I asked you the questions as you were singing the praises of how long it had
taken to implement and being disparaging about a MP's. attempt to put things
into the public arena.

Usually an outlandish comment normally inaccurate gets the ball rolling.
That's politics.

I apologise if you are upset that a newspaper might take back handers. It is
obvious I do not have any proof.

Yours memory serves you well about Finchley Centrals gateline what you say
is correct. It is true a gas pipe was discovered but as there is a gas meter
on that side I would have thought its discovery should have been sooner
rather than later.

So one last question that maybe you can answer. With all the problems
discovered at the planning stage why did they put a gateline in that would
never be used.

P.S. You have called me an idiot twice on this forum. This is a place to
voice opinion and create discussion so I like to think we all come across as
idiots or why else would we be asking questions.


"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 12:57:44 -0000, "Anon"
wrote:

[oyster implementation and Simon Hughes ill informed comment]

If Oyster took so long to implement.

Why was the training of staff so bad. Why is information still being
passed
through by word of mouth. Why are there changes to rules still happening.
Why is the publicity aimed towards customers not getting the message
across.
Why did they not introduce pre-pay with capping at the same time. Who
thought that fare revision week was a good time to start pre-pay. How
come a
large amount of stations still do not have adequate gate coverage or
staff
for its implementation.

Do you know what - I have absolutely no idea as I wasn't on the project
team. Why don't you ask TfL for an answer to your questions? Especially
as you know the E Mail format to be able to ask polite questions to the
correct and sufficiently senior people in the organisation.

The idea was great but the implementation was not.

If you want to see how bad it gets look into the problems with Finchley
Central. A gateline only on one side of the station. Fare dodgers on the
other. A gateline that has stood open ever since it was installed.
Everyone
including Bob Mason and Tim O'Toole not having the money or the ability
to
offer a solution.

Well we did do a design that provided for gates at both ends - the
ticket hall and the end of the bridge. I can vividly remember the site
meeting.

The following is from memory and what others have told me - so if it's
wrong then don't come back and flame me.

Finchley Central has a number of issues - a huge gas pipe (later
discovered) under the proposed location for the bridge ticket gates, the
inability to provide for a covered assistance point at that location. A
ticket hall that is really too small for the volume of passengers and I
understand staff concerns over health and safety issues. Oh and the
local populace have a ferocious reputation when it comes to trying to
shut the bridge exit / entrance point. It has been attempted many times
in order to stop fare evasion and it has proved impossible to achieve.
In addition you would overload the ticket hall which is already
inadequate.

The answer - and this is my guess - is to rebuild the whole damn place.
There is no money to do that given the far more pressing needs of other
locations on the network where congestion relief benefits would be far
higher.

What is more amazing is that The Evening Standard has obviously been
given a
back hander not to investigate it.

Care to substantiate that potentially very serious accusation? If you
can't then don't fling wild accusations around - it just makes you look
daft.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!