Forced to pay fine in cash at London Liverpool Street

[185143]

Or if they obtained it by dishonesty, which they have, then it's fraud.

Plenty of ways to get someone doing that!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Aug 2026 ==



It's certainly been obtained from the passenger under false pretences. They were of the impression it was in payment for a Penalty Fare, which it was not.

It's more fraud than theft though I'd say. Ironic that the correct sum would be £50+fare which is higher, but it doesn't make it not dishonest. Presumably they've got away with it for so long because it was saving the errant passenger money or the risk of being prosecuted - in a way a solicited bribe I suppose.

Either way if this story is as stated someone is going to get the sack and is unlikely to work on the railway again.

Exactly. IF this is true, then it's a clear case of a GA employee committing fraud against their employer, surely.

And I'd like to think given the highly unusual circumstances GA would be kind enough to thank the OP for bringing the matter to their attention and drop any case they may have against them.

Imagine the headline otherwise "I reported corrupt inspector and GA prosecuted ME!"

 

[speedy1]

Who has it been stolen from? The OP who didn't have a valid ticket or the employer?

I am also very aware that the police and CPS are unlikely to get involved in a matter where the amount is so small.

The manner in which you're participating in this thread is very curious

Casting doubt, trying to make the OP think there is nothing to report and even if there were, no chance of prosecution

Just how "very aware" are you of details in cases like this hm?

 

[MrJeeves]

The manner in which you're participating in this thread is very curious

I think Haywain's manner of participation in this thread is one of realism, rather than anything more.

I don't think there's nothing to report, but I also think it's unlikely anything would come of it, other than an internal investigation and/or gross misconduct case for the supposed employee involved in this.

 

[Titfield]

There has to be compelling evidence for the CPS to proceed with a prosecution assuming that the Police investigate and find such evidence.

The reality is that the Police have to assess the circumstances of a complaint / matter being brought to their attention and take a view on whether it is such that resources are devoted to investigating the matter.

 

[Haywain]

trying to make the OP think there is nothing to report

None of my comments have suggested anything of the sort.

and even if there were, no chance of prosecution

Sorry if being realistic offends you, but if there is only this one case I cannot see that the police would think it is worth stretching their limited resources too far, and similarly with the CPS. I think they would see a GA disciplinary as administering an appropriate level of justice. But hey, I could be wrong.

 

[rmHawk765]

I do think that GA would really want this to stay under their control rather than escalate to the police or court as it wouldn't be a great appearance on the media that they are (potentially, we don't know for sure yet) employing fraudsters, especially given they're overall regarded as one of the best operators. So it's a bit of an awkward situation; the supposed employee should be taken to court for the benefit of OP and other passengers but it actually could cause problems for GA as an organisation, who are capable of tracking this person down themselves if they are an employee and can keep everything behind closed doors.

I am also very aware that the police and CPS are unlikely to get involved in a matter where the amount is so small.

The issue here isn't the amount, it's the fact that this can pose a genuine concern to passengers on who is actually a genuine employee of GA and not engaging in any sort of malpractice, and perhaps a moral question of why they should be paying their fare when they're not even sure any penalty charged is going back to the operator. With the amount of fare evasion we see already, incidents like this are certainly not going to help.

 

[RJ]

I believe someone attempted to take cash in lieu of a penalty fare from @RJ there. It was a long time ago though, i'm struggling to find the thread.

Not me this time - mine was in relation to a problem with the Oyster PAYG logic.

 

[MikeWh]

Not me this time - mine was in relation to a problem with the Oyster PAYG logic.

I remember that. You "abused" the OSIs around Manor Park and exceeded the maximum journey time if I remember rightly. It certainly helped my understanding of how things worked as I was starting up my site.

 

[Egg Centric]

None of my comments have suggested anything of the sort.

Sorry if being realistic offends you, but if there is only this one case I cannot see that the police would think it is worth stretching their limited resources too far, and similarly with the CPS. I think they would see a GA disciplinary as administering an appropriate level of justice. But hey, I could be wrong.

Bear in mind that if true then there are at least two employees in on it. A conspiracy of fraudulent gateline workers (should be easy to prove more offences) sounds a good job to me for BTP.

 

[AlterEgo]

There has to be compelling evidence for the CPS to proceed with a prosecution assuming that the Police investigate and find such evidence.

The reality is that the Police have to assess the circumstances of a complaint / matter being brought to their attention and take a view on whether it is such that resources are devoted to investigating the matter.

That's true, but if this is a regular thing this RPI does then multiple reports will build up a pattern of intelligence. As others have said though the police getting involved over a single report is unlikely, but all crime should be reported to the police so they are aware of it.

 

[WesternLancer]

That's true, but if this is a regular thing this RPI does then multiple reports will build up a pattern of intelligence. As others have said though the police getting involved over a single report is unlikely, but all crime should be reported to the police so they are aware of it.

I suppose that given the people being asked for payment are themselves actually or very likely to be fare evaders, how many of them are going to be reporting what has happened to the police or railway company.
Which would mean patterns far less likely to appear I would think.

 

[saismee]

Bear in mind that if true then there are at least two employees in on it. A conspiracy of fraudulent gateline workers (should be easy to prove more offences) sounds a good job to me for BTP.

Not particularly important, but this would've been an RPI and not a member of gateline staff as they had a badge. This also means that the person has been employed for over a year and has been trained on the PACE act.

 

[TheJester]

I'm pretty sure we're not getting the full detail here

 

[reb0118]

Criminals and greedy people are often exploited by other criminals higher up the food chain. Therefore, why should fare evaders be different. On the face of it, and remember we only have one side here, this certainly appears dodgy.

However, applying Hanlon's razor, could this just be sloppy working? Who's to say any cash taken has not been properly accounted for.

I often retail tickets that have no resemblance to a passenger's actual journey, and do so to quickly rectify minor irregularities where no illegality is suspected OR where insufficient funds are available from marginal members of society (a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush). However everything taken is logged through the machine and a ticket/ receipt generated, even if not retained by the passenger.

Many years ago I encountered a colleague having great difficulty reconciling his cash takings. Why, because on a busy service he decided that it took too long to issue tickets so he just took the fares of those wanting singles with the intention of issuing the tickets later. Of course he then forgot what he had taken the money for and his takings didn't add up. Another colleague would sell his non issues and then wonder why his takings were always over. In neither case was there any criminal intent to defraud - just rank stupidity and a blatant disregard of cash handling procedures. I'm sure this type of behaviour still goes on.

 

[tatitiliti]

I was travelling to London Liverpool Street station without purchasing the correct ticket. I had bought a ticket from Stratford to Liverpool Street but had actually come from an earlier stop and bought my ticket while on the train.
Unfortunately it gave me a paper ticket that i needed to print.

I didn’t really know what to do so just tried my luck and asked an inspector at the gate if i could be let through to print it. They said “yeah of course i can help you with that” and took me to one side. Should’ve known that was too easy.

He proceeded to tell me he knew i had not come from Stratford and if i didn't tell the truth he could make things very hard for me. Whipped out a badge to say he was “undercover” and “i chose the wrong person to approach” because he was not a mere ticket inspector. Did a whole spiel that they would check CCTV, take me to a second location, take me to court and ultimately prosecute me. He had a second man there to back up his claims.

Discussion ended with him saying i needed to pay a fine + the price of another ticket if i didn't want a criminal record. I said okay but i didn't have enough money in my bank account to pay it on the spot. He insinuated i wouldn’t be able to leave without paying - obviously i didn’t want to be held by two men, so said i could pay part cash part card. He said he would help me out by only charging me a child fine which was £30. Conveniently the exact cash i had… Which he took off me, no proper details, no receipt, nothing. He briefly quizzed me on the station I had come from and asked to see something that had my address on it (he made me open my banking to show him as I didn’t have an ID on me). Didn’t write down these details or ask for my name.

In the moment, i knew it didn't feel right but honestly felt intimidated, threatened and ultimately shook down for my cash.

Is this a normal procedure? Was this 2 rogue Greater Anglia staff members?

I feel like I need to report it, but i am worried that i will then have to pay the £50 or £100 fine for travelling with the wrong ticket.

Any advice please!

Please get a CCTV SAR and report to GA and BTP as @AlterEgo advised.

 

[saismee]

Many years ago I encountered a colleague having great difficulty reconciling his cash takings. Why, because on a busy service he decided that it took too long to issue tickets so he just took the fares of those wanting singles with the intention of issuing the tickets later. Of course he then forgot what he had taken the money for and his takings didn't add up. Another colleague would sell his non issues and then wonder why his takings were always over. In neither case was there any criminal intent to defraud - just rank stupidity and a blatant disregard of cash handling procedures. I'm sure this type of behaviour still goes on.

I remember a colleague asked for something like 25.60 and as the customer was in a hurry, only wanted the 25 and would pay the 60p himself. Passenger was foreign and quite confused, but he re-explained it and the customer walked away after paying. Only then did my colleague realise it was 23.60 and that he had overcharged the passenger.

The passenger was made whole with a short sprint down the platform

 

[RJ]

I remember that. You "abused" the OSIs around Manor Park and exceeded the maximum journey time if I remember rightly. It certainly helped my understanding of how things worked as I was starting up my site.

It wasn't an abuse - I did 3 separate short trips over the course of a few hours, validating correctly and well within the maximum journey times each time. Unknown at the time, the logic was set to join them all up and treat the three journeys as one, unexpectedly resulting in the trips being charged for plus attempting to charge two maximum fares at Liverpool Street.

That should never have been possible having followed the clear "touch in, touch out" instructions for using the product and having the balance to cover the three trips!

 

[MikeWh]

It wasn't an abuse - I did 3 separate short trips over the course of a few hours, validating correctly and well within the maximum journey times each time. Unknown at the time, the logic was set to join them all up and treat the three journeys as one, unexpectedly resulting in the trips being charged for plus attempting to charge two maximum fares at Liverpool Street.

That should never have been possible having followed the clear "touch in, touch out" instructions for using the product and having the balance to cover the three trips!

I did put abuse in quotes. I was more acknowledging your help in getting to grips with the nuances of the system.

 

[vinnym70]

The prospect of a 'bad actor' doing this with inpunity at Liverpool Street seems a little implausible. It's a busy station yet it's quite compact so either this behaviour is non-existent or 'known' and/or 'tolerated' by colleagues (for whatever reasons) would be my immediate thoughts. If the latter then that would immediately suggest significant issues.

 

[Harratt4]

could this just be sloppy working?

It could be, however, if you are performing a quasi judicial role (I know strictly they aren’t issuing fines but if you want to have that conversation get on the Clapham omnibus!) then sloppy working should not be without consequences!

 

[Magrar]

I'm always surprised the default advice in this sort of outlandishly abusive situation isn't, "have you alerted your local paper or BBC journalist"?

Unless you do that, it's hard to imagine filing any official complaints would go anywhere at all.

If the story checks out, it's gold, and thus lights a rocket under any and all persons and bodies who actually have a responsibility to do something about such a thing.

Look at all the major recent scandals of our times. It always starts with an official complaint being ignored by someone in a position of responsibility.

 

[Benjwri]

I'm always surprised the default advice in this sort of outlandishly abusive situation isn't, "have you alerted your local paper or BBC journalist"?

If everyone contacted their MP at the sight of someone doing something they shouldn't MPs would get nothing done. Companies/the authorities need to be given at least a chance to sort things before such action is warranted.

 

[iamraymond]

If everyone contacted their MP at the sight of someone doing something they shouldn't MPs would get nothing done. Companies/the authorities need to be given at least a chance to sort things before such action is warranted.

So what you're saying is that MP's are being contacted at the sight of someone doing something wrong, by everyone haha

 

[Benjwri]

So what you're saying is that MP's are being contacted at the sight of someone doing something wrong, by everyone haha

No? That is effectively what the poster I was replying to was saying should happen...

 

[AlterEgo]

No? That is effectively what the poster I was replying to was saying should happen...

No it wasn't? Have you misread?

 

[Benjwri]

No it wasn't? Have you misread?

Ah for some reason I read paper as politician, regardless, in my opinion the company should at least be given a chance to sort it.

 

[Magrar]

Ah for some reason I read paper as politician, regardless, in my opinion the company should at least be given a chance to sort it.

You also misread "this sort of outlandishly abusive situation" as "someone doing something wrong."

I perhaps could have been clearer on another point, but happy to clarify - always go the official route first. But in a situation like this, expect a prompt and fullsome reply.

The first thing a journalist would obviously ask being, what did they do about it when you informed them?

 

[saismee]

So what you're saying is that MP's are being contacted at the sight of someone doing something wrong, by everyone haha

No? That is effectively what the poster I was replying to was saying should happen...

For the record, I think @iamraymond was making a joke that our MPs must already be being flooded with complaints because they don't seem to be doing anything already.

 

[mmh]

If everyone contacted their MP at the sight of someone doing something they shouldn't MPs would get nothing done. Companies/the authorities need to be given at least a chance to sort things before such action is warranted.

You're the first person to mention MPs in this thread.

 

[RJ]

I did put abuse in quotes. I was more acknowledging your help in getting to grips with the nuances of the system.

I know, more for the benefit of those who weren't following the whole debacle some 16(!) years ago!