Prosecuted for expired railcard before boarding train

[bellaaa]

Yesterday at around 6pm I was travelling from Bedminster to Parson Street. I like to purchase the ticket at the station so I make sure I get the correct time. There are no barriers so I get to the platform at BMT and there are a few revenue protection officers and other men in hi vis uniforms. One of them asks me to show him my ticket and I tell him I’m about to buy it. I don’t know if this made me appear more suspicious although he never mentions this the whole time.

I purchase the single with a 16-25 railcard that I’ve had since I was 16 (now 23) and never had to renew before. I don’t check my railcard app very often and didn’t get any emails about it expiring so didn’t think anything of it. (The officer said I would’ve received emails alerting me, but I’ve checked and never received anything) It’s my fault and I’m aware it’s my responsibility to make sure these things are valid. I didn’t check and that’s on me, I am aware.

I go to show him my ticket and he asks to see the railcard. I open the app and realise it’s expired and admit this to officer and explain I hadn’t realised and that’s my bad. He starts asking to take pictures of my ticket, my travel history, expired railcard and ID. I don’t understand what’s happening so I just comply. Then he starts telling me I was attempting to travel with a discount that’s invalid and that this has to go to the prosecution team to process. I ask if I can just buy a new ticket or pay the difference and he’s says no. He’s taken all my details and I says I’m going to get a prosecution letter which will contain a fine.

I’ve been advised that they’ll likely prosecute me for breaking Byelaw 18. But this states I’ve only committed an offence if I’ve boarded the train with an invalid ticket. I hadn’t boarded the train when he checked the ticket, I was on the platform and had only just purchased the ticket. He was witness to this. But I had not boarded the train. He should’ve let me renew my railcard or buy a new valid ticket, right?

My only concern is that as he was writing me up and taking my details the train arrived. It was at the point he was confirming my home address and explaining that a letter would be sent there, but we hadn’t completed the whole ordeal yet. I had already asked at this point if I could pay the difference to buy a new ticket without the discount applied but he’d said no. I asked if I could still get the train and he said yes because we had to continue the process and he essentially escorted me onto the carriage where all the other officers were. He gestured for me to get on before him and to stand by the doors surrounded by all these officers, so I felt I had no choice. We then carried on the process and began the interview on the train although I asked if we could wait until we got off because I was getting quite overwhelmed and he said that was fine. We got off at my stop (which was the next one) at PSN and completed the interview process on the platform there.

I want to appeal but I am afraid they will use the fact that I did technically board the train (even though it was with permission from staff) to decline it.

I am wondering what my rights are here? When I get the prosecution letter should I just ask to settle and pay the fee or is it worth appealing because I didn’t break the byelaw? He kept stating he *believed I intended* to travel with an invalid ticket and had my railcard not been checked then I *would have travelled* with an invalid ticket and that’s breaking the rule. But I’ve been told byelaws are not based on intent. So I shouldn’t be done for “intending” to do something I didn’t do?

I’ve been advised that the only other byelaw that might be applicable here is Byelaw 17 which would apply if I was boarding at a Compulsory Ticket Area. I don’t know what that is so if anyone can clarify if BMT is a compulsory ticket area I’d appreciate it.

Please can someone advise if I have grounds to appeal this prosecution. Please let me know if it’s worthwhile, or if they’ll use the fact I boarded the train with permission, as proof I did travel with the invalid ticket. Or can the prosecution be based on intent? Do I have any leverage in this? Thanks and let me know if I need to provide any more details.

 

[CarrotPie]

I’ve been advised that they’ll likely prosecute me for breaking Byelaw 18. But this states I’ve only committed an offence if I’ve boarded the train with an invalid ticket. I hadn’t boarded the train when he checked the ticket, I was on the platform and had only just purchased the ticket. He was witness to this. But I had not boarded the train. He should’ve let me renew my railcard or buy a new valid ticket, right?

Byelaw 18 states (link to the byelaws here):

18. Ticketless travel in non-compulsory ticket area
(1) In any area not designated as a compulsory ticket area, no person shall enter any train for the purpose of travelling on the railway unless that person is carrying a valid ticket entitling them to travel.
(2) A person shall hand over their ticket for inspection and verification of validity when asked to do so by an authorised person.
(3) No person shall be in breach of Byelaw 18(1) or 18(2) if:
(i) there were no facilities in working order for the issue or validation of any ticket at the time when, and the station where, that person began their journey;
(ii) there was a notice at the station where that person began their journey permitting journeys to be started without a valid ticket;
(iii) an authorised person gave that person permission to travel without a valid ticket.

I’ve been advised that the only other byelaw that might be applicable here is Byelaw 17 which would apply if I was boarding at a Compulsory Ticket Area. I don’t know what that is so if anyone can clarify if BMT is a compulsory ticket area I’d appreciate it.

The byelaws define a CTA as follows:

“compulsory ticket area” means any area designated as such under a Penalty Fares Scheme and identified by a notice to this effect. Persons who enter a compulsory ticket area without being in possession of a valid ticket may be liable to pay a penalty fare

Bedminster is also a GWR Penalty Fare station.

Byelaw 17 states:

17. Compulsory Ticket Are
(1) No person shall enter a compulsory ticket area on the railway unless that person has with them a valid ticket.
(2) A person shall hand over their ticket for inspection and verification of validity when asked to do so by an authorised person.
(3) No person shall be in breach of Byelaw 17(1) or 17(2) i
(i) there were no facilities in working order for the issue or validation of any ticket at the time when, and the station where, that person began their journey;
(ii) there was a notice at the station where that person began their journey permitting journeys to be started without a valid ticket; or
(iii) an authorised person gave that person permission to travel without a valid ticket.

My area of expertise ends here, so I'll let smarter people interpret the exact meaning of these byelaws in this case.

 

[swt_passenger]

Byelaw 18 states (link to the byelaws here):



The byelaws define a CTA as follows:

Bedminster is a GWR Penalty Fare station.

Byelaw 17 states:


My area of expertise ends here, so I'll let smarter people interpret the exact meaning of these byelaws in this case.

A ‘penalty fare station’ does not automatically become a compulsory ticket area. They’re actually unusual away from London.

 

[bellaaa]

A ‘penalty fare station’ does not automatically become a compulsory ticket area. They’re actually unusual away from London.

Will they clarify whether or not I am in breach of Byelaw 17 in my prosecution letter?

 

[Alex365Dash]

Bedminster is a GWR Penalty Fare station.

There’s a difference between a Penalty Fare station and a Compulsory Ticket Area (CTA). Most Penalty Fare stations don’t have CTAs - you can’t be penalised* for not having a valid ticket until you board a train unless you’ve entered a CTA.

Whilst I’m not 100% sure on it, I doubt Bedminster has a CTA - the Penalty Fare posters at the station will clarify if OP is unsure.

*The railway does also prosecute using Section 5 of the Regulation of Railways Act 1889, which doesn’t need you to board a train - but they would need to prove intent which seems unlikely.

I purchase the single with a 16-25 railcard that I’ve had since I was 16 (now 23) and never had to renew before. I don’t check my railcard app very often and didn’t get any emails about it expiring so didn’t think anything of it. (The officer said I would’ve received emails alerting me, but I’ve checked and never received anything) It’s my fault and I’m aware it’s my responsibility to make sure these things are valid. I didn’t check and that’s on me, I am aware.

This presents a different problem - if there’s any other situations in which you’ve used a 16-25 Railcard discounted ticket with an expired railcard, you still would’ve broken Byelaw 18, and if you’ve done so in the past six months, they may be able to prosecute for that.

Will they clarify whether or not I am in breach of Byelaw 17 in my prosecution letter?

They will - unfortunately if you haven’t gotten a letter yet, the best advice right now is to wait. Come back with a copy of the letter (with personal details redacted) when it arrives. This can take anywhere up to six months (plus a week or two).

 

[z444z]

Byelaws 17 and 18 both have exceptions for acting in accordance with instructions from a authorised person. It appears no byelaw offence has been committed. I doubt a compulsory ticket area exists at Bedminster so byelaw 17 wouldn’t apply anyway but need confirmation on that.

It’s possible that you could be prosecuted under RoRA 5.3(a), which states:

3) If any person—
(a) Travels or attempts to travel on a railway without having previously paid his fare, and with intent to avoid payment thereof

Have you travelled on the expired railcard previously?

You should read GWR’s revenue protection policy, available online. GWR almost always settle out of court, they will just want payment for the fares that have been purchased with an invalid discount (they’ll likely ask for the full Anytime single fares, no discount for returns, and no discount for the incorrect fares you did pay) plus an admin fee (usually around £150).

Try to relax until the letter arrives, then come back here for help. GWR are very reasonable and easy to deal with, it’s very unlikely you’ll actually be prosecuted.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Will they clarify whether or not I am in breach of Byelaw 17 in my prosecution letter?

Despite what the officers told you, you may be getting ahead of yourself. GWR prefer not to go to court - see their policy at https://www.gwr.com/-/media/gwr-sc-...WR-Revenue-Protection-Policy-January-2023.pdf, particularly page 11.

I see that @z444z has said more or less what I was about to say, so I won't repeat it!

 

[bellaaa]

There’s a difference between a Penalty Fare station and a Compulsory Ticket Area (CTA). Most Penalty Fare stations don’t have CTAs - you can’t be penalised* for not having a valid ticket until you board a train unless you’ve entered a CTA.

Whilst I’m not 100% sure on it, I doubt Bedminster has a CTA - the Penalty Fare posters at the station will clarify if OP is unsure.

*The railway does also prosecute using Section 5 of the Regulation of Railways Act 1889, which doesn’t need you to board a train - but they would need to prove intent which seems unlikely.

This presents a different problem - if there’s any other situations in which you’ve used a 16-25 Railcard discounted ticket with an expired railcard, you still would’ve broken Byelaw 18, and if you’ve done so in the past six months, they may be able to prosecute for that.

They will - unfortunately if you haven’t gotten a letter yet, the best advice right now is to wait. Come back with a copy of the letter (with personal details redacted) when it arrives. This can take anywhere up to six months (plus a week or two).

It expired in October and I had taken two journeys since then. Both short. So even if I’m not done for this journey, I could be prosecuted for either/both of those journeys. I guess that’s the most likely outcome in which case it’ll be in breach of Byelaw 18 and I’ll have to settle. That’s probably the easiest way out of all this anyway. Thanks for all the help I’ll be in touch once I get the letter.

 

[z444z]

It expired in October and I had taken two journeys since then. Both short. So even if I’m not done for this journey, I could be prosecuted for either/both of those journeys. I guess that’s the most likely outcome in which case it’ll be in breach of Byelaw 18 and I’ll have to settle. That’s probably the easiest way out of all this anyway. Thanks for all the help I’ll be in touch once I get the letter.

It’s really unlikely that they’d be able to prosecute you for previous offences as they wouldn’t have identified you as the traveller, if they could prove that the tickets had been used at all.

Given the small sum involved here, settling may well be the easiest way out of this, but you might have grounds to play hardball here if you wanted to, as they definitely don’t have a slam dunk conviction here, they may not even have one at all.

 

[bellaaa]

Byelaws 17 and 18 both have exceptions for acting in accordance with instructions from a authorised person. It appears no byelaw offence has been committed. I doubt a compulsory ticket area exists at Bedminster so byelaw 17 wouldn’t apply anyway but need confirmation on that.

It’s possible that you could be prosecuted under RoRA 5.3(a), which states:

Have you travelled on the expired railcard previously?

You should read GWR’s revenue protection policy, available online. GWR almost always settle out of court, they will just want payment for the fares that have been purchased with an invalid discount (they’ll likely ask for the full Anytime single fares, no discount for returns, and no discount for the incorrect fares you did pay) plus an admin fee (usually around £150).

Try to relax until the letter arrives, then come back here for help. GWR are very reasonable and easy to deal with, it’s very unlikely you’ll actually be prosecuted.

Unfortunately yes I have traveled previously. Two short journeys: one Bristol Temple Meads to Exeter and then one Keynsham to Bristol Temple Meads. I guess I just have accept I’ll be prosecuted for these journeys. Is there any point trying to argue how the officer addressed it at all? He at no point mentioned the previous journeys and accused me only of attempting to travel with an invalid ticket on this occasion (yesterday’s journey). He shouldn’t have begun to prosecute me from the start and instead let me just buy a new ticket which seems a bit unfair. But fair enough regarding the other two journeys.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 31 Jan 2026 ==

It’s really unlikely that they’d be able to prosecute you for previous offences as they wouldn’t have identified you as the traveller, if they could prove that the tickets had been used at all.

Given the small sum involved here, settling may well be the easiest way out of this, but you might have grounds to play hardball here if you wanted to, as they definitely don’t have a slam dunk conviction here, they may not even have one at all.

I will have tapped my ticket at the gates in Bristol Temple Meads both times and I think I tapped off at Exeter as well. The only time I didn’t scan my ticket was in Keynsham. Will that affect anything?

 

[Alex365Dash]

Unfortunately yes I have traveled previously. Two short journeys: one Bristol Temple Meads to Exeter and then one Keynsham to Bristol Temple Meads. I guess I just have accept I’ll be prosecuted for these journeys.

Just to reiterate the earlier point made by @z444z - GWR are very open to settling and it’s highly unlikely this will actually make it as far as court.

I will have tapped my ticket at the gates in Bristol Temple Meads both times and I think I tapped off at Exeter as well. The only time I didn’t scan my ticket was in Keynsham. Will that affect anything?

They will have the scan history to go off to indicate that it’s been used, but a scan doesn’t itself tell them who used the ticket.

 

[CarrotPie]

A ‘penalty fare station’ does not automatically become a compulsory ticket area. They’re actually unusual away from London.

Yes, which is why I did not say that a Penalty Fare station is, or contains, a Compulsory Ticket Area.

 

[bellaaa]

Just to reiterate the earlier point made by @z444z - GWR are very open to settling and it’s highly unlikely this will actually make it as far as court.

They will have the scan history to go off to indicate that it’s been used, but a scan doesn’t itself tell them who used the ticket.

Sorry I think I’m using the prosecute wrong: I mean that’s what I’ll initially be accused of doing in the letter they send me and then I have to either ask them to settle or dispute it?

So you’re suggesting the may or may not take into account the previous two journeys, are they still likely to cite yesterdays journey and could I dispute that if they do by saying I didn’t board the train with the invalid ticket?

 

[Alex365Dash]

So you’re suggesting the may or may not take into account the previous two journeys, are they still likely to cite yesterdays journey

Yes.

could I dispute that if they do by saying I didn’t board the train with the invalid ticket?

It depends on what they try to charge you with. Try and relax until you get a letter - it’ll detail the charge if they intend to prosecute you and we’ll be able to help further on that basis.

 

[Haywain]

but they would need to prove intent which seems unlikely.

Buying the ticket and presenting it will demonstrate intent.

 

[z444z]

You could agree to settle for all the journeys.

Or you could argue that no offence was committed yesterday and argue that they have insufficient evidence to prove any offence has ever been committed, and on that basis refuse to pay any amount. This is risky as they may decide to bring a prosecution under RoRA which may succeed, and they may also still pursue you civilly for the amount owed though this is less scary and probably wouldn’t cost as much as a settlement.

Imo it wouldn’t make much sense to agree to settle for previous journeys but refuse for yesterday’s. The admin fee will be the bulk of the cost anyway so if you’re paying that you may as well pay just pay all the fares to close the matter completely.

 

[Haywain]

It depends on what they try to charge you with. Try and relax until you get a letter - it’ll detail the charge if they intend to prosecute you

No, it won't. It might suggest an offence has been committed under the byelaws but that would not prevent the TOC later starting a prosecution under RoRA. I don't believe there is an obligation to specify which offence might be prosecuted at such an early stage.

 

[z444z]

Buying the ticket and presenting it will demonstrate intent.

Agreed. There is frequently misinformed advice on here about the meaning of intent under RoRA. To be fair I think I probably made the same mistakes when first giving advice.

 

[Alex C.]

Keep in mind that the only formal route of 'appeal' here means taking the case to court and mounting a defence - and the loss of this will mean you'll need to pay a fine plus costs, likely to exceed any settlement offer (and the associated criminal record).

You do have the option of corresponding with GWR beforehand to argue that no offence has been committed and it's possible that if you engage with them they will agree and drop the case. The fact you did end up travelling definitely complicates this though (and as posted above may warrant a prosecution under the more serious Regulation of Railways act), and they have no obligation to offer you a settlement.

 

[z444z]

No, it won't. It might suggest an offence has been committed under the byelaws but that would not prevent the TOC later starting a prosecution under RoRA.

Agreed again - we regularly see the “offence” alleged in the initial letter to be more just a description of what happened than the actual wording of an offence. For example “upon inspection did not present a valid ticket” is one we see regularly - it might accurately describe what happened but isn’t in itself an offence, as the TOC tend to imply.

 

[bellaaa]

Yes.

It depends on what they try to charge you with. Try and relax until you get a letter - it’ll detail the charge if they intend to prosecute you and we’ll be able to help further on that basis.

Ok thank you, I’ll update this once I get a letter.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 31 Jan 2026 ==

You could agree to settle for all the journeys.

Or you could argue that no offence was committed yesterday and argue that they have insufficient evidence to prove any offence has ever been committed, and on that basis refuse to pay any amount. This is risky as they may decide to bring a prosecution under RoRA which may succeed, and they may also still pursue you civilly for the amount owed though this is less scary and probably wouldn’t cost as much as a settlement.

Imo it wouldn’t make much sense to agree to settle for previous journeys but refuse for yesterday’s. The admin fee will be the bulk of the cost anyway so if you’re paying that you may as well pay just pay all the fares to close the matter completely.

This makes sense

 

[AlterEgo]

*The railway does also prosecute using Section 5 of the Regulation of Railways Act 1889, which doesn’t need you to board a train - but they would need to prove intent which seems unlikely.

It doesn't seem to any more based on what we've seen here, as they got into a scandal for using SJP to prosecute these cases, and can't be arsed with it any more.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 31 Jan 2026 ==

I go to show him my ticket and he asks to see the railcard. I open the app and realise it’s expired and admit this to officer

How long ago had the railcard expired?

I’ve been advised that they’ll likely prosecute me for breaking Byelaw 18. But this states I’ve only committed an offence if I’ve boarded the train with an invalid ticket. I hadn’t boarded the train when he checked the ticket, I was on the platform and had only just purchased the ticket. He was witness to this. But I had not boarded the train. He should’ve let me renew my railcard or buy a new valid ticket, right?

Yes, as you had not boarded the train. As has already been explained, train companies aren't prosecuting much, if at all, under RoRA, as they actually have to go to court and can't rely on submitting it all on paper under the Single Justice Procedure. There was a massive scandal about that recently, and about 75,000 (LOL, yes) prosecutions got overturned as a result. Competence is not a strong point of train companies when it comes to being on the right side of the law.

Whether any case could possibly be made out under a speculative RoRA prosecution would hinge mostly on how out of date your railcard was and if any intent might be ascertained from that.

My only concern is that as he was writing me up and taking my details the train arrived, I asked if I could still get the train and he said yes because we had to continue the process and he essentially escorted me onto the carriage where all the other officers were.

Was he wearing his bodycam and, if so, was it turned on?

I am wondering what my rights are here? When I get the prosecution letter should I just ask to settle and pay the fee or is it worth appealing because I didn’t break the byelaw? He kept stating he *believed I intended* to travel with an invalid ticket and had my railcard not been checked then I *would have travelled* with an invalid ticket and that’s breaking the rule.

It is *not* breaking Bylaw 18. Bylaw 18 is a strict liability offence, and you have to be caught actually doing it.

I’ve been advised that the only other byelaw that might be applicable here is Byelaw 17 which would apply if I was boarding at a Compulsory Ticket Area. I don’t know what that is so if anyone can clarify if BMT is a compulsory ticket area I’d appreciate it.

It is not a CTA.

 

[fandroid]

The purpose of them threatening prosecution and persevering in getting all your details was to be able to investigate how many trips you had been on previously using the out of date Railcard. As you say it was just two historical ones then there isn't a lot to worry about although the fare they'll demand for the trip to Exeter might be a nasty shock.

You could validly argue that you owe them nothing for the trip when you were "caught", and they'd struggle to get a conviction for it if you defended it in court. However, it was only a short journey, so is it worth the extra hassle?

One thing that may or may not give comfort is that GWR are having very long delays in catching up with prosecution cases. So much so that we have seen several recent ones where they have gone over the 6 months limit that applies. If that happens you will have much more leverage to reduce the amount for a settlement.

But, as has already been advised, it's just wait and see now. Carry on travelling with your renewed Railcard. Don't worry too much but always ensure that you have a valid ticket before boarding a train.

 

[bellaaa]

It doesn't seem to any more based on what we've seen here, as they got into a scandal for using SJP to prosecute these cases, and can't be arsed with it any more.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 31 Jan 2026 ==


How long ago had the railcard expired?


Yes, as you had not boarded the train. As has already been explained, train companies aren't prosecuting much, if at all, under RoRA, as they actually have to go to court and can't rely on submitting it all on paper under the Single Justice Procedure. There was a massive scandal about that recently, and about 75,000 (LOL, yes) prosecutions got overturned as a result. Competence is not a strong point of train companies when it comes to being on the right side of the law.

Whether any case could possibly be made out under a speculative RoRA prosecution would hinge mostly on how out of date your railcard was and if any intent might be ascertained from that.


Was he wearing his bodycam and, if so, was it turned on?


It is *not* breaking Bylaw 18. Bylaw 18 is a strict liability offence, and you have to be caught actually doing it.


It is not a CTA.

It expired October last year, I’ve only made two other short journeys since then. And yesterdays. And yes his body cam was on and recording. If they use the footage I’d hope they can see how genuinely shocked I was that it was expired and how upset I am at the situation. Which would hopefully prove I did not intend to use an invalid ticket intentionally! How likely is it they’d prosecute me against RoRa?

 

[z444z]

How likely is it they’d prosecute me against RoRa?

As others have said, quite unlikely, but mostly because the railway companies can’t be bothered, not necessarily because a conviction wouldn’t be possible.

If the journeys you’ve made have all been returns, except the one where you were stopped, the fares total for the settlement would be £91.80. Then the admin fee would likely be £150, for a total of £241.80.

By declining a settlement you’d be saving roughly £241.80 in settlement costs. Then there’s £91.80 in fares - let’s say there’s a 50% chance that they later recover that amount civilly (GWR are one of the train companies most likely to do so), so the expected value lost there is £91.80/2=£45.90, £241.80-£45.90=£195.90. So one way to think of it is whether £195.90 is a price worth paying to avoid any risk, even a small one, of criminal prosecution resulting in a criminal record.

GWR are one of the nicest TOCs and I have a feeling you might be able to get any settlement offer reduced by making an argument that no offence was committed and asking for fares paid to be taken into account in light of that. I wouldn’t recommend this with some other TOCs but with GWR I think the worst they’d say is no.

All of this is speculative for now, we need to see what their letter says before properly advising!

 

[bellaaa]

As others have said, quite unlikely, but mostly because the railway companies can’t be bothered, not necessarily because a conviction wouldn’t be possible.

If the journeys you’ve made have all been returns, except the one where you were stopped, the fares total for the settlement would be £91.80. Then the admin fee would likely be £150, for a total of £241.80.

By declining a settlement you’d be saving roughly £241.80 in settlement costs. Then there’s £91.80 in fares - let’s say there’s a 50% chance that they later recover that amount civilly (GWR are one of the train companies most likely to do so), so the expected value lost there is £91.80/2=£45.90, £241.80-£45.90=£195.90. So one way to think of it is whether £195.90 is a price worth paying to avoid any risk, even a small one, of criminal prosecution resulting in a criminal record.

GWR are one of the nicest TOCs and I have a feeling you might be able to get any settlement offer reduced by making an argument that no offence was committed and asking for fares paid to be taken into account in light of that. I wouldn’t recommend this with some other TOCs but with GWR I think the worst they’d say is no.

All of this is speculative for now, we need to see what their letter says before properly advising!

Luckily they were all singles, but yes that’s a good way to look at it. We will see when (if) the letter comes and go from there I guess! Thanks for the help everyone

 

[z444z]

Luckily they were all singles

So you only travelled by train one way and got back another way? Just to check I’ve understood!

 

[bellaaa]

So you only travelled by train one way and got back another way? Just to check I’ve understood!

Yeah one way, Bristol temple meads to Exeter on 24th December (yes, Xmas Eve) and then Keynsham to Bristol temple meads on the 27th December

 

[z444z]

Ok let’s redo that, though not a big difference:

If the journeys you’ve made have all been returns, except the one where you were stopped, the fares total for the settlement would be £47.60. Then the admin fee would likely be £150, for a total of £197.60.

By declining a settlement you’d be saving roughly £197.60 in settlement costs. Then there’s £47.60 in fares - let’s say there’s a 50% chance that they later recover that amount civilly (GWR are one of the train companies most likely to do so), so the expected value lost there is £47.60/2=£23.80, £197.60-£23.80=£173.80. So one way to think of it is whether £173.80 is a price worth paying to avoid any risk, even a small one, of criminal prosecution resulting in a criminal record.

 

[bellaaa]

Ok let’s redo that, though not a big difference:

If the journeys you’ve made have all been returns, except the one where you were stopped, the fares total for the settlement would be £47.60. Then the admin fee would likely be £150, for a total of £197.60.

By declining a settlement you’d be saving roughly £197.60 in settlement costs. Then there’s £47.60 in fares - let’s say there’s a 50% chance that they later recover that amount civilly (GWR are one of the train companies most likely to do so), so the expected value lost there is £47.60/2=£23.80, £197.60-£23.80=£173.80. So one way to think of it is whether £173.80 is a price worth paying to avoid any risk, even a small one, of criminal prosecution resulting in a criminal record.

Thank you you for doing this!