False complaints - Train Companies seemingly increasing prosecuting false compensation claimants

185 · 13 Mar 2019

Recently, I was made aware of a couple of cases of customers submitting complaints which were utterly false, as confirmed by CCTV. Often would be limited to the same small handful of customers making multiple complaints to a number of companies. Now it seems a number of firms have had enough and literally gone on the attack - Virgin are now publicly advertising a role for a Fraud Investigator (passenger complaints) - a role which was previously (quietly) advertised on a recruitment firm's page on their behalf.

Personally, I have always been a strong believer in a robust Customer Charter process with decent compensation when the railway falls apart - but - a strong believer in punishing those greedy liars who would jeopardise these schemes with fraudulent claims.

RailUK Forums

js1000 · 13 Mar 2019

It's difficult to define what constitutes Delay Repay fraud though as there is no standard legal regulations outlining the TOCs and passenger's rights as the Penalty Fare Regulations do let's say.

Some TOCs state that if you "intended" to catch the train but it was delayed or cancelled this would imply if you travelled on alternative routes or form of transport then your Delay Repay claim would still be valid. Other TOCs state that you must have "travelled" on the delayed train in question for the claim to be valid. There is a divergence in how it is applied and there is probably a good case for standardising and outlining the scheme.

Of course, I imagine we're talking about the serial claimants who somehow manage to get the one service a day which is delayed/cancelled everyday, even if it's 6 in the morning or 10 at night. It seems like there are quite a few individuals who are too daft to realise how suspicious their claims actually appear.

AM9 · 13 Mar 2019

js1000 said:
It's difficult to define what constitutes Delay Repay fraud though as there is no standard legal regulations outlining the TOCs and passenger's rights as the Penalty Fare Regulations do let's say.

Some TOCs state that if you "intended" to catch the train but it was delayed or cancelled this would imply if you travelled on alternative routes or form of transport then your Delay Repay claim would still be valid. Other TOCs state that you must have "travelled" on the delayed train in question for the claim to be valid. There is a divergence in how it is applied and there is probably a good case for standardising and outlining the scheme.

Of course, I imagine we're talking about the serial claimants who somehow manage to get the one service a day which is delayed/cancelled everyday, even if it's 6 in the morning or 10 at night. It seems like there are quite a few individuals who are too daft to realise how suspicious their claims actually appear.

I agree, - a bit like a poster here (can't remember who) that suggested if a service regularly suffered from late running and they could get to the station from a place of work to catch an already delayed train, (as shown by RTT). Having read the thread on here, it may be that TOCs are keeping a watch should it look like such a scam was being pulled.

Kite159 · 13 Mar 2019

Isn't there some slightly dodgy websites where if you put details of your ticket & journey it will scan to see if any journeys meet the criteria and encourages you to make a claim?

Haywain · 14 Mar 2019

Kite159 said:
Isn't there some slightly dodgy websites where if you put details of your ticket & journey it will scan to see if any journeys meet the criteria and encourages you to make a claim?

Such websites do exist, yes.

Belperpete · 14 Mar 2019

js1000 said:
Some TOCs state that if you "intended" to catch the train but it was delayed or cancelled this would imply if you travelled on alternative routes or form of transport then your Delay Repay claim would still be valid. Other TOCs state that you must have "travelled" on the delayed train in question for the claim to be valid.

Some TOCs may allow a claim and others may not in a particular situation, but submitting a claim that is then disallowed is not fraud provided that you specify truthfully what actually happened. While I encourage people to submit a claim whenever they are significantly delayed, this should only be if they are genuinely delayed. If you say that you travelled on a particular train when you didn't, for example, then that clearly is fraud.

I am surprised though that Virgin are advertising for a specific Fraud Investigator (passenger complaints) role. I would have thought this would be something their general Revenue Protection and anti-fraud team would do.

AlterEgo · 14 Mar 2019

Belperpete said:
Some TOCs may allow a claim and others may not in a particular situation, but submitting a claim that is then disallowed is not fraud provided that you specify truthfully what actually happened. While I encourage people to submit a claim whenever they are significantly delayed, this should only be if they are genuinely delayed. If you say that you travelled on a particular train when you didn't, for example, then that clearly is fraud.

I am surprised though that Virgin are advertising for a specific Fraud Investigator (passenger complaints) role. I would have thought this would be something their general Revenue Protection and anti-fraud team would do.

The skills of an RPI and those of a dedicated office-based fraud investigator are very different.

Journeyman · 14 Mar 2019

What would you do if you showed up to a station for, say, an 0800 train, and the previous one at 0730 was cancelled? You could easily claim you were going to use the 0730, and no-one would be able to prove otherwise.

GadgetMan · 14 Mar 2019

Journeyman said:
What would you do if you showed up to a station for, say, an 0800 train, and the previous one at 0730 was cancelled? You could easily claim you were going to use the 0730, and no-one would be able to prove otherwise.

You could, then one day the 07:05 train will have been 26 late and departed at 07:31, leaving you to explain why if you were there for the cancelled 07:30, you failed to board a train at 07:31.

SWT_USER · 14 Mar 2019

js1000 said:
It's difficult to define what constitutes Delay Repay fraud though as there is no standard legal regulations outlining the TOCs and passenger's rights as the Penalty Fare Regulations do let's say.

Some TOCs state that if you "intended" to catch the train but it was delayed or cancelled this would imply if you travelled on alternative routes or form of transport then your Delay Repay claim would still be valid. Other TOCs state that you must have "travelled" on the delayed train in question for the claim to be valid. There is a divergence in how it is applied and there is probably a good case for standardising and outlining the scheme.

Of course, I imagine we're talking about the serial claimants who somehow manage to get the one service a day which is delayed/cancelled everyday, even if it's 6 in the morning or 10 at night. It seems like there are quite a few individuals who are too daft to realise how suspicious their claims actually appear.

Agree with your post - in particular the bold. Wasn't there a case a few years ago where London Midland (as was) prosecuted a couple who were claiming for multiple journeys in different directions on the same day?

That said - I do have a varied travel pattern and will always claim if I'm delayed. Not much I can do if it does look suspicious.

I do wonder for smartcard customers on SWR whether they actually check the touch in/out timings. This wouldn't always prove anything - if the train I intend to catch is cancelled I'm not going to go to the station at the time it's due just to touch in.

ForTheLoveOf · 14 Mar 2019

SWT_USER said:
Agree with your post - in particular the bold. Wasn't there a case a few years ago where London Midland (as was) prosecuted a couple who were claiming for multiple journeys in different directions on the same day?

That said - I do have a varied travel pattern and will always claim if I'm delayed. Not much I can do if it does look suspicious.

I do wonder for smartcard customers on SWR whether they actually check the touch in/out timings. This wouldn't always prove anything - if the train I intend to catch is cancelled I'm not going to go to the station at the time it's due just to touch in.

Is the smartcard invalid if you don't touch it in, even if you have a season ticket loaded onto it?

185 · 15 Mar 2019

Interestingly in their case, VT concentrate on Delay Repay fraud, in my opinion the hardest to prove fraudulent. I heard some time ago of deliberate 'faulty' cancellations being put on trust to see who claims for them, but never witnessed it in practise.

I reckon other types would be far easier to prove, where customers have say made a false customer service related claim and CCTV or other data metrics show the opposite of what they are claiming.

jon0844 · 15 Mar 2019

ForTheLoveOf said:
Is the smartcard invalid if you don't touch it in, even if you have a season ticket loaded onto it?

The rules are you need to touch in and out. It may not be enforced at gatelines, but it would help in investigations like this. At the very least, if you claimed and they saw you didn't tap in or out they'd have a good justification to not pay. To prove you were lying would be more difficult, but they wouldn't need to - they'd just not pay. And how could you complain*?

* if the card readers were faulty, you'd have said so in the claim and I'm sure it could be easily and quickly verified.

AlterEgo · 15 Mar 2019

185 said:
I reckon other types would be far easier to prove, where customers have say made a false customer service related claim and CCTV or other data metrics show the opposite of what they are claiming.

...but much harder to prosecute and convict for.

Delay Repay fraud, once you have evidence, is straight up fraud for financial gain.

ForTheLoveOf · 15 Mar 2019

jon0844 said:
The rules are you need to touch in and out. It may not be enforced at gatelines, but it would help in investigations like this. At the very least, if you claimed and they saw you didn't tap in or out they'd have a good justification to not pay. To prove you were lying would be more difficult, but they wouldn't need to - they'd just not pay. And how could you complain*?

* if the card readers were faulty, you'd have said so in the claim and I'm sure it could be easily and quickly verified.

Hmm, well that's a bit rubbish. You lose a massive amount of flexibility over a paper season ticket, if you have to make sure you touch in and out each time

robbeech · 15 Mar 2019

ForTheLoveOf said:
Hmm, well that's a bit rubbish. You lose a massive amount of flexibility over a paper season ticket, if you have to make sure you touch in and out each time

That’s the general idea with moving forwards with a lot of ticketing concepts though isn’t it. Less flexibility means it is simpler.

SWT_USER · 15 Mar 2019

jon0844 said:
The rules are you need to touch in and out. It may not be enforced at gatelines, but it would help in investigations like this. At the very least, if you claimed and they saw you didn't tap in or out they'd have a good justification to not pay. To prove you were lying would be more difficult, but they wouldn't need to - they'd just not pay. And how could you complain*?

* if the card readers were faulty, you'd have said so in the claim and I'm sure it could be easily and quickly verified.

If you claim for a cancellation there wouldn't always be a tap in or out though. If the train you intend to catch is cancelled and you decide not to travel or take an alternative route you could still claim.

JN114 · 15 Mar 2019

Virgin, in line with most Intercity operators; take a great interest in numbers of passengers on the train. A friend who works in revenue for one of the Intercity TOCs did tell me recently if a case where during disruption more delay repay claims were submitted for a particularly delayed train than both the train manager and on-train software had counted (those counts by and large agreed, and shewed very few people on this train; however the number of delay repay submissions was significantly higher).

AlterEgo · 15 Mar 2019

JN114 said:
Virgin, in line with most Intercity operators; take a great interest in numbers of passengers on the train. A friend who works in revenue for one of the Intercity TOCs did tell me recently if a case where during disruption more delay repay claims were submitted for a particularly delayed train than both the train manager and on-train software had counted (those counts by and large agreed, and shewed very few people on this train; however the number of delay repay submissions was significantly higher).

Given that for very significantly delayed trains there will be as many legitimate claims for people who miss connections or take alternative routes, what does that research actually show? No conclusions can be made about fraud from it.

JN114 · 15 Mar 2019

If the Train Manager counts 100 people on the train between A & B, and 200 people submit delay repay claims claiming to have been delayed on that train between A & B, 100 people were lying. You can’t claim delay repay for a delayed train you weren’t on. If you missed that train because of a late previous connection; you still can’t claim delay repay for that train; you claim against the original delay that caused you to miss the connection.

AlterEgo · 15 Mar 2019

JN114 said:
You can’t claim delay repay for a delayed train you weren’t on.

Er, yes you can.

Example: I am at Birmingham New Street, wanting to go to London on the 1510 Virgin service. A person gets hit by a train at Adderley Park, and therefore there are no services for the foreseeable hour or two. The 1510 is stuck in a logjam somewhere north of New Street.

Tickets are being accepted via XC, GWR and Chiltern to get to London, so I use my ticket to get to London with an hour's delay.

I was never on the 1510, but I must claim against it.

This - and many variants of it - is really common. I hope whoever is doing the survey you mentioned isn't assuming those who weren't on the train but who claimed against it were acting dishonestly without further investigation.

I used to process delay repay for a TOC. I know all the ins and outs.

ForTheLoveOf · 15 Mar 2019

AlterEgo said:
Er, yes you can.

Example: I am at Birmingham New Street, wanting to go to London on the 1510 Virgin service. A person gets hit by a train at Adderley Park, and therefore there are no services for the foreseeable hour or two. The 1510 is stuck in a logjam somewhere north of New Street.

Tickets are being accepted via XC, GWR and Chiltern to get to London, so I use my ticket to get to London with an hour's delay.

I was never on the 1510, but I must claim against it.

This - and many variants of it - is really common. I hope whoever is doing the survey you mentioned isn't assuming those who weren't on the train but who claimed against it were acting dishonestly without further investigation.

I used to process delay repay for a TOC. I know all the ins and outs.

Beyond this, which explains why there may sometimes be claims for trains that people weren't actually on, we must of course allow for some people to make mistakes in terms of what they claim for, which are of course not dishonest. Not dishonest, in the same way it isn't dishonest if a TOC issues a Penalty Fare where they shouldn't have done so, or where they charge a higher fare than they should have. All of these, we are reminded, could just be honest mistakes.

sheff1 · 15 Mar 2019

JN114 said:
You can’t claim delay repay for a delayed train you weren’t on.

To add to AlterEgo's example. Someone arrives at Sheffield to travel to Birmingham on the 1024 train to find it running 40 mins late so they instead travel on the 1055 which is on time. Their scheduled arrival time was 1127, their actual arrival time was 1207 so they are entitled to Delay Repay against the 1024 without ever setting foot on it. As the delayed 1024 is now running a few minutes behind the 1055 the number of walk up passengers boarding the former will be far less than normal.

The assertion that everyone making a claim against a train they were not on is "lying" is blatantly untrue.

Mathew S · 15 Mar 2019

ForTheLoveOf said:
Hmm, well that's a bit rubbish. You lose a massive amount of flexibility over a paper season ticket, if you have to make sure you touch in and out each time

I might be missing something, but how does having to touch in/out cost you flexibility? It's still valid for all the same journeys as any other season ticket.

sheff1 · 15 Mar 2019

Mathew S said:
I might be missing something, but how does having to touch in/out cost you flexibility? It's still valid for all the same journeys as any other season ticket.

The most obvious example (there are more) - you hold a season from Basingstoke to Woking. One day you need to travel to London so you buy a Woking to London return. If you have to touch in and out you must leave the train at Woking to do so and then continue on a later train - the same on the return. With a paper season ticket you can travel direct to London and back on one train - even one which doesn't stop at Woking.

simonw · 15 Mar 2019

sheff1 said:
The most obvious example (there are more) - you hold a season from Basingstoke to Woking. One day you need to travel to London so you buy a Woking to London return. If you have to touch in and out you must leave the train at Woking to do so and then continue on a later train - the same on the return. With a paper season ticket you can travel direct to London and back on one train - even one which doesn't stop at Woking.

You only have to touch in and out to get through the barriers. If the barriers are open you don't have to and there is no penalty for not doing so. So your example would work fine.

sheff1 · 15 Mar 2019

simonw said:
You only have to touch in and out to get through the barriers. If the barriers are open you don't have to and there is no penalty for not doing so.

That is not what the earlier poster said.

simonw · 15 Mar 2019

sheff1 said:
That is not what the earlier poster said.

I've used a smart card for my season ticket for the best part of two years and that is how it has worked for me. There may be a requirement in the regs that you should touch in and out but there is in reality no penalty for not doing so with a season ticket. It might be different if you load a single or return ticket rather than a season ticket, but your post talked of a season ticket.

Mathew S · 15 Mar 2019

sheff1 said:
The most obvious example (there are more) - you hold a season from Basingstoke to Woking. One day you need to travel to London so you buy a Woking to London return. If you have to touch in and out you must leave the train at Woking to do so and then continue on a later train - the same on the return. With a paper season ticket you can travel direct to London and back on one train - even one which doesn't stop at Woking.

This isn't the thread for this discussion, so let's not go any further, but I disagree. If you use the ticket in a valid way - which is the same as any other season ticket - then it's valid. No need to make a special change of trains to touch in/out. TOCs can ask you, but I would love to see one try to prosecute for it.

MikeWh · 15 Mar 2019

JN114 said:
If the Train Manager counts 100 people on the train between A & B, and 200 people submit delay repay claims claiming to have been delayed on that train between A & B, 100 people were lying. You can’t claim delay repay for a delayed train you weren’t on. If you missed that train because of a late previous connection; you still can’t claim delay repay for that train; you claim against the original delay that caused you to miss the connection.

I might be missing something here, but if a train leaves station A on time and gets held up for over 30 minutes by a signalling issue between A and B, where B is the next stop, then the only people claiming delay repay for that train ought to have been physically on it. Even more so if station A was the start of the service. If I am missing something, please can someone explain.

False complaints - Train Companies seemingly increasing prosecuting false compensation claimants

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member