Trending Now
  • Rowling Foundation Offers to Fund NHS Single-Sex Space Challenges
  • Consumer Legal Funding Is Not Third-Party Litigation Financing, ARC Argues
Announcements Case Developments Commercial

Operator of Great Northern, Southern, Gatwick Express and Thameslink to face legal claim worth up to £73m as over 3 million consumers are overcharged for London train fares

November 24, 2021

Operator of Great Northern, Southern, Gatwick Express and Thameslink to face legal claim worth up to £73m as over 3 million consumers are overcharged for London train fares

A legal claim seeking compensation worth up to £73m for routine overcharging on train tickets affecting an estimated 3.2 million passengers has been filed against the operator of one of Britain’s busiest commuter railway networks.

The collective claim against Govia Thameslink Railway (“GTR”) – the operator of the Great Northern, Southern, Gatwick Express and Thameslink lines – was filed on Wednesday 24th November with London’s specialist competition court, the Competition Appeal Tribunal (the “Tribunal”).

It was filed by Mr Justin Gutmann, a consumer rail campaigner who last month secured the landmark legal approval to bring to trial collective actions seeking compensation worth up to £93 million against two other rail operators, the South Western and Southeastern rail franchises, over the same issue.

The claim revolves around the lack of access to so-called ‘boundary fares’ – where travellers holding a London Travelcard should be offered discounted tickets taking them from the boundary of any zone covered by the card to their destination.

GTR is alleged to have not made ‘boundary fares’ sufficiently available for Travelcard holders to purchase, nor making passengers aware of their existence. The rail company’s failure has left customers with little option but to buy a higher fare than was necessary because their travelcard already entitled them to travel part of their journey. It is calculated that 240 million journeys since November 2015 could have benefited from boundary fares if travellers had been aware of them.

This is a breach of the UK’s competition rules (s.18 of the Competition Act 1998) and an abuse by GTR of its market powers. Great Northern serves destinations including Cambridge, Peterborough, King’s Lynn and Ely while Thameslink is a key commuter line to central London linking Brighton, St Albans, Bedford, East Grinstead and Luton Airport. Southern serves destinations including Brighton, Hastings, Portsmouth, Southampton, Eastbourne and Milton Keynes.

The claim is thought to affect an estimated 3.2 million passengers who held travelcards and used GTR services since November 2015.  The abuse is ongoing despite GTR also being the parent company of Southeastern.

Mr Gutmann, formerly of Citizens’ Advice, said: “This claim is the latest step in my campaign to stamp out routine overcharging of millions of passengers by some of Britain’s top rail operators. The failure of these companies to make Boundary Fares more freely available is scandalous and has been going on for years. It’s a practice that needs to stop – and passengers who have overpaid deserve compensation.”

What is the claim about? What are boundary fares?

Boundary fares allow passengers who own a Travelcard to travel beyond the zones it covers without doubling up on payment. Independent research has demonstrated that such fares are not readily available online or over the telephone and are rarely offered at ticket counters unless expressly requested. This practice is an abuse of the company’s dominant position and in breach of UK competition laws.

Who is eligible?

Passengers who owned a Travelcard at any time from 1 October 2015 and also purchased a rail fare from a station within the zones of their Travelcard to a destination outside those zones may be eligible for compensation under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (“2015 Act”). This allows for a collective claim to be brought on behalf of a group of individuals who are alleged to have suffered a common loss. As a result of the 2015 Act, groups of persons who have all lost out do not need to bring an individual claim to bring compensation for their loss. Instead, these consumers may all receive compensation through a single, collective claim brought on their behalf by Mr Gutmann.

Affected passengers will not have to pay any legal costs to participate in the claim and do not need to do anything at this stage to be included in it.

What next?

The Competition Appeal Tribunal will now determine whether or not Mr Gutmann’s claim is allowed to proceed. Anyone who would like to receive further information about the claim, can visit the claim website, www.BoundaryFares.com, to sign up for updates.

Justin Gutmann represents the passengers bringing this legal case against Govia Thameslink Railway Ltd. Mr Gutmann has a wealth of experience working in the consumer rights sphere and he has strong expertise in the transport sector. He has spent a large part of his professional life dedicated to consumer welfare, public policy and market research, and he was recently approved as class representative in similar cases against the South Eastern and South Western rail franchises.

Mr Gutmann’s final job was Head of Research and Insight at Citizens Advice. He spent eight years working for London Underground. Mr Gutmann is represented by Charles Lyndon Limited and Hausfeld. His claim is funded by Woodsford, a global ESG and litigation funding specialist.

Announcements

View All
Announcements Commercial

Court of Appeal Shuts Down BHP’s Attempt to Overturn Mariana Liability Judgment

By John Freund |

The Court of Appeal of England and Wales today refused BHP’s application for permission to appeal the High Court’s landmark liability judgment in the Mariana disaster litigation.

The High Court found BHP responsible for the 2015 collapse of the Fundão tailings dam in Mariana, Minas Gerais, Brazil, concluding that BHP is liable for the disaster under both the Brazilian Civil and Environmental law.

The Court of Appeal heard BHP’s application for permission to appeal the decision on 12 March after BHP was refused permission to appeal by the High Court in January.  BHP asked the court for permission to contest the findings that it was a polluter, and that it had knowledge of the risks associated with the dam before the collapse. The mining company also challenged the finding that all claimants brought their claims in time.

The Court of Appeal’s refusal marks a further victory for the hundreds of thousands of Brazilian victims who have spent over ten years pursuing justice, and a major setback for BHP. The High Court’s liability judgment remains in force, and BHP has exhausted the ordinary routes by which it could seek to overturn it.

In today’s ruling, the court concluded that BHP’s proposed grounds of appeal have no real prospect of success and there is no other compelling reason for the appeal to be heard.  The decision means that the parties will proceed to the trial of Stage 2 of the proceedings, which will determine issues of causation, loss and damages. The trial evidence is to be heard from April 2027 to December 2027, with closing submissions listed for March 2028.

Lord Justice Fraser wrote in the decision: “I do not accept that any of the grounds relating to BHP’s liability for the dam collapse are reasonably arguable. I do not consider that there is any foundation for the different complaints that the trial judge failed to engage with BHP’s case."

Jonathan Wheeler, lead partner for the Mariana litigation at Pogust Goodhead, said: “The Court of Appeal has now joined the High Court in finding that BHP’s grounds of appeal have no real prospect of success - an emphatic and unambiguous outcome. BHP remains liable for the worst environmental disaster in Brazil’s history, and it will not be given another bite at the cherry.”

“Our clients have waited more than a decade for justice while BHP pursued every procedural avenue to avoid accountability; those avenues are now closed. We are focused on securing the compensation that hundreds of thousands of Brazilians have been owed for far too long.”

Announcements Commercial

Loopa Finance Wins at the Lexology European Awards 2026 in the Litigation / General Counsel Category

By John Freund |

Loopa Finance has been recognized as the winner in the Litigation – General Counsel Team category at the Lexology European Awards 2026, one of the leading recognitions in the international legal sector.

The award was received in London by Ignacio Delgado, General Counsel Europe at the firm, on behalf of Loopa Finance’s European team, composed of Ignacio Delgado (General Counsel Europe), Marina Gouveia (Investment Manager), Fernando Pérez Lozada (Senior Investment Manager), and Fernando Folgueiro (Managing Partner).

The Lexology European Awards recognize outstanding legal teams across the region through a methodology that combines independent research, quantitative and qualitative analysis, and thousands of nominations supported by clients and industry peers, as well as the annual research conducted by the Lexology Index (formerly Who’s Who Legal) and Client Choice.

The selection process is based on performance evaluations related to effective communication, commercial understanding, technical expertise, strategic management, and team strength, and is supported by a global community of more than 940,000 subscribers.

This recognition positions Loopa Finance’s European team among the leading practitioners in complex litigation and strategic legal management in Europe.

“This award reflects the strength of a team operating across two continents that understands litigation not only from a legal perspective, but also through financial analysis and risk management. It is the result of collective work and a rigorous, strategic approach to structuring complex disputes,” said Delgado during the ceremony.

More Than an Award: Validation of a Model

The award comes at a time of consolidation for the firm. Loopa Finance recently completed its rebranding process, evolving from Qanlex to Loopa Finance and reinforcing an identity aligned with its growth in continental Europe and its broader international positioning.

It also coincides with the closing of Fund III, raising €65 million to finance complex litigation and arbitration across Europe and Latin America, significantly expanding the firm’s investment capacity and supporting the continued growth of its platform in the region.

This milestone adds to the firm’s recent rankings, including its Band 1 classification by Chambers & Partners in Latin America and Europe, its recognition as “Highly Recommended” by Leaders League across multiple jurisdictions, and the inclusion of members of its team among the Thought Leaders in Third-Party Funding by the Lexology Index. Together, these results confirm the strength of Loopa Finance’s model and the consolidation of its team as a reference in the strategic financing of disputes at an international level.

About Loopa Finance

Loopa Finance is an investment fund specializing in the financing and monetization of litigation and arbitration across continental Europe and Latin America, supported by a technology-driven model and rigorous risk analysis. The firm provides capital to cover legal costs or monetize ongoing claims through non-recourse structures, where the recovery of the investment depends exclusively on the successful outcome of the case, assuming the financial risk of the dispute while fully aligning its interests with those of clients and law firms.

Announcements Commercial

Pravati Capital Partners with SEI to Bring Litigation Finance to Registered Investment Advisors

By John Freund |

One of the oldest litigation finance firms in the United States has announced a strategic partnership aimed at expanding mainstream investor access to the asset class.

As reported by Business Wire via Yahoo Finance, Scottsdale-based Pravati Capital has partnered with financial services firm SEI to provide registered investment advisors with structured access to litigation finance as an alternative investment option. The collaboration will leverage SEI's distribution platform to make litigation funding opportunities available within advisor portfolios.

The partnership reflects growing institutional interest in litigation finance as an alternative asset class. Historically, litigation funding has been difficult for mainstream financial advisors to access on behalf of their clients, with the market largely dominated by specialized funds and institutional investors. The Pravati-SEI arrangement seeks to bridge that gap by creating a more accessible pathway for advisors seeking diversification through non-correlated investments.

The announcement underscores a broader industry shift as litigation finance continues to move from a niche strategy toward greater acceptance within traditional wealth management channels. As the global litigation funding market grows — projected to reach over $25 billion in 2026 — partnerships like this one may signal a new phase of institutional adoption.