Southeastern Becoming Harder to Deal With?

[Hadders]

In recent weeks Southeastern appear to have become 'more difficult' to deal with.

Historically they are one of the more pragmatic train companies to deal with, almost always offering an out of court settlement to anyone who co-operates with them.
Recently we've started to see some cases sent to court. Initial indications were they seemed to 'lose' some replies to initial letters and once contacted out of court settlements were offered.
This week we've seen cases where people are being prosecuted, although it seems they have engaged with Southeastern.

Has anyone else noticed this change? Or is it just me overthinking it?

Does anyone who works for, or has connections with, Southeastern know if anything has changed? If so, it would be good to know if there has been a change in policy so we can advise people seeking our help accordingly. Feel free to get in touch through conversation message if you don't feel able to post in this thread.

Here's a link to Southeastern's Revenue Protection Policy.

Revenue Protection Policy | Southeastern

We aim to clarify passenger responsibilities when travelling with us

www.southeasternrailway.co.uk

I've not had need to read before so I'm not sure if anything has changed but it does seem rather basic compared to, for example, GWR's

https://www.gwr.com/-/media/gwr-sc-website/files/revenue-protection-policy/GWR-Revenue-Protection-Policy-January-2023.pdf

 

[John R]

I think we've seen a couple of SE cases where the letter sent has continued to suggest that the fare dodging was in fact "an honest mistake", (or at least they've tried to persuade us that was the case) when, certainly to my mind, it was pretty clear a case of deliberate evasion.

We've always recommended that people are honest, and don't try to lie about what caused them to be stopped without a valid ticket. Maybe the investigator is doing a "smell test" and if they think the person isn't "owning" their actions that they are taking a more hard line approach?

 

[island]

I have noticed the change although it seemed to me, initially at least, as though correspondence was being lost. There has also been a number of cases where the six-month limit was about to be hit.

I think they are starting to see a lot more cases of blatant long term short-faring come through as well, tied I think to Southeastern only starting to offer e-tickets on their flows relatively recently. Southeastern RPIs are doing specialised operations to detect e-ticket misuse at many of their major terminals.

Many of these cases are at the level of "if this isn't enough to prosecute, what is?"

I might show up at Bexley Magistrates Court one of these days – Southeastern take over a courtroom there every other Wednesday.

 

[thedbdiboy]

There are two factors arising from the recent, erm, publicity around revenue protection that are affecting things.
1) DOHL as holding group has been reviewing consistency of approach across its TOCs
2) Although out-of-court settlements are understandably preferred as a way of avoiding formal action, there is a concern that it means due process is not being observed for those with the means to buy their way out of a formal sanction
I do not know to what degree they are directly affecting TOC approaches.

 

[island]

Just had another case in and this time it seems Southeastern didn't even write asking for an explanation.

They appear to be getting quite tough.

 

[WesternLancer]

Would be interesting to see if people using solicitors are getting the same tougher stance now too.

 

[John R]

If this is specific to DOHL group companies then I would expect it to be matched by a similar change at others, most notably Northern, for which we see quite a few cases here. I don't think we have seen evidence of that yet, but maybe it's just a matter of time.

 

[Gloster]

Is the change in practice, if such it is, across the board or selective? Are they still looking at some cases and saying ’this looks like a genuine mistake, so we will give them an opportunity to explain themselves’, but ones that look like blatant dishonesty are now going straight to prosecution?

 

[AlterEgo]

I think the changes we have seen recently are due to some sort of admin foul up and are not intentional.

 

[DamzFX]

I have noticed the change although it seemed to me, initially at least, as though correspondence was being lost. There has also been a number of cases where the six-month limit was about to be hit.

I think they are starting to see a lot more cases of blatant long term short-faring come through as well, tied I think to Southeastern only starting to offer e-tickets on their flows relatively recently. Southeastern RPIs are doing specialised operations to detect e-ticket misuse at many of their major terminals.

Many of these cases are at the level of "if this isn't enough to prosecute, what is?"

I might show up at Bexley Magistrates Court one of these days – Southeastern take over a courtroom there every other Wednesday.

What do you mean by the "six-month limit" are cases auto dropped if it hasn't been proceeded after 6 months? Wasn't sure what you meant by that.

I've currently got email confimation that they have my reply (posted apology letter response) so currently awaiting on their second letter response from Southeastern (hopefully providing me with an out-of-court settlement). It does scare me a bit reading that some people never got SE second response and just got a court summons. Really hope this doesn't happen to me

 

[John R]

What do you mean by the "six-month limit" are cases auto dropped if it hasn't been proceeded after 6 months? Wasn't sure what you meant by that.

I've currently got email confimation that they have my reply (posted apology letter response) so currently awaiting on their second letter response from Southeastern (hopefully providing me with an out-of-court settlement). It does scare me a bit reading that some people never got SE second response and just got a court summons. Really hope this doesn't happen to me

They have 6 months from the date of the offence to lay papers before the court, else they are out of time.

Probably best if any further discussion of your case takes place in that thread, to avoid taking this one off topic.

I think the changes we have seen recently are due to some sort of admin foul up and are not intentional.

If the hardening of approach is genuine, and not due to a foul up, then it would certainly appear to run completely counter to today's announcement re the overall review of prosecutions, which would be to reduce the number.

 

[island]

If the hardening of approach is genuine, and not due to a foul up, then it would certainly appear to run completely counter to today's announcement re the overall review of prosecutions, which would be to reduce the number.

It would, but it also wouldn't be the first (or second, third...) time two different arms of the government said two different things.

 

[Hadders]

It seems that Southeastern has now offered settlements in a couple of cases that had been sent to court. One used Manak solicitors, in the other case was dealt with by the defendant.

So it seems, based on these cases, that Southeastern are still open to out of court settlements.