Rail prosecution

[John R]

However, tickets are not transferable under most situations, so being the purchaser of a ticket then used fraudulently would not be a clever position to be in surely?

 

[Deafdoggie]

I think you are missing the fairly obvious point that Northern do not know who actually used the return ticket
An interview where the OP fesses up would fix this problem

Whilst certainly helpful to them, it's not their only solution. As others have said, buying an A-B single each day and the return portion being used on each of those days does potentially lead to a conclusion, beyond all reasonable doubt, that they were being used by the same person. Unless the OP can show they had an alternative method of transport.
And then there's also the non-transferable issue. Whilst often a blind eye is turned to that, again it doesn't help the OPs situation.

 

[skyhigh]

However, tickets are not transferable under most situations, so being the purchaser of a ticket then used fraudulently would not be a clever position to be in surely?

There is absolutely nothing to stop someone buying a ticket for someone else to use - indeed it is specifically allowed in the NRCOT (it was banned under the previous NRCOC but this changed several years ago). The only issue would be transferring a part used ticket, but it's not relevant here.

 

[island]

However, tickets are not transferable under most situations, so being the purchaser of a ticket then used fraudulently would not be a clever position to be in surely?

Unused tickets are transferable as long as they have not been made out in a person's name and are not sold above face value. (Possibly some other technical conditions,)

 

[bingleybong]

If they were all scanned on the OP's device then there cannot really be any doubt that the OP did this has been established.

 

[island]

If they were all scanned on the OP's device then there cannot really be any doubt that the OP did this has been established.

The device on which a ticket is displayed is not, to my knowledge, recorded at the point of scanning. The same ticket can be displayed on multiple devices, or printed.

 

[randyrippley]

I think you are missing the fairly obvious point that Northern do not know who actually used the return ticket
An interview where the OP fesses up would fix this problem

As the ticket was on an app on his phone it's difficult to see how anyone else used it.

 

[island]

As the ticket was on an app on his phone it's difficult to see how anyone else used it.

As above, the railway does not have a record of where the ticket was when it was scanned.

 

[Haywain]

As above, the railway does not have a record of where the ticket was when it was scanned.

No but if tickets were bought on an app just before being used it will likely tie them to that device.

 

[John R]

There is absolutely nothing to stop someone buying a ticket for someone else to use - indeed it is specifically allowed in the NRCOT (it was banned under the previous NRCOC but this changed several years ago). The only issue would be transferring a part used ticket, but it's not relevant here.

However, you cannot transfer the return part of a ticket if you have used the outward part, which appears the relevant condition here.

 

[HurdyGurdy]

However, you cannot transfer the return part of a ticket if you have used the outward part, which appears the relevant condition here.

It is hardly relevant if the mischief being suggested by the TOC is that the return portion of the ticket was used more than once. Whether transferred or not, its validity would expire at the end of its first use. You may say that if then transferred it is doubly invalid, but the point about someone else acquiring it is that it would not be the purchaser who was using it to travel.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Worth checking. I have not seen an answer to this. Was the RETURN ticket bought electronically or on the same app or is it a different type of ticket. So is the return ticket not easy to connect with the OP - an interview might be to try to discover this. The current level of suspicion might be just that they wonder what mode of transport the OP used for the return journeys.

 

[Blindtraveler]

The immediate thought that sprung to my mind when they said they were doing this based on purchase history was what if someone was doing something totally innocent like buying singles in the morning to get to work but then car sharing on the way home? Wouldn't this sort of action be completely and utterly big brother gone bonkers and waste a lot of everybody's time and cause unnecessary stress? The railway is getting paranoid there's no doubt about it

 

[HurdyGurdy]

Wouldn't this sort of action be completely and utterly big brother gone bonkers and waste a lot of everybody's time and cause unnecessary stress?

Based on purchase history alone, perhaps. But although Northern say it's the purchase activity which prompts further investigation, the OP says the return portion of the same ticket was scanned when used on multiple occasions, so we have to assume the company has evidence of an invalid ticket being used to travel.

 

[Killingworth]

Based on purchase history alone, perhaps. But although Northern say it's the purchase activity which prompts further investigation, the OP says the return portion of the same ticket was scanned when used on multiple occasions, so we have to assume the company has evidence of an invalid ticket being used to travel.

We may suspect they have evidence of fare evasion but it may not be assumed how much evidence they have. Aa far as we know so far they may only be suspicious of so many one way journeys and one return ticket.

I know people travel one way from my local station and return by other means. However if the OP knows how many times they've avoided payment they can voluntarily confess before discovering just how strong the evidence may be.

Those who regularly buy and use correct tickets may have limited sympathy with regular fare dodgers.

 

[Haywain]

The railway is getting paranoid there's no doubt about it

The railway has identified a pattern of ticket misuse which the OP has confirmed they have done correctly. While there may be questions about their ability to successfully prosecute the OP, it can hardly be called paranoia.

 

[SuspectUsual]

The thing I don’t really understand here is what happened on the return trains when the ticket was scanned.

I’ve been on plenty of Northern trains and witnessed conductors scanning invalid tickets and then challenging the holder - lots of occasions of advance but on the wrong train, once someone travelling on the wrong date, once someone travelling further than the station their ticket was to.

If the same ticket is scanned on multiple days surely it alerts the conductor on occasions two onwards and he should then start asking questions?

 

[Hadders]

Moderator Note - we're starting to drift into speculative territory which is not helpful to the OP. Can we make sure that discussion in this thread remains on-topic and any discussion about ticket scanning, railway paranoia etc go into a separate thread.

Thanks.

 

[Peter Sarf]

My questions :-
Is the return ticket traceable back to the OP ?. (in other words how was the return ticket bought).
Is the only suspicion the number of single/one-way journeys made ?. (which we have established were traceable back to the OP).

 

[Deafdoggie]

The immediate thought that sprung to my mind when they said they were doing this based on purchase history was what if someone was doing something totally innocent like buying singles in the morning to get to work but then car sharing on the way home? Wouldn't this sort of action be completely and utterly big brother gone bonkers and waste a lot of everybody's time and cause unnecessary stress? The railway is getting paranoid there's no doubt about it

The railway aren't hauling everyone in who buys only singles. They very, very clearly have more to go on than that!
Indeed, that might be the red-herring. I suspect they know the return has been scanned multiple times and who purchased it. They now need to simply know the purchaser is the one who has been using it. Whilst an interview is a quick & easy way for them to find this out, they have other means at their disposal too.

 

[Peter Sarf]

The railway aren't hauling everyone in who buys only singles. They very, very clearly have more to go on than that!
Indeed, that might be the red-herring. I suspect they know the return has been scanned multiple times and who purchased it. They now need to simply know the purchaser is the one who has been using it. Whilst an interview is a quick & easy way for them to find this out, they have other means at their disposal too.

CCTV images - once they know what the purchaser looks like.

Are we sure the return ticket is traceable back to the (over) user like the singles were ?. Or was the return bought by cash at a machine ?.

 

[skyhigh]

CCTV images - once they know what the purchaser looks like.

Are we sure the return ticket is traceable back to the (over) user like the singles were ?. Or was the return bought by cash at a machine ?.

They are not going to trawl through CCTV.

It has been made abundantly clear that the return was an e-ticket bought via an app. This is how the misuse will have been traced.

 

[scrapy]

If the same ticket is scanned on multiple days surely it alerts the conductor on occasions two onwards and he should then start asking questions?

If the conductor looked into the scan history then they may well have done but if the ticket is valid and no suspicion is raised, the conductor probably has no reason to do this.

The ticket is also valid for break of journey so it may have had several scans. The back office may have looked into the locations of these scans (they have access to GPS data) and realised they don't make up a consecutive journey. Eg same ticket scanned at Chorley one day, Bolton next, Leyland next, Chorley again the next day.

 

[SuspectUsual]

If the conductor looked into the scan history then they may well have done but if the ticket is valid and no suspicion is raised, the conductor probably has no reason to do this.

The ticket is also valid for break of journey so it may have had several scans. The back office may have looked into the locations of these scans (they have access to GPS data) and realised they don't make up a consecutive journey. Eg same ticket scanned at Chorley one day, Bolton next, Leyland next, Chorley again the next day.

Ah yes of course, I’d not considered break of journey

 

[Starmill]

They do, however, have a reasonable assumption.

Indeed, but in the absence of a confession, if the matter went to court the railway could invite the magistrates/jury to conclude that the reason for multiple tickets from A to B but only one from B to A was that the same ticket was being used repeatedly from B to A. And unless the defendant (as they would be at that point) presented evidence to explain why another conclusion was appropriate it seems to me that the magistrates/jury would be able to use their experience of what it is reasonable to expect people to do to conclude that it was beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had repeatedly used the same ticket from B to A.

I bet they haven't even got any evidence that the OP is the person who was travelling. Proving that is near-impossible without either a witness statement from someone who stopped the traveller and asked them for their identity, or an admission. The only other viable route is through CCTV, which is usually patchy, of low quality and difficult to even get hold of in the first place, let alone sufficiently to match times with one individual recurring traveller. That will be an important part of what they want from the interview.

 

[Peter Sarf]

They are not going to trawl through CCTV.

It has been made abundantly clear that the return was an e-ticket bought via an app. This is how the misuse will have been traced.

Thanks for clarifying. I had not recalled that the return ticket was also bought as an e-ticket from reading the thread. Looking back I still could not be sure.

 

[Deeg117]

@Wayfarer123 - What the latest / outcome on this?

 

[skyhigh]

@Wayfarer123 - What the latest / outcome on this?

Please start your own thread so individual advice can be given.

 

[oredeinoyewale]

Excuse me please, how did you solve this case and what was the outcome ? I have a very similar case right now.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Hi @oredeinoyewale - welcome to the forum!

Although a lot of problems look much the same, we ask people to start their own threads for their own problem. That's partly because it's rare for two problems to be exactly the same - but also because we don't want to get muddled between two cases. So we can best help you if you tell us what's happened in your case in your own thread.