Fraudulent Trainline refunds

[skyhigh]

As previously suggested, it appears Northern are now starting to contact customers who they suspect have submitted fraudulent refund requests.

For example:

https://mobile.twitter.com/matt_biker/status/1451552249763741719

@northernassist
is this a scam by any chance?

From the attached letter received:

This office acts as the prosecuting authority for Northern Trains Limited.

Working with our partner trainline.com we have identified that you have submitted 9 refunds of which
5 of the tickets have been scanned as used. A total value of £8.00 has been claimed over a period of
12 weeks. Please be advised that refund claims should only be submitted when you have been
unable to make the journey.

Fraudulent refund claims amount to a criminal offence under sections 1 and 2 of the Fraud Act 2006.
If found guilty of such an offence in a court of law then, upon summary conviction, the maximum
penalty is a sentence of imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to a fine not exceeding
the statutory maximum (or to both). Upon conviction in the Crown Court, the maximum penalty for an
offence of fraud is a sentence of imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years or to a fine (or to
both).

On this occasion, we are going to give you the opportunity to repay to Northern Trains Limited the
refunds that you claimed by way of compensation and also an administration fee of £90 for our costs
towards the investigation of this case. We also seek confirmation from you that you acknowledge that
you must only make refund claims when you have been unable to make the journey that you
purchased the ticket for.

If the amount of £98.00 is repaid, and we receive the acknowledgement below, then we undertake
that on this occasion we will not instigate criminal proceedings against you.

Please acknowledge receipt of this letter by completing the pro forma response which can be found overleaf alongside making the requested compensation payment.

I suspect we will be hearing more about this on this area of the forum over the coming weeks...

 

[Merseysider]

Are some people actually thick enough to claim a refund for £1.60 knowing full well the ticket’s been used? Throw the book at them.

 

[Nova1]

Are some people actually thick enough to claim a refund for £1.60 knowing full well the ticket’s been used? Throw the book at them.

yes, there are a surprisingly large amount of people who think they won't be caught and that they are gaming the system by buying a ticket then refunding it

this is really why, where possible, TOCs should make sure as many e-tickets as possible are actually being scanned, not just a glance of the ticket and "that's alright pal"

 

[bunnahabhain]

Anybody doing this is going to get a letter similar to the above. I was discussing it with a manager recently and it's being taken very seriously, something I'm quite pleased about having spent the past few years feeding back information as and when.

One of the most ridiculous I've ever had was a chap who boarded and as I was busy with some paperwork in the back I took about 20mins to head down to check tickets, he had refunded his fairly cheap ticket about 1 minute before I reached him having presumably second guessed me that I wouldn't be going down.

 

[_toommm_]

I’m surprised TTL allows you to refund tickets that have been marked as scanned (not that that is any sort of mitigation of course).

 

[skyhigh]

I’m surprised TTL allows you to refund tickets that have been marked as scanned (not that that is any sort of mitigation of course).

They've also started providing fee-free automatic refunds of applicable uncollected tickets, which is another area in which TOCs will be looking closely at.

Are some people actually thick enough to claim a refund for £1.60 knowing full well the ticket’s been used? Throw the book at them.

You'd probably be quite surprised if you saw the % of e-tickets refunded on certain routes...

 

[trebor79]

Are some people actually thick enough to claim a refund for £1.60 knowing full well the ticket’s been used? Throw the book at them.

Yep. Happens all the time and I think some guards get confused by the passenger deliberately shilling them saying things like "oh I always have problems with this app". Witnessed this a couple of weeks ago, the guy got away with it and an off-duty guard trued to explain the scam to the on-duty guard afterwards but I don't think the penny dropped.

 

[_toommm_]

Yep. Happens all the time and I think some guards get confused by the passenger deliberately shilling them saying things like "oh I always have problems with this app". Witnessed this a couple of weeks ago, the guy got away with it and an off-duty guard trued to explain the scam to the on-duty guard afterwards but I don't think the penny dropped.

There was a group of people on the train that I was on that were travelling from Holyhead to Manchester (at the very least) including a change at Chester. They had the ToD reference, but hadn't collected it at Holyhead. They must have got away with it on the train from Holyhead in another carriage, but on the train from Chester, I heard them all formulating what to say if the guard didn't accept the reference, along the lines of 'It'll be fine' and 'Just say we boarded at xyz, they can't charge us that much'. Somehow they even got past Carlisle security at Piccadilly, so wouldn't surprise me if they got the journey for free by refunding afterwards.

 

[bunnahabhain]

I’m surprised TTL allows you to refund tickets that have been marked as scanned (not that that is any sort of mitigation of course).

It's more that people refund them, then the tickets get scanned. For example a screenshot or printout if you don't scan them will appear to be valid.

 

[Gloster]

I am not up-to-date with the current situation with tickets and may have misunderstood something. However, what would be the situation if a passenger had passed through the gates, got their ticket validated, or whatever, and then found that their train is cancelled or badly late. In that case they have a valid reason to expect a refund, but it may appear that they have travelled.

 

[RPI]

About time, the amount of people extracting the urine with trainline refunds is ridiculous

 

[Merseysider]

I am not up-to-date with the current situation with tickets and may have misunderstood something. However, what would be the situation if a passenger had passed through the gates, got their ticket validated, or whatever, and then found that their train is cancelled or badly late. In that case they have a valid reason to expect a refund, but it may appear that they have travelled.

Then they would be entitled to the refund, and if the train company asks, explaining the intended train was cancelled would hopefully resolve the situation.

 

[skyhigh]

I am not up-to-date with the current situation with tickets and may have misunderstood something. However, what would be the situation if a passenger had passed through the gates, got their ticket validated, or whatever, and then found that their train is cancelled or badly late. In that case they have a valid reason to expect a refund, but it may appear that they have travelled.

As I understand it, the system being used to identify these refunds is clever enough to consider time and location of scans, plus train running data to suggest if was disruption that meant that tickets might be refunded. There will be other factors that are taken into account too.

 

[Undiscovered]

this is really why, where possible, TOCs should make sure as many e-tickets as possible are actually being scanned, not just a glance of the ticket and "that's alright pal"

QR and Bar codes are pretty difficult to scan on train.
You have to line up two electronic screens, one with a rapidly changing autofocus, to be at a distance of exactly 6inches, for 3-5seconds, while on a moving platform.
Assuming you can get capture, you're then relying on the machine playing ball and reading the ticket, rather than demanding a reset.

To scan every ticket would take forever so you have to sometimes pretend that the ticket has been scanned (while you look at their screen to check ticket codes, rail cards etc, and frown convincingly at your own screen while you confirm validity), or give a wave and move on.
Play the averages that the ticket will have at least been scanned once.

 

[Merseysider]

QR and Bar codes are pretty difficult to scan on train.
You have to line up two electronic screens, one with a rapidly changing autofocus, to be at a distance of exactly 6inches, for 3-5seconds, while on a moving platform.
Assuming you can get capture, you're then relying on the machine playing ball and reading the ticket, rather than demanding a reset.

I would disagree - I almost exclusively use e-tickets and they’re pretty much always scanned in less than a second.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

So from the point of giving advice if/when posters come to us:
1) Is the railway right in law (i.e. that this could be prosecuted under the Fraud Act and the punishment is a fine and/or up to a year in prison from the magistrates, or a fine and/or up to 10 years in prison from the Crown Court)?
2) Is the railway right in practice? Who hears these cases (magistrates or Crown Court) and what punishment do they actually impose?
3) Realistically, is there any way of presenting a cancelled ticket for travel that would not be fraud - or alternatively of travelling and then cancelling the ticket that would not be fraud? I'm thinking of whether there would be any genuinely innocent explanations that we might be invited to support.

If we can answer these questions in advance, then hopefully it will help with the quality of advice that we can give.

 

[Bertie the bus]

So from the point of giving advice if/when posters come to us:
1) Is the railway right in law (i.e. that this could be prosecuted under the Fraud Act and the punishment is a fine and/or up to a year in prison from the magistrates, or a fine and/or up to 10 years in prison from the Crown Court)?
2) Is the railway right in practice? Who hears these cases (magistrates or Crown Court) and what punishment do they actually impose?
3) Realistically, is there any way of presenting a cancelled ticket for travel that would not be fraud - or alternatively of travelling and then cancelling the ticket that would not be fraud? I'm thinking of whether there would be any genuinely innocent explanations that we might be invited to support.

If we can answer these questions in advance, then hopefully it will help with the quality of advice that we can give.

Surely, in order to give advice the person requesting it would provide details of what has happened and people can then evaluate the information and determine whether it was fraudulent or not.

What you are asking for is some ready made excuses that deliberate fraudsters can just cut and paste so they can try and get away with it.

 

[skyhigh]

QR and Bar codes are pretty difficult to scan on train.
You have to line up two electronic screens, one with a rapidly changing autofocus, to be at a distance of exactly 6inches, for 3-5seconds, while on a moving platform.
Assuming you can get capture, you're then relying on the machine playing ball and reading the ticket, rather than demanding a reset.

To scan every ticket would take forever so you have to sometimes pretend that the ticket has been scanned (while you look at their screen to check ticket codes, rail cards etc, and frown convincingly at your own screen while you confirm validity), or give a wave and move on.
Play the averages that the ticket will have at least been scanned once.

The handsets we use take a fraction of a second to scan barcode tickets, same technology as a supermarket self scan handset (rather than a phone app using a standard phone camera to read the barcode).

 

[T-Karmel]

QR and Bar codes are pretty difficult to scan on train.
You have to line up two electronic screens, one with a rapidly changing autofocus, to be at a distance of exactly 6inches, for 3-5seconds, while on a moving platform.
Assuming you can get capture, you're then relying on the machine playing ball and reading the ticket, rather than demanding a reset.

To scan every ticket would take forever so you have to sometimes pretend that the ticket has been scanned (while you look at their screen to check ticket codes, rail cards etc, and frown convincingly at your own screen while you confirm validity), or give a wave and move on.
Play the averages that the ticket will have at least been scanned once.

Or request your company to provide you with a QR code scanner which connected to your work phone will scan them in a second. Many TOCs already offer those to their front line staff.

However, what would be the situation if a passenger had passed through the gates, got their ticket validated, or whatever, and then found that their train is cancelled or badly late. In that case they have a valid reason to expect a refund, but it may appear that they have travelled.

To request a refund (not Delay Repay, so they must abandon the journey they're making) that would just not happen every single time they travel.

Whilst the refund freud going on on the railway is basically something that some people are doing everyday, even twice a day. It's quite obvious when Trainline looks up their journey history and really hard to justify by passenger.

 

[bunnahabhain]

QR and Bar codes are pretty difficult to scan on train.
You have to line up two electronic screens, one with a rapidly changing autofocus, to be at a distance of exactly 6inches, for 3-5seconds, while on a moving platform.
Assuming you can get capture, you're then relying on the machine playing ball and reading the ticket, rather than demanding a reset.

To scan every ticket would take forever so you have to sometimes pretend that the ticket has been scanned (while you look at their screen to check ticket codes, rail cards etc, and frown convincingly at your own screen while you confirm validity), or give a wave and move on.
Play the averages that the ticket will have at least been scanned once.

That isn't my experience. If somebody has their screen dark or it's a Samsung curved screen phone then it can take longer to scan depending on the device used. I've got a handheld scanner and can use the camera on my Envoy ticket machine so depending on the scenario and which of my 17 hands I feel like using that day it use one or the other.

 

[Cdd89]

I can understand why refunds might be granted following one scan at the origin station (or a station along the route, if starting short), since entering the station is not a commitment to travel — though obviously any pattern of doing so would be highly suspicious.

A greater issue is that there are a very many journeys where no scan will ever take place; and realistically anyone who goes to a busy gateline attendant and says “this isn’t scanning” will be let through with a glance of the e-ticket (and without a scan) most of the time.

 

[greyman42]

Are some people actually thick enough to claim a refund for £1.60 knowing full well the ticket’s been used? Throw the book at them.

Just say if your fraudulent activity cost the TOC about £29,000. What's the worse your going to get; a suspended sentence?

 

[Skie]

Fairly easy problem to solve if you delay refunds until the next day and after a check has been made to ensure the ticket hasn’t actually been scanned at the destination or on a train that wasn’t delayed. If it has, then ask for more info before issuing the refund.

It does seem like the railway is failing to design fraud out of ticketing systems.

 

[Haywain]

2) Is the railway right in practice? Who hears these cases (magistrates or Crown Court) and what punishment do they actually impose?

What happens in practice is that each case is treated on its merits. The penalties quoted may not be imposed in the vast majority of cases but it is important that people understand how serious these matters are.

 

[Wolfie]

Are some people actually thick enough to claim a refund for £1.60 knowing full well the ticket’s been used? Throw the book at them.

Indeed. Utter stupidity and cupidity deserves punishment.

 

[MotCO]

I've been thinking why scanned tickets should be refunded. The obvious one as mentioned earlier is that you pass through the barriers on to the platform and then realise your train is delayed, cancelled,or possibly run through without stopping.

However, is it also possible people are claiming a refund when it should actually be a delay repay they are looking for? If someone's train is delayed and they have heard that you can get your money back, then they may think it is a refund they should be applying for, not having heard of 'delay repay' as a separate procedure.

 

[yorkie]

As I understand it, the system being used to identify these refunds is clever enough to consider time and location of scans, plus train running data to suggest if was disruption that meant that tickets might be refunded. There will be other factors that are taken into account too.

Do all scans consistently register the time and location/train accurately?

I've been thinking why scanned tickets should be refunded. The obvious one as mentioned earlier is that you pass through the barriers on to the platform and then realise your train is delayed, cancelled,or possibly run through without stopping.

Or you start the journey, encounter a delay, abandon journey and return to origin.

However, is it also possible people are claiming a refund when it should actually be a delay repay they are looking for? If someone's train is delayed and they have heard that you can get your money back, then they may think it is a refund they should be applying for, not having heard of 'delay repay' as a separate procedure.

That is possible; it is not unknown for people to get confused between a refund and delay compensation.

If a customer explains the delay, then providing they have not additionally claimed compensation from the train company, I would expect leniency to be shown; what should happen is this:

What happens in practice is that each case is treated on its merits. The penalties quoted may not be imposed in the vast majority of cases but it is important that people understand how serious these matters are.

Just say if your fraudulent activity cost the TOC about £29,000. What's the worse your going to get; a suspended sentence?

I don't know about 29k but a 4k Delay Repayfraud resulted in a suspended sentence:
https://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/19502006.poole-fraudulently-claimed-4-000-railway-firms/

Carl Anthony Haywood, 31, of Winton Avenue, Poole, pleaded guilty ten counts of fraud by false representation when he claimed more than £4,000 in compensation from railway companies.

Haywood, who wants to forge a career in the railway industry, appeared at Bournemouth Crown Court for sentencing.
The court heard how Haywood “took advantage of a weak system” to claim £4,138 from railway companies on ten occasions in 2017.

However, due to a delay in proceedings, Judge Brian Forster QC sentenced him to eight months imprisonment, suspended for 18 months.

 

[Nova1]

However, is it also possible people are claiming a refund when it should actually be a delay repay they are looking for? If someone's train is delayed and they have heard that you can get your money back, then they may think it is a refund they should be applying for, not having heard of 'delay repay' as a separate procedure.

I see this opposite quite a lot, people confused why (random TOC) wants to charge them £10 for a refund when their train was cancelled and they abandoned journey.

 

[Dai Corner]

I can see how refunds of £1.60 as mentioned in the OP could go under the radar but it would seem to take a very 'weak system' to authorise ten to the same person averaging over £400.

 

[yorkie]

I’m surprised TTL allows you to refund tickets that have been marked as scanned (not that that is any sort of mitigation of course).

It won't do, but not all scans go straight to the live database; in some cases it may be hours later before the scan appears in all systems.

Also I don't know how quickly any refund would filter through the system (and it probably varies by retailer) but it's potentially possible that a refund request could be made just before going through a ticket gate (or encountering a ticket inspection) and the reader doing the scan may not realise at that stage that a refund has been made.

What some people don't realise is that e-tickets provide a lot more information for an investigation, than paper tickets do. However the quality of information in the scans is not always good; a scan may not be accurate in terms of what the customer was actually doing (for example it may record them as being on a different train to what they were actually travelling on; you couldn't necessarily conclusively deny a Delay Repay claim on that basis).