West Midlands Railway Short Fare Evasion

[trainuser1234]

My husband and I use the same trainline account (with my email as login) to purchase train tickets.

I have received and email from the fraud team at WMR as a few weeks ago my husband purchased a ticket whilst travelling and was advised that it was not valid for the service despite the fact that the ticket was an anytime single. The ticket person on the train was not cooperative at all and essentially just told my husband he would be fined and needed to give his name and address. At this point my husband did not give his name and address as he was not happy with how he had been treated. The ticket person then simply said that they will use our trainline account to contact him.

I responded to the first email from WMR clarifying the situation from our perspective and asking if they can provide further details or evidence as we have said that the full fare was paid.
They have instead come back and suggested that there are 'multiple short fare evasion tickets' on my account and have asked me to provide my address.

I do not understand why they need my address and how they can come to the conclusion that tickets are short fare evasion as we do not always travel to the station closest to our home - we use other stations for various reasons.
Obviously I do not want to be prosecuted or taken to court for this and would rather have it resolved but just wanted advice on how to respond. Especially if they could potentially try to charge us for journeys we did not make

Thank you

 

[SuspectUsual]

If you're confident that everything other than the incident with your husband is above board, then write back and tell them so. From what you've said, it reads as if you have some idea why they might think you've been short faring (you don't always use the station nearest where you live - and they'll have got your address from your trainline account); so if you can explain why you buy the tickets you do in a simple way that would probably help too

 

[KNN]

It wouldn't be valid if it wasn't bought before travelling. You are unlikely to win that argument.

Also if they have caught your husband short-faring then be prepared for them not to believe you got on at a different station at other times.

 

[trainuser1234]

I would also be interested to know how far back they can look at tickets for and try to charge me for if anyone knows please?

 

[KNN]

I would also be interested to know how far back they can look at tickets for and try to charge me for if anyone knows please?

Someone will know if there is a limit, but it's definitely measured in years.

 

[WesternLancer]

My husband and I use the same trainline account (with my email as login) to purchase train tickets.

I have received and email from the fraud team at WMR as a few weeks ago my husband purchased a ticket whilst travelling and was advised that it was not valid for the service despite the fact that the ticket was an anytime single. The ticket person on the train was not cooperative at all and essentially just told my husband he would be fined and needed to give his name and address. At this point my husband did not give his name and address as he was not happy with how he had been treated. The ticket person then simply said that they will use our trainline account to contact him.

I responded to the first email from WMR clarifying the situation from our perspective and asking if they can provide further details or evidence as we have said that the full fare was paid.
They have instead come back and suggested that there are 'multiple short fare evasion tickets' on my account and have asked me to provide my address.

I do not understand why they need my address and how they can come to the conclusion that tickets are short fare evasion as we do not always travel to the station closest to our home - we use other stations for various reasons.
Obviously I do not want to be prosecuted or taken to court for this and would rather have it resolved but just wanted advice on how to respond. Especially if they could potentially try to charge us for journeys we did not make

Thank you

Welcome

It's actually an offence not to give your details (ie name and address) when asked for them by a railway official - tho I appreciate your husband won't have known this probably - but it won't have helped at the time if it was not given I suspect. If the staff were initially minded to issue a Penalty fare on the spot that would have been to your husbands advantage since they can be settled for £50 and have rights of Appeal if they have been wrongly issued. Other options don't have those safeguards sadly (as they are essentially requests / threats by the railway to 'answer what we want want to know or we will take you to the magistrates court')

It would help to try and understand why he was told that the ticket your husband had was not valid - - some of the questions set out here, if they can be answered, would help people give the best advice here - because if that ticket wasn't valid they may be thinking tickets he regularly buys are not valid and that could soon mount up.

Please read before posting in Disputes & Prosecutions

Guidance for those asking for advice: Please bear in mind the following, when asking for advice in this section: We need to know all relevant facts in order to assist you, including, for example: The stations* where you actually started & finished your journey The stations* where you changed...

www.railforums.co.uk

But I would think they need to have some evidence, or an admission, that your husband was short faring (ie buying a ticket for a trip that is shorter than the journey actually undertaken), and that would need to be more than "you live in Stratford on Avon but this ticket is from Solihull". Without evidence that won't stand up in court so their ultimate 'threat' can't be carried out presumably.

But it would be advisable to provide your correct postal address in my view.

If you can give more information / post a copy of anything received from them without personal details included - it will help ensure you get good advice.

 

[Cuthbert]

I would also be interested to know how far back they can look at tickets for and try to charge me for if anyone knows please?

They can go back many many years.

 

[John R]

I do not understand why they need my address and how they can come to the conclusion that tickets are short fare evasion as we do not always travel to the station closest to our home - we use other stations for various reasons.

There are several ways in which they can tell that you or your husband didn't travel from the station you claim to. An easy one is to put a revenue block on the station he claims to have boarded at (if it is not barriered) and so lack of an entry scan would prove it. This is done quite frequently at stations known to be used for short ticketing. The time the ticket was purchased might be insightful for them too.

The danger with continuing to be uncooperative (which started with not giving name and address) is that they may be disinclined to offer an out of court settlement and say "OK then, we'll see you in court." It's potentially a high risk approach.

 

[trainuser1234]

thank you for the replies. I think I am going to ask them how this can be resolved out of court. I still don’t understand why they need my address but will give this if absolutely necessary

 

[WesternLancer]

thank you for the replies. I think I am going to ask them how this can be resolved out of court. I still don’t understand why they need my address but will give this if absolutely necessary

You can ask that for sure, but do you think something was indeed wrong with the ticket held?

 

[johnny_t]

You probably need to split this down into two different things so that you can deal with them effectively.

1) Your husband's ticket. If it was bought after the train had left the station he bought it from, then it is not valid. It doesn't matter if it is an anytime single, or anything like that. Their suspicion, rightly or wrongly, will be that he saw a ticket inspector coming and bought a ticket. Unfortunately, his refusal to co-operate with them afterwards may well have opened you up to a whole lot more grief.

2) Short-faring. If you are happy that you haven't been and you have a reasonable explanation, then there really shouldn't be anything to lose by just being co-operative. From their point of view, 'I don't see why you need my address' does make it look like you are hiding something. There are, of course, many reasons why someone may not travel from the station nearest their house. However, if in your heart you suspect that they might be onto something, they probably are onto something and there comes a time when it is best to stop digging.

 

[Elecman]

I would also be interested to know how far back they can look at tickets for and try to charge me for if anyone knows please?

7 years

 

[AlterEgo]

1) Your husband's ticket. If it was bought after the train had left the station he bought it from, then it is not valid. It doesn't matter if it is an anytime single, or anything like that. Their suspicion, rightly or wrongly, will be that he saw a ticket inspector coming and bought a ticket. Unfortunately, his refusal to co-operate with them afterwards may well have opened you up to a whole lot more grief.

To be abundantly clear, the ticket is perfectly valid, but an offence had been committed under the Bylaws if he boarded the train and passed an opportunity to pay. The offence is complete at that moment and buying a ticket later is immaterial.

The ticket person on the train was not cooperative at all and essentially just told my husband he would be fined and needed to give his name and address. At this point my husband did not give his name and address as he was not happy with how he had been treated.

This is, separately, also an offence.

 

[John R]

thank you for the replies. I think I am going to ask them how this can be resolved out of court. I still don’t understand why they need my address but will give this if absolutely necessary

Look at it this way. Your husband committed an offence by not giving his details when requested. Maybe if you want to resolve this out of court it might not be a good idea to, effectively, perpetuate that offence by still refusing to do so.

Our advice is always to be cooperative as you want them to choose the route of least pain for you. Why would you act in a way that will antagonise them?

 

[trainuser1234]

West Midlands Railway have sent me a list of suspected short fare evasions on my account dating back to 2020. I only have access to my purchase history on my trainline account back to 2022 - is it fair that they are able to count transactions that I cannot verify?
Also, it seems that they are trying to charge me for return tickets when I had only purchased singles - is this allowed? How can I provide evidence that only a single ticket was required?

The total amount that they are wanting to charge is not something I can afford!

 

[Fermiboson]

I take it from your other thread then that you have replied to cooperate. It would be helpful to copy over correspondence relevant to the case (or maybe the mods could merge the thread?)

To answer your questions: Yes, it is fair. It did happen. You can try to fight them on it, but they will simply prosecute you (for the single event they have evidence for, which will still end up costing you more). It is in your interest to cooperate.
You will probably need very strong justification and supporting evidence why all of your journeys only go one way in order to win the return ticket argument. (It is possible if you are apologetic and sincere, and most importantly honest.) Can you make the argument here?

If you are not able to afford the true cost of the settlement then you will not be able to afford the court fine either. Cooperation, paying the settlement by all legal means available to you, is in your interests. We have occasionally heard of TOCs allowing the use of payment plans for out of court settlements, but this is not at all a guarantee, I don’t know if WMR does it, and don’t rely on it.

 

[trainuser1234]

I take it from your other thread then that you have replied to cooperate. It would be helpful to copy over correspondence relevant to the case (or maybe the mods could merge the thread?)

To answer your questions: Yes, it is fair. It did happen. You can try to fight them on it, but they will simply prosecute you (for the single event they have evidence for, which will still end up costing you more). It is in your interest to cooperate.
You will probably need very strong justification and supporting evidence why all of your journeys only go one way in order to win the return ticket argument. (It is possible if you are apologetic and sincere, and most importantly honest.) Can you make the argument here?

If you are not able to afford the true cost of the settlement then you will not be able to afford the court fine either. Cooperation, paying the settlement by all legal means available to you, is in your interests. We have occasionally heard of TOCs allowing the use of payment plans for out of court settlements, but this is not at all a guarantee, I don’t know if WMR does it, and don’t rely on it.

Hi, Thank you for this. I don't understand how they can assume that all of these journeys are return journeys? If a single fare was purchased, surely they may only charge for the single fare?

 

[Fermiboson]

Hi, Thank you for this. I don't understand how they can assume that all of these journeys are return journeys? If a single fare was purchased, surely they may only charge for the single fare?

Well, pragmatically, you are the vulnerable party here. They can just go ahead, say “screw it” and give you a criminal record if you displease them enough.

I think you do need to be honest here: *did* you, factually, make the return journeys? I think any reasonable person would find it hard to believe that you’re constantly just travelling in one direction every day, no matter your ticket purchases.

(I’d like to note that charging a return for a return journey is already somewhat lenient; the usual treatment we see is two singles in each direction. They are unlikely to have too much patience left.)

 

[John R]

Hi, Thank you for this. I don't understand how they can assume that all of these journeys are return journeys? If a single fare was purchased, surely they may only charge for the single fare?

Well given you’ve been rather evasive here as to what has actually gone on, it’s not surprising that if you are equally evasive with them that that they also make assumptions as to what might be normal travel, and base any out of court settlement offer on that amount.

Ultimately you don’t have to accept it, and can be prosecuted for the one offence instead.

 

[WesternLancer]

Hi, Thank you for this. I don't understand how they can assume that all of these journeys are return journeys? If a single fare was purchased, surely they may only charge for the single fare?

They will not be unreasonable (given what we see on previous threads) if you are co-operating and can demonstrate plausibly that you only would have made a single journey - ie explain how you would have got back in a way that they are likely to believe or you can provide some supportive evidence for - if someone gives you a lift for example, would that person ultimately be prepared to give a signed supporting statement to that effect (bear in mind that in theory that is a supporting statement that could get discussed in a court room - so lying would be a very bad idea, lying to a court is likely to have a worse outcome than a conviction for fare evasion...)

 

[johnny_t]

Not everyone realises it, but if you have an Android phone, Google Maps Timeline is usually switched on by default, and has a surprising level of history on you. If you do, genuinely, travel one way into town and then walk home on summer evenings, or get a lift because you co-worker does Zumba in your village hall, then it will show it.

 

[AlterEgo]

Hi, Thank you for this. I don't understand how they can assume that all of these journeys are return journeys? If a single fare was purchased, surely they may only charge for the single fare?

Did you or did you not make return journeys? Very simple question. If you did, you're on the hook for them - and it is reasonable for them to assume you did make return journeys especially given the nature of the offence was simply paying when challenged.

 

[KNN]

Hi, Thank you for this. I don't understand how they can assume that all of these journeys are return journeys? If a single fare was purchased, surely they may only charge for the single fare?

They assume you aren't telling the truth because you've not done so previously. So they look at the most likely pattern of someone who pays when they can't get away with not paying.

It's now on you to prove what you claim, you can't expect them to take your word for it.

 

[skyhigh]

Hi, Thank you for this. I don't understand how they can assume that all of these journeys are return journeys? If a single fare was purchased, surely they may only charge for the single fare?

Regardless of anything else, are they asking for 2x Anytime Singles for the return journey, or are they asking for 1x Anytime Day Return (or equivalent)?

The return fare is often only a pound or so more expensive than a single, so even if they accept what you're saying you might find the settlement offer doesn't go down very much if they've used Return fares to calculate it.

 

[signed]

are they asking for 2x Anytime Singles for the return journey, or are they asking for 1x Anytime Day Return (or equivalent)?

The usual way they (every TOC seem to do it from reports on the forum) do it is 2x Anytime Singles, if they count a return it's usually a gesture.

 

[skyhigh]

The usual way they (every TOC seem to do it from reports on the forum) do it is 2x Anytime Singles, if they count a return it's usually a gesture.

Which is why I asked the OP what the TOC were asking here. I'm aware of what the usual practice is, but it's not unheard of for return fares to be charged.