MG11 help please

[Jey123000]

This morning, my daughter was issued an MG11 at London Charing Cross. She had purchased her ticket via Trainline and had had been scanning in and out for the past 4 days without any issues. Today when she arrived at Charing Cross, the app wouldn't scan so she approached a ticket inspector for help. He examined the ticket ticket and asked where she had boarded. She told him Grove Park but it turned out that the ticket was only valid from London Bridge. (A couple of zones difference). He then pointed out to her the same had happened for the past 4 journeys since she started using the Trainline app. He then said this was fraud, she will be prosecuted, she has to inform her employer (she is a university student on a 1 year internship). Prior to using the Trainline app, she diligently swiped in and out using her credit card and this can be evidenced with her credit card statement.

She explained it was never her intention to avoid paying the right fare and that this was a genuine mistake, but the ticket inspector kept telling her that she will not be believed and she will be prosecuted, get a criminal record and be fired from here job. In a state of panic, she then answered all hi9s witness statement questions with no comment.

She is planning to work in the finance industry and is worried she will get a criminal conviction before her career even starts.

Any advice on likely outcomes or best way to proceed will be appreciated.

 

[notmyrealname]

Hi.

The experts should be along soon to help. On the face of it, from what you've said it sounds to me as if the ticket inspector went a bit over the top. If she has an otherwise unblemished record it may not come to that.

Could you post any paperwork your daughter has received please? Be sure to cover up her name and address and any reference number if there is one.

 

[30907]

Short answer: SE will most likely agree to a financial settlement provided she responds to their letter (which may take some time to arrive). They may overlook her non-cooperation with the inspector - they are used to that (and lies!).

Longer answer: your daughter is guilty of short-faring on 4 (or more) occasions. It is an easy offence to commit, as most SE stations don't have gates, but also easy to detect if the ticket hasn't been scanned at London Bridge. It is the passenger's responsibility to have a valid ticket before boarding their train.
If it proceeds to court she will be found guilty and fined, and she will need to tell her employer - their policy may or may not lead to dismissal for dishonesty.

 

[Jey123000]

Thank you for your responses. My daughter does have an unblemished record and was cooperative in giving her details and telling the ticket inspector it was a genuine mistake. I have spoken to her since and before she was allowed to leave, the inspector said he will note that she is prepared to cooperate so hopefully it will be a fine and associated costs.

Thank you again for your helpful advice - she was really worried and now we will just await the letter. Once we receive it, I will post if I have any questions

 

[Grvrdvicdr]

The reason she was able to pass through the gates previously is likely because there was no revenue staff there, but when they are they put a block on tickets such as this. No matter what your daughter says this wasn’t “accidental” as it can’t be and the inspector will know this as they hear it everyday, she has to put in her stations in on Trainline, the app doesn’t do this by itself. But southeastern will definitely go through her purchasing history and highlight any other journeys such as this one so what others would say is any out of court settlement will likely be between £150 and £200 if you add tickets costs and the admin costs

 

[Gloster]

Just to say that if she handles it right she has every chance of getting an out of court settlement, which means no criminal record, although whether to offer this is the railway’s decision. She will have to wait for a letter to arrive, which can take anything from a couple of days to several months to arrive, though usually it is a few weeks. The letter will have to be answered promptly; the experts on this forum can advise on that, so she should come back when she receives it. The important thing is that she gets the letter: she presumably gave the correct name and address at the end (and not a university address which she won’t be at for a while).

Just to check: if she received any paperwork, could she/you post it in this thread. Please obscure the name, address and any other identifying details, such as reference numbers.

 

[Titfield]

In the meantime you may wish to look at some of the threads @Hadders has contributed to.

He has written what many knowledgeable forum members consider to be the guidance for writing an appropriate response to a letter from a TOC (Train Operating Company) in these circumstances.

 

[John R]

In the meantime you may wish to look at some of the threads @Hadders has contributed to.

He has written what many knowledgeable forum members consider to be the guidance for writing an appropriate response to a letter from a TOC (Train Operating Company) in these circumstances.

And worth noting too to avoid using AI to draft a response. Letters such drafted come across as insincere, due to the OTT language used, and the lack of effort of the sender to write it themselves.

 

[ikcdab]

Please don't say it was a "genuine mistake" in the response. This was a deliberate act and it just compounds things if you try and pass it off as accidental. Better to own the fraud, admit it and commit to not doing it again.

Thank you for your responses. My daughter does have an unblemished record and was cooperative in giving her details and telling the ticket inspector it was a genuine mistake. I have spoken to her since and before she was allowed to leave, the inspector said he will note that she is prepared to cooperate so hopefully it will be a fine and associated costs.

Thank you again for your helpful advice - she was really worried and now we will just await the letter. Once we receive it, I will post if I have any questions

"

 

[Greyman1]

Please don't say it was a "genuine mistake" in the response. This was a deliberate act and it just compounds things if you try and pass it off as accidental. Better to own the fraud, admit it and commit to not doing it again.

"

100% agree. Revenue departments see this day in day out.

 

[CFRAIL]

I imagine they'll look at her purchasing history. If it was just this week then that's conceivable it could be a mistake (despite entering her stations). If there are other occasions then they'll dig deeper.

 

[Jey123000]

Thank you all - she is back from work so I have a bit more clarity on the events this morning (as she was pretty distraught at the time when she was trying to relay what happened). She has recently started using Trainline to buy her tickets having previously tapped in with her credit card (so her statement shows the full Grove Park - London Charing Cross fares). She had gone out a week ago socially and changed her Trainline ticket from London Bridge to London Charing Cross and had completely forgotten this, so she was 'repeat buying' her ticket without taking any notice. Grove Park station has an Oyster tap in but does not have a scanner for Trainline tickets so it wasn't getting flagged up. It is her oversight and so she has not paid the correct fare the last 4 times - it is about about £1 difference per fare with a railcard. She approached the ticket inspector herself and was compliant in showing her valid railcard, trainline history and her correct personal details/address as she thought having never been in that situation, at most she would get an on-the-spot fine. I think she was completely blindsided that it became a conversation about prosecution/criminal record/being fired. Only then she got really scared and then answered 'no comment' after that. As advised, we will wait for the letter and pray that they will be willing to accept an admission, apology and financial settlement. Thank you so much for your advice - I will definitely post the letter if/when it arrives and seek your expert advice before putting together a response to them.

Attached is the slip she received this morning...

 

[island]

She explained it was never her intention to avoid paying the right fare and that this was a genuine mistake

This it clearly wasn't. It is necessary to select a station from and to, and it just can't happen by mistake without an explicit intention to not pay the right fare.

What's ironic is that if the passenger was travelling off-peak this would actually cost 10p more than paying the right fare by tapping in and out. At peak time it's a saving of just £1.20.

All that said, Southeastern are almost always willing to settle out of court if the passenger cooperates and does not lie any further.

 

[Jey123000]

I imagine they'll look at her purchasing history. If it was just this week then that's conceivable it could be a mistake (despite entering her stations). If there are other occasions then they'll dig deeper.

Her purchasing history shows Grove Park (our nearest home station) to Charing Cross, and her trips from university to home, so hopefully this will be taken into account

 

[Parham Wood]

The inspector's behaviour was improper, but unfortunately best ignored until the matter is resolved and maybe after that as well. There is an unfortunate lesson to be learnt for her here that one should always check what you are buying on line before pressing the final button. I do wonder whether these apps are really fit for purpose, I don't use them but really there should be a big screen that pops up saying you are buying from x to y, fare type etc. Perhaps there is and people ignore or don't read the screen properly. I think people do not understand the implications of getting rail tickets wrong, after all a goods purchase of a few pounds if you get it wrong is not really a major issue, you will just lose that money or get something you didn't want, but with rail tickets you can end up in court. I hope that does not happen for her and others here will advise the best route to take.

 

[WesternLancer]

This it clearly wasn't. It is necessary to select a station from and to, and it just can't happen by mistake without an explicit intention to not pay the right fare.

What's ironic is that if the passenger was travelling off-peak this would actually cost 10p more than paying the right fare by tapping in and out. At peak time it's a saving of just £1.20.

All that said, Southeastern are almost always willing to settle out of court if the passenger cooperates and does not lie any further.

Yes. Problem is that even if this is an error it will be tricky to persuade them of that because people buyin tickets on Trainline from London Bridge to Charing Cross is a tactic of deliberate fare evaders to buy a cheap ticket that will open the barriers at their destination for a journey commenced much further out.

I would think most passengers from London Bridge to Charing Cross would use their contactless bank card or Oyster.

Having said all this I think still good chance of avoiding prosecution by the op responding with advice from here on how to do that.

 

[Jey123000]

Hi all. My daughter received the letter from Southeastern saying the matter has been provisionally authorised for prosecution, and I wanted to get your advice on how we make comments on the incident.

Just to re-cap from this thread, my daughter had changed her Trainline app journey when she was out socially to London Bridge - Charing Cross but was buying a quick-buy open return ticket for about a week and travelling from Grove Park - Charing Cross, and therefore did not pay the correct fare over that week. The interface on the Trainline app says in big writing 'Still going to London Charing Cross?' and so she would just buy. When she couldn't get through the barrier, at Charing Cross she voluntarily went to the ticket inspector to help her understand why. It was only then she saw it was a London Bridge - Charing Cross fare. She willingly showed her Trainline app history, showed her Oyster tap-ins which showed full fares, valid railcard and gave her correct contact details.

Regardless, it is her fault and we won't challenge that. The fare evasions amount to £1 difference per journey - therefore £4 in total. She is confident her history will show she has never evaded fares in the past and all her ticket purchases show a full London to Home or University to Home fares.

I would like to ask how she should best word it in order to avoid prosecution but willing to pay whatever fines / administrative fees required. Is it worth describing how this ended up happening, or just admit fault, apologise, and urge them not to prosecute? Would it be useful to say she is mid-university doing an internship and this would seriously affect her job applications, or are they not bothered with this?

Any advice would be gratefully received!

 

[WesternLancer]

Hi all. My daughter received the letter from Southeastern saying the matter has been provisionally authorised for prosecution, and I wanted to get your advice on how we make comments on the incident.

Just to re-cap from this thread, my daughter had changed her Trainline app journey when she was out socially to London Bridge - Charing Cross but was buying a quick-buy open return ticket for about a week and travelling from Grove Park - Charing Cross, and therefore did not pay the correct fare over that week. The interface on the Trainline app says in big writing 'Still going to London Charing Cross?' and so she would just buy. When she couldn't get through the barrier, at Charing Cross she voluntarily went to the ticket inspector to help her understand why. It was only then she saw it was a London Bridge - Charing Cross fare. She willingly showed her Trainline app history, showed her Oyster tap-ins which showed full fares, valid railcard and gave her correct contact details.

Regardless, it is her fault and we won't challenge that. The fare evasions amount to £1 difference per journey - therefore £4 in total. She is confident her history will show she has never evaded fares in the past and all her ticket purchases show a full London to Home or University to Home fares.

I would like to ask how she should best word it in order to avoid prosecution but willing to pay whatever fines / administrative fees required. Is it worth describing how this ended up happening, or just admit fault, apologise, and urge them not to prosecute? Would it be useful to say she is mid-university doing an internship and this would seriously affect her job applications, or are they not bothered with this?

Any advice would be gratefully received!

Thanks for the update - to get an idea of the format for a response there is a very useful guide that @Hadders often posts on the forum that is worth you reading

here is an example in post #8 of this thread, and other threads show examples of what people who follow the advice have drafted, if you have not seen an already.

MG11 from Southeastern

My partner just received an MG11 from Southeastern on a train from Abbey Wood to Deptford as she didn’t have a ticket. I’m aware she will get a letter threatening prosecution that gives her the chance to offer to pay the fare plus any costs (I’ve just read through loads of threads on here where...

www.railforums.co.uk

which says:
...what will happen next is Southeastern will write to your partner saying that they have received a report, have sufficient evidence to prosecute but asking for your comments before deciding how to proceed. It is extremely important that you reply to this letter and you might want to include the following points in your reply:

- That you are sorry for what has happened
- What you have learned from the incident
- That you are keen to settle the matter without the need for court action
- Offer to pay the outstanding fare and the train company's administrative costs in dealing with the matter

Make sure your reply is short and concise, don't give a sob story - they've heard it all before. Southeastern are usually prepared to offer an administrative settlement (commonly known as an out of court settlement) to people who engage with the process and who haven't come to their attention before. There is no guarantee of this and the they are within their rights to prosecute you in the magistrates court should they wish to do so.

Be aware that Southeastern will be able to search your online ticket purchase history and... you might be asked further questions about this.

If you are offered a settlement you will normally have to pay the outstanding fare at the full Anytime rate. You will also have to pay an admin fee of around £150. An out of court settlement might appear to be a fine, but it isn't and you won't have a criminal record as a result of accepting one.

Feel free to post a copy of the letter once it arrives (with personal details redacted) along with your draft reply in this thread and forum members will be happy to proof read it for you.

 

[Hadders]

What you've been sent is Southeastern's standard letter that they send in these sort of situations. If you write a reply along the lines mentioned above then I would expect you to get a favourable outcome.

If you post a draft reply in this thread form members will proof read it for you.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Oct 2024 ==

Discussion about whether accidentally underpaying is a dismissable offence has been moved to a separate thread:

Discussion on Whether Accidentally Underpaying is a Dismissable Offence

She explained it was never her intention to avoid paying the right fare and that this was a genuine mistake your daughter is guilty of short-faring on 4 (or more) occasions. ....It is the passenger's responsibility to have a valid ticket before boarding their train. If it proceeds to court...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[Jey123000]

My daughter received a court summons to Bexley Magistrates Court today and has been given the option to plead guilty by post, plead guilty in person or plead not guilty in person. The covering sheet has a section on it called 'Cost and compensation application' and it looks like they are asking her to pay the outstanding fare avoided of £6.70 together with a contribution towards prosecution costs of £150. My question is if we plead guilty and pay the cost and compensation application, will she be given a criminal record?

 

[Titfield]

My daughter received a court summons to Bexley Magistrates Court today and has been given the option to plead guilty by post, plead guilty in person or plead not guilty in person. The covering sheet has a section on it called 'Cost and compensation application' and it looks like they are asking her to pay the outstanding fare avoided of £6.70 together with a contribution towards prosecution costs of £150. My question is if we plead guilty and pay the cost and compensation application, will she be given a criminal record?

Yes she will receive a criminal record. That is the result of pleading guilty or being found guilty in a court of law.

 

[John R]

Yes she will receive a criminal record. That is the result of pleading guilty or being found guilty in a court of law.

And in addition to the fare avoided and costs, she will also receive a fine, (which is the punishment aspect to the conviction).

 

[Hadders]

Please can you upload copies of all the documentation you have been sent in relation to this so we can understand what exactly what offence your daughter is being charged with. This will allow us to give the best advice.

Do redact personal details and case reference numbers before uploading.

 

[John R]

Please can you upload copies of all the documentation you have been sent in relation to this so we can understand what exactly what offence your daughter is being charged with. This will allow us to give the best advice.

Do redact personal details and case reference numbers before uploading.

As well as anything you've received, please include the letter sent in response to the original letter.

It's possible that they haven't received it - we've seen a few cases with SouthEastern recently where resending it with a covering note has done the trick.

 

[Jey123000]

As advised, she wrote to southeastern saying how sorry she was and offered to pay the difference and associated costs to avoid a criminal conviction. As a side-note, she only realised when she showed the inspector that it had happened 4 other times, so when she was taken aside to be questioned further, she admitted this had happened and said ‘no comment’ afterwards because she was really scared.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Nov 2024 ==

As well as anything you've received, please include the letter sent in response to the original letter.

It's possible that they haven't received it - we've seen a few cases with SouthEastern recently where resending it with a covering note has done the trick.

She posted it and emailed it to southeastern, and got an automated acknowledgement from the team there.

 

[John R]

Well you haven’t yet shared the letter sent, which may be critical in determining why SE has decided to prosecute.

Having read your post #12, where it is all put down to a mistake, I have to say that reading the witness statement transcript of the conversation, it would lead me to say “deliberate fare dodging 100%”. And more importantly, I suspect SE did too. So if the letter in any way maintains the “accidental” line in that post #12, I can well imagine that they were not particularly impressed by it.

 

[Jey123000]

Well you haven’t yet shared the letter sent, which may be critical in determining why SE has decided to prosecute.

Having read your post #12, where it is all put down to a mistake, I have to say that reading the witness statement transcript of the conversation, it would lead me to say “deliberate fare dodging 100%”. And more importantly, I suspect SE did too. So if the letter in any way maintains the “accidental” line in that post #12, I can well imagine that they were not particularly impressed by it.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Nov 2024 ==

Apologies - the original letter is further up on this thread - I will repost.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Nov 2024 ==

This is what my daughter sent to them:

Dear Sir/Madam,

Thank you for your letter dated 07/10/2024. I am grateful for the opportunity to provide an explanation but would like to start by saying that I accept full responsibility for how this situation has come about and I unreservedly apologise for my actions.

At the time of the incident I had only used the Trainline app a handful of times. Through my own negligence I had incorrectly set the starting location of the journey to London Bridge instead of Grove Park. I was only made aware of this when the barrier at Charing Cross didn’t open and I approached a station guard.

Regardless of my explanation, I recognise it is my responsibility to have the correct ticket for my journey and I would like to reiterate my apology for not doing so.

I am a university student currently on a 1 year internship. I have travelled this route many times prior to using the trainline app and am happy to provide you with my bank statements showing that prior to this incident I have correctly tapped in and out at the correct stations.

I respectfully request that you accept my apology and that I be allowed to pay the outstanding fare and any associated fines and costs to avoid court action.

 

[John R]

Through my own negligence I had incorrectly set the starting location of the journey to London Bridge instead of Grove Park. I was only made aware of this when the barrier at Charing Cross didn’t open and I approached a station guard.

So interested in what others think, but imo this is a clear statement that it was accidental, rather than a deliberate attempt to avoid paying the correct fare. I doubt that they will believe that for the reason that a short ticket such as was purchased is the classic fare dodgers tactic, made all the more implausible in London where contactless or Oyster would be the obvious choice for a ticket between Charing X and London Bridge.

Now, whether that has influenced their decision to prosecute I cannot tell, but I doubt it has helped her cause.

It's worth noting that as well as going back and asking "did you take account of my letter?", the other option would be to engage a solicitor. We do occasionally see cases like this where a letter of apology has not been accepted, but a subsequent intervention by one of the specialist solicitors sometimes mentioned here has had the desired effect. Of course in that case you would incur their fees, which tend to be a few hundred pounds.

 

[AlterEgo]

That’s as clear a case of deliberate short faring there can be. It’s much easier to just own up to what you’ve done; they aren’t going to buy that excuse. It’s not really possible to select London Bridge instead of Grove Park by accident.

Contactless - the method she was using until she apparently discovered this ruse - is cheaper and easier to use on this route unless you try to get away with short ticketing to open only one barrier using paper or electronic tickets on Trainline. We all know what the score is and so do Southeastern. The witness statement only backs this up.

We’ve seen some instances of Southeastern mislaying correspondence recently so we can’t say for sure whether they’ve lost the correspondence or are just unimpressed at the refusal to take accountability for the offending. It’s still better to write to them again, but perhaps a little more honestly, asking them to withdraw the summons in exchange for repaying the full fares evaded and their costs.

 

[island]

My question is if we plead guilty and pay the cost and compensation application, will she be given a criminal record?

That isn’t how it works.

Firstly “we” don’t plead guilty, only the defendant does.

Secondly if the defendant pleads guilty, there will be a fine to pay, a surcharge of 40% of the fine, plus the costs and compensation. The typical fine for this offence on a guilty plea is two thirds of a week’s wages, or £80 if unwaged.

And she will get a criminal record.