Ticket Anomalies with TL

[No Expert]

Yesterday I received an email from Thameslink wanting to discuss "e-ticket anomalies" with me. I've scheduled a call with them for this coming Friday as I'm too busy with work to talk during office hours before.

Is this standard practice for them to do before they start a prosecution? Am I better off just not engaging?

 

[yorkie]

Do you have any more information?

Have you obtained refunds for e-tickets for example?

I have had some interesting discussions with retailers/TOC staff about the sort of fraud that goes on, so if there is suspicious activity that can be explained as being legitimate, I would ensure it is explained to avoid a potential prosecution.

 

[No Expert]

Do you have any more information?

Have you obtained refunds for e-tickets for example?

I'm wary of providing too much information but yes, broadly that's correct.

 

[WesternLancer]

Yesterday I received an email from Thameslink wanting to discuss "e-ticket anomalies" with me. I've scheduled a call with them for this coming Friday as I'm too busy with work to talk during office hours before.

Is this standard practice for them to do before they start a prosecution? Am I better off just not engaging?

Can't answer that specifically - don't recall a similar thread on here at least not recently - but there are often probs with e-tickets (such that some thread users avoid them!)
can you shed any more light at this stage - eg have you had any prob with e-tickets (for example at gates) or other aspects of you using them.
Do you have any reason to think they might have grounds to prosecute?

Std practice ahead of prosecution seems to be NOT to ring anyone, just to do it after sending you a letter alleging what they think you have done wrong and asking you your version of events. OK to do that in writing, I'd not be keen to do it by phone unless you recorded yourself - too easy to get confused over complexities of ticket validity etc.

If they have your contact details via the e-ticket process (do they have your address?) they would probably just prosecute, so it may be worth engaging to try and establish what they are contacting you about. But take care what you say perhaps.

 

[No Expert]

Can't answer that specifically - don't recall a similar thread on here at least not recently - but there are often probs with e-tickets (such that some thread users avoid them!)
can you shed any more light at this stage - eg have you had any prob with e-tickets (for example at gates) or other aspects of you using them.
Do you have any reason to think they might have grounds to prosecute?

Std practice ahead of prosecution seems to be NOT to ring anyone, just to do it after sending you a letter alleging what they think you have done wrong and asking you your version of events. OK to do that in writing, I'd not be keen to do it by phone unless you recorded yourself - too easy to get confused over complexities of ticket validity etc.

If they have your contact details via the e-ticket process (do they have your address?) they would probably just prosecute, so it may be worth engaging to try and establish what they are contacting you about. But take care what you say perhaps.

Very helpful, thank you.

 

[30907]

Very helpful, thank you.

Indeed, I would be inclined to ask for details in writing of their concerns. Whether you will get it....

 

[WesternLancer]

I'm wary of providing too much information but yes, broadly that's correct.

If, say you have been buying e-tickets, then applying for refunds and travelling (say) I'd stop doing that. They will be able to find you and could use CCTV to track you and stop you for questioning.
Apols if this is not the case - not my intention to accuse you of that.

 

[Egg Centric]

If you *have* been doing something dodgy on the other hand, then I don't see how it would be in your interests to engage with them.

 

[No Expert]

If you *have* been doing something dodgy on the other hand, then I don't see how it would be in your interests to engage with them.

Are you suggesting that if they wish to pursue a case against someone then they would need to stop them in person?

 

[crablab]

Are you suggesting that if they wish to pursue a case against someone then they would need to stop them in person?

I think the suggestion was more that if one had done something dodgy, one could delay/frustrate the process (some would say the inevitable), and hope TL forgot about it.

 

[No Expert]

I think the suggestion was more that if one had done something dodgy, one could delay/frustrate the process (some would say the inevitable), and hope TL forgot about it.

Possibly - though I can imagine antagonising them won't play well if they do choose to pursue a case against someone.

 

[crablab]

Well indeed... But I guess some posters in this particular area of the forum chose to bury their heads in the sand, and have subsequently realised that doesn't work by the time they come to ask for advice

 

[No Expert]

Well indeed... But I guess some posters in this particular area of the forum chose to bury their heads in the sand, and have subsequently realised that doesn't work by the time they come to ask for advice

Part of me wonders if they send these emails with the hope of getting people to preemptively confess to a hypothetical issue when their case isn't strong enough to pursue by itself.

 

[WesternLancer]

Possibly - though I can imagine antagonising them won't play well if they do choose to pursue a case against someone.

Personally I would engage with them I think - but then I actively do my best to have the right ticket for various reasons (this isn't always easy on UK railways I admit...!)

If they suspect you I would expect them to use CCTV on barriers to work out when / where your e-ticket is usually activated or journey ends and typical journey patterns and what you look like then try to intercept you at a future date and question you. This view is based on operational practice shown on one of the TV fare dodger programmers nowt more than that. Or do ticket checks proactively whilst looking for you from images on CCTV.

If they are keen to do this given reduced passenger numbers I doubt it is hard to do.

Personally I'd not want that hanging over me on every trip...

 

[No Expert]

Personally I would engage with them I think - but then I actively do my best to have the right ticket for various reasons (this isn't always easy on UK railways I admit...!)

If they suspect you I would expect them to use CCTV on barriers to work out when / where your e-ticket is usually activated or journey ends and typical journey patterns and what you look like then try to intercept you at a future date and question you. This view is based on operational practice shown on one of the TV fare dodger programmers nowt more than that. Or do ticket checks proactively whilst looking for you from images on CCTV.

If they are keen to do this given reduced passenger numbers I doubt it is hard to do.

Personally I'd not want that hanging over me on every trip...

Would you mind PM'ing me? Thank you.

Personally I would engage with them I think - but then I actively do my best to have the right ticket for various reasons (this isn't always easy on UK railways I admit...!)

Seems I am unable to reply to your PM as I am a new member

 

[Y Ddraig Coch]

If you speak to them via the phone and they give you the "this call is being recorded" spiel I suggest you end the call there and ask for it to be continued in writing where you have time to get advice (if needed) and plan your reply, on the phone could make you say something under duress and if being recorded and they have warned you it could be used in their evidence (if there is an to be found of course)

 

[Hadders]

A couple of things to consider:

If you engage with the process then generally this will be looked upon more favourably in any decision to prosecute and eventually if a sentence is imposed by a court.

On the other hand it is ultimately up to the Train Company to prove to a court beyond all reasonable doubt that you have committed an offence. There is a risk of incriminating yourself if you engage ‘too much’.

Only you know what you have done and how culpable you are. If you have committed an offence, which the train company could prove, then it’s probably best to engage with them to try and keep it out of court or at least help to mitigate the sentence imposed.

If you do not believe you have done anything wrong then let them prove it.

 

[WesternLancer]

If you speak to them via the phone and they give you the "this call is being recorded" spiel I suggest you end the call there and ask for it to be continued in writing where you have time to get advice (if needed) and plan your reply, on the phone could make you say something under duress and if being recorded and they have warned you it could be used in their evidence (if there is an to be found of course)

would they have an address to do that with? I guess at least an e-mail address associated with the e-ticket purchase maybe? I suppose the OP could volunteer a contact address - in the way you would if you have been stopped by a revenue protection officer and questioned about your ticket I guess.

 

[Y Ddraig Coch]

would they have an address to do that with? I guess at least an e-mail address associated with the e-ticket purchase maybe? I suppose the OP could volunteer a contact address - in the way you would if you have been stopped by a revenue protection officer and questioned about your ticket I guess.

Possibly not, but the thought of possibly being "interviewed" on the phone without time to consult or think carefully about their reply I feel would not be in the OP's best interests. This is just my opinion obviously.

 

[WesternLancer]

Possibly not, but the thought of possibly being "interviewed" on the phone without time to consult or think carefully about their reply I feel would not be in the OP's best interests. This is just my opinion obviously.

Good point

Can't recall what T-Link revenue protection approach generally is, do they use TILtd? Do they go for prosecutions as a general rule or settlements? - unless it is a severe / repeat offence etc obviously.

 

[Y Ddraig Coch]

Good point

Can't recall what T-Link revenue protection approach generally is, do they use TILtd? Do they go for prosecutions as a general rule or settlements? - unless it is a severe / repeat offence etc obviously.

I couldn't tell you, the fact they are even contacting the OP by phone is new to me and I will be interested how this pans out.

 

[35B]

Possibly not, but the thought of possibly being "interviewed" on the phone without time to consult or think carefully about their reply I feel would not be in the OP's best interests. This is just my opinion obviously.

Isn't that just a modern equivalent of the face to face interview that might have been held pre-Covid

 

[Y Ddraig Coch]

Isn't that just a modern equivalent of the face to face interview that might have been held pre-Covid

Maybe, but they didn't stop him at the time, and as far as I am aware have no right at all to interview him afterwards which is why I wouldn't recommend any sort of phone interview (if I had any suspicion I may be in the wrong) in case of incriminating myself.

Of course the OP could be a completely law abiding citizen with nothing to hide and in that case, should willingly help out. I still think even in that case that giving an e mail address may be the way forward to communicate though. Evidence of who, what and when things were said are recorded safely then.

 

[Egg Centric]

I think the suggestion was more that if one had done something dodgy, one could delay/frustrate the process (some would say the inevitable), and hope TL forgot about it.

Not about delaying the process - just about not providing TL with evidence to use against them. There's a reason solicitors advise the guilty to go no comment!

Of course if they have acted above board then the advice would be different.

 

[VauxhallandI]

Much in the vein of this, talking will only leave you in trouble even when innocent

 

[Egg Centric]

Much in the vein of this, talking will only leave you in trouble even when innocent

I don't agree with that. If OP has clearly done nothing wrong then he should engage (but not put himself at trouble to do so unless TL pay his expenses, because why should he?). Our system is somewhat different to the US in that courts can infer things from refusing to answer questions, and our police are far better. Standing on your rights all the time is a hassle.

If you have committed an offence, which the train company could prove, then it’s probably best to engage with them to try and keep it out of court or at least help to mitigate the sentence imposed.

If you do not believe you have done anything wrong then let them prove it.

My advice is tailored towards the other possibility - that where the OP believes he has or may have committed an offence which the train company may or may not be able to prove. An interview, answered honestly, means that the train company is practically guaranteed to prove it. Of course that has to be weighed up against that they almost certainly won't settle if he doesn't and they are able to prove it.

But they may not settle anyway, even if he comes clean.

Only OP knows what he did, but his lack of candour is somewhat suspect.

One final thing to consider OP - under absolutely no circumstances should you agree to an interview if you are unwilling to tell the truth in it.

 

[RPI]

So if I've read this correctly then you haven't been stopped in person? Just contacted asking to speak to you regarding irregularities in your ticket purchasing history?

Normally with a situation like this a person would be invited to attend a voluntary interview, if you don't engage with them then as others have pointed out it makes it more difficult for TL to prove anything so they will have to investigate further by trawling CCTV etc, they may not find anything and leave it there or they may find enough evidence to proceed to court, or they may just take a chance and put what they do have before the court anyway and see how you react, they can always withdraw it at a later date, there are a lots of ifs and buts and the onus is on TL to prove your guilt. I'd say that if there are a large number of previous journeys that they are investigating then this could be quite big, in such a case only a qualified legal professional could give you the right advice so it may be worth considering

 

[WesternLancer]

So if I've read this correctly then you haven't been stopped in person? Just contacted asking to speak to you regarding irregularities in your ticket purchasing history?

Normally with a situation like this a person would be invited to attend a voluntary interview, if you don't engage with them then as others have pointed out it makes it more difficult for TL to prove anything so they will have to investigate further by trawling CCTV etc, they may not find anything and leave it there or they may find enough evidence to proceed to court, or they may just take a chance and put what they do have before the court anyway and see how you react, they can always withdraw it at a later date, there are a lots of ifs and buts and the onus is on TL to prove your guilt. I'd say that if there are a large number of previous journeys that they are investigating then this could be quite big, in such a case only a qualified legal professional could give you the right advice so it may be worth considering

would the Train company be able to get a residential address from an e ticket record? I'm assuming you can't easily instigate court action against a person without a contact address (unless they are in custody I guess)? Presume if an RPI questions someone at a station and they refuse to give an address BTP would be called. That's not an option if they simply are phoning you up.

 

[Hadders]

would the Train company be able to get a residential address from an e ticket record? I'm assuming you can't easily instigate court action against a person without a contact address (unless they are in custody I guess)? Presume if an RPI questions someone at a station and they refuse to give an address BTP would be called. That's not an option if they simply are phoning you up.

I would imagine so seeing as you have to purchase an e-ticket online which would mean having an account.

 

[Y Ddraig Coch]

I would imagine so seeing as you have to purchase an e-ticket online which would mean having an account.

An account needs an e-mail address and bank details , neither of which give anything away as to your location.