Chiltern Railways / TIL Prosecution

Chiltern Railways take a proactive approach in catching suspected fare evaders, especially because fare evasion is a major problem on their lines, causing a huge loss of revenue.

They regularly conduct operations at the gates, where tickets are scrutinised. Fraud investigators also occasionally check tickets on trains. If ticket issues are identified, the matters are then passed to their fraud team for further investigation.

You may have received a Notice of Intention to Prosecute from Chiltern Railways, which is the initial letter that is sent out to an individual who is accused of fare evasion. However, due to the volume of cases, most fare evasion prosecutions are handled by TIL (Transport Investigations Limited) on behalf of Chiltern Railways.

Chiltern Railways sometimes send out letters, requesting a formal interview under caution at Marylebone station, after they have completed an investigation.  we are normally able to cancel the need for the interview if we are instructed on your behalf to seek a resolution.

Reeds Solicitors specialise in this area and have an excellent track record in securing out of court settlements, avoiding any form of criminal record. Please contact us through our contact page here. Alternatively, you can phone 0333 240 7373, or email us at fareevasion@reeds.co.uk.

You can read our reviews here.

What should I do if I receive the initial letter from Chiltern Railways or TIL (Transport Investigations Limited)?

The Notice of Intention to Prosecute gives you 14 days to respond. The initial letter from TIL allows 21 days.

This is an opportunity to outline any relevant mitigation and address the circumstances of the ticket infraction. If not handled correctly, the matter can escalate into a prosecution.

As part of our service, we would take over conduct of the matter and reply on your behalf to Chiltern Railways / TIL, seeking an out of court settlement. We would consider whether any supporting documents could increase your chances of success.

Chiltern Railways are able to apply to Trainline to view your ticket purchasing history. If further ticket issues would be revealed, we would need to carefully consider how to address this in the representations.

What should I do if I have received a court summons?

Chiltern / TIL prosecute cases in various Magistrates’ Courts, including High Wycombe, Oxford, Birmingham and Milton Keynes. Normally, there is a specific date to attend court.

In order to avoid a conviction, we would need to convince Chiltern Railways / TIL to withdraw the court summons and offer an out of court settlement instead. This involves outlining relevant mitigation and addressing any issues with the ticket infraction(s).

Even if the court date is only a few days away, we are still likely to be able to assist.

I have not received the initial letter from Chiltern Railways / TIL yet – can you still help?

Yes. We can reach out to Chiltern Railways proactively on your behalf, even before you have received the initial letter. Sometimes it can take 2-3 months for the initial letter to be sent out, because of the investigations taking place into the ticket history. Many of our clients want to avoid this nervous wait and do not want to rely on the post when the consequences of failing to reply can be so serious.

What fare evasion offences could I be prosecuted for?

Transport Investigations Limited (TIL), on behalf of Chiltern Railways, privately prosecute under two offences, depending on the circumstances:

s.5(3) of the Regulation of Railways Act 1889 – intentionally travelling on the Railway without having paid the fare.

The Regulation of Railways Act 1889 is normally the preferred charge. The allegation is that you have intentionally travelled without paying the correct fare. Typically, this may involve ‘short tickets’ which do not cover the full journey or ‘sandwich tickets’ where the middle part of the journey is not covered by the tickets. It is also an offence to ‘pay when challenged’, which involves travelling without a ticket and only seeking to buy one when encountering the inspector.

Railway Bye Law 18(1) & 17(1)- Entering a train for the purpose of travel without a valid ticket.

This alternative charge is very easy to prove, because it is committed by simply traveling without a valid ticket. There is no ‘dishonesty’ or ‘intention’ element to prove in court.

How can Reeds Solicitors help me with Chiltern Railways Prosecutions?

We have a vast amount of experience in a wide range of fare evasion cases. Having worked in this area for years, we also have direct contact details of the relevant prosecutors, which greatly assists in resolving matters promptly.

The starting point would be to arrange a virtual meeting, where we can obtain all of the information and background about the matter. Then we can draft written representations on your behalf, seeking an out of court settlement.

With our careful and considered approach, we are successful in the vast majority of cases.

We offer fixed fees which cover all of the work involved – so you have complete clarity in terms of costs.

Case Studies and Testimonials for Reeds Solicitors

Case study 1 – Transport Investigations Limited Settlement

B was caught traveling with a ticket, which only covered part of the journey into London Marylebone. His local station does not have any barriers, so he could board the train without a ticket and then purchase a ticket from Wembley to Marylebone on his trainline account. He had been doing this for over 6 months. He received the initial letter from TIL and replied but was informed that a ‘summons may now be issued’. Reeds Solicitors submitted representations on his behalf to TIL, carefully considering how to address the previous journeys and outline the client’s relevant mitigation points. TIL agreed to offer an out of court settlement.

Case study 2 – Chiltern Railways ‘Sandwich Ticketing’ offence

C purchased two tickets for each journey – one to get through the barrier onto the train and another to get through the barrier on arrival in Marylebone, with the middle part of the journey missing. This is known as ‘sandwich ticketing’. After obtaining C’s ticket history, Chiltern also identified a number of ‘false refunds’ on the account. Reeds Solicitors submitted detailed representations, with various supporting documents. The prosecutor said that they would normally prosecute this type of case but that they were persuaded by the mitigation to offer an out of court settlement on this occasion.

Case Study 3 – Uncooperative Behaviour wth a Chiltern Railways Revenue Protection Officer

D was spoken to by a Revenue Protection Officer and the interaction did not go smoothly. His behaviour was deemed uncooperative, and this was an underlying reason why the matter was proceeding to prosecution. Reeds Solicitors intervened, coming up with a plan of action, addressing all the relevant issues. An out of court settlement was reached.

Case Study 4 – Interview Under Caution Request

E received a letter from Chiltern, inviting him for a voluntary interview under caution. It was due to take place at Marylebone station, with a senior investigator from Chiltern’s fraud team. The allegation involved fraudulent refunds and ‘short tickets’. Reeds Solicitors were instructed to takeover conduct of the matter. We were able to cancel the need for an interview, which saved our client a lot of stress. Ultimately, the matter was settled out of court.