SWR Investigation Notice

[astj]

Hi all,
A few days ago I received a Notice of Investigation email from South Western Railways.
The email informed me that I was under investigation for an incident back in December, where I had bought a ticket with a 16-17 Railcard. I was stopped at London Waterloo and failed to show the RPO said railcard. He issued me a Travel Irregularity Report and I went on my way.
The email also mentioned that this specific email was not a request for payment but rather an opportunity for me to provide my version of events/any mitigation or explanations before the investigation report is sent to the prosecution team.

Having read a number of posts on this forum about people grappling with Notices of Prosecution, it struck me as odd that I was being informed of the investigation and not just issued with the NoP.

I have two questions for you all:

1) Is this normal or standard practice and am I overthinking things?
2) Would now be the right time to respond with the recommended response of apologising for my actions and offering to pay a full settlement?

Thanks in advance everyone!

 

[SECR 65]

Would you be able to upload the letter with personal details redacted? Especially if it's not the same as other letters people on the forum have recieved.

Have you been travelling with invalid tickets lots in the past? I suspect they may have looked back through your purchase history and identified discrepancies.

Am I right in thinking that this is not a Notice of Intention to Prosecute? I know you said it's not a 'notice of prosecution' - I'm just trying to establish exactly what they've sent.

Does the email mention the specific incident from December or not?

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Hi all,
A few days ago I received a Notice of Investigation email from South Western Railways.
The email informed me that I was under investigation for an incident back in December, where I had bought a ticket with a 16-17 Railcard. I was stopped at London Waterloo and failed to show the RPO said railcard. He issued me a Travel Irregularity Report and I went on my way.
The email also mentioned that this specific email was not a request for payment but rather an opportunity for me to provide my version of events/any mitigation or explanations before the investigation report is sent to the prosecution team.

Having read a number of posts on this forum about people grappling with Notices of Prosecution, it struck me as odd that I was being informed of the investigation and not just issued with the NoP.

I have two questions for you all:

1) Is this normal or standard practice and am I overthinking things?
2) Would now be the right time to respond with the recommended response of apologising for my actions and offering to pay a full settlement?

Thanks in advance everyone!

It would help if you could show us the letter you received (with your personal details hidden) as some of the train companies seem to be making changes to how they do things (e.g. GTR now being open to messages via portal) so it might be that this is something different from what we've seen before.

But broadly speaking, this sounds like a fairly typical first letter from the railway: regardless of what it says, it's your first and best chance to convince them that you won't break the rules again, and you're prepared to pay the train fares you dodged plus the cost of the investigation.

So that's what you need to say in your response. If they have asked specific questions you need to answer those, but it is also your chance to try to convince them that you won't cheat again.

 

[astj]

Would you be able to upload the letter with personal details redacted? Especially if it's not the same as other letters people on the forum have recieved.

Have you been travelling with invalid tickets lots in the past? I suspect they may have looked back through your purchase history and identified discrepancies.

Am I right in thinking that this is not a Notice of Intention to Prosecute? I know you said it's not a 'notice of prosecution' - I'm just trying to establish exactly what they've sent.

Does the email mention the specific incident from December or not?

The email and attached letter I received were both directly from an Investigator at SWR, so I'm apprehensive to post here, but the subject line of the email uses the phrase "Notice of Investigation".
Yeah, I've definitely travelled with invalid tickets before, I suspect you're right, that's what they've done.
Yes, the email does mention the specific incident from December.

 

[SECR 65]

The email and attached letter I received were both directly from an Investigator at SWR, so I'm apprehensive to post here, but the subject line of the email uses the phrase "Notice of Investigation".
Yeah, I've definitely travelled with invalid tickets before, I suspect you're right, that's what they've done.
Yes, the email does mention the specific incident from December.

I understand that you are concerned about sharing more information on here, and that's fair enough and completely your choice. I would, though, suggest that our ability to advise is reduced without the letter or further details about the nature of past journeys. In theory SWR could check on this thread but in practice we haven't seen any instances where that seems to have happened or affected the result of a case. As an example, the template we suggest as a response to NIPs is always almost identical, but the railway almost always settles outside of court. This includes SWR.

If there is a significant history of significant fare evasion, and you are reluctant to share details with us, then you may want to enlist the help of a solicitor, which would obviously come at rather a cost. That said, SWR are normally very happy to settle out of court, so provided you cooperate and follow the advice of forum members, this should be possible.

I suppose what I'm trying to say is that if you are able to share further details on the forum, then we should be able to help you achieve an out of court settlement. But, without us having the whole story, we might not be able to advise as effectively, and consequentially you may need to consider a solicitor.

Without knowing the exact nature of what's behind your case, I will just mention that SWR seem to be already looking through your ticketing history, and they will be able to see everything. They also have access to tap in and tap out data.

It would strike me as slightly unusual for you to have an email about investigation for one ticket without a valid railcard. Therefore, I suspect they've been through your tciketing history and found dozens of tickets from the past also without a valid railcard, and so want to know more from you. In general, try not to incriminate yourself by telling them more than they already know, bearing in mind though that they can see ticketing history if purchased online (rather than physical from a machine or ticket office).

If you simply forgot your railcard or have only done this once then please do let us know because that should mean a simple matter of settling out of court for a small fee with some guidance from the forum.

It would also be worth looking at other threads on the forum regarding railcard issues, if any of these seem similar to your case. You could also search 'SWR notice of investigation' to see if there are any other threads with the same letter.

Apologies for the extensive and possibly rather blunt reply, but I hope some of this is helpful. Do let us know of any further questions because we can still help even without the letter.

 

[astj]

I understand that you are concerned about sharing more information on here, and that's fair enough and completely your choice. I would, though, suggest that our ability to advise is reduced without the letter or further details about the nature of past journeys. In theory SWR could check on this thread but in practice we haven't seen any instances where that seems to have happened or affected the result of a case. As an example, the template we suggest as a response to NIPs is always almost identical, but the railway almost always settles outside of court. This includes SWR.

If there is a significant history of significant fare evasion, and you are reluctant to share details with us, then you may want to enlist the help of a solicitor, which would obviously come at rather a cost. That said, SWR are normally very happy to settle out of court, so provided you cooperate and follow the advice of forum members, this should be possible.

I suppose what I'm trying to say is that if you are able to share further details on the forum, then we should be able to help you achieve an out of court settlement. But, without us having the whole story, we might not be able to advise as effectively, and consequentially you may need to consider a solicitor.

Without knowing the exact nature of what's behind your case, I will just mention that SWR seem to be already looking through your ticketing history, and they will be able to see everything. They also have access to tap in and tap out data.

It would strike me as slightly unusual for you to have an email about investigation for one ticket without a valid railcard. Therefore, I suspect they've been through your tciketing history and found dozens of tickets from the past also without a valid railcard, and so want to know more from you. In general, try not to incriminate yourself by telling them more than they already know, bearing in mind though that they can see ticketing history if purchased online (rather than physical from a machine or ticket office).

If you simply forgot your railcard or have only done this once then please do let us know because that should mean a simple matter of settling out of court for a small fee with some guidance from the forum.

It would also be worth looking at other threads on the forum regarding railcard issues, if any of these seem similar to your case. You could also search 'SWR notice of investigation' to see if there are any other threads with the same letter.

Apologies for the extensive and possibly rather blunt reply, but I hope some of this is helpful. Do let us know of any further questions because we can still help even without the letter.

Here is the email and letter.
As far as fare evasion, I've in one way or another avoided paying the full amount for my commute since June 2025, although I've not incorrectly used a railcard to apply discounts since the cited incident in December.

I commute once a week so that's 46 times since June. The Anytime Single ticket is £10.50 each way, so £21 in total. 46 * 21 = 966.
I can't speak to anything before that as I simply can't recall the specifics of those journeys, except I know I didn't travel between January 25 and June 25.

 

[SECR 65]

Here is the email and letter.
As far as fare evasion, I've in one way or another avoided paying the full amount for my commute since June 2025, although I've not incorrectly used a railcard to apply discounts since the cited incident in December.

I commute once a week so that's 46 times since June. The Anytime Single ticket is £10.50 each way, so £21 in total. 46 * 21 = 966.
I can't speak to anything before that as I simply can't recall the specifics of those journeys, except I know I didn't travel between January 25 and June 25.

Thank you very much for posting this. It will help us to advise. This letter looks familiar - I think I've seen another thread with this before. Clearly they are looking at your history, but you should still be able to settle out of court if you cooperate.

I would suggest that you reply with your details and also apologise for what has happened (only refer to the one incident but don't imply that it hasn't happened before). I reckon that a framework similar to NIP replies might be suitable. It would be good to get other members' opinions of this.

SWR will probably send a list of journeys they consider to be fare evasion, then ask you to give details about the journey and state if you held a valid ticket or not. Then, hopefully you can settle for the cost of the anytime singles, plus an admin fee, which might be a couple of hundred quid.

 

[astj]

Thank you very much for posting this. It will help us to advise. This letter looks familiar - I think I've seen another thread with this before. Clearly they are looking at your history, but you should still be able to settle out of court if you cooperate.

I would suggest that you reply with your details and also apologise for what has happened (only refer to the one incident but don't imply that it hasn't happened before). I reckon that a framework similar to NIP replies might be suitable. It would be good to get other members' opinions of this.

SWR will probably send a list of journeys they consider to be fare evasion, then ask you to give details about the journey and state if you held a valid ticket or not. Then, hopefully you can settle for the cost of the anytime singles, plus an admin fee, which might be a couple of hundred quid.

Thanks for the advice! I'll look to draft a reply this weekend.
If anyone else has advice, it'd be more than welcome

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Thank you very much for posting this. It will help us to advise. This letter looks familiar - I think I've seen another thread with this before. Clearly they are looking at your history, but you should still be able to settle out of court if you cooperate.

I would suggest that you reply with your details and also apologise for what has happened (only refer to the one incident but don't imply that it hasn't happened before). I reckon that a framework similar to NIP replies might be suitable. It would be good to get other members' opinions of this.

SWR will probably send a list of journeys they consider to be fare evasion, then ask you to give details about the journey and state if you held a valid ticket or not. Then, hopefully you can settle for the cost of the anytime singles, plus an admin fee, which might be a couple of hundred quid.

I wouldn't quite go along with this - instead, tune it a little.

The railway know that you fare dodged once (when they caught you at Waterloo) and having gone through your online history they suspect that you have fare dodged on a number of other occasions, because they know that your account was used to buy tickets which you weren't entitled to use. But they don't know if you used them (maybe you bought them for a friend) so they would like you to tell them what you have done.

We won't advise you to lie (that's not so much a moral stance as a practical one: if the railways catch you out in a lie they will be much more likely to take you to court rather than let you settle out of court) but you aren't obliged to reply even if the railway asks you questions.

Instead, it makes sense to see this as a negotiation: the railway wants to get back the money you should have paid (plus the costs of their investigation) and be certain that you will pay the right fare in future: you (I would guess) want to get out of this problem with as few problems as possible, so cheaply and without a criminal record.

In this case, the railway holds most of the cards. In particular, for the time they caught you, they already have everything they need to prosecute you and have you convicted. As above, I assume you don't want a criminal record so you want to avoid going down that route.

That means cooperating - but you don't have to answer questions that haven't been asked. So as well as confirming that you won't do it again, it makes sense to ask the railway which journeys they are interested in.

That puts the ball in their court to say how big the problem is rather than what you are prepared to admit to - and also gives you the chance to check that the journeys they are chasing really were made by you!

 

[Brickz]

You may want to take down the images and black out the reference numbers that are visible still

 

[Haywain]

As far as fare evasion, I've in one way or another avoided paying the full amount for my commute since June 2025, although I've not incorrectly used a railcard to apply discounts since the cited incident in December

This suggests that you are continuing to evade the correct fare in some way. That's not a bright thing to do and you should buy the correct tickets from now on.

 

[astj]

Hi guys,
Just following up with a draft response.

Dear [Investigator]
REF: [Reference Number]
I was stopped by a Revenue Protection Officer at London Waterloo on 18th December 2025. I was unable to produce a valid railcard for my journey and was issued a Travel Irregularity Report. I thanked the Officer for his time, bought a valid ticket for my return journey and went about my day.
Obviously, my actions were foolish, naive, and unbecoming. I deeply regret them and offer my sincerest apologies. I am aware of the severity of my actions and how they negatively impact the rail service and other customers. I will ensure to always purchase correct and valid tickets from now on.

Moving forward, I am happy to help the investigation where I can, so that it may proceed as smoothly as possible for all parties. To do this, may I have a list of other potential inconsistencies you are investigating? If any wrongdoing on my part is found, it would be my desire to settle outside of court, where I would be willing to pay the full, correct fare and any administrative costs incurred by the process.

Yours,
[Name]

 

[30907]

Hi guys,
Just following up with a draft response.

I thanked the Officer for his time, bought a valid ticket for my return journey and went about my day.

I would delete this, to me it suggests you thought nothing of it

Obviously, my actions were foolish, naive and unbecoming. I deeply regret them and offer my sincerest apologies.

Your actions were not just "failing to produce a railcard" - you didn't have one (and I presume weren't entitled to one; that is a serious error of judgement (or plain wrongdoing, if you prefer) not just foolish or naive.

If any wrongdoing on my part is found, it would be my desire to settle outside of court, where I would be willing to pay the full, correct fare and any administrative costs incurred by the process.

Yes, of course you would be willing - but you need to ask if they would be willing to consider settling. You aren't doing them a favour, you want a favour from them.

Hope that helps.

 

[astj]

That does help, @30907 , thanks.

Just on this point

Yes, of course you would be willing - but you need to ask if they would be willing to consider settling. You aren't doing them a favour, you want a favour from them.

How would you go about rephrasing that last sentence to do that?

 

[Fawkes Cat]

That does help, @30907 , thanks.

Just on this point

How would you go about rephrasing that last sentence to do that?

Something like

'I would be grateful if you would consider letting me settle this matter out of court '

 

[Haywain]

If any wrongdoing on my part is found,

It already has been found, and you have pretty much admitted to it.