Mobile Ticket - Fraud

[SillyBoy66]

Hi All,

I am new here and was wondering if anybody could assist please. I have been reading through the forums and have not (unless I have missed) seen a situation similar to what I found myself in earlier this week. So here goes:

Yesterday morning whilst travelling on the Thameslink service from Brighton to City Thameslink I was caught by Thameslink ticket inspector with mobile ticket purchased on the Trainline App for only part of my journey (Brighton to Haywards Heath). There were what I believe to be British Transport Police present but they simply carried on walking through the carriage - not sure if this is relevant but thought I would mention this just in case it is.



The ticket inspector explained that I would need to purchase a full ticket, which I did there and then via the Trainline mobile App which he checked. The ticket inspector then explained that I had committed fraud but that on this occasion he would not take my contact details but insisted that he must scan the ticket for the short part of the journey (I.e the Brighton to Haywards Heath mobile ticket) and flag this with the Fraud Team. I assume by this that Thameslink will then examine my ticket purchase history via the Trainline app.



If I am being totally honest this is not the first time that I have purchased tickets for only part of my journey over the last year or so as I have noticed that with the whole Covid situation that ticket barriers often remain open at both ends of my journey especially in the evenings and that ticket inspectors are rarely on-board undertaking checks. Regardless, I accept this is a poor excuse and what I have done is wholly unacceptable and quite frankly stupid. I am obviously terrified of the potential consequences and am fully expecting to be contacted at some point if my account is investigated as I assume it will be if this is even possible?



I was wondering if anybody has encountered this and could let me know what I might expect to happen next?



Lastly, I can safely say that this will be the last time that I do such a stupid thing and take a needless risk to save a few quid. The fear of the unknown is making feel ill to the pit of my stomach. I totally hold my hands up and am not expecting any sympathy as I know that this is entirely my own doing and I have no excuse. However, as I said, any advice or thoughts would be greatly appreciated.



Thanks!

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Welcome to the forum.

As your details weren't taken, it's unlikely that there will be further action. But you'll have to wait for just over six months to be certain of this. Why that long? Because if legal action is taken against you it will almost certainly be in the magistrate's court, and the railway have six months from the date of the offence to tell the court that they want to prosecute - and then the court may take a few weeks to let you know when the case will be heard. But (except in the unlikely event of you being prosecuted for fraud in the Crown Court) after the time to take the matter to the magistrate's court has expired there's nothing more that the railway can do to you.

If action is taken, then what's likely to happen is that the railway will write to you for your side of the story: there's advice elsewhere on this forum on what to say if that happens, but if the railway do write to you, come back and we can give our best view at that point.

Once the railway have written to you, they can do three things
- take no further action.
- offer you a chance to settle out of court. This will involve paying the train fares that you should have paid, plus the costs that the railway has incurred. Going down this route will be a private agreement between you and the railway and not a criminal conviction or fine
- take you to court, where (on what you have told us) you would be convicted. You would then have to pay a fine, the prosecution costs, compensation (i.e. the train fares you should have paid) and court costs. This would almost certainly be more than an out of court settlement and would (in the broadest sense) be a criminal conviction - come back to us if it looks as if you are being taken down that road and we can explore it further.

As I say, it's unlikely that there will be further action. So essentially you need to sit and wait to see if the railway do anything more. But
- if the railway do write to you, don't ignore it: the only chance of avoiding going to court is to engage with the process
- remember that train crew tend to work the same route, and do remember people. The inspector who pulled you up will remember you - and if they find you fare dodging again they are very unlikely to be so lenient next time. And another inspector may not give you the benefit of the doubt either.

 

[SillyBoy66]

Hi Fawkes,

Thanks for your prompt message and sound advice. I have not been able to think about any thing else other than this situation since it happened so naturally have done lots of reading over the last day or so on here on the various threads on the next steps that need to be taken should I be contacted further.

Just one question please which I am not sure can be answered - but is it possible for my Trainline account to be investigated via the QR code that the ticket officer scanned?

Goes without saying that I will not be taking such a stupid risk ever again and in all honesty I simply cannot believe I have been so naive.

If I do get contacted in the next 6 months I will of course let everybody know. Thanks again.

 

[Haywain]

Just one question please which I am not sure can be answered - but is it possible for my Trainline account to be investigated via the QR code that the ticket officer scanned?

Yes, it is possible.

 

[SillyBoy66]

Thanks Haywain. I thought as much.

 

[AlterEgo]

Yes, it is possible.

Not only possible, but likely, given it's low hanging fruit.

It's a but of a mystery why an interview under caution wasn't done though.

 

[Haywain]

It's a but of a mystery why an interview under caution wasn't done though.

Yes, it seems odd to allow the purchase of a new ticket when you've got clear evidence in front of you.

 

[robbeech]

Yes, it seems odd to allow the purchase of a new ticket when you've got clear evidence in front of you.

It’s entirely possible that it’s all a lie to avoid getting punched in the teeth (I’m not for one minute suggesting the op would do this). We have seen a lot of “nothing will happen” and “you only have to pay the fare” comments from guards and revenue teams when the reality is you end up being prosecuted. I’m not sure what facilities they gave to scan a ticket and report it without taking passenger details though. An E ticket barcode with a name on it could be anyones. I could take a photo of your ticket on your phone screen and present that. An M ticket is different of course.

 

[jon0844]

They will indeed make a check of purchase history from scanning the barcode, and I believe Trainline is working with many TOCs on this as well as alerting them of customers who are making a significant number of refunds (e.g. people buying tickets, not scanning them and immediately refunding after).

 

[sd0733]

It’s entirely possible that it’s all a lie to avoid getting punched in the teeth (I’m not for one minute suggesting the op would do this). We have seen a lot of “nothing will happen” and “you only have to pay the fare” comments from guards and revenue teams when the reality is you end up being prosecuted. I’m not sure what facilities they gave to scan a ticket and report it without taking passenger details though. An E ticket barcode with a name on it could be anyones. I could take a photo of your ticket on your phone screen and present that. An M ticket is different of course.

In this case it doesn’t seem like either of those things were said though, the OP says that the RPI said details of the scan will be passed to the “Fraud team”, that does at least imply that something will happen.
I don’t know the ins and outs of how it works but there have been a lot of cases of short faring at my TOC (not Thameslink) where prosecutions have taken place from Trainline or other online based ticket accounts.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Given the well-informed comments above, I would raise the risk of the OP facing further action from 'unlikely' to 'unlikely but not impossible'. It seems to me that not taking the OP's details when there was a good opportunity to do so makes associating them with the short-faring incident more difficult, but if the ticket-selling company are sharing data with the railway operating company then I can see that there could still be enough evidence to convince a court of the facts beyond reasonable doubt.

 

[robbeech]

Given the well-informed comments above, I would raise the risk of the OP facing further action from 'unlikely' to 'unlikely but not impossible'. It seems to me that not taking the OP's details when there was a good opportunity to do so makes associating them with the short-faring incident more difficult, but if the ticket-selling company are sharing data with the railway operating company then I can see that there could still be enough evidence to convince a court of the facts beyond reasonable doubt.

Indeed, best case, a future ticketing irregularity from this individual may trigger something more, worst case, you'll be hearing from them after this incident.

In this case it doesn’t seem like either of those things were said though,

But they did claim the inspector said :

that on this occasion he would not take my contact details

 

[Skimpot flyer]

Afraid to be the bearer of bad news, but surely the inspector would not need to take the op's contact details if he scanned the electronic ticket? If Trainline co-operate with the Fraud Team, they'll provide details of the OP's registered email address and postal address, surely?

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Afraid to be the bearer of bad news, but surely the inspector would not need to take the op's contact details if he scanned the electronic ticket? If Trainline co-operate with the Fraud Team, they'll provide details of the OP's registered email address and postal address, surely?

I think that everyone has been assuming this throughout - hence no-one predicting that further action is impossible. But if the case is taken to court, it's not impossible to imagine the following exchange:

Defence: RPI, how do you know that the right person is in the dock?

RPI: because we normally take down their name and address when we catch them

Defence; did you take down the name and address in this case?

RPI: No, I relied on Trainline's records

Defence (to the magistrates): I suggest that although we know that this Trainline account was used to buy train tickets from A to B, we do not know beyond reasonable doubt that my client used those tickets to travel beyond B to C. We know that someone was stopped by the railway; we don't know that it was my client.

The fact that the OPs details weren't taken aren't fatal to a prosecution in that other evidence may be available, but it certainly doesn't help the railway. That's why, on balance, I think this will be the end of the matter - but understand that I could be wrong and the railway may still pursue the OP.

 

[vinnym70]

Defence (to the magistrates): I suggest that although we know that this Trainline account was used to buy train tickets from A to B, we do not know beyond reasonable doubt that my client used those tickets to travel beyond B to C. We know that someone was stopped by the railway; we don't know that it was my client.

Unless the RPI was recording the interaction on a bodycam? I've noticed these seem exceptionally commonplace now, not just on the railways but I've also seen shop staff wearing them recently.

 

[skyhigh]

I'm reasonably sure that the passenger will hear no more from it.

However, I expect they will have a look at the history on the account and if there's a pattern of behaviour set up a block to catch the same passenger again. If they find a short fare again, then they have a record that the passenger has already been warned and the outcome will be straight to court, no settlement...

 

[AlterEgo]

I think that everyone has been assuming this throughout - hence no-one predicting that further action is impossible. But if the case is taken to court, it's not impossible to imagine the following exchange:

Defence: RPI, how do you know that the right person is in the dock?

RPI: because we normally take down their name and address when we catch them

Defence; did you take down the name and address in this case?

RPI: No, I relied on Trainline's records

Defence (to the magistrates): I suggest that although we know that this Trainline account was used to buy train tickets from A to B, we do not know beyond reasonable doubt that my client used those tickets to travel beyond B to C. We know that someone was stopped by the railway; we don't know that it was my client.

The fact that the OPs details weren't taken aren't fatal to a prosecution in that other evidence may be available, but it certainly doesn't help the railway. That's why, on balance, I think this will be the end of the matter - but understand that I could be wrong and the railway may still pursue the OP.

They could always just write to the OP as we have seen with other fraud cases on here.

 

[yorkie]

Afraid to be the bearer of bad news, but surely the inspector would not need to take the op's contact details if he scanned the electronic ticket? If Trainline co-operate with the Fraud Team, they'll provide details of the OP's registered email address and postal address, surely?

The retailer would surely only do this if there was reasonable grounds to do so.

Given an interview under caution was not undertaken, I am not convinced that there would be sufficient evidence presented by the company at this stage, but it depends on what argument the train company puts forward and what evidence is on the customers account visible by Trainline and what their policy is in this matter.

 

[jon0844]

I'm reasonably sure that the passenger will hear no more from it.

However, I expect they will have a look at the history on the account and if there's a pattern of behaviour set up a block to catch the same passenger again. If they find a short fare again, then they have a record that the passenger has already been warned and the outcome will be straight to court, no settlement...

I'm not sure how tightly integrated the barcode readers are with Cubic gates, but I am sure at some point they'll be able to flag specific tickets issued by a certain company to a certain user. Mobile readers will also show the history of a ticket, including a check of whether they tapped in at the origin.

If the passenger claims a gate was open, a check can be made and if there's reason to believe the user hadn't started at that station (perhaps there was a block on) then they can go down the MG11 route. Also, perhaps if the T&Cs require you must tap in and out, they could potentially take details just for not tapping/scanning in regardless (and of course anyone is free to appeal as per the law).

I do think a lot of people are perhaps unaware of how much easier e-tickets and barcodes are for fraud detection. Or perhaps will be, assuming such measures aren't yet in place.