Govia Thameslink Railway (Southern) - Delay repay declined

[Sonadagothalus]

Hello,

I've had my delay repay claims with GTR, specifically Southern declined with a bit of a snotty comms back about why in the past few weeks. I replied and the upshot is they are demanding a percentage of my paid delays back claiming they "know" a large portion are fraudulent?

Firstly they claim that using a 3rd party app to submit the claim is not allowed in their T&Cs.

Secondly they claim I did not make the journeys that I claimed for citing irregular patterns and other nonsense that totally ignores the fact my travel pattern is irregular due to work.

Regarding the first instance, if I am delayed, I make a claim and it uses an easier front end system that aggregates data and keeps records of my claims and I then get the payment sent back to me directly for a journey that I have specifically made, where is the financial impact to GTR to warrant refusing me using this?

In the second instance I usually take pictures of delay boards or something similar at the station as my job involves compliance and photo taking so it's handy for claiming my expenses to help jog my memory of where I was and on what day. They allude to the fact of CCTV proving my claims are bogus, I'm not sure how after watching CCTV of me boarding a train they can claim I didn't catch it?

I'm curious if I have been singled out or if this is just a fishing trip by GTR as a new way to maximise revenue and if it has happened to anyone else?

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Someone had a very similar problem with the same train company a few days ago: you may find some useful advice on that thread:

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/delay-repay-declined.162269/

 

[Sonadagothalus]

Someone had a very similar problem with the same train company a few days ago: you may find some useful advice on that thread:

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/delay-repay-declined.162269/

Thanks for that, I did see the thread but it was locked hence creating a new thread.

I was unsure if we are the only 2 or if there are more.

The other thing that perhaps someone in the know can advise me on, if they have watched the CCTV as they claim and you can see I am on a train and on the station at the time I claim I was, why are they rejecting my claims?

It's probably too hard to do here but the raw images that I have saved all have geo data on so I can prove I took them at the time and even went to the ticket office and got the forms to fill in there and then when at Gatwick, surely CCTV of someone queuing and filling out a form and handing it back with the tickets at the same station is pretty hard to dispute as a fraudulent claim of never travelling to there?

 

[Failed Unit]

I get the feeling that the delay repay staff are incentivised to reject claims. But on the reviews of CCTV.

1. How do they know what you look like?
2. On the 2 occasions I the BTP have needed to look at it for a crime (personally) it was inconclusive.

I am like you. Certain weeks I could claim every journey. (Great northern ppm is around 40% on time) my selection of trains varies from 0640 to 0942 depending on my work demands.

Unfortunately they have ground me down and a don’t bother. Sick of the process and the appeals. They have won. Looks like they are trying other tactics to bully people out of claims.

 

[bb21]

What is the 3rd party app you use?

 

[Sonadagothalus]

What is the 3rd party app you use?

I've used delay repay sniper, but this is generally for when I do a week in a hotel at a location and I am making multiple journeys on the same line back and forth in a week and if I get a lot of delays back to back every day, I do this at the end of a week to verify the exact length of the delay on each day against what train I caught compared to what time my original train should have gotten me in.

If it is a one off journey I take photos and submit it there and then at my end station myself as I can check it there and then from the boards and know I've done it.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

What's the value of the amiunt in total have they rejected?

 

[Sonadagothalus]

We're talking a 4 figure sum which is pretty steep and must represent just about every claim I've ever made!

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

We're talking a 4 figure sum which is pretty steep and must represent just about every claim I've ever made!

Well, in that case I see two possible outcomes:

If your claims are honest then continue to press them for the money due, and make sure to collect as much evidence as possible for future claims. If they continue to refuse without good evidence as to why your claims are allegedly fraudulent, consider taking the matter further - if internal complaints procedures have been exhausted, potentially consider contacting your MP, and/or take legal advice as to the advisability of taking legal action against them, and the prospects of success if you did so. You may also wish to make a Subject Access Request under Section 7 of the Data Protection Act - this means they must give you a copy of all the data they hold on you (with some exceptions), which will presumably include the CCTV evidence they claim show you are acting fraudulently. This way, you would have further proof as to the legitimacy of your claims. As others have said in other similar threads - try to get something in writing from your employer which demonstrates the reason for your 'non-standard' commuting patterns.

If your claims are not honest, then you should definitely take legal advice as to your best actions going onwards, to resolve the situation otherwise than with you being prosecuted.

I have no idea whether your claims are honest or not, I have no reason to doubt that they are honest, but those are the two options I see.

 

[Sonadagothalus]

Sorry just to clarify, they have paid me all my claims and are now saying they have reviewed them I need to pay them back and made threats of BTP involvement if I don't

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Sorry just to clarify, they have paid me all my claims and are now saying they have reviewed them I need to pay them back and made threats of BTP involvement if I don't

If your claims are honest, then whilst you may have to go through the stress, costs and worry caused by a prosecution if they do go that far, you should be in the clear legally. Either they have some evidence that purports to show you acting fraudulently, or they are really getting the wrong end of the stick.

It might be useful to have redacted copies of exactly what they're saying. PM first to forum administrators if you're unsure.

 

[matt_world2004]

If you have easy to access evidence about the sincerity of your claims eg hotel reciepts etc etc. Ask them to identify a specific claim that they have evidence of fraudulent use.

Do not mention that you have kept your own evidence . and then show them evidence for that claim only .

 

[bb21]

Unfortunately I do not have anything else to add to what I already said in a similar recent thread linked to in Post 2. AlterEgo also posted useful information in that thread which tally with my professional opinion.

One thing I would stress, and urge caution on, when people use an app that relies on open source data is that the data contained within is not always correct, which may or may not explain why some of your claims may have aroused suspicion, in other words, you could have been unknowingly submitting what would seemingly have come across as fraudulent claims. I do not believe this is a widespread issue, however there are several areas in the country where this would apply.

My advice remains that the claimant keeps a record of actual delays on the travels themselves. I know it is a pain but it need not be spot on, as it is accepted that claims may deviate from actual recorded delays by a small margin, due to a whole host of reasons (mainly ones of practicality).

 

[Sonadagothalus]

Unfortunately I do not have anything else to add to what I already said in a similar recent thread linked to in Post 2. AlterEgo also posted useful information in that thread which tally with my professional opinion.

One thing I would stress, and urge caution on, when people use an app that relies on open source data is that the data contained within is not always correct, which may or may not explain why some of your claims may have aroused suspicion, in other words, you could have been unknowingly submitting what would seemingly have come across as fraudulent claims. I do not believe this is a widespread issue, however there are several areas in the country where this would apply.

My advice remains that the claimant keeps a record of actual delays on the travels themselves. I know it is a pain but it need not be spot on, as it is accepted that claims may deviate from actual recorded delays by a small margin, due to a whole host of reasons (mainly ones of practicality).

Thanks for your comments, it's all welcome. I do indeed keep lots of records and evidence so I can trawl through and dig out I am being honest, the point comes back to why should I have to spend even more time proving I am innocent to a company who have already had enough of my time delaying me and claiming when I do travel with them.

I guess I'm also just confused as to what triggered this off, why target someone and make claims you have evidence to prove claims are false when you clearly don't and what makes me so special?

Unless of course this is a coordinated approach and they assume anyone with different claims at different times won't be able to remember or have evidence and be scared enough by the threat of police to hand money back to them, in which case this is totally disgusting behaviour not only to engage in such but to lie and claim you have evidence you don't to support extorting money from people.

 

[Clip]

Thanks for your comments, it's all welcome. I do indeed keep lots of records and evidence so I can trawl through and dig out I am being honest, the point comes back to why should I have to spend even more time proving I am innocent to a company who have already had enough of my time delaying me and claiming when I do travel with them.

I guess I'm also just confused as to what triggered this off, why target someone and make claims you have evidence to prove claims are false when you clearly don't and what makes me so special?

Unless of course this is a coordinated approach and they assume anyone with different claims at different times won't be able to remember or have evidence and be scared enough by the threat of police to hand money back to them, in which case this is totally disgusting behaviour not only to engage in such but to lie and claim you have evidence you don't to support extorting money from people.

I dont have much to add to what BB21 has said but from what you have said in lodging all your claims all at once at the end of the week some weeks and then lodging a claim on the day when you have been delayed may also have aroused their suspicion as the difference in how you claim and now admitting using a 3rd party app to do this will seem odd to those in charge of looking at your claims and had a marker set agains it which, as bb21 has alluded too, could be false claims.

 

[Harlequin]

Have they actually used the word "fraud"? I work in law rather than anything to do with the railways, and it's not a word any potential litigator would (or at least should) use lightly. It's also rare in my experience for any firm to pay out and then seek reimbursement of a sum paid in good faith without evidence that good faith has not been applied by the beneficiary of the payment. If they're scaremongering then that's completely unacceptable, and it would be interesting to learn exactly what "proof" they have. Have you asked them for their proof? Not meaning to sound skeptical, but I quite often see examples of people attempting to demonstrate their presence in a particular area at a particular time, and my immediate thought is why on Earth they felt compelled to take a photo to demonstrate it.

 

[matt_world2004]

Have they actually used the word "fraud"? I work in law rather than anything to do with the railways, and it's not a word any potential litigator would (or at least should) use lightly. It's also rare in my experience for any firm to pay out and then seek reimbursement of a sum paid in good faith without evidence that good faith has not been applied by the beneficiary of the payment. If they're scaremongering then that's completely unacceptable, and it would be interesting to learn exactly what "proof" they have. Have you asked them for their proof? Not meaning to sound skeptical, but I quite often see examples of people attempting to demonstrate their presence in a particular area at a particular time, and my immediate thought is why on Earth they felt compelled to take a photo to demonstrate it.

Maybe they need to take a picture to show their employer why they are late, I have also seen people take pictures of train display boards because they are irate about being late again. its not hugely unusual.

Another step the op could use,Is google timeline if enabled records the location of the phone to within about five minutes. It would establish they were physically at the station. and it goes back years. It can be used to also establish that an onward journey was made.

 

[Sonadagothalus]

Maybe they need to take a picture to show their employer why they are late, I have also seen people take pictures of train display boards because they are irate about being late again. its not hugely unusual.

Another step the op could use,Is google timeline if enabled records the location of the phone to within about five minutes. It would establish they were physically at the station. and it goes back years. It can be used to also establish that an onward journey was made.

The main reasons for photo taking of locations are to jog my own memory when claiming any expenses back and invoicing clients and also for when completing a tax return at the end of the year and having receipts trying to match everything together. Photos are more useful to see a huge gap between 2 jobs for 1 client that then remind me I did an ad-hoc job as a one off for another client so I know to include said job. The money claimed back from a delay also needs to offset my travel costs when submitting my tax return so again recording a location time and a delay all helps paint a picture for me.

I totally accept that different types of claims and formats may be unusual but if you can see travel across a large part of the network with no pattern to it surely whoever would look at this would accept the traveller isn't fixed in a 9-5 job limited to a specific route. Investigate anything that looks suspicious by all means but going all gung ho demanding money back claiming the other party to be in the wrong is overkill.

 

[matt_world2004]

The main reasons for photo taking of locations are to jog my own memory when claiming any expenses back and invoicing clients and also for when completing a tax return at the end of the year and having receipts trying to match everything together. Photos are more useful to see a huge gap between 2 jobs for 1 client that then remind me I did an ad-hoc job as a one off for another client so I know to include said job. The money claimed back from a delay also needs to offset my travel costs when submitting my tax return so again recording a location time and a delay all helps paint a picture for me.

I totally accept that different types of claims and formats may be unusual but if you can see travel across a large part of the network with no pattern to it surely whoever would look at this would accept the traveller isn't fixed in a 9-5 job limited to a specific route. Investigate anything that looks suspicious by all means but going all gung ho demanding money back claiming the other party to be in the wrong is overkill.

Yes, I would fight it. But only provide evidence for the claims they said you were incorrectly claiming .I have a feeling southern are trying to wiggle out here and would probably change the goalposts when presented with evidence of your claims,

 

[Fawkes Cat]

I stand by my suggestion to the OP of looking at the previous thread (which you confirmed you had already done), but there do seem to be a couple of additional points not covered there, one of which is of particular relevance to you, and both of which I think are of general interest.

1. Are Southern demanding you pay them money, or asking you to? I'm not asking about how they are talking to you, but what specifically is the meaning of what they are saying. So there might be a nicely worded demand, or an aggressively worded request. But I think the distinction matters.

If Southern are demanding the money, then if you don't pay them their next step would be to move to some sort of debt recovery - which starts with firmly worded letters, and ends with county court judgements and large men arriving on your doorstep to take your saleable assets away. That would mean that your first opportunity to make your case would be at the county court - which is a point you only reach after a great deal of discomfort in terms of aggressive letters and phone calls from the debt collectors. An early resolution will rely on you co-operating with the railway company and hoping for their goodwill

If Southern are asking for the money, then it seems to me that this means that - as things stand at the moment - they have no right to it, and before applying debt recovery they would need to establish their right to the money by going to court (the county court again or maybe the small claims court, but at a much earlier stage of the process) and you would be able to present your argument then to a neutral judge. It's also possible that if they are asking for the money then at an earlier point they will decide that it's not worth recovering the money: if you can provide them with convincing evidence of why your claims are valid, this may help them come to that decision. Again, this may involve you co-operating with them but their hand is weaker and yours correspondingly stronger.

I am not a lawyer, so I'm not sure that I have that distinction right: maybe someone with specific legal knowledge could advise us on what the position actually is?

2. Is there wider evidence of Southern / GTR taking wider action against people who they think are exploiting the Delay Repay scheme? As you have commented, this is not the first case this month on this forum of Southern objecting to Delay Repay claims which the passenger tells us are valid. It could just be coincidence that two people have sought the forum's advice at the same time - or it could suggest that Southern/GTR are taking a tough approach.

Because of this second point, it would certainly be interesting, and I think useful, for those of us who follow this forum if you could keep us in touch with what you decide to do, and what response you get from the railway company. Whatever we learn about Southern/GTR's approach will help us to improve the advice we give if there are further cases.

(Edit - after further thought and in light of ForTheLoveOf's comment below, struck through as quite possibly wrong)

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

I think the distinction matters

I don't see how that distinction matters for the purposes of them attempting to recover it at court. They have every right and possibility to take it to Court (whether civil or criminal), but OP has the same right to defend himself/herself vigorously. Given the evidence OP has told us he/she has, I imagine their prospects to be certainly better than other Court cases we have heard of here on the forums.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

I don't see how that distinction matters

- yes, I now think you might well be right. I've left my post so people can see what you disagree with, but struck it through.

 

[Panda]

One thing I would stress, and urge caution on, when people use an app that relies on open source data is that the data contained within is not always correct, which may or may not explain why some of your claims may have aroused suspicion, in other words, you could have been unknowingly submitting what would seemingly have come across as fraudulent claims.

I tried out delay repay sniper and it wasn't very accurate. During my month trial, it suggested several times that I had valid claims for trains I used and I knew for a fact I didn't have a valid claim (including showing some trains as cancelled). It was also a lot less effort keeping track of my claims myself and just doing the claims as soon as the delay happened (or setting a reminder to do it later).

 

[AlterEgo]

We're talking a 4 figure sum which is pretty steep and must represent just about every claim I've ever made!

What’s the value of your season ticket?

Over which period of time have you made these claims? Do you have evidence (eg photos) for every single claim they’ve rejected, or just a selection?

I am certain GTR will *not* have watched any CCTV at this point.

 

[gingerheid]

Don't they realise the problem is their trains are truly truly disgracefully awful?

I now try to drive to work whenever I possibly can, but if I do wake up too tired to drive then GN's propensity to cancel trains at my local station if anything goes wrong anywhere at all means that my median journey to work by train includes a 58m delay.

 

[AlterEgo]

Don't they realise the problem is their trains are truly truly disgracefully awful?

I now try to drive to work whenever I possibly can, but if I do wake up too tired to drive then GN's propensity to cancel trains at my local station if anything goes wrong anywhere at all means that my median journey to work by train includes a 58m delay.

This may be the case but this thread is for advice and help.

GTR’s PPM is around 80%. This means that 1 in 5 journeys are five minutes late or greater at the end destination. Delay Repay kicks in at 15 minutes. Therefore someone claiming a four figure sum off Delay Repay (given how parsimonious each claim is on a season ticket) will attract initial suspicion.

We do need to know more about the journeys the OP has been making, the ticket held, how many claims a week, and so on.

OP: feel free to PM me (if you have a spreadsheet or something this will be really useful) - I will let you know what, if anything may have aroused your suspicion and if there is anything you can do to help yourself.

As I mentioned earlier, I am pretty sure they won’t have looked at CCTV.

 

[island]

You may also wish to make a Subject Access Request under Section 7 of the Data Protection Act - this means they must give you a copy of all the data they hold on you (with some exceptions), which will presumably include the CCTV evidence they claim show you are acting fraudulently.

I fear that would be fruitless. Any such request would fall to be declined under section 29 (1) and/or 35 (2) of the Data Protection Act.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

I fear that would be fruitless. Any such request would fall to be declined under section 29 (1) and/or 35 (2) of the Data Protection Act.

Indeed, as I noted there are exceptions. Whether they would be smart enough to apply them, if they're relevant, is another matter. If they took it Court they would also have to disclose such evidence.

 

[AlterEgo]

What’s the value of your season ticket?

Over which period of time have you made these claims? Do you have evidence (eg photos) for every single claim they’ve rejected, or just a selection?

I am certain GTR will *not* have watched any CCTV at this point.

(Posting with permission from the OP)

The OP has been in contact privately with a journey history and ticket details.

I’m satisfied that all the claims are legitimate and this is apparent even from the briefest look at the details. I’m also satisfied that GTR not only have their suspicion wrong, but that it is not even reasonable for them to suspect the OP of fraud.

I suspect GTR are contacting their top (however many) claimers by volume and sending them identical correspondence. This will ensnare a number of fraudulent claimers. However they can’t even have looked at the OP’s claim history before writing to them. Therefore the forum may expect to hear from more people in the same situation in the future.

The correspondence sent to the OP by GTR contains allegations and threats which have absolutely no substance.

I understand the OP is in correspondence with other forum members who are offering help but this update should help clarify any ambiguities about whether the OP is legitimate. They are.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

(Posting with permission from the OP)

The OP has been in contact privately with a journey history and ticket details.

I’m satisfied that all the claims are legitimate and this is apparent even from the briefest look at the details. I’m also satisfied that GTR not only have their suspicion wrong, but that it is not even reasonable for them to suspect the OP of fraud.

I suspect GTR are contacting their top (however many) claimers by volume and sending them identical correspondence. This will ensnare a number of fraudulent claimers. However they can’t even have looked at the OP’s claim history before writing to them. Therefore the forum may expect to hear from more people in the same situation in the future.

The correspondence sent to the OP by GTR contains allegations and threats which have absolutely no substance.

I understand the OP is in correspondence with other forum members who are offering help but this update should help clarify any ambiguities about whether the OP is legitimate. They are.

The promised new Rail Ombudsman can't come soon enough...