In message , Bob Adams
writes
In message , Kat
writes
What phoning? You'll only need to phone if you have more than one
unresolved journey on your Oyster.

That sounds a lot like phoning to me.

You only have to phone if you have more than one unresolved journey. If
you use the Oyster correctly, that shouldn't happen more than once.

Oysters don't overcharge if used correctly (apart from a few anomalies which
are currently being sorted out.)

An unusual definition of none.

It's not a definition; it's an explanation.

I have been using a monthly travel card for the past five years. I have
had zero stress with it.

Never happened to me.

Never happened to me.

Never happened to me. I have a zones 1 to 6 card anyway.

Which does not answer my original question which was :
Will somebody please explain to me how an Oyster card is an improvement
over a travel card _from a regular commuter passengers point of view_ ?


Why don't you try seeing it from the POV of someone who DOES NOT have a
1 - 6 season ticket; DOES have constant problems with a magnetic ticket
which no matter how many times it's been replaced still fails again
after a few uses (I see lots of these); DO see their tickets swallowed
up by a faulty gate; and DOES have to go through UTS gates to travel?

Nice to see someone back to the usual LUL and LU staff knocking.... I
was starting to worry.
--
Kat Me, Ambivalent? Well, yes and no.

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.

Roger

"Richard Adamfi" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 11:53:43 -0000, "Dave Liney"
wrote:

What are these more tailored fares products? I've not seen any new form
of
ticket available on Oyster that I couldn't get on a paper ticket. The
2003

What about cheap tube fares at the weekend? Maximum single 1.00 pound
outside Zone 1, 1.80 including Zone 1.

It would be very simple to have those available on a paper ticket. As I said
in the bit you snipped. TfL have chosen not to but there is no reason why
they couldn't have them on paper tickets.

The one thing that I had forgotten was the price cap for pre-pay, which is a
good idea. I hope it can think beyond just the one day though to be able to
upgrade you to a weekend travelcard, or even a seven-day season.

Dave.

On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 11:53:43 -0000, "Dave Liney"
wrote:
"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
.. .

Yes there are benefits for TfL from Oyster but a lot of those are about
providing a better service and more tailored fares products for
passengers. These should encourage usage of public transport -
especially off peak - and isn't this something that is considered to be
"a good thing"?

What are these more tailored fares products? I've not seen any new form of
ticket available on Oyster that I couldn't get on a paper ticket. The 2003
fares in 2004 and reduced off-peak fares could have been introduced for
paper ticket users, but were reserved for Oyster to encourage take up and
presumably to enable a "78% of trips made on LU are done with Oyster, isn't
it a success" poster campaign (no doubt with a picture of Smiling Ken on it,
as if he had anything to do with it).

Well when we did the spec we allowed for off peak discounted fares,
against the peak flow discounted pricing, through ticketing on one fare
for bus to bus or bus to tube as well as One Day tickets on the card
etc. These are quite complex products and will not be introduced on day
one but I expect some of them to emerge in time - the Long Term TfL
Fares Policy document suggests that they will.

Capping wasn't something we thought of initially but fares policy in
London has changed considerably since Ken took over. Also I expect the
idea of capping to One Day prices emerged from market research into how
people would react to a Stored Value product. Certainly before Oyster
emerged it was clear from questions on this group that people were
reticent to commit to a stored value card if they ran the risk of
"overpaying" relative to a One Day ticket they were already familiar
with.

There are further big changes proposed with a big increase in
interavailability with National Rail routes - this being partly linked
to the development of the Overground Network.

Of course there is an incentive to get people onto Oyster - it is about
reducing the need to queue and allowing the card and gates to do the
fare calculation. Unless the ticket machine fare tables have been
re-engineered (and they might have been) then it is not possible to have
differentially priced single fares for the peak and off peak. Well it
*is* but everyone would have to buy tickets from ticket offices which is
not exactly a good idea.

As for a Ken poster then so what? He's in charge now - he wasn't when we
designed the system and negotiated the contract. When did issues like
that ever stop a politician taking the credit for current events?
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

On Sat, 10 Jan 2004, Bob Adams wrote:

Which does not answer my original question which was :
Will somebody please explain to me how an Oyster card is an improvement
over a travel card _from a regular commuter passengers point of view_ ?

Do you realise that there are two kinds of oyster, travelcard and pre-pay
[1]? The thread had talked about pre-pay oyster; you're comparing them to
paper travelcards. A fair comparison would be between pre-pay oyster and
paper singles (in which case oyster is a huge win - cheaper and much more
convenient) or oyster and paper travelcards (in which case oyster is a
small win - it's easier to swipe; if it works, that is).

tom

[1] Well, two ways of using an oyster; the best way to think about an
oyster is as an electronic ticket wallet, in which you can keep either a
normal travelcard or a magic supply of singles (ie pre-pay), or both.

--
This should be on ox.boring, shouldn't it?

On Sat, 10 Jan 2004, Paul Corfield wrote:

There are further big changes proposed with a big increase in
interavailability with National Rail routes - this being partly linked
to the development of the Overground Network.

Can we read about these changes, and this development, anywhere?

tom

--
This should be on ox.boring, shouldn't it?

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

On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 19:41:59 +0000, Tom Anderson
wrote:

On Sat, 10 Jan 2004, Paul Corfield wrote:

There are further big changes proposed with a big increase in
interavailability with National Rail routes - this being partly linked
to the development of the Overground Network.

Can we read about these changes, and this development, anywhere?

if you go to the TfL Website Home page, then About TfL and then find the
TFL Board Minutes section. Recent agendas have included draft business
plans, bus strategic plans, fares policy etc. There is the 2004 Business
Plan which lays out a range of (funding and plan) options including
extending LUL fares to all TOC services within the zonal area so we have
full integration - all for £10m pa. There is also stuff about extending
Pre-Pay and funding mods to TOC ticket machines and gates to allow it to
work.

Select the pdf files as you get all the papers there - be warned the
files are sometimes very big but I find it interesting stuff.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

On Fri, 9 Jan 2004 23:35:14 +0000, Bob Adams
wrote:

In message , Ben and Michiyo
writes
You should only swipe once for going in and once going out. If you can not
make sure you are only charged for one journey and if not ring the
oystercard helpline to be refunded.

Will somebody please explain to me how an Oyster card is an improvement
over a travel card _from a regular commuter passengers point of view_ ?

A travel card just works. No phoning, no unnecessary swiping, no
overcharging, no stress. Is an Oyster truly an improvement for anybody
else other than LUL? If not, why is everybody playing along with this
charade?

I guess three main reasons...

(1) So long as I just go on having the same travelcard that I've
always had, but on an Oyster card, very little changes. I get a
plastic ticket instead of a paper one, I keep the same bit of plastic
when I renew it, and I touch it at barriers instead of putting it in a
slot. Otherwise I use my travelcard just the same way as I always did

(2) Despite some uncertainties and confusion about how it works in
every case, pre-pay should save me hassle: one cash payment in advance
and then I just meticulously touch my card whenever I go out of zone,
instead of having to mess around buying extension tickets. In my
case, the real value from pre-pay will come when I can use Oyster
pre-pay at East Finchley for pay-and-display car parking, a paper from
the newsagents at the front of the station, and an espresso from café
mobile just outside, as well as for my extension fare...

(3) I fund LU through both my council tax and my season ticket -
so if it saves LU money, either by more efficient ticketing or by
reducing fraud, it saves me money as well

Martin

Paul Corfield wrote in message . ..

Recent [TfL Board Minutes] agendas have included draft business
plans, bus strategic plans, fares policy etc. There is the 2004 Business
Plan which lays out a range of (funding and plan) options including
extending LUL fares to all TOC services within the zonal area so we have
full integration - all for £10m pa.

I really don't like the idea of extending LUL fares to all TOC
services within the zonal area. And I'm confused as to how it would
/cost/ £10m pa. It might /generate/ an extra £10m pa though.

LUL fares are a rip-off. A weekly point-to-point season from my Z2
home station to "London Terminals" is £7.70. Obviously it is not
valid for use on tubes or buses or for any other rail journeys but it
works out very cheap for me. I'd much rather buy that basic ticket
and top-up with cash fares where necessary than spend £19-odd on a Z12
weekly Travelcard. However, the beauty of the current system is that
I can choose to buy the more expensive ticket if it suits my travel
pattern better; I'm not forced to.

There is also stuff about extending
Pre-Pay and funding mods to TOC ticket machines and gates to allow it to
work.

A good idea but, IMO, only if the current, much better value, TOC
fares are retained.