On Thu, 24 May 2012 09:03:29 -0700, ian batten wrote:

On May 24, 3:44Â*pm, "Paul Scott" wrote:

In the SWT area, there are a fair proportion of card only machines, but
AFAIAA only where multiple machines are fitted alongside one another.

And there are card-only machines in LUL stations, although again only
(in my limited experience) in multiple with more full-service machines.
However, it's an interesting question as to whether if you have a pair
of machines, one of which takes cash (or your preferred method of
payment) and the other of which doesn't, and the "wrong" one fails,
whether that constitutes "full working order". A pair of machines which
together accept two forms of payment might be seen as one machine which
takes both, or as two machines either of which needs to be working.
Presumably, someone with money and time on their hands will get
themselves PF'd, force a testcase and get a resolution.

ian

What would be more interesting would be a court ruling, on how far (if at
all) T&Cs can mandate payment method. I appreciate in a very specialist
transaction, a vendor might be able to stipulate "credit cards only".
However, in a situation where a service is nominally offered to the
general public, would a clause insisting you pay by card, or magic beans
be regarded as "unfair". And if not, what *exactly* is the concept of
"legal tender" ?