'Hedge fund manager in ^42,550 train fare dodge' - ongoing discussion

[whole diary]

[ellendune]

Am I right in believing a level 3 fine is 300% of weekly income?

No it is ^1,000 on summary conviction (i.e. in a Magistrate's court) Criminal Justice Act 1991 Section 17

[Cynthia]

I've got a hedge fund.   

I'm saving up for a man to come and prune and pollard the one at the foot of the front garden.

Um, I wouldn't want to be privet to a story like that, BNM......!

[Chris from Nailsea]

He may merely be resting on his laurels, before branching out into hedgerow management ... 

[thetrout]

I've got mixed views on this one... Odd when I don't condone fare dodging.

On the one hand I look at it. What he was doing was bloody clever and he probably got a sense of achievement from getting one up on Southeastern for 5 years.

He paid over ^40k within 3 days of being asked. Clearly has more money than sense and should've known better to begin with.

Sadly, to manipulate the OysterCard system in London to pay a cheaper fare than what should be due really isn't hard if you a logical mindset. But knowing how to do something and actually doing it are 2 different things altogether. (I must stress I know I could pay a cheaper fare on an Oyster^▸ (Smartcard system used by passengers on Transport for London services) if I wanted but I don't)

I don't think he will remain anonymous for much longer though. All we have to do is look at those in the spotlight who have had injunctions granted to protect their names being revealed. Then the CPS decided that to prosecute every single person on Twitter who referenced the name of a certain sports person who committed an affair would not be in the public interests (More like we don't have the man power to do it)

I think the reason SE wanted to settle out of court was they were embarrassed it took them 5 years to pick up on it. And maybe if the persons train had been late or whatnot he could have continued to do so for another 5 years.

My penultimate feeling on this is if he is worried for his job then why the hell was he doing this in the first place? Ultimately if I was someone senior on SE I'd be asking this chap to tell me what other flaws were in my revenue system that could be closed down on the basis of a lesser settlement (Plea bargain I guess).

Sometimes people are too clever for their own good with certain things. But use the skills in the right way and you could make the system better overall

But as I said... I wonder how long he will remain anonymous for... And that will be something even with the odd ^40k lying around and an expensive Lawyer won't stop damage... Yes someone might get sued for Defamation... But the name will still be out there... Time to be quiet now me thinks

[Cynthia]

So, thetrout, how many people are shaking in their shoes right now do you think, awaiting an embarrassing disclosure?

(I had to correct myself on that last word - I wrote 'enclosure' at first, still thinking about all those hedges, no doubt....  Perhaps the Fund Manager should have Boxed clever and looked to his Elders)

[ChrisB]

On the one hand I look at it. What he was doing was bloody clever and he probably got a sense of achievement from getting one up on Southeastern for 5 years.

It shows up SouthEastern for their lax ticket checks....and him for not getting the London end right (all he had to do was keep a Zone 1 season (to get him in/out at Cannon Street without flagging up a max fare deduction) on his Oyster^▸ (Smartcard system used by passengers on Transport for London services) & chances are he'd still be doing it....

I don't think he will remain anonymous for much longer though. All we have to do is look at those in the spotlight who have had injunctions granted to protect their names being revealed.

There's no injunction on his name....SouthEastern agreed to accept the money & not to name him. Anyone within that company that does will lose their job - enough of a threat to keep them quiet. Ditto anyone with the BTP^▸ (British Transport Police) that might have been involved.

S/He will definitely want to remain anonymous as keeping your clients as a Hedge Fund Manager might be difficult if your clients know your open to a bit of Fraud.....and they'd lose their job through losing clients & end up being made redundant quite quickly if it got out....

[Brucey]

I should also add (completely forgot about this previously) is that Oyster^▸ (Smartcard system used by passengers on Transport for London services) records are only kept for 8 weeks under normal circumstances, therefore it would have been very difficult to prosecute (and therefore recover fares) for more than 8 weeks.  Accepting an out of court settlement was clearly in the best interests of the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company).

[Worcester_Passenger]

While I can appreciate all the reasons this was settled out of court, I'm left with the unpleasant fact that this person has not been punished for their actions - they have merely paid up what they should have paid in the first place.

The lack of punishment brings the law into disrepute (and angers the other commuters and the Daily Mail).

[ChrisB]

I'd like to understand more about the 'right' SouthEastern stated that everyone had to settle out of court - is that just simply because custom & practice exists or that a legal right exists?

[SDS]

Every TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) has the right to push through to prosecution regardless of your offers/attempt to settle out of court.

[Southern Stag]

It shows up SouthEastern for their lax ticket checks....and him for not getting the London end right (all he had to do was keep a Zone 1 season (to get him in/out at Cannon Street without flagging up a max fare deduction) on his Oyster^▸ (Smartcard system used by passengers on Transport for London services) & chances are he'd still be doing it....

That would probably have been noticed too. If you only ever touch in/out at Cannon Street it suggests some kind of suspicious behaviour. Even with a Travelcard on Oyster you are still meant to to touch in and out on every journey.

[LiskeardRich]

It shows up SouthEastern for their lax ticket checks....and him for not getting the London end right (all he had to do was keep a Zone 1 season (to get him in/out at Cannon Street without flagging up a max fare deduction) on his Oyster^▸ (Smartcard system used by passengers on Transport for London services) & chances are he'd still be doing it....

That would probably have been noticed too. If you only ever touch in/out at Cannon Street it suggests some kind of suspicious behaviour. Even with a Travelcard on Oyster you are still meant to to touch in and out on every journey.

Although impractical (impossible??) on a boundary zone season ticket to touch in/out at boundary. What you're meant to do and can do are two different things here.

[ChrisB]

And I don't believe you pick up a max fare 'fine' either?

[thetrout]

It shows up SouthEastern for their lax ticket checks....and him for not getting the London end right (all he had to do was keep a Zone 1 season (to get him in/out at Cannon Street without flagging up a max fare deduction) on his Oyster^▸ (Smartcard system used by passengers on Transport for London services) & chances are he'd still be doing it...

I deliberately wanted to avoid mentioning where he went wrong. As we cannot condone fare evasion on a public forum... That was just one of the things he did wrong!

There's no injunction on his name....SouthEastern agreed to accept the money & not to name him. Anyone within that company that does will lose their job - enough of a threat to keep them quiet. Ditto anyone with the BTP^▸ (British Transport Police) that might have been involved.

Without sound provocative or rude. That is a rather ignorant and very naive way to look at it. There are so many different variables where his name could come out it's impossible to name them all.

But if Edward Snowdon or Bradley Manning* didn't mind losing their jobs... And someone in Southeastern decided he should be named because (as seems to be general views on this forum) he should have been prosecuted. Then I can't see a threat of losing your job as a 'credible' one. (If that's the right word)

I could go on and list some of the more obvious ways this could come out. But I don't want to start a tit for tat spat on the forum. But if someone really wanted to look hard enough (i.e. a competitor/nemesis Hedge Fund Manager) then to work it out probably wouldn't be to difficult...!

* - I appreciate there is alot of controversy over these two... But Edward Snowdon in particular I find is relevant to my line of thought. I used this example as an over-exaggeration to demonstrate it has happened before in a more serious manner.

So, thetrout, how many people are shaking in their shoes right now do you think, awaiting an embarrassing disclosure?

I'm not quite sure I understand the question. But in this case here if I was this chap; I would be following the number 3 rule. Tell nobody and secure incriminating evidence (Not even my partner/wife, kids, family member, best friends etc) and then just hope it never comes out. Ultimately reminding myself I am likely to be exposed any moment!


The reason I mentioned the injunctions is because with Social Media in the past they have failed completely. I was using previous history and events as examples. Same with choosing to remain anonymous; after a period of time you'll probably find it will come out.

There is an injunction in place in particular I know of, which it forbids anyone to watch, store, attempt to access, distribute or discuss the content of some video footage. Despite this... If you really wanted to, know where to look, and fancied potentially facing some serious questions to answer; it can be found with relative ease. (That is not an admission of any wrong doing)

Why hasn't it been removed despite the injunction? Well I guess those which granted the injunction are still wondering how The Pirate Bay are still operating!!

I'm going way off topic here but my comments were based on previous events in the past and my 'knowledge' of digital communications...

Note to mods: Please PM me if I need to amend anything that might be too close to the borderline

[LiskeardRich]

!

There's no injunction on his name....SouthEastern agreed to accept the money & not to name him. Anyone within that company that does will lose their job - enough of a threat to keep them quiet. Ditto anyone with the BTP^▸ (British Transport Police) that might have been involved.

Without sound provocative or rude. That is a rather ignorant and very naive way to look at it. There are so many different variables where his name could come out it's impossible to name them all.

I don't know about lose job, but disciplinary definitely. I'd be pretty certain there will be confidentiality clauses in the employees contracts that they can't discuss customer details, so we can rule out any details coming from staff at southeastern.