SWR: high count fare evasion advice

[insearchofadvc]

Hi, I have recently received email from south western railway, after being stopped at a london station and admitting to short-faring. They since pulled my ticket purchase history which shows ~150 journeys which allude to short-faring (going back a few years) - some journeys I can't prove i had a railcard also.
I need to respond within 6 days. I of course do not want this to go to court, I also would rather not pay thousands in fines (or lawyer fees). I would appreciate any advice!!!
If I was to admit to the highlighted incidents indeed being short-faring, would that generate a fine and that be it? could admission of fraudulent journeys result in progression to court? If anyone has been in this situ before or knows somebody who has - please let me know!!

 

[jfollows]

Welcome to the forum, and I suggest you search this section for lots of similar cases.

If you engage with SWR, apologise, explain you understand what you did was wrong, and will no longer do it, they are likely to offer an out of court settlement based on full fare single tickets for your journeys plus an administration fee of £150 or so.

Not a fine.

No need for a lawyer.

If you pay, you will not go to court and not receive a criminal record.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Sep 2025 ==

If you want to know the full single fare for each journey, https://www.brfares.com/ may be helpful.

 

[WirralLine]

Just to be clear, when @jfollows says a full single fare for each journey, this usually means a return journey would be 2x singles fares, rather than a (cheaper) return fare.

 

[John R]

Respond admitting it, apologising profusely, promise not to do it again, and ask very nicely if they will consider an out of court settlement. There are lots of examples on this board, the better ones not using AI.

Then work out the likely cost, 2x anytime single fare for each day you did it, add around £150, and start working out how you are going to pay that sort of amount very quickly once asked.

 

[insearchofadvc]

Thank you @jfollows , they requested I annotate the spreadsheet - would it be appropriate to annotate that I dont remember?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Sep 2025 ==

Respond admitting it, apologising profusely, promise not to do it again, and ask very nicely if they will consider an out of court settlement. There are lots of examples on this board, the better ones not using AI.

Then work out the likely cost, 2x anytime single fare for each day you did it, add around £150, and start working out how you are going to pay that sort of amount very quickly once asked.

if i cant remember, would you advise admitting to short-faring for the journeys they are suspicious of regardless?

 

[John R]

Thank you @jfollows , they requested I annotate the spreadsheet - would it be appropriate to annotate that I dont remember?

It would be helpful if you post a copy of the letter, with identifying details obscured.

A sample of the spreadsheet might help too, though if you simply agree that all the journeys were from/to one station, it might be easier just to say that in your letter.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Sep 2025 ==

Thank you @jfollows , they requested I annotate the spreadsheet - would it be appropriate to annotate that I dont remember?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Sep 2025 ==


if i cant remember, would you advise admitting to short-faring for the journeys they are suspicious of regardless?

If, say, all the suspicious journeys started at (eg) Vauxhall, then you will know if they are short fares, and so will they.

 

[insearchofadvc]

It would be helpful if you post a copy of the letter, with identifying details obscured.

A sample of the spreadsheet might help too, though if you simply agree that all the journeys were from/to one station, it might be easier just to say that in your letter.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Sep 2025 ==


If, say, all the suspicious journeys started at (eg) Vauxhall, then you will know if they are short fares, and so will they.

Most of the journeys are Vauxhall - waterloo or Clapham junction - waterloo, and there was a brief period where tickets were purchased between the final 2 stops further down the line. I can send it over to over message?

 

[Titfield]

You say you can not remember if they were short journeys. Why would they not be short journeys (as you have done this before)?
Have you ever had a real reason to travel just between these two points?

 

[Fawkes Cat]

You say you can not remember if they were short journeys. Why would they not be short journeys (as you have done this before)?
Have you ever had a real reason to travel just between these two points?

To put this rather more bluntly - although the railway are giving you the chance to comment on each journey, the railway isn't stupid. They'll know what short-faring looks like, and if you say that you weren't short faring when you were then the railway will conclude that you're lying - which will mean that they can't trust you, and they will be reluctant to let you settle this matter.

You don't know what the railway knows, so don't assume that you can pull the wool over their eyes. Look at the spreadsheet honestly, and admit the times when you were short faring.

 

[AlterEgo]

The last refuge of the hardcover fare evader is usually trying to get off half the fares owed in the hope that being honest half the time will buy them some credit. They weren't born yesterday so just be honest. If you've got a ton of Vauxhall to Waterloo tickets they're all short fares, nobody buys this ticket because it is so much cheaper on contactless.

 

[Cloud Strife]

If you've got a ton of Vauxhall to Waterloo tickets they're all short fares, nobody buys this ticket because it is so much cheaper on contactless.

Hang on. The existence of these fares proves absolutely nothing, except that the poster known as insearchofadvc bought these tickets. The railway would have to prove that they intentionally short fared on these occasions, not that "it looks like you've been short faring", and having done it once is still not proof that they've actually done it on those occasions as well.

If all tickets were scanned at barriers regardless if they were put through machines or shown to a member of staff, it would be a different story as there would be a clear history showing that a ticket was only used at Waterloo and not at the origin station, but this isn't the case.

 

[AlterEgo]

Hang on. The existence of these fares proves absolutely nothing, except that the poster known as insearchofadvc bought these tickets. The railway would have to prove that they intentionally short fared on these occasions, not that "it looks like you've been short faring", and having done it once is still not proof that they've actually done it on those occasions as well.

If all tickets were scanned at barriers regardless if they were put through machines or shown to a member of staff, it would be a different story as there would be a clear history showing that a ticket was only used at Waterloo and not at the origin station, but this isn't the case.

They wouldn't have to prove anything, they've got them red handed on once occasion and are now in the process of settling the rest. These instances won't get anywhere near a court. If the train company isn't happy the OP is being honest they just withdraw the settlement and prosecuted for the one specimen offence. Bear in mind SWR will already have the scan data. This is just an honesty test at this stage.

 

[SussexMan]

...I also would rather not pay thousands in fines...

I'm sure that most people would rather not have to pay as much as they do for their tickets, so instead of seeing this as "pay thousands in fines" just see it as paying back all the money you should have paid in the first place (possibly at a premium fare, but that is because it was your choice not to pay it in the first place).

 

[Kite159]

Hang on. The existence of these fares proves absolutely nothing, except that the poster known as insearchofadvc bought these tickets. The railway would have to prove that they intentionally short fared on these occasions, not that "it looks like you've been short faring", and having done it once is still not proof that they've actually done it on those occasions as well.

If all tickets were scanned at barriers regardless if they were put through machines or shown to a member of staff, it would be a different story as there would be a clear history showing that a ticket was only used at Waterloo and not at the origin station, but this isn't the case.

Or if they are paper tickets to avoid the 'lack of entry scan', I'm sure in the database there will be a log of the ID number of the TVM used to print them off.

And if said TVM is miles away from Vauxhall then it just adds fuel to the fire.

 

[John R]

Or if they are paper tickets to avoid the 'lack of entry scan', I'm sure in the database there will be a log of the ID number of the TVM used to print them off.

And if said TVM is miles away from Vauxhall then it just adds fuel to the fire.

True, but I think short fares of that type are almost universally bought as e-tickets.

 

[insearchofadvc]

I'm sure that most people would rather not have to pay as much as they do for their tickets, so instead of seeing this as "pay thousands in fines" just see it as paying back all the money you should have paid in the first place (possibly at a premium fare, but that is because it was your choice not to pay it in the first place).

Agreed, i responded admitting to all instances of short-faring, he has emailed to say that he has passed it to prosecution with recommendation for out-of-court settlement

 

[coolgiraffe44]

Agreed, i responded admitting to all instances of short-faring, he has emailed to say that he has passed it to prosecution with recommendation for out-of-court settlement

Hey, any update on this? I have a family member in a similar situation! Quite terrified

 

[notmyrealname]

Hi, welcome to the forum.

If you need advice on this, you need to start your own thread please. Trying to advise two people on one thread doesn't work, it just gets confusing.