will not know if you just pay up.

Move on.

GZ

 

[steffyweffy87]

The amount requested sounds preposterously high to me too. Could they really justify that figure as the actual sum of money needed to put the company back into the position it would have been in if the passenger had not cheated? What was the actual ticket price paid? Under criminal law, which they are using, the starting point should surely be repaying the discount together with the actual costs they incurred dealing with what sounds like a simple matter.

The discounted fare paid was £32 - paying the difference between that maximum ticket price (£170) seems more appropriate.

 

[JordR]

The discounted fare paid was £32 - paying the difference between that maximum ticket price (£170) seems more appropriate.

It's really not, why would anyone pay the right fare if all that happened on the few occasions they were caught is being asked to pay the difference?

Avanti isn't allowed to fine you, only a court can do that. They consider the amount they have requested puts them in the same position as if the right ticket had been bought in the first place. This also considers all the admin time they've been spending on this.

You don't have to pay it, but one or both will probably end up in the magistrates' court if you don't.

 

[methecooldude]

The discounted fare paid was £32 - paying the difference between that maximum ticket price (£170) seems more appropriate.

You don't get to make that decision I'm afraid