Intention to Prosecute letter from Govia Thameslink. Please Help

[dailo]

Hi,

I received a letter in the post today from Govia Thameslink Railway with the title "Notice of Intention to prosecute".

In October, I boarded the 2046 train from Radlett to St Albans City arriving at 2052. I was in a hurry to catch the train so I only bought the ticket online after boarding the train and the e-ticket came through at 2053. I was stopped by a Revenue Protection Inspector at the exit barrier of St Albans City Station (at 2107) because of "Did enter a train for the purpose of travelling on the railway, and upon inspection at St Albans City (SAC); did not produce a valid ticket entitling travel".

The letter requires me to reply within the next 14 days, giving me the opportunity to describe what happened in my point of view.

I have read through a few post on this forum, and this is my draft response. I would be extremely grateful if someone can take a look and advice please. I am very worried that this would proceed to court action.

Thank you very much for your help in advance!

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing in response to the notice of intention to prosecute letter dated on DD MMM YYYY (Ref: XXXX).

Firstly, I would like to apologize to Govia Thameslink Railway for any trouble my actions may have caused, and I am grateful for the opportunity to explain what happened on the day.

On DD October 2024, I was in a hurry to catch the train so I bought the train ticket (see attached) after I had boarded the train to St Albans City. I fully acknowledge my error of judgement and there is no excuse to ensure that I have the appropriate ticket before travelling.

I now understand that it is illegal to not possess a valid ticket before I board a train and I am truly sorry for my actions. I fully accept that my behaviour was inappropriate and would like to do whatever is necessary to make amends. This has taught me an important lesson, and I have since committed to make sure that I have valid tickets before boarding any trains.

I would be grateful for the opportunity to settle this matter without the need for court action. I am prepared to pay any penalty fare as well as the administrative costs incurred in dealing with this matter.

Thank you for considering my request and I hope to demonstrate that I have learned from this incident. I look forward to your response and sincerely appreciate your time and understanding.

Yours Sincerely,

 

[tixy]

Hi,

I received a letter in the post today from Govia Thameslink Railway with the title "Notice of Intention to prosecute".

In October, I boarded the 2046 train from Radlett to St Albans City arriving at 2052. I was in a hurry to catch the train so I only bought the ticket online after boarding the train and the e-ticket came through at 2053. I was stopped by a Revenue Protection Inspector at the exit barrier of St Albans City Station (at 2107) because of "Did enter a train for the purpose of travelling on the railway, and upon inspection at St Albans City (SAC); did not produce a valid ticket entitling travel".

The letter requires me to reply within the next 14 days, giving me the opportunity to describe what happened in my point of view.

I have read through a few post on this forum, and this is my draft response. I would be extremely grateful if someone can take a look and advice please. I am very worried that this would proceed to court action.

Thank you very much for your help in advance!

Change “Penalty fare” to “the appropriate fare plus any administrative costs you feel appropriate” you cannot be charged a penalty fare if being considered for prosecution

 

[dailo]

Change “Penalty fare” to “the appropriate fare plus any administrative costs you feel appropriate” you cannot be charged a penalty fare if being considered for prosecution

Thank you. Is there anything else I should add to have a better chance of a quick settlement resolution? I am deeply sorry for what I did and I am devastated of the potential consequences of prosecution and court action.

 

[tixy]

Thank you. Is there anything else I should add to have a better chance of a quick settlement resolution? I am deeply sorry for what I did and I am devastated of the potential consequences of prosecution and court action.

No, leave it at that. If you waffle too much the staff will loose interest. As for speed, don’t expect anything overnight. Anything less than 3-4 weeks is a bonus. Remember, they have 6 months to decide so although this is the most painful part, patience is a virtue.

 

[dailo]

I have updated my response with @martinchapman8 suggestions, and I plan to send this out early in the coming week on tracked/recorded delivery. I would be extremely grateful if someone can do a final proof read please.

Shall I also send the same response to their email gtr.prosecutions@gtrailway.com?

Dear Fare Evasion Manager,

I am writing in response to the notice of intention to prosecute letter dated on DD MMM YYYY (Ref: XXXX).

Firstly, I would like to apologize to Govia Thameslink Railway for any trouble my actions may have caused, and I am grateful for the opportunity to explain what happened on the day.

On DD October 2024, I was in a hurry to catch the train so I bought the train ticket (see attached) after I had boarded the train to St Albans City. I fully acknowledge my error of judgement and there is no excuse to ensure that I have the appropriate ticket before travelling.

I now understand that it is illegal to not possess a valid ticket before I board a train and I am truly sorry for my actions. I fully accept that my behaviour was inappropriate and would like to do whatever is necessary to make amends. This has taught me an important lesson, and I have since committed to make sure that I have valid tickets before boarding any trains.

I would be grateful for the opportunity to settle this matter without the need for court action. I am prepared to pay the appropriate fare plus any administrative costs as deemed appropriate in dealing with this matter.

Thank you for considering my request and I hope to demonstrate that I have learned from this incident. I look forward to your response and sincerely appreciate your time and understanding.

Yours Sincerely,

 

[30907]

I have updated my response with @martinchapman8 suggestions, and I plan to send this out early in the coming week on tracked/recorded delivery. I would be extremely grateful if someone can do a final proof read please.

Just one point

I am prepared to pay the appropriate fare plus any administrative costs as deemed appropriate in dealing with this matter

That reads as if you are making them an offer, whereas it is up to them to make the offer. How about
"I realise you would expect me to pay..." or something similar?

Shall I also send the same response to their email gtr.prosecutions@gtrailway.com?

Yes, ignore their auto-reply which apparently says otherwise.

 

[tixy]

Just one point

That reads as if you are making them an offer, whereas it is up to them to make the offer. How about
"I realise you would expect me to pay..." or something similar?

Yes, ignore their auto-reply which apparently says otherwise.

Agreed. Other than that point, it’s fine.

I would suggest emailing and posting (make sure it’s recorded and keep proof of posting)
Also keep the auto reply.

 

[dailo]

I have received an out of court settlement offer yesterday. Thank you for the advice!

 

[island]

I have received an out of court settlement offer yesterday. Thank you for the advice!

Glad to hear it. Would you mind stating how much it was? It's useful for us to be able to advise other posters of the rough amount to expect to pay.

 

[furlong]

Indeed - you claimed the original ticket you presented was valid - albeit purchased late. If true, that means there was no further fare to pay - the train company isn't entitled to make you pay twice for your journey! So it would be interesting to know how much they are asking for in settlement in cases like this where the outstanding fare due appears to be zero.

 

[Haywain]

the train company isn't entitled to make you pay twice for your journey!

They are, and the OP is entitled to decline the opportunity and take their chances in court.