Nearly half a million pounds recovered from fare-dodging fraudsters on EMR

[Haywain]

Article on Rail Business Daily website concerning East Midlands Railway's revenue protection operations, which may be of interest:

Nearly half a million pounds recovered from fare-dodging fraudsters on EMR

October 27, 2022

Nearly half a million pounds has been recovered by East Midlands Railway (EMR) as they clamp down on fraudulent travellers.

From 1 January to 13 October, revenue protection officers and onboard staff have issued 9,642 notices and successfully prosecuted 1,470 fare avoiders through the courts – returning a combined total of £493,000.

Neil Grabham, customer services director at East Midlands Railway, said: “The vast majority of our customers always buy a ticket, and they understand that for the railway to successfully operate, improve, and secure investment, fares need to be paid for.

“Sadly though, there are a minority of determined people who always look to evade paying or look for ways to work the system.

“We have recently added to our revenue protection teams and created a totally new fraud team, all of whom will be doing everything they can to reduce ticketless travel and hold persistent offenders to account.’’

The fines were made for a number of reasons, including travelling without a valid ticket, fraudulently travelling on a child’s ticket, and travelling beyond the destination of their ticket. Offenders were only pursued through the courts after they travelled without a ticket and refused to pay for their journey and the corresponding fine.

More information concerning East Midlands Railway’s fare policies can be found on its website here: https://www.eastmidlandsrailway.co.uk/help-manage/about-us/policies/penalty-fares

 

[Ediswan]

Article on Rail Business Daily website concerning East Midlands Railway's revenue protection operations, which may be of interest:

I note this. As this rail industry article refers to 'fines', it should not be surprising that passengers do the same.

The fines were made for a number of reasons, including travelling without a valid ticket, fraudulently travelling on a child’s ticket, and travelling beyond the destination of their ticket. Offenders were only pursued through the courts after they travelled without a ticket and refused to pay for their journey and the corresponding fine.

 

[AlterEgo]

Strange that we almost never hear of EMR in the disputes area on this forum.

 

[skyhigh]

Strange that we almost never hear of EMR in the disputes area on this forum.

Yes and no. The numbers look impressive, but 1,470 prosecutions and 9,642 notices (penalty fares?) is pretty small compared to the likes of Northern which issued over 53,000 penalty fares, 33,000 TIRs and 11,000 prosecutions totalling over £2 million in a 12 month period

 

[ainsworth74]

I'm not entirely sure that EMR should be bandying around the term "fraudsters" quite so liberally.

 

[AlterEgo]

Yes and no. The numbers look impressive, but 1,470 prosecutions and 9,642 notices (penalty fares?) is pretty small compared to the likes of Northern which issued over 53,000 penalty fares, 33,000 TIRs and 11,000 prosecutions totalling over £2 million in a 12 month period

I read that the notices were out of court settlements - although I may be overthinking it.

 

[Haywain]

I'm not entirely sure that EMR should be bandying around the term "fraudsters" quite so liberally.

Why?

 

[AlterEgo]

Why?

Because they haven't prosecuted anyone for fraud.

These:

travelling without a valid ticket...and travelling beyond the destination of their ticket

Definitely aren't fraud.

 

[Haywain]

Because they haven't prosecuted anyone for fraud.

These:

travelling without a valid ticket...and travelling beyond the destination of their ticket

Definitely aren't fraud.

They are just using everyday language in the same way as they have referred to fines.

 

[AlterEgo]

They are just using everyday language in the same way as they have referred to fines.

I don’t think anyone thinks of a fraudster as someone who has done something accidental. If these notices are Penalty Fares then they’re supposed to penalise mistakes, not render someone a fraudster.

 

[AdamWW]

They are just using everyday language in the same way as they have referred to fines.

Are they? Pick on people at random and ask them to think of a word describing being made to pay a sum of money for not having a valid ticket and I think there's a good chance most/many of them would describe it as a fine.

Ask them to describe someone travelling further than their ticket says or using a child ticket they aren't entitled to and I'm not so sure that "fraud" would be a particularly popular answer.

 

[Haywain]

Ask them to describe someone travelling further than their ticket says or using a child ticket they aren't entitled to and I'm not so sure that "fraud" would be a particularly popular answer.

We see plenty of cases on here where people are told they have committed fraud after buying a child ticket and getting caught. And this is in the press, so it's hardly essential that the language is accurate for every single possibility. If it bothers you that much, I provided a link to Rail Business daily where the story was published so you can go there and complain.

 

[_toommm_]

Their RPIs are some of the most frequent ones I’ve encountered, especially on the Intercity services out of Derby. It seems (anecdotally at least) that they’re very active.

 

[AdamWW]

If it bothers you that much, I provided a link to Rail Business daily where the story was published so you can go there and complain.

What an odd response.

 

[MagisterLudi]

What an odd response.

Not when read in the same tone as the individual's many other replies to threads.

 

[Starmill]

We see plenty of cases on here where people are told they have committed fraud after buying a child ticket and getting caught.

Only if they were doing it deliberately, and in order to gain a financial advantage.

Simply paying for a new correct ticket to rectify the error, or paying a Penalty Fare, doesn't imply either fraud or any allegation of the same. I also don't think that common language ever really brings fraud into these kind of situations.

For example nobody calls it "fraud" to pay a fixed penalty for parking illegally or paying a huge fee for car parking in breach of the purported conditions.

 

[baz962]

Only if they were doing it deliberately, and in order to gain a financial advantage.

Simply paying for a new correct ticket to rectify the error, or paying a Penalty Fare, doesn't imply either fraud or any allegation of the same. I also don't think that common language ever really brings fraud into these kind of situations.

I would pretty much think that an adult would know that they aren't a child and that's deliberate and gaining a financial advantage.

 

[Starmill]

Yes and no. The numbers look impressive, but 1,470 prosecutions and 9,642 notices (penalty fares?) is pretty small compared to the likes of Northern which issued over 53,000 penalty fares, 33,000 TIRs and 11,000 prosecutions totalling over £2 million in a 12 month period

The Penalty Fare numbers wouldn't ever be comparable really given people boarding EMR trains are not subject to Penalty Fares at very many stations.

I would pretty much think that an adult would know that they aren't a child and that's deliberate and gaining a financial advantage.

I'm unsure how that affects anything? It would be necessary to prove that the customer didn't make an error. Accidentally pressing the wrong button on the app would be a convincing defence to fraud charges. Which is why they're not used.

 

[baz962]

The Penalty Fare numbers wouldn't ever be comparable really given people boarding EMR trains are not subject to Penalty Fares at very many stations.


I'm unsure how that affects anything? It would be necessary to prove that the customer didn't make an error. Accidentally pressing the wrong button on the app would be a convincing defence to fraud charges. Which is why they're not used.

Looks to me like several presses and going to one of two boxes. One says adult pre selected and the other says child and the number zero. You would have to press the minus button on the adult box and separately go to the child box and press the plus button.
First this page and select adult no railcards.

Then this one and deselect adult and select child.

 

[Harpers Tate]

I wonder how much they spent on revenue protection activities during the same period. Or - what was the net income?

Also - if the existence of revenue protection activity is a deterrent to some, I wonder what the amount recovered in properly paid (and therefore undetected) fares, paid by those who would have "avoided" in absence of such actiity, was.

And then - adding the detected recovered fares (as quoted) to the undetected "recovered" fares, and subtracting the cost of enforcement - what's the overall net?

I'm sure nobody knows for certain or precisely. But it's the sort of consideration that intelligent business should have. It's pointless (for example) spending 100k pa to recover a £50k pa loss.

 

[skyhigh]

The Penalty Fare numbers wouldn't ever be comparable really given people boarding EMR trains are not subject to Penalty Fares at very many stations.

I understand, but just giving a potential reason we hardly ever see cases involving EMR on here, as they issue comparatively few reports/penalty fares compared to others.

 

[Starmill]

Looks to me like several presses and going to one of two boxes. One says adult pre selected and the other says child and the number zero. You would have to press the minus button on the adult box and separately go to the child box and press the plus button.
First this page and select adult no railcards.
View attachment 122792
Then this one and deselect adult and select child.View attachment 122793

Again I really don't see what difference this makes? You can only allege fraud if you're prepared to actually back that up with evidence which puts it beyond a doubt that the person has deliberately tried to gain financial advantage by lying. Unfortunately your screenshots simply don't change that. And as I've already said, what actually happens in this situation is charging a new ticket or Penalty Fare if relevant, and that's not the common use of the term.

 

[yorksrob]

I would pretty much think that an adult would know that they aren't a child and that's deliberate and gaining a financial advantage.

One isn't officially an adult until 18, so is it not logical to assume that one would be eligible for a child fare up until that point ?

 

[zwk500]

One isn't officially an adult until 18, so is it not logical to assume that one would be eligible for a child fare up until that point ?

Not if the system you're buying from clearly says child is 15 or under (appreciate not every retailer will, but most do).

 

[Starmill]

One isn't officially an adult until 18, so is it not logical to assume that one would be eligible for a child fare up until that point ?

Indeed. And it's also common for people not to understand the meaning of terms like Northern only and to use EMR instead. If they paid a Penalty Fare for doing so, nobody reasonable would call them a "fraudster". However EMR have decided to label them thusly. I do not know why so I can only speculate.

Not if the system you're buying from clearly says child is 15 or under (appreciate not every retailer will, but most do).

As I keep saying, it's still pretty much irrelevant unless EMR could put it beyond a doubt that they were lying.

 

[yorksrob]

Indeed. And it's also common for people not to understand the meaning of terms like Northern only and to use EMR instead. If they paid a Penalty Fare for doing so, nobody reasonable would call them a "fraudster". However EMR have decided to label them thusly. I do not know why so I can only speculate.


As I keep saying, it's still pretty much irrelevant unless EMR could put it beyond a doubt that they were lying.

Indeed. It seems, if not a common mistake, an understandable one.

Not if the system you're buying from clearly says child is 15 or under (appreciate not every retailer will, but most do).

Indeed, assuming it's noticable. But some ticket machines aren't particularly user freindly.

Not if the system you're buying from clearly says child is 15 or under (appreciate not every retailer will, but most do).

Indeed, assuming it's noticable. But some ticket machines aren't particularly user freindly.

 

[AdamWW]

Again I really don't see what difference this makes? You can only allege fraud if you're prepared to actually back that up with evidence which puts it beyond a doubt that the person has deliberately tried to gain financial advantage by lying. Unfortunately your screenshots simply don't change that. And as I've already said, what actually happens in this situation is charging a new ticket or Penalty Fare if relevant, and that's not the common use of the term.

I think it's clear that the railway companies issue penalty fares to and prosecute (or threaten to) people who have made honest mistakes. It may not be possible to tell in individual circumstances whether someone is trying to cheat the system or not, but it stands to reason that, for example, some people with expired railcards will have made a genuine error.

So it seems somewhat disingenous to lump them all under the category of "fraudsters" to me.

 

[Starmill]

I think it's clear that the railway companies issue penalty fares to and prosecute (or threaten to) people who have made honest mistakes.

Precisely.

If it bothers you that much, I provided a link to Rail Business daily where the story was published so you can go there and complain.

It's worth noting that nobody has actually implied that Rail Business Daily have done anything wrong at any point. Multiple people have however criticised EMR over their choices of words, because the choices of words large organisations give to the media tell you a lot about their internal priorities.

Not when read in the same tone as the individual's many other replies to threads.

The railway industry does suffer from a certain amount of 'fortress' mentality, where a hypothetical person who has a working relationship with a TOC then feels that any criticism of that or another TOC is in some way a personal thing, and that they've become obliged to defend "their" part of the industry. Obviously, all TOCs receive lots of criticism, from lots of different people and organisations, on a very frequent basis. Anyone who doesn't like that is therefore going to feel somewhat under attack, basically all of the time.

It's notable that this just doesn't seem to happen in the bus industry or to FOCs. It's about the management culture of TOCs in particular. I personally can't understand it because if a large firm I'd worked for were featured in the media in a negative light or were accused by a trade union of immoral business practices, I wouldn't feel any need to be personally involved at all. I certainly wouldn't be swayed to support one position or the other just because I worked for them. A professional working relationship is always about giving your best possible work when you're at work, and doing your own thing and having all of your own opinions in your free time.

 

[Ediswan]

The only use of the term 'fraud' attributed to EMR is "created a totally new fraud team". All other uses of the term are editorial, by Rail Business Daily.

 

[Sm5]

Article on Rail Business Daily website concerning East Midlands Railway's revenue protection operations, which may be of interest:

9642 notices, £493,000 in revenue… average £51.13

£493k isnt much in the scheme of things, how much does the legal team managing this earn in salary ?, plus offices etc ?

I wonder how much revenue they lost, by pursuing those who made an innocent 1st time mistake, and will now seek to avoid rail use and influence others around them by hearing there horror stories in the pub, over dinner etc and think stuff that.