Travel fraud investigation

[ella98]

Hi everyone,

On 17/06/24, I was on the train from Northampton to Watford junction. I had to change in Milton Keynes central. Just before Milton Keynes central, staff asked to check my ticket. He did then requested to see rail card. He told me my railcard was expired and I could get fined on the journey if someone else checked my ticket so I should buy another ticket which I did immediately and a few days later I renewed my rail card and never used that rail card again.

Today I received an email from Digital Fraud team which I will attach screenshots. I’ve been thinking since I received this email and I realised my previous rail card expired in July 2023 and I’ve bought 7 tickets since then using that rail card. I had just moved to the uk when I bought my rail card because a friend told me to but I didn’t realise how important this was and just forgot to renew it. I read threads from here and the advice helped me trace my all my tickets back. I am not sure how to respond to this email whether to only address the incident from 17/06/24?

Please I need help and would be looking forward to responses, thank you.

 

[dciuk]

Is this the first comunication you have received regarding this as the incident happened over 6 months ago, it limits the action the railway can take and if the on board staff sold you a valid ticket for that incident, I would not have thought they should be querying that any further. Have you made purchases since then with a railcard discount and if so, did you hold a valid railcard at the time of travel on those tickets?

 

[island]

If you have not committed any ticket offences in the last 6 months they won't be able to prosecute you for them.

They can in theory prosecute for fraud which doesn't have this time limit, but 1) they virtually never do and 2) they would need to prove you intended to commit a fraud. They don't have any evidence of that at present. They are hoping you will give them some, or failing that, that they can extract a settlement from you.

Accordingly, assuming you have not committed any ticket offences since last August, my advice would be either to ignore the correspondence, or to reply in very brief terms such as
"Dear ____
I acknowledge receipt of your email. I have no comment to make regarding the matters you raise.
Regards
_____"

 

[ella98]

Thank you for your response. Yes this happened 17/06/24 and I received the email today. I bought another valid ticket on the trainline app from Milton Keynes to Watford junction. And I renewed my railcard so yes I’ve held a valid railcard on all tickets since then.

 

[AlterEgo]

Desperate Hail Mary from West Midlands here, who have one of the most lazy and feckless “fraud investigation” teams. Do not respond to their borderline illiterate email for the reasons @island outlines. They’re bad at their job and very stupid and you are not here to dig them out of a hole. They had their six months.

Don’t respond.

 

[Haywain]

They had their six months.

And even then the matter had been resolved on the train! They really are quite poor at this.

 

[jumble]

Desperate Hail Mary from West Midlands here, who have one of the most lazy and feckless “fraud investigation” teams. Do not respond to their borderline illiterate email for the reasons @island outlines. They’re bad at their job and very stupid and you are not here to dig them out of a hole. They had their six months.

Don’t respond.

Nothing changes
Post 20 claims they are former RPIs who you would expect might know the law

Digital fraud team

Hi! Recently, I was getting a train for which I believed I had purchased a ticket for and as my train station has broken barriers I walked through without checking my Trainline app, after I got on the train I checked my app and realised my purchase hadn’t gone through so I immediately brought...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[Hadders]

Frankly this is appalling from WMR.

The initial incident was regularised by @ella98 being allowed to purchase a new ticket. It would have been better if this had been sold by the guard on the train rather than the OP purchasing via the Trainline app but that's probably splitting hairs.

Next, WMR then decide to conduct a data-trawl and discover other journeys might've been made with an expired railcard. Now, purchasing tickets is not illegal but using them illegally is. WMR have no evidence that the tickets identified in the data trawl were purchased were used incorrectly. We do regularly see train companies doing this sort of thing but this is normally done when the train company is investigating the offence for which they have been caught and the train company can always prosecute this original offence if the passenger doesn't play ball. Of course, in this case they can't prosecute the original offence because it was regularised by the sale of a new ticket.

Finally, if WMR want to prosecute they must lay papers before the court within six months. They are out of time to do so. There is always the threat of a fraud prosecution but I've never seen a prosecution for fraud concerning railway ticketing in al the years I've been on this forum.

As for next steps, I would be tempted to simply not reply at all although WMR are likely to send further letters and emails threatening all sorts of things like BTP and prosecution. If @ella98 chooses to engage with WMR they will offer an out of court settlement for the cost of the 7 journeys made with an expired railcard plus an admin fee of around £175. This would give closure and I understand why people might choose to engage, and I would normally recommend this, but given WMR's behaviour I'm not sure I can recommend it.

I do think there are some wider issues here - as the situation was regularised onboard is it right that WMR then conducted a data-trawl based on the ticket scan alone?
Railway prosecutions and the behaviour of train companies has been in the spotlight recently. Train companies expect passengers to follow the correct rules and the law but when it comes to their own behaviour it seems different rules apply.

 

[ella98]

Frankly this is appalling from WMR.

The initial incident was regularised by @ella98 being allowed to purchase a new ticket. It would have been better if this had been sold by the guard on the train rather than the OP purchasing via the Trainline app but that's probably splitting hairs.

Next, WMR then decide to conduct a data-trawl and discover other journeys might've been made with an expired railcard. Now, purchasing tickets is not illegal but using them illegally is. WMR have no evidence that the tickets identified in the data trawl were purchased were used incorrectly. We do regularly see train companies doing this sort of thing but this is normally done when the train company is investigating the offence for which they have been caught and the train company can always prosecute this original offence if the passenger doesn't play ball. Of course, in this case they can't prosecute the original offence because it was regularised by the sale of a new ticket.

Finally, if WMR want to prosecute they must lay papers before the court within six months. They are out of time to do so. There is always the threat of a fraud prosecution but I've never seen a prosecution for fraud concerning railway ticketing in al the years I've been on this forum.

As for next steps, I would be tempted to simply not reply at all although WMR are likely to send further letters and emails threatening all sorts of things like BTP and prosecution. If @ella98 chooses to engage with WMR they will offer an out of court settlement for the cost of the 7 journeys made with an expired railcard plus an admin fee of around £175. This would give closure and I understand why people might choose to engage, and I would normally recommend this, but given WMR's behaviour I'm not sure I can recommend it.

I do think there are some wider issues here - as the situation was regularised onboard is it right that WMR then conducted a data-trawl based on the ticket scan alone?
Railway prosecutions and the behaviour of train companies has been in the spotlight recently. Train companies expect passengers to follow the correct rules and the law but when it comes to their own behaviour it seems different rules apply.

Thank you for your response. I think I’ll wait to see if I hear from them again and I’ll keep everyone updated.

 

[ella98]

Hi everyone, I received another email. How to respond please? Thank you.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Feb 2025 ==

Please note it’s 7 incidents not 8 because I bought another ticket on the train the day the incident happened which I have the proof.

 

[Hadders]

This is all inline with what I said would happen in post #8

Based on what you've told us WMT are out of time to prosecute you int he Magistrates Court. I do think they will continue to send further letters and threats.

 

[Pushpit]

Your options are

1) Ignore the above, say nothing, do not acknowledge, do not call, do not seek clarification. So long as you have held a valid and in-date railcard for the last 6 months, you cannot be prosecuted under the criminal system.

2) Pay up, according to the terms of the email. This will prevent a civil claim being made against you, but I don't think we have seen a civil process from West Midlands. There is a suspicion that TOCs are moving to using Small Claims Courts, but it's a lot more work for them and there are - in my opinion - better protections for the passenger. A civil claim does not give you a criminal record but can, in certain circumstances, make getting credit or a new telephone more difficult. Plus it's possible for the amount claimed to spiral. Both would require you to ignore the process - if you stay on top of the claim and respond to emails (etc) then this bad outcome is unlikely to happen.

3) Pay up purely the missed fares, not using Anytime Singles, but in essence the railcard discounts for the 8 trips in question. That would be, I'm sure, a lot less than £240, corrects the direct loss to West Midlands, and will make it very difficult, if not impossible, for West Midlands to use the the civil court process to pursue you.

4) Offer to pay West Midlands only the equivalent of 6 months railcard fee, so the tightest possible definition of West Midland's losses. More of a gamble, since the Small Claims Court may decide it's not sufficient or correct, but it's in my view arguable. Or you can use this as a counter claim later in the process. But the reason I mention it is that if this scenario had been the other way around I'm quite sure West Midlands would only offer this.

1) is for those with a high ability to take on risk / not easily fazed.
2) is for those who get anxious about this sort of thing.
3) is what I would do.
4) is what I would like to do.

 

[jumble]

Your options are

1) Ignore the above, say nothing, do not acknowledge, do not call, do not seek clarification. So long as you have held a valid and in-date railcard for the last 6 months, you cannot be prosecuted until the criminal system.

2) Pay up, according to the terms of the email. This will prevent a civil claim being made against you, but I don't think we have seen a civil process from West Midlands. There is a suspicion that TOCs are moving to using Small Claims Courts, but it's a lot more work for them and there are - in my opinion - better protections for the passenger. A civil claim does not give you a criminal record but can, in certain circumstances, make getting credit or a new telephone more difficult. Plus it's possible for the amount claimed to spiral. Both would require you to ignore the process - if you stay on top of the claim and respond to emails (etc) then this bad outcome is unlikely to happen.

3) Pay up purely the missed fares, not using Anytime Singles, but in essence the railcard discounts for the 8 trips in question. That would be, I'm sure, a lot less than £240, corrects the direct loss to West Midlands, and will make it very difficult, if not impossible, for West Midlands to use the the civil court process to prosecute you.

4) Offer to pay West Midlands only the equivalent of 6 months railcard fee, so the tightest possible definition of West Midland's losses. More of a gamble, since the Small Claims Court may decide it's not sufficient or correct, but it's in my view arguable. Or you can use this as a counter claim later in the process. But the reason I mention it is that if this scenario had been the other way around I'm quite sure West Midlands would only offer this.

1) is for those with a high ability to take on risk / not easily fazed.
2) is for those who get anxious about this sort of thing.
3) is what I would do.
4) is what I would like to do.

I dont undersatand how WMT would use the civil court to prosecute when they have no evidence whatever that the disputed tickets were not thrown into the nearest dustbin unused.
I suspect that the civil claims mentioned are in cases such as where delay repay has been wrongly claimed, BTP dont want to know and it is clealy provable that the claimant asked for and received money that they were not entitled to have.
In any event if it did go to small claims court then the OP would just have to pay even if found proved and a small amount of fees and the whole matter goes away
My understanding is that the only circumstance that prevents a phone being granted is if the OP does not settle judgement within 30 days
I would really like to hear if any civil claims have actually been made with no proof as above
I personally would be following @AletrEgos advice and do nothing as it is my view that WMT are never going to attend in person a small claims court over a non provable £240 which does not get reported nor sets a precident and therefore has no deterent effect on others

 

[AlterEgo]

Your options are

1) Ignore the above, say nothing, do not acknowledge, do not call, do not seek clarification. So long as you have held a valid and in-date railcard for the last 6 months, you cannot be prosecuted under the criminal system.

2) Pay up, according to the terms of the email. This will prevent a civil claim being made against you, but I don't think we have seen a civil process from West Midlands. There is a suspicion that TOCs are moving to using Small Claims Courts, but it's a lot more work for them and there are - in my opinion - better protections for the passenger. A civil claim does not give you a criminal record but can, in certain circumstances, make getting credit or a new telephone more difficult. Plus it's possible for the amount claimed to spiral. Both would require you to ignore the process - if you stay on top of the claim and respond to emails (etc) then this bad outcome is unlikely to happen.

3) Pay up purely the missed fares, not using Anytime Singles, but in essence the railcard discounts for the 8 trips in question. That would be, I'm sure, a lot less than £240, corrects the direct loss to West Midlands, and will make it very difficult, if not impossible, for West Midlands to use the the civil court process to pursue you.

4) Offer to pay West Midlands only the equivalent of 6 months railcard fee, so the tightest possible definition of West Midland's losses. More of a gamble, since the Small Claims Court may decide it's not sufficient or correct, but it's in my view arguable. Or you can use this as a counter claim later in the process. But the reason I mention it is that if this scenario had been the other way around I'm quite sure West Midlands would only offer this.

1) is for those with a high ability to take on risk / not easily fazed.
2) is for those who get anxious about this sort of thing.
3) is what I would do.
4) is what I would like to do.

I would broadly agree with this. Posters here know that I'd probably choose 1,4,3,2 in order of preference if it were me, but nonetheless this accurately summarises the risks and benefits of each. 2) is spot on - I'd point out that even on the off chance they take you to a civil court to recover any debt they feel owed, having the money saved and ready to pay if you lose means you won't get a CCJ. CCJs only appear if you don't satisfy the debt within a month of the judgment date.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Feb 2025 ==

I dont undersatand how WMT would use the civil court to prosecute when they have no evidence whatever that the disputed tickets were not thrown into the nearest dustbin unused.

Civil claims are decided on the balance of probability, and I think a court would decide that on the balance of probabilities and absent any evidence from the defendant, the tickets were used for travel.

 

[Pushpit]

I dont undersatand how WMT would use the civil court to prosecute when they have no evidence whatever that the disputed tickets were not thrown into the nearest dustbin unused.

I'm sympathetic to the overall message, but just to clarify one aspect: civil courts work not on the criminal standard of "beyond reasonable doubt", where your point above seems to sit, but on "balance of probabilities". So a District Judge may well say "Eight tickets discarded into a dustbin? Really?"

 

[jumble]

I would broadly agree with this. Posters here know that I'd probably choose 1,4,3,2 in order of preference if it were me, but nonetheless this accurately summarises the risks and benefits of each. 2) is spot on - I'd point out that even on the off chance they take you to a civil court to recover any debt they feel owed, having the money saved and ready to pay if you lose means you won't get a CCJ. CCJs only appear if you don't satisfy the debt within a month of the judgment date.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Feb 2025 ==


Civil claims are decided on the balance of probability, and I think a court would decide that on the balance of probabilities and absent any evidence from the defendant, the tickets were used for travel.

True but We dont really know what a court would decide if things ever got that far.

 

[ella98]

Your options are

1) Ignore the above, say nothing, do not acknowledge, do not call, do not seek clarification. So long as you have held a valid and in-date railcard for the last 6 months, you cannot be prosecuted under the criminal system.

2) Pay up, according to the terms of the email. This will prevent a civil claim being made against you, but I don't think we have seen a civil process from West Midlands. There is a suspicion that TOCs are moving to using Small Claims Courts, but it's a lot more work for them and there are - in my opinion - better protections for the passenger. A civil claim does not give you a criminal record but can, in certain circumstances, make getting credit or a new telephone more difficult. Plus it's possible for the amount claimed to spiral. Both would require you to ignore the process - if you stay on top of the claim and respond to emails (etc) then this bad outcome is unlikely to happen.

3) Pay up purely the missed fares, not using Anytime Singles, but in essence the railcard discounts for the 8 trips in question. That would be, I'm sure, a lot less than £240, corrects the direct loss to West Midlands, and will make it very difficult, if not impossible, for West Midlands to use the the civil court process to pursue you.

4) Offer to pay West Midlands only the equivalent of 6 months railcard fee, so the tightest possible definition of West Midland's losses. More of a gamble, since the Small Claims Court may decide it's not sufficient or correct, but it's in my view arguable. Or you can use this as a counter claim later in the process. But the reason I mention it is that if this scenario had been the other way around I'm quite sure West Midlands would only offer this.

1) is for those with a high ability to take on risk / not easily fazed.
2) is for those who get anxious about this sort of thing.
3) is what I would do.
4) is what I would like to do.

Thank you so much for your response. If I were to go with option 3, I’m not sure how to arrive or calculate the railcard discounts. I’ve been going through my booking confirmations and there’s no breakdown of what the railcard discount is.

 

[jfollows]

Thank you so much for your response. If I were to go with option 3, I’m not sure how to arrive or calculate the railcard discounts. I’ve been going through my booking confirmations and there’s no breakdown of what the railcard discount is.

Although I would go with @AlterEgo and ignore this, it’s your choice. To all intents and purposes the railcard discount is one third, so if you add an additional 50% to the discounted fare you will be close enough to the full fare.

 

[John R]

I dont undersatand how WMT would use the civil court to prosecute when they have no evidence whatever that the disputed tickets were not thrown into the nearest dustbin unused.

Unless they were scanned of course...

 

[Pushpit]

Thank you so much for your response. If I were to go with option 3, I’m not sure how to arrive or calculate the railcard discounts. I’ve been going through my booking confirmations and there’s no breakdown of what the railcard discount is.

You can find out the fares accurately, by date of travel, via

Purchase flexible walk-up fares for any British train journey

Purchase flexible single/return tickets & Travelcards – in 3 clicks, at face value with no fees. Every British rail fare shown, railcard discounts included.

www.brfares.com

The 50% idea is good enough, the slight vagueness relates to roundings and getting to the nearest 5p amount. In your example the discount was £11.60, so 8 x £11.60 (assuming they were all the same) = total of £92.80 under option 3 above. There are further complications if there was a minimum fare for that particular trip, if you were on a 16-25 railcard, but hopefully you know about whether that would apply. That's £12, but this being British railways there are yet further complications, that minimum fare does not apply to all trips nor to Advance tickets.

 

[ella98]

You can find out the fares accurately, by date of travel, via

Purchase flexible walk-up fares for any British train journey

Purchase flexible single/return tickets & Travelcards – in 3 clicks, at face value with no fees. Every British rail fare shown, railcard discounts included.

www.brfares.com

The 50% idea is good enough, the slight vagueness relates to roundings and getting to the nearest 5p amount. In your example the discount was £11.60, so 8 x £11.60 (assuming they were all the same) = total of £92.80 under option 3 above. There are further complications if there was a minimum fare for that particular trip, if you were on a 16-25 railcard, but hopefully you know about whether that would apply. That's £12, but this being British railways there are yet further complications, that minimum fare does not apply to all trips nor to Advance tickets.

Thank you for this. I’ve used the link above with my booking confirmations to calculate the rail discount prices for 7 tickets as I bought another ticket for the 8th time which I’ll attach receipts and the rail card purchased after.
I’ll write to them today to offer to pay the rail discounts on all 7 tickets and administration fee in line with option 3.

I appreciate everyone’s contribution, thank you and will keep you updated when I receive a response.

 

[Egg Centric]

Unless they were scanned of course...

But who was using the tickets?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Feb 2025 ==

Thank you for this. I’ve used the link above with my booking confirmations to calculate the rail discount prices for 7 tickets as I bought another ticket for the 8th time which I’ll attach receipts and the rail card purchased after.
I’ll write to them today to offer to pay the rail discounts on all 7 tickets and administration fee in line with option 3.

I appreciate everyone’s contribution, thank you and will keep you updated when I receive a response.

If you're going for option 3 then you don't need to offer any administration fee. Keep it strictly to their so-called loss. Although I agree entirely with @AlterEgo that 1,4,3,2 is the way to go for anyone that isn't e.g. naturally anxious.

 

[ella98]

But who was using the tickets?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Feb 2025 ==



If you're going for option 3 then you don't need to offer any administration fee. Keep it strictly to their so-called loss. Although I agree entirely with @AlterEgo that 1,4,3,2 is the way to go for anyone that isn't e.g. naturally anxious.

Okay, thank you for your response.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Feb 2025 ==

am writing in response to email dated 12/02/2025 regarding the incident on 16/06/2024.

Firstly, I would like to express my sincere apologies for travelling without a railcard, it was not my intention to do so.

The staff advised me to buy a new ticket on the train which I bought immediately and you will find attached the receipt. I also bought a new rail card shortly after to ensure this does not happen again, you will find attached receipt.

I am keen to settle this matter without the need for court action and ready to pay the railcard discounts for the 7 trips which amounts to £81.20.

I would be very grateful if can be settled amicably.

Thank you.

Kind regards.



This is intended response, I would appreciate your feedback very much, thank you.

 

[John R]

But who was using the tickets?

That wasn't the point I was answering...

when they have no evidence whatever that the disputed tickets were not thrown into the nearest dustbin unused.

I'm well aware that who used the tickets is a separate issue, but if it can be established that the tickets were used, it becomes much more difficult for someone to say that it wasn't them, as to prove that they would have to ask someone to commit perjury (on the working assumption that the tickets were indeed used by the OP).

 

[Pushpit]

This is intended response, I would appreciate your feedback very much, thank you.

I think that's good, not least your confirmation that there won't be a repetition. You perhaps want to consider to consider adding some wording along the lines of "This will correct the loss of income sustained by your company by not having an in date railcard". This would go after £81.20. The reason being that if this did go to Small Claims, the rail company cannot seek punitive damages, but can seek damages which repairs the breach of contract. It's a bit more complicated than that, but neither of us are lawyers.

I don't know if you have been issued with a cheque book, but if you have I would be tempted to attach a cheque since the rail company can then decide to cash it or return the cheque. If they return the cheque, well I don't think that will be a good look if they go to court. It's a minor point. I also agree it's wrong for you to offer the admin fee - much later down this path there are several mediation and negotiation stages, so keep that card back. The Digital Team here have to decide whether to accept the £80 loaf or the £390 loaf, knowing they will have to spend a lot of resources to do that, and may end up with a few crumbs.

 

[ella98]

I have now responded to the email and will be awaiting their response.

I’ll keep you updated, thank you very much for all your help.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Feb 2025 ==

Hi everyone,

they finally responded to me today, my offer was ignored they only deducted the cost of the 8th ticket that I bought.

 

[Pushpit]

OK, so this is the crunch point. They can of course escalate it to the Prosecutions Team, who will presumably say "out of time" in terms of a criminal prosecution, which is the case here. Let's bear in mind that this is a digital trawl that they could have done at any point from June onwards. Had they been more efficient they would have a much stronger argument about that approach. Their problem, not yours.

You can ignore this request and follow ups, which I suspect will get more intimidating. You can argue with them, I doubt it will change much since they are presumably on a standard workflow here. You can pay all they are demanding - that would be wrong in my opinion, but it would get rid of the position. You could lop off their admin charges. Finally you could just pay £81.20 to the bank codes provided, then write to them that this is in full and final settlement of the sums that are owed.

If you do this, their only option, as far as I can tell, is to raise a Small Court case claim, and with it almost certainly mandatory dispute resolution if you request it.

 

[AlterEgo]

You should ignore the correspondence.

Now you have acknowledged it you are in a weaker position than before, because you have generated another piece of correspondence which is demanding your attention. I didn't see your draft, but you should absolutely not have acknowledged any debt or wrongdoing in your reply to them, but it is too late now. You have now discovered that they want all of the money, without taking into account what you have already paid, a demand worse than if they just tried to get the money off you in civil court. In fact they don't give a flying toss what you said and didn't even acknowledge it. They wouldn't be able to claim this sum if it went to a civil claim - they can only claim their demonstrated losses, which is the difference in fares, not brand new Anytime fares.

Please ignore them. Keep a couple of hundred quid to one side for the rare chance they take you to a civil claim, and then get on with your life. Do not talk to these people if you don't have to! Don't admit to anything where they don't have any chance of a criminal conviction! They must close down hundreds of these cases a month where people have simply junked the email. This lot can't even write an email in plain English or even send it within six months. They are lazy and stupid. Don't waste your time.

 

[ella98]

Hi everyone, I received this email this morning. Not sure I need to respond or just ignore.

 

[Pushpit]

I regard that as good news. BTP for sure won't do anything. The Prosecution Team - unless they also handle civil claims - can't do much either. I would wait to see if you hear anything more. What would be interesting to know is whether the Digital Team will pass on your offer to pay £81 or not. Interesting to know, but not to the point of asking them! The reason being is that from a corporate perspective by their actions they have lost the opportunity to recover some money rather than none. The Prosecution Team can only send it to a solicitor for the civil claim and your £81 offer gets in the way here.