Potential Prosecution

[Gashers]

Could take 4 plus weeks to hear back.
Not sure about outcome. What you were doing is towards the serious end of the spectrum because it was deliberate pre planned evasion.

But still a chance of not being prosecuted i would hope.

Yeah fingers crossed. I’ve seen similar cases agree an out of court settlement and lesser cases go to court. Just got to hope my letter contained everything necessary. The bit that bugs me is the offence was ‘unable to produce a valid ticket’ but we know it was more than that.

 

[WesternLancer]

The bit that bugs me is the offence was ‘unable to produce a valid ticket’ but we know it was more than that.

I suspect that is the simplest reason for them to put down that could enable progression to prosecution successfully if it needs to do so.

The reality of what we see from the small sample of cases that come here is that most get settlements, but other info (Freedom of Info requests I think and a forum member who observed a day of court cases out of interest) shows that a large number (possibly even a majority) of people stopped and reported for investigation get prosecuted and those prosecutions return guilty verdicts - but I'm pretty sure these are made up of cases of people who put their head in the sand / ignore / never get the court summons / don't understand what is happening - so basically don't engage in the process ever or until it's far too late.

The job of the frontline ticket inspection staff involved with this is probably be to complete paperwork in such a way that if it gets to court a prosecution can be obtained as simply and quickly as possible because of the vast number of fare evasion cases they need to put through week in week out.

 

[Gashers]

I suspect that is the simplest reason for them to put down that could enable progression to prosecution successfully if it needs to do so.

The reality of what we see from the small sample of cases that come here is that most get settlements, but other info (Freedom of Info requests I think and a forum member who observed a day of court cases out of interest) shows that a large number (possibly even a majority) of people stopped and reported for investigation get prosecuted and those prosecutions return guilty verdicts - but I'm pretty sure these are made up of cases of people who put their head in the sand / ignore / never get the court summons / don't understand what is happening - so basically don't engage in the process ever or until it's far too late.

The job of the frontline ticket inspection staff involved with this is probably be to complete paperwork in such a way that if it gets to court a prosecution can be obtained as simply and quickly as possible because of the vast number of fare evasion cases they need to put through week in week out.

That’s really useful thank you. Say it does go to court, would I be responsible of paying the court fees in addto GTR’s compensation and gaining a criminal record?

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Say it does go to court, would I be responsible of paying the court fees in addto GTR’s compensation and gaining a criminal record?

Yes. On conviction, you will have to pay
- a fine (based on your income: maybe £220 or so)
- a surcharge (essentially a bit more of a fine)
- compensation (the train fare you should have paid) and
- prosecution costs

From Single Justice Procedure notices that people have shown us, the prosecution costs tend to come in at around £150 - we saw £135 yesterday so I've rounded up a bit.

 

[WesternLancer]

That’s really useful thank you. Say it does go to court, would I be responsible of paying the court fees in addto GTR’s compensation and gaining a criminal record?

There are other threads where court punishment formula gets set out (and you are a long way from that yet) but I think you end up with

- a court fine (related by formula to your income so long as you declare income on the relevant form to the court otherwise they assume a notional weekly income)
- a victim surcharge
- GTR's costs (usually stated on the court paperwork that the accused receives in advance)

These can be paid to the court in installments - unlike a settlement offer which the railway company would want in a lump sum

- Plus of course it is a public record that you have been to court and found guilty - so you literally have 'a criminal record' that you are required to declare in certain circs (like job applications, insurance applications etc - so in theory it could increase the cost of your car insurance perhaps) for a period of time until it's 'spent' IIRC

But even if your first attempt to resolve this and request a settlement fails, it's possible to try again before it gets to the court date, or even we have seen the occasional case of this being achieved at the court on the day.

There is also the solicitor route to get help - with a small number of firms expert in the area and claim to have the ability to fast track matters with the railway companies - but their fees likely to be £500+ and they can't guarantee they can achieve a settlement.

So I'm sure you can see why the advice of your friends to doctor a railcard expiry date was pretty bad advice given the financial consequences likely to be way higher than the cost of a new, albeit different, railcard. It might be a point worth telling them as you say others have done this, though I appreciate that can be a difficult conversation to have with mates who probably think what's happened to you won't ever happen to them....

But like I say you are some way off all of this, but this may help you to know what to expect.

Plenty of help for you here for free as things develop of course.

 

[Gashers]

Both very useful replies, thank you so much. Do you think they will go through my jounrye history to find any invalid tickets? I had summed up the single adult anytime fare for each journey and it comes to about £900. However, that includes my season tickets to college which I believe would have been allowed as the ST expiry date was a bit longer?

 

[WesternLancer]

Both very useful replies, thank you so much. Do you think they will go through my jounrye history to find any invalid tickets? I had summed up the single adult anytime fare for each journey and it comes to about £900. However, that includes my season tickets to college which I believe would have been allowed as the ST expiry date was a bit longer?

I fear you must assume as a matter of course that they will go through things in your history. This is even more likely in a case of deliberate pre mediated evasion in my personal opinion.

I don't know the rules about how a season ticket expiry date meshes against the 16-17 saver railcard expiry date, but you could be correct. Someone here will know that.

 

[Gashers]

Ahh okay, would they be able to check invalid travel that is over 6 months ago? The doctored railcard was from Aug - Nov 2024, they wrote to me Feb 2024. Does that mean any purchases up to September 12th won’t be looked at?

 

[Haywain]

would they be able to check invalid travel that is over 6 months ago?

Yes, and you should assume that they will.

they wrote to me Feb 2024.

Feb 2025, you mean?

Does that mean any purchases up to September 12th won’t be looked at?

No.

 

[WesternLancer]

Ahh okay, would they be able to check invalid travel that is over 6 months ago? The doctored railcard was from Aug - Nov 2024, they wrote to me Feb 2024. Does that mean any purchases up to September 12th won’t be looked at?

They can go back through years worth or records.

 

[Gashers]

Yes, and you should assume that they will.

Feb 2025, you mean?

No.

Yes Feb 25 sorry, and they will or won’t look at the Aug - Sept journeys?

 

[Haywain]

they will or won’t look at the Aug - Sept journeys?

They will.

 

[Gashers]

Okay that’s fine. Will keep everyone updated once I receive a response

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Mar 2025 ==

I have just received this email with the letter attached.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Mar 2025 ==

How do I respond to this?

 

[WesternLancer]

Okay that’s fine. Will keep everyone updated once I receive a response

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Mar 2025 ==

I have just received this email with the letter attached.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Mar 2025 ==

How do I respond to this?

Options are probably

You reply, apologise again, express willingness to co-operate and a desire to pay what you owe, and ask them to send you a list of the occasions that they believe you may have travelled without a valid ticket (that you can then check against your own records)

or

You decide not to engage in that sort of process and accept that the matter will escalate to court prosecution. You would probably / almost certainly be found guilty and have a court fine imposed and a criminal record

There may be other options that other people here can suggest (which might include getting a solicitor involved perhaps)

 

[Gashers]

Options are probably

You reply, apologise again, express willingness to co-operate and a desire to pay what you owe, and ask them to send you a list of the occasions that they believe you may have travelled without a valid ticket (that you can then check against your own records)

or

You decide not to engage in that sort of process and accept that the matter will escalate to court prosecution. You would probably / almost certainly be found guilty and have a court fine imposed and a criminal record

There may be other options that other people here can suggest (which might include getting a solicitor involved perhaps)

Should I write back in post or via email? Would it not be similar to the letter I had sent previously?

 

[WesternLancer]

Should I write back in post or via email? Would it not be similar to the letter I had sent previously?

If you got that by e-mail then I assume you could reply by e-mail.

As to content I suggested it's moving things on, showing you are willing to co-operate, implicitly accepting that this wasn't a one off and you know you need to pay them, but keeping it out of court, which in my view is ultimately the best thing, even if it costs you money (court will cost money and has the criminal record as well - which is why I think best avoided)

If you do decide to write / e-mail - get your wording checked here before you send it.

You could re-iterate some of the points you said before (or even enclose what you said before) as those screenshots don't seem to me to confirm that for 100% sure they actually received it as it's not mentioned I don't think - which is odd (ie the attachment looks like the usual letter - ie the one you got before)

Hopefully other forum members can pitch in with some views over the next 24 hours or so - you have 7 days to consider your reply / next steps at least. @AlterEgo always gives good steer to people on not incriminating themselves so may have a view on this one for example, but other very good people have given advice in this thread too and hopefully will also do again when they have the chance to see this development.

 

[Gashers]

How would something like this sound

Dear Mr Campbell,

I am confirming the receipt of your letter dated 6 March 2025 regarding my rail travel. I take this matter seriously and would like to resolve it as quickly as possible.

I previously reached out regarding this matter, but I am unsure if my response was received. Please could you confirm if it was acknowledged?

I understand that there are concerns over multiple journeys, and I would like to discuss how this can be settled without the need for legal proceedings. Please could you confirm the next steps and whether an out-of-court settlement would be an option in this case?

I am happy to cooperate and provide any necessary details to bring this matter to a resolution. Please let me know how best to proceed.

Yours sincerely,

 

[Bungle158]

Personally, l would ditch "reached out". It sounds as though you were doing them a favour

 

[Gashers]

Personally, l would ditch "reached out". It sounds as though you were doing them a favour

I previously contacted GTR by post regarding this matter?

 

[WesternLancer]

I previously contacted GTR by post regarding this matter?

yes, that's better - rest of it look OK to me - but like I say wait say 24 hours to see if others have suggestions

edit - you could change this:

Please could you confirm if it was acknowledged?

to this

'Please could you confirm if you have had sight of that?'

but it's not a big deal.

 

[John R]

I'm not sure why you are asking whether it has been seen. The covering email explicitly says that "you have been in correspondence".

I also think you need to be much more apologetic in this reply than you currently are - indeed I can't see an apology anywhere in it - and also be much clearer that you agree that with them that there have been multiple journeys when you failed to pay the correct fare. (At the moment there is only a vague acknowledgment that they have "concerns". You need to be upfront and acknowledge that those concerns are justified.)

 

[WesternLancer]

I'm not sure why you are asking whether it has been seen. The covering email explicitly says that "you have been in correspondence".

Well to be fair it didn’t help the op me not noticing that! Thanks for noticing it.

Had I noticed that I’d not have suggested it being referenced in this reply of course.

I haven’t say the GTR reply isn’t that helpful in suggesting to the op what they want them to do really. Eg ‘we’ve read your response but believe we are going to prosecute’, or ‘tell us more about our belief there is multiple evasion, do you accept that?’

Anyway that’s a bit beside the point

 

[Gashers]

Dear Mr Campbell,

I am confirming the receipt of your letter dated 6 March 2025 regarding my rail travel.

I sincerely apologise for my past actions regarding my rail travel. I fully acknowledge that I failed to pay the correct fare for multiple journeys, and I deeply regret this mistake. I take full responsibility and understand the seriousness of the matter.

I am keen to resolve this as quickly as possible and would like to discuss whether an out-of-court settlement would be an option. I fully appreciate the impact of fare evasion and assure you that I now always purchase the correct tickets for my journeys.

Please let me know how I can proceed to bring this matter to a resolution.

Yours sincerely,

What about this?

 

[John R]

Maybe “would be very grateful if an out of court settlement would be an option”, as “discuss” sounds too much like a negotiation of equals.

But apart from that it looks ok to me.

 

[WesternLancer]

Maybe “would be very grateful if an out of court settlement would be an option”, as “discuss” sounds too much like a negotiation of equals.

But apart from that it looks ok to me.

That’s helpful.

 

[Gashers]

With the change to would be grateful, all good to email off?

 

[John R]

Yes, that should be fine.

 

[Gashers]

Recieved this email today, they attached an excel doc with all my rail travel and it looks accurate. How should I respond? Are they giving me a settlement?

Good afternoon Jack,

Thanks for your swift response.

GTR's investigation of your rail travel and ticket purchases has established that rail fares were avoided by you on a number of dates since 28/01/2023. On some of the dates, you used child fare tickets, thus obtaining a 50% saving on the adult fare. You also purchased 'short' and 'sandwich' tickets. A 'short' ticket is when the user purchases a single ticket in order to either enter or exit the ticket barriers at the beginning or end of their rail journey, whilst a 'sandwich' ticket is when an individual purchases two tickets covering only a small portion of their rail journey at both the beginning and end, in order to be able to enter and exit the ticket barriers at the origin and destination stations.

As an alternative to the case being referred for prosecution, GTR may be prepared to offer you the option of paying a financial settlement, consisting of all fares that were avoided plus associated investigation costs. You are under no obligation to reach a settlement agreement with GTR regarding this matter, however, the only alternative course of action would see a Notice of Intention to Prosecute being issued in lieu of the case proceeding to court. Please note, it will only be possible to reach a settlement agreement subject to you being completely open and honest regarding ALL fraudulent rail travel.

Please see the attached spreadsheet of the dates that have been identified during GTR's investigation.

The tickets highlighted green are season ticket purchases. You paid the correct fare for all of the season tickets, including those purchased after the expiry of your 16-17 Railcard on 03/09/3034, as it continued to be valid for the purchase of season tickets until 03/01/2025. The season tickets are shown on the spreadsheet, as on multiple dates they were used in conjunction with other tickets you had purchased in order to avoid rail fares.

Column M shows the reason fares were avoided on a particular date, whilst column N is for you to enter any comments you may have.

Once you have reviewed the spreadsheet and confirmed the dates of fare avoidance are correct, a settlement proposal will be prepared.

Please don't hesitate to contact me should you have any questions.



Kind Regards,
Euan

 

[Titfield]

You need to check the excel spreadsheet extremely carefully making sure that the details are correct. You will then need to confirm this back to them. If they have made an error then you need to provide the proof of that error. Once the spreadsheet is agreed they will calculate the fares due, add on the admin fee and then offer you an out of court settlement for you to pay. If you accept and pay within the timescale set that will close the matter. If you do not agree or do not pay in full by the deadline then they will prosecute.

 

[Gashers]

That’s perfect. They all look accurate to me. Do I need to add a comment for tickets they have labeled as short journeys to tell them the origin station or will this be fine?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Mar 2025 ==

There are a few incorrect tickets but they aren’t worth too much, should I just alllow it rather than challenge it?