Delay repay on trains

[Sox1000]

Hi all my son who is 23 high functioning Autistic. He is fanatical about trains and I’ll often take trips around the country, even up as far as Scotland. It has come to my attention that over 2 months last year he was putting in for delay repay. But the trains he was putting in for the was not the ones he was delayed on. But the train companies were just paying him out. He was using money he got back to buy more train tickets. So it was just rolling and rolling.
it soon came their attention as so many claims were being put in by one person. And they contacted him and told him they will be looking into all his claims.
2 months later they have investigated and came to the amount of £5000 he owed in just the 2 months.
my son has offered to pay them back at £150 a month as he’s on Universal Credit of £219 a month. They have refused his offer and want to see him at head office in Euston Station.
now I have spoken to the man who has investigated this. And my one main question I asked him. Why was not the delay repay refund investigated by their office in the first place before being paid out. As if it was this would never of happened.

[jaguarsuk]

Hi all my son who is 23 high functioning Autistic. He is fanatical about trains and I’ll often take trips around the country, even up as far as Scotland. It has come to my attention that over 2 months last year he was putting in for delay repay. But the trains he was putting in for the was not the ones he was delayed on. But the train companies were just paying him out. He was using money he got back to buy more train tickets. So it was just rolling and rolling.
it soon came their attention as so many claims were being put in by one person. And they contacted him and told him they will be looking into all his claims.
2 months later they have investigated and came to the amount of £5000 he owed in just the 2 months.
my son has offered to pay them back at £150 a month as he’s on Universal Credit of £219 a month. They have refused his offer and want to see him at head office in Euston Station.
now I have spoken to the man who has investigated this. And my one main question I asked him. Why was not the delay repay refund investigated by their office in the first place before being paid out. As if it was this would never of happened.

I have a background in the railway, in performance and revenue protection, albeit a while back now.

To an extent Delay Repay is taken in good faith that you were on the train you say you were as realistically without a lot of work (pulling CCTV, identifying individuals and checking they board the train they said they did) it is impossible to 100% verify travel.

It will not have been noticed quickly as although it sounds unlikely, some days the same train every day is delayed and the same people travel on it. What is likely to have been noticed is that it was lots of different timed trains across different days, meaning an unusual pattern, but that takes time to build up.

What I'm trying to say is it is not the train company's responsibility to have noticed more quickly or put a stop to it. It was your sons responsibility to act in a right and lawful way.

Some revenue protection staff have the qualification to be able to interview under caution, so before agreeing to a meeting ask is that the format of this meeting? If so, take a solicitor along to the meeting.

Train companies do not tend to use the police when they prosecute, unless BTP catch an individual doing something, they're more likely to bring private prosecutions under the railway bye laws.

I don't want to worry you, but I also don't want to mislead you. The fact they are refusing a repayment plan would suggest the meeting will be an interview under caution with a view to a prosecution.

The question becomes did your son make dishonest representations to the train company with intent to have financial or personal gain? If he did, he is guilty of the offence of Fraud by Misrepresentation.

The burden of proof will be on the train company to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that is the case to secure a conviction.

Whilst I understand you mentioning your sons autism, by your own admission he is 'high functioning' and I'd imagine this is why he receives UC not PIP.

The problem is with the financial or personal gain part, he was doing it to purchase more tickets and that is a personal gain.

If they do get a conviction his autism will play a part in mitigation in terms of explaining that the number of occasions is not reflective of a level of offending and rather a trait autistic people have of obsessive behaviour, which in this instance has been a negative obsession.

An interview under causation doesn’t automatically mean a prosecution, it may be when they have conducted it they take into account the mitigating circumstance of your son having autism and decided not to bring a prosecution.

They may feel a warning and repayment plan a more appropriate avenue to go down at that stage.

I would prepare for the worst and accept anything other than that is a good result.

[islandgirl]

Every time I have claimed I have had to upload tickets as proof unless I booked direct with the train company involved in which case I did not even have to claim it was repaid automatically. How has he managed this?

[Sox1000]

I have a background in the railway, in performance and revenue protection, albeit a while back now.

To an extent Delay Repay is taken in good faith that you were on the train you say you were as realistically without a lot of work (pulling CCTV, identifying individuals and checking they board the train they said they did) it is impossible to 100% verify travel.

It will not have been noticed quickly as although it sounds unlikely, some days the same train every day is delayed and the same people travel on it. What is likely to have been noticed is that it was lots of different timed trains across different days, meaning an unusual pattern, but that takes time to build up.

What I'm trying to say is it is not the train company's responsibility to have noticed more quickly or put a stop to it. It was your sons responsibility to act in a right and lawful way.

Some revenue protection staff have the qualification to be able to interview under caution, so before agreeing to a meeting ask is that the format of this meeting? If so, take a solicitor along to the meeting.

Train companies do not tend to use the police when they prosecute, unless BTP catch an individual doing something, they're more likely to bring private prosecutions under the railway bye laws.

I don't want to worry you, but I also don't want to mislead you. The fact they are refusing a repayment plan would suggest the meeting will be an interview under caution with a view to a prosecution.

The question becomes did your son make dishonest representations to the train company with intent to have financial or personal gain? If he did, he is guilty of the offence of Fraud by Misrepresentation.

The burden of proof will be on the train company to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that is the case to secure a conviction.

Whilst I understand you mentioning your sons autism, by your own admission he is 'high functioning' and I'd imagine this is why he receives UC not PIP.

The problem is with the financial or personal gain part, he was doing it to purchase more tickets and that is a personal gain.

If they do get a conviction his autism will play a part in mitigation in terms of explaining that the number of occasions is not reflective of a level of offending and rather a trait autistic people have of obsessive behaviour, which in this instance has been a negative obsession.

Hi thanks for your input my son does receive PIP as he has severe Anxiety and depression as well as Autism. he does have repetitive traits as well as other problems.
The interview he was told and has it in writing just a friendly chat.

[atticus]

Are you certain that it will not be an interview under caution?

[Sox1000]

Every time I have claimed I have had to upload tickets as proof unless I booked direct with the train company involved in which case I did not even have to claim it was repaid automatically. How has he managed this?

yes he had to take photos of the tickets to prove he had them.
a
so I don’t know how it got to this state.

[Sox1000]

Are you certain that it will not be an interview under caution?

He has it in writing via email it’s will just be a friendly chat.

[atticus]

hmmm...

[Sox1000]

hmmm...

Exactly my thoughts I’ve not seen the email my son said that’s what it said. But he does read things wrong. But even if it does say that. Surely they can’t just interview him under caution.

[islandgirl]

never ever believe that it will be a friendly chat,

[Sox1000]

hmmm...

I have just seen the email where my son said this will be a polite interview.
it reads.
this is not a Police interview of any kind and will not be recorded.
this is a meeting between you and first rail to discuss your claims, settlement,and resolution in an amicable manner and to address any remaining concerns.

[atticus]

never ever believe that it will be a friendly chat,

^^^This

[islandgirl]

See post 10 and 12. They will be deciding whether to charge. One wrong word...

[Sox1000]

See post 10 and 12. They will be deciding whether to charge. One wrong word...

That’s the problem with my son a trait of his Autism he says what he thinks.
sometimes it can be the wrong thing but people who know him, knows that’s just him and he’s not being rude etc.

[islandgirl]

I have a friend who is exactly the same so I do understand. Even more reason to ensure he is represented at the interview