Letter from TFW about Misuse of 26-30 railcard*settled*

[Poller2712.]

Hi all,
I have read a few similar issues on this and was wondering if anyone had their outcome. Back story - I work in cardiff as a store manager and I commute from hengoed station. I work shift patterns and when I have bought a ticket for my late shift using my rail card it states travel any time of day. I have went into work earlier and this is a common thing.

They have checked my ticket and rail card and I have never been told otherwise so I didn’t even think it was an issue until I received this email which is the same email I’ve seen around on this forum.

Good afternoon,



This office is the investigating authority for Transport for Wales Rail Limited (TfW). I have submitted a subject access request to Trainline to obtain your contact details.

This email has been generated because your account was flagged by one of our staff for incorrectly using your railcard. The reason for this flag was because a 26-30 discount had been applied to your ticket whilst travelling outside of the restrictions of this railcard ie before 10am on a weekday with no minimum fare of £12 having been paid.

For reference, there is a link below to the full terms and conditions of travel from the National Rail website:



https://www.26-30railcard.co.uk/help/railcard-terms-conditions/



As a result of the flag, your travel history has been scrutinised. I can see that between November 2022 and September 2023 you travelled a total of 55 times whilst claiming the 26-30 discount incorrectly as your tickets were all scanned before 10am.



I have sufficient evidence to progress this case for prosecution, however I am currently considering which is the most appropriate legislation.



It would seem you boarded the train using a ticket with a discount that you were not entitled to in an attempt to avoid paying the full fare of your journey. This matter could be progressed under differing pieces of legislation, namely:



Regulation of Railways Act 1889 Section 5(3)

If any person —

1. Travels or attempts to travel on a railway without having previously paid his fare, and with intent to avoid payment thereof.

Or, the legislation which carries the higher penalty:​

​

Fraud Act 2006, section 2 Fraud by false representation​

(1) A person is in breach of this section if he—

(a) dishonestly makes a false representation, and

(b) intends, by making the representation—

(i) to make a gain for himself or another, or

(ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.



Before deciding which avenue to pursue I would like to give you this opportunity to present any mitigating circumstances. I recommend that you seek independent legal advice from a solicitor versed in criminal law who is registered with the Law Society. It may also be an advantage if they have experience in rail fare law as this is a specialist area.

Please return any information to the following email address,

If you do not respond to this letter within 14 days, I can pass this information to British Transport Police to progress the matter further.

to say I am beside myself upset is an understatement. I have never been in trouble for anything.

I am more than happy to pay the difference which is £156.

Has anyone had a reply or outcome about this?

Thanks in advance

 

[TheJester]

Hello.

I think your calculation is some way off. As you were travelling with an invalid ticket they will price what you need to pay as the undiscounted anytime single fare. What you have paid will not be taken into consideration.

 

[Poller2712.]

Hello.

I think your calculation is some way off. As you were travelling with an invalid ticket they will price what you need to pay as the undiscounted anytime single fare. What you have paid will not be taken into consideration.

Right okay.

Thank you, as stated before any info around this is helpful.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Welcome to the forum!

The good news is that from the tone of the letter, it seems to me that TfW are looking to settle this matter out of court, as long as you co-operate with them.

The bad news (and I see that @TheJester has just made the same point) is that it will cost more than you think: the railway's usual practice is not to take any account of fares that you have paid (because they weren't a part payment for a valid ticket, but full payment for an invalid ticket) and work out the amount you owe on the basis of paying full single fares (again, they don't calculate on the basis of return tickets).

My advice (and others may be along with differing advice - we're all individuals and we can have different views!) would be to

- have a good look at your Trainline records. See if you agree with their calculation of 55 journeys
- respond to the letter. Explain the mistake that you made
- confirm that now you know, you won't make the same mistake again
- ask if it would be possible to settle the matter out of court for the train fares owed and a contribution to the costs that TfW have incurred

I would hope (but cannot guarantee) that TfW will be willing to settle for the train fares plus maybe £200 or so.

 

[EZJ]

Unfortunately you will have to pay back whatever the full fare is for that route, you will also be asked to cover administrative costs. Others more skilled than me will be along shortly to help you construct your response.
In short though it looks like they have you bang to rights for 55 occasions for not having a valid ticket. Sorry it's not better news.

 

[spag23]

I work shift patterns and when I have bought a ticket for my late shift using my rail card it states travel any time of day.

Where or what is this "it"? Printed? Screen display? etc

 

[skyhigh]

I would hope (but cannot guarantee) that TfW will be willing to settle for the train fares plus maybe £200 or so.

Looks as if an Anytime Single is £5.20. 55x£5.20 is £286 so at a rough estimate expect to pay in the region of £500 if they will agree a settlement.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Concur with @skyhigh. The undiscounted anytime single fare from Hengoed to Cardiff is something like £5.20, so 55 times that will be £286-00. In addition, as already mentioned upthread, you may well be asked to pay a three figure sum towards TfW's admin and investigation costs.

You'll also be expected to pay the overall amount requested in one lump sum.

 

[Poller2712.]

The undiscounted anytime single fare from Hengoed to Cardiff is something like £5.20, so 55 times that will be £286-00. In addition, as already mentioned, you might well be asked to pay a three figure sum towards TfW's admin and investigation costs.

So a daily return is £8.30 and discounted is £5.45. I don’t mind paying the fine as it’s my fault I just do not want it going to court.

I am upset that it’s never been flagged to me personally to give me the chance to rectify.

The letter is from a trainee conductor

Looks as if an Anytime Single is £5.20. 55x£5.20 is £286 so at a rough estimate expect to pay in the region of £500 if they will agree a settlement.

Yeah that sounds around right, thank you for your advice

Concur with @skyhigh. The undiscounted anytime single fare from Hengoed to Cardiff is something like £5.20, so 55 times that will be £286-00. In addition, as already mentioned upthread, you may well be asked to pay a three figure sum towards TfW's admin and investigation costs.

You'll also be expected to pay the overall amount requested in one lump sum.

Yeah it’s not the money as I would absolutely of bought a new ticket anyway.

Unfortunately you will have to pay back whatever the full fare is for that route, you will also be asked to cover administrative costs. Others more skilled than me will be along shortly to help you construct your response.
In short though it looks like they have you bang to rights for 55 occasions for not having a valid ticket. Sorry it's not better news.

Unfortunately you will have to pay back whatever the full fare is for that route, you will also be asked to cover administrative costs. Others more skilled than me will be along shortly to help you construct your response.
In short though it looks like they have you bang to rights for 55 occasions for not having a valid ticket. Sorry it's not better news.

yeah I thought as much but why wasn’t it flagged to me in person?

 

[Mcr Warrior]

I am upset that it’s never been flagged to me personally to give me the chance to rectify.

Unfortunately, when you purchase railcard discounted, you are expected to abide with all the relevant terms and conditions. It'll be relatively expensive to resolve, but, hopefully, not the end of the world. Good luck in sorting!

 

[Poller2712.]

Welcome to the forum!

The good news is that from the tone of the letter, it seems to me that TfW are looking to settle this matter out of court, as long as you co-operate with them.

The bad news (and I see that @TheJester has just made the same point) is that it will cost more than you think: the railway's usual practice is not to take any account of fares that you have paid (because they weren't a part payment for a valid ticket, but full payment for an invalid ticket) and work out the amount you owe on the basis of paying full single fares (again, they don't calculate on the basis of return tickets).

My advice (and others may be along with differing advice - we're all individuals and we can have different views!) would be to

- have a good look at your Trainline records. See if you agree with their calculation of 55 journeys
- respond to the letter. Explain the mistake that you made
- confirm that now you know, you won't make the same mistake again
- ask if it would be possible to settle the matter out of court for the train fares owed and a contribution to the costs that TfW have incurred

I would hope (but cannot guarantee) that TfW will be willing to settle for the train fares plus maybe £200 or so.

Firstly thank you for welcoming me! It’s been a really helpful forum! And thank you for your advice! Really appreciate it

Unfortunately, when you purchase railcard discounted, you are expected to abide with all the relevant terms and conditions.

Okay thank you for your reply

 

[John R]

Just a long shot, but the letter states that they have identified 55 cases where a ticket was scanned before 10am.

Is there not some onus on the operator to highlight this in one of the previous 54 scans? Could it be argued that by accepting the ticket on those 54 scans, there was the opportunity to bring the error to the OP's attention which should have been taken?

I'll admit this would probably have to be tested in a court of law, and there may be no appetite to do that, but it does appear completely unreasonable.

 

[Poller2712.]

Just a long shot, but the letter states that they have identified 55 cases where a ticket was scanned before 10am.

Is there not some onus on the operator to highlight this in one of the previous 54 scans? Could it be argued that by accepting the ticket on those 54 scans, there was the opportunity to bring the error to the OP's attention which should have been taken?

I'll admit this would probably have to be tested in a court of law, and there may be no appetite to do that, but it does appear completely unreasonable.

Hello, yeah this is something I’ve asked, however from the replies from other people it seems the ticket conductors don’t need to.

I do think it’s not nice as it feels they have known and it’s accumulated then they’ve reached out.

 

[Haywain]

I do think it’s not nice as it feels they have known and it’s accumulated then they’ve reached out.

Have you recently had a ticket check where this has been highlighted?

 

[Poller2712.]

Have you recently had a ticket check where this has been highlighted?

The last 2 weeks have been weekly tickets (no discount applied) then previous to that it was monthly (no discount applied) however it has never ever been told to me that I wasn’t allowed to do so. It’s never been highlighted or I would 1. Pay the full price then and there and get a new ticket and 2. Stop all together as I would be aware

Where or what is this "it"? Printed? Screen display? etc

 

[Titfield]

Second long shot to reduce the amount demanded but have you checked that all 55 occasions are on weekdays?(and not on a Public Holiday).

 

[sheff1]

Just a long shot, but the letter states that they have identified 55 cases where a ticket was scanned before 10am.

Is there not some onus on the operator to highlight this in one of the previous 54 scans? Could it be argued that by accepting the ticket on those 54 scans, there was the opportunity to bring the error to the OP's attention which should have been taken?

I'll admit this would probably have to be tested in a court of law, and there may be no appetite to do that, but it does appear completely unreasonable.

Well the email asks the OP "to present any mitigating circumstances".
Whether not being advised of the situation on 54 previous occasions is (potentially) persuasive mitigation might be worth running past a suitably qualified legal person (the email also recommends seeking legal advice) - some legal firms offer an initial consultation free of charge.

 

[Poller2712.]

Second long shot to reduce the amount demanded but have you checked that all 55 occasions are on weekdays?

I haven’t but I absolutely will! Thank you! I didn’t even think of that

Well the letter asks the OP "to present any mitigating circumstances".
Whether not being advised of the situation on 54 previous occasions is (potentially) persuasive mitigation might be worth running past a suitably qualified legal person (the letter also recommends seeking legal advice) - some legal firms offer an initial consultation free of charge.

 

[Somewhere]

This is my point. I can understand that a visual check of a ticket might not pick it up. But if it has been scanned, why on earth does the scanner not warn the operator of the machine that the ticket is not valid? The only situation I can see that might not apply is if travel starts before 1000 and ends after it, and the scan is at the exit barrier.

It almost feels like entrapment in that the opportunity to pick up the offence at the earliest opportunity is not taken.

I was going to use the word 'entrapment', especially after 55 previous occasions. Technology exists these days to flag these things at the point of scanning. There's another thread running about a barcode ticket that wasn't accepted, despite being valid for travel
Just goes to show how useless railway IT is

 

[Haywain]

This is my point. I can understand that a visual check of a ticket might not pick it up. But if it has been scanned, why on earth does the scanner not warn the operator of the machine that the ticket is not valid? The only situation I can see that might not apply is if travel starts before 1000 and ends after it, and the scan is at the exit barrier.

It almost feels like entrapment in that the opportunity to pick up the offence at the earliest opportunity is not taken.

Scanned at gates. Northern use additional kit during revenue blocks to check railcard discounted eTickets.

 

[Somewhere]

Scanned at gates. Northern use additional kit during revenue blocks to check railcard discounted eTickets.

Does that mean the gates don't use any software to check the ticket is actually valid?

 

[Titfield]

I would be inclined to agree. If the ticket has been scanned and accepted, then the system must be at fault for not flagging that the ticket might not be valid. The fact that the ticket has been accepted implies that it is valid for travel.


I would ask under what legislation they have accessed the OP's personal data. Because obviously they don't know what legislation they have used

Yes I do tend to agree that if a ticket is checked and not identified as invalid then it has been accepted as valid by the operator.

It may be brinksmanship but I wonder if the OP should go back to TfW and offer the difference in the fares plus say £100 admin fee to settle the matter. If this was rejcted he could go to court and then argue his point in front of the magistrates. He would I think still be convicted but it could then be reported in the local press etc. He could call the ticket inspectors as witnesses and ask them why they did not identify the ticket as invalid. TfW may not want this drain on resources to occur.

 

[Somewhere]

Yes I do tend to agree that if a ticket is checked and not identified as invalid then it has been accepted as valid by the operator.

It may be brinksmanship but I wonder if the OP should go back to TfW and offer the difference in the fares plus say £100 admin fee to settle the matter. If this was rejcted he could go to court and then argue his point in front of the magistrates. He would I think still be convicted but it could then be reported in the local press etc. He could call the ticket inspectors as witnesses and ask them why they did not identify the ticket as invalid. TfW may not want this drain on resources to occur.

I would even go so far as to charge TfW an admin fee for dealing with the matter, as their barcode scanners are obviously useless and have led to this situation occurring

Or how about:
"Apologies I was not aware my ticket was not valid for travel, as it was accepted as valid by yourselves on those 55 occasions when I scanned it correctly. I was not aware your ticket barriers are defective, and I shall endeavour to ensure I have a valid ticket in future.
Once again, thank you for bringing this matter to my attention"

 

[skyhigh]

I would even go so far as to charge TfW an admin fee for dealing with the matter

If you do that you destroy any chance of achieving a settlement and leave you arguing that point in front of a magistrate.

 

[Somewhere]

If you do that you destroy any chance of achieving a settlement and leave you arguing that point in front of a magistrate.

It would be tempting to do that, to be honest, if they decide to proceed

 

[furlong]

Point out NRCoT 9.5.1. So you were inspected 50-odd times using a time-restricted ticket, and not once did they ask you to pay the difference in fare? They might wish 9.5.1 wasn't written in the way it is but as we've discussed on this forum before, it's difficult to argue that it's not applicable.

(Why didn't they just write you a nice letter, pointing out the shortcomings of their equipment, instructing you to cease using tickets in this way any more, and asking if you'd voluntarily repay them? As regards fraud, how are they going to prove you knew this was wrong unless you admit it? If they proceeded, the 50 times (not really) entrapment argument could be considered under 'abuse of process' as they have to bear some element of culpability. There shouldn't be any reason to pay completely new fares - the difference ought to suffice. it's one of those cases where if prosecution succeeded you could well imagine there being a discharge without a fine.)

 

[Somewhere]

Point out NRCoT 9.5.1. So you were inspected 50-odd times using a time-restricted ticket, and not once did they ask you to pay the difference in fare? They might wish 9.5.1 wasn't written in the way it is but as we've discussed on this forum before, it's difficult to argue that it's not applicable.

(Why didn't they just write you a nice letter, pointing out the shortcomings of their equipment, instructing you to cease using tickets in this way any more, and asking if you'd voluntarily repay them?)

Could they ask a passenger to pay the difference retrospectively for the 55 occasions? Or even the one occasion they were stopped if they weren't asked at the time?

 

[JonathanH]

So you were inspected 50-odd times using a time-restricted ticket, and not once did they ask you to pay the difference in fare?

That could be seen as simply 'getting away with it'. The traveller still has the responsibility to have a valid ticket.

The barriers at the end of the journey may not be programmed to apply logic that relies on the type of railcard discount, time the journey started, and amount of the fare.

 

[skyhigh]

It would be tempting to do that, to be honest, if they decide to proceed

You might find that tempting, but in most cases the OP of threads in this section want the issue sorted with a minimum of fuss.

Suggesting they try invoicing TfW in return is terrible advice on that basis.

 

[furlong]

That could be seen as simply 'getting away with it'. The traveller still has the responsibility to have a valid ticket.

But the train company also has a responsibility to ensure the traveller knows of the relevant restriction.

If you want to pursue that line of discussion then we need to ask the OP:
How did you purchase your tickets?

E.g. Perhaps there was a warning in the purchase process that the train company can prove that they deliberately bypassed? Deliberately specified a later time in order to obtain the ticket? For example, perhaps the email on purchasing included the text "Please note that your ticket is not valid until 10am - see your railcard T&Cs"