Where do they get the address confirmation from?

[orpine]

Quite a few months ago I was penalty fared (happily I won the appeal) - I paid the £20 with cash on the spot.

On the form they asked for the address which I filled in. Because I paid at the time they didn't confirm my address but I remember the RPI saying they could. I note reading some of the other posts here that address confirmation is fairly normal.

So my question - what source do they use to confirm the address? Electoral roll? Credit Card services? Something else?

I ask because if it ever happens again and they actually want to confirm my address - well I try to minimise the number of such lists I'm on, so what'll happen if (ideally) I'm not on the list?
Also, what happens if/when the confirmation list is wrong? There must be false negatives (people showing as not being at the address given, even though they are). Do they just not let the passenger go?

(Note - I don't carry any form of ID either.)

 

[maniacmartin]

They get it from the unedited electoral roll.

 

[island]

I understand they use credit reference agencies, who in turn have access to the unedited electoral roll.

 

[87 027]

As of June 2014 the Electoral Registration Transformation Programme will introduce individual registration to replace the current method of one person confirming details on behalf of the entire household:

https://www.gov.uk/transformation/register-to-vote

"ERTP will transform the electoral registration process by introducing Individual Electoral Registration (IER). Instead of one person in a household supplying the details of all people living at the same address (which can result in fraud and errors), IER will require people to register individually."

 

[paddington]

As of June 2014 the Electoral Registration Transformation Programme will introduce individual registration to replace the current method of one person confirming details on behalf of the entire household:

Can't wait, stupid council never posted us a form this year, and the worker who came around wouldn't let me make any changes! Had to force the council to send a new form and post it back to them...

 

[orpine]

As someone who doesn't like to be on the electoral roll (for reasons that are beyond the scope of this forum ), and hasn't been on it most of his life, what happens if/when I get penaltied again and this time they do try and check up?

 

[DeeGee]

As someone who doesn't like to be on the electoral roll (for reasons that are beyond the scope of this forum ), and hasn't been on it most of his life, what happens if/when I get penaltied again and this time they do try and check up?

But you are legally obliged to return voter information, and as of next year, you'll be doing it as an individual, rather than a household. Therefore failure to respond will leave you liable to a penalty of £1000.

Therefore, I'd imagine that you'll be appearing on the register.

Of course, you could return your individual registration form and declare yourself ineligible to vote.

In which case, if you are actually qualified to vote (Over 18, permanently resident in the UK and a citizen of UK, EU or some Commonwealth Countries) and have supplied false information, you'll be liable for a penalty of £5000.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

As someone who doesn't like to be on the electoral roll (for reasons that are beyond the scope of this forum ), and hasn't been on it most of his life, what happens if/when I get penaltied again and this time they do try and check up?

There are a host of other ways of verifying details, including registered addresses of contract mobile phones, postal service records, purchases of goods and services which require your address, lots of which the debt collectors (the firms the TOCS use are debt collection agencies) seem to have access to.

 

[michael769]

As someone who doesn't like to be on the electoral roll (for reasons that are beyond the scope of this forum ), and hasn't been on it most of his life, what happens if/when I get penaltied again and this time they do try and check up?

The police may be called and you could be detained until such a time as they are able to satisfy themselves as to your identity.

The primary source for identity checks is CIFAS.

 

[island]

As someone who doesn't like to be on the electoral roll (for reasons that are beyond the scope of this forum ), and hasn't been on it most of his life, what happens if/when I get penaltied again and this time they do try and check up?

It is an offence not to be on the electoral roll.

 

[WSW]

They get it from the unedited electoral roll.

Then that fact, presumably, is made clear to the passenger when asked for their "address"? If not, then it's no fault of the passenger if the address does not show up on the "confirmation" process.

Steve

 

[CyrusWuff]

It is an offence not to be on the electoral roll.

Not quite. It's an offence not to respond to the canvas. Of course, if you're not on the Electoral Roll you may find it difficult to obtain any form of credit, which includes utilities...

 

[andrewkeith5]

There are a host of other ways of verifying details, including registered addresses of contract mobile phones, postal service records, purchases of goods and services which require your address, lots of which the debt collectors (the firms the TOCS use are debt collection agencies) seem to have access to.

In fact, anything that requires a credit check will give the credit reference agencies your address to be compared with your 'known' address list - that includes current accounts (even without an overdraft), insurance (quotes will often log a search to check your address too), mobile phone contracts, extended warranties for electricals, etc. If the police get involved, then just about anything can be used - drivers licence database, passport database etc.

Also bear in mind any time you don't check the box to say your details cannot be passed on (even accidentally) under DPA means that company can sell/give your data to a credit referencing agency or debt collector (or anyone, tbh).

Or they could go to the account you used to purchase your train tickets and look at your payment/delivery addresses, all of which would theoretically count as known addresses for you...

 

[34D]

Not quite. It's an offence not to respond to the canvas. Of course, if you're not on the Electoral Roll you may find it difficult to obtain any form of credit, which includes utilities...

Not utilities I don't think

 

[island]

Not quite. It's an offence not to respond to the canvas.

Same difference.

As for utilities, while you can't be denied a gas or electricity account (possibly excluding situations where you have had a previous bad debt), if you have a poor credit rating you may be required to have a prepayment meter. And not being on the electoral roll will reduce your credit rating, but you could have other factors that increase it.

 

[maniacmartin]

If you have moved house since the last canvas then you may well not be there. Also if you're not old enough to vote or if you have multiple addresses.

 

[richw]

I have never been on an electoral register until last year. Didn't realise it was an offence.

They obtain the address details from credit reference agencies I understand, if you have any credit facilities, utilities, contract mobile phones, electoral register, bank accounts, council tax, or loans they can verify your address. (This list is not extensive I'm looking at what's showing on my credit report I've in front of me). As long as you have one of these at your address you provide, they'll be able to verify your address.

As a side question the DPA act requires explicit content to access this information from the subject, or does this not apply where an offence has occurred?

 

[island]

As a side question the DPA act requires explicit content to access this information from the subject, or does this not apply where an offence has occurred?

It is a common myth that the Data Protection Act says organizations processing personal data need consent of the data subject. I suggest you read schedule 2 to the Data Protection Act 1998 which lists all of the valid reasons for processing data, just one of which is needed. Consent is there, but two other valid options which would apply here are when the processing is necessary for the administration of justice or when the processing is necessary for the purposes of legitimate interests pursued by the data controller.

 

[cjp]

The police may be called and you could be detained until such a time as they are able to satisfy themselves as to your identity.

The primary source for identity checks is CIFAS.

To save other people searching:

from Companies House :-

Previous Names:
Date of change Previous Name
02/05/2000 CREDIT INDUSTRY FRAUD AVOIDANCE SYSTEM

 

[swj99]

..............Because I paid at the time they didn't confirm my address but I remember the RPI saying they could. I note reading some of the other posts here that address confirmation is fairly normal.

It's up to the RPI if they want to check or validate the details, but 23 (1) of the railway byelaws simply says,

Name and address
Any person reasonably suspected by an authorised person of breaching or
attempting to breach any of these Byelaws shall give his name and address
when asked by an authorised person

There is no mention of any requirement that a person is under any obligation to produce evidence of these details, so it would seen that once they have provided them, they have satisfied this requirement, whether the authorised person believes the information to be true or not.

 

[richw]

It is a common myth that the Data Protection Act says organizations processing personal data need consent of the data subject. I suggest you read schedule 2 to the Data Protection Act 1998 which lists all of the valid reasons for processing data, just one of which is needed. Consent is there, but two other valid options which would apply here are when the processing is necessary for the administration of justice or when the processing is necessary for the purposes of legitimate interests pursued by the data controller.

Thanks that answered the question, as I suspected for the administration of justice,

 

[Flamingo]

Of course, if the OP wants to know how the TOC can confirm their address, the TOC simply need to check the refund claims submitted...

Regarding passengers requiring a UFN, if (as the OP says they do not) they say they do not carry ANY ID, then I go from asking them for their name and address, to asking them to leave the train at the next convenient opportunity where one of my revenue colleagues or BTP can play silly buggers with them for as long as it takes the Revenue (or BTP) to get bored. Some of them have a very high boredom threshold...

 

[CallySleeper]

Purely out of curiosity, what happens if out of simplicity I give a correspondence address to an RPI, i.e. one in which I am living at for the majority of time but one which my bank account, phone etc is not registered at? If they can't link my name to that address, could I still get done for providing false details?

 

[scotsman]

Purely out of curiosity, what happens if out of simplicity I give a correspondence address to an RPI, i.e. one in which I am living at for the majority of time but one which my bank account, phone etc is not registered at? If they can't link my name to that address, could I still get done for providing false details?

I imagine that if there's nothing to link you to that address, then yes, they may consider that enough to open a bylaw case against you for providing false details.

A correspondance address would probably check out, as your mail will have gone there, so various organisations will have shared it as on your recrod.

However, should a case against you be opened, the defence would presumably be you turning up in court with several forms of ID and stacks of mail sent to that address recently.

 

[richw]

Purely out of curiosity, what happens if out of simplicity I give a correspondence address to an RPI, i.e. one in which I am living at for the majority of time but one which my bank account, phone etc is not registered at? If they can't link my name to that address, could I still get done for providing false details?

I'd think this is the case with many students, everything registered to parents address, but living 3-4 months at a time away from home. I know when I was in student houses I left everything that could identify myself at my parents address for security with only things of low importance directing to my student houses

 

[cuccir]

Purely out of curiosity, what happens if out of simplicity I give a correspondence address to an RPI, i.e. one in which I am living at for the majority of time but one which my bank account, phone etc is not registered at? If they can't link my name to that address, could I still get done for providing false details?

I'm sure this has come up on here before? I seem to recall the conclusion at the time was that as long as you are contactable and will receive correspondence at an address, that's fine: the offence is to give false details, not giving details which a particular system cannot identify.

Of course, you can expect further questioning if they can't link your name to an address and, even if the explanation is innocent, might lead to further investigation.

 

[island]

Purely out of curiosity, what happens if out of simplicity I give a correspondence address to an RPI, i.e. one in which I am living at for the majority of time but one which my bank account, phone etc is not registered at? If they can't link my name to that address, could I still get done for providing false details?

If the address is one at which you can be reached and found, then it is not a false address. However, if the database checks do not pull up a match, there may be further questioning or police involvement.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I'm sure this has come up on here before? I seem to recall the conclusion at the time was that as long as you are contactable and will receive correspondence at an address, that's fine

You recall correctly.
Investigators are used to having temporary addresses which do not immediately correspond when checked, and then following explanations from the passenger, manage to confirm the validity of the address. However, this does seem to put the matter into a slow-track process, which can keep the passenger in a state of suspence for a number of weeks.

: the offence is to give false details, not giving details which a particular system cannot identify.

Yes.

. . . the railway byelaws simply says, . . . .

There is no mention of any requirement that a person is under any obligation to produce evidence of these details, so it would seen that once they have provided them, they have satisfied this requirement, whether the authorised person believes the information to be true or not.

It is the Regulation of Railways Act S.5.3(c) which an Inspector would want to be satisfied has not been breached : "Having failed to pay his fare, gives in reply to a request by an officer of a railway company a false name or address,"

 

[orpine]

Of course, if the OP wants to know how the TOC can confirm their address, the TOC simply need to check the refund claims submitted...

I often put delay compensation claims in a false name but valid address. I figure they don't actually need my name - they have my ticket to prove I travelled.

Regarding passengers requiring a UFN, if (as the OP says they do not) they say they do not carry ANY ID, then I go from asking them for their name and address, to asking them to leave the train at the next convenient opportunity where one of my revenue colleagues or BTP can play silly buggers with them for as long as it takes the Revenue (or BTP) to get bored. Some of them have a very high boredom threshold...

That seems like borderline harrassment. Especially when someone earlier quoted a byelaw that says no ID is required. This isn't wartime Britain ("Papers Please!")

 

[b0b]

It is the Regulation of Railways Act S.5.3(c) which an Inspector would want to be satisfied has not been breached : "Having failed to pay his fare, gives in reply to a request by an officer of a railway company a false name or address,"

A bit confused here, surely the Inspector has to have suspicion of a false address, not lack of proof of a non-false address? An address that doesn't immediately "check out" doesn't prove anything about its falseness.