Silly silly me

[najaB]

I have no more to say to them, they have already dismissed a settlement.

Don't give up - many posters have had success on their second, third or subsequent letters.

 

[Ashlaarr]

I would contact the train company directly asking if they will agree to a substantial out of court settlement and asking them how much they want.

If they will not settle out of court, then you need to wait and see what legislation they use. See our 'Fares Guide' for details regarding the options they have open to them. You may wish to seek legal advice. If it's a Byelaw Offence you may as well just plead guilty and pay the fine. If it's a Regulation of Railways Act offence then you may want to see a solicitor before deciding how to proceed.

Thank you for your advice Yorkie! I recived an email from ATW and I have the result I wanted!!

They said:, I have liaised with the Transport Investigations Limited management team and I have been advised that, as you have accepted guilt and shown remorse and that this is your first offence, they are happy for you resolve this issue by administrative disposal. A letter will be sent to you in the post providing you with further instructions.

RESULT!!

 

[najaB]

Thank you for your advice Yorkie! I recived an email from ATW and I have the result I wanted!!

Happy to hear that.

 

[gray1404]

Let you know what settlement they offer to you.

 

[Ashlaarr]

All settled and payed now. Final administrative settlement of £93.40. Could of been worse. Thank you all for your help. It's been an emotional one but lesson learnt!!

 

[najaB]

All settled and payed now. Final administrative settlement of £93.40. Could of been worse. Thank you all for your help. It's been an emotional one but lesson learnt!!

Thanks for coming back and letting us know.

 

[Jamo04]

All settled and payed now. Final administrative settlement of £93.40. Could of been worse. Thank you all for your help. It's been an emotional one but lesson learnt!!

Hi Ashlarr.

Appreciate this is an old thread but I would be interested to know what your response was like to ATW.

I am in exactly the same situation. I have replied to the letter from TIL apologizing and advising this is my first offence and my last etc.! i am expecting the same reply from them as you and them stating there is no reason why they shouldn't take me to court (although i haven't received a reply from TIL as of yet..).

Once i get the reply from TIL and if it does say they have no choice but to issue me summons, what was your email like to ATW? I am not sure whether to be proactive and just email them now before hearing from TIL? Some advise from somebody who has gone through the same thing would be appreciated! I have my own thread should you wise to comment on there directly.

Thanks!

 

[gray1404]

I cannot for the life of me work out why TIL limited have a habit of writing back to people in essence rejecting the passengers wish to settle out of court. They seem to send a standard letter worded "we see no reason why this matter cannot proceed to court" letter. Then, later on they (or the TOC) offer an out of court settlement. I have heard of such letters being sent out on a number of occasions to people for who it is the first time they have been caught, admit they are wrong, applogise and with to cover costs.

Their letters seem to achieve nothing other then prolong the matter for the OP and increase their own costs, not to mention acting unfairly.

 

[Gareth Marston]

I cannot for the life of me work out why TIL limited have a habit of writing back to people in essence rejecting the passengers wish to settle out of court. They seem to send a standard letter worded "we see no reason why this matter cannot proceed to court" letter. Then, later on they (or the TOC) offer an out of court settlement. I have heard of such letters being sent out on a number of occasions to people for who it is the first time they have been caught, admit they are wrong, applogise and with to cover costs.

Their letters seem to achieve nothing other then prolong the matter for the OP and increase their own costs, not to mention acting unfairly.

I suspect there's an element of not "wanting to make it easy" for the offender, "got caught paid an easy to do fine got away with it 10 times later and got the money back mate" or "God they were awkward I wont do that again".

Project Fear

 

[najaB]

I have heard of such letters being sent out on a number of occasions to people for who it is the first time they have been caught, admit they are wrong, applogise and with to cover costs.

We would be unlikely to hear from the people whose initial letter was accepted.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I suspect there's an element of not "wanting to make it easy" for the offender, "got caught paid an easy to do fine got away with it 10 times later and got the money back mate" or "God they were awkward I wont do that again".
Project Fear

Plus TIL will probably be paid by ATW on a scale depending on how much work they do on a particular case, and it will bump up the "administrative disposal" cost.
Quid's in all round.
ATW do seem to be tightening up on ticketless travel though, enforcing standard conditions of travel and all that.

 

[gray1404]

This is the problem. I feel TIL are increasing the administrative work involved so they can bump up their costs, which they charge to ATW and thus a higher administrative settlement to the passenger. Has to be something wrong with them doing that.

I will check to see if their approach is in line with ATW policy or not. I doubt it is.

 

[Haywain]

There's an easy way for people to avoid these costs. A simple matter of buying a ticket for the whole journey.

 

[Clipper]

This is the problem. I feel TIL are increasing the administrative work involved so they can bump up their costs.

If the passenger is not happy with the level of costs they could always have their day in court, the cost of which would be considerably more.

Lower admin fees would be less of a deterrent?

Anyway, I'm glad the OP got the result he was hoping for.

 

[Gareth Marston]

There's an easy way for people to avoid these costs. A simple matter of buying a ticket for the whole journey.

Buying a ticket at your origin station will aid enormously as the amount of people in South Wales who buy tickets when challenged from other places to their destinations must mean they get lost on the way home and end up at the wrong town. Just think they can look at their ticket and they"ll remember where to go home to!

It will help South Wales Poice to as every Sunday there are concerned realities going to the local Nick in the Valleys with the same story about their relative going to Cardiff on the free train service but haven't come back.

 

[Fare-Cop]

I will check to see if their approach is in line with ATW policy or not. I doubt it is.

What was the answer to your enquiry?

 

[gray1404]

ATW Arriva Trains Wales Revenue Enforcement Policy states: "Customers can make genuine mistakes. If this is the first time a customer has been identified within this process they should not normally be taken to prosecution and may be offered an administrative settlement. The exception to this is if there is an attempted fraud or other aggravating circumstance.

Prosecution will be the last course of action. There are some areas where prosecution is unavoidable.

Fraud
Giving false personal details
Knowingly claiming a short journey
Repeat offender e.g. Travelling without a ticket on more than one occasion"


I do not personally feel that Transport Investigations are adhering to this as often as they should be. Though I suppose short faring would be classed an aggravating circumstance and knowingly claiming a short journey is listed above.

 

[najaB]

Prosecution will be the last course of action. There are some areas where prosecution is unavoidable.

Fraud
Giving false personal details
Knowingly claiming a short journey
Repeat offender e.g. Travelling without a ticket on more than one occasion"


I do not personally feel that Transport Investigations are adhering to this as often as they should be.

The highlighted applies in this case.

 

[Ashlaarr]

Hi Ashlarr.

Appreciate this is an old thread but I would be interested to know what your response was like to ATW.

I am in exactly the same situation. I have replied to the letter from TIL apologizing and advising this is my first offence and my last etc.! i am expecting the same reply from them as you and them stating there is no reason why they shouldn't take me to court (although i haven't received a reply from TIL as of yet..).

Once i get the reply from TIL and if it does say they have no choice but to issue me summons, what was your email like to ATW? I am not sure whether to be proactive and just email them now before hearing from TIL? Some advise from somebody who has gone through the same thing would be appreciated! I have my own thread should you wise to comment on there directly.

Thanks!

If I were you mate I'd wait for the initial reply from TIL and see what they say, don't stress over it. They use I bullying tactic to scare you. Wait for the reply, if they say they have enough evidence to prosecute then email ATW, I didn't hear anything back from ATW for about 10 days, then I had an email off them saying they would accept an administrative settlement and TIL would be in touch with me to arrange payment.

It's beyond me why TIL go around the who situation the long way. They are just making more work for themselves for the sake of it!! I wrote about 4 letters before I got to this stage and being able to settle. Don't stress.

 

[baz962]

ATW will refer your correspondence to Transport Investigations (TI).

I wonder if some clarification on process might be helpful here.It is true that different companies have different policies, but the process applicable to ATW is that :-

• Each incident is investigated and assessed by Transport Investigations (TI);
• TI is responsible for all correspondence;
• TI is responsible for determining whether to recommend a prosecution or alternative resolution (prosecution is always chosen for giving false name or address, deliberate short faring, repeat offending, etc where the evidence is sufficient);
• Where prosecution is recommended, a file is prepared and sent to ATW for approval;
• A Director of ATW must confirm each recommendation for prosecution before TI will prepare for prosecution any further;
• TI will apply to the Court for a Summons;
• The Court will issue a Summons to the accused offender;
• TI will prepare the papers for trial and instruct a Prosecutor;
• TI will consider any suggestions of an administrative disposal on its own merits (an 'out-of-Court settlement'), though the circumstances which always lead to a prosecution as listed above will continue to apply;
• TI will also consider any "last-minute" suggestions of an administrative disposal on its own merits (an 'out-of-Court settlement'), which the Prosecutor would refer back to them from the Court;
• ATW would be informed if a decision not to prosecute a particular incident was taken by TI at any point after having given its approval to prosecute.

This process was agreed with Transport Focus.

Some Welsh Assembly members had been vocal in expressing concern at the policy of attempting to change the entrenched 'pay only if challenged' habits in south Wales, and the procedure above was developed in response, in consultation with, and was approved by, Transport Focus.

This isn't quite the same as saying that 'a case is handed back to' ATW. Nor that ATW is the prosecutor.

Cross Country (XC) have agreed the same procedure with TI as have ATW.

Hope this helps.

While reading these posts I was wondering what if you gave a false name/address and after that I read this answer however how can they prosecute if they do not have your details

 

[gray1404]

If someone gives a fake address they can't do anything unless they were to then discover the true identity of the offender, which is not easy normally.

 

[Fare-Cop]

If someone gives a fake address they can't do anything unless they were to then discover the true identity of the offender, which is not easy normally.

I didn't think it was the policy of this forum to encourage offenders to commit another offence, but in any case it is a great deal easier to identify people these days than many seem to believe.

Giving false details and being found out makes the matter very much more serious as a great many people find to their cost.

For starters, it virtually guarantees prosecution when a settlement might otherwise be agreed in many cases.

 

[baz962]

I didn't think it was the policy of this forum to encourage offenders to commit another offence, but in any case it is a great deal easier to identify people these days than many seem to believe.

Giving false details and being found out makes the matter very much more serious as a great many people find to their cost.

For starters, it virtually guarantees prosecution when a settlement might otherwise be agreed in many cases.

When I asked It was not in any way to encourage and neither would I ever fare dodge I just wondered what steps they take to find out just as a matter of interest. The one and only time I came close was one of those cases due to ignorance. I found out last year that the tickets you buy on my toc/line anyway are ok upto 4am the next day but a couple of years before that I had gone over a bit while on a night out in london and for some reason I had mistakenly thought you were ok until 6 am and I told the ticket man on the train that. luckily he just charged me a new ticket but if he had threatened to prosecute I may have been tempted to give false details as 1. I am honest 2. was a genuine mistake and 3. A first (and only) offence and although I personally cannot abide fare dodgers or thieves, lets face it that is basically what it is at the same time I dont like bullying people who might go overboard for genuine oversights.

 

[gray1404]

Fare-cop, you say it is a great deal easier to identify people these days than many seem to believe. How is it so easy?

 

[najaB]

Fare-cop, you say it is a great deal easier to identify people these days than many seem to believe. How is it so easy?

With apologies to Fare-cop if I've misunderstood his post, but I took it to mean that it's a lot harder to get away with giving false details in the first place, rather than tracking them down after the fact.

 

[Antman]

With apologies to Fare-cop if I've misunderstood his post, but I took it to mean that it's a lot harder to get away with giving false details in the first place, rather than tracking them down after the fact.

I suspect in many cases staff know from the look of the person that they are unlikely to give correct details and simply charge what they should have paid anyway with a warning that they are likely to be prosecuted if they try it again etc.

 

[gray1404]

I am not so sure. My understanding is that a passenger is required to give their name and address under certain circumstances. I do not think that the rail staff have the power to detain them once they have given their name and address and the customer is under no duty to hang around while they check out this information. So if a customer has given a name and address (it could be the correct one) by the time the staff realise it is false then the passenger may have taken off already. Also, there is every chance that a customer could give correct details and these could come back as not being able to be checked out. In such a circumstance what else can a customer do other then saying "tough, I've given you my correct details."

 

[island]

Unless there is BTP standing around it is quite tricky.

 

[najaB]

I do not think that the rail staff have the power to detain them once they have given their name and address and the customer is under no duty to hang around while they check out this information.

To quote the Byelaws:

23. Name and address
Any person reasonably suspected by an authorised person of breaching or attempting to breach any of these Byelaws shall give his name and address when asked by an authorised person.

And the Regulation of Railways Act:

If a passenger having failed either to produce, or if requested to deliver up, a ticket showing that his fare is paid, or to pay his fare, refuses or fails on request by an officer or servant of a railway company, to give his name and address, any officer of the company . . may detain him until he can be conveniently brought before some justice or otherwise discharged by due course of law.

It is pretty clear that the requirement is to give your valid and correct address and that the officer of the railway is entitled to check if the name and address given are, in fact, correct. I think it would be quite difficult to argue otherwise.

However, as island says, in practice it is difficult/impossible for a RPI to enforce the power of detention unless BTP are in attendance.

 

[Ashlaarr]

I would like to point out, a friend of mine traveled on the same evening, we both got stopped and he refused to give out any identification, when ask for ID he said he was not carrying any.
A different officer went through the same questions as he did with me but he did not have a body camera as did the one that was questioning me.

He has not heard anything from TIL or ATW.