Thameslink Notice of Intention to Prosecute

[JS91]

Hi there,

Hope everyone is well.

On 01/04/2025, my partner had her ticket checked by an inspector on the Thameslink Service from St Albans to Kings X, only to be told that she had been travelling with the wrong ticket (incorrect railcard). The inspector then searched through her phone (I’m not sure of the legal power used or even if there is one?) and noted that this had had happened a couple times in the weeks prior and further accused my partner of ‘sandwiching’ journeys. This has caused her immense distress and is not the case. My partner used the wrong railcard which was a genuine mistake for which she was extremely embarrassed and distressed.

Today, we have received the NIP which only references one matter which she is being accused of, that being ‘On 01/04/2025, you did enter a train for the purpose of travelling on the railway and upon inspection at London St Pancras Intl; did not produce a valid ticket entitling travel’. This does not mention the other sandwiching offences which the inspector thought was happening (incorrectly) or any other previous journey.

I have a couple questions:

1. Does this mean that the only offence being investigated is the incorrect ticket for the single journey?

2. If this is the case and it was a genuine mistake, which it was, is this a reasonable reply:

Dear Govia thameslink Team,

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to explain my actions relating to the incident that took place on 01/04/2025.

I would like to sincerely apologise to Govia Thameslink and for the time and administration costs this matter has caused.

I fully understand the large scale of revenue losses that Train companies face as a result of fare evasion and how unacceptable it is.

On the day, I boarded the train under the belief I had the correct ticket and railcard for my Journey, only to realise that I had the incorrect ticket when the Inspector checked it. This was completely unintentional and a mistake. This was pointed out to me by the inspector and I was and still am devastated.

During the incident and since this has happened I have felt extremely stressed and anxious about the situation.

I am a professional with a distinguished career and if this matter were to escalate further to court, a criminal conviction would certainly compromise my life moving forward and impact my future prospects.

I have never been in trouble with the authorities and am an upstanding citizen with no previous convictions, cautions or arrests or indeed any previous dealing with law enforcement.

Since this mistake was raised I have been extremely careful when purchasing rail tickets and I assure you that this will not happen again and that a valuable lesson has been learnt.

Whilst my words above do not serve as an excuse, I take full responsibility for my actions and I sincerely hope that it's possible to understand how a criminal prosecution would be detrimental to my life moving forward.

I am keen to resolve this matter as quickly as possible without the need for court action if you would allow me to pay the outstanding fare and any administrative costs and/or fine which you feel necessary. This would be greatly appreciated.

Once again, I would like to express my wholehearted apologies for the inconvenience caused and assure you that it will not happen again. I sincerely hope that you will consider my request to settle this matter out of court and avoid any further escalation.

This incident has caused be an extreme level of distress and embarrassment and I hope to have a conclusion soon.

Many thanks for your understanding

END
As stated in the reply, this is a first offence with no previous history of offending in any capacity.

We want this matter sorted as soon as possible but I suppose I’m conscious of this being admitted and having the book thrown at my partner in court if she accepts responsibility/no evidence to the contrary.

Apologies this is a long message but any advice would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance

 

[notmyrealname]

Hi, welcome to the forum.

It would help the pros here if you could read this forum sticky and let us have the information it asks for, please.

Please read before posting in Disputes & Prosecutions

Guidance for those asking for advice: Please bear in mind the following, when asking for advice in this section: We need to know all relevant facts in order to assist you, including, for example: The stations* where you actually started & finished your journey The stations* where you changed...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[JS91]

Hi, welcome to the forum.

It would help the pros here if you could read this forum sticky and let us have the information it asks for, please.

Please read before posting in Disputes & Prosecutions

Guidance for those asking for advice: Please bear in mind the following, when asking for advice in this section: We need to know all relevant facts in order to assist you, including, for example: The stations* where you actually started & finished your journey The stations* where you changed...

www.railforums.co.uk

Thanks for the reply and flagging.

Please see below:

• • The stations* where you actually started & finished your journey - St Albans & St Pancras
  • The stations* where you changed trains (if applicable); -None
  • If you presented a ticket(s), the information* stated under "Ticket type", "From", "To", "Route", and any other relevant details; Off Peak return from St Albans - St Pancras 16-17 saver (mistake)
  • Details of any Railcard(s) held; 25-30 Railcard
  • When and where ticket(s) were purchased, including whether this was prior to the journey commencing; - Prior to journey via Trainline app.
  • What happened in any encounter with railway staff;- Staff member was extremely rude and caused my partner to have a panic attack but she complied with what she was being asked of.
  • Upload copies of any paperwork (with personal details redacted) with your post.-Attached
• We need to know what outcome(s) you would consider satisfactory - Pay a fine/any costs incurred/out of court settlement

 

[AlterEgo]

The train company will audit her ticket purchasing accounts after receiving the letter. It’s really important to know if she has done either of the following:

- claimed the 16-17 discount before
- “sandwiched” tickets as the inspector alleges (why would the inspector think that?)

before you reply. She’s effectively subject to an honesty test at this stage to see if she is suitable to dispose of the offence out of court.

 

[JS91]

The train company will audit her ticket purchasing accounts after receiving the letter. It’s really important to know if she has done either of the following:

- claimed the 16-17 discount before
- “sandwiched” tickets as the inspector alleges (why would the inspector think that?)

before you reply. She’s effectively subject to an honesty test at this stage to see if she is suitable to dispose of the offence out of court.

Thanks for the reply.

So she had claimed the discount several times prior by doing this accidentally.

Genuinely we have no idea where the sandwiching claim has come from. Occasionally she has bought tickets to other stations but this is due to her actually going to these stations for other reasons. Radlett for example which is the next stop down.

Surely if they were investigating other offences, they would have to ask her to account for them as opposed to the one rail journey mentioned in the allegations? Do they not audit them before sending her a letter to make sure they have a full picture as to what they are alleging?

As I’m reading if (potentially wishful thinking) she’s being asked to account for the single journey only and nothing else?

 

[AlterEgo]

Thanks for the reply.

So she had claimed the discount several times prior by doing this accidentally.

They're not likely to believe it's accidental; they weren't born yesterday. 16-17 Saver is the highest possible discount railcard one can apply, it's not even adjacent to 26-30 on any ticket purchasing site, and it's one people think that - if they're caught - can plausibly brush off as accidental as it's age related just like their 26-30.

Genuinely we have no idea where the sandwiching claim has come from. Occasionally she has bought tickets to other stations but this is due to her actually going to these stations for other reasons. Radlett for example which is the next stop down.

Yes, that would be a classic sandwich ticket strategy. Purchase the cheapest possible ticket to operate the barriers, use contactless once in London (eg: at Farringdon) to enter the TfL system having never paid properly for the Thameslink journey. Extremely common strategy seen here dozens of times; TL will see this hundreds or thousands of times a year.

Surely if they were investigating other offences, they would have to ask her to account for them as opposed to the one rail journey mentioned in the allegations? Do they not audit them before sending her a letter to make sure they have a full picture as to what they are alleging?

They want to send a letter first to ask her to account for the offence where she was stopped. They can then audit her transactions (which sometimes takes some time owing to data protection requests to other retailers) to see if there is a fuller picture of offending.

If they do audit her accounts - and sometimes they don't! - they may ask for her short one-stop journeys to be explained.

As I’m reading if (potentially wishful thinking) she’s being asked to account for the single journey only and nothing else?

At this stage, yes. But you have to be very careful to avoid suggesting something was a mistake when it will look to the train company like it wasn't, and if they suspect short faring or sandwich/donut ticketing they will be very suspicious indeed.

 

[JS91]

They're not likely to believe it's accidental; they weren't born yesterday. 16-17 Saver is the highest possible discount railcard one can apply, it's not even adjacent to 26-30 on any ticket purchasing site, and it's one people think that - if they're caught - can plausibly brush off as accidental as it's age related just like their 26-30.

Ok thank you. We’ll keep that in mind. Obviously I’m aware that it looks far from ideal.

Yes, that would be a classic sandwich ticket strategy. Purchase the cheapest possible ticket to operate the barriers, use contactless once in London (eg: at Farringdon) to enter the TfL system having never paid properly for the Thameslink journey. Extremely common strategy seen here dozens of times; TL will see this hundreds or thousands of times a year.

She absolutely hasn’t done that though. For one she gets off at either West Hampstead or King’s Cross every day and pays for the tube from either of the nearest underground stations using her contactless card. Whenever she has brought a ticket to another station, she has gone to that other station.

They want to send a letter first to ask her to account for the offence where she was stopped. They can then audit her transactions (which sometimes takes some time owing to data protection requests to other retailers) to see if there is a fuller picture of offending.

If they do audit her accounts - and sometimes they don't! - they may ask for her short one-stop journeys to be explained.

Any idea how long this does take at all? Considering it was now several months ago, I would’ve expected them to have done what they needed to by now but of course I could be wrong.

At this stage, yes. But you have to be very careful to avoid suggesting something was a mistake when it will look to the train company like it wasn't, and if they suspect short faring or sandwich/donut ticketing they will be very suspicious indeed

It’s not suggesting something is a mistake if it is a genuine mistake would be the only thing I’d say to that.

Going back to my initial post. Is the reply satisfactory or does it need changing? This was a genuine mistake.

 

[simonw]

Hi there,

Hope everyone is well.

On 01/04/2025, my partner had her ticket checked by an inspector on the Thameslink Service from St Albans to Kings X, only to be told that she had been travelling with the wrong ticket (incorrect railcard). The inspector then searched through her phone (I’m not sure of the legal power used or even if there is one?) and noted that this had had happened a couple times in the weeks prior and further accused my partner of ‘sandwiching’ journeys. This has caused her immense distress and is not the case. My partner used the wrong railcard which was a genuine mistake for which she was extremely embarrassed and distressed.

Today, we have received the NIP which only references one matter which she is being accused of, that being ‘On 01/04/2025, you did enter a train for the purpose of travelling on the railway and upon inspection at London St Pancras Intl; did not produce a valid ticket entitling travel’. This does not mention the other sandwiching offences which the inspector thought was happening (incorrectly) or any other previous journey.

I have a couple questions:

1. Does this mean that the only offence being investigated is the incorrect ticket for the single journey?

2. If this is the case and it was a genuine mistake, which it was, is this a reasonable reply:

Dear Govia thameslink Team,

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to explain my actions relating to the incident that took place on 01/04/2025.

I would like to sincerely apologise to Govia Thameslink and for the time and administration costs this matter has caused.

I fully understand the large scale of revenue losses that Train companies face as a result of fare evasion and how unacceptable it is.

On the day, I boarded the train under the belief I had the correct ticket and railcard for my Journey, only to realise that I had the incorrect ticket when the Inspector checked it. This was completely unintentional and a mistake. This was pointed out to me by the inspector and I was and still am devastated.

During the incident and since this has happened I have felt extremely stressed and anxious about the situation.

I am a professional with a distinguished career and if this matter were to escalate further to court, a criminal conviction would certainly compromise my life moving forward and impact my future prospects.

I have never been in trouble with the authorities and am an upstanding citizen with no previous convictions, cautions or arrests or indeed any previous dealing with law enforcement.

Since this mistake was raised I have been extremely careful when purchasing rail tickets and I assure you that this will not happen again and that a valuable lesson has been learnt.

Whilst my words above do not serve as an excuse, I take full responsibility for my actions and I sincerely hope that it's possible to understand how a criminal prosecution would be detrimental to my life moving forward.

I am keen to resolve this matter as quickly as possible without the need for court action if you would allow me to pay the outstanding fare and any administrative costs and/or fine which you feel necessary. This would be greatly appreciated.

Once again, I would like to express my wholehearted apologies for the inconvenience caused and assure you that it will not happen again. I sincerely hope that you will consider my request to settle this matter out of court and avoid any further escalation.

This incident has caused be an extreme level of distress and embarrassment and I hope to have a conclusion soon.

Many thanks for your understanding

END
As stated in the reply, this is a first offence with no previous history of offending in any capacity.

We want this matter sorted as soon as possible but I suppose I’m conscious of this being admitted and having the book thrown at my partner in court if she accepts responsibility/no evidence to the contrary.

Apologies this is a long message but any advice would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance

Delete this:

During the incident and since this has happened I have felt extremely stressed and anxious about the situation.

I am a professional with a distinguished career and if this matter were to escalate further to court, a criminal conviction would certainly compromise my life moving forward and impact my future prospects.

I have never been in trouble with the authorities and am an upstanding citizen with no previous convictions, cautions or arrests or indeed any previous dealing with law enforcement.


They do not care about its impact on your partner's life.

The good news is that they are very likely to make an offer to settle out of court.

However, they may investigate your partner's account and if they find examples of buying two short tickets with a gap for one journey, colloquialy referee to as doughnutting)
come back for a second bite at the cherry

 

[JS91]

Delete this:

During the incident and since this has happened I have felt extremely stressed and anxious about the situation.

I am a professional with a distinguished career and if this matter were to escalate further to court, a criminal conviction would certainly compromise my life moving forward and impact my future prospects.

I have never been in trouble with the authorities and am an upstanding citizen with no previous convictions, cautions or arrests or indeed any previous dealing with law enforcement.


They do not care about its impact on your partner's life.

The good news is that they are very likely to make an offer to settle out of court.

However, they may investigate your partner's account and if they find examples of buying two short tickets with a gap for one journey, colloquialy referee to as doughnutting)
come back for a second bite at the cherry

Thank you for the advice - very much appreciated.

Will this have an impact if she’s brought a return ticket, touched in at Kings Cross to return to St Albans and not touched out as the barriers were open due to the time of night she has returned?

 

[simonw]

Thank you for the advice - very much appreciated.

Will this have an impact if she’s brought a return ticket, touched in at Kings Cross to return to St Albans and not touched out as the barriers were open due to the time of night she has returned?

So long as she didn't try and use the ticket more than once, then no. I assume when you say touched in you mean using a ticket to open the barriers.

 

[JS91]

So long as she didn't try and use the ticket more than once, then no. I assume when you say touched in you mean using a ticket to open the barriers.

Yes that’s exactly what I mean thank you.

Will this suffice do you think? What I don’t want to happen is for her to take accountability fully and to have the book thrown at her. Honesty is the best policy and all that.

Dear Govia thameslink Team,

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to explain my actions relating to the incident that took place on 01/04/2025.

I would like to sincerely apologise to Govia Thameslink and for the time and administration costs this matter has caused.

I fully understand the large scale of revenue losses that Train companies face as a result of fare evasion and how unacceptable it is.

On the day, I boarded the train under the belief I had the correct ticket and railcard for my Journey, only to realise that I had the incorrect ticket when the Inspector checked it. This was pointed out to me by the inspector and I was and still am devastated.

Since this issue was raised I have been extremely careful when purchasing rail tickets and I assure you that this will not happen again and that a valuable lesson has been learnt.

Whilst my words above do not serve as an excuse, I take full responsibility for my actions and I sincerely hope that it's possible to understand how a criminal prosecution would be detrimental to my life moving forward.

I am keen to resolve this matter as quickly as possible without the need for court action if you would allow me to pay the outstanding fare and any administrative costs and/or fine which you feel necessary. This would be greatly appreciated.

Once again, I would like to express my wholehearted apologies for the inconvenience caused and assure you that it will not happen again. I sincerely hope that you will consider my request to settle this matter out of court and avoid any further escalation.

This incident has caused be an extreme level of distress and embarrassment and I hope to have a conclusion soon.

Many thanks for your understanding

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Aug 2025 ==

They're not likely to believe it's accidental; they weren't born yesterday. 16-17 Saver is the highest possible discount railcard one can apply, it's not even adjacent to 26-30 on any ticket purchasing site, and it's one people think that - if they're caught - can plausibly brush off as accidental as it's age related just like their 26-30.


Yes, that would be a classic sandwich ticket strategy. Purchase the cheapest possible ticket to operate the barriers, use contactless once in London (eg: at Farringdon) to enter the TfL system having never paid properly for the Thameslink journey. Extremely common strategy seen here dozens of times; TL will see this hundreds or thousands of times a year.


They want to send a letter first to ask her to account for the offence where she was stopped. They can then audit her transactions (which sometimes takes some time owing to data protection requests to other retailers) to see if there is a fuller picture of offending.

If they do audit her accounts - and sometimes they don't! - they may ask for her short one-stop journeys to be explained.


At this stage, yes. But you have to be very careful to avoid suggesting something was a mistake when it will look to the train company like it wasn't, and if they suspect short faring or sandwich/donut ticketing they will be very suspicious indeed.

Apologies for follow up message but I suppose what I’m getting at is shall we offer up to say she has does this before albeit mistakenly or not? We don’t want to offer up something that could get her in to further trouble if it’s not necessary. Thanks for your help.

 

[tram21]

She absolutely hasn’t done that though. For one she gets off at either West Hampstead or King’s Cross every day and pays for the tube from either of the nearest underground stations using her contactless card. Whenever she has brought a ticket to another station, she has gone to that other station.

It would help if these tickets were scanned out at Radlett (etc.). The inspector couldn't see that at the time but the back office will be able to- were they generally scanned out at the barriers?

 

[30907]

Your revised letter looks much better.

Your partner do not need to incriminate herself, but be careful of saying something that the travel history would contradict. I think you are OK on this but double check.

The good news is that GTR will almost certainly agree to settle.

 

[MarlowDonkey]

So she had claimed the discount several times prior by doing this accidentally.

Trainline is notorious for "remembering" railcards, catching people out when they've expired. So once a 26-30 card is selected, it should come up for every ticket selection.

If travelling to a Zone 1 or 2 station, why not buy a ticket through to the destination?

 

[John R]

It would help if these tickets were scanned out at Radlett (etc.). The inspector couldn't see that at the time but the back office will be able to- were they generally scanned out at the barriers?

And to be clear here, if they were scanned, there will be absolutely no problem with those tickets. But if they were not scanned then there will indeed be questions asked about those tickets, which will be very difficult to answer to their satisfaction.

 

[JS91]

Thanks everyone. Really appreciated.

 

[JS91]

Hi all,

By way of update, GTR have issued a fine of £70 and the matter is now closed.

Thank you for the advice.

 

[WesternLancer]

Glad it’s sorted.
More generally we’ve seen a few relatively low cost GTR settlement requests recently.
Looking noticeably lower than some other operators.