Advice Only for Greater Anglia - Delay Repay Fraud

[Journeyman]

A lot of the time, I've seen a train was delayed, gone home and waited to see when it all settles down, and travelled later. In working out the delay, I'll check online to see how much I would have been delayed had I taken the first available train after the one I'd intended to catch. No-one seems to have an issue with this, and I've never claimed more than I should by doing it.

 

[alistairlees]

A lot of the time, I've seen a train was delayed, gone home and waited to see when it all settles down, and travelled later. In working out the delay, I'll check online to see how much I would have been delayed had I taken the first available train after the one I'd intended to catch. No-one seems to have an issue with this, and I've never claimed more than I should by doing it.

Is the correct answer.

 

[SteveM70]

A lot of the time, I've seen a train was delayed, gone home and waited to see when it all settles down, and travelled later. In working out the delay, I'll check online to see how much I would have been delayed had I taken the first available train after the one I'd intended to catch. No-one seems to have an issue with this, and I've never claimed more than I should by doing it.

Is the correct answer.

It absolutely is, although I can see why doing this and using a smartcard will create suspicion as the times won’t match

 

[Hadders]

1. I have a season ticket and walk 10mins to the station. I can see that the train I am going to catch and the ones after it for a couple of hours are cancelled as I can look at RealTimeTrains/TOC website/wherever before I leave for the station. By your reckoning I have to go and stand at the station for 2hrs like an utter lemon. I'm going to stay at home until they start running again - is that not a valid DR claim for you?

My view is that is a valid DR claim.

1. If you aren't at the station, you're not giving the TOC an opportunity to reduce the delay, such as using a taxi/bus/stop order*. I think it's a grey area, as I can see how you might choose to stay home to avoid a delay or inconvenience, and perhaps the T&Cs need to be made clearer to remove any ambiguity. Otherwise this is massively open to fraud, as anyone can claim they had a meeting at an odd time or whatever.

The TOC should then reject the claim if they did provide alternative transport. What is absolutely not be acceptable is for the passenger to make a delay repay claim, have the claim paid and then 18 months later the TOC write to the passenger alleging the claim might have been made fraudulently.

 

[PL80]

Delay Repay works mostly on honesty


Why would you agree a settlement with GA if you have only ever claimed in good faith?

Fair question. In short, for a quiet life. I simply cannot provide evidence to back up validity of claims for over a year ago. Whilst Mr Brown-Went-Off-To-Town-On-The-08.21 every day, there's many reasons why my own travel pattern varied; half-day holidays, after-works drinks, doctors appts, the list is endless, and it should not be for GA to assume a claim is fraudulent on that basis. But as I say, I can't prove that, so the lesson here is keep an audit trail.

If I dug my heels in and asked GA to provide proof, would they realistically be able to after all this time? I doubt it. But I don't have the time or energy to go back and forth with GA, and seeking legal advice would not be worth it over such a modest sum, so on balance will cut my losses and move on.

As I said in my original post if I was intent on defrauding GA I just wouldn't buy a ticket.

 

[Journeyman]

It absolutely is, although I can see why doing this and using a smartcard will create suspicion as the times won’t match

Thing is, if asked to elaborate - which I was by SouthEastern on one occasion - I can explain what I've done. They were happy and paid up.

 

[philthetube]

Some users on here are coming across as aggressive. I came on here for advice about the letter and to find out what other people have done. I feel like I have accused of trying to pull a fast one on GA when I was trying to claim back money for cancelled/delayed trains in what I thought was the correct way. I have never used 'Genie' or 'Bot' algorithms to highlight trains that have run late.

Someone earlier said about people inputting the claim incorrectly and racking up more errors. That is what I have done. I didn't know I was incorrectly filling out the form. One section is 'train delayed or cancelled' (I would put cancelled) and the next section was 'how long was the delay?' (you could choose up to 15 mins/15-30 mins/30 mins-one hour etc... I chose 120 minutes as I thought that is what best represented a cancelled train. I didn't know it meant how long I was delayed. I have admitted my error and paid up. I had to pay for all DR overpayments in the letter + more (there was text in the letter in red saying there were more), of varying costs plus the Admin fee (Less than £100) which was based on the number of errors, I think.

Now you have fully settled, I would be inclined to try and speak to customer services, not the investigation team, and explain what happened, adding that you were happy to repay the money which you had erroneously claimed, and had paid the full amount requested, as you felt you had no choice in order to make this go away. Though you felt it unfair that you had to pay this following an error which you made filling out a delay repay form which could be read in two ways.

It would cost you nothing to try.

 

[jon0844]

Fair question. In short, for a quiet life. I simply cannot provide evidence to back up validity of claims for over a year ago. Whilst Mr Brown-Went-Off-To-Town-On-The-08.21 every day, there's many reasons why my own travel pattern varied; half-day holidays, after-works drinks, doctors appts, the list is endless, and it should not be for GA to assume a claim is fraudulent on that basis. But as I say, I can't prove that, so the lesson here is keep an audit trail.

If I dug my heels in and asked GA to provide proof, would they realistically be able to after all this time? I doubt it. But I don't have the time or energy to go back and forth with GA, and seeking legal advice would not be worth it over such a modest sum, so on balance will cut my losses and move on.

As I said in my original post if I was intent on defrauding GA I just wouldn't buy a ticket.

I would have thought that you could easily defend your claims by saying that and no further action would be taken.

 

[Horizon22]

My question is that if some people did incorrectly fill in GA delay forms by error as they say - such as clicking the 120 mins option by mistake for a lesser delay - why didn't GA just reject that the first time?

 

[Hadders]

My question is that if some people did incorrectly fill in GA delay forms by error as they say - such as clicking the 120 mins option by mistake for a lesser delay - why didn't GA just reject that the first time?

Indeed. You have to wonder about the processing of some of the claims by GA.

 

[eoff]

My question is that if some people did incorrectly fill in GA delay forms by error as they say - such as clicking the 120 mins option by mistake for a lesser delay - why didn't GA just reject that the first time?

My guess is that they knew those trains were delayed so people were due 'some' compensation. Now they are being picky. I don't think they have much chance of proving fraud on the basis of someone picking the 120min box in particular because the form (or at least the current one) starts by giving examples of train delay and not journey delay and furthermore people entered details of the actual service on the form.

 

[Titfield]

Indeed. You have to wonder about the processing of some of the claims by GA.

Perhaps they just match on departure date, time, departure and arrival station? After all the delay surely should be the same for all claims with the same details.

 

[Hadders]

Perhaps they just match on departure date, time, departure and arrival station? After all the delay surely should be the same for all claims with the same details.

But if the train was delayed by 30 minutes and someone submitted a claim for 120 minutes then GA should reject it?
If the train is cancelled and the next train was 30 minutes later and I claimed for a 120 minute delay then GA should reject it.

If GA have been paying claims without checking the train running info then I believe this would be very poor behaviour on their part.

There will be some cases (I believe one was common referred to as 'doing a Colchester') where a minor delay in arriving at Colchester caused the connecting train to Colchester Town to be missed resulting in an hour delay. A perfectly legitimate claim as it's the delay to the overall journey that counts but it wouldn't surprise me if GA rejected these sort of claims meaning claimants would need to appeal.

 

[Horizon22]

Indeed. You have to wonder about the processing of some of the claims by GA.

Well either that, or what some people are posting isn't the full story.

 

[30907]

Well either that, or what some people are posting isn't the full story.

Maybe, but for the purposes of this forum I think we must assume posters' intentions are honest, and only challenge factual inconsistencies/errors.

 

[Shawshank]

Well I guess I’m the only guilty man in Shawshank.

Got my letter last week, paid up £850 today, including a £200 admin charge.

was provided smart card tap-ins as evidence.

appreciate im bang to rights as there were definite instances where I never intended to take the train claimed.

What I guess is slightly annoying is that the vast majority of my claims were genuine as the service on my route was appalling during the time I was commuting.

the majority of my claims were where a series of trains were delayed/cancelled leaving London at 5-6pm, so I would either leave the station or not even bother going after checking the app from my office before leaving and stay late or have a beer/dinner and then take a train home at 7.30-8 when the crowds from the disruption had died down...I didn’t realise that the expectation was I got the next available service or else.

you live and learn, guess it’s a small contribution to improving future service.

for the tin-foil hat wearers, my name
does begin with a J but no app/third party used for claims.

 

[island]

Thanks for sharing.

 

[Titfield]

Well I guess I’m the only guilty man in Shawshank.

Got my letter last week, paid up £850 today, including a £200 admin charge.

was provided smart card tap-ins as evidence.

appreciate im bang to rights as there were definite instances where I never intended to take the train claimed.

What I guess is slightly annoying is that the vast majority of my claims were genuine as the service on my route was appalling during the time I was commuting.

the majority of my claims were where a series of trains were delayed/cancelled leaving London at 5-6pm, so I would either leave the station or not even bother going after checking the app from my office before leaving and stay late or have a beer/dinner and then take a train home at 7.30-8 when the crowds from the disruption had died down...I didn’t realise that the expectation was I got the next available service or else.

you live and learn, guess it’s a small contribution to improving future service.

for the tin-foil hat wearers, my name
does begin with a J but no app/third party used for claims.

Thank you for your honesty in recounting this.

I think GA need to make far clearer how the "rules" are going to be interpreted going forward. Perhaps the Rail Ombudsman and Travelwatch should investigate this to ensure that the rules are fair to both parties.

 

[GreenTea]

I paid up as well, not as much as £850 but it was in the 100's. They also provided me with SmartCard tap in data as evidence. Has anyone received a letter saying the case is closed?

 

[b0b]

the majority of my claims were where a series of trains were delayed/cancelled leaving London at 5-6pm, so I would either leave the station or not even bother going after checking the app from my office before leaving and stay late or have a beer/dinner and then take a train home at 7.30-8 when the crowds from the disruption had died down...I didn’t realise that the expectation was I got the next available service or else.

I do feel for you, that does seem harsh and when I lived in London I could easily see myself getting caught out by this too, it doesn't take long to figure out if the service is messed up in the evening rush, it's often a good choice to partake in a beer or 3 and catch later trains that might be running better and also not rammed. I can see myself thinking I was delayed by the train company too.

 

[Journeyman]

I do feel for you, that does seem harsh and when I lived in London I could easily see myself getting caught out by this too, it doesn't take long to figure out if the service is messed up in the evening rush, it's often a good choice to partake in a beer or 3 and catch later trains that might be running better and also not rammed. I can see myself thinking I was delayed by the train company too.

I really can't see why this is a problem, and I'd want to discuss it with them. If you can prove what your normal travel pattern is, and you only claim for the delay up to the first available service after it, what is the issue?

 

[87electric]

Well I guess I’m the only guilty man in Shawshank.

Got my letter last week, paid up £850 today, including a £200 admin charge.

was provided smart card tap-ins as evidence.

appreciate im bang to rights as there were definite instances where I never intended to take the train claimed.

What I guess is slightly annoying is that the vast majority of my claims were genuine as the service on my route was appalling during the time I was commuting.

the majority of my claims were where a series of trains were delayed/cancelled leaving London at 5-6pm, so I would either leave the station or not even bother going after checking the app from my office before leaving and stay late or have a beer/dinner and then take a train home at 7.30-8 when the crowds from the disruption had died down...I didn’t realise that the expectation was I got the next available service or else.

you live and learn, guess it’s a small contribution to improving future service.

for the tin-foil hat wearers, my name
does begin with a J but no app/third party used for claims.

Thanks for your first post, Shawshank. Or whatever name you use.

 

[island]

I really can't see why this is a problem, and I'd want to discuss it with them. If you can prove what your normal travel pattern is, and you only claim for the delay up to the first available service after it, what is the issue?

I suppose the argument they would run is that DelayRepay is compensation for one’s inconvenience, and if it is convenient for one to hang around in the office/pub/wherever and get a later train, one hasn’t really been inconvenienced.

 

[Wolfie]

I suppose the argument they would run is that DelayRepay is compensation for one’s inconvenience, and if it is convenient for one to hang around in the office/pub/wherever and get a later train, one hasn’t really been inconvenienced.

If l find something that l can usefully do as a result of the delay that the railway caused me that does not mean that l'm not still delayed. By your logic l should sit and freeze on a station platform rather than go to a warm pub. If the railway thinks that it has the right to say that then the second word of the response is undoubtedly 'off'....
Any TOC making such an assertion would get absolutely destroyed in the media. Some are probably arrogant enough to try it. They deserve the response that they'd get.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

If l find something that l can usefully do as a result of the delay that the railway caused me that does not mean that l'm not still delayed. By your logic l should sit and freeze on a station platform rather than go to a warm pub. If the railway thinks that it has the right to say that then the second word of the response is undoubtedly 'off'....
Any TOC making such an assertion would get absolutely destroyed in the media. Some are probably arrogant enough to try it. They deserve the response that they'd get.

An alternative version of the same argument from the railway's point of view might be that Delay Repay is offered for delays resulting from the railway's action or inaction* - but not for the customer's action. So if your half-hourly train is cancelled and the next one runs# then you can claim DR for half an hour. If - having found that your planned train is cancelled - you go to the pub for two hours, you can't claim two hours-worth of DR, because the railway didn't make you go to the pub.


* I appreciate that DR is meant to be 'no-fault' so there aren't arguments about whether a delay was down to a train failure (railway's fault) or a fire on a house next to the line (not the railway's fault). Here I am trying to distinguish between a train failing to turn up and a DR claimant failing to board an available train.

# assuming for this example identical timings (offset by half an hour) between the cancelled and running train.

 

[Wolfie]

An alternative version of the same argument from the railway's point of view might be that Delay Repay is offered for delays resulting from the railway's action or inaction* - but not for the customer's action. So if your half-hourly train is cancelled and the next one runs# then you can claim DR for half an hour. If - having found that your planned train is cancelled - you go to the pub for two hours, you can't claim two hours-worth of DR, because the railway didn't make you go to the pub.


* I appreciate that DR is meant to be 'no-fault' so there aren't arguments about whether a delay was down to a train failure (railway's fault) or a fire on a house next to the line (not the railway's fault). Here I am trying to distinguish between a train failing to turn up and a DR claimant failing to board an available train.

# assuming for this example identical timings (offset by half an hour) between the cancelled and running train.

Actually l'd agree with you on that. If your own action compounds the ultimate delay it is unreasonable to try to claim for the greater time. So when l go to the warm pub l have an eye on my phone for when trains resume running.

 

[robbeech]

Is anyone arguing that?

I haven’t seen anyone arguing that if your train is cancelled resulting in a 30 minute delay it would be acceptable to delay yourself further and claim additional compensation.
I’d argue that there’s a very fine line between that and claiming at all.

 

[Journeyman]

Is anyone arguing that?

I haven’t seen anyone arguing that if your train is cancelled resulting in a 30 minute delay it would be acceptable to delay yourself further and claim additional compensation.
I’d argue that there’s a very fine line between that and claiming at all.

I've already stated that if the delay is 30 minutes and I choose to delay myself for an hour, I'll claim for the former. That absolutely shouldn't be an issue.

 

[Wolfie]

I've already stated that if the delay is 30 minutes and I choose to delay myself for an hour, I'll claim for the former. That absolutely shouldn't be an issue.

Yup. That is reasonable.

Is anyone arguing that?

I haven’t seen anyone arguing that if your train is cancelled resulting in a 30 minute delay it would be acceptable to delay yourself further and claim additional compensation.
I’d argue that there’s a very fine line between that and claiming at all.

The railway industry is compensating me for the inconvenience caused by their issues. How l choose to spend the time that l have lost as a result really is none of their business.

 

[SteveM70]

I've already stated that if the delay is 30 minutes and I choose to delay myself for an hour, I'll claim for the former. That absolutely shouldn't be an issue.

Absolutely

But I’d be intrigued to know whether any of the DR claims that GR have pushed back on based on tap in data for this sort of scenario.

Normally get the 17:00 but it’s cancelled

Go to the shops / pub, end up being a couple of hours


Get the 20:00

Note that the 17:30 ran on time so claim 30 minute DR

GA say “hang on a minute pal, you were on the 20:00 and it was on time, pay up or we’ll see you in court”