Govia Notice of intention to prosecute

[junicat15]

Hello,

I've received a Notice of intention to prosecute letter from Govia Thameslink and I could really do with some advice please!

I believe that I received the Notice letter because I had been issued penalty fines on two prior occasions. I'm very ashamed to say that prior to being caught on 11 June I had a habit of purchasing outbound-only tickets from Arlesey to Farringdon. Not as an excuse but for context as to why I did this, Arlesey doesn't have a ticket barrier and in Farringdon I switch onto the tube for the rest of my journey. I noticed that I'd get my outbound tickets inspected and never my return tickets, and having just returned from parental leave money is tight. Since 11 June I have been purchasing the correct return tickets, but I have counted 25 times in my Trainline app where I purchased the outbound-only tickets.

On 11 June I did have a valid outbound ticket, but it was for the following train at 09:03 and not the 08:35 that I caught (there is no price difference between the two). I was in a hurry to make the train and payment for the ticket failed at the same time that I boarded the train as my station has very little mobile reception. I know this is my fault. I immediately refreshed the Trainline app but I could no longer choose to pay for the 08:35 as it had departed. It took 3 minutes to complete the payment with bad reception. Half an hour later a ticket inspector checked my ticket. I politely explained that I originally tried to pay for the 08:35 and showed him the timestamp of payment at 08:38. The ticket inspector did agree that my ticket was technically valid, but still took my details. I presume he then saw my name on the system, hence being issued with this letter.

I've attached the redacted letter that I received, but the details of offence are: "That you on 11 June 2024, Did enter a train for the purpose of travelling on the railway, and upon inspection at Farringdon <lu> (ZFD); did not produce a valid ticket entitling travel."

I have read a number of cases on this forum which were very helpful with drafting a response letter, thank you. I want to include a mention of the fact that I had purchased a ticket, whilst fully accepting that I was still in the wrong. Given that I failed to pay for 25 return tickets I do not want to incriminate myself so have not mentioned this, though I am fully aware that they may discover these nonetheless and am preparing myself to pay a hefty fine should they audit my Trainline account. It goes without saying that I've learned my lesson and I would be very grateful for any advice you may have regarding my response letter.

--

Dear GTR,

Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to respond to your letter dated 26th July 2024, Reference number: XX

I would like to sincerely apologise for travelling with a ticket that was not valid for my journey. In my hurry to make the train, I realised that my payment for the 08:35 had failed once I boarded the train. I immediately attempted to make payment again but was unsuccessful due to the train having departed. I therefore paid for the following train (09:03) with a timestamp 08:38 (ticket reference TTXXX). As you are aware, further down the journey an Inspection Officer rightly informed me that the ticket was not valid.

I accept that it is entirely my fault that I had not ensured that payment had been taken prior to stepping on to the train. It is my responsibility as a passenger of the railway services to ensure I always hold a valid ticket prior to travelling. I am very apologetic for taking advantage of the railway service and I am extremely regretful for my lapse in judgement.

I am committed to ensuring that I hold a valid ticket before travelling and now that I have discovered the Flexi Season Ticket option I will be purchasing these for my travel after the Summer holidays.

It would be extremely appreciated if your company would be willing to settle this matter out of court and I am very willing to pay the outstanding fare in addition to your administrative costs in dealing with this matter.

Sincerely,

 

[AntoniC]

My advice would be NOT to mention the other 25 occasions unless GTR specifically ask about them.

 

[Hadders]

Welcome to the forum!

I think the letter is fine, please do let us know how you get on.

 

[junicat15]

Thanks for your feedback @Hadders and AntoniC, I will be posting the tracked letter tomorrow and will update you once I receive a response.

 

[MotCO]

I am a bit confused. You say that you had a valid ticket for the 9.03 train, but not the 8.35. Excuse my ignorance, but are Thameslink tickets train specific, or was it an anytime ticket that was valid on any train in the morning rush hour? If your ticket was valid, is there a case to answer? However, if you did not produce the (valid) 9.03 ticket for inspection, then technically you "did not produce a valid ticket entitling travel".

 

[Haywain]

You say that you had a valid ticket for the 9.03 train, but not the 8.35. Excuse my ignorance, but are Thameslink tickets train specific, or was it an anytime ticket that was valid on any train in the morning rush hour? If your ticket was valid, is there a case to answer? However, if you did not produce the (valid) 9.03 ticket for inspection, then technically you "did not produce a valid ticket entitling travel".

The key to this is that the ticket was not purchased prior to departure of the train, and the OP boarded without holding a ticket. As GTR are in the habit of offering settlement amounts that are at the lower end of the scale I can see little point in trying to get clever over whether the wording of the letter (and it's a letter, not a charge for the court to consider) is strictly accurate.

 

[furlong]

"The ticket inspector did agree that my ticket was technically valid,"

So you did produce a ticket valid for travel (there can be no "technically" about this - it is either valid or it is not) and the company (through the inspector) already agreed that you showed a valid ticket, contrary to the incorrect assertion in the letter?

Your reply needs to make that clear and enclose a copy of your ticket, pointing out the error in the letter, and trusting that that will be the end of that matter.

Purchasing after departure does not make a ticket invalid. It is a railway byelaw offence to board without a ticket, but in the circumstances described you'd expect train companies to follow their policies and use their discretion not to prosecute, not least as prosecution where the correct fare was paid just 3 minutes late and half-an-hour before inspection would be unlikely to pass a public interest test.

You're admitting still owing them money for other journeys though and they can certainly try to make you pay for those, but it seems the journey in question is not one of them.

I can see little point in trying to get clever over whether the wording of the letter (and it's a letter, not a charge for the court to consider) is strictly accurate.

They have been using the same words in court, and it's very disappointing to see GTR still sending letters like this. It remains to be seen whether this gets scooped up into the wider net of procedural problems leading potentially to convictions being annulled and out-of-court settlements being made void and repaid.

 

[MotCO]

The key to this is that the ticket was not purchased prior to departure of the train, and the OP boarded without holding a ticket. As GTR are in the habit of offering settlement amounts that are at the lower end of the scale I can see little point in trying to get clever over whether the wording of the letter (and it's a letter, not a charge for the court to consider) is strictly accurate.

My issue is that there was a ticket purchased prior to departure, but the OP thought it was only valid on the 9.03 not the 8.35, so he purchased a second ticket for the 8.35 but this did not arrive before departure.

 

[furlong]

Well for complete clarity, can the OP provide full details of the ticket(s) concerned including price, type, stations, date/time purchased etc.? Train companies and retailers have numerous obligations to the purchasers of tickets which include being clear about their validity.

My issue is that there was a ticket purchased prior to departure, but the OP thought it was only valid on the 9.03 not the 8.35, so he purchased a second ticket for the 8.35 but this did not arrive before departure.

That was not my reading of the original post.

 

[MotCO]

Well for complete clarity, can the OP provide full details of the ticket(s) concerned including price, type, stations, date/time purchased etc.? Train companies and retailers have numerous obligations to the purchasers of tickets which include being clear about their validity.


That was not my reading of the original post.

I see what you mean. The OP started by saying he had a ticket for the 9.03, then went on to discuss buying a ticket for the 8.35. We need the OP to clarify.

 

[30907]

I see what you mean. The OP started by saying he had a ticket for the 9.03, then went on to discuss buying a ticket for the 8.35. We need the OP to clarify.

It's reasonable to assume that the ticket was as the OP described, a single. There is no Offpeak or Advance fare for the journey (only a Super OP valid at weekends, which is irrelevant.)

A Byelaw 18.1 offence (usual exceptions apart) was committed when the OP boarded the train and evidenced by not producing a ticket purchased before its departure. I agree it's a shame GTR can't get their wording to match the byelaw.

 

[junicat15]

Hi all,

Sorry for the late responses to the above thread. Correct that there is no Offpeak/Advance option for the journey that I was making and the issue was that I boarded the 08:35 without a valid ticket before stepping on board the train, thereby making my 09:03 ticket that I purchased (at 08:38) invalid. Hope that clears that up.

I posted my response (as drafted above) via Tracked Delivery on 3rd August. I can see that my letter was received and signed for by 'Reception' on 5th August.

However unfortunately this seems to have escalated. I have just received a letter via email from the GTR Fraud Team titled 'Govia Thameslink Railway - Fraudulent Rail Travel'. The sender has attached a letter (as a Word Doc, hence why I was able to easily redact it). Please find attached letter. They say "I understand you have recently been in correspondence with GTR’s Prosecutions Department, however an investigation has established that you avoided rail fares on multiple dates and the case has therefore been referred to GTR’s Fraud Department."

It's clear that they've investigated and found my previous failures to buy full tickets which I completely accept is my fault. They ask for a response within 7 days. There has not been any specific question asked so I'm not too sure what I am meant to include in my response. Is anyone able to help?

Many thanks for any advice.

 

[WesternLancer]

Hi all,

Sorry for the late responses to the above thread. Correct that there is no Offpeak/Advance option for the journey that I was making and the issue was that I boarded the 08:35 without a valid ticket before stepping on board the train, thereby making my 09:03 ticket that I purchased (at 08:38) invalid. Hope that clears that up.

I posted my response (as drafted above) via Tracked Delivery on 3rd August. I can see that my letter was received and signed for by 'Reception' on 5th August.

However unfortunately this seems to have escalated. I have just received a letter via email from the GTR Fraud Team titled 'Govia Thameslink Railway - Fraudulent Rail Travel'. The sender has attached a letter (as a Word Doc, hence why I was able to easily redact it). Please find attached letter. They say "I understand you have recently been in correspondence with GTR’s Prosecutions Department, however an investigation has established that you avoided rail fares on multiple dates and the case has therefore been referred to GTR’s Fraud Department."

It's clear that they've investigated and found my previous failures to buy full tickets which I completely accept is my fault. They ask for a response within 7 days. There has not been any specific question asked so I'm not too sure what I am meant to include in my response. Is anyone able to help?

Many thanks for any advice.

So looks like they have found evidence relating to the other 25 journeys you mentioned up thread where you have not had the correct ticket - see what others think in terms of a reply, but they probably now want you to acknowledge that and be prepared to pay for that travel too in the hope that they will agree to settle it without court caution. Hopefully they are looking for an indication of your continued willingness to co-operate with them in exchange for which they may still settle.

It may be that a reply from you that includes some kind of admission of what you have done on other occasions, and perhaps a polite request for them to detail the occasions concerned so that you can check your own ticket records might be the next step? Or something that clearly states you are 'willing to co-operate with further investigation as per the letter dated xx'

I see it is from a Fraud Department with a different e-mail address to the prosecutions department. No idea if any significance should be accorded to that.

 

[Haywain]

Is anyone able to help?

Given the wording of that letter, and the fact that we know that GTR are really quite reasonable on dealing with these matters, I think you should respond and accept that you have identified 25 other occasions where you have not purchased the correct ticket. If that is a true reflection of what you have done I don't think there is any benefit in asking them to provide details for you to agree with in the way suggested above. Other than that, the normal stuff in the letter - apology, request for settlement.

I see it is from a Fraud Department with a different e-mail address to the prosecutions department. No idea if any significance should be accorded to that.

Same office, different desk, I suspect.

 

[WesternLancer]

I don't think there is any benefit in asking them to provide details for you to agree with in the way suggested above. Other than that, the normal stuff in the letter - apology, request for settlement.

Actually I agree with this approach - they are looking for co-operation after all presumably. Amended my post above.

Same office, different desk, I suspect.

 

[junicat15]

Thanks your your replies @WesternLancer and @Haywain. Interested to see if @Hadders has anything to add but I will go ahead in drafting up a response to the Fraud Dept. Shall I first post the draft here for review?
Thanks again.

 

[Haywain]

Shall I first post the draft here for review?

I think that would be a good idea.

 

[WesternLancer]

Thanks your your replies @WesternLancer and @Haywain. Interested to see if @Hadders has anything to add but I will go ahead in drafting up a response to the Fraud Dept. Shall I first post the draft here for review?
Thanks again.

also - make your own private calculation of the fares evaded and do all you can to put that money aside as if they can still be persuaded to offer a settlement you will need to be ready to make a payment promptly and in full. You need to price the fares at the Standard Anytime Single price for each individual journey where the correct ticket was not held (ie a return trip is 2 Anytime Singles).

An Arlesey - London Anytime day single looks like £22.10 at current prices.

 

[junicat15]

Thankyou for that tip - I shall start calculating plus factor in a hefty admin fee as I think I've seen mentioned in other posts.

I hope it goes without saying that I am very willing to apologise, cooperate and do everything I can to settle this out of court but for my own peace of mind from previous cases you've seen that had the Fraud Dept involved, are you fairly confident that they'll still be prepared to settle rather than to take it to court? That is, they want me to own up to it before they offer the settlement.

 

[Haywain]

for my own peace of mind from previous cases you've seen that had the Fraud Dept involved, are you fairly confident that they'll still be prepared to settle rather than to take it to court?

I remain confident that you will achieve a settlement.

 

[MotCO]

I remain confident that you will achieve a settlement.

...provided that you engage with them in a positive and timely manner.

 

[junicat15]

@MotCO that is absolutely my intention!

 

[Hadders]

Just to add that GTR's latest letter is saying they want to speak to you, which will be to discuss the value of the settlement. Experience has shown us that if you write a suitable email to them, admitting to what you've done, then you can probably avoid having to speak to them. Many people struggle to speak to people in these sort of situations so like to try and find a way of avoiding having to have the conversation.

If you post a draft reply in this thread we can proof read it for you.

 

[junicat15]

Hello,
Thanks all for your help thus far. I have drafted a response to the Fraud team that needs to be sent via email, as they request in their letter.
Note that I received a message from RailUK Forums to say that my post in which I attached the letter from the Fraud team had been removed because it included identifiable information (which on review was the name of the Fraud officer, not myself), and I can still view the post so I'm unsure if others can. As a reminder I am to respond to the Fraud team following their investigation of my history. I have re-uploaded the redacted letter just in case.

I considered adding a note on why I avoided paying for the full fares (returning to work after parental leave, cost of childcare, etc) but in truth I don't think including it will help me. I'm interested to hear if others think otherwise.

I would be extremely grateful of any input and advice. Thank you!

--

Dear Mr. [Name of Fraud officer]

I write in response to your email dated Friday 16th August 2024.

I am extremely ashamed to admit that I have avoided rail fares on multiple dates this year. I have taken the time to review every rail journey that I have taken this year (booked via the Trainline app) and I am embarrassed to say that I have identified a total of 24 dates (including 11th June 2024) in which I travelled without the correct and valid rail ticket. I have summarised the dates in an attachment to this email.

I am extremely regretful for repeatedly taking advantage of the railway service that I rely on to commute to and from work. Please accept my deepest apologies and I can sincerely say that I have truly learned my lesson and will never take advantage of any of the railway services again. I hope the fact that I reverted to paying for the correct tickets immediately following the 11th of June can be seen as a token of my commitment.

I am currently recovering from surgery and am therefore unable to commute but when I return to using the rail services I am committed to ensuring that I always hold a valid ticket before travelling. I have also discovered the Flexi Season Ticket option which I will be purchasing going forward.

It would be extremely appreciated if your company would be willing to settle this matter out of court and I am very willing to pay a sum that Govia sees fair to resolve the matter in addition to your administrative costs in dealing with this issue.

[Including attachment]

Sincerely,

 

[WesternLancer]

Hello,
Thanks all for your help thus far. I have drafted a response to the Fraud team that needs to be sent via email, as they request in their letter.
Note that I received a message from RailUK Forums to say that my post in which I attached the letter from the Fraud team had been removed because it included identifiable information (which on review was the name of the Fraud officer, not myself), and I can still view the post so I'm unsure if others can. As a reminder I am to respond to the Fraud team following their investigation of my history. I have re-uploaded the redacted letter just in case.

I considered adding a note on why I avoided paying for the full fares (returning to work after parental leave, cost of childcare, etc) but in truth I don't think including it will help me. I'm interested to hear if others think otherwise.

I would be extremely grateful of any input and advice. Thank you!

--

Dear Mr. [Name of Fraud officer]

I write in response to your email dated Friday 16th August 2024.

I am extremely ashamed to admit that I have avoided rail fares on multiple dates this year. I have taken the time to review every rail journey that I have taken this year (booked via the Trainline app) and I am embarrassed to say that I have identified a total of 24 dates (including 11th June 2024) in which I travelled without the correct and valid rail ticket. I have summarised the dates in an attachment to this email.

I am extremely regretful for repeatedly taking advantage of the railway service that I rely on to commute to and from work. Please accept my deepest apologies and I can sincerely say that I have truly learned my lesson and will never take advantage of any of the railway services again. I hope the fact that I reverted to paying for the correct tickets immediately following the 11th of June can be seen as a token of my commitment.

I am currently recovering from surgery and am therefore unable to commute but when I return to using the rail services I am committed to ensuring that I always hold a valid ticket before travelling. I have also discovered the Flexi Season Ticket option which I will be purchasing going forward.

It would be extremely appreciated if your company would be willing to settle this matter out of court and I am very willing to pay a sum that Govia sees fair to resolve the matter in addition to your administrative costs in dealing with this issue.

[Including attachment]

Sincerely,

I'm not sure that there is much to be gained by adding in the reasons for doing it - but that said I doubt it would count against your efforts to get a settlement

On the draft I think at the end it's maybe better to phrase it as if it's a request that you would like them to be sympathetic enough to consider (as it's obvious you would appreciate it)

eg "I would be most grateful if you would be prepared to consider allowing me to settle this matter out of court and I am very willing to pay a sum that Govia sees fair to resolve the matter in addition to your administrative costs in dealing with this issue."

But that's only a small matter of emphasis and I don't think it's critical in what otherwise looks like a good draft to me.