GWR railcard fine

[John R]

I rounded it one way or another. I divided the already paid fates by 66.6 then multiplied. £127 is close enough I would think.

I would agree. The odd few pennies discrepancy is not going to be the difference between GWR accepting and refusing the offer.

 

[naomileanne]

Just updating that I didn’t manage to get GWR to budge. They did give the option to pay it off monthly which I am doing. Let me know if anyone else managed to challenge this better than I did!

 

[furlong]

We've seen before with GWR you're unlikely to get a proper deal unless you present solid legal arguments - don't waste time with irrelevancies or matters that have little impact on the settlement - and then hold firm until their proper lawyers review those arguments.

For a long while you're just negotiating with people who are following instructions. For the best result you set out the legal arguments in the initial response, making clear what you'll accept, then just hold firm as they work through their internal layers of escalation simply reiterating your position, just like they reiterate theirs.

If you didn't get a response disputing your legal arguments using legal reasoning, then you didn't yet reach the right people there with which to make a deal. We've seen before it can take a surprising number of letters before this happens. This is why it's important that your letters focus only on the substantive points and don't get drawn into discussing irrelevancies.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Jun 2026 ==

The letter in post 25 lacks the legal reasoning (which you can see on other similar threads), which you'll need to supply in response to whatever points they made when they rejected it.

 

[WesternLancer]

Just updating that I didn’t manage to get GWR to budge. They did give the option to pay it off monthly which I am doing. Let me know if anyone else managed to challenge this better than I did!

Thanks for updating. That’s important info for others to know.

 

[MotCO]

We've seen before with GWR you're unlikely to get a proper deal unless you present solid legal arguments - don't waste time with irrelevancies or matters that have little impact on the settlement - and then hold firm until their proper lawyers review those arguments.

For a long while you're just negotiating with people who are following instructions. For the best result you set out the legal arguments in the initial response, making clear what you'll accept, then just hold firm as they work through their internal layers of escalation simply reiterating your position, just like they reiterate theirs.

If you didn't get a response disputing your legal arguments using legal reasoning, then you didn't yet reach the right people there with which to make a deal. We've seen before it can take a surprising number of letters before this happens. This is why it's important that your letters focus only on the substantive points and don't get drawn into discussing irrelevancies.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Jun 2026 ==

The letter in post 25 lacks the legal reasoning (which you can see on other similar threads), which you'll need to supply in response to whatever points they made when they rejected it.

From post #32, it seems as though the OP is paying off the GWR figure by instalments. Presumably any further correspondence to GWR should reference this fact, maybe with a caveat that they will only pay up to the value they think fair.