No response from Chiltern?

[timothy456]

Hello,

I received a Notice of Intended Prosecution from Chiltern in February 2025 (letter dated 7th February) from an incident last September 2024 (travelling without having renewed my railcard).

I responded via email as the letter instructed on the 12th of February 2025. To this day, I haven’t heard anything back at all. I’m constantly checking my junk emails everyday in case I’ve missed anything, but I have definitely not had anything.

Has this happened to anybody else? It seems like a really long time to not hear anything, particularly when their auto response email said I’d hear within 60 days.

 

[Titfield]

Chiltern appear to have a very significant backlog of cases and we have seen letters from them literally days within the 6 month deadline for issuing court proceedings.

Some letters have been accompanied by a SJPN and an Out of Court Settlement offer so if the offer is not taken up then the SJPN procedure is within the deadline. Whilst this may appear to be alarming, nevertheless the OOC offer does stand and can be taken up. The proceedings are then discontinued.

 

[timothy456]

Chiltern appear to have a very significant backlog of cases and we have seen letters from them literally days within the 6 month deadline for issuing court proceedings.

Some letters have been accompanied by a SJPN and an Out of Court Settlement offer so if the offer is not taken up then the SJPN procedure is within the deadline. Whilst this may appear to be alarming, nevertheless the OOC offer does stand and can be taken up. The proceedings are then discontinued.

In my case, the incident occurred last September, so the 6 month deadline has already passed. I was more so wondering if they can still issue me with a fine when it has been this long, particularly as I did respond to their letter in February apologising and asking to do so, but it has now been well over the 60 days they said it would take for somebody to get back to me.

If they don’t get back to me within their own set time frame, can they exceed that?

The situation has dragged on for so long and I suppose I just want to know whether I can forget about it or not or if I’ll hear back eventually. I’m potentially moving house soon too which will be a pain if they send any further info in letter form and not email.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Hello,

I received a Notice of Intended Prosecution from Chiltern in February 2025 (letter dated 7th February) from an incident last September 2024 (travelling without having renewed my railcard).

I responded via email as the letter instructed on the 12th of February 2025. To this day, I haven’t heard anything back at all. I’m constantly checking my junk emails everyday in case I’ve missed anything, but I have definitely not had anything.

Has this happened to anybody else? It seems like a really long time to not hear anything, particularly when their auto response email said I’d hear within 60 days.

As you know from the auto response that your reply reached Chiltern, it looks as if they are out of time to prosecute - for cases at the magistrates court, the prosecutor (Chiltern) have six months from the incident to inform the court. So you can probably relax, but please let us know if you do hear from them: Chiltern been known to try it on.

I’m potentially moving house soon too which will be a pain if they send any further info in letter form and not email.

While much less stuff goes by post than used to, it may be worth paying for the Royal Mail 5o redirect your post anyhow: https://www.royalmail.com/personal/receiving-mail/redirection

 

[WesternLancer]

As you know from the auto response that your reply reached Chiltern, it looks as if they are out of time to prosecute - for cases at the magistrates court, the prosecutor (Chiltern) have six months from the incident to inform the court. So you can probably relax, but please let us know if you do hear from them: Chiltern been known to try it on.



While much less stuff goes by post than used to, it may be worth paying for the Royal Mail 5o redirect your post anyhow: https://www.royalmail.com/personal/receiving-mail/redirection

I would think anything that includes court related paperwork will come in hard copy post.

I’d certainly consider a Royal Mail redirection if moving house.

They may still try to progress court action even if out of time to do so. I doubt you can rely on the court to notice that.

 

[timothy456]

As you know from the auto response that your reply reached Chiltern, it looks as if they are out of time to prosecute - for cases at the magistrates court, the prosecutor (Chiltern) have six months from the incident to inform the court. So you can probably relax, but please let us know if you do hear from them: Chiltern been known to try it on.



While much less stuff goes by post than used to, it may be worth paying for the Royal Mail 5o redirect your post anyhow: https://www.royalmail.com/personal/receiving-mail/redirection

Thank you, I’m relieved if this is the case. Is it also too late for them to offer a settlement fee too in that case, or are they still within their rights to do so?

 

[AlterEgo]

Thank you, I’m relieved if this is the case. Is it also too late for them to offer a settlement fee too in that case, or are they still within their rights to do so?

In that case there is no settlement offer unless they wanted to take the matter of their losses down a civil route, which has a much longer time limit.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

In that case there is no settlement offer unless they wanted to take the matter of their losses down a civil route, which has a much longer time limit.

The point of an out of court settlement is that in exchange for you giving them money, they agree not to pursue you in court. My understanding is that there's now no risk of Chiltern prosecuting you in the criminal court, so from that point of view you don't need to agree to an out of court settlement. Until recently we would have said that was the end of the matter. But as @AlterEgo says, it is open to the railway to pursue you for the money you owe through the civil court. In the past, they didn't take that route but we are (I think) beginning to see this used in a few cases.

The railway has (I think) six years to try to recover their money - and the civil court isn't used every time. Realistically, you can't stay on edge for all that time, so my advice remains the same: stop worrying but please come back for more advice if the railway do contact you about this.

 

[timothy456]

As if I manifested it, I have heard back from Chiltern’s Fraud team this week (it has taken them 117 days to respond to me, rather than the ‘up to 60’ mentioned within their auto-response to my email in February which is quite frustrating!).

Although way out of the 6-month time period of my initial lack of railcard incident (September 2024), they have now responded with the following (email):

Thank you for your e-mail.



Please find attached a spreadsheet containing your ticket purchasing history for you to complete. A column has been added for your comments.



There are a number of suspicious refunds, highlighted in blue, please confirm the reason for requesting a refund, please note a refund should only be requested if you have been unable to make the journey.



If you engage in this process, it may be possible for you to settle this matter via an out of court disposal.



We are authorised to deal with your case by way of an administrative disposal, but a prerequisite of dealing with this matter in this manner is that you take responsibility for all the offences committed, honesty is paramount if we are to offer you this option.



If you have any questions, feel free to reply to this e-mail.



It sort of feels like they are now completely ignoring the initial reason for wanting to prosecute me now, although this incident is included on the spreadsheet (not highlighted in blue though, since it isn’t a ‘suspicious refund’ issue).

I am not sure if they are trying to start a new problem so they have a reason for me to still pay after taking too long to reply to me about my railcard offence. That being said, all refunds are from 2021 – 2023. Some I simply cannot recall since it has been so long. Some are innocent and I can explain the reasons I did not use the tickets. However, I will admit there are a few from 2021 when I was a silly student that I refunded after not having my ticket checked. I'm not proud of this.

I will obviously be as honest as I can with all comments. However, I am concerned that my legitimate and truthful reasons for not using and refunding some tickets will probably sound like an excuse and I cannot prove myself, but hey ho.

If I provide comments for each one (even if I have to put ‘cannot recall’ or similar as reasons for some - unless this isn't recommended) and oblige with the process, am I likely to still get an out of court settlement based on previous cases? Even though everything is still technically way out of date.. it seems a little unfair, even though I admit I have done wrong on some of them.

Any advice would be much appreciated.

 

[Adam Williams]

I will obviously be as honest as I can with all comments

Why reply?

 

[timothy456]

Why reply?

I am 50/50, I don't want to get myself in any more trouble. They haven't outlined a deadline to comply by at all, so I am open to more views and opinions, and open to waiting to see if they follow up again after a certain number of days. I'm not sure how I'm supposed to recall instances from up to 4 years ago, whether innocent or not.

 

[Haywain]

Why reply?

Because refund issues are a more clear cut fraud issue than ticketing infractions?

 

[Adam Williams]

Because refund issues are a more clear cut fraud issue than ticketing infractions?

They need to show that OP travelled on all of those occasions, even for a section 11 Fraud Act 2006 offence in order that "services be obtained for himself". The post earlier in the thread suggests that OP was confident the tickets weren't checked - so how clear cut do you think the prosecution's case will be without any scan records? There's not going to be CCTV to recover at this point.

Barnett's case, which I think was section 2 anyway, involved a full admission from the accused.

However, I will admit there are a few from 2021 when I was a silly student that I refunded after not having my ticket checked. I'm not proud of this.

Were they E-Tickets? Are you 100% confident the tickets weren't checked? Including scanned at a entry or exit barrier?

 

[Haywain]

They need to show that OP travelled on all of those occasions, even for a section 11 Fraud Act 2006 offence in order that "services be obtained for himself".

Appreciate all that, but with different time limits the appetite for risk maybe different. It's an individual choice.

 

[Adam Williams]

Appreciate all that, but with different time limits the appetite for risk may be different. It's an individual choice.

Oh, absolutely. And also very different potential maximum consequences for the offences set out in that legislation as well.

 

[timothy456]

They need to show that OP travelled on all of those occasions, even for a section 11 Fraud Act 2006 offence in order that "services be obtained for himself". The post earlier in the thread suggests that OP was confident the tickets weren't checked - so how clear cut do you think the prosecution's case will be without any scan records? There's not going to be CCTV to recover at this point.

Barnett's case, which I think was section 2 anyway, involved a full admission from the accused.


Were they E-Tickets? Are you 100% confident the tickets weren't checked? Including scanned at an entry or exit barrier?

Yes, they were e-tickets and only in cases where a ticket was both NOT checked by an inspector and barriers were open for me to freely walk through would I refund a ticket.

At the moment I think it’s best that I just comply and be honest about these ones though if I’m going to get an out of court settlement rather than prosecution.

I’m just wondering what happens if I say I can’t recall some, as I simply can’t.

 

[WesternLancer]

I’m just wondering what happens if I say I can’t recall some, as I simply can’t.

You should just say that you can not recall the circumstances of the journey at this distance in time. it's not an unreasonable thing to say - they may give you the benefit of the doubt if you are otherwise being honest and co-operating.

I don't think it would make it more likely they prosecute you - but you may have to pay for sums that you should not have to have paid if they might have been legitimate refund claims - but in some ways perhaps that is the 'price' of making other, dishonest claims - because you can't say in all honesty that all the claims were legitimate (because you know they are not all legitimate) - and the best thing to do when in the sort of situation you are in is not lie.

 

[timothy456]

Hello.

I really appreciate all of the advice and guidance. I have completed the spreadsheet and drafted a response to send to Chiltern this week, but I'd appreciate any feedback first. Please let me know if you feel that any amendments are necessary.

At this stage, I'm ready to just send a response as soon as possible, hopefully receive an offer to settle financially and put it all to bed. The price will be worth the lack of stress and worry. Thankfully I am in a living situation at the moment where I can 'afford' this more so than any other time in my life, so I am trying to focus on the silver linings.

Good morning,

Thank you for your email and for your patience as you awaited my response.

Thank you for sharing this spreadsheet with me. I have now completed this as per your request.

Within the spreadsheet, I have added comments for all legitimate refunds. There is one journey that I have commented ‘cannot recall’ as I am simply unable to recall the circumstances. There is also one journey that I have checked on my trainline history and I did not appear to refund.

If you require any further information, please let me know.

For those that I have left blank, in the interest of holding full accountability for all offences committed, I admit that I have, on these occasions, refunded tickets that have not been checked or scanned during the journey.

This was in an attempt to save some money and pay off previous student debt, which I profoundly regret. I understand that this was my own personal situation and not one that concerns anybody else. Having reflected on my actions following my initial Notice of Intended Prosecution concerning my railcard, I am now able to fully comprehend the substantial impact that this has in terms of revenue loss for Chiltern and other rail companies.

My financial circumstances improved exponentially after 2023, and this pattern of wrongdoing stopped. I am, truthfully, relieved to have been held accountable, as it has given me a chance to reflect and learn from my mistakes. This behaviour was out of character for me.

I certainly have no plans to refund used tickets, nor travel without a valid rail card on any occasion ever again. I am deeply remorseful of my actions and hope that, by obliging with this process in a prompt manner and offering my full transparency, you are able to allow me the opportunity to settle this matter via an out of court disposal. I am prepared to contribute however much is necessary to recompense the losses caused by my neglectful actions, along with any administrative charges.

I appreciate the time that you have put into this case, as well as the opportunity for me to put forward my comments.

Kind regards,
XXX

 

[enyoueffsea]

My advice on this is slightly different as what you are admitting to here is fraud. I’d be extremely wary of doing this as that is a very different matter to a normal ticketing offence.

Whether Chiltern have the desire to progress this as a fraud case I don’t know, but it must be highlighted it is a possibility.

 

[timothy456]

My advice on this is slightly different as what you are admitting to here is fraud. I’d be extremely wary of doing this as that is a very different matter to a normal ticketing offence.

Whether Chiltern have the desire to progress this as a fraud case I don’t know, but it must be highlighted it is a possibility.

I am more wary about what could happen if I don’t respond and ignore it all.

They mentioned within their initial email with the spreadsheet that:

“If you engage in this process, it may be possible for you to settle this matter via an out of court disposal.



We are authorised to deal with your case by way of an administrative disposal, but a prerequisite of dealing with this matter in this manner is that you take responsibility for all the offences committed, honesty is paramount if we are to offer you this option.”

I of course understand that this is only a ‘may’, however, to me it sounds like they are expecting me to own up to the ones that need owning up to. I’m left with no other option as I’m not going to lie.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Tuesday at 19:34 ==

I am more wary about what could happen if I don’t respond and ignore it all.

They mentioned within their initial email with the spreadsheet that:

“If you engage in this process, it may be possible for you to settle this matter via an out of court disposal.



We are authorised to deal with your case by way of an administrative disposal, but a prerequisite of dealing with this matter in this manner is that you take responsibility for all the offences committed, honesty is paramount if we are to offer you this option.”

I of course understand that this is only a ‘may’, however, to me it sounds like they are expecting me to own up to the ones that need owning up to. I’m left with no other option as I’m not going to lie.

As they were also out of time with my initial railcard NIP, I’m of the opinion that this is a way for them to still get me for something that they can, and still get some money back. Which is fair enough I suppose.

 

[enyoueffsea]

No problem at all and it’s down to your individual risk assessment on this one.

I hope it works out as planned but just wanted to ensure you are fully sighted on all possibilities.