WMT - fraud investigation

[av51]

Hi, hoping for some advice on the below matter and how to respond please.

I was issued a PFN for purchasing ticket after boarding the train when I was stopped by WMT revenue protection at Snow Hill. I paid the PFN the same day.

I subsequently received an email from the fraud investigation team at WMT, wording was the same as other threads on this forum. I responded to this very simply acknowledging the incident and stating the PFN had been paid providing the transaction ID as proof and that it was my understanding that this closed the matter.

I have just received the email below from WMT, which is now asking for proof I hold/held a disabled railcard. To confirm I have correctly held a disabled railcard, albeit with a gap over covid when I didn't use the railway.

I think they are looking at other instances of this occuring but this is not clear from the email.

Any advice would be gratefully received - thank you! Obviously I'm quite worried!

-----
Thank you for your response

Please be aware that the incident which lead to this investigation is for the Penalty fare that was issued on the day in question.

These incidents are then forwarded to us in the fraud department for checks on all historic rail journeys for further investigation.

As it stands you are liable for these tickets as they are attached to your account no, with the use of this email address that you have replied to us on, which is connected to the device you own and purchased the Tickets on and under the Trainline T’S and c’s you are held liable for any transaction you make.

when dealing with invalid bought tickets as they would have not been valid at the time and for reference, if stopped by a revenue officer a ticket with an invalid Railcard the penalty under the regulations of railways acts 2018 and National Rail Conditions of carriage it is £100 plus the cost of a valid ticket for every journey. Which is why we process the full amount not the difference because it contravenes Regulations and is classed as fraud under the fraud act 2006.

Whilst investigating your case and before we investigate further, we can see attached to your tickets you have applied Disabled persons Railcard on multiple occasions. we will need to see proof and proof of purchase between the date range of January 2020 and May 2025 so we can adjust amounts accordingly, or if necessary.

When we ask for proof of railcard this is because it could affect your case and is done before we send you any amounts, we deem you may owe.

Improper use of this facility is classed as fraudulent activity. If you cannot provide this within the next 7 days, then the final amount will be calculated at the full cost.
---

 

[AlterEgo]

Please also show us their original email and the email you sent WMT. You shouldn’t reply to this speculative emails about historic and unprovable offences.

 

[av51]

Thanks for responding swiftly. See attached original email from WMT and my response.

Redacted transaction nos etc.

 

[Egg Centric]

Ignore their barely literate response

 

[Haywain]

It appears that they are choosing to accuse you, with absolutely no evidence, of something that you haven’t done. I think you should ignore the letter and let them waste their own time with their investigation rather than wasting yours.

 

[NorthWestRover]

when dealing with invalid bought tickets as they would have not been valid at the time and for reference, if stopped by a revenue officer a ticket with an invalid Railcard the penalty under the regulations of railways acts 2018 and National Rail Conditions of carriage it is £100 plus the cost of a valid ticket for every journey. Which is why we process the full amount not the difference because it contravenes Regulations and is classed as fraud under the fraud act 2006.

Ignore their barely literate response

Quite. What on earth does that paragraph I have quoted mean?!

 

[Hadders]

This is a very poorly worded email from WMT and frankly, this is poor behaviour from WMT.

The important principle here is that purchasing tickets is not illegal but travelling without a valid ticket is illegal. To secure a conviction in court WMT have to prove to a court that you used these tickets. I'm not convinced that showing tickets linked to an email address or phone shows this, especially as it is perfectly legal to purchase tickets for someone else.

There is no requirement to keep railcards past their expiry date, and WMT asking for expired railcards really does concern me.

 

[enyoueffsea]

I'm not convinced that showing tickets linked to an email address or phone shows this, especially as it is perfectly legal to purchase tickets for someone else.

It doesn’t prove this at all. It’s entirely speculative and shouldn’t be responded to.

WMT appear to be going very rogue recently, even more so than normal.

They can’t be far away from sending threatening emails to anyone who ever uses a railcard.

 

[av51]

Thank you all for your thoughts and advice, really appreciated.

I'll ignore the email and not respond.

Should further correspondence be received from WMT I'll update this thread.

 

[Hadders]

Just to be aware that ignoring the email will see further follow-up emails threatening police involvement, prosecution, fraud etc. Do let us know if you receive further contact.

 

[AdamWW]

"if stopped by a revenue officer a ticket with an invalid Railcard the penalty under the regulations of railways acts 2018 and National Rail Conditions of carriage it is £100 plus the cost of a valid ticket for every journey"

Does anyone know where this figure of £100 comes from?
I know it's the (undiscounted) Penalty Fare amount, but that wouldn't apply to a situation which includes the "cost of a valid ticket for every journey".

At least we know that humans are writing these messages because generative AI would write in proper grammar.

 

[styles]

"if stopped by a revenue officer a ticket with an invalid Railcard the penalty under the regulations of railways acts 2018 and National Rail Conditions of carriage it is £100 plus the cost of a valid ticket for every journey"

Does anyone know where this figure of £100 comes from?
I know it's the (undiscounted) Penalty Fare amount, but that wouldn't apply to a situation which includes the "cost of a valid ticket for every journey".

At least we know that humans are writing these messages because generative AI would write in proper grammar.

It's in The Railways (Penalty Fare Regulations) 2018, as amended in 2022:

Amendment ("Amendment of regulation 9") https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2022/1094/made to be read in conjunction with the original https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2018/366/regulation/9/made:

5.—(1) In regulation 9(1), at the beginning, insert the words “Subject to paragraph (1A),”.

(2) After regulation 9(1), insert—

“(1A) In respect of England, where a penalty fare is charged under regulation 5(1) to a person travelling by, present on, or leaving a train, the amount of the penalty fare is—

(a)£100 plus the price of the full single fare applicable, or

(b)if paid before the end of the period of 21 days beginning with the day following the day on which the penalty fare is charged, £50 plus the price of the full single fare applicable.

Their wording in their email isn't the best, but they're basically saying that for each evaded fare the penalty fare may be £100 + the cost of a valid ticket. That is assuming though that the other conditions are met for a penalty fare to be issued for the journey.

 

[AlterEgo]

Their wording in their email isn't the best, but they're basically saying that for each evaded fare the penalty fare may be £100 + the cost of a valid ticket. That is assuming though that the other conditions are met for a penalty fare to be issued for the journey.

They cannot issue a penalty fare retrospectively.

 

[styles]

They cannot issue a penalty fare retrospectively.

Yes, hence:

That is assuming though that the other conditions are met for a penalty fare to be issued for the journey.

 

[AlterEgo]

Yes, hence:

They're using the fact they would charge you a penalty fare each time to justify charging full Anytime fares. Something which is obviously stupid "ah damn we didn't catch you on those occasions but let us use legislation which doesn't apply to somehow say we are entitled to more than our actual losses".

 

[jumble]

Thanks for responding swiftly. See attached original email from WMT and my response.

Redacted transaction nos etc.

My Goodness

Are these people legally trained at all?

I cannot imagine that anyone who is would be stupid enought to be suggesting that someone who has bought a ticket after departure was somehow comitting a fraud by false representation.
As others have advised just block these clowns

 

[SuspectUsual]

As others have advised just block these clowns

No, whatever you do, don't block them. Ignore them? Absolutely, if that's what you decide. But blocking them would mean that if they decided to go down the prosecution route (however wrongly) you'd have no knowledge of it until after the event, and we've all seen how problematic that can be to unpick and put right

 

[jumble]

No, whatever you do, don't block them. Ignore them? Absolutely, if that's what you decide. But blocking them would mean that if they decided to go down the prosecution route (however wrongly) you'd have no knowledge of it until after the event, and we've all seen how problematic that can be to unpick and put right

Having considered carefully and mindful that there is a very minimum possibility that they will be stupid enough to prosecute I agree that actual blocking is taking an unnecessary risk.

 

[av51]

Thanks for the advice all, appreciated.

Having read it a couple of times I'm not clear as to what is being investigated further, is it:
a) potential other instances of purchasing a ticket on the train hence references to "amounts you may owe" / "final amount"
b) use of a railcard?

To be clear I'm not proposing to ask WMT but as others have pointed out the wording is so bad it's difficult to interpret!