Thanks - understood, and perfectly good example for you to illustrate things with IMHO - anyway, it starts to sound like you have legit claims and you can support that with some proof or evidence that you have - and that importantly you stuck with the train despite the delay. I would then say you should politely dispute what GA are suggesting, that your claims were not legit. But I suspect you do need to be confident. I am sure people on here will give advice to you regarding particular delay claim examples if you are not sure about them, so long as you are clear about what you did or claimed, or as clear as you can reasonably be.
Good luck with this.
The only note of caution I would sound is what evidence to the contrary GA could have. @R2244 says he held a paper ticket, and my reading of this thread is that there is not sufficient information contained on a paper ticket or retained by the exit barriers for GA to have unquestionable evidence. As I have said previously, it is nigh on impossible to prove you were on a particular train, but GA might be able to prove when you entered or left a station. (You can prove when you might have left the office, but you can't categorically prove that you were on the 6.24 train to Chelmsford or whatever.). And in an earlier post by a friend of a passenger, GA said that the 'evidence' provided by the passenger was insufficient.
They have work records dating back to the time in question and their shift patterns match up with the trains they would have been on. They can prove they were booked to be at work and this makes sense but with the exception of a few photographs with time stamps here and there which barely proves a handful of journeys (and even fewer were actually delayed ones) they cannot prove they were on those trains, which I suspect nobody can.
On contact, GA say that if they cannot prove they were on those trains then they will be passing their details on to the police as they’ve made an above average number of claims.
they’ve offered a settlement of around £1100 which is just under twice the total claimed.
By all means, @R2244 should challenge GA, but they should be aware of the other issues raised by previous claimants.