Advice Only for Greater Anglia - Delay Repay Fraud

[30907]

Unless there is some certain evidence of fraud. I find it difficult to see how they can send the letter they sent out in good faith. I would not be able to tell you what time the train I got home was last week let alone last year. Struggle to remember what date I was at the pub a year ago would be difficult

A regular commuter would probably be able to say "the hhmm is a train I use from time to time but owing to the lapse of time I cannot now confirm whether I used it on ddmmyy."
What slightly concerns me is the letter in #58 (not from the OP BTW) which flags up only two services - GA may have specific reasons for suspicion but it's hardly enough to show a pattern of behaviour.

 

[Egg Centric]

Presumably railway companies retain details of train running times for quite a while (it's not personal data so no GDPR problems) and it's routine for banks to hang on to financial transaction data for six years - so it's not too difficult to see that a railway company could also hang on to details of the delay repay payments they have made for that sort of time as well.

Assuming those 2 sources of data, I don't see any great technical difficulty in

- working out the most 'profitable' DR claims that could be made each day for each pair of stations (presumably Liverpool Street and Home Station)
- comparing the results of this against claims made by any given passenger (either using the same season ticket, or by email/name/bank account combination)
- sending stroppy letters to people whose names appear persistently on the compared data.

Would this stand up in court? As I have said in an earlier post, I think so - there comes a point when coincidence is no longer an adequate explanation. And should the railway go to the County Court to get their money back, they only need to prove that it's more likely than not that a claim wasn't legitimate.

The procedure you suggest is very likely to risk falling foul of the Prosecutor's Fallacy - in simple terms "We identified the most suspicious 100 of our 100 000 season ticket holders. In each case, there's only a 1 in 1000 chance that someone would have their peculiar travel pattern!"

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 31 Jan 2021 ==

Is anyone here unambiguously asserting innocence, by the way?

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

From someone who is not at all nuanced in railway matters relating to ticketing and delay repay (although I'm catching up!) - I too note that there haven't really been any protests of innocence.

If the simple fact is that you have used a third party tool to claim delay repay (which appears to be a perfectly legitimate method, if used correctly), the question is whether when you have been presented with a list of delayed trains for your route(s), have you always selected the train that you actually caught, or just the train(s) that were eligible for compensation? If you have been at best naive or careless, or at worse, downright fraudulent - I would graciously look to repay the fares, offer an apology, and probably stop using any third party service that may lead you astray in the future.

I suppose a lot of people don't necessarily have the mindset that making false statements even in the form of just "clicking the wrong/ different train once in a while" often legally equates to deception/fraud with severe penalties. So if the above is semi-accurate, maybe carefully consider your position before rushing to do one thing or another.

If the police get involved, even if you're not ultimately prosecuted/convicted, it's going to mean at the very least a trip to the police station, interview under caution, possible combing through your finances (looking to match the payments received from the train operator), along with a good look at whatever data the railway does still have available. Also, answering the question "Have you ever been investigated or involved in a criminal offence, even if it did not result in conviction?" also becomes a difficult one to answer, if you were ever to apply for jobs requiring enhanced security or background checks.

I notice in the terms and conditions for Delay Repay Genie it states:

Delay Repay Genie

www.delayrepaygenie.com

We do not condone fraudulent claims. We provide a data and admin service for the submission of valid claims where users were impacted by a delay or cancellation. It is your responsibility to only submit valid claims which you were impacted by. DRG provides a tool to facilitate the submission of claims and is not responsible for the outcome of any claims submitted. To assist our Users, we prevent the submission of more than 2 claims per day.

 

[gingerheid]

I certainly made a lot of claims at that time (there was one week they paid me to go to work and a few more that came close, and one of my colleagues lamented that they were making more in Great Yarmouth - Ipswich delay repay claims than their daughter was making from their part time job with GA).

On the other hand though, while I made a huge number of claims at the time and my travel patterns were slightly random because my work was flexible and I had a choice of routes to try and avoid delays (for example I wouldn't cycle to Cambridge North and start travelling towards Ely if I could see from the comfort of my bed that the train wasn't making it's way towards Peterborough), I've not had a letter. Their bar for suspicion might be set quite high!

However, while I get what they're doing and why, it's very incredibly brave indeed of GA to do it for the period that is both so long ago and the one during which they were having an absolute nightmare as regards operating rail services!

 

[357]

I'll admit I only read to the beginning of page 3, but...

All this about tap in/tap out times and CCTV... in 2019?

TfL do not store Oyster data that can be identified to any person for more than 8 weeks.

Make a GDPR claim to GA for your smart card (if you had one) tap in and tap out times. If they can not provide, then you know they are fishing.

Also when I was working for GA, station CCTV was kept for 30 days and train CCTV for 5 days, unless downloaded at the time, it is gone.

If they were investigating and downloaded at the time, there is no chance they would wait until now to contact you.

 

[Titfield]

Perhaps GA are not actually anticipating recovering anything (but it would be a bonus) and are simply issuing a veiled hint that your "card has been marked" so make sure you follow the rules in future.

 

[AlterEgo]

I rarely post here any more, but have a lot of experience in handling Delay Repay claims and suspicious travel and claim patterns are very easy to pick up on. TOCs use CRM systems where each claimant has their details logged so a history of complaints and claims can be seen. That's just as much for good customer service ("oh, this is the third time he's complained about this station's toilets, that's not good at all") as it is for anything else.

Everyone at the TOCs knows about the subscription services that show delayed trains, and everyone there knows a less lazy fraudster will even mine RealTimeTrains etc for delayed trains. People who work for TOCs have a good idea how many claims an average season ticket holder will make and people who make a large number of claims will stand out.

What's especially stupid about using tools like Delay Repay Sniper is you are not the only subscriber! Hundreds, or thousands of people get the same notifications for your route...and guess what? A lot of those will make the same claims as you do, meaning it's even easier to see the group of people who always manage to somehow take the most delayed train of the day.

Dodgy claims on their own aren't compelling court evidence, but consider how you'd answer these questions in a fraud trial (the details aren't particular, but I can well imagine the line of questioning) :

- You travel on your season ticket from say, Colchester to London. Why do you have a season ticket?
- Do you work in London?
- What do you do?
- What times do you normally work?
- Can you explain why you arrived in London two hours early on X date?
- You work from 9:30am until 6pm. Did you travel, as you claimed, back home from London at 12:30pm on X date?
- Do you use a subscription service to notify you of delayed trains?
- Do you ever submit claims for trains you didn't take?
- Do you ever submit claims for trains you're not sure you took?
- How many claims have you submitted over the course of your season ticket, and how much has been repaid to you?
- The Train Company suggests you and other claimants use this delay repay subscription tool to maximise the number of claims by claiming for delays which didn't affect you as you didn't travel on those trains. They have evidence that there were 65 such claims on the 3:15pm departure on X date from passengers who use this subscription service - but their passenger data shows there are usually only about 50 passengers aboard. I am sure you can see why the company finds this strange. With this in mind - and bearing that you told us you work until 6pm - are you sure you did in fact take that train?


The posters seeking help on this page well know that claiming for delayed trains you never actually took is dishonest. I suggest that Greater Anglia have reasonable suspicion to send out these letters and I don't think they would have done so lightly.

I very much recommend taking legal advice, as the offence of fraud is serious and will have lasting consequences. If you made dishonest or incorrect claims, I recommend trying to come to a settlement with the TOC using a solicitor.

 

[Jo78]

Perhaps GA are not actually anticipating recovering anything (but it would be a bonus) and are simply issuing a veiled hint that your "card has been marked" so make sure you follow the rules in future.

Exactly that and I am innocent but nevertheless it is worrying even receiving a letter threatening to report you to the police when they have no concrete evidence just an algorithm highlighting certain claims. I work for a law firm in London so for me would mean losing my job. There are 4 people reported on here, how many thousands have they sent out already.

 

[island]

Make a GDPR claim to GA for your smart card (if you had one) tap in and tap out times. If they can not provide, then you know they are fishing.

Whilst your skepticism about the availability and usefulness of CCTV is well-founded, this GDPR access request would fall to be refused as liable to prejudice a criminal investigation.

 

[Beazer]

Whilst your skepticism about the availability and usefulness of CCTV is well-founded, this GDPR access request would fall to be refused as liable to prejudice a criminal investigation.

GDPR access request refused, how so?

 

[SuspectUsual]

Whilst your skepticism about the availability and usefulness of CCTV is well-founded, this GDPR access request would fall to be refused as liable to prejudice a criminal investigation.

Surely this would be information that would have to be disclosed to the defence were it to proceed to trial?

 

[island]

Never mind, I am getting myself mixed up with the FOI act.

 

[jon0844]

I rarely post here any more, but have a lot of experience in handling Delay Repay claims and suspicious travel and claim patterns are very easy to pick up on. TOCs use CRM systems where each claimant has their details logged so a history of complaints and claims can be seen. That's just as much for good customer service ("oh, this is the third time he's complained about this station's toilets, that's not good at all") as it is for anything else.

Everyone at the TOCs knows about the subscription services that show delayed trains, and everyone there knows a less lazy fraudster will even mine RealTimeTrains etc for delayed trains. People who work for TOCs have a good idea how many claims an average season ticket holder will make and people who make a large number of claims will stand out.

What's especially stupid about using tools like Delay Repay Sniper is you are not the only subscriber! Hundreds, or thousands of people get the same notifications for your route...and guess what? A lot of those will make the same claims as you do, meaning it's even easier to see the group of people who always manage to somehow take the most delayed train of the day.

Dodgy claims on their own aren't compelling court evidence, but consider how you'd answer these questions in a fraud trial (the details aren't particular, but I can well imagine the line of questioning) :

- You travel on your season ticket from say, Colchester to London. Why do you have a season ticket?
- Do you work in London?
- What do you do?
- What times do you normally work?
- Can you explain why you arrived in London two hours early on X date?
- You work from 9:30am until 6pm. Did you travel, as you claimed, back home from London at 12:30pm on X date?
- Do you use a subscription service to notify you of delayed trains?
- Do you ever submit claims for trains you didn't take?
- Do you ever submit claims for trains you're not sure you took?
- How many claims have you submitted over the course of your season ticket, and how much has been repaid to you?
- The Train Company suggests you and other claimants use this delay repay subscription tool to maximise the number of claims by claiming for delays which didn't affect you as you didn't travel on those trains. They have evidence that there were 65 such claims on the 3:15pm departure on X date from passengers who use this subscription service - but their passenger data shows there are usually only about 50 passengers aboard. I am sure you can see why the company finds this strange. With this in mind - and bearing that you told us you work until 6pm - are you sure you did in fact take that train?


The posters seeking help on this page well know that claiming for delayed trains you never actually took is dishonest. I suggest that Greater Anglia have reasonable suspicion to send out these letters and I don't think they would have done so lightly.

I very much recommend taking legal advice, as the offence of fraud is serious and will have lasting consequences. If you made dishonest or incorrect claims, I recommend trying to come to a settlement with the TOC using a solicitor.

I wonder if the data on the new rolling stock that can show how many people are on a train (approximately), including how many board and alight at each station, might be used to see if a delayed train really did have as many people onboard as there were claims made.

 

[arb]

As an interesting data point regarding claiming at different times of day, I have a friend (honestly, yes, it's not me!) who keeps meticulous records of the journeys they make on their season ticket, which are very often at different times of day.

Between June 2019 and March 2020 (working from home since then) they submitted 21 delay repay claims for journeys on their season ticket, across multiple TOCs, and these were for 18 differently timed trains (in the morning between 08:00 and 10:00, one claim at around lunchtime, and in the evening between 17:00 and 23:00). With Greater Anglia it was 10 claims for 9 differently timed trains. They've not received the letter from Greater Anglia that is being discussed in this thread.

 

[island]

Did your friend submit the claims personally, or via “delay repay genie”?

 

[jumble]

I'll admit I only read to the beginning of page 3, but...

All this about tap in/tap out times and CCTV... in 2019?

TfL do not store Oyster data that can be identified to any person for more than 8 weeks.

Make a GDPR claim to GA for your smart card (if you had one) tap in and tap out times. If they can not provide, then you know they are fishing.

Also when I was working for GA, station CCTV was kept for 30 days and train CCTV for 5 days, unless downloaded at the time, it is gone.

If they were investigating and downloaded at the time, there is no chance they would wait until now to contact you.

There were a lot of disappointed people on the TV programme Fare Dodgers at War with the Law who found themselves being questioned about misbehaviour on oyster and being told they would be paying back substantial sums going back in some cases 5 years having believed the story that TFL had no data beyond 8 weeks.

There was another thread about this in 2019 but I am still none the wiser

Fare Evasion Zone 1-8 Southeastern Railways

I'm sure you'll try and think of another obstacle though.... Don't blame me, blame the EU/ICO - The emphasis under the GDPR is data minimisation, both in terms of the volume of data stored on individuals and how long it’s retained. To summarise the legal requirements, Article 5 (e) of the GDPR...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[ainsworth74]

I think @AlterEgo offers some very useful advice here:

I rarely post here any more, but have a lot of experience in handling Delay Repay claims and suspicious travel and claim patterns are very easy to pick up on. TOCs use CRM systems where each claimant has their details logged so a history of complaints and claims can be seen. That's just as much for good customer service ("oh, this is the third time he's complained about this station's toilets, that's not good at all") as it is for anything else.

Everyone at the TOCs knows about the subscription services that show delayed trains, and everyone there knows a less lazy fraudster will even mine RealTimeTrains etc for delayed trains. People who work for TOCs have a good idea how many claims an average season ticket holder will make and people who make a large number of claims will stand out.

What's especially stupid about using tools like Delay Repay Sniper is you are not the only subscriber! Hundreds, or thousands of people get the same notifications for your route...and guess what? A lot of those will make the same claims as you do, meaning it's even easier to see the group of people who always manage to somehow take the most delayed train of the day.

Dodgy claims on their own aren't compelling court evidence, but consider how you'd answer these questions in a fraud trial (the details aren't particular, but I can well imagine the line of questioning) :

- You travel on your season ticket from say, Colchester to London. Why do you have a season ticket?
- Do you work in London?
- What do you do?
- What times do you normally work?
- Can you explain why you arrived in London two hours early on X date?
- You work from 9:30am until 6pm. Did you travel, as you claimed, back home from London at 12:30pm on X date?
- Do you use a subscription service to notify you of delayed trains?
- Do you ever submit claims for trains you didn't take?
- Do you ever submit claims for trains you're not sure you took?
- How many claims have you submitted over the course of your season ticket, and how much has been repaid to you?
- The Train Company suggests you and other claimants use this delay repay subscription tool to maximise the number of claims by claiming for delays which didn't affect you as you didn't travel on those trains. They have evidence that there were 65 such claims on the 3:15pm departure on X date from passengers who use this subscription service - but their passenger data shows there are usually only about 50 passengers aboard. I am sure you can see why the company finds this strange. With this in mind - and bearing that you told us you work until 6pm - are you sure you did in fact take that train?


The posters seeking help on this page well know that claiming for delayed trains you never actually took is dishonest. I suggest that Greater Anglia have reasonable suspicion to send out these letters and I don't think they would have done so lightly.

I very much recommend taking legal advice, as the offence of fraud is serious and will have lasting consequences. If you made dishonest or incorrect claims, I recommend trying to come to a settlement with the TOC using a solicitor.

Particularly as it seems that this might end up being a fraud case rather than your common or garden issue that we regularly deal with here legal advice may well be wise. The Law Society keep an online register that you can use to find one here (I'd think as a starting point any dealing with criminal law should be able to assist).

All that I would personally add is that if you are certain that all the claims made were for journeys that you undertook and delays you actually encountered then you may wish to not involve a solicitor at this stage and instead respond to GA along the lines of clarifying that all your claims are correct and legitimate but as the journeys in question were over a year ago if GA would like to discuss any specific concerns that you request they send more information about the journeys that are causing them concern and you'll be happy to look at it further but obviously considering the elapsed time you cannot say how much you'll be able to help. You could then see how they reply.

 

[Jimmyd84]

I got one of these letters too. I responded with some details about ones I could remember highlighting the time that had passed and the barriers are often open at both stations.

I got this response this morning:
We have completed the investigation in to your case and have looked at your delay repay claims over the last 15 months and compared this to your smartcard data to verify the claims.

There are numerous days where claims have been submitted and there is no data for you travelling. There are legitimate claims that do match up but too many occasions where there is no data for you travelling.

Please let me know how you wish to proceed. Thanks.

They haven't referenced anything in my email, haven't queried or challenged anything I've said.

 

[Hadders]

So as I suspected upthread GA have used smartcard touch in and touch out data.

Does anyone know if it is a requirement to tap in and out with a season ticket held on a GA smartcard?

 

[Watershed]

So as I suspected upthread GA have used smartcard touch in and touch out data.

Does anyone know if it is a requirement to tap in and out with a season ticket held on a GA smartcard?

No it's not, touching in and out is only required to pass through barriers.

Therefore it's entirely plausible - particularly during peak times when barriers may routinely be kept open to abate overcrowding - that journeys were undertaken without any touches.

It's now becoming clear why, a couple of years back, they were suddenly so keen for people to switch to smartcards!

 

[357]

There were a lot of disappointed people on the TV programme Fare Dodgers at War with the Law who found themselves being questioned about misbehaviour on oyster and being told they would be paying back substantial sums going back in some cases 5 years having believed the story that TFL had no data beyond 8 weeks.



There was another thread about this in 2019 but I am still none the wiser

Fare Evasion Zone 1-8 Southeastern Railways

I'm sure you'll try and think of another obstacle though.... Don't blame me, blame the EU/ICO - The emphasis under the GDPR is data minimisation, both in terms of the volume of data stored on individuals and how long it’s retained. To summarise the legal requirements, Article 5 (e) of the GDPR...

www.railforums.co.uk

Yes, if TfL have suspicions they can mark the cards. However, if GA had these suspicions since 2019 I doubt they would wait until now. I was working for TfL when that program was made.

I got one of these letters too. I responded with some details about ones I could remember highlighting the time that had passed and the barriers are often open at both stations.

I got this response this morning:
We have completed the investigation in to your case and have looked at your delay repay claims over the last 15 months and compared this to your smartcard data to verify the claims.

There are numerous days where claims have been submitted and there is no data for you travelling. There are legitimate claims that do match up but too many occasions where there is no data for you travelling.

Please let me know how you wish to proceed. Thanks.

They haven't referenced anything in my email, haven't queried or challenged anything I've said.

Is it possible that there are indeed journeys where you did not touch in/out?
It is always possible they are sending threatening letters to try and get people to admit something and pay them some money.

South Eastern for example send out letters saying "Prosecution has been authorised for this case" for every ticketless passenger they take the details of - the prosecution is authorised the moment you travel without a ticket, however only a very small amount of incidents result in this. It's using scary letters to try and prompt payment, and given GA's financial situation nothing in this thread is shocking me.

I think they don't have evidence but are waiting to see if any passengers will blink before they do. They have nothing to lose, but can make out that you can lose a lot.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

So as I suspected upthread GA have used smartcard touch in and touch out data.

Does anyone know if it is a requirement to tap in and out with a season ticket held on a GA smartcard?

I guess if other people tapped in and tapped out at the same station around the same time it would be very suspicious if there was no data available for one particular person especially in the context of Delay Repay.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 1 Feb 2021 ==

Even if the ticket barriers were open, does anyone know whether this is logged or audited anywhere? I'm thinking if the data shows that they were closed between certain times, you couldn't really claim you'd simply walked through.

 

[Jimmyd84]

Yes, if TfL have suspicions they can mark the cards. However, if GA had these suspicions since 2019 I doubt they would wait until now. I was working for TfL when that program was made.


Is it possible that there are indeed journeys where you did not touch in/out?
It is always possible they are sending threatening letters to try and get people to admit something and pay them some money.

South Eastern for example send out letters saying "Prosecution has been authorised for this case" for every ticketless passenger they take the details of - the prosecution is authorised the moment you travel without a ticket, however only a very small amount of incidents result in this. It's using scary letters to try and prompt payment, and given GA's financial situation nothing in this thread is shocking me.

I think they don't have evidence but are waiting to see if any passengers will blink before they do. They have nothing to lose, but can make out that you can lose a lot.

Barriers are often open, especially on evening trains where there is no staff in the station. I definitely don't tap if the barrier is open. If I've been out drinking for the evening then I certainly wouldnt even contemplate it.
I also always aim for the queue where a guard was letting people through as it was always quicker than having to tap as they just hold the barrier open rather than needing to let it shut after everyone one.

I'd pay a reasonable amount just to get it to go away as I've found this incredibly stressful straight away. Given I haven't travelled for a year I've saved a lot of money. Maybe that's what they want

 

[Hadders]

I guess if other people tapped in and tapped out at the same station around the same time it would be very suspicious if there was no data available for one particular person especially in the context of Delay Repay.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 1 Feb 2021 ==

Even if the ticket barriers were open, does anyone know whether this is logged or audited anywhere? I'm thinking if the data shows that they were closed between certain times, you couldn't really claim you'd simply walked through:

A few observations:

- If a passenger makes a delay repay claim but they touched in and out at different times then GA has the passenger bang to rights.
- I would expect a competent train company to check tap in and out data as part of routine delay repay processing so I do wonder why some of these claims were simply rejected initially
- This is a reminder (if one were needed) that the use of smart tickets (e-tickets) means that train companies can very easily track your every movement. Big brother certainly is watching over you.
- Any action taken by GA against a passenger should focus on what that passenger did or didn't do, not what anyone else did.

 

[vinnym70]

Surely if the lack of touch-in/touch-out data was a deciding factor, the original delay repay claims should have been rejected on that basis?

 

[Jimmyd84]

Surely if the lack of touch-in/touch-out data was a deciding factor, the original delay repay claims should have been rejected on that basis?

That's the part I don't get. They hold up delay repay for "extra checks" quite often. If they have no tap in or tap out data then they could request more evidence at the time when you would have a chance of proving it. You would also then know what evidence they needed going forward if you were queried again.

 

[jumble]

Surely if the lack of touch-in/touch-out data was a deciding factor, the original delay repay claims should have been rejected on that basis?

Maybe GA have invested in a computer program that now throws out like confetti the obvious candidates for extra attention whereas previously the cost of manually verifying everything was not worth the return
If I am correct it is an interesting consequence that one new computer program makes it trivial to find out what delays occur and another one makes it trivial to catch those who abuse the system by using the first computers output


( just like HMRC insist that all submitted tax returns are of a consistent type which makes comparison with other similar businesses turnover vs profit trivial

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

In a criminal investigation, especially fraud, it's sometimes "better" to let the fraud continue/persist over a period of time to show that it wasn't a one-off, and show a repeated pattern of offending, and then one day they decide it's enough, and the game is up. This would also tie in with it being referred to the police, seeing as though they don't seem to be asking for a settlement amount?

Rejecting a claim could also "tip off" someone that the checks are being made. In fairness, Coronavirus has probably also created a bit of a delay.

A legal honeytrap so to speak.

 

[SuspectUsual]

Is there a possibility that when GA were in crisis mode with awful service and correspondingly high levels of delay repay claims, they applied less rigorous tests? Certainly with Northern, when things were at their worst, I had valid claims where I should’ve received one free single ticket, but got sent anywhere between one and four free return tickets. Maybe partly to allow quicker processing and partly a goodwill gesture

 

[arb]

Did your friend submit the claims personally, or via “delay repay genie”?

Submitted them personally. Also of relevance to the thread, it was a paper ticket, not a smartcard.