|
Cycle hire
On 18 July, 14:59, Clive wrote:
In message , Paul Corfield writesEven the Standard has been quite ferocious on the lorry / bicycle accident issue in London and I don't think we have a coherent position from City Hall about to properly deal with increasing cycling and having huge lorries on the road. May be a course of cycle proficiency would be in order, as it should instruct cyclists that stopping at the left side of a lorry about to turn left is not in there best interest, if they are looking for a long life. -- Clive The solution, then, when a lorry pulls up on the right, is to proceed through the red light before the lorry turns. Or are you one of those people who think that cyclists should always be in the middle of the lane, because that's where cars go, and should not let motor vehicles overtake them? |
Cycle hire
In message
, MIG writes The solution, then, when a lorry pulls up on the right, is to proceed through the red light before the lorry turns. Or are you one of those people who think that cyclists should always be in the middle of the lane, because that's where cars go, and should not let motor vehicles overtake them? No, I think that, like other road users, cyclists are responsible for their own action. It is up to them to take appropriate action, like passing left turning vehicles on the right and vice-versa. Where there is doubt then stay behind, in short just stay safe. It's not my duty to look out for every other road user and in this neck of the woods, cyclists are few and far between, but I have driven in London and ridden on the top deck of buses and quite frankly the behaviour of cyclists there is abysmal. -- Clive |
Cycle hire
I wonder how long before some adolescent and his mates come along and
start destroying them. |
Cycle hire
|
Cycle hire
|
Cycle hire
On Jul 18, 10:11*pm, wrote: In article , (Basil Jet) wrote: On 18/07/2010 13:10, Tom Anderson wrote: On Sun, 18 Jul 2010, David Walters wrote: The payment station takes credit cards, and keys, But not Oyster? Maybe the deposit is more than anyone has on their Oyster card. What deposits? How will the enforce the excess charges? Card pre-authorisation. |
Cycle hire
|
Cycle hire
|
Cycle hire
|
Cycle hire
In article ,
(Clive) wrote: In message , writes Why should vehicles that are a danger to other road users (pedestrians as well as cyclists) be allowed on roads where they are found? Any vehicle whose driver can't see its near side is in that category. Pedestrians shouldn't be on the road in the first place, just like cyclists shouldn't be on the pavement. Cyclists should know when they are in the blind spot of a large vehicle, if the don't then the road is not the place to be, hence they need to be trained. Anyway, what counts is safety and if a question exists about your safety on a bike then your obvious place is behind where you can't be crushed between rear wheels and a guard rail. Tell that to the pedestrian on the pavement when a Tesco lorry turning a corner in Cambridge killed him, then! -- Colin Rosenstiel |
Cycle hire
|
Cycle hire
Clive wrote on 18 July 2010 18:29:08 ...
In message , MIG writes The solution, then, when a lorry pulls up on the right, is to proceed through the red light before the lorry turns. Or are you one of those people who think that cyclists should always be in the middle of the lane, because that's where cars go, and should not let motor vehicles overtake them? No, I think that, like other road users, cyclists are responsible for their own action. It is up to them to take appropriate action, like passing left turning vehicles on the right and vice-versa. Where there is doubt then stay behind, in short just stay safe. It's not my duty to look out for every other road user and in this neck of the woods, cyclists are few and far between, but I have driven in London and ridden on the top deck of buses and quite frankly the behaviour of cyclists there is abysmal. Agreed. They should stay on the lower deck. -- Richard J. (to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address) |
Cycle hire
On Jul 18, 9:19*am, wrote:
And membership? It seems the biggest difference for now is the scheme will only be available to members on the 30th with casual use four weeks later. http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/medi...tre/16314.aspx "Anyone will be able to sign up for a daily, weekly or annual membership from 23 July at tfl.gov.uk/barclayscyclehire In order to use the scheme on 30 July, members will need to have received and activated their Cycle Hire key, so pioneers are urged to sign up as soon as possible." |
Cycle hire
In message PyU0o.307277$Hs4.126412@hurricane, Richard J.
writes but I have driven in London and ridden on the top deck of buses and quite frankly the behaviour of cyclists there is abysmal. Agreed. They should stay on the lower deck. I walked straight into that, didn't I. -- Clive |
Cycle hire
|
Cycle hire
On Jul 19, 11:12*am, Tom Barry wrote: wrote: I wonder how long before some adolescent and his mates come along and start destroying them. Can I put it on record now that I do not expect vandalism to be a serious issue for the scheme - it's too well built and generally in areas with decent CCTV coverage, plenty of passing traffic on foot and no particular gang or vandalism problem. *I can't see it being much fun to smash up, basically. I'm sure there will be some instances of it though - mindless tyre slashing and the like - plus other issues like stolen bikes (despite the deposit - card fraud and the like), and perhaps some 'cycle- jackings' (hire bikes stolen from users who are on them - i.e. mugging of sorts). But despite all this I broadly agree with your proposition, I think it'll basically be respected. I suppose such potential issues might be more likely to arise if there were to be a future expansion of the scheme further out from the centre, but I can't imagine that happening until the existing scheme has bedded down properly. (I can imagine expansion being something that could come up in the next Mayoral election, should the scheme be successful which I think it will be.) |
Cycle hire
On Jul 18, 11:34*pm, : (Mizter T) wrote: On Jul 18, 10:11*pm, wrote: [snip] What deposits? How will the enforce the excess charges? Card pre-authorisation. Makes sense. Another detail not (yet) on the web site, though. The scheme hasn't launched yet, so the webpages don't cover all the details and I don't think that's unreasonable either. The requirement for a deposit of sorts, via card pre-authorisation, can be inferred by the "Other charges" that feature on the website - £300 for a non-return charge, "up to £300" for damage. And some sort of deposit is needed (others can feel free to argue against this but it's the only way such a scheme will work) - AIUI this is how most other similar schemes operate in other cities. What's not clear is whether or not a potential user will need £300 (or £150 or whatever) in available funds in their account (via their credit/debit card) to be able to rent a bike - i.e. those at the edge of their overdraft or credit card credit limit, or those without an overdraft and only a small bit of money in their account, will they be able to access the scheme? Also it's not clear how it'll work for those with annual membership - will there be a card pre-authorisation requirement for them, or will they provide adequate proof of their identity so that TfL (well, actually Serco, the operators of the scheme) can track them down if there's an issue such as a missing or damaged bike? The answers to the above will of course become clear shortly. Incidentally, FWIW I can imagine that one might only be able to apply for membership from the date the scheme actually launches, or possibly even later than that if the membership back-office infrastructure is not yet fully sorted out - if there's a priority then it'll be launching the scheme on the prescribed day (30 July) - getting the bikes out there, making sure they pay stations work etc - and other things might have to wait. Should this occur I can imagine the write ups decrying the scheme as being an instant and dismal failure! |
Cycle hire
On Jul 19, 11:51*am, Mizter T wrote:
On Jul 19, 11:12*am, Tom Barry wrote: wrote: I wonder how long before some adolescent and his mates come along and start destroying them. Can I put it on record now that I do not expect vandalism to be a serious issue for the scheme - it's too well built and generally in areas with decent CCTV coverage, plenty of passing traffic on foot and no particular gang or vandalism problem. *I can't see it being much fun to smash up, basically. I'm sure there will be some instances of it though - mindless tyre slashing and the like - plus other issues like stolen bikes (despite the deposit - card fraud and the like), and perhaps some 'cycle- jackings' (hire bikes stolen from users who are on them - i.e. mugging of sorts). But despite all this I broadly agree with your proposition, I think it'll basically be respected. I suppose such potential issues might be more likely to arise if there were to be a future expansion of the scheme further out from the centre, but I can't imagine that happening until the existing scheme has bedded down properly. (I can imagine expansion being something that could come up in the next Mayoral election, should the scheme be successful which I think it will be.) Is there any information about how the scheme is paid for? Is there a certain utilisation rate at which it pays for itself or will it always be tax payer subsidised? If the later I can't see any expansion happening for a long time, with the possible exception of Canary Wharf around the Barclays HQ. |
Cycle hire
On Jul 19, 12:13*pm, Mizter T wrote: [snip] Incidentally, FWIW I can imagine that one might only be able to apply for membership from the date the scheme actually launches, or possibly even later than that if the membership back-office infrastructure is not yet fully sorted out - if there's a priority then it'll be launching the scheme on the prescribed day (30 July) - getting the bikes out there, making sure they pay stations work etc - and other things might have to wait. Should this occur I can imagine the write ups decrying the scheme as being an instant and dismal failure! Well, I got that completely wrong then (as per usual)! As David Walters post upthread recounts, it turns out that for the first month the scheme will only be available for those with an annual membership, so "occasional users" (i.e. those wanting 24-hour or 7-day access) will have to wait - meanwhile sign-up for annual membership opens on the 23 July, that's this coming Friday. |
Cycle hire
On Jul 19, 10:25*am, David Walters wrote: On Jul 18, 9:19*am, wrote: And membership? It seems the biggest difference for now is the scheme will only be available to members on the 30th with casual use four weeks later. http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/medi...tre/16314.aspx "Anyone will be able to sign up for a daily, weekly or annual membership from 23 July at tfl.gov.uk/barclayscyclehire In order to use the scheme on 30 July, members will need to have received and activated their Cycle Hire key, so pioneers are urged to sign up as soon as possible." Thanks for that nugget of info David - that's an interesting development. I guess it's fair enough, as it's a way of kinda soft- launching the scheme in a more controlled way with a soft-of controlled 'usership'. Still, it'll disappoint those who were keen on trying it out early on, but who wouldn't want to fork out for a membership until they'd given it a test-run, or because they've already got their own bike which they use for cycling most places, or whatever other reason. |
Cycle hire
On Jul 17, 9:42*pm, wrote: (Mizter T) wrote: On Jul 17, 1:01*pm, Paul Corfield wrote: I still can't my head round the charging model although I've not devoted a lot of brain power to understanding it. [...] It's not really all that complicated - see the fees and charges on this page: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/roadusers/cycling/12444.aspx First off you need to pay an "access fee" to be able to use the system - this is £1 for 24-hours or £5 for seven days, or else £45 for a year's membership. Then you pay for how long you use the bike - no charge for up to half an hour, £1 for up to an hour, then it starts to jump up somewhat at £4 for an hour and a half etc etc (see the table for details). The thinking that users will only borrow the bikes for a short period of *of time (to make a journey across central London), and will return them to a dock once they get 'there' - the charging model is thus intended to ensure that bikes stay in circulation and remain available for other users. All the other bike hire schemes in major cities (of which there are now several in Europe and around the world) seem to broadly follow this principle. I'm confused too. Maybe Paul has the same problem. It's how the "access fee" of up the £45 a year and membership and the "Key fee" of £3 relate. Yes I'd seen that and pondered on it myself - perhaps the key fee is quoted separately so that: (a) the fee for a replacement key is clear, and users realise the key itself is valuable; (b) it might allow for a user's annual membership to lapse, but for them to then pick it up again say three months later using the same key (and underlying account information) - and perhaps in the future there could be shorter membership periods available as well. There appears to be nothing about becoming a member on the link given. Patience Colin - or do you really want to be part of the 'right-now', instant-gratification-is-demanded generation? Anyhow see David Walter's post downthread - sign-up for membership opens this coming Friday the 23rd July, though TfL don't specify the exact hour when this happens. Regardless, everyone will be able to enjoy working themselves into a tissy when the website falls over - indeed, I suggest people start stoking their righteous anger in readiness right now ;-) |
Cycle hire
On Jul 19, 12:50*pm, David Walters wrote: On Jul 19, 11:51*am, Mizter T wrote: On Jul 19, 11:12*am, Tom Barry wrote: wrote: I wonder how long before some adolescent and his mates come along and start destroying them. Can I put it on record now that I do not expect vandalism to be a serious issue for the scheme - it's too well built and generally in areas with decent CCTV coverage, plenty of passing traffic on foot and no particular gang or vandalism problem. *I can't see it being much fun to smash up, basically. I'm sure there will be some instances of it though - mindless tyre slashing and the like - plus other issues like stolen bikes (despite the deposit - card fraud and the like), and perhaps some 'cycle- jackings' (hire bikes stolen from users who are on them - i.e. mugging of sorts). But despite all this I broadly agree with your proposition, I think it'll basically be respected. I suppose such potential issues might be more likely to arise if there were to be a future expansion of the scheme further out from the centre, but I can't imagine that happening until the existing scheme has bedded down properly. (I can imagine expansion being something that could come up in the next Mayoral election, should the scheme be successful which I think it will be.) Is there any information about how the scheme is paid for? Is there a certain utilisation rate at which it pays for itself or will it always be tax payer subsidised? If the later I can't see any expansion happening for a long time, with the possible exception of Canary Wharf around the Barclays HQ. There'll be various bits of info buried around the TfL site I'd think (e.g. in the Board papers), but I haven't really delved into that side of things much. In the grand scheme of things, I don't think it's a very expensive project overall in terms of the total transport budget. I doubt it'll never be self-sufficient, even taking into account the Barclays sponsorship - but I'll stop spouting vagaries now and leave it open to others to supply rather more concrete specifics! One way of justifying the scheme (and potential expansion thereof) is to look at how those using it might otherwise have travelled - e.g. would they have gone by Tube, bus, taxi or car. If it was by Tube or bus, then one could look at the cost of providing capacity for such a journey (i.e. the subsidy), and ponder on whether providing the cycle hire scheme (or extra capacity or expansion thereof) was perhaps a cheaper way of taking pressure off the public transport network (especially at peak times, with the extra capacity that's required to move the masses). If they would otherwise have travelled by taxi or car, then doing the journey by bicycle would reduce road congestion. In other words, one could look at it holistically - indeed one can include provision for cycling in general in that broad equation - rather than just considering whether or not the scheme will pay for itself from the usage fees (and sponsorship). |
Cycle hire
In article ,
(Clive) wrote: In message , writes Pedestrians shouldn't be on the road in the first place, just like cyclists shouldn't be on the pavement. Cyclists should know when they are in the blind spot of a large vehicle, if the don't then the road is not the place to be, hence they need to be trained. Anyway, what counts is safety and if a question exists about your safety on a bike then your obvious place is behind where you can't be crushed between rear wheels and a guard rail. Tell that to the pedestrian on the pavement when a Tesco lorry turning a corner in Cambridge killed him, then! And the connection with cycling is? Shared danger. Cyclists are not the only victims of the Government allowing such dangerous vehicles on the roads. All it needs is Constriction and Use regulations that require a driver to be able to see everywhere that his vehicle is going. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
Cycle hire
In message ,
writes In article , (Clive) wrote: In message , writes Pedestrians shouldn't be on the road in the first place, just like cyclists shouldn't be on the pavement. Cyclists should know when they are in the blind spot of a large vehicle, if the don't then the road is not the place to be, hence they need to be trained. Anyway, what counts is safety and if a question exists about your safety on a bike then your obvious place is behind where you can't be crushed between rear wheels and a guard rail. Tell that to the pedestrian on the pavement when a Tesco lorry turning a corner in Cambridge killed him, then! And the connection with cycling is? Shared danger. Cyclists are not the only victims of the Government allowing such dangerous vehicles on the roads. All it needs is Constriction and Use regulations that require a driver to be able to see everywhere that his vehicle is going. Essentially, you've never driven a vehicle with a blind spot and are now allowing yours to get in the way. -- Clive |
Cycle hire
In article ,
(Clive) wrote: In message , writes In article , (Clive) wrote: In message , writes Pedestrians shouldn't be on the road in the first place, just like cyclists shouldn't be on the pavement. Cyclists should know when they are in the blind spot of a large vehicle, if the don't then the road is not the place to be, hence they need to be trained. Anyway, what counts is safety and if a question exists about your safety on a bike then your obvious place is behind where you can't be crushed between rear wheels and a guard rail. Tell that to the pedestrian on the pavement when a Tesco lorry turning a corner in Cambridge killed him, then! And the connection with cycling is? Shared danger. Cyclists are not the only victims of the Government allowing such dangerous vehicles on the roads. All it needs is Constriction and Use regulations that require a driver to be able to see everywhere that his vehicle is going. Essentially, you've never driven a vehicle with a blind spot and are now allowing yours to get in the way. Wrong assumption there! I'm saying that vehicles with blind spots that large should no longer be allowed to mix with vulnerable road users. A lot has been done to reduce road deaths in the last decade and more. Cars are much safer than they were that recently. It's time lorries were brought up to scratch too. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
Cycle hire
|
Cycle hire
In message
, David Walters writes Is there any information about how the scheme is paid for? Figures quoted by the BBC earlier this year showed an outlay of £140m for the first six years (for set-up and running). Barclays have stumped up £25m of this, so presumably TfL are having to fund the scheme at the rate of just over £19m per annum. However, offset against this is the income from hire charges, so it's not impossible that the scheme could be self-financing. Certainly, and as Mizter T indicated, it is unlikely to be a major drain on resources. Is there a certain utilisation rate at which it pays for itself or will it always be tax payer subsidised? I don't know if calculations have been made - there are a lot of imponderables, such as the rate of uptake (which has generally been higher than expected in other cities with such schemes) and the rate of theft (which has also been much higher than expected in the Paris Vélib scheme). If the later I can't see any expansion happening for a long time, with the possible exception of Canary Wharf around the Barclays HQ. To become as popular as the Paris scheme, I think the London scheme would need to extend into Zone 2 at some stage, but that could indeed be a long way off in the current financial climate. -- Paul Terry |
Cycle hire
"Paul Terry" wrote in message
... In message To become as popular as the Paris scheme, I think the London scheme would need to extend into Zone 2 at some stage, but that could indeed be a long way off in the current financial climate. By June next year, there'll probably be posts here asking firstly that they can be used on the London to Brighton bike ride, and secondly that they should be allowed on the SN trains that day... Paul S |
Cycle hire
In message
, Mizter T writes What's not clear is whether or not a potential user will need £300 (or £150 or whatever) in available funds in their account (via their credit/debit card) to be able to rent a bike I suspect they will. According to a rather old BBC article on the scheme .... http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/london/h...00/8293273.stm .... "You'll use credit cards to place an automatic refundable deposit on the bike". In other words, pax won't be able to hire the bike (even for the free 30 minutes) unless they have enough credit to pay the deposit. Once the bike is returned, the deposit is then refunded to the card by means of a charge back. Those with limited funds might therefore be disappointed if hiring a bike to go on a shopping trip :) -- Paul Terry |
Cycle hire
Mizter T wrote:
There'll be various bits of info buried around the TfL site I'd think (e.g. in the Board papers), but I haven't really delved into that side of things much. In the grand scheme of things, I don't think it's a very expensive project overall in terms of the total transport budget. I doubt it'll never be self-sufficient, even taking into account the Barclays sponsorship - but I'll stop spouting vagaries now and leave it open to others to supply rather more concrete specifics! Boris originally said it was to be provided at no cost to London, but later backtracked on this, and at about £40-45m a year for the last two years it's not hard to see this as a pretty expensive project overall. Barclay's £25m over five years (IIRC) is for both Cycle Hire and Cycle Superhighways so has to be seen as about 1/10th of the total £250m odd cost of both schemes, if the 12 CS routes are ever completed. That's pretty hefty, about half a Victoria Station rebuilding or a quarter of an East London Line. Basically, whatever the running costs, TfL's put in a lot up front, mostly IIRC nicked from existing cycle scheme budgets (e.g. LCN+). On the holistics point, I suspect the main abstraction will be from buses, then taxis. In that sense it possibly increases the bus subsidy per passenger, although a lot depends on the kind of user who'll take it. I'm still not sure who it's aimed at, given that they're specifically avoiding trying to provide for commuter flows from terminal stations (they'd need a hell of a lot more bikes and vans to move them about, since catering for commuter flows is highly capital intensive in vehicles). It's more likely they're aiming it at short trip casual users who may have business in a couple of areas of town on the same day, and can take a bike between them instead of a cab or working out which bus goes there or dropping down into the Tube for a short, expensive Zone 1 trip. I'm still in favour of a licensed pedicab scheme, personally. Could even combine the two, and it has the benefit of being usable by post-pub crowds - I'm so looking forward to the first drunk freewheeling through London on a Boris bike (yes, it's banned, no, Boris doesn't think it's a problem, at least for himself). Even better, how about hire-pedicabs? Two up front pedalling, two in the back? That would be *ace*. Tom |
Cycle hire
On Jul 19, 6:10*pm, Paul Terry wrote: Mizter T wrote: What's not clear is whether or not a potential user will need £300 (or £150 or whatever) in available funds in their account (via their credit/debit card) to be able to rent a bike I suspect they will. According to a rather old BBC article on the scheme ... http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/london/h...id_8293000/829... ... "You'll use credit cards to place an automatic refundable deposit on the bike". In other words, pax won't be able to hire the bike (even for the free 30 minutes) unless they have enough credit to pay the deposit. Once the bike is returned, the deposit is then refunded to the card by means of a charge back. Yes, I can't quite see how it'd work otherwise using card pre- authorisation. Those with limited funds might therefore be disappointed if hiring a bike to go on a shopping trip :) "But I know I've got enough in my account to buy this engagement ring... it's a spontaneous thing, you see..." That said, the scheme (and charging regime) is designed to steer people towards returning bikes to docking stations after they've finished their journey, rather than locking them up and keeping them for themselves - I understand one of the bits of advice that London (in the form of TfL) got from the Paris Velib scheme was not to include an integral lock in the bike - the lock on the Paris bikes is apparently a bit on the puny side, and fairly easily overcome, so hirers who locked their bikes up were coming back to find them gone. So the logic being employed in the London scheme is that it's better from both a security and also a circulation and availability of hire cycle standpoint that bikes are returned back to docking stations, not locked up and idle for however long. And given all that, our hero in search of the engagement ring will in all likelihood have returned his bike to a docking station before heading into Graff's or along Hatton Garden - his problem may then come when he tries to hire a bike to race back to his hopeful prospect, who may be cooling on him as the seconds pass. That said, I realise the flaw in my proposition - the card pre- authorisation would likely be levied at the same time as the 24-hour or 7-day access fee was taken, so the reserved amount would then not become available until that period had expired. In which case, our groom might have got not further than the docking station outside the palatial self-appointed two-star Pimlico hotel before having to resort to slower means of moving, leaving our bride to be rather too much time to ponder the passion-numbing subject of just how long it's been since a Hoover has seen the carpet under the hotel bed... |
Cycle hire
|
Cycle hire
|
Cycle hire
On Jul 23, 9:22*am, David Walters wrote: On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 07:36:48 -0500, wrote: Hmm. That's what's confusing me. The keys are mentioned as available separately for a £3 charge. No link there to membership. I wonder whether businesses will be able to take out memberships for casual use by their staff, for example? Membership sign up is now available. You have to be 18 to be a member but you can sign up for up to 4 keys, at £3 each, so I don't see why a business couldn't have a collection of keys. Once you have signed up if you opt for the £1/day version as I did it seems you are actually charged when you hire a cycle. Yes, I just signed up for the £1 a day version too (and before I'd read your post so I'm not just a copy-cat!) - I wasn't expecting to be able to do that at all, but was instead under the seemingly erroneous impression that "membership" (with key) equalled 'annual subscription' - looking at the press release you cited earlier in this thread I see however that I didn't read it properly: ---quote--- Anyone will be able to sign up for a daily, weekly or annual membership from 23 July at tfl.gov.uk/barclayscyclehire ---quote--- Source: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/medi...tre/16314.aspx You can opt to auto-renew but I don't know why you would ever want to do that. Even for the annual access charge you might as well only renew it when you use it. What's unclear is how key-holding members will reactivate their key with a new access period - e.g. say I've got a key and want 7-day access, will I have to go on-line first and 'order' that, or will I be able to turn up at a docking station and sort it out - though I'm not sure the latter will be possible as IIRC there's no key 'hole' in the pay stations, just in each of the cycle docks themselves. So if one just turns up with a key that doesn't have an 'live' access period/ membership associated with it will one even be able to just take a bike and get 24-hour access - or will the key be no good unless it's re-activated online? (I suspect the latter.) Free T-Shirt for the first 1000 to sign up. I'm sure it will be a fetching Barclays blue and help you blend in with the Cycle Superhighways nicely. Lovely. |
Cycle hire
On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 01:53:33 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T wrote:
On Jul 23, 9:22Â*am, David Walters wrote: You can opt to auto-renew but I don't know why you would ever want to do that. Even for the annual access charge you might as well only renew it when you use it. What's unclear is how key-holding members will reactivate their key with a new access period - e.g. say I've got a key and want 7-day access, will I have to go on-line first and 'order' that, or will I be able to turn up at a docking station and sort it out - though I'm not sure the latter will be possible as IIRC there's no key 'hole' in the pay stations, just in each of the cycle docks themselves. So if one just turns up with a key that doesn't have an 'live' access period/ membership associated with it will one even be able to just take a bike and get 24-hour access - or will the key be no good unless it's re-activated online? (I suspect the latter.) There is a key reader in the pay stations which lets you do things like check your hire history so you might be able to also pay for access there. I've just read the T&Cs properly and it makes the auto-renew a bit clearer. http://www.tfl.gov.uk/termsandconditions/15869.aspx "If you agreed to Auto Renewal, we will deduct the relevant Access Fee(s) for you and each Additional User on the date that you present any of your Key(s) at a Docking Point to undock a Cycle following expiry of the previous Access Period." So if you opt for auto renew at the daily rate and use bikes in 4 24 hour periods over 7 days you will be charged £4 and not £7. Or at least I think that is what happens.... |
Cycle hire
On Jul 23, 10:19*am, David Walters wrote: On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 01:53:33 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T wrote: On Jul 23, 9:22*am, David Walters wrote: You can opt to auto-renew but I don't know why you would ever want to do that. Even for the annual access charge you might as well only renew it when you use it. What's unclear is how key-holding members will reactivate their key with a new access period - e.g. say I've got a key and want 7-day access, will I have to go on-line first and 'order' that, or will I be able to turn up at a docking station and sort it out - though I'm not sure the latter will be possible as IIRC there's no key 'hole' in the pay stations, just in each of the cycle docks themselves. So if one just turns up with a key that doesn't have an 'live' access period/ membership associated with it will one even be able to just take a bike and get 24-hour access - or will the key be no good unless it's re-activated online? (I suspect the latter.) There is a key reader in the pay stations which lets you do things like check your hire history so you might be able to also pay for access there.. Oh ok, that escaped my notice when I've taken a look at them. I've just read the T&Cs properly and it makes the auto-renew a bit clearer. http://www.tfl.gov.uk/termsandconditions/15869.aspx "If you agreed to Auto Renewal, we will deduct the relevant Access Fee(s) for you and each Additional User on the date that you present any of your Key(s) at a Docking Point to undock a Cycle following expiry of the previous Access Period." So if you opt for auto renew at the daily rate and use bikes in 4 24 hour periods over 7 days you will be charged £4 and not £7. Or at least I think that is what happens.... That seems to make sense - in fact it seems quite sensible (and good investigating!) - this means occasional users could have Auto Renewal set-up for 24-hour access and whenever key is used it'd start a new 24- hour period (unless one was already live). One question I have is, if a user were to have 7-day access on Auto Renew, how easy would it be for them to downgrade it to 24-hour access if they just wanted to use the system for a day (rather than a week) - would they be able to do this at a pay station, or would they have to do it online? I'm not too sure whether offering 7-day access on Auto Renewal might cause more confusion than the benefit it'd offer to the perhaps relatively low number of people who might find it useful - that said, perhaps I'm wrong in thinking that. |
Cycle hire
On Jul 23, 10:19*am, David Walters wrote: [snip] I've just read the T&Cs properly and it makes the auto-renew a bit clearer. http://www.tfl.gov.uk/termsandconditions/15869.aspx Just read through them myself - in addition to my comments about the Auto Renewal facility in my other reply, here's a few other bits and pieces I noted in the T&Cs (about things other than Auto Renewal)... ---quote--- 7.5 - A 5 minute time interval is required between the end of one journey and the commencement of another journey. If you (or an Additional User) attempt to undock a Cycle from a Docking Point within the 5 minute time interval, this will be treated as a continuation of the previous journey and the Period of Use and Usage Charge shall be calculated accordingly. ---/quote--- So, you won't be able to stay within the free half-hour's usage simply by swapping bikes at docking stations before the 30 minutes is up - you'll have to wait for five minutes to be up, and by the sounds of it you won't be able to get around this by just walking up the road and use the next docking station along as that possibility appears to be covered by the above term too - so, cheapskates beware! ---quote--- 8.3 - If you are unable to dock a Cycle at the Docking Station of your choice due to the lack of an available Docking Point, you should present your Payment Card (if you are a Casual User) or Key (if you are a Member) at the Terminal at the affected Docking Station and dock the Cycle at an alternative Docking Stations. The Terminal will state the period of time that you are allowed free of charge to enable you (and each Additional User) to dock the Cycle at a Docking Point at an alternative Docking Station. ---/quote--- I had heard there would be some system whereby you wouldn't be penalised if a docking station was full, but wasn't sure how it'd work - the above term explains it. ---quote--- 9.3 b (i) - must not: lock or secure the Cycle to any object or property during the Period of Use; ---/quote--- I knew that was to be discouraged but hadn't realised it would actually be prohibited. But that's fair enough in the context of the whole system - if you want to lock a bike up and leave it, you take it back to a docking station and dock it (and hope that one's available when you come back!). ---quote--- 9.3 b (vii) - must not: use the Cycle for racing or stunt or trick- riding; ---/quote--- Nonetheless, expect YouTube videos soon enough! (See Paris and Velib.) ---quote--- 11.8 - You may obtain a receipt for each of your (or an Additional User's) journey records from the Terminal. ---/quote--- Which solves the expenses issue. |
Cycle hire
On Jul 23, 10:19 am, David Walters wrote: On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 01:53:33 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T wrote: On Jul 23, 9:22 am, David Walters wrote: You can opt to auto-renew but I don't know why you would ever want to do that. Even for the annual access charge you might as well only renew it when you use it. What's unclear is how key-holding members will reactivate their key with a new access period - e.g. say I've got a key and want 7-day access, will I have to go on-line first and 'order' that, or will I be able to turn up at a docking station and sort it out - though I'm not sure the latter will be possible as IIRC there's no key 'hole' in the pay stations, just in each of thecycledocks themselves. So if one just turns up with a key that doesn't have an 'live' access period/ membership associated with it will one even be able to just take a bike and get 24-hour access - or will the key be no good unless it's re-activated online? (I suspect the latter.) There is a key reader in the pay stations which lets you do things like check your hire history so you might be able to also pay for access there. When I was around town yesterday (on my bike no less) I noticed that a few of the pay stations are already turned on and active - an example being the one on Bernard Street opposite Russell Square tube station. The simple touch-screen user interface seemed familiar - the screens look a bit like those on a ticket machine, maybe it's just the New Johnston font. IIRC there were six initial options, including balance, print receipt, and usage history - or wording along those lines. I also note that there's a usage history available online for those with web accounts (which is presumably everyone with a membership and a key). |
Cycle hire
On Sun, 25 Jul 2010 19:14:49 +0100, Mizter T wrote:
When I was around town yesterday (on my bike no less) I noticed that a few of the pay stations are already turned on and active - an example being the one on Bernard Street opposite Russell Square tube station. About 2 weeks ago I found one on Union Street in Southwark that thought it had bikes for hire, according to it's neighbours, and was happy to take my credit card as a casual user. I'm afraid I chickened out of the transaction as I wasn't sure how I would be able to return the non-existent bike. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 11:26 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk