In article ,
wrote:
In article ,
(John Haines) wrote:
In article , Paul
Corfield wrote:
Pre-Pay is a new product and has not (IMO) settled down. The
launch was always going to be phased and I think you will
continue to see questions and issues being raised for a number of
months until people gain confidence in using it, staff awareness
and training improves and the newer features are introduced. It
will take time to settle down.
Try it - you *might* like it.
From the postings here it seems that some of the consequences of
this settling down period are increased hassle and expense for some
users even to the point of being refused travel. This is very
off-putting. Does TfL have a suitably responsive system for
learning from these issues that users can also gain some recompense
from?
A trial or development period should not be at the expense of the
paying user.
John Haines
I don't have all the posts, but from the original post in the Fare
Dodging Consequences topic, it seems that there was nothing wrong
with the system the the poster's case. He was fraudulently
travelling in zone one when he only had a zone two card and the
system correctly identified this and charged the person accordingly.
In which case the system was working correctly.
If a person fraudulently travelled in the same way with only a zone
two ticket, as the original poster said that he did regularly, then
that person would be fined if caught by a revenue inspector. Perhaps
the Oyster system can be amended to detect fraud and automatically
deduct a fine as well, with a court referral after X times 
Too many people deliberately avoid paying their fare / correct fare
(and seem proud of the fact that they've fiddled something) then
complain when they get caught.
My comments were nothing to do with the Fare Dodging thread. They
relate directly to the paragraph I quoted and to experiences of
legitimate users reported elsewhere.
As far as fare dodging goes, I agree with your comments entirely.
John Haines