Someone Used My Details for Tram Fine

[cinomoll]

Today (2nd April 2026) I received in the letter that on the 24th March 2026, I received a tram ticket fine at St Peter’s Square in Manchester (Asking to pay £60, and will be doubled to £120 after 14 days from date of issue). I had not been on any tram services that day, nor had I gone into Manchester. The person had given my name, and address.

I used the website in the letter to put a request for an appeal in, but my sister suggested I also call in. After calling in, the women confirmed that they had given my Name, Address, but hadn’t given my correct D.O.B. They had gotten the birth year right, but not the date. She gave an email, to which I was to provide my passport and other ID.

I did so whilst providing other evidence. My college log in their attendance, and I had a lesson at 9:00, 1:45, and 3:05 that I was marked in for. For my free period at 10:20, I provided a screenshot of me confirming to my friend I am meeting her in the graphics area of our college to do our work. For my free period at 12:20, I provided a snapchat, time-stamped photo that I was at the library revising. I also showed photographic evidence of myself revising at home afterwards.

I sent this email today, and will like to ask anyone for further advice. I am worried that they won’t respond and matters will escalate for court proceedings. As for whoever gave my details I have no idea, except I have some family members who seem the type of people to do this, although I am not in contact with them. When I called, the women said finding the person would be like finding “a needle in a haystack”, unless I had a specific way of identifying them, such as them having green hair. The thing is I cannot suggest someone in particular.

Any advice would be deeply appreciated!

 

[Haywain]

I sent this email today, and will like to ask anyone for further advice. I am worried that they won’t respond and matters will escalate for court proceedings.

You seem to have done all you can at this stage, so relax and forget about it.

As for whoever gave my details I have no idea, except I have some family members who seem the type of people to do this, although I am not in contact with them. When I called, the women said finding the person would be like finding “a needle in a haystack”, unless I had a specific way of identifying them, such as them having green hair. The thing is I cannot suggest someone in particular.

This is not something for you to be worrying about. It is only your concern to say that it wasn't you and to keep an eye open for any suggestion that your details are being used for more nefarious purposes.

 

[cinomoll]

You seem to have done all you can at this stage, so relax and forget about it.

This is not something for you to be worrying about. It is only your concern to say that it wasn't you and to keep an eye open for any suggestion that your details are being used for more nefarious purposes.

Thank you. You have no idea how much this reassurance means to me, I’m a overthinker, so I was losing sleep over imagining the worst.

 

[WesternLancer]

Thank you. You have no idea how much this reassurance means to me, I’m a overthinker, so I was losing sleep over imagining the worst.

Seems to me you’ve been able to provide more evidence it wasn’t you than most people could.
I’d like to hope that in a reasonable period of time they will provide written confirmation no further action will be taken against you. If not I think you should be writing to them to ask for that.

If it did escalate to prosecution, which would be a total pain, it’s for them to prove it was you, not for you to prove it wasn’t you aiui.

Your instinct is right. It’s probably someone who knows you that’s giving your details which is particularly unpleasant thing to do.

The ticket inspector may have taken a basic description of the person they questioned. They won’t share that with you but that’s why they might want your true ID in order to compare it with their incident record and then hopefully rule you out.

They will be used to people giving false information like this to evade fares and evade being caught.

 

[185143]

Seems to me you’ve been able to provide more evidence it wasn’t you than most people could.
I’d like to hope that in a reasonable period of time they will provide written confirmation no further action will be taken against you. If not I think you should be writing to them to ask for that.

If it did escalate to prosecution, which would be a total pain, it’s for them to prove it was you, not for you to prove it wasn’t you aiui.

Your instinct is right. It’s probably someone who knows you that’s giving your details which is particularly unpleasant thing to do.

The ticket inspector may have taken a basic description of the person they questioned. They won’t share that with you but that’s why they might want your true ID in order to compare it with their incident record and then hopefully rule you out.

They will be used to people giving false information like this to evade fares and evade being caught.

I assume Metrolink use Body Worn Cameras?

 

[WesternLancer]

I assume Metrolink use Body Worn Cameras?

Reasonable to assume that indeed but I don’t know.
Certainly helps in scenarios like this I’m sure to have that rather than have to rely on basic handwritten description notes after all.

 

[tram21]

I assume Metrolink use Body Worn Cameras?

They will but like all body worn cameras won't be activated unless there is a need to, for example when someone is refusing to interact with an officer. When someone is being very cooperative I don't think cameras are activated.

 

[jfollows]

A good number of years ago I received a similar letter.

I responded to the effect that it wasn’t me, I wasn’t even in Manchester that day, I had a suspicion about who had given them my name and address if they wanted to pursue it, but otherwise I asked for confirmation that the case against me had been dropped.

By return of post, in a couple of days, I received the confirmation I had requested and that was that.

As @WesternLancer already said, they are accustomed to this sort of thing.

 

[AlterEgo]

You really can just say it wasn’t you and there’s very little they can do. Enforcement of this sort of thing is by consent.

 

[Snow1964]

I think you have provided a good amount of evidence.

It is rather telling on the attitude of the Operator that they haven't had the courtesy to respond telling you case is dropped.

Although maybe they will do that sometime after Easter (although really is bit stupid to send a letter with email return address, that might need urgent response timed to arrive on a bank holiday weekend, if not going to be anyone there to process the response)

 

[WesternLancer]

They will but like all body worn cameras won't be activated unless there is a need to, for example when someone is refusing to interact with an officer. When someone is being very cooperative I don't think cameras are activated.

In a way that’s abit daft. An accomplished liar who regularly fare dodges will have thought this through and realise that being aggressive etc isn’t as god an idea as just calmly giving false details.

Would be better to body cam every case of an incorrect fare found. Tho maybe that might escalate situations with ‘genuine mistake’ cases and inspectors want to avoid that?

 

[AlterEgo]

In a way that’s abit daft. An accomplished liar who regularly fare dodges will have thought this through and realise that being aggressive etc isn’t as god an idea as just calmly giving false details.

Would be better to body cam every case of an incorrect fare found. Tho maybe that might escalate situations with ‘genuine mistake’ cases and inspectors want to avoid that?

You could get away with giving false details quite a few times but eventually the inspectors will be briefed and word will get around. But it’s true that as a one off or for a few occasions nothing really can be done. We choose to live in this sort of society.

 

[Benjwri]

It is rather telling on the attitude of the Operator that they haven't had the courtesy to respond telling you case is dropped.

Although maybe they will do that sometime after Easter (although really is bit stupid to send a letter with email return address, that might need urgent response timed to arrive on a bank holiday weekend, if not going to be anyone there to process the response)

I would argue that it isn't at all unreasonable that a reply was not received to an email seeming sent on the evening before a bank holiday. I wouldn't expect, nor want, there to be staff being paid to work on prosecutions on a bank holiday. I'm sure the OP will receive a response next week, especially given dropping a prosecution probably requires sign off.

 

[Haywain]

It is rather telling on the attitude of the Operator that they haven't had the courtesy to respond telling you case is dropped.

Give them a chance - the OP only received the letter on Thursday, so it's unlikely that anyone has even seen a response from the OP yet.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Apr 2026 ==

really is bit stupid to send a letter with email return address, that might need urgent response timed to arrive on a bank holiday weekend, if not going to be anyone there to process the response

I would argue that giving an email address alows the recipient of their letter to deal with matter more quickly and conveniently, and at minimal cost compared to having to send a letter. The fact that no-one will see the response for a few days is neither here nor there.

 

[tram21]

In a way that’s abit daft. An accomplished liar who regularly fare dodges will have thought this through and realise that being aggressive etc isn’t as god an idea as just calmly giving false details.

Would be better to body cam every case of an incorrect fare found. Tho maybe that might escalate situations with ‘genuine mistake’ cases and inspectors want to avoid that?

I think body cams hold limited storage and also it's difficult to go through all the footage if you recorded all the time but I might be wrong.

Body cams are meant to be used to prevent escalation and as part of evidence for aggressive cases etc, and it really does help so that you're 'not alone' as a member of staff as its all being recorded.

 

[Benjwri]

I think body cams hold limited storage and also it's difficult to go through all the footage if you recorded all the time but I might be wrong.

Body cams are meant to be used to prevent escalation and as part of evidence for aggressive cases etc, and it really does help so that you're 'not alone' as a member of staff as its all being recorded.

The types of body camera worn by rail staff usually do not retain footage unless they are started recording by the staff member. Many also retain footage for a few minutes and include this when started recording. There won't be much footage to sort through because of this, and it is easily trackable to the time of the incident, but it is reliant on the staff member having have pressed the button to start recording.

 

[WesternLancer]

I think body cams hold limited storage and also it's difficult to go through all the footage if you recorded all the time but I might be wrong.

Body cams are meant to be used to prevent escalation and as part of evidence for aggressive cases etc, and it really does help so that you're 'not alone' as a member of staff as its all being recorded.

Thanks for comments

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Apr 2026 ==

The types of body camera worn by rail staff usually do not retain footage unless they are started recording by the staff member. Many also retain footage for a few minutes and include this when started recording. There won't be much footage to sort through because of this, and it is easily trackable to the time of the incident, but it is reliant on the staff member having have pressed the button to start recording.

Thanks for added info

 

[flashberry43]

I wouldn’t say you’re losing sleep over this, if, you’re truly posting this on the same day you received it…

You’ve done all you can.

 

[cinomoll]

I wouldn’t say you’re losing sleep over this, if, you’re truly posting this on the same day you received it…

You’ve done all you can.

I did lose sleep aha as pathetic as that sounds.. I received it in the morning and I went to sleep early, but I couldn’t due to overthinking.

Things like this never happen to me because I am a bit of a goody two-shoes, and I have good relations with people, so for something like this to happen out of the blue - it sent me spiralling.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Apr 2026 ==

A good number of years ago I received a similar letter.

I responded to the effect that it wasn’t me, I wasn’t even in Manchester that day, I had a suspicion about who had given them my name and address if they wanted to pursue it, but otherwise I asked for confirmation that the case against me had been dropped.

By return of post, in a couple of days, I received the confirmation I had requested and that was that.

As @WesternLancer already said, they are accustomed to this sort of thing.

Thank you for sharing your own experience! Unlike you, unfortunately I genuinely have no idea who could have done this to me, so that’s a growing source of paranoia for me.

I’m afraid of the possibility that they could do this again to me, and I wouldn’t have the evidence to back myself up. Although, maybe they’ve learnt their lesson from being caught?

Do you think the MetroLink could do anything for this? I think it’s unfair that I have to go about this with no sense of closure from that aspect.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

I’m afraid of the possibility that they could do this again to me, and I wouldn’t have the evidence to back myself up.

Bear in mind the important point @WesternLancer made in post #4:

If it did escalate to prosecution, which would be a total pain, it’s for them to prove it was you, not for you to prove it wasn’t you aiui

Practically speaking, I expect the railway will believe you, and you will not be bothered further. You're not the first person this has happened to so the railways are used to it happening.

Ahd it could be worse: the police once tried to deliver a small boy to my house - he'd found my address as agent on an election leaflet and used that instead of his real one when he was caught being a nuisance in the park. AsI shut the door I could hear the bizzy saying 'Now then lad, where do you really live???'

 

[cinomoll]

Good News!

Just received a response from MetroLink and they said the following:

We are aware you believe someone has given your details; to allow our staff not to accept these details again we would appreciate your co-operation in helping us apprehend this person.

Could you therefore please supply us with: -

• A contact telephone number, a piece of confidential information about yourself, and a photocopy of a scanned pre-signed document eg. passport, driving licence.

In return, if this person does attempt to use your details again, we will try to contact you or failing that, the individual will be asked the confidential information that you have supplied us with. I can assure you that any information given to our office will be treated with the utmost discretion and confidentiality.

 

[WesternLancer]

Good News!

Just received a response from MetroLink and they said the following:

We are aware you believe someone has given your details; to allow our staff not to accept these details again we would appreciate your co-operation in helping us apprehend this person.

Could you therefore please supply us with: -

• A contact telephone number, a piece of confidential information about yourself, and a photocopy of a scanned pre-signed document eg. passport, driving licence.

In return, if this person does attempt to use your details again, we will try to contact you or failing that, the individual will be asked the confidential information that you have supplied us with. I can assure you that any information given to our office will be treated with the utmost discretion and confidentiality.

Interesting to see they have a pro active approach on this.

One other thing for you to do might be to check your electoral registration is up to date (and select the option that prevent the council selling on your data - I think this is called the 'restricted register') - to do this you need to make sure you are accurately registered to vote at your current address - and more importantly - have been removed from the electoral register at previous addresses (contact the local council in the area you previously may have lived in to check this). This is because junk mail going to addresses might be used by the person who did this to give your name and address, with that name and address matching some sort of official record that checks back against the electoral register

Start here:

Register to vote

Register to vote to take part in elections in the UK. Includes how to get on the electoral register and how to update your address on the register.

www.gov.uk

or contact the Electoral Registration Office at your local council (the one you pay your council tax to).

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Good News!

Just received a response from MetroLink and they said the following:

We are aware you believe someone has given your details; to allow our staff not to accept these details again we would appreciate your co-operation in helping us apprehend this person.

Could you therefore please supply us with: -

• A contact telephone number, a piece of confidential information about yourself, and a photocopy of a scanned pre-signed document eg. passport, driving licence.

In return, if this person does attempt to use your details again, we will try to contact you or failing that, the individual will be asked the confidential information that you have supplied us with. I can assure you that any information given to our office will be treated with the utmost discretion and confidentiality.

I quite like this approach - especially if you realise that 'confidential' doesn't have to mean 'important'. If you are the only person to know that your first goldfish was called Cedric, that will do nicely as confidential information.

 

[blimmo]

It also doesn't have to be true information: as long as you remember it (or have it written down somewhere accessible) you can treat it like a password.

 

[cinomoll]

I quite like this approach - especially if you realise that 'confidential' doesn't have to mean 'important'. If you are the only person to know that your first goldfish was called Cedric, that will do nicely as confidential information.

Yes that’s the approach I took! Just thought of something incredibly niche about my childhood, which could have endless answers.