Southeastern contactless missing tap in question

[locomoto]

One of my relatives used their contactless card (they are one of my supplementary cardholders) to board a Southeastern train from Lewisham to Charlton. When I checked my card statement I saw that they had been overcharged for travel that day and called TfL who said it was because there was a missing tap in which they customer service agent was able to correct over the phone.

However, my relative has now told me they actually boarded the train at St Johns and I suspect that they may not have tapped in intentionally (although I'm unsure as they are relatively new to London so maybe made a genuine mistake?) as they also mentioned that their card was checked on board the train but they were not sure if by TfL staff or Southeastern staff, although there are some details I'm still unclear about as I don't understand why the staff did not confront my relative at the time for not having tapped in and did not issue a fine.

I'm worried my relative might be at risk of prosecution? Or maybe even myself as they are one of my supplementary cardholders? Would they review the CCTV images from the station to check if they had boarded at Lewisham or not?

I wanted to ask whether I should reach out to inform either TfL or Southeastern of the situation so that the correct starting station can be used to calculate the correct fare. Also, I am slightly confused as to who should be dealing with this matter as the payment and subsequent refund were by TfL but the travel was not on the TfL network but on a Southeastern train.

 

[SECR 65]

Did the member of staff on the train take any details e.g. name and address?

I think Southeastern is driver only operation in the metro area so I suppose unlikely to have been a SE guard - so presumably revenue protection officer from either SE or TFL.

 

[locomoto]

I've just asked and apparently no details were taken by the staff on the train and my relative was not given any paperwork of any kind and they just moved on after scanning their contactless card which seems odd if they did not successfully tap in. No sure if there was some miscommunication which happened as my relative's English is also limited.

 

[swt_passenger]

I've just asked and apparently no details were taken by the staff on the train and my relative was not given any paperwork of any kind and they just moved on after scanning their contactless card which seems odd if they did not successfully tap in. No sure if there was some miscommunication which happened as my relative's English is also limited.

If a contactless card is checked onboard a train or tube the person checking cannot see if it’s touched in. The reconciliation happens later on in the TFL payment system. If there’s a history develops of not tapping in then the card will be blocked. At that point an onboard check will fail.

Remember contactless is not the same process as Oyster, nothing about a touch in can be written to the card.

 

[greatkingrat]

Nobody is going to be trawling through CCTV to try and confirm if your relative boarded at Lewisham or not. For a start, how would they even know what the relative looks like?

 

[locomoto]

Nobody is going to be trawling through CCTV to try and confirm if your relative boarded at Lewisham or not. For a start, how would they even know what the relative looks like?

Well, I figured they have the record of the tap out at Charlton so can identify them from CCTV taken at that time? Also, as they are a supplemental cardholder of mine, I worry I might carry the responsibility due to this? Also bit confused if it’s TfL or Southeastern I should be contacting about this.

 

[Hadders]

There is no need to contact anyone about this.

@swt_passenger has described how contactless cards are checked.

When everything is reconciled in the TfL back-office if the touch-in happened before the revenue check then no further action is taken. If the card hadn’t been touched in then a failed revenue inspection charge is applied. If multiple revenue inspections are failed then the card is blocked from use on the contactless transport system.

You can check the status of your account at contactless.tfl.gov.uk. Without an account you can see 7-days worth of activity, if you sign up for an account then you can see history stretching back much further. You will need to use the card number from the supplementary card when checking the history.

 

[locomoto]

Thanks, so there is no chance TfL would pass the information onto Southeastern to review the CCTV to see if my relative really did get on at Lewisham? As their story seems suspicious and I suspect that they have not been completely honest with me. As my relative is on a visa I’m worried that any potential for future prosecution could affect them applying for permanent residency in the future. Also, as the main cardholder do I carry any responsibility for the supplementary cardholders actions?

 

[iamraymond]

If you feel your relative is intentionally not tapping in, it may be worth removing their access, just for peace of mind

 

[AlterEgo]

Well, I figured they have the record of the tap out at Charlton so can identify them from CCTV taken at that time? Also, as they are a supplemental cardholder of mine, I worry I might carry the responsibility due to this? Also bit confused if it’s TfL or Southeastern I should be contacting about this.

CCTV isn't God Mode, it doesn't tell you who anyone is. It records video of people's faces.

 

[locomoto]

CCTV isn't God Mode, it doesn't tell you who anyone is. It records video of people's faces.

Sorry, I meant they know the exact time of the tap out, so can just match that with the face of the person who was tapping out at that time at Charlton station on the CCTV?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 May 2026 ==

If you feel your relative is intentionally not tapping in, it may be worth removing their access, just for peace of mind

Yes I have decided to give them an oyster which I can top up for them instead. I am also a bit worried about future issues for their visa and also because they are looking to work in the NHS in a caring role.

 

[AlterEgo]

Sorry, I meant they know the exact time of the tap out, so can just match that with the face of the person who was tapping out at that time at Charlton station on the CCTV?

So at 14:21 a person with a face they've never seen before is tapping out. Then what?

 

[locomoto]

So at 14:21 a person with a face they've never seen before is tapping out. Then what?

I guess they could trace this person back to the train they took and see if they got on at Lewisham or not?

 

[SECR 65]

I suppose theoretically, with a lot of time and effort, it could be possible to identify a person they were looking for from CCTV. However, assuming your relative was not flagged by the ticket inspection, which seems to be the case, and customer services have corrected the charging issue, then as far as I can see all is sorted. Almost all reports for prosecution happen by someone being caught in the act, apart from major fraud cases, maybe. In the absence of any details being taken, or any communication from the ticket inspector, I can't see that any action would be or could be taken.

 

[AlterEgo]

I guess they could trace this person back to the train they took and see if they got on at Lewisham or not?

Yeah they could spend ages doing that and see this person they've never seen before in their life got on at Lewisham. And then what?

 

[locomoto]

I suppose theoretically, with a lot of time and effort, it could be possible to identify a person they were looking for from CCTV. However, assuming your relative was not flagged by the ticket inspection, which seems to be the case, and customer services have corrected the charging issue, then as far as I can see all is sorted. Almost all reports for prosecution happen by someone being caught in the act, apart from major fraud cases, maybe. In the absence of any details being taken, or any communication from the ticket inspector, I can't see that any action would be or could be taken.

I gave the TfL customer service the name and address of my relative as well as my name and address and also explained that they are using my supplementary card. So they do have these details

 

[locomoto]

Yeah they could spend ages doing that and see this person they've never seen before in their life got on at Lewisham. And then what?

Well then they would see that they did not in fact get on at Lewisham. So I guess the could charge my relative with fraud?

 

[greatkingrat]

The difference in fares between St Johns - Charlton and Lewisham - Charlton is 60p peak, 30p off-peak. Nobody is going to be charged with fraud for the sake of 60 pence.

 

[AlterEgo]

Well then they would see that they did not in fact get on at Lewisham. So I guess the could charge my relative with fraud?

They don't know who your relative is. CCTV isn't God Mode, all it does it record images of people.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

If this is an isolated incident, there's almost certainly nothing to worry about: even if they can put a face to your relative then it's extremely unlikely that they will pursue to the point of putting a name to the face.

But we do know (from Channel 5 documentaries and the like) that when TfL identify serial fare evaders they can follow the matter up: sending a team out to pick up the offender is one option. This was on the 'big railway ' rather than TfL but the same may apply.

So in practice (and if it will work with the relationship between the OP and their relative) the practical thing to do is for the OP to advise their relative of the consequences of what they're doing: for the moment there's probably no harm done, but there may be a problem if they carry on fare dodging.

 

[locomoto]

Yes I’ve told them that this is serious and having a criminal record could affect their visa and career prospects. Maybe that’s being a bit dramatic but I guess better to scare them off trying again. So I guess what I’m asking is TfL/Southeastern would not look to prosecute based on CCTV evidence alone? As I have provided names and addresses to TfL customer service.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Yes I’ve told them that this is serious and having a criminal record could affect their visa and career prospects. Maybe that’s being a bit dramatic but I guess better to scare them off trying again. So I guess what I’m asking is TfL/Southeastern would not look to prosecute based on CCTV evidence alone? As I have provided names and addresses to TfL customer service.

It depends who you are dealing with - and I appreciate that, at this stage, you don't know.

TfL's usual approach is to prosecute. But Southeastern may threaten prosecution, but would probably settle out of court (which by my understanding would have no impact on your relative's visa position).

But as I have said above, it's unlikely that this will go any further. You and your relative need to keep an eye out for letters or emails from the railway or TfL (come back to us urgently if you get anything as we may be able to make sensible suggestions) but if you don't hear anything you probably have nothing to worry about.

 

[Hadders]

TfL are not going to trawl CCTV over a single missed touch-in.

 

[AlterEgo]

Nothing will happen. Thousands of touch ins are missed every day and corrected by calling up.

 

[island]

Yes I’ve told them that this is serious and having a criminal record could affect their visa and career prospects. Maybe that’s being a bit dramatic but I guess better to scare them off trying again. So I guess what I’m asking is TfL/Southeastern would not look to prosecute based on CCTV evidence alone? As I have provided names and addresses to TfL customer service.

As numerous people have already stated, nothing is going to come of this beyond the passenger being charged the failed inspection and/or unstarted journey fees.

 

[locomoto]

So I guess I shouldn’t contact anyone at the moment? Do TfL ever share information like this with Rail companies such as Southeastern?

 

[AlterEgo]

Don't do anything, this is a completely elementary matter. No, TfL will not report a missing tap to Southeastern.

Nothing is going to happen.