Notice of Intention to Prosecute from Thameslink

[1112]

Hi all, this forum seems like a very helpful and useful place and I have been reading many cases here so far to gather an idea of what may happen to me next. Two days ago while I wasn't home (have seen it today) I received a Notice of Intention to Prosecute from Thameslink and would very much appreciate some advice on how to appeal this, my next steps, and likely outcomes. Thanks.

Essentially, I am 22 and I have had a valid 16-25 railcard for years, but I have very frequently purchased tickets and travelled with a 16-17 railcard over the past 7 months or so to save money. Of course, given the consequences I'm now facing I recognise this as a terrible mistake and feel awful over it (and immediately stopped using the 16-17 railcard after my encounter with the RPI officer). The truth is that I believe I initially did this unintentionally for the first couple of journeys, but then noticed how much cheaper the fares were and continued deliberately. Again, I see now that this has been a horrible idea, and I didn't even realize myself how long it had been going on for.

This letter follows on from an encounter on 20th Feb at City Thameslink station where I was stopped by a RPI offer at the gates. My return ticket for that day's work commute was from Tulse Hill to City Thameslink, with a 16-17 railcard, purchased via Trainline. He asked to see my railcard and when I produced the wrong one (my 16-25 railcard) he challenged me on this, so I then said I'd chosen the wrong railcard on the app by mistake, hoping to get out of it. He then asked to see my booking history on Trainline and stated that it can't be a mistake if I have been doing this repeatedly. This is when he said he would take my details as this was evidently a faredodging offence.

I became a bit panicked and in retrospect I regret not being more honest and co-operative at the time: however, I believe there may have been genuine misunderstandings which might have caused the officer to think I was trying to obscure my details. I am transgender and use a different name for my bank cards, professional life, online accounts etc than that which appears on my passport, and I have also moved to London very recently in October. Therefore, when he found my address he said there was no proof of me living there, despite the fact that I gave him the correct address and listed every name I could possibly be under. His confrontational tone caused me to become more panicked and defensive; I'm not asking for sympathy of course, just worried that these factors may have complicated the case as I wound up having to find a bank statement on my phone to get him to trust the address I provided. Perhaps this part isn't an issue, I don't know.

Either way I have enclosed photos of the letter I received and would very much appreciate advice on a response; from what I've read here the best shot is to aim for an out of court settlement or to offer to pay a fine which comprises the overall fares dodged and an admin fee for the company. I am absolutely terrified of receiving any kind of criminal record or even needing to go to court, the thought makes me feel sick with anxiety, especially as working with children is something I have done for years and hope to do more of in the future. However, I see that given the length of time I have been offending for, my case is not looking good to avoid prosecution; I'm just desperately hoping there's something I can do, I would happily pay fines instead. I feel like **** and know that I have nobody to blame but myself.

Would it be smarter to continue saying that these misuses of the railcard were all unintentional, or would it much better serve my case at this stage to own up to intentional wrongdoing and just plead forgiveness? I know they will have access to my booking history and it's quite incriminating especially as I switch between using the 16-17 saver and my actual railcard (16-25) on different journeys.

Moreover, I should be leaving the UK on Monday April 1st for 3 weeks until the 22nd. Therefore I absolutely need to send my response in the next three days. However, I'm scared I will receive a follow up letter from them while I'm away and miss something important/time-sensitive. Does anybody have any advice regarding how long it usually takes them to respond, and to settle a court date if necessary?

Thank you everyone. I really regret this.

 

[FenMan]

In your post, you're asking us the question "Would it be smarter to continue saying that these misuses of the railcard were all unintentional" when you know they WERE intentional.

The answer is "No". We're not in the business of encouraging posters to lie in order to avoid the consequences of their actions. But we do offer good advice to point to the best ways forward to minimise the consequences of their behaviour. The no. 1 piece of advice is being honest with yourself, us, and GTR, as there is nothing to work on without honesty.

Your claim is you chose a 16-17 railcard fare "unintentionally". You are 22, so that argument is deader than the deadest dodo. You knew what you were doing.

GTR will likely investigate your purchasing history and draw their conclusions. Looking at other threads, if you're co-operative they will be be too. Any "savings" you've made will be outweighed by their settlement offer and associated costs, but, unless you want a day in court that you will lose, and get a criminal record, I'd fully engage with them and work hard to convince them there will be no repeat of your past behaviour.

I've avoided commenting on the word salad regarding your personal circumstances as I very much doubt GTR will much care. You've underpaid to travel on their services. They want the fares due plus the costs they've incurred to find out what's been going on. That's it.

 

[furlong]

Tell them when you are away in your response. Also give them an email address and they might be able to sort it all out with you that way while you are abroad.

 

[1112]

Thank you very much for your responses here, I appreciate it a lot. Here are photos of the front and back of the letter for full clarity on the case, in case this is relevant. Hopefully sometime later today I will draft a response which I would love to have some advice on as clearly it's really important to be as co operative as possible. I will really learn my lesson from this.

 

[Hadders]

Welcome to the forum!

Thankfully you're dealing with GTR who generally take a pragmaic approach to this sort of thing to people who co-operate with their investigation. Had you been caught by an inspector from Transport for London then you'd probably end up facing a prosecution.

I suggest sending a short, concise reply covering the following points:

- That you are sorry for what has happened
- What you have learned from the incident
- That you are keen to settle the matter without the need for court action
- Offer to pay the outstanding fare and the train company's administrative costs in dealing with the matter

Make sure your reply is short and concise, don't give a sob story - they've heard it all before. GTR are usually prepared to offer an administrative settlement (commonly known as an out of court settlement) to people who engage with the process and who haven't come to their attention before. We cannot guarantee this will be the outcome but with GTR it almost certainly is.

An aggravating factor in your case is that you have done this before. GTR have only asked you about the incident on the 20th February so I would confine your reply to this single incident only, you are not required to incriminate yourself. Do be aware that GTR might decide to research your Trainline purchase history and come back to you at a later date with further questions.

If you are offered a settlement the amount tends to be around £150 plus the outstanding fare at the full Anytime price with no credit given for the value of the ticket you did purchase. An out of court settlement might appear to be a fine, but it isn't and you won't have a criminal record as a result of accepting one.

Feel free to post a copy of your draft reply in this thread and forum members will be happy to proof read it for you.

 

[1112]

Welcome to the forum!

Thankfully you're dealing with GTR who generally take a pragmaic approach to this sort of thing to people who co-operate with their investigation. Had you been caught by an inspector from Transport for London then you'd probably end up facing a prosecution.

I suggest sending a short, concise reply covering the following points:

- That you are sorry for what has happened
- What you have learned from the incident
- That you are keen to settle the matter without the need for court action
- Offer to pay the outstanding fare and the train company's administrative costs in dealing with the matter

Make sure your reply is short and concise, don't give a sob story - they've heard it all before. GTR are usually prepared to offer an administrative settlement (commonly known as an out of court settlement) to people who engage with the process and who haven't come to their attention before. We cannot guarantee this will be the outcome but with GTR it almost certainly is.

An aggravating factor in your case is that you have done this before. GTR have only asked you about the incident on the 20th February so I would confine your reply to this single incident only, you are not required to incriminate yourself. Do be aware that GTR might decide to research your Trainline purchase history and come back to you at a later date with further questions.

If you are offered a settlement the amount tends to be around £150 plus the outstanding fare at the full Anytime price with no credit given for the value of the ticket you did purchase. An out of court settlement might appear to be a fine, but it isn't and you won't have a criminal record as a result of accepting one.

Feel free to post a copy of your draft reply in this thread and forum members will be happy to proof read it for you.

Thank you so much Hadders for this extremely helpful response. There are some points I'd like clarification on - I'm now unsure as to whether I should mention past instances of fare evasion in my reply to the letter, as these were seen and pointed out to me by the inspector at the time on 20th Feb (via looking at my Trainline booking history). They're easy to check so I'm sure that GTR knows exactly how many times I have evaded my full fare. The reply in this thread from Fenman seems to indicate I need to fess up on this. Although you are correct that only the instance on 20th Feb is mentioned here, would it not seem incriminating for me to avoid owning up to all past offences?

If GTR did reply to me with 'further questions', what might this look like or involve? I want to be as co operative as possible here and I'm scared that only referencing the one instance on 20th Feb will make me look more suspicious and dishonest, making it harder to achieve an out of court settlement.

If I do decide to declare about longer term fare evasion, am I required to calculate myself exactly how much is owed to GTR in missed fares and mention this amount in my letter? I have always used this faredodging tactic (16-17 railcard) via Trainline but I have used it to travel across different network operators, not only GTR. Does that further complicate things?

Thank you so so much for your help at this scary time. I feel so much remorse around this situation and have definitely learned my lesson and never want to do this again, it's not worth the risk at all.

 

[Brissle Girl]

Re your penultimate paragraph any tickets you have bought online with any ticket retailer are likely to be found, but tickets bought at a station is much less likely.

If other instances are identified then they will calculate the amounts due. However, it’s in your interests to do the same so that a) you can satisfy yourself that it is correct and b) you can get an idea now of the total amount you might be asked to pay within 14 days as part of any settlement. (You should use the Anytime Single fare for each individual journey, and then add around £150 for an admin fee on top as that’s typically the basis for calculation, with no offset for the fare actually paid.)

 

[1112]

Thank you so much for your further advice. Below is a draft of the letter I intend to reply with and I'd massively massively appreciate any feedback on this.

Dear Sir/Madam

Reference number: XXXXXX

I am writing in response to your notice of intention to prosecute letter I received from you dated 26th March 2024. Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to respond.

On the morning of 20th February 2024, my details were taken by a Revenue Protection Inspector at City Thameslink after I was unable to produce a valid ticket for the journey I was on. I had purchased an Anytime Day Return e-ticket from Tulse Hill to London Terminals; I hold a valid 16-25 railcard, but I had applied a 16-17 railcard discount to this purchase.

I take full responsibility for this error and accept that there is no excuse for my actions. I have now become aware of the huge damage done by fare evasion to the rail industry, and I am deeply ashamed, remorseful and sorry for the negative impact I have had on the rail network, its hardworking staff and honest passengers who abide by ticket rules. I assure you that I will not repeat this wrongdoing and will always pay full fares with only appropriate discounts applied in future; as evidenced by the fact that I have always used my correct railcard (16-25) in all bookings made since.

I would be extremely grateful to be allowed the opportunity to settle this misconduct without the need for court action. I wish to make any amends necessary, including covering your administrative costs in investigating this matter, and paying any fees you deem appropriate, including the full, correct fare for the journey outlined above.

As I wish to be as co-operative, timely and expedient as possible, I find it necessary to note that I will be abroad outside of the UK from the 1st - 22nd April 2024, and therefore I risk missing any postal correspondence from you during this time; thus I humbly request that you please contact me via email during this period at this address: XXXXX, to ensure the swiftest possible response.

I apologise profusely for my wrongdoing and the inconvenience which it has caused you.

Yours faithfully,
XXXXX

 

[Titfield]

Thank you so much Hadders for this extremely helpful response. There are some points I'd like clarification on - I'm now unsure as to whether I should mention past instances of fare evasion in my reply to the letter, as these were seen and pointed out to me by the inspector at the time on 20th Feb (via looking at my Trainline booking history). They're easy to check so I'm sure that GTR knows exactly how many times I have evaded my full fare. The reply in this thread from Fenman seems to indicate I need to fess up on this. Although you are correct that only the instance on 20th Feb is mentioned here, would it not seem incriminating for me to avoid owning up to all past offences?

If GTR did reply to me with 'further questions', what might this look like or involve? I want to be as co operative as possible here and I'm scared that only referencing the one instance on 20th Feb will make me look more suspicious and dishonest, making it harder to achieve an out of court settlement.

If I do decide to declare about longer term fare evasion, am I required to calculate myself exactly how much is owed to GTR in missed fares and mention this amount in my letter? I have always used this faredodging tactic (16-17 railcard) via Trainline but I have used it to travel across different network operators, not only GTR. Does that further complicate things?

The question whether someone being investigated by a TOC for "fare evasion" (I use that as a catch all term for not having the correct / valid ticket) should provide full details of all instances of not paying the correct fare is a challenging one to answer.

The opinion of the majority of the regular forum responders is that a) the person being investigated should not incriminate themselves by volunteering information not requested by the TOC b) but be prepared for the TOC to follow up when they have researched any online accounts the person may hold.

All cases turn on their facts and the letter received should be read carefully for any questions relating to multiple instances of not paying the correct fare.

 

[Brissle Girl]

I feel the penultimate paragraph could be abbreviated a bit with less verbiage and still get the message across that you won’t see any post until after the 22nd. Other than that, it feels about right to me.

 

[30907]

I feel the penultimate paragraph could be abbreviated a bit with less verbiage and still get the message across that you won’t see any post until after the 22nd. Other than that, it feels about right to me.

There are a number of other places in the draft letter which betray the misuse of either a thesaurus or of ChatGPT, such as:

deeply ashamed, remorseful and sorry

Remember that the person reading it has a heavy workload, so make it easy for them.

 

[JonathanH]

One odd point about this one is that no one travelling from Tulse Hill to London would use a 16-25 railcard to purchase their ticket at peak time, because, with the minimum fare condition, and given Tulse Hill is in Zone 3, it is cheaper by Oyster at £4.40 each way. The anytime day return is £9.40, and £4.70 with the 16-17 saver.

That makes it appear very transparent that the choice of a 16-17 saver option is premeditated.

Indeed, this part of the response doesn't really read true if it is at peak time for this journey as the fare with a 16-25 railcard is £12, although I appreciate the discount works on other journeys where the fare is higher.

I assure you that I will not repeat this wrongdoing and will always pay full fares with only appropriate discounts applied in future; as evidenced by the fact that I have always used my correct railcard (16-25) in all bookings made since.

It might be better to acknowledge that they will be using the appropriate fare on Oyster instead, or using e-tickets without discount.

 

[Hadders]

Overall, I feel the letter reads well. Please do let us know how you get on.

 

[Brissle Girl]

That makes it appear very transparent that the choice of a 16-17 saver option is premeditated.

The OP has made it clear, both in their original post, and in the letter when they talk about fare evasion, that it was not done accidentally. So I’m not sure what point you are making.

 

[Haywain]

the fare with a 16-25 railcard is £12,

No, it isn't, it's £9.40. There is no surcharge for using a railcard, there is just no discount below the minimum fare.