Chiltern
Railways

Chiltern Railways work in a very particular way for their prosecutions.

We deal with all Chiltern cases which tend to be-

Purchasing tickets shorter than your journey
Purchasing only the start and end of a journey without a ticket covering the middle part of the journey.
Using a railcard with your ticket which you do not hold.
Having no ticket at all
Paying when challenged, meaning you purchase a ticket when you see an inspector

The majority of our client’s have Trainline apps or similar and have offended a high number of occasions without being caught previously.

The Process

When you are stopped by an inspector from Chiltern Railways, you will not be given anything. They will take your name and address and check your identification documents. We can resolve your case without you even receiving your letter, saving you months of stress and sleepless nights.

On occasion you will receive a letter from them informing you that you have committed an offence and asking you to inform them of any circumstances they should take into account. If you do not persuade them to settle out of court, you will be prosecuted. Sometimes this letter can come from Transport Investigations, an agent who conducts some work for Chiltern although most work is undertaken in house. We are able to resolve a matter out of court for you promptly by persuading Chiltern to do so.

If you are unsuccessful, you will receive a court summons known as a single justice procedure notice. Chiltern often produce the summons and also have a separate letter within the same documentation inviting you for an interview. This will state that the economic crime and fraud unit have submitted a data access request under Schedule 2 Part 1 Paragraph 2 of the Date Protection Act 2018 and GDPR Article 6 (1) (d) to various rail ticket retailers which will indicate fare evasion on other occasions. They will ask you to provide a railcard also if validly held.

The single justice procedure notice itself will charge you with Byelaw 18 (1) of the Railway Byelaws made under Section 219 and Schedule 20 of the Transport Act 2000, in accordance with the Railways Act 2000, in accordance with the Railways Act 2005, in that you entered a non-compulsory ticket area for the purpose of travelling with the Railway without having a valid ticket entitling you to travel. There is often a second charge stating that under Byelaw 18 (2) of the Railway Byelaws made under section 219 and section 20 of the Transport Act 2000, in accordance with the Railways Act 2005, in that you failed to hand over a ticket for inspection and verification of validity when asked to so by an authorised person.

These offences are strict liability meaning intention is irrelevant. If you fail to have a valid ticket or hand it over when asked to do so, you are likely to be found guilty.

You can also be charged under Section 5 (3) of the Regulation of Railways Act 1889 which sets out that if any person attempts to travel, on a railway without having previously paid his fare, and with intent to avoid payment thereof, he commits an offence.

The consequences of being found guilty are that you can have a criminal record for one year after which it is spent. You can also be fined up to a £1,000. You would also need to pay Chiltern’s legal costs and any outstanding tickets. This often means being found guilty is more expensive than settling a case out of court which crucially avoids a criminal record.

We will be able to negotiate an out of court settlement, deal with the 21 day court limit to enter your plea and dispense with the interview giving you peace of mind and a quick resolution.

Samir Moftah has dealt with fare evasion cases for over ten years and has settled over 1,000 fare evasion cases from May 2021 to June 2024 alone, let alone the many years of successful settlements for clients prior to this. We deal with Chiltern cases in very high volumes and resolve each case for our clients avoiding a conviction. Samir is a Director and has been a qualified solicitor since 2010. You will deal with Samir only throughout your case and he will give your case his full attention.

Samir represents regulated professionals such as lawyers, doctors, those in finance jobs, accountants and for the Civil Service. Samir also represents clients who are students or who reside in the UK with a visa or are applying for citizenship. Samir is trusted to deliver and has an excellent track record of success and enjoys excellent relationships with all the train companies, prosecutors, fraud departments in the country. Samir has hundreds of 5 star reviews from past clients and enjoys helping clients to ease their stress, take control of their situation and ultimately resolve matters so that they never have to worry about a prosecution in the future.

Case Studies

STUDY 1- Our client was working under an international visa. He did not have a valid ticket on more than one occasion and was stopped by an inspector. This led to the client being contacted by the fraud department as they were looking to prosecute which would have led to a criminal record. We were instructed by our client and were able to make representations to the prosecutor which led them to settle the case within one day. We had a very relieved client who was able to continue working and have no issues with his visa.

STUDY 2- Our client worked within the construction trade and due to insufficient funds had a short ticket for journeys over two months. Our client had not been contacted by the prosecution team but had been stopped and was anxious. We were able to quickly work on his case and have the matter settled promptly which allowed our client to remain in work and avoid a conviction.

STUDY 3- Our client had avoided his fares for over eight months by purchasing a short ticket. He was stopped by an inspector and had been written to. We were able to make representations to the prosecutor and were able to settle the case within one day.

STUDY 4- Our client had not paid for her fares for a number of months. She had been stopped by an inspector but not contacted by the prosecutor. We were able to contact them, obtain disclosure and make representations in order to have the case settled promptly. Our client was very relieved and very grateful as this allowed her to keep her job and travel abroad.

STUDY 5- Our client had not paid for her fares correctly for three years. She had been contacted by the prosecutor as they were looking to convict her given the extensive fare evasion. Through our legal submissions, we were able to persuade them to settle out of court which meant that our client did not have to attend court and avoided a conviction thus remaining in employment.