Travel Irregularity Report - SWT - need advice

[JamesArchy01]

That's the feedback we get - or at least, that's how I read it.

Do you mean from other cases here ? Is that very comment I mean *

So their cases had faster out of court settlement agreement due to their lawyers engagement ?

 

[Swedenorer]

Be clear a solicitor may negotiate an out of court settlement but you re running ahead of yourself here.

Once again - tell us the exact ticket, fare, and journey. There is no point being coy about this otherwise you will only get general advice and maybe spend money you don't need to.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Do you mean from other cases here ? Is that very comment I mean *

So their cases had faster out of court settlement agreement due to their lawyers engagement ?

That's my understanding. I should say that I haven't gone back through the threads to check, but it's what it looks like to me.

But of course, it might be that I have got the wrong end of the stick. I think it says it somewhere in the posts that you're meant to read before starting off here, but we're not lawyers: we're just people with an interest in railways who try to do our best as amateurs to help out - so I can't guarantee to have got it right!

 

[JamesArchy01]

That's my understanding. I should say that I haven't gone back through the threads to check, but it's what it looks like to me.

But of course, it might be that I have got the wrong end of the stick. I think it says it somewhere in the posts that you're meant to read before starting off here, but we're not lawyers: we're just people with an interest in railways who try to do our best as amateurs to help out - so I can't guarantee to have got it right!

Thanks, what I think I’ll do is engage a lawyer and use the free 15 mins consultation and ask this specifically. I want to understand their experience from prev cases where they were successful due to an early engagement (ie reacting prior the first letter arriving etc)

 

[WesternLancer]

I did some research and came across a blog from a lawyers website and it mentioned the lawyer can reach out early to the rail company prior to the first letter to arrive and offer an out of court settlement. It is also advice this the earlier you engage the lawyer the better so someone “professional” can assist and advice you on your next steps

Well, as the famous quote says ‘they would say that wouldn’t they’.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 May 2026 ==

Thanks, what I think I’ll do is engage a lawyer and use the free 15 mins consultation and ask this specifically. I want to understand their experience from prev cases where they were successful due to an early engagement (ie reacting prior the first letter arriving etc)

Given today is a bank holiday just use the search function on the forum to search the names of the firms listed a few posts back and you will find cases mentioned by people who have used them and their experiences.

Several firms have been mentioned as giving good service.

IIRC. Manak specifically claim they can jump the queue with GTR at least and I recall probably at least two cases where clients posted to say the did do that, maybe they have the same relationship with SW trains. Other firms may also have that ability.

If you ring solicitors firms make sure you get clear estimates/ quotes for their scale of charges for this work.

However I’m not convinced even these firms would have the level of detailed knowledge of the uk rail fares Routing Guide compared to people here, but I guess they could post a question here and charge you for the time involved in doing that
But I would expect the solicitor to focus on getting an out of court settlement. Without the Routing Guide validity knowledge they may not be able to simply state to the railway’there is no case here’ however. But they may retain that knowledge in house at the solicitors so I may be wrong to suggest they don’t know it.
As mentioned before many actual front line rail staff don’t properly know it. It’s genuinely potentially complicated.

You are clearly keen not to post your ticket details here which is up to you, but it might save you north if £500 if you did. Depending on the ticket.
But if this is causing you severe stress then putting it in the hands of a professional might help you in that regard.

 

[AlterEgo]

Be clear a solicitor may negotiate an out of court settlement but you re running ahead of yourself here.

Once again - tell us the exact ticket, fare, and journey. There is no point being coy about this otherwise you will only get general advice and maybe spend money you don't need to.

I rather suspect the OP has been engaging in something different to what they claim to have been doing given their reticence to even share the ticket and route (which may well provide a defence).

OP: you will need to be frank with your solicitor and disclose everything of relevance. What a solicitor will *not* be able to do for you is assess the validity of your tickets using the Routeing Guide (this would be fundamental to any claim of ticket invalidity and train companies themselves get this wrong more often than you think).

Regardless, a solicitor is not necessary to negotiate an out of court settlement with SWR. They settle every time provided you write a simple letter apologising and promising to rectify your behaviour and requesting to dispose of the matter out of court. A solicitor represents an outlay of £600 to £1000 on top of whatever you need to pay SWR to settle the case to get the same outcome.

Unfortunately, as you are unwilling or.unable to provide the exact facts of your case, the forum cannot provide you with any detailed lay expert advice.

 

[phoenix743]

TIRs (Travel Irregularity Report) have been around for a very long time, as have MG11s. No one has created a new name, but not all staff are in a position to take a witness statement which requires an MG11.

On SWR they have just switched from MG11 which said report for prosecution to TIR which state Travel Irregularity report I believe it was to bring them in line with other TOCs

 

[JamesArchy01]

Hi all,

I had a question about how e-tickets and station barriers work in practice.

On my regular route, the gates at the origin station are sometimes left open, especially during busy periods, so passengers often just walk through without scanning the Aztec code on their e-ticket. At the destination station, however, the barriers are usually closed, so I always scan there to exit.

There have also been occasions where staff manually open the gates during peak times and wave large numbers of people through without asking them to scan their tickets.

My question is: is it considered acceptable for an e-ticket journey to only be scanned once (for example only at the destination station)? With Oyster/contactless there is obviously a tap-in/tap-out record, but with Aztec e-tickets I’m not sure what information is actually recorded by the system.

Can train operators see when and where an e-ticket was scanned, and whether it was scanned at both ends of the journey? I’m wondering because if a historical journey was ever questioned or disputed, it could potentially appear irregular if there is only one scan recorded due to the gates being open or staff allowing passengers through.

It also makes me wonder whether passengers are left a bit vulnerable in these situations, especially when stations leave barriers open without clear reminders that tickets should still be scanned.

Would appreciate any insight from people familiar with railway systems or ticketing records.


Thanks

 

[jfollows]

There is no requirement to scan an e-ticket at any time, other than to open a closed barrier.

If barriers are open, there is no requirement to scan a ticket.

Unfortunately, railway staff sometimes invent rules such as a “requirement” to scan a ticket because it suits their view of how things ought to work.

Clearly there are special cases such as flexi-season tickets, but even these only have to be “activated” and barrier scanning is only one possible method.

I have made trips with absolutely no scans, either in barriers or onboard trains. It’s perfectly fine.

 

[Swedenorer]

In this respect an e-ticket is no different from a paper one where it is possible to do a very lengthy journey, as I did recently, with no form of inspection or surrender at all.

If the railway doesn't want to check validity and prevent possible reuse then it is up to them.

Anyway try scanning an e-ticket (available in that form for £15.20 Cheap Day) in and out from Amberley to Warblington!

 

[John R]

To answer one question, yes they can see where and when it was scanned. (And they find that information of great value where they suspect someone of short faring, as we often see here.)

 

[JamesArchy01]

Thanks for your reply, oh interesting! Ok good to know.

Actually I does anyone know if the tap in tap out data is recoded at all for each journey for a ticket purchased on the app ? Will that company have these recoded ?

Basically I want to understand if they can track you in the system or the route you took etc

 

[island]

There is no requirement to scan an e-ticket other than to open ticket gates or when requested by staff.

Scans at gates and by staff are recorded to a database.

 

[iamraymond]

Thanks for your reply, oh interesting! Ok good to know. Actually I does anyone know if the tap in tap out data is recoded at all for each journey for a ticket purchased on the app ? Will that company have these recoded ? Basically I want to understand if they can track you in the system or the route you took etc

Is this in relation to a Ticket Irregularity Report (TIR)?

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Is this in relation to a TIR?

I imagine it relates to the OP's other thread: https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...rt-swt-need-advice.301717/page-2#post-7772701

If the OP has decided not to go with a solicitor, then hopefully they will provide enough information for us to give properly targeted advice: we are keen to help!

Alternatively, if the solicitor is asking them to find this out, that's suggestive of a solicitor who's not totally in touch with railway matters: we have named some firms who specialise and may not need to be spoon-fed this sort of factual background.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Is this in relation to a TIR?

I imagine it relates to the OP's other thread, where the OP has chosen not to provide the information which would help us to provide more tailored guidance.

Given that the OP has chosen not to provide that information, I suspect that the OP has been short-faring or doughnutting.

And so, to answer their question, yes, a TOC can see where a ticket has been scanned. They can also see the exact time it was purchased.

As they were stopped, it is likely that the TOC could make a prosecution stick for that specific offence on that specific day, should they wish to.

For the other instances, if the OP has a number of tickets between a common short-faring station pair and those tickets only ever show a scan at one of those stations, then the TOC are likely to assume that the OP has been short-faring on those occasions also. They won't be able to prove it to the criminal standard and it will just be an assumption, but they will likely include those journeys in their calculations for an out-of-court settlement.

 

[jumble]

Just because the inspector said it wasn’t valid doesn’t mean that it wasn’t actually valid.

There is nothing to be gained by concealing the ticket you used and the route you took.

Indeed recently plenty of Train managers have been issuing TIRs on loophole tickets claiming they were invalid when if fact they were fully compliant with all the rules including providing reserved seats on a valid itinerary
In fact one TM told someone I know that if they had seen the valid ticket on the platform they would have refused to allow the passenger to board the train

 

[Haywain]

Indeed recently plenty of Train managers have been issuing TIRs on loophole tickets

Issuing a TIR is entirely the correct action for a TM to take if they believe a ticket is not intended to be valid in the way it is being used.

 

[jumble]

Issuing a TIR is entirely the correct action for a TM to take if they believe a ticket is not intended to be valid in the way it is being used.

I do not agree with a TM stating that a ticket is invalid and refusing to say why in the face of overwhelming evidence that the ticket was 100% valid
Do we think they have the right to demand, under pain of BTP involvement, name and address from a customer who has an undisputedly valid ticket whether it was intended or not that the ticket be valid?

 

[Tetchytyke]

Do we think they have the right to demand, under pain of BTP involvement, name and address from a customer who has an undisputedly valid ticket whether it was intended or not that the ticket be valid?

If they reasonably believe the ticket to not be valid they can ask for name and address as per Byelaw 23(1).

Issuing a TIR is exactly what should happen if a ticket inspector believes a ticket is either not valid in the way it is being used or is not intended to be valid in the way it is being used. In the latter case, this allows the TOC's fares managers to clarify through negative easements, etc, how the ticket should be used.

If you are using good value tickets on advantageous routeings, it is wise to keep a copy of the itinerary in the event of subsequent challenge.

However, given the OP's postings on the other thread, I suspect he was simply short-faring rather than using a good value ticket.

 

[skyhigh]

I rather suspect the OP has been engaging in something different to what they claim to have been doing given their reticence to even share the ticket and route (which may well provide a defence).

Reading this in conjunction with the later thread by the same OP asking about scan data I suspect you're right and the actual issue is short faring or doughnutting rather than a wrong route.

 

[talltaf]

Thanks for your reply, oh interesting! Ok good to know.

Actually I does anyone know if the tap in tap out data is recoded at all for each journey for a ticket purchased on the app ? Will that company have these recoded ?

Basically I want to understand if they can track you in the system or the route you took etc

All tap in and tap out events are recorded (if you actually tapped in or out, of course) as are any inspection scans by conductors, and shows whether the ticket was accepted or rejected.

All records are recorded against the unique ticket number (UTN). If - for example - you bought a ticket from Trainline, it would be in the format TTXXXXXXXXX, so that's what the train company would have used to work out where, when and how your tickets have been used.

 

[JamesArchy01]

All tap in and tap out events are recorded (if you actually tapped in or out, of course) as are any inspection scans by conductors, and shows whether the ticket was accepted or rejected.

All records are recorded against the unique ticket number (UTN). If - for example - you bought a ticket from Trainline, it would be in the format TTXXXXXXXXX, so that's what the train company would have used to work out where, when and how your tickets have been used.

Yeah they do then why do they leave gates open and let people through when it gets busy and leave them open and not tell you to scan them if its the important incase of any dispute!!!

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Yeah they do then why do they leave gates open and let people through when it gets busy

As I understand it, the rules require barriers to be staffed: if there are no staff available, they have to be open

and not tell you to scan them if its the important incase of any dispute!!!

It may not feel like it when you're in one, but overwhelmingly train journeys don't end in a dispute - so for the overwhelming majority of people this would ask them to do something extra for no good reason.

 

[talltaf]

Yeah they do then why do they leave gates open and let people through when it gets busy and leave them open and not tell you to scan them if its the important incase of any dispute!!!

There is a balance between scan rate and throughput of passenger. There is absolutely no requirement for a ticket to be scanned on an open gate. If the gate line staff choose to open them to let more people through, it doesn't leave a record so (in theory) that shouldn't really pose you a problem, but conversely they can't see that you used the gate anyway.

What is the dispute over though?

 

[Fawkes Cat]

What is the dispute over though?

From OP's other thread:

I took the wrong route a few times (maybe more than 40+) throughout the period, not realising the limitation of my ticket. On the TIR it states “over travelled” I assumed the route was permitted to any route as there was a statement “break travel” is permitted on the app.

This having two threads is getting confusing. I'll draw the duplication to the mods' attention and they can decide whether they should be in one.

 

[JamesArchy01]

There is a balance between scan rate and throughput of passenger. There is absolutely no requirement for a ticket to be scanned on an open gate. If the gate line staff choose to open them to let more people through, it doesn't leave a record so (in theory) that shouldn't really pose you a problem, but conversely they can't see that you used the gate anyway.

What is the dispute over though?

Sorry what do you mean they can't see that you used the gate anyway?

 

[talltaf]

From OP's other thread:
This having two threads is getting confusing. I'll draw the duplication to the mods' attention and they can decide whether they should be in one.

Ah for context, that makes a bit more sense.

"Over-travelled" on potentially 40+ journeys would take some time for them to investigate.

Sorry what do you mean they can't see that you used the gate anyway?

I mean if you go through and don't scan the ticket, there is no record you went through. That would be the same each time, but if you have gone through gates before your origin station or after your destination station, those scans will show up for them (as will any scans conductors did on the train).

Outside of missing their letter, what is your biggest concern?