Advice on short fare prosecution letter:

[ST999]

Essentially, an individual I know is in this situation and is seeking advice. Any advice or any similar cases or likely outcomes are appreciated.

An individual has been commuting by train for roughly two years. They consistently purchased a cheaper ticket that covered only the final stops of their actual journey, despite routinely travelling a longer route that required a higher-priced fare. They also used an aged railcard discount they were not eligible for during part of this time.

This pattern went undetected because station gates accepted the ticket and ticket checks were infrequent. A few months ago, a ticket inspector noticed the clear ticket mismatch. Although nothing was said at the time, this appears to have triggered the operator’s review of their travel history.

The transport operator has now sent the individual a formal message from its prosecutions or revenue protection team. The communication states that the operator has identified irregular travel patterns, has concerns about intentionally avoiding the correct fare, and is considering legal action. It requests evidence of legitimate travel over the relevant period and asks for a prompt written response. The individual does not have evidence that would support legitimate travel.


They emphasise that they prosecute such cases, citing laws that allow for fines of up to £1,000, possible imprisonment, and a criminal record. They also note the situation might fall under the Fraud Act, which carries even more serious implications.

They ask the individual to provide any evidence showing no offence was committed and require a response within seven days to avoid the matter moving further toward prosecution.

Thats the email. I will say the fact that it says still a fine of £1000 3 months prison makes me think this is over the single case a few months ago despite what they said about checking history.


Please, any advice or help at all is welcome.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Nov 2025 ==

For additional reference, the shorter ticket being bought saved about 4.50 pounds a day around 3x a week.

The company is north western and that the individual is very eager to settle out of court. What is the best approach?

 

[AlterEgo]

Basically this will cost you every single journey fraudulently taken at the Anytime rate to resolve without prosecution. If you tell us the journey we can tell you how much they will want in settlement - but it will be expensive and it will need to be paid promptly.

It would help to know exactly when you were stopped because there are some limitations to what can be prosecuted and when depending on the age of the offences.

This will help to advise you what to write back to them.

 

[WesternLancer]

Essentially, an individual I know is in this situation and is seeking advice. Any advice or any similar cases or likely outcomes are appreciated.

An individual has been commuting by train for roughly two years. They consistently purchased a cheaper ticket that covered only the final stops of their actual journey, despite routinely travelling a longer route that required a higher-priced fare. They also used an aged railcard discount they were not eligible for during part of this time.

This pattern went undetected because station gates accepted the ticket and ticket checks were infrequent. A few months ago, a ticket inspector noticed the clear ticket mismatch. Although nothing was said at the time, this appears to have triggered the operator’s review of their travel history.

The transport operator has now sent the individual a formal message from its prosecutions or revenue protection team. The communication states that the operator has identified irregular travel patterns, has concerns about intentionally avoiding the correct fare, and is considering legal action. It requests evidence of legitimate travel over the relevant period and asks for a prompt written response. The individual does not have evidence that would support legitimate travel.


They emphasise that they prosecute such cases, citing laws that allow for fines of up to £1,000, possible imprisonment, and a criminal record. They also note the situation might fall under the Fraud Act, which carries even more serious implications.

They ask the individual to provide any evidence showing no offence was committed and require a response within seven days to avoid the matter moving further toward prosecution.

Thats the email. I will say the fact that it says still a fine of £1000 3 months prison makes me think this is over the single case a few months ago despite what they said about checking history.


Please, any advice or help at all is welcome.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Nov 2025 ==

For additional reference, the shorter ticket being bought saved about 4.50 pounds a day around 3x a week.

The company is north western and that the individual is very eager to settle out of court. What is the best approach?

The best approach to settle? Probably reply offering to pay all fares evaded and see what they ask for.
Might not be the cheapest but at the end of the day they want the money they believe they are owed.

It might be advantageous to respond with greater subtlety but ultimately the route to avoiding prosecution is generally the same.

No way of knowing what they know about the evasion however. Though I assume there are digital trails to follow ref past evasion history you mention.

 

[ST999]

Basically this will cost you every single journey fraudulently taken at the Anytime rate to resolve without prosecution. If you tell us the journey we can tell you how much they will want in settlement - but it will be expensive and it will need to be paid promptly.

It would help to know exactly when you were stopped because there are some limitations to what can be prosecuted and when depending on the age of the offences.

This will help to advise you what to write back to them.

He is happy to pay for all of those journeys. Short ticket and wrong railcard saved 4.50 per day vs correct ticket. 3x a week for last 2 years since starting work means its likely around £1.5k. He was stopped on a train to the actual stop not the short one in February and they say they have looked at ticket records since. He acted like he got the wrong train by accident clearly they reported it. He is remorseful and knows it was silly for a small amount of savings.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Nov 2025 ==

The best approach to settle? Probably reply offering to pay all fares evaded and see what they ask for.
Might not be the cheapest but at the end of the day they want the money they believe they are owed.

It might be advantageous to respond with greater subtlety but ultimately the route to avoiding prosecution is generally the same.

No way of knowing what they know about the evasion however. Though I assume there are digital trails to follow ref past evasion history you mention.

So full co-operation without anything too apologetic - more acknowledging - should be okay and they will likely not take him to court / prosecute?

 

[AlterEgo]

So the original incident was in February?

Please show us the email with your name redacted because they are out of time to prosecute an instance in February. This works in your favour.

 

[ST999]

So the original incident was in February?

Please show us the email with your name redacted because they are out of time to prosecute an instance in February. This works in your favour.

Wording -
We have recently been handed a file relating to an incident on 18th February 2025, when approached by staff carrying out their revenue duties, you were asked to show your valid ticket you offered a ticket that was not valid for the journey you had completed, possibly committing short journey fraud.
It has been reported to the Digital Fraud Department for further investigation.

Further investigations into this matter have been carried out, including a full review of the ticket records. It would appear, at this stage, that this may be a case of fraud.

(Region) trains take travel fraud extremely seriously and is committed to prosecuting all cases of fare evasion to the full extent of the law. Travelling on the railway with the intent to avoid paying the full fare is an offence under the Regulation of Railways Act 1889. Such an offence carries a maximum fine of £1,000 and/or three months’ imprisonment and, in either case, a criminal record. It must also be considered whether this matter amounts to a much more serious offence under the Fraud Act 2006.

At this stage we would be grateful if you would provide any evidence to support the claim that none of the above legislation has been contravened to prevent further action being contemplated.

Please respond within 7 days from the date of this email to avoid further escalation.

Kind regards,

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Nov 2025 ==

surely as its repeat violation and he has been doing it till now they can use more recent evidence etc. he is worried about pissing them off further / not co-operating. Hes also worried about the number of times this occurred, though it wasnt a conscious decision everytime - more just book ticket dont think about it - the number of times it occured over a long period - would they still potentially want to prosecute even if he agrees to pay all fines and payments due?

 

[AlterEgo]

So when exactly did the offending stop? When caught, or has it continued after?

 

[ST999]

Email received today, obviously wont be committing again. Was still committing after Feb / until now - he wasnt given a fine or anything.

So when exactly did the offending stop? When caught, or has it continued after?

 

[AlterEgo]

I'd be inclined not to reply. They have not actually stopped and interviewed you or identified you and have no evidence of ticket usage. If they want to go down a civil route they can, but it will limit what they can claim from you. There is no need to incriminate yourself and it may be in your interests to say nothing.

 

[ST999]

I'd be inclined not to reply. They have not actually stopped and interviewed you or identified you and have no evidence of ticket usage. If they want to go down a civil route they can, but it will limit what they can claim from you. There is no need to incriminate yourself and it may be in your interests to say nothing.

Considering he is fine with paying whatever is necessary to ensure there are no chances of prosecution / criminal record though - surely suggesting settling up will just guarantee things. Not co-operating could piss them off more etc - make them dig into ticket records etc more.

 

[AlterEgo]

Considering he is fine with paying whatever is necessary to ensure there are no chances of prosecution / criminal record though - surely suggesting settling up will just guarantee things. Not co-operating could piss them off more etc - make them dig into ticket records etc more.

Train companies don't get "pissed off", West Midlands Railway operates a moderately incompetent sausage factory of "fraud investigators" (some of whom cannot write in full sentences) who haven't realised that they can't prosecute at least one of the offences they are alleging because it is simply out of time. That is because they are lazy and not very good at their job. In fact, they never actually identified you when checking a ticket bought under your account.

Imagine for a moment you never got the email or it went to spam - what do you think they do? In our experience they do nothing. There are so many cases of entry level travel fraud they deal with they have to prioritise people who reply. They want money money money. You don't have to give it to them, but if you really want to do that, you basically need to email them saying so.

They realitically cannot prosecute you for any offence. Letting them claim civilly will reduce the cost to you significantly. Settling out of court will be most expensive and if, as you allude to being afraid of further audit, there are more skeletons in your closet and they find even more offences, settling won't cover the stuff they haven't discovered.

Having seen hundreds of these cases on the forum I'd be sitting doing nothing and not replying. But it is up to you.

 

[ST999]

Train companies don't get "pissed off", West Midlands Railway operates a moderately incompetent sausage factory of "fraud investigators" (some of whom cannot write in full sentences) who haven't realised that they can't prosecute at least one of the offences they are alleging because it is simply out of time. That is because they are lazy and not very good at their job. In fact, they never actually identified you when checking a ticket bought under your account.

Imagine for a moment you never got the email or it went to spam - what do you think they do? In our experience they do nothing. There are so many cases of entry level travel fraud they deal with they have to prioritise people who reply. They want money money money. You don't have to give it to them, but if you really want to do that, you basically need to email them saying so.

They realitically cannot prosecute you for any offence. Letting them claim civilly will reduce the cost to you significantly. Settling out of court will be most expensive and if, as you allude to being afraid of further audit, there are more skeletons in your closet and they find even more offences, settling won't cover the stuff they haven't discovered.

Having seen hundreds of these cases on the forum I'd be sitting doing nothing and not replying. But it is up to you.

And whats your take on him asking for the evidence that they have to that he can evaluate his options further? If he does offer to settle it does reduce prosecution risk right (even if not now if they go into further records etc) I think minimising this is his main priority to be honest. Obviously will be buying the correct ticket from now as well.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Nov 2025 ==

ple

Train companies don't get "pissed off", West Midlands Railway operates a moderately incompetent sausage factory of "fraud investigators" (some of whom cannot write in full sentences) who haven't realised that they can't prosecute at least one of the offences they are alleging because it is simply out of time. That is because they are lazy and not very good at their job. In fact, they never actually identified you when checking a ticket bought under your account.

Imagine for a moment you never got the email or it went to spam - what do you think they do? In our experience they do nothing. There are so many cases of entry level travel fraud they deal with they have to prioritise people who reply. They want money money money. You don't have to give it to them, but if you really want to do that, you basically need to email them saying so.

They realitically cannot prosecute you for any offence. Letting them claim civilly will reduce the cost to you significantly. Settling out of court will be most expensive and if, as you allude to being afraid of further audit, there are more skeletons in your closet and they find even more offences, settling won't cover the stuff they haven't discovered.

Having seen hundreds of these cases on the forum I'd be sitting doing nothing and not replying. But it is up to you.

Please can you reference these other cases please.

 

[jfollows]

Please can you reference these other cases please.

You can search the forum if you want to see write-up on similar cases, it’s not down to @AlterEgo to give you ‘evidence’.

But it’s definitely the case that we see this frequently. These train companies have discovered a mine of information from which they draw conclusions and write to people hoping they ‘confess’ or otherwise incriminate themselves.

The use of language such as ‘fraud’ frightens people who do not realise that, often, there is no case to be made.

Analysis of a ticket purchase history does not, by itself, prove very much. Buying tickets of any sort isn’t an offence. Using invalid tickets is.

There’s no excuse for not paying the correct fare, but detection and prosecution must be done correctly.

Many people who receive advice to “do nothing” never come back to the forum, so we can’t know whether something else happened.

 

[ST999]

You can search the forum if you want to see write-up on similar cases, it’s not down to @AlterEgo to give you ‘evidence’.

But it’s definitely the case that we see this frequently. These train companies have discovered a mine of information from which they draw conclusions and write to people hoping they ‘confess’ or otherwise incriminate themselves.

The use of language such as ‘fraud’ frightens people who do not realise that, often, there is no case to be made.

Analysis of a ticket purchase history does not, by itself, prove very much. Buying tickets of any sort isn’t an offence. Using invalid tickets is.

There’s no excuse for not paying the correct fare, but detection and prosecution must be done correctly.

Many people who receive advice to “do nothing” never come back to the forum, so we can’t know whether something else happened.

But if he did want to minimise prosecution risk would the best approach not be to simply co-operate and say he will pay. Equally could he ask for the evidence that they have?

 

[jfollows]

But if he did want to minimise prosecution risk would the best approach not be to simply co-operate and say he will pay. Equally could he ask for the evidence that they have?

It’s up to you (I know that you’re doing this for someone else).

When I used to work I learned to ignore emails from people fishing for information. They usually forgot about it and stopped bothering me.

By replying you put yourself on their radar and provoke them into further action. You also run the risk of incriminating yourself.

You can not be prosecuted for an offence like this if information is not laid before the courts within six months of the alleged offence.

 

[ST999]

But as the offence has been ongoing from February till yesterday they potentially have evidence still valid right - if they have ticket records etc.

 

[AlterEgo]

But as the offence has been ongoing from February till yesterday they potentially have evidence still valid right - if they have ticket records etc.

No, because they did not stop the traveller, and best still, interview them, a key component of any railway related offence. You need to.identiy the traveller. They have not.

 

[ST999]

No, because they did not stop the traveller, and best still, interview them, a key component of any railway related offence. You need to.identiy the traveller. They have not.

While there was no interview, he was identified as his ticket was scanned which links to his account / email. If they look into ticket records they can see the issues occurring / ongoing.

 

[John R]

While there was no interview, he was identified as his ticket was scanned which links to his account / email. If they look into ticket records they can see the issues occurring / ongoing.

It doesn’t prove that he (ie not somebody else) used the ticket.

 

[AlterEgo]

While there was no interview, he was identified as his ticket was scanned which links to his account / email. If they look into ticket records they can see the issues occurring / ongoing.

Yes, and have no evidence of who was actually travelling by train, which is the key thing they need for any railway related prosecution. They need to identify the traveller, not the purchaser.

 

[ST999]

But further investigation and it wouldnt be hard to work out whos travelling cameras etc. i see your point but if co-operation to some extent would reduce the company’s intent to prosecute then wouldnt this be a better option.

 

[AlterEgo]

But further investigation and it wouldnt be hard to work out whos travelling cameras etc

They aren't going to do this. They never do. Leaving aside the fact CCTV gets deleted after a few weeks, they might have an image of someone. What then? How do they know who that is?

. i see your point but if co-operation to some extent would reduce the company’s intent to prosecute then wouldnt this be a better option.

It depends on whether you would like to voluntarily incriminate yourself for offences which the train company has insufficient evidence, and also whether you would like to take the most expensive option. Settling out of court will involve you paying a huge sum of money. Letting the company bring a civil claim (if it can be bothered - we haven't seen this company do this yet) curtails the limit they can claim to only their actual losses and they cannot bring you for their own invented costs. A criminal prosecution is a non starter. It cannot happen, and we have never seen this company commence a prosecution after someone has ignored or missed this sort of fishing email.

From everything we have seen, if no response is received to the email, the company discards the case and moves on to threaten people who are more easily frightened.

 

[ST999]

They aren't going to do this. They never do. Leaving aside the fact CCTV gets deleted after a few weeks, they might have an image of someone. What then? How do they know who that is?


It depends on whether you would like to voluntarily incriminate yourself for offences which the train company has insufficient evidence, and also whether you would like to take the most expensive option. Settling out of court will involve you paying a huge sum of money. Letting the company bring a civil claim (if it can be bothered - we haven't seen this company do this yet) curtails the limit they can claim to only their actual losses and they cannot bring you for their own invented costs. A criminal prosecution is a non starter. It cannot happen, and we have never seen this company commence a prosecution after someone has ignored or missed this sort of fishing email.

From everything we have seen, if no response is received to the email, the company discards the case and moves on to threaten people who are more easily frightened.

London Northwestern and West Midlands Railway have never gone down the prosecution route? okay thanks for this insight. How about the fact that his purchasing behaviour will now change - obviously now buying the correct ticket with the correct railcards - cant they see this as a change of behaviour which could lead them to investigate further? Apologies if pedantic he wants to basically ensure there won’t be any issues etc.

 

[AlterEgo]

London Northwestern and West Midlands Railway have never gone down the prosecution route?

Not when they haven't made a stop, and not identified the traveller, and sent an email based solely on purchasing records, no.

okay thanks for this insight. How about the fact that his purchasing behaviour will now change - obviously now buying the correct ticket with the correct railcards - cant they see this as a change of behaviour which could lead them to investigate further? Apologies if pedantic he wants to basically ensure there won’t be any issues etc.

Stop buying off whichever site you've been using. Even then that is not evidence. They've already missed their chance to bring a prosecution. Firstly it is too late. Secondly they didn't identify the traveller. They will maybe send one or two more desperate emails of increasing shrillness but after the third it stops.

 

[johnny_t]

London Northwestern and West Midlands Railway have never gone down the prosecution route? okay thanks for this insight. How about the fact that his purchasing behaviour will now change - obviously now buying the correct ticket with the correct railcards - cant they see this as a change of behaviour which could lead them to investigate further? Apologies if pedantic he wants to basically ensure there won’t be any issues etc.

No-one can absolutely guarantee that there won't be any issues, but there is a lot of collective experience that can tell you that there almost certainly won't be.

If 'your friend' wants to absolutely put it to bed and nothing is going to put his mind at rest, then he should write in, confess all and pay what is asked, but he should also be aware that he will not be paying the £4.50 saving for each journey, but the full single fare for each leg travelled. Most people here would say that this would be a lot of unnecessary expense, but its up to him.

 

[ST999]

No-one can absolutely guarantee that there won't be any issues, but there is a lot of collective experience that can tell you that there almost certainly won't be.

If 'your friend' wants to absolutely put it to bed and nothing is going to put his mind at rest, then he should write in, confess all and pay what is asked, but he should also be aware that he will not be paying the £4.50 saving for each journey, but the full single fare for each leg travelled. Most people here would say that this would be a lot of unnecessary expense, but its up to him.

Okay - whats your opinion on asking them what evidence they have just to check and see what they actually have before deciding to ignore or co-operate?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Nov 2025 ==

No-one can absolutely guarantee that there won't be any issues, but there is a lot of collective experience that can tell you that there almost certainly won't be.

If 'your friend' wants to absolutely put it to bed and nothing is going to put his mind at rest, then he should write in, confess all and pay what is asked, but he should also be aware that he will not be paying the £4.50 saving for each journey, but the full single fare for each leg travelled. Most people here would say that this would be a lot of unnecessary expense, but its up to him.

Okay - whats your opinion on asking them what evidence they have just to check and see what they actually have before deciding to ignore or co-operate?

 

[AlterEgo]

If you plan on not cooperating you don't ask them what evidence they have. We have already established they do not have evidence to bring a railway related prosecution and even if they did they are out of time.

 

[johnny_t]

Okay - whats your opinion on asking them what evidence they have just to check and see what they actually have before deciding to ignore or co-operate?

My opinion is that that would probably be the worst of all worlds.

 

[John R]

My opinion is that that would probably be the worst of all worlds.

Agree - it's implicitly saying "I did it, but can you prove it?"

 

[pittabread]

No, because they did not stop the traveller, and best still, interview them, a key component of any railway related offence. You need to.identiy the traveller. They have not.

Sorry to piggy back here, but let's say the person in question, got stopped and issued a fine, but offered up a made up name and address. Then received the same email as the this other gentleman here.

Would your advice be the same? Considering the email has the name of the interested party, and a fine was issued which was ignored/tossed away with a fake address and name.