Fined 1,5K.

[z444z]

I fear this line of discussion risks losing the OP. It wouldn’t be the first time.

@doglover12 are you aware of the consequences of a criminal conviction for the future you have planned? If not, could you share, very roughly, what your plans are so that we can advise? How would you feel about letting this go to court and getting a criminal conviction to save £500-£1000?

We also shouldn’t forget that following a criminal conviction GTR could still pursue the OP for the the other occurrences via a civil claim. It’s likely, imo, they would win such a claim because it’s quite clear that on the balance of probabilities these fares have been evaded. I don’t think we’ve seen GTR do this before, but other TOCs have been starting to do it recently and a fairly high value case like this would be a great one for GTR to start with, so the risk needs to be considered.

 

[furlong]

Firstly, if you held a 16-25 railcard valid for any part of the period concerned, assuming you're hoping to settle, write back to them with a copy of it and ask nicely if they would update the spreadsheet accordingly to reflect their actual loss. (They should be asking for the difference between the railcard discounts on the fares concerned.)

Secondly the sum demanded is a lot more than double the amount paid (to compensate for a 50% discount). Are all the cases where they have, for example replaced an off-peak fare with an anytime one correct presumably because the alleged journey was at an invalid time for the off-peak fare? (I presume the left part of the spreadsheet which you haven't shared with us would help to answer that?)

 

[doglover12]

Firstly, if you held a 16-25 railcard valid for any part of the period concerned, assuming you're hoping to settle, write back to them with a copy of it and ask nicely if they would update the spreadsheet accordingly to reflect their actual loss. (They should be asking for the difference between the railcard discounts on the fares concerned.)

Secondly the sum demanded is a lot more than double the amount paid (to compensate for a 50% discount). Are all the cases where they have, for example replaced an off-peak fare with an anytime one correct presumably because the alleged journey was at an invalid time for the off-peak fare? (I presume the left part of the spreadsheet which you haven't shared with us would help to answer that?)

okk thank you prefect I will try this now.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Secondly the sum demanded is a lot more than double the amount paid (to compensate for a 50% discount).

I'd not noticed that on first inspection, but it seems a little odd.

For instance, Elstree to London Thameslink is (now) £9.25 for a discounted Anytime Day Return, but the spreadsheet suggests that the OP only paid £4.10. £4.10 is roughly 50% of the discounted fare, rounded to the nearest 5p. So they're effectively saying the OP only paid 25% of what they should have done. That seems too low.

The full fare is £18.50, and this is accurately recorded in the far right column. So the discrepancy appears to be related to the payments the OP initially made.

It may be worth checking that they have recorded the amount the OP paid correctly, in case they have under-counted the payments that he actually did make.

 

[furlong]

If the OP shares the rest of the spreadsheet, we could help to try to understand that. (It's also possible there's some assumed short-faring involved.)

 

[doglover12]

Here is the screenshot of all my journeys.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Jan 2026 ==

I'd not noticed that on first inspection, but it seems a little odd.

For instance, Elstree to London Thameslink is (now) £9.25 for a discounted Anytime Day Return, but the spreadsheet suggests that the OP only paid £4.10. £4.10 is roughly 50% of the discounted fare, rounded to the nearest 5p. So they're effectively saying the OP only paid 25% of what they should have done. That seems too low.

The full fare is £18.50, and this is accurately recorded in the far right column. So the discrepancy appears to be related to the payments the OP initially made.

It may be worth checking that they have recorded the amount the OP paid correctly, in case they have under-counted the payments that he actually did make.

so should I possibly not email them about applying my 16-25 railway card yet ,and about them possibly over charging me?

 

[Mattplans]

ETA: Can't help but notice the number of journeys between West Horndon, Laindon, and Basildon. Don't answer, but have you also been doughnutting by any chance?

Without a doubt, not that it matters and not to aggravate the discussion/circumstance any further; I'm sure this one below was a use of the Farringdon trick with a change at West Ham.




@doglover12 Some members asked earlier about your future career plans. This could help them advise you on whether you would be better off not taking the settlement which could result in you having to pay less as they can only prosecute you for the time they caught you. But I agree (and even though it might be hard to see) you are getting off a bit lucky with the settlement offered here (after some of the errors are corrected and reduced) as there's a lot more you could be in trouble for.

Some members might be able to comment on whether you should ask if you are able to have the admin costs reduced, as it is more than GTR has charged in some other cases.

The burden of proof is on the TOC to prove OP used them, and insofar I can’t see clear evidence this is the case.

I agree with you but sadly OP is caught in this situation. I think most would agree that the railway would not be able to meet the burden of evidence to prosecute for the earlier trips/journies, but they were caught for an instance where they have the evidence and the only need one. and I am sure we can also agree that if OP doesn't pay that GTR will pursue prosecution. OP might be able to reduce the settlement fee a small bit, but after that it will be either pay that fee or face prosecution. If OP is interested in working in a regulated industry, they should jump at the chance to put this matter to rest and not have it harm their future career prospects by having a criminal record.

 

[doglover12]

Without a doubt, not that it matters and not to aggravate the discussion/circumstance any further; I'm sure this one below was a use of the Farringdon trick with a change at West Ham.

View attachment 195323


@doglover12 Some members asked earlier about your future career plans. This could help them advise you on whether you would be better off not taking the settlement which could result in you having to pay less as they can only prosecute you for the time they caught you. But I agree (and even though it might be hard to see) you are getting off a bit lucky with the settlement offered here (after some of the errors are corrected and reduced) as there's a lot more you could be in trouble for.

Some members might be able to comment on whether you should ask if you are able to have the admin costs reduced, as it is more than GTR has charged in some other cases.

I agree with you but sadly OP is caught in this situation. I think most would agree that the railway would not be able to meet the burden of evidence to prosecute for the earlier trips/journies, but they were caught and I am sure we can also agree that if OP doesn't pay that GTR will pursue prosecution. OP might be able to reduce the settlement fee a small bit, but after that it will be either pay that fee or face prosecution. If OP is interested in working in a regulated industry, they should jump at the chance to put this matter to rest and not have it harm their future career prospects by having a criminal record.

I do plan to work in a regulated industry related to healthcare, but if there is a way to reduce my fine, I will take it, even if it’s by a little amount. I just don’t want to do anything that will cause them to give me my original fine or take away the £500 reduction I have actually paid, etc. If asking them to add some of the payment to my 16-25 railway card, which I did add, is a safe option, I’m happy to do it. I just want the best advice from all of you, as you guys seem to be the experts in this case.

 

[z444z]

I do plan to work in a regulated industry related to healthcare, but if there is a way to reduce my fine, I will take it, even if it’s by a little amount. I just don’t want to do anything that will cause them to give me my original fine or take away the £500 reduction I have actually paid, etc. If asking them to add some of the payment to my 16-25 railway card, which I did add, is a safe option, I’m happy to do it. I just want the best advice from all of you, as you guys seem to be the experts in this case.

From our experience, as long as the TOC doesn’t think you’re taking the ****, a reasonable request to reduce the settlement, even if answered with “no”, generally won’t result in the offer being withdrawn, although it is certainly a risk. If you draft a response to them we can help you refine it.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Here is the screenshot of all my journeys.

Thank you.

It appears that GTR have assumed a certain amount of short-faring as well as the use of the 16-17 Saver.

This is an example:



That would account for the discrepancy between the amount you paid and the amount they are requesting.

You paid for a discounted Elstree to Radlett season ticket but they think you actually travelled into London. The scope for negotiation there is if you genuinely did not travel into London using that ticket.

Please do not confirm on this thread if their assumption is correct and you have been short-faring as well as misusing the railcard. But if their assumption is correct, my opinion (for what it is worth) would be much more towards "pay up and make it go away".

You could reply stating you had a valid 16-25 railcard, providing evidence of the same, and ask them to take this into account with the settlement calculation. They may say yes, they may say no. It is not entirely without risk- they could withdraw their offer. But I don't think they would; I think they would just decline to re-calculate the settlement. If you want to go down this route, post a draft here before sending.

 

[doglover12]

From our experience, as long as the TOC doesn’t think you’re taking the ****, a reasonable request to reduce the settlement, even if answered with “no”, generally won’t result in the offer being withdrawn, although it is certainly a risk. If you draft a response to them we can I would like to reiterate that I am keen to resolve this matter by settlement and remain willing to pay the amount properly due. I am very sorry for what has occurred and have learned from this.

Thank you.

It appears that GTR have assumed a certain amount of short-faring as well as the use of the 16-17 Saver.

This is an example:
View attachment 195325
View attachment 195326

That would account for the discrepancy between the amount you paid and the amount they are requesting.

You paid for a discounted Elstree to Radlett season ticket but they think you actually travelled into London. The scope for negotiation there is if you genuinely did not travel into London using that ticket.

Please do not confirm on this thread if their assumption is correct and you have been short-faring as well as misusing the railcard. But if their assumption is correct, my opinion (for what it is worth) would be much more towards "pay up and make it go away".

You could reply stating you had a valid 16-25 railcard, providing evidence of the same, and ask them to take this into account with the settlement calculation. They may say yes, they may say no. It is not entirely without risk- they could withdraw their offer. But I don't think they would; I think they would just decline to re-calculate the settlement. If you want to go down this route, post a draft here before sending.

I was wondering if it would be possible for some of the journeys listed on the spreadsheet to be updated, as I held a valid 16–25 Railcard during the time frame breakdown and I am able to provide proof of the railcard if required. I am still willing to pay the amount properly due. I am very sorry for what has occurred and have learned from this.

 

[WesternLancer]

I do plan to work in a regulated industry related to healthcare, but if there is a way to reduce my fine, I will take it, even if it’s by a little amount.

I totally get this - because I was once a skint student and if I was asked to pay some money and I thought I could reduce this by say £300 I would have thought that was well worth a try - and indeed it may be.

BUT - I'm going to suggest you weigh up all the advice here and sleep on it and make a decision on what to do in the next 24 hours.

And the next para is how I think it might be worth looking at it from thew perspective of someone who is no longer a skint student:

What you need to think about is when you get into this career - and health care is something in much demand no doubt at all sorts of levels - your future earnings potential will be strong I would hope (OK rather different if you were planning on being a health care assistant or a nurse or being a GP but you know what I mean) - and this £300 / £500 / £1,500 over time is actually a small sum even if it does not sound like it now - even if it does not seem like that now. And some of those healthcare roles may well require you to declare any conviction for longer term (I'm not an expert) as you need to be clear about being honest (no one really wants to trust their health care to someone who is a bit dodgy or a liar after all) - so If you decide on an option that puts you on a pathway to court and a criminal record, and that serves to make it more difficult to get a job promptly after you graduate, a delay of a month or two or three in getting a job could easily cost you that sort of money in lost income. Now I'm not saying that is going to happen - there's no way I can know after all - but I do believe that is the sort of thing you need to think about when weighing up your decision as to whether to pay them what they are demanding now, try to negotiate with them for a reduction, or an instalment plan, or let it play out to court.

 

[z444z]

I was wondering if it would be possible for some of the journeys listed on the spreadsheet to be updated, as I held a valid 16–25 Railcard during the time frame breakdown and I am able to provide proof of the railcard if required. I am still willing to pay the amount properly due. I am very sorry for what has occurred and have learned from this.

I will work on improving this for you shortly, but please don’t make any rushed decisions, as @WesternLancer has said do sleep on it and make sure the decision you’re making is the right one for you.

 

[doglover12]

I totally get this - because I was once a skint student and if I was asked to pay some money and I thought I could reduce this by say £300 I would have thought that was well worth a try - and indeed it may be.

BUT - I'm going to suggest you weigh up all the advice here and sleep on it and make a decision on what to do in the next 24 hours.

And the next para is how I think it might be worth looking at it from thew perspective of someone who is no longer a skint student:

What you need to think about is when you get into this career - and health care is something in much demand no doubt at all sorts of levels - your future earnings potential will be strong I would hope (OK rather different if you were planning on being a health care assistant or a nurse or being a GP but you know what I mean) - and this £300 / £500 / £1,500 over time is actually a small sum even if it does not sound like it now - even if it does not seem like that now. And some of those healthcare roles may well require you to declare any conviction for longer term (I'm not an expert) as you need to be clear about being honest (no one really wants to trust their health care to someone who is a bit dodgy or a liar after all) - so If you decide on an option that puts you on a pathway to court and a criminal record, and that serves to make it more difficult to get a job promptly after you graduate, a delay of a month or two or three in getting a job could easily cost you that sort of money in lost income. Now I'm not saying that is going to happen - there's no way I can know after all - but I do believe that is the sort of thing you need to think about when weighing up your decision as to whether to pay them what they are demanding now, try to negotiate with them for a reduction, or an instalment plan, or let it play out to court.

Alright, thank you. I plan to stay out of court, so I’m drifting towards the instalment or reduction. Honestly, I don’t really mind paying it all in full, but if there is an easier way without any issue or further escalation, I’m happy to take it, if that means you guys think I shouldn’t argue with the 16-25 railway card proposal, and just pay what i’m being asked then I will take that offer I just want the best outcome possible.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Jan 2026 ==

Alright, thank you. I plan to stay out of court, so I’m drifting towards the instalment or reduction. Honestly, I don’t really mind paying it all in full, but if there is an easier way without any issue or further escalation, I’m happy to take it, if that means you guys think I shouldn’t argue with the 16-25 railway card proposal, and just pay what i’m being asked then I will take that offer I just want the best outcome possible.

I totally get this - because I was once a skint student and if I was asked to pay some money and I thought I could reduce this by say £300 I would have thought that was well worth a try - and indeed it may be.

BUT - I'm going to suggest you weigh up all the advice here and sleep on it and make a decision on what to do in the next 24 hours.

And the next para is how I think it might be worth looking at it from thew perspective of someone who is no longer a skint student:

What you need to think about is when you get into this career - and health care is something in much demand no doubt at all sorts of levels - your future earnings potential will be strong I would hope (OK rather different if you were planning on being a health care assistant or a nurse or being a GP but you know what I mean) - and this £300 / £500 / £1,500 over time is actually a small sum even if it does not sound like it now - even if it does not seem like that now. And some of those healthcare roles may well require you to declare any conviction for longer term (I'm not an expert) as you need to be clear about being honest (no one really wants to trust their health care to someone who is a bit dodgy or a liar after all) - so If you decide on an option that puts you on a pathway to court and a criminal record, and that serves to make it more difficult to get a job promptly after you graduate, a delay of a month or two or three in getting a job could easily cost you that sort of money in lost income. Now I'm not saying that is going to happen - there's no way I can know after all - but I do believe that is the sort of thing you need to think about when weighing up your decision as to whether to pay them what they are demanding now, try to negotiate with them for a reduction, or an instalment plan, or let it play out to court.

Also if paying the fine leads to no criminal conviction or issues I am happy to also take that option, I just want the best for me and my future since i’m still young and the easiest without any regret what’s so ever.

 

[Mattplans]

It appears that GTR have assumed a certain amount of short-faring as well as the use of the 16-17 Saver.

could OP also ask for clarification regarding this surcharge? As they haven't said anything about short-faring

 

[z444z]

Also if paying the fine leads to no criminal conviction or issues I am happy to also take that option, I just want the best for me and my future since i’m still young and the easiest without any regret what’s so ever.

What they’re offering you isn’t a fine, it’s an offer to settle out of court. This would not lead to a criminal conviction or any kind of record other than the train company keeping their own record of the matter.

 

[35B]

Alright, thank you. I plan to stay out of court, so I’m drifting towards the instalment or reduction. Honestly, I don’t really mind paying it all in full, but if there is an easier way without any issue or further escalation, I’m happy to take it, if that means you guys think I shouldn’t argue with the 16-25 railway card proposal, and just pay what i’m being asked then I will take that offer I just want the best outcome possible.

You need to look at this in terms of odds. The screenshots you've shared suggest that GTR are keeping things fairly simple and not pushing hard where the data they have would allow them to be quite a lot tougher. While there may be room to negotiate further, you need to consider how far you are willing to push them to get the settlement down, versus the risk of them saying no and withdrawing the offer. You then need to consider how much you might get off the settlement they're offering, and compare it to the cost of not getting a settlement at all. If you're a card player, I'd say it's the choice between stick or twist.

A further word of advice, if I may. In your opening post, you made the point that you're now using the correct railcard. The screenshots suggest that you may also not have paid for the full journey you've made, but just enough to get through barriers (and as @Tetchytyke says, please do not respond to this point on a public forum). Please, for your sake, make sure that you are squeaky clean about paying for the full journey, with the right railcard from hereon in. The settlement offer is your final "life" here, and if GTR or others were to catch you again, you are unlikely to get the same leniency.

 

[doglover12]

What they’re offering you isn’t a fine, it’s an offer to settle out of court. This would not lead to a criminal conviction or any kind of record other than the train company keeping their own record of the matter.

alright yes if there’s a safe way to reduce the amount to pay to settle out of court I am happy to ask them to include this, but as long it doesn’t escalate anything.

 

[AlterEgo]

alright yes if there’s a safe way to reduce the amount to pay to settle out of court I am happy to ask them to include this, but as long it doesn’t escalate anything.

Well there isn't anything guaranteed, but you can always ask, as long as you do so with a proper rationale.

 

[doglover12]

You need to look at this in terms of odds. The screenshots you've shared suggest that GTR are keeping things fairly simple and not pushing hard where the data they have would allow them to be quite a lot tougher. While there may be room to negotiate further, you need to consider how far you are willing to push them to get the settlement down, versus the risk of them saying no and withdrawing the offer. You then need to consider how much you might get off the settlement they're offering, and compare it to the cost of not getting a settlement at all. If you're a card player, I'd say it's the choice between stick or twist.

A further word of advice, if I may. In your opening post, you made the point that you're now using the correct railcard. The screenshots suggest that you may also not have paid for the full journey you've made, but just enough to get through barriers (and as @Tetchytyke says, please do not respond to this point on a public forum). Please, for your sake, make sure that you are squeaky clean about paying for the full journey, with the right railcard from hereon in. The settlement offer is your final "life" here, and if GTR or others were to catch you again, you are unlikely to get the same leniency.

so i’m guessing if I push to far they would keep the original amount?

 

[35B]

so i’m guessing if I push to far they would keep the original amount?

Or (I believe less likely) say "deal's off".

That's why I've encouraged you to ask yourself what the different outcomes are, and make your decisions consciously. GTR are also a part of this, and will have their own views of what is or isn't an acceptable outcome for them. Like in any negotiation, push too hard and they'll clam up.

 

[WesternLancer]

so i’m guessing if I push to far they would keep the original amount?

No, not necessarily. If you push too far they could withdraw the out of court offer at any time and say 'we're taking you to court instead'

The problem is no one here can tell you how far is too far.... we can only give you advice based on the experience of other cases we see on here where GTR tend to be 'reasonable'. A grovelling request might just elicit a reduced sum, or it might just result in a 'sorry this is our final offer, pay it or we will prosecute'.

- but what you need to do is look at it from their point of view when they look at your case - what you have done (in their eyes) is totally unreasonable - you have repeatedly and deliberately tried to dodge paying what you owe them - I suspect that because you got away with it once you kept doing it - and you justified it to yourself by saying you were a student and shouldn't have to pay the full fare. How does that look to other people who do pay the full fare? Many such people I suspect would just say 'take them to court, punish them and make them pay what they owe'.

To continue the card playing analogy - they hold all the cards.

This is what you need to weigh up IMHO

 

[doglover12]

Alright perfect I get it I guess there’s no harm in asking them to calculate 16-25 railway card if any of you can later help me draft the email to make it sound professional and polite if they do say no i'll stop and not push it it's my first time asking can they really turn it o my staright away after asking staright away and say no?

 

[srg]

I would suggest if you work in healthcare in a regulated profession, probity is the most important attribute.

The consequences of a conviction would likely remain throughout your career - probably having to declare it every year to your regulator and employer.

Their offer of allowing you to pay to make this all go away seems like something I really think you should take - I wouldn't even gamble about trying to get a slight discount.

 

[35B]

Alright perfect I get it I guess there’s no harm in asking them to calculate 16-25 railway card if any of you can later help me draft the email to make it sound professional and polite if they do say no i'll stop and not push it it's my first time asking can they really turn it o my staright away after asking staright away and say no?

I suggest that you try to draft something, and then others will help hone it - it needs to be authentically from you.

But you do need to accept that this is a deal, and that GTR will be making a choice to do this. Other operators (notably TfL, who run the Underground), would never even discuss a deal like this.

 

[doglover12]

I would suggest if you work in healthcare in a regulated profession, probity is the most important attribute.

The consequences of a conviction would likely remain throughout your career - probably having to declare it every year to your regulator and employer.

Their offer of allowing you to pay to make this all go away seems like something I really think you should take - I wouldn't even gamble about trying to get a slight discount.

Ahh, this is all so confusing. I don’t know if I should risk it and ask to pay less or just take it like that. The worst thing is for me to go to court, so I would happily pay, but it’s more so if they see it as disrespectful and completely disregard me or they are open to allowing me to get a little reduction, I’m new to all this so I really don’t know what is best.

 

[LYradial]

Is it possible that asking to take the 17-25 railcard into account would be regarded as adding insult to injury, or even be regarded as an admission of guilt and if they do go to prosecution ask for all these incidents to be taken into consideration
which would add to the expense in court.

just my thoughts I read all these threads on this but rarely comment

 

[doglover12]

Is it possible that asking to take the 17-25 railcard into account would be regarded as adding insult to injury, or even be regarded as an admission of guilt and if they do go to prosecution ask for all these incidents to be taken into consideration
which would add to the expense in court.

just my thoughts I read all these threads on this but rarely comment

Yes, in theory I get what you mean. That’s why I’m trying to avoid the fact I had a 17-25 railway card, but still, 16-17 could make matters worse, but if I can say it without any issues, there’s no choosing to be a problem, but I'm trying to avoid that.

 

[AlterEgo]

Yes, in theory I get what you mean. That’s why I’m trying to avoid the fact I had a 17-25 railway card, but still, 16-17 could make matters worse, but if I can say it without any issues, there’s no choosing to be a problem, but I'm trying to avoid that.

I'm confused here.

Did you have a 16-25 railcard when you travelled for all these trips or not? If not, why are you asking them to take it into account?

 

[blimmo]

I think OP may be misunderstanding what "take a 16-25 railcard into account" means. The only thing I think we have seen them do in response to seeing a 16-25 railcard is to remove any correctly paid fares from consideration. AFAICT from the spreadsheet posted there were no such fares included anyway. There is one 16-25 discounted ticket but it likely did not cover the whole journey made. This is already more generous than is often seen on here: I would just pay the settlement if at all possible and forget about trying to get it reduced.