
EXCLUSIVE Moment 'fare dodger' is warned he could be committing fraud after only paying for short part of his journey
The man was stopped by a revenue protection officer at the barriers at London Waterloo station after arriving on a South Western Railway (SWR) service.
He had bought the ticket with a railcard discount but failed to present the card, meaning he faced a penalty fare of £100 plus the price of the full single fare.
But the officer became suspicious when he found that the ticket from Vauxhall to Waterloo had been bought only 20 minutes earlier, and not scanned at Vauxhall.
When the passenger provided his identity details and address, the officer noted that he lived in Sunbury-on-Thames, much further down the SWR line in Surrey.
This meant the officer suspected that the man may have been attempting a 'short fare', which is where passengers only buy a ticket for part of your journey.
Commuters on SWR often travel into London from much further afield but buy an e-ticket from a stop near Waterloo such as Vauxhall for a cheaper fare. This means they can try to go through the barriers at Waterloo and avoid paying for the full journey.
The incident is the latest to feature in the popular Channel 5 programme Fare Dodgers: At War With The Law, which is airing on Monday nights at 9pm.
It saw officer Jack challenge the passenger who arrived at Waterloo on a ticket from Vauxhall, telling him: 'We're checking for railcards'.
The man tells Jack: 'Railcard? I don't have the railcard on me. Do I need to buy another ticket then?
'I know that if you go on the website, it can show you that you've got a railcard – does that make sense - because it's a physical one not a digital one.'
But when Jack starts looking into the ticket more closely, he discovers it was bought about 20 minutes earlier and was not scanned at Vauxhall.
The passenger says: 'I realised I was coming here because I was meeting my girlfriend or whatever. I live round Vauxhall.'
Jack then asks the man for his details, which he provides, but his address is listed as Sunbury - not Vauxhall.
Jack tells him: 'I'm going to be very blunt and very honest with you. Your address is in Sunbury, your ticket hasn't been scanned in at Vauxhall. When I report this about the railcard, they're going to investigate the ticket as part of that.'
The passenger is then told that if it is found he travelled from elsewhere, he could be handed a more expensive penalty. He simply replies: 'Perfect, yeah, cheers.'
And in a sign he has been through the process before, the man adds: 'They normally take quite long with this though, don't they? Takes a couple of weeks.'
Asked by the officer again whether he travelled from Sunbury, the man says: 'No, no, I travelled from Vauxhall.'
Jack then reports him to the fraud team, telling the programme: 'This person in particular hasn't scanned in his QR at Vauxhall. Bought it 20 minutes ago which indicates to me he may have travelled from further.
'So the railcard that he did put on the ticket, he wasn't carrying with him, so we've reported him under that fact, and then we're going to ask the fraud team to investigate the rest of it.'
The case is then sent to SWR's fraud department for further investigation, with the man facing prosecution if he had not been truthful about where he travelled from.
MailOnline has covered a series of incidents featured in the Channel 5 documentary, which comes as Robert Jenrick highlighted fare dodging another London station.
The shadow justice secretary posted a video on social media last Thursday in which he confronted people who forced their way through the ticket barriers at Stratford.
He asked one person 'do you think it's alright not to pay' and challenged another to 'go back through the barrier and pay'. At the top of an escalator he said to one person 'do you want to go back and pay like everybody else'?
Mr Jenrick later told the BBC that he wants authorities to 'step up' and 'reassert these basic rules', adding that he wants transport bodies to understand 'that these things are not small rule breaks', and said he was 'unapologetic' about sharing the clip.
But the Transport Salaried Staffs' Association union said the video was 'not only inappropriate but also potentially dangerous for passengers, staff and the individual involved'.
Further incidents featured in the Channel 5 show have included passengers trying to push through barriers to avoid having to touch in or out.
Others resort to violence if they are caught, with shocking videos filmed at stations showing passengers attacking police officers or punching security guards.
Some try doing 'doughnut tickets', which is where you buy a short ticket for the first part of the journey, to scan the QR code on your entry barrier; and then another short ticket for the last section, to scan out at your destination station.
This can lead to a much cheaper fare because you do not pay for the lengthier middle section of the trip - meaning there is a hole in the journey, hence the 'doughnut'.
Separately, a report released on Wednesday found fare evasion is becoming 'normalised', with train staff telling the inquiry that they are struggling to cope with 'aggressive' passengers who refuse to buy tickets.
Travellers are using 'a range of techniques to persistently' underpay or avoid paying and see it as a 'victimless crime ', according to the Office of Road and Rail (ORR).
Staff enduring abusive behaviour when asking fare-dodgers to present their tickets are warning that evasion is becoming 'increasingly more challenging to tackle'.
The report had been commissioned to look at concerns some passengers were being unfairly prosecuted by train operators over genuine mistakes when buying tickets.
But it found fare evasion is a mounting problem now costing taxpayers £400million a year which is resulting in higher fares and less investment cash to improve services.
Meanwhile TikTok influencers are brazenly showing Tube passengers how to illegally travel for free by 'bumping' through the station ticket barriers.
Young men are filming themselves laughing and joking with each other as they push through the wide-aisle gates in videos liked by hundreds of thousands of viewers.
The gates, which were first installed in 2008 at a cost of £12million, are normally used by wheelchair users, older people, parents with children and travellers with luggage.
But they are increasingly being used by fare dodgers who either push through the gap in the middle, or quickly follow someone in front of them who touches out.
'Fare Dodgers: At War with the Law' is on Channel 5 on Monday evenings at 9pm

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Independent
16 minutes ago
- The Independent
How people in Epping reacted to closure of migrant hotel
Locals in Epping have welcomed an injunction to block asylum seekers from being housed at a nearby hotel, but raised concerns the decision would only 'kick the can down the road'. Epping Forest District Council was granted a temporary High Court injunction on Tuesday blocking asylum seekers from being housed at the Bell Hotel in Epping, Essex. Several protests and counter-protests have been held in the town since Hadush Gerberslasie Kebatu, a then-resident at the hotel, was charged with trying to kiss a teenage girl, which he denies. Following the decision on Tuesday, a crowd of about a dozen people gathered outside the hotel brandishing flags, shouting 'We've won' and popping sparkling wine, while passing traffic honked their horns at them. A few police cars were parked nearby with officers standing outside the hotel, which is fenced in. Other residents gave a mixed reaction to the injunction, with some saying they were glad to 'see it gone'. But others cited concerns about where the asylum seekers currently housed inside the hotel would be moved to in light of the court's decision. Callum Barker, 21, a construction worker who lives next to the hotel, was handing out leaflets at the protest including the names of three men staying at the Bell Hotel who are alleged to have committed criminal offences. He said he was in favour of the injunction. Mr Barker told the PA news agency: 'Our community's in danger and we don't want these people here. 'I'm ecstatic; I haven't stopped smiling. For five years, this hotel's blighted us. Everyone's had their complaints and reservations about it and I'm really glad to see it gone. 'I think nationally there will be more protests; I hope so. We want people to get out into their communities, get rid of these hotels. 'It's not right they're here on taxpayers' dime while British people struggle. 'They get three meals a day and a roof over their head while kids go hungry in school and have to rely on free dinners and I think it's terrible. The asylum system is broken.' In the town centre, Charlotte, 33, a solicitor living in Epping, said: 'I think it's kicking the can down the road because where are they going to go? 'Personally, I have lived here for four years and I've never had an issue, never noticed any problems with any asylum seekers living in the hotel a mile away. 'With the injunction today, I don't know what the long-term solution is going to be because they have to be housed somewhere so what's the alternative? 'I don't partake in (the protests). I think people are allowed to have a right of free speech but what annoys me about them is I'm on community groups on Facebook and it seems if you're not speaking about it you're presumed to be completely for it when I think a lot of people are in the middle. 'There are extremists at these protests every week.' Michael Barnes, 61, a former carpenter from Epping, said he was happy about the High Court's decision. He said: 'The question is, where does it go from here? I don't love them on my doorstep but, in fairness, they've got to live somewhere. 'I don't think it's all of them, it's just the minority of them that get up to no good.' Gary Crump, 63, a self-employed lift consultant living just outside of Epping, said: 'I was quite pleased it's actually happened. 'I don't think they should be housed in the hotels like they are. 'We haven't got the infrastructure here. The doctors' surgery is filled up in the mornings with people from there with translators. Everything is pushing the limits. We're an island. We're full. 'I've got no reason to be against people coming into the UK but I do think that the reasons given are not true in a lot of cases.' Ryan Martin, 39, who runs a natural health business, said: 'It's a good thing. When people spend a lot of money to live in this area, they want to feel safe. 'Them shutting it down probably happened because of the noise that was made about it and the reaction they saw from people because there was a strong reaction. 'It was taking a while to happen but people finally got up to protest against them being here.'


The Sun
an hour ago
- The Sun
Driver pleads GUILTY to killing woman, 22, in 140mph horror crash on Christmas Day as he fled police in his Mercedes
A DRIVER has pleaded guilty to the killing of a 22-year-old woman on Christmas Day in a 140mph horror crash. Evan Forde, 32, was driving his Mercedes in Brent Cross, north London, when he crashed into another vehicle at high speed. 2 He then proceeded to flee from the police on foot in the early hours of the morning on December 25, 2022. Brazilian Maria Carolina Do Nascimento was a passenger in the BMW that Forde crashed into. The young woman tragically passed away at the scene. The accident occurred on a 40mph stretch of road in Hendon Way at around 3.45am. Despite the speed limit, Forde had been driving at speeds of more than 140mph. This resulted in Nascimento's tragic death, despite the London Ambulance Service rushing to the scene and desperately trying to save the girl. Shortly before the fatal crash, police officers on patrol in a marked vehicle had indicated for his car to stop. However, the vehicle drove off from police and there was no pursuit, according to Scotland Yard. Moments later, cops were informed that the same car had been involved in a collision. The occupants of the Mercedes did not stop for the police as they proceeded to flee the scene on foot. Moment unsuspecting painter is sent flying through air in terrifying crash after car comes out of nowhere On Tuesday, Forde appeared at the Old Bailey where he pleaded guilty to causing Ms Nascimento's death by dangerous driving. Members of the victim's family wept in court after he admitted the offence. Defence barrister Tasmin Malcolm said Forde had "always accepted" he was driving the Mercedes. She said: 'Undoubtedly the speed Mr Forde was driving will be an aggravating feature to the court. 'It is important we are satisfied of the accuracy of the material relied on by the Crown.' Prosecutor Frederick Hookway observed that small variations of the speeds involved in the case were unlikely to have an impact given the defendant had reached 'top speeds of over 140mph'. Judge Anthony Leonard KC adjourned sentencing until October 22 and granted Forde continued conditional bail. He told him: "You have pleaded guilty to a very serious charge. "There was perhaps no option other than to do so given the state of the evidence. "However, the fact you pleaded at this stage will be taken into account at sentencing. Previously the Metropolitan Police said it had made a referral to the Independent Office for Police Conduct as is routine in such circumstances.


BBC News
an hour ago
- BBC News
Lenny Scott: Friend of alleged prison officer killer 'felt used'
A man accused of helping to murder a former prison officer wiped away tears in court as he claimed his friend of 15 years "confessed" to the shooting in a phone Scott, 33, was shot six times outside a gym in Skelmersdale, Lancashire, at 19:35 GMT on 8 February 2024. Anthony Cleary, 29, admits dropping off a van containing an electric bike near the scene, but denied knowing his friend, 35-year-old Elias Morgan, would use them as "attack and getaway" vehicles in the shooting - which Mr Morgan denies any involvement in. Mr Cleary told Preston Crown Court the first he knew of the shooting was when Mr Morgan told him "I've done someone". HGV driver Mr Cleary, who denies murder and an alternative count of manslaughter, told the jury he had known Mr Morgan since he was around 13 years old. He said Mr Morgan called him on the afternoon of 7 February 2024 and offered him £150 to move a van to an address in Skelmersdale, a short distance from the gym on Peel Road, using a low-loader truck. He claimed he did not ask Mr Morgan why he needed the van moving and had no idea it was related to any criminal plan - despite accepting he knew Mr Morgan "did not have a nine-to-five" job and that he was a criminal capable of Cleary said the following night, at 23:05 GMT, he got a call from Mr Morgan on WhatsApp. Under questioning from his barrister, Tim Forte KC, Mr Cleary said: "He [Morgan] rang me to say he had done someone in Skem and I needed to get rid of me phone."He said he asked Mr Morgan whether it had anything to do with the van he left there the previous evening, and was told it Forte asked if he believed Mr Morgan at the time, and Mr Cleary said: "He's a bit of a joker, he's always messing around. "But he didn't sound like he was messing around."He said his fears were confirmed when he searched online and found news reports about a shooting in Skelmersdale. Asked how he felt towards his then close friend, Mr Cleary said: "I was fuming. "I don't know the word, like used."He accepted that he had remained in regular contact with Mr Morgan, telling the jury: "If I changed how I acted towards him, he would have changed how he acted towards me."It could have turned into some sort of violence."He told the jury the situation made him feel "trapped". In cross-examination Mr Morgan's barrister, Caroline Goodwin KC, suggested Mr Cleary was "simply gutless" and was attempting to "get yourself out of trouble" by blaming her client. She pointed out that minutes after a supposedly life-changing phone call which implicated him in a murder, Mr Cleary was exchanging Facebook messages with a woman about the purchase of a car. Mr Cleary said he "was not thinking straight" at the time and had simply been dealing with "another problem that I had". Ms Goodwin also highlighted that despite Mr Cleary allegedly being told to "get rid of his phone", he not only carried on using it but that Mr Morgan continued to contact him on that number. She said: "I'm going to suggest if there was a confession and you put two and two together and he said ditch your phone, you would have done. "But you didn't, did you?"Mr Cleary replied: "No."He was also cross-examined by Alex Leach KC, prosecuting, who questioned him about a screengrab of a Google map image he sent to Mr Morgan on the evening of 7 February. He said the map showed the gym on Peel Road, and not the estate where he had left the van. Mr Leach said: "It showed the location where just over 24 hours later, Mr Scott was shot."Mr Cleary said he could not recall why the map was sent. Mr Leach suggested one explanation was it was "just bad luck" that he sent a map of the murder scene to Mr Morgan, who would be accused of the shooting, having driven a van used by the gunman to the murder scene. Mr Cleary denied the alternative, which Mr Leach suggested was that he "knew exactly" what Mr Morgan was planning. The prosecution has alleged Mr Scott's murder was an "act of retaliation" four years after he seized a phone from the prison cell of Mr Morgan at HMP Altcourse in Liverpool. The jury heard data on the phone revealed Mr Morgan was in a sexual relationship with a female prison officer at Altcourse called Sarah Williams, who was later jailed. At the time Mr Scott reported to police and to prison authorities that he had been threatened by Mr Morgan, who the jury heard told the prison officer "I will get you" while making a gun sign. The trial continues. Listen to the best of BBC Radio Lancashire on Sounds and follow BBC Lancashire on Facebook, X and Instagram. You can also send story ideas via Whatsapp to 0808 100 2230.