Repeated Misuse of invalid ticket

[Grace98]

Hi All

Posting on here for a friend as she is extremely worried about an incident with southeastern rail. She was stopped back in November by an undercover rail enforcement officer and was asked what journey she made on that day and to present her ticket. The annual season ticket ticket was valid from St Mary Cray to London Victoria however she was travelling from West Malling to London Victoria. She didn’t make this journey every day as she frequently stays with her boyfriend in London so only uses it a couple of times a week but none the less she’s been caught using a ticket that’s not valid for the journey she’d been making for around 8-9 months. She didn’t lie to the enforcement officer when asked for the reasons, she just straight up told them the truth and was very upset and applogetic which the officer said will go in her favour and that as a first offence she will most like just receive a fine. She has just received the letter in the post asking for her statement of account of what happened which from reading previous threads needs to match what she told the officer on the day she was stopped. However on the letter it doesn’t say she is being procecured under any rail enforcement bylaws act. She’s really worried about what the outcome of this could be as it was intent to travel without a valid ticket on multiple occasions over several months.
If anyone has any advice on what could potentially happen in this situation or what she should respond in her letter back to southeastern to avoid a hefty repayment that would be great. (She’s expecting to have to pay back a lot but is more worried about a criminal record etc.)

Thanks so much.

 

[6Gman]

Hi All

Posting on here for a friend as she is extremely worried about an incident with southeastern rail. She was stopped back in November by an undercover rail enforcement officer and was asked what journey she made on that day and to present her ticket. The annual season ticket ticket was valid from St Mary Cray to London Victoria however she was travelling from West Malling to London Victoria. She didn’t make this journey every day as she frequently stays with her boyfriend in London so only uses it a couple of times a week but none the less she’s been caught using a ticket that’s not valid for the journey she’d been making for around 8-9 months. She didn’t lie to the enforcement officer when asked for the reasons, she just straight up told them the truth and was very upset and applogetic which the officer said will go in her favour and that as a first offence she will most like just receive a fine. She has just received the letter in the post asking for her statement of account of what happened which from reading previous threads needs to match what she told the officer on the day she was stopped. However on the letter it doesn’t say she is being procecured under any rail enforcement bylaws act. She’s really worried about what the outcome of this could be as it was intent to travel without a valid ticket on multiple occasions over several months.
If anyone has any advice on what could potentially happen in this situation or what she should respond in her letter back to southeastern to avoid a hefty repayment that would be great. (She’s expecting to have to pay back a lot but is more worried about a criminal record etc.)

Thanks so much.

Just to be clear, are you saying that she has been commuting from West Malling to Victoria on an annual season ticket from St Mary Cray?

 

[Grace98]

Yes, not every day, only a couple of days a week but she has been doing that journey

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

This thread may be useful. It seems a fairly similar situation to that of your friend.

 

[yorkie]

...e she will most like just receive a fine. She has just received the letter in the post asking for her statement of account of what happened which from reading previous threads needs to match what she told the officer on the day she was stopped. However on the letter it doesn’t say she is being procecured under any rail enforcement bylaws act. She’s really worried about what the outcome of this could be as it was intent to travel without a valid ticket on multiple occasions over several months.
If anyone has any advice on what could potentially happen in this situation or what she should respond in her letter back to southeastern to avoid a hefty repayment that would be great. (She’s expecting to have to pay back a lot but is more worried about a criminal record etc.)...

Depending on what evidence is gathered, they may decide to prosecute her under the more serious Regulation of Railways Act, which not only carries a fine but also a criminal record.

A Railway Byelaw prosecution does not require the company to demonstrate intent, but does not come with a criminal record.

That said, if she can reach an out of court settlement with the company, they may accept this instead of pursuing the matter through the courts. I cannot advise on what sort of sum might be agreeable to both parties, however.

 

[najaB]

If anyone has any advice on what could potentially happen in this situation or what she should respond in her letter back to southeastern to avoid a hefty repayment that would be great.

Being honest is the best policy as being caught in a lie will only make matters worse. In her reply she should confirm or correct the information that they have, apologise for her actions and offer to make restitution. As to the amount, unless she has strong evidence to the contrary, if the journey is to/from work they will assume that she's been doing it every work day (rather than a couple of times a week) and use that to estimate their losses.

She’s really worried about what the outcome of this could be as it was intent to travel without a valid ticket on multiple occasions over several months.

As @yorkie says, it is impossible to predict how much any settlement would be, but as a rough guide to the amount likely to be involved:

• I'd expect that they will say that, having already paid for her season ticket, she should have bought tickets from her starting station to the point at which her season ticket was valid
• The Anytime Single from West Malling to St Mary Cray (from where her season ticket would be valid) is £20.50
• They would then multiple this by the number of days she is assumed to have made the journey
• So 8 months, 4 weeks per month, 5 days a week is 160 days, times £20.50 gives a starting point of around £3,280, plus costs involved in investigating her case

This is likely to be a worst case though and if they are amenable to a settlement they may ask for an amount less than this.

 

[js1000]

It doesn't help that West Malling and St Mary Cray are some distance apart and season ticket cost difference is double I believe. However I would suggest it would be difficult to prove they have repeatedly used this ticket on occasion over the past 9 months on the route described without CCTV evidence or ticket data. CCTV generally only goes back 30 days and I believe West Malling has no ticket barriers it's tricky to prove the person has used this ticket for the past 9 months under the Railway Act 1889.

However, I fear your friend shot herself in the foot and divulged far more than she should have probably done so at the time she was questioned by the officer. It happens a lot when passengers are caught by officers, people get flustered and panic when it's best if they shut up, simply give their details, digest the incident and think about their response when the letter from the TOC comes in the post. No RPI can compel you to talk other than for you to provide your name and address when asked to do so - blowing your lid, getting irate, trying to be too clever by over-explaining or simply giving a false details isn't the way to go.

Settlement is their best option which will eliminate the need to take it to court under byelaw prosecution which I feel is a certainty given the difference in fares. As Yorkie says, the more serious Railway Act 1889 depends on what evidence they have and that is difficult to advise on - we can only speculate. It is potentially in passenger's interest to pre-empt any investigation under the Railway Act and settle early. What the settlement sum will be I don't know.

 

[najaB]

the Railway Act 1889

Proper title the Regulation of Railways Act (1889) for anyone looking for details. Section 5.3 being the relevant portion.

 

[Grace98]

It doesn't help that West Malling and St Mary Cray are some distance apart and season ticket cost difference is double I believe. However I would suggest it would be difficult to prove they have repeatedly used this ticket on occasion over the past 9 months on the route described without CCTV evidence or ticket data. CCTV generally only goes back 30 days and I believe West Malling has no ticket barriers it's tricky to prove the person has used this ticket for the past 9 months under the Railway Act 1889.

However, I fear your friend shot herself in the foot and divulged far more than she should have probably done so at the time she was questioned by the officer. It happens a lot when passengers are caught by officers, people get flustered and panic when it's best if they shut up, simply give their details, digest the incident and think about their response when the letter from the TOC comes in the post. No RPI can compel you to talk other than for you to provide your name and address when asked to do so - blowing your lid, getting irate, trying to be too clever by over-explaining or simply giving a false details isn't the way to go.

Settlement is their best option which will eliminate the need to take it to court under byelaw prosecution which I feel is a certainty given the difference in fares. As Yorkie says, the more serious Railway Act 1889 depends on what evidence they have and that is difficult to advise on - we can only speculate. It is potentially in passenger's interest to pre-empt any investigation under the Railway Act and settle early. What the settlement sum will be I don't know.

Thanks for your detailed reply! Very helpful. Do you think that I’m her response back that she should say something along the lines of “I’d be happy to pay a fine and would be willing to come to an out of court settlement as I am deeply regretful for my actions”

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Thanks for your detailed reply! Very helpful. Do you think that I’m her response back that she should say something along the lines of “I’d be happy to pay a fine and would be willing to come to an out of court settlement as I am deeply regretful for my actions”

The draft response in the thread I linked to is probably fine.

 

[najaB]

Do you think that I’m her response back that she should say something along the lines of “I’d be happy to pay a fine and would be willing to come to an out of court settlement as I am deeply regretful for my actions”

Bear in mind that a fine and a settlement are polar opposites - a fine is imposed by the Court after a guilty verdict, a settlement avoids the matter going to court in the first place.

 

[Bertie the bus]

Thanks for your detailed reply! Very helpful. Do you think that I’m her response back that she should say something along the lines of “I’d be happy to pay a fine and would be willing to come to an out of court settlement as I am deeply regretful for my actions”

I’m not sure you/your friend should be using language like happy or willing to. That sort of implies you think you are in a position to dictate the terms. You are not.

 

[Llanigraham]

The only words needed from that sentence are "I am willing to come to an out of Court settlement AND I deeply regret my actions"

 

[30907]

It doesn't help that West Malling and St Mary Cray are some distance apart and season ticket cost difference is double I believe. However I would suggest it would be difficult to prove they have repeatedly used this ticket on occasion over the past 9 months on the route described without CCTV evidence or ticket data. CCTV generally only goes back 30 days and I believe West Malling has no ticket barriers it's tricky to prove the person has used this ticket for the past 9 months under the Railway Act 1889.

However, I fear your friend shot herself in the foot and divulged far more than she should have probably done so at the time she was questioned by the officer. It happens a lot when passengers are caught by officers, people get flustered and panic when it's best if they shut up, simply give their details, digest the incident and think about their response when the letter from the TOC comes in the post.

From the OP's description I suspect the friend had attracted the attention of RP officers before she was caught.

The difference in fares BTW is about £60 weekly.

 

[Bertie the bus]

The only words needed from that sentence are "I am willing to come to an out of Court settlement AND I deeply regret my actions"

That is almost exactly what the OP wrote. Of course they are willing to come to an out of court settlement. Who wouldn't be?

A more appropriate wording would be "I deeply regret my actions and would appreciate the opportunity to settle this out of court at the earliest opportunity...'.

 

[najaB]

A more appropriate wording would be "I deeply regret my actions and would appreciate the opportunity to settle this out of court at the earliest opportunity...'.

I wouldn't even use the words "out of court".

I am deeply ashamed of and regretful about my actions for which I offer no excuse. I would like to resolve the matter at your earliest convenience to minimise further expenditure of time and effort on your part.

 

[js1000]

From the OP's description I suspect the friend had attracted the attention of RP officers before she was caught.

The difference in fares BTW is about £60 weekly.

I did think that possibly if they were undercover. Something to bear in mind. It's difficult to speculate and the OP would have to potentially assume they have acquired evidence.

 

[gazthomas]

I do wonder if anyone from South Eastern revenue protection was reading this post they would know exactly who this relates to given the railway stations in question and other context.

 

[Haywain]

I do wonder if anyone from South Eastern revenue protection was reading this post they would know exactly who this relates to given the railway stations in question and other context.

They may well read this. Do you think it will make a difference?

 

[gazthomas]

They may well read this. Do you think it will make a difference?

I don't think so as the advice given is sound, I just wonder sometimes if could prejudice cases

 

[najaB]

I don't think so as the advice given is sound, I just wonder sometimes if could prejudice cases

Only if what they post here contradicts what they tell Southeastern.

 

[RPOMan]

I did think that possibly if they were undercover. Something to bear in mind. It's difficult to speculate and the OP would have to potentially assume they have acquired evidence.

You would have thought so being plain clothes.