Very heavy fine for first time offence

[steffyweffy87]

I will keep this short.
Daughter at University in London.
Brother from Liverpool went to visit.

Daughter has a student railcard and thought it clever to purchase return ticket for brother on trainline app with student railcard discount applied.

Brother had ticket controlled on train and obviously could not produce railcard.

Now daughter received the below email from Avanti at the email her railcard is registered to.

Firstly there seems to be some mistake in terms of identity, as email is addressed to daughter, sent to daughter email, but is clearly directed at brother.
Secondly £420 fine (£170 full fare + £250) seems extremely excessive.

Means to pay such large amount from any member if the family within 14days very limited. Anything we can do to overturn this or at least get fine reduced?

Thank you all very much in advance for any help or advice.

 

[AlterEgo]

It's quite simple: the email, addressed to her, is wrong. No, she wasn't stopped.

She should reply simply stating she was not stopped, because that is true. Make no other comment. She has committed no offence.

Too bad for them that they don't seem to have the actual traveller's details! The writer of the email doesn't even know the difference between "sort" and "sought".

 

[furlong]

The amount requested sounds preposterously high to me too. Could they really justify that figure as the actual sum of money needed to put the company back into the position it would have been in if the passenger had not cheated? What was the actual ticket price paid? Under criminal law, which they are using, the starting point should surely be repaying the discount together with the actual costs they incurred dealing with what sounds like a simple matter.

 

[Hadders]

We don't see many cases involving Avanti on here but £250 in admin fees seems very steep for what, based on what we know so far, is a straightforward case.

I'm wondering if there's a bit more to this than what we know. Clearly an invalid ticket was not presented during a ticket inspection on the train. Normally with Avanti the Train Manager would ask the person to pay for a new ticket - was this offered? If so was it declined? What details were given to the Train Manager?

 

[Cuthbert]

Not saying this is what happened.
But the brother might have refused details and left the service. The Train Manager on board only has a scan of the ticket.

 

[steffyweffy87]

We don't see many cases involving Avanti on here but £250 in admin fees seems very steep for what, based on what we know so far, is a straightforward case.

I'm wondering if there's a bit more to this than what we know. Clearly an invalid ticket was not presented during a ticket inspection on the train. Normally with Avanti the Train Manager would ask the person to pay for a new ticket - was this offered? If so was it declined? What details were given to the Train Manager?

No details were given to the train manager except « my sister bought the ticket for me » and he did not offer to purchase another ticket - just said a fine would be sent

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Jan 2025 ==

The amount requested sounds preposterously high to me too. Could they really justify that figure as the actual sum of money needed to put the company back into the position it would have been in if the passenger had not cheated? What was the actual ticket price paid? Under criminal law, which they are using, the starting point should surely be repaying the discount together with the actual costs they incurred dealing with what sounds like a simple matter.

The discounted fare paid was £32 - paying the difference between that maximum ticket price (£170) seems more appropriate.

 

[Snow1964]

Just to be clear buying tickets is not an offence, travelling without a valid ticket is.

Your daughter did not travel, she is not liable. Should politely reply back saying although she bought the ticket, she did not travel, and thus it could not be her who was stopped. Don't say anything else (not obliged to incriminate someone else eg her brother). It is good idea to add a sentence asking them to confirm matter is now closed.

One thing we need to be clear of (please advise), is if your daughter didn't travel, did she subsequently try and claim a refund for the ticket. If ticket was both scanned and a refund claimed then might be the source of the settlement offer in lieu of investigation into wrongdoing. If she did try and claim a ticket refund then please say so, because different reply might be appropriate (others will add their views soon).
.

 

[transportphoto]

It's quite simple: the email, addressed to her, is wrong. No, she wasn't stopped.

She should reply simply stating she was not stopped, because that is true. Make no other comment. She has committed no offence.

Too bad for them that they don't seem to have the actual traveller's details! The writer of the email doesn't even know the difference between "sort" and "sought".

Agreed with this. This feels like the best course of action.

 

[some bloke]

She is, unsurprisingly, guilty of an offence, in this case under byelaw 22 even if a fraud prosecution is impossible or unlikely.

Railway byelaws

Explains what the railway byelaws are, why they have been made and how they can be enforced and interpreted.

www.gov.uk

If she says it wasn't her who was stopped, it might seem sensible for them to reply that they suspect her of an offence, and request an explanation.

She can ask the student union if they can provide some free legal advice from a solicitor, though most will not have specialist knowledge of either railway law or how train companies operate.

 

[Adam Williams]

She is, unsurprisingly, guilty of an offence

She didn't step foot on a train or station property. Have you read the thread?

 

[methecooldude]

She didn't step foot on a train or station property. Have you read the thread?

She is still guilty of byelaw 22. Have you read the Byelaws?

 

[Bletchleyite]

She is still guilty of byelaw 22. Have you read the Byelaws?

For reference this is:

22. Fares offences committed on behalf of another person​

No person shall:

1. buy a ticket on behalf of another intending to enable another person to travel without having paid the correct fare
2. transfer or produce a ticket on behalf of another person intending to enable that other person to travel without having paid the correct fare

It would appear she is indeed guilty of this, though proving the intent part could be difficult as it is a very easy thing to do accidentally (buy a ticket for someone else forgetting to take the discount off).

 

[Adam Williams]

For reference this is:



It would appear she is indeed guilty of this, though proving the intent part could be difficult as it is a very easy thing to do accidentally (buy a ticket for someone else forgetting to take the discount off).

I don't think the intent is made out at all, it's certainly not clear from the initial post that this was intentional. I read it as more of a "she did something that wasn't smart [forgetting to remove the discount]" rather than "she thought it'd be a clever way to save money".

She is, unsurprisingly, guilty of an offence

She is still guilty of byelaw 22. Have you read the Byelaws?

This is somewhat off-topic, but to make a general point: If you're going to link to a document with many parts, quoting the part you are trying to argue in your post is probably sensible. The fragment anchor that was chosen to link to "#travel-and-fares-1" points at the top of Byelaw 17!

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don't think the intent is made out at all, it's certainly not clear from the initial post that this was intentional. I read it as more of a "she did something that wasn't smart [forgetting to remove the discount]".

I suppose it comes down to whether the Court would interpret the intent as being to purchase a discounted ticket that she knew he wasn't entitled to, or if it was enough that she intended to buy him a ticket even if proving she intended to get the discount for him would be difficult or impossible. I think this has come up before in other areas.

 

[AlterEgo]

She is, unsurprisingly, guilty of an offence, in this case under byelaw 22 even if a fraud prosecution is impossible or unlikely.

No, those are intent-based offences where she has to intend the other person to commit the offence, and deliberately enable them to do so.

If she simply shuts up the TOC will have no evidence of such intent.

If she says it wasn't her who was stopped, it might seem sensible for them to reply that they suspect her of an offence, and request an explanation.

No comment and ignore them. It will go away.

 

[steffyweffy87]

Just to be clear buying tickets is not an offence, travelling without a valid ticket is.

Your daughter did not travel, she is not liable. Should politely reply back saying although she bought the ticket, she did not travel, and thus it could not be her who was stopped. Don't say anything else (not obliged to incriminate someone else eg her brother). It is good idea to add a sentence asking them to confirm matter is now closed.

One thing we need to be clear of (please advise), is if your daughter didn't travel, did she subsequently try and claim a refund for the ticket. If ticket was both scanned and a refund claimed then might be the source of the settlement offer in lieu of investigation into wrongdoing. If she did try and claim a ticket refund then please say so, because different reply might be appropriate (others will add their views soon).
.

She didn’t try and claim for a refund. She did however supply her brother with a screenshot of her railcard which is what he produced to the train manager.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Jan 2025 ==

No, those are intent-based offences where she has to intend the other person to commit the offence, and deliberately enable them to do so.

If she simply shuts up the TOC will have no evidence of such intent.


No comment and ignore them. It will go away.

Thanks for your comments. If it is just ignored doesn’t she run the risk of the penalty getting bigger and a court summons?
She did supply her brother with the ticket (bought in her debit card) and a screenshot of her railcard.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Jan 2025 ==

For reference this is:



It would appear she is indeed guilty of this, though proving the intent part could be difficult as it is a very easy thing to do accidentally (buy a ticket for someone else forgetting to take the discount off).

She did supply him with a screenshot of her railcard too which he did in fact produce to the controller

 

[Bletchleyite]

She didn’t try and claim for a refund. She did however supply her brother with a screenshot of her railcard which is what he produced to the train manager.

In which case the intent element of the offence noted above is clearly made out. Very, very stupid thing to do.

Given this she is probably best paying up. A Court fine will very likely be higher. If he too gets a settlement offer for his offence he should probably pay it too.

 

[Adam Williams]

Surely the Railcard has a photograph on it? Genuinely curious as to how she expected this would work?

 

[AlterEgo]

Thanks for your comments. If it is just ignored doesn’t she run the risk of the penalty getting bigger and a court summons?
She did supply her brother with the ticket (bought in her debit card) and a screenshot of her railcard.

Ok, you didn't mention that, that is clearly an offence and evidence of intent. She should try to settle the matter immediately.

 

[steffyweffy87]

Hi all and thank you for your comments - could you please let me know if you think the below is an appropriate and acceptable response from the daughter:

Dear Lucy,





I am writing in response to your letter regarding the travel incident on 28/11/2024. I would like to clarify the circumstances surrounding this matter and request your consideration regarding the settlement terms.





I purchased the ticket in question but did not travel on that day. Instead, I gave the ticket to my brother, unaware that the railcard discount had been applied. Unfortunately, he was also unaware that he was not permitted to travel using a ticket purchased with my railcard until informed by the Train Manager. I acknowledge that this was a mistake on my part, and I fully understand the importance of adhering to rail travel policies.





I would like to settle this matter and am willing to pay the full price of a Standard Anytime Single ticket to resolve it out of court. However, I would like to respectfully request whether the £250 administrative fee could be reconsidered or reduced. This was an honest mistake and misunderstanding, and I have never previously committed any travel-related offence.





Additionally, as I am a student based in London, I would like to request an extension or installment plan for the payment if possible. I would appreciate any flexibility you could provide in this regard.





Please let me know if my request can be considered and the next steps I should take. Thank you for your time and understanding.

 

[Egg Centric]

Hi all and thank you for your comments - could you please let me know if you think the below is an appropriate and acceptable response from the daughter:

Dear Lucy,





I am writing in response to your letter regarding the travel incident on 28/11/2024. I would like to clarify the circumstances surrounding this matter and request your consideration regarding the settlement terms.





I purchased the ticket in question but did not travel on that day. Instead, I gave the ticket to my brother, unaware that the railcard discount had been applied. Unfortunately, he was also unaware that he was not permitted to travel using a ticket purchased with my railcard until informed by the Train Manager. I acknowledge that this was a mistake on my part, and I fully understand the importance of adhering to rail travel policies.





I would like to settle this matter and am willing to pay the full price of a Standard Anytime Single ticket to resolve it out of court. However, I would like to respectfully request whether the £250 administrative fee could be reconsidered or reduced. This was an honest mistake and misunderstanding, and I have never previously committed any travel-related offence.





Additionally, as I am a student based in London, I would like to request an extension or installment plan for the payment if possible. I would appreciate any flexibility you could provide in this regard.





Please let me know if my request can be considered and the next steps I should take. Thank you for your time and understanding.

Did the railcard screenshot have your daughter's photo on it or was it edited to show your son? If the latter then it's incredibly difficult to claim this was an honest mistake.

 

[FenMan]

Hi all and thank you for your comments - could you please let me know if you think the below is an appropriate and acceptable response from the daughter:

Dear Lucy,





I am writing in response to your letter regarding the travel incident on 28/11/2024. I would like to clarify the circumstances surrounding this matter and request your consideration regarding the settlement terms.





I purchased the ticket in question but did not travel on that day. Instead, I gave the ticket to my brother, unaware that the railcard discount had been applied. Unfortunately, he was also unaware that he was not permitted to travel using a ticket purchased with my railcard until informed by the Train Manager. I acknowledge that this was a mistake on my part, and I fully understand the importance of adhering to rail travel policies.





I would like to settle this matter and am willing to pay the full price of a Standard Anytime Single ticket to resolve it out of court. However, I would like to respectfully request whether the £250 administrative fee could be reconsidered or reduced. This was an honest mistake and misunderstanding, and I have never previously committed any travel-related offence.





Additionally, as I am a student based in London, I would like to request an extension or installment plan for the payment if possible. I would appreciate any flexibility you could provide in this regard.





Please let me know if my request can be considered and the next steps I should take. Thank you for your time and understanding.

In post 16 you state: "She did however supply her brother with a screenshot of her railcard which is what he produced to the train manager."

I fail to see how the this statement squares with this section in your draft letter:

I gave the ticket to my brother, unaware that the railcard discount had been applied. Unfortunately, he was also unaware that he was not permitted to travel using a ticket purchased with my railcard until informed by the Train Manager.

??????

 

[steffyweffy87]

Did the railcard screenshot have your daughter's photo on it or was it edited to show your son? If the latter then it's incredibly difficult to claim this was an honest mistake.

It just had the daughter’s picture on it, just a genuine screenshot of the railcard, not an edit/photoshop

 

[John R]

I can’t see how what you have written is true, given what you have just told us about the screenshot of a railcard with your daughter’s photo on it. Obviously it would not be valid for him. And we always advise people to tell the truth when responding to these letters.

 

[steffyweffy87]

In post 16 you state: "She did however supply her brother with a screenshot of her railcard which is what he produced to the train manager."

I fail to see how the this statement squares with this section in your draft letter:


??????

Would having « forgotten » that the railcard discount had been applied be more suitable? Then I guess still need to justify why he was in possession of a screenshot of the railcard…….

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Jan 2025 ==

I can’t see how what you have written is true, given what you have just told us about the screenshot of a railcard with your daughter’s photo on it. Obviously it would not be valid for him. And we always advise people to tell the truth when responding to these letters.

I don’t disagree with you - silly and oblivious children getting caught out - they didn’t know better. I just think a £250 admin fee is extortionate.

 

[John R]

Would having « forgotten » that the railcard discount had been applied be more suitable? Then I guess still need to justify why he was in possession of a screenshot of the railcard…….

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Jan 2025 ==

Exactly. You’ve answered your own question. It’s still not true, and the investigator reading it will know that too.

£250 is indeed a high admin fee, but under the circumstances you e described, trying to garner sympathy that it is unjustifiably high is unlikely to be successful, and I think you are best advised to pay up.

 

[some bloke]

Wouldn't simply paying up be under false pretences, that she was the person stopped?

She did however supply her brother with a screenshot of her railcard which is what he produced to the train manager.

That explains the Fraud Act reference (which is not to say they'd actually prosecute for fraud).

If it was a mistake, why did you say she thought it was clever?

 

[Peter Sarf]

There are two parts to the issue here.

1) Travelling with the incorrect ticket - cost/fine £171.30.

2) Committing a fraud by supplying and/or using information to enable the ticket to be fraudulently used - cost unknown.

Now the email says that paying up will prevent any further criminal proceedings.
BUT is that referring to part 1 or both parts ?.
Paying up for part 1 could open the door to part 2 I wonder. In which case sister will be asked for brothers personal details.

Also are there really two people committing offences here (sister and brother) ?.

But I would suggest as far as the current fine+costs goes the current perpetrator (brother) does not have a leg to stand on. Pay up but maybe ask for more time to pay some now and the rest in instalments.

It occurs to me that you should consider seeking legal advice in case the £421.30 is in fact just the tip of the iceberg.

I am not a legal expert and all the above is just what occurs to me using common sense.

 

[some bloke]

he was also unaware that he was not permitted to travel using a ticket purchased with my railcard

Why should they believe that?

 

[gray1404]

At this point Avanti have sent an email to a female thinking it has gone to the male who travelled and their train manager spoke to who didn't have a valid ticket and was using their sister's Railcard (as stated in the email). Avanti are clearly after the traveller here. They do not have the travellers details and unknowingly to them they have sent the email to the wrong person. The email is not intended for the sister and that is not who Avanti are after.