Help! - Email from WMR Stating that I had misused my Railcard

[Mehd]

I received an email from WMR early this March claiming that I misused my 16-17 railcard as far back as 2020 and said I continued to do so until February 2025, I showed them proof that it was valid for me to use the railcard between 2020-2022 via both the online and physical railcards and I have provided the evidence for this.

I also said that I currently use the 16-25 saver for my journeys as a student. I bought these on the trainline app. I went through my trainline ticket history but it doesn't allow me to view the ticket PDF History, only the price and journey taken.

I know for a fact from 2022-2024 (September) I definitely used the 16-25 saver constantly however, I did use the 16-17 saver for my nephew a couple of times from then until February and I may have used it for some of my own tickets within this time, Mainly from Coventry to Rugby (around £7 for the advanced ticket price for WMR), and rarely to/from both Euston and Birmingham New Street, I asked them for the tickets in question and said i'm happy to pay the fare difference, and to cooperate but asked for the tickets in question so we can come to a settlement, as they are willing to do, with the proof of the rail cards I owned/own.

I have attached correspondence so far (2 emails from them, 3 emails from me), please let me know what steps to take next/what the possible outcome will be with WMR?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Mar 2025 ==

I have also attached the proof of current/previous railcards

 

[Spaceship323]

The usual advice is not to reply to this type of email. Anyone is allowed to buy tickets for someone else, it's only illegal to use them incorrectly. Have you ever been stopped and asked to provide details?
Don't say you're happy to pay the difference in fares as it looks as if you've done nothing wrong. Of course they are willing to settle - they want your money
Saying that, you have responded to this "fishing trip" so maybe if you just email WMR copies of your railcards they will stop this nonsense (I see you have told them you "may" have selected the wrong railcard, this may create a problem as you may have self incriminated yourself, it's a pity you didn't come here for advice before responding to their first email)
Someone more expert than me may give better advice

Edited to add the sentence in brackets

 

[Mehd]

The usual advice is not to reply to this type of email. Anyone is allowed to buy tickets, it's only illegal to use them incorrectly, have you ever been stopped and asked to provide details?

I have never been stopped or asked to provide details before.

Don't say you're happy to pay the difference in fares as it looks as if you've done nothing wrong. Of course they are willing to settle - they want your money

Do I have to continue with settling now that i've offered to pay the difference in fares?

Saying that, you have responded to this "fishing trip" so maybe if you just email WMR copies of your railcards they will stop this nonsense

I have attached the railcards as evidence to my 2nd response to WMR.

 

[30907]

As you have replied, I would expect WMR to respond with a spreadsheet identifying journeys undertaken at a 16-17 fare.

You should compare this with your own records

If you have used that discount for yourself, WMR will quite correctly regard you as having cheated them of the correct fare (even if accidentally if it followed a purchase for your nephew).

You must expect them to ask you for the full single fare for each of these journeys, not just the difference, plus an admin sum of £175 (seems to be the current rate!).

If you can provide evidence of your nephew's 16-17 Saver they should be willing to delete those.

Please come back for further advice when the next reply comes.

 

[Egg Centric]

WMR are seriously starting to take the mickey here. If you (and your nephew or anyone else using the tickets you buy) have never been stopped this is becoming egregious abuse of their access to trainline database imo.

 

[JordR]

It probably would have been better never to engage in the first place, then it is likely nothing would have happened. You've also made statements that imply some irregularity, which probably hasn't helped.

See what they say and see if you can explain the journeys they raise. If you can, do so and leave it at that. I'd only be even talking settlement if you genuinely did travel without the correct railcard.

 

[AlterEgo]

Never ever reply to these fishing emails. As soon as you open a dialogue with them you invite further scrutiny and the potential of having answered several establishing questions and then feeling compelled to answer a specific and incriminating one.

I recommend ceasing all correspondence. Shutting up is the best thing you can do for yourself.

 

[Mehd]

Please come back for further advice when the next reply comes.

I'll post any further correspondence in this chat as soon as they reply.

WMR are seriously starting to take the mickey here. If you (and your nephew or anyone else using the tickets you buy) have never been stopped this is becoming egregious abuse of their access to trainline database imo.

I do find it quite out of the ordinary for WMR to question anyone on their trainline usage especially without evidence of who used the tickets and never being spoken to in person about this.

It probably would have been better never to engage in the first place, then it is likely nothing would have happened. You've also made statements that imply some irregularity, which probably hasn't helped.

Is it still likely that WMR won't respond to my follow-up email? Afterall, I haven't explicitly admitted any guilt for anything I haven't done.

I recommend ceasing all correspondence. Shutting up is the best thing you can do for yourself.

Is this still a possibility despite engaging? I want to avoid any potential escalation especially when it seems planned by WMR, I only responded as I was genuinely concerned about my own 16-25 railcard usage to which I am entitled to use.

 

[AlterEgo]

Is this still a possibility despite engaging? I want to avoid any potential escalation especially when it seems planned by WMR, I only responded as I was genuinely concerned about my own 16-25 railcard usage to which I am entitled to use.

You should not have responded at all. Now you find yourself engaged in dialogue, where at this point, if you refuse to answer any questions, it is more likely that guilt can be inferred.

When using a right against self incrimination (the right to not respond) you should do this as a blanket strategy. Respond to nothing at all, not even “is the sky blue?”.

The correct strategy when faced with out of the blue allegations is to simply not respond. What do you think happens to the hundreds of emails they send to dead inboxes or that end up in spam folders? Nothing. They’ve nowhere to go after that.

Now you are potentially facing the prospect of being asked for a large sum of money. You’ve incriminated yourself by saying it’s possible you accidentally selected the 16-17 saver when it was not valid for you, while at the same time maintaining you can’t see a record of which railcard was used for which ticket, but also that you do buy legitimate 16-17 fares. Then you state your willingness to pay money to resolve it.

The obvious follow up questions for West Mids here are “why do you believe some purchases were an accident when you also told us you do buy tickets for your nephew, yet you haven’t been able to see what, if any, journeys were discounted with the 16-17 Saver?” and “what is your nephew’s name, what journeys did he make and we’d like to see his railcard history please”. Then they’ll get to the point where they say something like “so on (date) you did in fact purchase a 16-17 saver ticket (reference) for (journey) - did you travel on this ticket?”

Travelling on a 16-17 Saver when you don’t have one is a criminal offence. It’s extremely naive to engage with them in this way and doing so in such an earnest way by asking to pay (whatever difference, you’d leave it up to them?) to make it go away only undermines your defence.

 

[Mehd]

You should not have responded at all. Now you find yourself engaged in dialogue, where at this point, if you refuse to answer any questions, it is more likely that guilt can be inferred.

Would the logical strategy now just be to deny any wrongdoing or usage of any other saver other than my own? Is it now just a waiting game to see what they come up with?

The correct strategy when faced with out of the blue allegations is to simply not respond. What do you think happens to the hundreds of emails they send to dead inboxes or that end up in spam folders? Nothing. They’ve nowhere to go after that.

I'm sure some of these scenarios may result in an escalation if no response is given in a timely manner?

The obvious follow up questions for West Mids here are “why do you believe some purchases were an accident when you also told us you do buy tickets for your nephew, yet you haven’t been able to see what, if any, journeys were discounted with the 16-17 Saver?” and “what is your nephew’s name, what journeys did he make and we’d like to see his railcard history please”. Then they’ll get to the point where they say something like “so on (date) you did in fact purchase a 16-17 saver ticket (reference) for (journey) - did you travel on this ticket?”

Will this line of questioning be guaranteed to happen by WMR, are they likely to pursue this?

Travelling on a 16-17 Saver when you don’t have one is a criminal offence. It’s extremely naive to engage with them in this way and doing so in such an earnest way by asking to pay (whatever difference, you’d leave it up to them?) to make it go away only undermines your defence.

Is there still time to cease correspondence as they have no real evidence to suspect I had committing any criminal offence other than their access to the trainline app, to which we have established buying the ticket is not a criminal offence but using it is?

When using a right against self incrimination (the right to not respond) you should do this as a blanket strategy. Respond to nothing at all, not even “is the sky blue?”.

Thank you for the advice, I will keep this in mind for future reference. What would be the best way to approach this now that dialogue has been engaged.

 

[AlterEgo]

Would the logical strategy now just be to deny any wrongdoing or usage of any other saver other than my own? Is it now just a waiting game to see what they come up with?

I recommend you make no comment about anything else for the time being to see whether West Mids have anything more to say.

I'm sure some of these scenarios may result in an escalation if no response is given in a timely manner?

Escalation for what? They’ve not got any hard evidence of wrongdoing. That’s why they email you - to see if you’ll talk.

Will this line of questioning be guaranteed to happen by WMR, are they likely to pursue this?

It’s not clear whether they’re bright enough to go down this road - their “fraud” department is…not great. But they might. Or they might not.

Is there still time to cease correspondence as they have no real evidence to suspect I had committing any criminal offence other than their access to the trainline app, to which we have established buying the ticket is not a criminal offence but using it is?


Thank you for the advice, I will keep this in mind for future reference. What would be the best way to approach this now that dialogue has been engaged.

I still recommend ceasing all correspondence. If they continue to come back, post the emails in this thread.

 

[dciuk]

I wrote the following last night before anyone else had replied, but the thread disappeared and it would not allow me to post it. It has probably been superseded by some of the answers that have been posted since, but this was my advice at that point.

This looks like a fishing exercise from WMR. On the face of it they have seen purchases spanning more than 2 years and have come to the conclusion it is likely that the wrong discount was applied to some of the tickets. It is perfectly acceptable to purchase a ticket for someone else to use. Are they likely to find any tickets with the 16/17 railcard discount applied from the period when niether yourself or your nephew held a 16/17 railcard? Ideally you would have asked for help before sending the first reply so the experts here could have suggested on the best course of action. I am not sure if you mentioning that you might have selected the 16-17 option in error might have hurt your case, but it does not appear that you have admitted to anything, just that you cannot rule out a mistake. It might help if you are able to send them a screenshot or photo of your nephews railcard, but please wait to see what other forum members think before doing so. It might be that your explantion regarding purchasing for your nephew will conclude the matter given that they do not appear to have any evidence that you have travelled on an invalid ticket, and from what you have told us you are not aware of having used the discount incorrectly

 

[Pushpit]

I'm sure some of these scenarios may result in an escalation if no response is given in a timely manner?

The only practical escalation route is via a civil claim against you. So that's open to rail companies but there isn't much evidence in this forum of it happening. Two cases that have been reported in recent months involve people who have not given full updates, and perhaps that's for very good reasons. A civil claim won't result in a criminal record for all intents and purposes.

@AlterEgo has lucidly here - and elsewhere - explained the perils of fishing trips and overall I agree. The one exception I make, and which may apply to you, is if genuinely there is little or no loss to the railway company and their fishing can never land a fat trout. Or if the fares involved are very small, which may be referenced in your post 1. In that circumstance I would give an argument to pay off the narrow cost of what you are owed, since the civil channel works very differently to the criminal channel. Offering a sensible compromise amount in order to settle is viewed favourably by the 3 core processes involved, and inhibits railway companies from their more outrageous fees and replacement ticket costs. If you are certain that the sums are low, the incidents are few in number, and that the other tickets were legitimate, then there is an alternative argument here for pro-active co-operation.

 

[band]

I wrote the following last night before anyone else had replied, but the thread disappeared and it would not allow me to post it. It has probably been superseded by some of the answers you that have been posted since, but this was my advice at that point.

This looks like a fishing exercise from WMR. On the face of it they have seen purchases spanning more than 2 years and have come to the conclusion it is likely that the wrong discount was applied to some of the tickets. It is perfectly acceptable to purchase a ticket for someone else to use. Are they likely to find any tickets with the 16/17 railcard discount applied from the period when niether yourself or your nephew held a 16/17 railcard? Ideally you would have asked for help before sending the first reply so the experts here could have suggested on the best course of action. I am not sure if you mentioning that you might have selected the 16-17 option in error might have hurt your case, but it does not appear that you have admitted to anything, just that you cannot rule out a mistake. It might help if you are able to send them a screenshot or photo of your nephews railcard, but please wait to see what other forum members think before doing so. It might be that your explantion regarding purchasing for your nephew will conclude the matter given that they do not appear to have any evidence that you have travelled on an invalid ticket, and from what you have told us

Hi, I recently have had the same email, however have selected the 16-17 saver by accident when having a 16-25 railcard. I responded saying I’m happy to pay the difference, but the only problem is I was stopped at a station before receiving this email where I got got caught with a 16-17 and they said I would receive an email in 6-8 weeks. I’m concerned now that WmR will believe I have 2 incidents when they both regard the same thing.

 

[dciuk]

Hi, I recently have had the same email, however have selected the 16-17 saver by accident when having a 16-25 railcard. I responded saying I’m happy to pay the difference, but the only problem is I was stopped at a station before receiving this email where I got got caught with a 16-17 and they said I would receive an email in 6-8 weeks. I’m concerned now that WmR will believe I have 2 incidents when they both regard the same thing.

@band Please can you create your own thread so that we can advise you appropriately. Your situation is not quite the same as that of Mehd

 

[Mehd]

I have received a response from WMR, please note for context that I was never stopped or caught in person for any of these tickets bought and I did buy 16-17 tickets for my nephew from September onwards, however WMR are giving me only 2 options (A to pay up and B for this to go to the digital prosecutions team) and are claiming that I may have engaged in short journey fraud (which I have never done).

They're also claiming these journeys may come up (even if I pay) if they get a flag that I did short journey fraud (which I have not done, and they are clearly not adding this to the amount as it cannot be proven) should I send my nephews railcard or will this be interpreted as uncooperative? I am aware that in the earlier emails I did say I would pay the difference for his railcard usage too, would this be an issue? I can't check the validity of these tickets as the trainline app does not allow me to view the PDF of the railcard used.

They're also trying to make me pay for journeys older than 6 months old, I also do not recall using the 16-17 in this time as I had a 16-25 saver, are they allowed to do this?

Could someone suggest some advice and how to respond to the next email? Do I have grounds to negotiate or will this be interpreted as being uncooperative?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Mar 2025 ==

I'm also curious whether this is a full and final settlement of this case, I find WMR unreasonable here.

I have attached correspondence for reference.

 

[furlong]

Let's pick an example. What was your complete journey on 30th January 2025? That'll probably be one of the cases that looks like "short journey fraud".

(And as others have said, in general it can be better to ignore completely fishing trips like this from the outset, as proof can be extremely difficult without an admission.)

 

[Egg Centric]

(Screenshot of email saying "Please in your response choose which option to take. Option A - to make full payment. Option B - Have case handed over to the Prosecutions Team and incur further fees")

How unprofessional is this?????????

WMR are going to end up like the post office.

 

[Mehd]

Let's pick an example. What was your complete journey on 30th January 2025? That'll probably be one of the cases that looks like "short journey fraud".

On this specific case, I can see the potential discrepancy, what occurred was I went to Long Bucky, Not London Euston. I had visited the town twice as there's a good pub a few good friends from Birmingham called The Old Kings Head on the Thursday and we decided to go back on the Sunday.

This only shows how their "data driven" investigation has holes and flaws without catching anyone "in the act", for which, I have always intended to hold the correct ticket.

So in fact, I was over charged for this specific "journey" to London.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Mar 2025 ==

(And as others have said, in general it can be better to ignore completely fishing trips like this from the outset, as proof can be extremely difficult without an admission.)

Is ignoring this email still a better choice at this stage? Seeming that they're insisting on me choosing either Option A (to which, It doesn't make logical sense to pay for journeys that had been taken appropriately... and beyond 6 months?) or Option B?

Is there any advice on the best next steps from here without potentially further escalating? They used the language "any other offences" upon the assumption an "offence" occurred, this is an absurd overreach of power.

 

[AlterEgo]

On this specific case, I can see the potential discrepancy, what occurred was I went to Long Bucky, Not London Euston. I had visited the town twice as there's a good pub a few good friends from Birmingham called The Old Kings Head on the Thursday and we decided to go back on the Sunday.

So why would you not just refund the ticket to London and buy the much cheaper and correct ticket to Long Buckby?

Long Buckby isn’t really the sort of place groups of people from cities come for an evening out (I know - I have just moved there!), so it’s not a story I think WMR would believe without it being substantiated. It will seem more likely to them that you went to London, ended up unchecked on the way back, and at Long Buckby purchased a ticket - the shortest and cheapest one possible - to operate the barriers at Rugby, ensuring a “clean” return coupon of whichever flexible ticket you may have had. That’s what it’ll look like to them because the explanation here doesn’t pass the smell test.

How did you get to Long Buckby on the Sunday? Can you substantiate that missing journey from the travel history?

Is ignoring this email still a better choice at this stage? Seeming that they're insisting on me choosing either Option A (to which, It doesn't make logical sense to pay for journeys that had been taken appropriately... and beyond 6 months?) or Option B?

Option C is to ignore them but you have chosen to engage so far, which means that now you are confronted with a journey history, refusal to engage is more likely to infer your guilt.

 

[Pushpit]

They may only offer 2 options, but that doesn't mean you have to go along with this. From what you have suggested, few to none of these trips are examples of fare evasions. So even if they invoke B then they will need to prove that you were on the train without the appropriate ticket. From what you have said, this won't be possible, so you won't need to worry. They need more than this to prosecute you.

Now if there are a few invalid trips you have a choice whether to ignore the letter entirely or to offer just to pay for the invalid trips. Option D if you like, if Option C is to just ignore this latest email. The risk with Option D is that if you admit some trips then you have given up on option B, in terms of just letting WMR prosecute - which they can't do without more evidence.

I can't see the point in paying for trips which you did not make or for which you held a valid ticket. But equally the list of trips has a lot of one way trips which don't seem to "join up" in conventional journey terms. That's not a crime, but I can see why they are suspicious.

 

[Mehd]

So why would you not just refund the ticket to London and buy the much cheaper and correct ticket to Long Buckby?

I appreciate the questioning, as I'm sure WMR would go down the same road of questions - I'll assume that now is too late to refund the ticket? I believe using the 16/25 saver to London on that day would've made the price £20 compared to Long Buckby's £13.50 at the time so I didn't bother with the hassle.

Long Buckby isn’t really the sort of place groups of people from cities come for an evening out (I know - I have just moved there!), so it’s not a story I think WMR would believe without it being substantiated. It will seem more likely to them that you went to London, ended up unchecked on the way back, and at Long Buckby purchased a ticket - the shortest and cheapest one possible - to operate the barriers at Rugby, ensuring a “clean” return coupon of whichever flexible ticket you may have had. That’s what it’ll look like to them because the explanation here doesn’t pass the smell test.

I have receipt purchases confirming on both Thursday and Sunday that I went to the Old Kings Head, they're more than welcome to check the evidence if needs be.

Option C is to ignore them but you have chosen to engage so far, which means that now you are confronted with a journey history, refusal to engage is more likely to infer your guilt.

It's important to highlight that in the email they haven't provided to me a timeframe to reply, and they don't seem to have any substantive evidence to anything, other than journeys and trips, and their "data" where they also included what they believed to be a "short-fared" trip

So even if they invoke B then they will need to prove that you were on the train without the appropriate ticket. From what you have said, this won't be possible, so you won't need to worry. They need more than this to prosecute you.

They have no record of me being present on any journey without a valid ticket, I have already given up using the trainline app since this (what appears to be an) absurd ordeal and have opted to using the ticket machines in each station to ensure two separate correct tickets, without WMR attempting to penalize and threaten to what seems like an expedition of getting more money. I'm curious whether the "data" they currently hold will be enough for prosecution, would it be wise to reply with a picture of my nephews railcard or not reply at all?

Now if there are a few invalid trips you have a choice whether to ignore the letter entirely or to offer just to pay for the invalid trips. Option D if you like, if Option C is to just ignore this latest email. The risk with Option D is that if you admit some trips then you have given up on option B, in terms of just letting WMR prosecute - which they can't do without more evidence.

I'm wondering if their attempt to take this to the prosecution team, if they don't get a response from me will happen at this stage? and if I refuse to pay, will this be a plausible threat seeming that they don't have any substantive proof of either fare evasion or misusage of any railcard.

I can't see the point in paying for trips which you did not make or for which you held a valid ticket. But equally the list of trips has a lot of one way trips which don't seem to "join up" in conventional journey terms. That's not a crime, but I can see why they are suspicious.

Avanti West Coast equally has journeys to/from both Coventry/Rugby and London Euston/Birmingham New Street which stop at all four these stations, this entire attempt to use data to put together an assumption then leave with me 2 options in an abrupt manner really makes me question their intent in all this. The fear I have is them withdrawing the offer of an out of court settlement and pushing through with prosecution on weak evidence and making me accountable for their assumptions without any basis.

 

[WesternLancer]

I received an email from WMR early this March claiming that I misused my 16-17 railcard as far back as 2020 and said I continued to do so until February 2025, I showed them proof that it was valid for me to use the railcard between 2020-2022 via both the online and physical railcards and I have provided the evidence for this.

I also said that I currently use the 16-25 saver for my journeys as a student. I bought these on the trainline app. I went through my trainline ticket history but it doesn't allow me to view the ticket PDF History, only the price and journey taken.

I know for a fact from 2022-2024 (September) I definitely used the 16-25 saver constantly however, I did use the 16-17 saver for my nephew a couple of times from then until February and I may have used it for some of my own tickets within this time, Mainly from Coventry to Rugby (around £7 for the advanced ticket price for WMR), and rarely to/from both Euston and Birmingham New Street, I asked them for the tickets in question and said i'm happy to pay the fare difference, and to cooperate but asked for the tickets in question so we can come to a settlement, as they are willing to do, with the proof of the rail cards I owned/own.

I have attached correspondence so far (2 emails from them, 3 emails from me), please let me know what steps to take next/what the possible outcome will be with WMR?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Mar 2025 ==

I have also attached the proof of current/previous railcards

I think you should refer to your railcard as a 16-25 Railcard. Not a ‘16-25 Saver’.

I know this is pedantic but ticket stuff is complex enough without getting the names of things confused / muddled.

 

[Mehd]

I think you should refer to your railcard as a 16-25 Railcard. Not a ‘16-25 Saver’.

I know this is pedantic but ticket stuff is complex enough without getting the names of things confused / muddled.

If you have insights on how this whole ordeal can be solved with WMR, I would truly appreciate any feedback you could give.

 

[WesternLancer]

If you have insights on how this whole ordeal can be solved with WMR, I would truly appreciate any feedback you could give.

Thanks. But sorry I’ve no further insight beyond replies you have c already had.

I hope you can get it sorted.

 

[Mehd]

I've been looking through old posts on this forum from members who have dealt with WMR previously and it seems that this investigator dealing with my case has unfairly escalated someone's case to the Prosecutions team AND the British Transport Police after their own admission of wrongdoing on email, with the investigator claiming they didn't email back: Press here for reference: Digital Fraud Email from WMT

I did block out the Investigator's name previously (this is the same working on my case "Investigator ID DFI20968"), however this is a big revelation which could save time and expense.

I don't want to pay up when I used my tickets appropriately, but at the same time I don't want to unfairly go down the same much more expensive path as this unfortunate customer. That being said, they were caught in the act and admitted their mistakes, I did neither and wasn't given a date like they did, @AlterEgo and @WesternLancer you may recognize this case from last year, what do you suggest in light of this and my personal situation? This all seems unfair and dare I say tyrannical @Egg Centric.

If others can advise, I would appreciate a any draft emails, or if I have any chance of negotiating at this stage, as ignoring, as demonstrated as before, isn't the best option. But likewise admitting anything has the potentiality of escalation even with cooperation.

I have attached the previous forum member's conversation (as found on the link) and my own for reference.

 

[Hadders]

This is an interesting case!

My view is this sort of phishing exercise from WMR isn't really acceptable and I agree with other forum members who have said that the best course of action would've been to ignore it. However, @Mehd has (not unreasonably) engaged and we are where we are.

What we do know is @Mehd says they purchased tickets for their Nephew who held a 16-17 Saver railcard. This is absolutely fine and @Mehd should not be penalised for this. A copy of the nephew's railcard could be provided but I am reluctant to suggest this because that could open up the nephew's account to investigation.

We also know that @Mehd says they have applied a 16-17 Saver discount when they weren't entitled to do so. If these journeys could be identified then it might be reasonable to offer payment for these journeys only stating that all other journeys were made with valid tickets.

 

[Pushpit]

The advice is already up there, there are upsides and downsides to the different options, ultimately only you can choose which option looks the best, not least because you have been a bit vague as to any wrongdoing. That vagueness may be quite understandable, but in terms of giving advice there are constraints since you know a lot more than anyone here.

To clarify, the options seem to be
A) Pay up
B) Say nothing (with the threat of the Prosecution Team), so passively ignore this option or a limited reply
C) Actively ignore this email and all future emails. Even set up an email Rule to bounce back replies.
D) Engage to get some middle way and offer to pay for the 16-17 trips. If more than 6 months old you should, in my view, only pay WMR's direct loss.

A) makes sense to get rid of the hassle, and because you have cheated the railway on a large scale and have lots of money.
D) only makes sense if you have actually done something wrong but more than 6 months ago. No need to answer here, and it may be "the right thing to do" if you think a civil claim will follow, though I think that a civil claim is unlikely. This is the wrong approach if you have done something bad in the last 6 months and the railway could prove it via scans / refunds etc.
C) makes most sense if you have definitely done nothing wrong. It also may make sense if you have been a "little bit wrong" but you know they don't have the evidence and it was more than 6 months ago. So that's your judgement call, D versus C, fairly similar in some respects.
B) I can't see much benefit, other than to move the case along a bit more quickly if you were to reply (say) "you're out of time, kindly go away".

 

[Mehd]

My view is this sort of phishing exercise from WMR isn't really acceptable and I agree with other forum members who have said that the best course of action would've been to ignore it. However, @Mehd has (not unreasonably) engaged and we are where we are.

Is ignoring their last email still a viable option? Is there "data" enough suspicion to warrant anything further beyond threats?

What we do know is @Mehd says they purchased tickets for their Nephew who held a 16-17 Saver railcard. This is absolutely fine and @Mehd should not be penalised for this. A copy of the nephew's railcard could be provided but I am reluctant to suggest this because that could open up the nephew's account to investigation.

I know of the options presented by previous members, 800+ is a large sum of money, if this can be radically reduced with his railcard then I would opt for this choice, but if ignoring is the better option, then should I take the risk of what could happen even if they don't have evidence if they don't hear back from me?

We also know that @Mehd says they have applied a 16-17 Saver discount when they weren't entitled to do so. If these journeys could be identified then it might be reasonable to offer payment for these journeys only stating that all other journeys were made with valid tickets.

I haven't admitted to anything I haven't done, do they need an admission? I haven't got time in my day for any interviews/court proceedings, should I accept this loss for safety? will this escalate later on, seeming as they are trying to push other allegations onto me without ever being caught for anything.

A) Pay up
B) Say nothing (with the threat of the Prosecution Team), so passively ignore this option or a limited reply
C) Actively ignore this email and all future emails. Even set up an email Rule to bounce back replies.
D) Engage to get some middle way and offer to pay for the 16-17 trips. If more than 6 months old you should, in my view, only pay WMR's direct loss.

A) makes sense to get rid of the hassle, and because you have cheated the railway on a large scale and have lots of money.
D) only makes sense if you have actually done something wrong but more than 6 months ago. No need to answer here, and it may be "the right thing to do" if you think a civil claim will follow, though I think that a civil claim is unlikely. This is the wrong approach if you have done something bad in the last 6 months and the railway could prove it via scans / refunds etc.
C) makes most sense if you have definitely done nothing wrong. It also may make sense if you have been a "little bit wrong" but you know they don't have the evidence and it was more than 6 months ago. So that's your judgement call, D versus C, fairly similar in some respects.
B) I can't see much benefit, other than to move the case along a bit more quickly if you were to reply (say) "you're out of time, kindly go away".

What would be the best way to email them, "A" seems like an unviable option to me, especially if they're not ruling out that it wont be looked at again, With "B" are they allowed to backdate beyond 6 months?. "C" sounds preferable but i'm unsure what the consequences will be for ignoring their emails seeming as though @AlterEgo has already established that it may hint towards guilt as I had engaged with their first email. Will engaging and negotiating in taking Option "D" lead to them escalating and withdrawing their offer for not choosing their initial two options? This seems like a cornering attempt from the investigator to me.

 

[Pushpit]

Their only "power" is to take you to court. So for B, they can't take you to Magistrates Court for events over 6 months ago (with a few unlikely exceptions) but they can take you through the civil channels, also unlikely. Given that, if you go down D, they still cannot prosecute you for anything over 6 months ago. To repeat, if they withdraw their offer, they can still only take you to Magistrates court for more recent events so it's difficult to see what escalation could amount to, assuming that you have done nothing wrong recently.

You need to decide an option, then draft something here for review if it's D or perhaps B. For C the main consequences will be further emails, unless you block them, in which case they could perhaps write to you, but the potential outcome for B still applies. If you have done nothing wrong in the last 6 months then that should give you confidence about C. If you have been less than honest, then different outcomes are possible.