|
Card clash
http://metro.co.uk/2014/03/16/thousa...-after-oyster-
readers-charge-wrong-card-in-contactless-glitch-4610552/ "Just under one per cent of all Oyster and contactless journeys involve a card clash and we are seeing this number continue to drop each week." Sorry, but 1% seems very high. -- Roland Perry |
Card clash
In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote: http://metro.co.uk/2014/03/16/thousa...r-oyster-reade rs-charge-wrong-card-in-contactless-glitch-4610552/ "Just under one per cent of all Oyster and contactless journeys involve a card clash and we are seeing this number continue to drop each week." Sorry, but 1% seems very high. Profitably so, I'm sure. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
Card clash
On 18/03/2014 11:00, Roland Perry wrote:
http://metro.co.uk/2014/03/16/thousa...-after-oyster- readers-charge-wrong-card-in-contactless-glitch-4610552/ "Just under one per cent of all Oyster and contactless journeys involve a card clash and we are seeing this number continue to drop each week." Sorry, but 1% seems very high. My experience of card clash is an error 94 & the gates don't open. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com |
Card clash
In message , at 17:46:47 on
Tue, 18 Mar 2014, Tony Dragon remarked: http://metro.co.uk/2014/03/16/thousa...-after-oyster- readers-charge-wrong-card-in-contactless-glitch-4610552/ "Just under one per cent of all Oyster and contactless journeys involve a card clash and we are seeing this number continue to drop each week." Sorry, but 1% seems very high. My experience of card clash is an error 94 & the gates don't open. I didn't think that gates were enabled for contactless cards yet. -- Roland Perry |
Card clash
On 18/03/2014 18:28, Roland Perry wrote: http://metro.co.uk/2014/03/16/thousa...-after-oyster- readers-charge-wrong-card-in-contactless-glitch-4610552/ "Just under one per cent of all Oyster and contactless journeys involve a card clash and we are seeing this number continue to drop each week." Sorry, but 1% seems very high. My experience of card clash is an error 94 & the gates don't open. I didn't think that gates were enabled for contactless cards yet. Given there's a not-insignificant trial running, I'd suggest they are. |
Card clash
In message , at 19:18:24 on Tue, 18 Mar
2014, Mizter T remarked: http://metro.co.uk/2014/03/16/thousa...-after-oyster- readers-charge-wrong-card-in-contactless-glitch-4610552/ "Just under one per cent of all Oyster and contactless journeys involve a card clash and we are seeing this number continue to drop each week." Sorry, but 1% seems very high. My experience of card clash is an error 94 & the gates don't open. I didn't think that gates were enabled for contactless cards yet. Given there's a not-insignificant trial running, I'd suggest they are. I'd forgotten about the trial. But it's very worrying that they are charging the credit cards of people not signed up to the trial. That seems to me to be completely wrong, on many levels (for example, it means anyone can join the 'trial' just by proffering their card). -- Roland Perry |
Card clash
On 18/03/2014 19:34, Roland Perry wrote: http://metro.co.uk/2014/03/16/thousa...for-bus-after- oyster-readers-charge-wrong-card-in-contactless-glitch-4610552/ "Just under one per cent of all Oyster and contactless journeys involve a card clash and we are seeing this number continue to drop each week." Sorry, but 1% seems very high. My experience of card clash is an error 94 & the gates don't open. I didn't think that gates were enabled for contactless cards yet. Given there's a not-insignificant trial running, I'd suggest they are. I'd forgotten about the trial. But it's very worrying that they are charging the credit cards of people not signed up to the trial. That seems to me to be completely wrong, on many levels (for example, it means anyone can join the 'trial' just by proffering their card). The Metro story you referenced in the original post refers to buses - CPC acceptance is not a trial on buses, it's been accepted as a fare payment method since December 2012. FWIW, trying my contactless credit card on validators (both on gates and standalone) has resulted in an error message, can't remember which one. There are now posters and signs around the transport network warning against card clash, but I think the message should have been delivered earlier and more forcefully. |
Card clash
In message , at 20:03:09 on Tue, 18 Mar
2014, Mizter T remarked: On 18/03/2014 19:34, Roland Perry wrote: http://metro.co.uk/2014/03/16/thousa...for-bus-after- oyster-readers-charge-wrong-card-in-contactless-glitch-4610552/ "Just under one per cent of all Oyster and contactless journeys involve a card clash and we are seeing this number continue to drop each week." Sorry, but 1% seems very high. My experience of card clash is an error 94 & the gates don't open. I didn't think that gates were enabled for contactless cards yet. Given there's a not-insignificant trial running, I'd suggest they are. I'd forgotten about the trial. But it's very worrying that they are charging the credit cards of people not signed up to the trial. That seems to me to be completely wrong, on many levels (for example, it means anyone can join the 'trial' just by proffering their card). The Metro story you referenced in the original post refers to buses - CPC acceptance is not a trial on buses, it's been accepted as a fare payment method since December 2012. I know, but someone mentioned "gates" (error 94 etc), which I don't recall ever seeing on a bus. FWIW, trying my contactless credit card on validators (both on gates and standalone) has resulted in an error message, can't remember which one. There are now posters and signs around the transport network warning against card clash, but I think the message should have been delivered earlier and more forcefully. That's another message from the newspaper article - the need for such warnings, which are quite frankly a desperate attempt to cover up a massive technology failure. -- Roland Perry |
Card clash
Roland Perry wrote on 18 March 2014 20:47:53 ...
In message , at 20:03:09 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014, Mizter T remarked: On 18/03/2014 19:34, Roland Perry wrote: http://metro.co.uk/2014/03/16/thousa...for-bus-after- oyster-readers-charge-wrong-card-in-contactless-glitch-4610552/ "Just under one per cent of all Oyster and contactless journeys involve a card clash and we are seeing this number continue to drop each week." Sorry, but 1% seems very high. My experience of card clash is an error 94 & the gates don't open. I didn't think that gates were enabled for contactless cards yet. Given there's a not-insignificant trial running, I'd suggest they are. I'd forgotten about the trial. But it's very worrying that they are charging the credit cards of people not signed up to the trial. That seems to me to be completely wrong, on many levels (for example, it means anyone can join the 'trial' just by proffering their card). The Metro story you referenced in the original post refers to buses - CPC acceptance is not a trial on buses, it's been accepted as a fare payment method since December 2012. I know, but someone mentioned "gates" (error 94 etc), which I don't recall ever seeing on a bus. FWIW, trying my contactless credit card on validators (both on gates and standalone) has resulted in an error message, can't remember which one. There are now posters and signs around the transport network warning against card clash, but I think the message should have been delivered earlier and more forcefully. That's another message from the newspaper article - the need for such warnings, which are quite frankly a desperate attempt to cover up a massive technology failure. I'm not sure I'd describe it as a *technology* failure. The passenger has presented a set of cards to the reader, two of which have validity for the journey. What do you expect to happen in those circumstances? If the card furthest away from the reader pad is on the edge of the acceptable range, it may or may not be read. So you might get a card clash (neither card accepted - try again) or you might have the nearest card used for the journey. The failure is the lack of communication for several YEARS, by both TfL and the banks. It took me some time to realise that the frequent mis-read of my Oyster (Freedom Pass) at Tube stations was caused by the RFID Barclaycard in the same wallet. That was long before RFID cards had any validity on TfL services. Neither Barclaycard nor TfL had bothered to warn me. -- Richard J. (to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address) |
Card clash
"Richard J." wrote in message ... Roland Perry wrote on 18 March 2014 20:47:53 ... In message , at 20:03:09 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014, Mizter T remarked: On 18/03/2014 19:34, Roland Perry wrote: http://metro.co.uk/2014/03/16/thousa...for-bus-after- oyster-readers-charge-wrong-card-in-contactless-glitch-4610552/ "Just under one per cent of all Oyster and contactless journeys involve a card clash and we are seeing this number continue to drop each week." Sorry, but 1% seems very high. My experience of card clash is an error 94 & the gates don't open. I didn't think that gates were enabled for contactless cards yet. Given there's a not-insignificant trial running, I'd suggest they are. I'd forgotten about the trial. But it's very worrying that they are charging the credit cards of people not signed up to the trial. That seems to me to be completely wrong, on many levels (for example, it means anyone can join the 'trial' just by proffering their card). The Metro story you referenced in the original post refers to buses - CPC acceptance is not a trial on buses, it's been accepted as a fare payment method since December 2012. I know, but someone mentioned "gates" (error 94 etc), which I don't recall ever seeing on a bus. FWIW, trying my contactless credit card on validators (both on gates and standalone) has resulted in an error message, can't remember which one. There are now posters and signs around the transport network warning against card clash, but I think the message should have been delivered earlier and more forcefully. That's another message from the newspaper article - the need for such warnings, which are quite frankly a desperate attempt to cover up a massive technology failure. I'm not sure I'd describe it as a *technology* failure. The passenger has presented a set of cards to the reader, two of which have validity for the journey. What do you expect to happen in those circumstances? If the card furthest away from the reader pad is on the edge of the acceptable range, it may or may not be read. So you might get a card clash (neither card accepted - try again) or you might have the nearest card used for the journey. The failure is the lack of communication for several YEARS, by both TfL and the banks. It took me some time to realise that the frequent mis-read of my Oyster (Freedom Pass) at Tube stations was caused by the RFID Barclaycard in the same wallet. That was long before RFID cards had any validity on TfL services. Neither Barclaycard nor TfL had bothered to warn me. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I think you contradicted your own claim here If both cards are valid for the journey then you are right that the technology may have difficulty deciding which one to charge (and certainly wont know it has made a mistake if only one tries to "connect") but cards that are not valid for the journey interfering with a card that is, is a failure of the technology and ought to have been designed out at the start tim |
Card clash
tim..... wrote on 18 March 2014 21:57:24 ...
"Richard J." wrote in message ... Roland Perry wrote on 18 March 2014 20:47:53 ... In message , at 20:03:09 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014, Mizter T remarked: On 18/03/2014 19:34, Roland Perry wrote: http://metro.co.uk/2014/03/16/thousa...for-bus-after- oyster-readers-charge-wrong-card-in-contactless-glitch-4610552/ "Just under one per cent of all Oyster and contactless journeys involve a card clash and we are seeing this number continue to drop each week." Sorry, but 1% seems very high. My experience of card clash is an error 94 & the gates don't open. I didn't think that gates were enabled for contactless cards yet. Given there's a not-insignificant trial running, I'd suggest they are. I'd forgotten about the trial. But it's very worrying that they are charging the credit cards of people not signed up to the trial. That seems to me to be completely wrong, on many levels (for example, it means anyone can join the 'trial' just by proffering their card). The Metro story you referenced in the original post refers to buses - CPC acceptance is not a trial on buses, it's been accepted as a fare payment method since December 2012. I know, but someone mentioned "gates" (error 94 etc), which I don't recall ever seeing on a bus. FWIW, trying my contactless credit card on validators (both on gates and standalone) has resulted in an error message, can't remember which one. There are now posters and signs around the transport network warning against card clash, but I think the message should have been delivered earlier and more forcefully. That's another message from the newspaper article - the need for such warnings, which are quite frankly a desperate attempt to cover up a massive technology failure. I'm not sure I'd describe it as a *technology* failure. The passenger has presented a set of cards to the reader, two of which have validity for the journey. What do you expect to happen in those circumstances? If the card furthest away from the reader pad is on the edge of the acceptable range, it may or may not be read. So you might get a card clash (neither card accepted - try again) or you might have the nearest card used for the journey. The failure is the lack of communication for several YEARS, by both TfL and the banks. It took me some time to realise that the frequent mis-read of my Oyster (Freedom Pass) at Tube stations was caused by the RFID Barclaycard in the same wallet. That was long before RFID cards had any validity on TfL services. Neither Barclaycard nor TfL had bothered to warn me. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I think you contradicted your own claim here If both cards are valid for the journey then you are right that the technology may have difficulty deciding which one to charge (and certainly wont know it has made a mistake if only one tries to "connect") but cards that are not valid for the journey interfering with a card that is, is a failure of the technology and ought to have been designed out at the start Or perhaps a limitation of the technology? Are there in fact any examples of RFID systems which can handle and ignore any non-valid cards while processing a valid card? -- Richard J. (to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address) |
Card clash
In message , at 21:32:05 on Tue, 18 Mar
2014, Richard J. remarked: There are now posters and signs around the transport network warning against card clash, but I think the message should have been delivered earlier and more forcefully. That's another message from the newspaper article - the need for such warnings, which are quite frankly a desperate attempt to cover up a massive technology failure. I'm not sure I'd describe it as a *technology* failure. The passenger has presented a set of cards to the reader, two of which have validity for the journey. What do you expect to happen in those circumstances? A properly designed system would instruct the cards to back-off for a pseudo random period, then interrogate again. At that point it's much more likely that only one would respond. Yes, I know it doesn't currently work like that. If the card furthest away from the reader pad is on the edge of the acceptable range, it may or may not be read. So you might get a card clash (neither card accepted - try again) or you might have the nearest card used for the journey. Another, lower-tech, option would be to have twin pads. One for Oyster and another for contactless credit cards. The failure is the lack of communication for several YEARS, by both TfL and the banks. It took me some time to realise that the frequent mis-read of my Oyster (Freedom Pass) at Tube stations was caused by the RFID Barclaycard in the same wallet. That can't be the case, because there's a combined Oyster/Contactless Barclaycard which has worked perfectly well for years as an Oyster on an Oyster-only pad. That was long before RFID cards had any validity on TfL services. Neither Barclaycard nor TfL had bothered to warn me. Clashes have been known about for years - I used to have a door-entry rfid card which I could not keep in my regular wallet as it interfered with the Oyster. -- Roland Perry |
Card clash
In message , at 02:01:21 on Wed, 19 Mar
2014, Steve Fitzgerald ] remarked: I didn't think that gates were enabled for contactless cards yet. Given there's a not-insignificant trial running, I'd suggest they are. I'd forgotten about the trial. But it's very worrying that they are charging the credit cards of people not signed up to the trial. That seems to me to be completely wrong, on many levels (for example, it means anyone can join the 'trial' just by proffering their card). I don't think anyone said they were? They are not charging cards yet, just reading (and currently rejecting) them when presented. Bus or tube? The original article said (about buses): "Almost 1,800 commuters have been given refunds totalling £11,000 after Oyster readers charged the wrong card." Then there's a recent "not-insignificant trial" which from the context is on the tube. So the tube gates must be activated, and accepting payments from people on that second trial (iirc the trial is only for PAYG as season ticket holders didn't qualify). -- Roland Perry |
Card clash
In message , at 09:33:28 on Wed, 19 Mar
2014, Steve Fitzgerald ] remarked: I didn't think that gates were enabled for contactless cards yet. Given there's a not-insignificant trial running, I'd suggest they are. I'd forgotten about the trial. But it's very worrying that they are charging the credit cards of people not signed up to the trial. That seems to me to be completely wrong, on many levels (for example, it means anyone can join the 'trial' just by proffering their card). I don't think anyone said they were? They are not charging cards yet, just reading (and currently rejecting) them when presented. Bus or tube? The original article said (about buses): "Almost 1,800 commuters have been given refunds totalling £11,000 after Oyster readers charged the wrong card." Then there's a recent "not-insignificant trial" which from the context is on the tube. So the tube gates must be activated, and accepting payments from people on that second trial (iirc the trial is only for PAYG as season ticket holders didn't qualify). The discussion I referred to (up there) mentioned gates. That's right. The tube gates which have been recently activated for contactless credit cards, and which must be contributing to the clashes. What we don't know yet is how many of the tube gate clashes have resulted in payments being deducted from a credit card, when the holder also had an Oyster season. That's the mechanism that's over-charged travellers at least £11,000 on the buses so far (plus we have to assume that many such over-charges have gone un-noticed or un-complained about). I don't have exhaustive knowledge but I can't ever remember seeing gates on buses in London recently. -- Roland Perry |
Card clash
In message , at 12:21:32 on Wed, 19 Mar
2014, Steve Fitzgerald ] remarked: What we don't know yet is how many of the tube gate clashes have resulted in payments being deducted from a credit card, when the holder also had an Oyster season. That's the mechanism that's over-charged travellers at least £11,000 on the buses so far (plus we have to assume that many such over-charges have gone un-noticed or un-complained about). None, as the gates are not able to charge live cards yet. Not even the ones belonging to people on the tube-rollout pilot. http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/proj...mes/28751.aspx One of my questions being, how do the gates know if a contactless card presented to them at the moment belongs to a piloter or not? -- Roland Perry |
Card clash
I'm not sure I'd describe it as a *technology* failure. The passenger
has presented a set of cards to the reader, two of which have validity for the journey. What do you expect to happen in those circumstances? A properly designed system would instruct the cards to back-off for a pseudo random period, then interrogate again. I still don't understand how that tells it which of the two valid cards to use. On the theory that the fairly bad always triumphs over the good, I expect the solution will be tin foil hat wallete with an external pocket. My wallet has internal shielding on each card pocket so that none of the cards in it are visible to external readers. It would not be hard to make a modified version of such a wallet with one pocket deliberately left unshielded, so you can use it to touch in without removing the card from the wallet. I understand all the reasons such an approach stinks, e.g., for people who use the Oyster to get to work and a company ID to unlock the office door, but you heard it here first. -- Regards, John Levine, , Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly |
Card clash
In message , at 14:52:30 on Wed, 19 Mar
2014, John Levine remarked: I'm not sure I'd describe it as a *technology* failure. The passenger has presented a set of cards to the reader, two of which have validity for the journey. What do you expect to happen in those circumstances? A properly designed system would instruct the cards to back-off for a pseudo random period, then interrogate again. I still don't understand how that tells it which of the two valid cards to use. If it got an answer from both (with a suitable separation), it could decide to use the season ticket rather than the PAYG. Doesn't have to take just the first one, especially just after it had detected a clash. -- Roland Perry |
Card clash
I still don't understand how that tells it which of the two valid
cards to use. If it got an answer from both (with a suitable separation), it could decide to use the season ticket rather than the PAYG. Doesn't have to take just the first one, especially just after it had detected a clash. I suppose, but that still doesn't help in the many cases where there is no clear reason to prefer one card over another. It seems a poor use of funds to redo the gates when it will only help sometimes. Like I said, people will get wallets that more or less solve the problem. -- Regards, John Levine, , Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly |
Card clash
"Richard J." wrote in message ... tim..... wrote on 18 March 2014 21:57:24 ... "Richard J." wrote in message ... Roland Perry wrote on 18 March 2014 20:47:53 ... In message , at 20:03:09 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014, Mizter T remarked: On 18/03/2014 19:34, Roland Perry wrote: http://metro.co.uk/2014/03/16/thousa...for-bus-after- oyster-readers-charge-wrong-card-in-contactless-glitch-4610552/ "Just under one per cent of all Oyster and contactless journeys involve a card clash and we are seeing this number continue to drop each week." Sorry, but 1% seems very high. My experience of card clash is an error 94 & the gates don't open. I didn't think that gates were enabled for contactless cards yet. Given there's a not-insignificant trial running, I'd suggest they are. I'd forgotten about the trial. But it's very worrying that they are charging the credit cards of people not signed up to the trial. That seems to me to be completely wrong, on many levels (for example, it means anyone can join the 'trial' just by proffering their card). The Metro story you referenced in the original post refers to buses - CPC acceptance is not a trial on buses, it's been accepted as a fare payment method since December 2012. I know, but someone mentioned "gates" (error 94 etc), which I don't recall ever seeing on a bus. FWIW, trying my contactless credit card on validators (both on gates and standalone) has resulted in an error message, can't remember which one. There are now posters and signs around the transport network warning against card clash, but I think the message should have been delivered earlier and more forcefully. That's another message from the newspaper article - the need for such warnings, which are quite frankly a desperate attempt to cover up a massive technology failure. I'm not sure I'd describe it as a *technology* failure. The passenger has presented a set of cards to the reader, two of which have validity for the journey. What do you expect to happen in those circumstances? If the card furthest away from the reader pad is on the edge of the acceptable range, it may or may not be read. So you might get a card clash (neither card accepted - try again) or you might have the nearest card used for the journey. The failure is the lack of communication for several YEARS, by both TfL and the banks. It took me some time to realise that the frequent mis-read of my Oyster (Freedom Pass) at Tube stations was caused by the RFID Barclaycard in the same wallet. That was long before RFID cards had any validity on TfL services. Neither Barclaycard nor TfL had bothered to warn me. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I think you contradicted your own claim here If both cards are valid for the journey then you are right that the technology may have difficulty deciding which one to charge (and certainly wont know it has made a mistake if only one tries to "connect") but cards that are not valid for the journey interfering with a card that is, is a failure of the technology and ought to have been designed out at the start Or perhaps a limitation of the technology? Are there in fact any examples of RFID systems which can handle and ignore any non-valid cards while processing a valid card? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This isn't really the point at which the technology has failed if an RFID can't cope with this then that's the technology that's been poorly implemented tim |
Card clash
"Roland Perry" wrote in message ... In message , at 21:32:05 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014, Richard J. remarked: There are now posters and signs around the transport network warning against card clash, but I think the message should have been delivered earlier and more forcefully. That's another message from the newspaper article - the need for such warnings, which are quite frankly a desperate attempt to cover up a massive technology failure. I'm not sure I'd describe it as a *technology* failure. The passenger has presented a set of cards to the reader, two of which have validity for the journey. What do you expect to happen in those circumstances? A properly designed system would instruct the cards to back-off for a pseudo random period, then interrogate again. At that point it's much more likely that only one would respond. Yes, I know it doesn't currently work like that. If the card furthest away from the reader pad is on the edge of the acceptable range, it may or may not be read. So you might get a card clash (neither card accepted - try again) or you might have the nearest card used for the journey. Another, lower-tech, option would be to have twin pads. One for Oyster and another for contactless credit cards. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Oh yeah I can just see TMOTCO getting that right ;-) tim, |
Card clash
"John Levine" wrote in message ... I still don't understand how that tells it which of the two valid cards to use. If it got an answer from both (with a suitable separation), it could decide to use the season ticket rather than the PAYG. Doesn't have to take just the first one, especially just after it had detected a clash. I suppose, but that still doesn't help in the many cases where there is no clear reason to prefer one card over another. It seems a poor use of funds to redo the gates when it will only help sometimes. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- The gates get reprogrammed software frequently However ISTM that the time taken to wait for the delay between the cards re-transmitting is going to be a killer here - especially if you've three (or four) cards tim |
Card clash
In message , at 18:24:08 on Wed, 19 Mar
2014, John Levine remarked: I still don't understand how that tells it which of the two valid cards to use. If it got an answer from both (with a suitable separation), it could decide to use the season ticket rather than the PAYG. Doesn't have to take just the first one, especially just after it had detected a clash. I suppose, but that still doesn't help in the many cases where there is no clear reason to prefer one card over another. If I have two+ contactless credit cards then I really don't care which of them TfL use, as long as they only use ones I've signed up to my "capped account" of course. It seems a poor use of funds to redo the gates when it will only help sometimes. I think they've vastly underestimated the number of people with more than one 'rfid' card. In the near future there are likely to be lots of people with at least one ITSO card, as well as one Credit Card, even if they have decided to give up on Oyster. Like I said, people will get wallets that more or less solve the problem. I've already had to do that (perhaps six years ago). How many different wallets do they want people to have? And remember that one of the USPs of Oyster was *not* needing to take it out of your wallet to use. -- Roland Perry |
Card clash
On 18/03/2014 19:34, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 19:18:24 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014, Mizter T remarked: http://metro.co.uk/2014/03/16/thousa...-after-oyster- readers-charge-wrong-card-in-contactless-glitch-4610552/ "Just under one per cent of all Oyster and contactless journeys involve a card clash and we are seeing this number continue to drop each week." Sorry, but 1% seems very high. My experience of card clash is an error 94 & the gates don't open. I didn't think that gates were enabled for contactless cards yet. Given there's a not-insignificant trial running, I'd suggest they are. I'd forgotten about the trial. But it's very worrying that they are charging the credit cards of people not signed up to the trial. That seems to me to be completely wrong, on many levels (for example, it means anyone can join the 'trial' just by proffering their card). Neither card was charged, but the gates would not open. Contactless card, oyster card & fredom pass all clash. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com |
Card clash
Like I said, people will get wallets that more or less solve the
problem. ... I've already had to do that (perhaps six years ago). How many different wallets do they want people to have? And remember that one of the USPs of Oyster was *not* needing to take it out of your wallet to use. Right, that's why the commuter wallet has that unshielded pocket. R's, John -- Regards, John Levine, , Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly |
Card clash
In message , at 00:00:53 on Thu, 20 Mar
2014, John Levine remarked: Like I said, people will get wallets that more or less solve the problem. ... I've already had to do that (perhaps six years ago). How many different wallets do they want people to have? And remember that one of the USPs of Oyster was *not* needing to take it out of your wallet to use. Right, that's why the commuter wallet has that unshielded pocket. That's OK if you only have one rfid card you want to use frequently. The problem with the proliferation of such cards is that this becomes increasingly less likely. -- Roland Perry |
Card clash
In message , at 21:17:28 on
Wed, 19 Mar 2014, Tony Dragon remarked: My experience of card clash is an error 94 & the gates don't open. I didn't think that gates were enabled for contactless cards yet. Given there's a not-insignificant trial running, I'd suggest they are. I'd forgotten about the trial. But it's very worrying that they are charging the credit cards of people not signed up to the trial. That seems to me to be completely wrong, on many levels (for example, it means anyone can join the 'trial' just by proffering their card). Neither card was charged, but the gates would not open. Contactless card, oyster card & fredom pass all clash. Yes, that's your experience. Others (albeit only reported in the press so far on buses) is that two cards can be recognised, and both "charged" (although one might be a season, but that's still an overcharge scenario). -- Roland Perry |
Card clash
And remember that one of the USPs of Oyster was *not* needing to take it
out of your wallet to use I don't but I keep mine in a plastic Oyster wallet not with my credit cards. Even without the card clash issue I wouldn't start waving my main wallet around at a station gateline or getting on a bus. |
Card clash
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 06:24:08PM +0000, John Levine wrote:
Like I said, people will get wallets that more or less solve the problem. If only there was a free, convenient solution that everyone is familiar with. Oh, wait, there is! Ask the nice man at the ticket office for a ticket holder. Put your Oyster thingy into it. Carry it in a convenient pocket. Sorted. -- David Cantrell | Pope | First Church of the Symmetrical Internet On the bright side, if sendmail is tied up routing spam and pointless uknot posts, it's not waving its arse around saying "root me!" -- Peter Corlett, in uknot |
Card clash
|
Card clash
David Cantrell wrote:
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 06:24:08PM +0000, John Levine wrote: Like I said, people will get wallets that more or less solve the problem. If only there was a free, convenient solution that everyone is familiar with. Oh, wait, there is! Ask the nice man at the ticket office for a ticket holder. Put your Oyster thingy into it. Carry it in a convenient pocket. Sorted. What it will be OK in a back pocket which you sit on as I do with my paper season tickets? Otherwise putting two wallets in a front pocket is not that convenient as you have to get both out to see which one to use. -- Mark |
Card clash
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 01:38:32 +0000, (Mark
Bestley) wrote: What it will be OK in a back pocket which you sit on as I do with my paper season tickets? Otherwise putting two wallets in a front pocket is not that convenient as you have to get both out to see which one to use. I don't as a rule put things in back pockets because pickpockets might be tempted. But in any case a thin season ticket wallet is so obviously different from a thicker money wallet that I can't see such confusion really occurring. Neil -- Neil Williams. Use neil before the at to reply. |
Card clash
On 18/03/2014 17:46, Tony Dragon wrote:
My experience of card clash is an error 94 & the gates don't open. My experience (several times) is that got card clashes quite often: unfortunately sometimes I got through the entry gate by following someone just ahead, and then found an unresolved journey at the exit gate (which then took me at least 30 mins on the phone to resolve). I have learned from this to keep my Oyster card in a separate card folder to all others, which is a real nuisance. But it seems the only way. As we accumulate more an more RFID cards (my credit card supplier has refused to provide me with a non-RFID version) we will simply have to keep a separate card holder for each and every card. Welcome to the inconvenience of the pay-wave future. -- Clive Page |
Card clash
Clive Page wrote on 21 March 2014 09:34:39 ...
On 18/03/2014 17:46, Tony Dragon wrote: My experience of card clash is an error 94 & the gates don't open. My experience (several times) is that got card clashes quite often: unfortunately sometimes I got through the entry gate by following someone just ahead, and then found an unresolved journey at the exit gate (which then took me at least 30 mins on the phone to resolve). That's a completely different issue. If you wait for the yellow light before touching in, you'll avoid that scenario. I have learned from this to keep my Oyster card in a separate card folder to all others, which is a real nuisance. But it seems the only way. As we accumulate more an more RFID cards (my credit card supplier has refused to provide me with a non-RFID version) we will simply have to keep a separate card holder for each and every card. Welcome to the inconvenience of the pay-wave future. Do a Google image search for "trifold wallet". You can keep two RFID cards in the outer flaps and all the other cards in the centre. When touching in, you just fold out the flap with the Oyster in it. Simple. -- Richard J. (to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address) |
Card clash
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 09:34:39 +0000, Clive Page
wrote: As we accumulate more an more RFID cards (my credit card supplier has refused to provide me with a non-RFID version) we will simply have to keep a separate card holder for each and every card. Welcome to the inconvenience of the pay-wave future. Or just take out the desired card. When standing at a checkout this is hardly inconvenient. Neil -- Neil Williams. Use neil before the at to reply. |
Card clash
Or just take out the desired card. When standing at a checkout this
is hardly inconvenient. You aren't at a checkout you are in the middle of maybe 20 people all pushing top get on the bus or at a barrier gate in the middle of the rush hour. The last thing you want is to hold up a wallet full of credit and debit cards where it can be grabbed let alone the fact that you will be getting jostled by a lot of impatient people. For security and speed keep the Oyster card separate in the dedicated wallet provided. |
Card clash
|
Card clash
"Neil Williams" wrote in message .net... On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 01:38:32 +0000, (Mark Bestley) wrote: What it will be OK in a back pocket which you sit on as I do with my paper season tickets? Otherwise putting two wallets in a front pocket is not that convenient as you have to get both out to see which one to use. --------------------------------------------------------------------- I put my Oyster card/train ticket(s)/passport in my shirt pocket for easy retrieval I never put my wallet there tim |
Card clash
On 25/03/2014 16:44, tim..... wrote:
[...] I put my Oyster card/train ticket(s)/passport in my shirt pocket for easy retrieval I never put my wallet there I put my passport / boarding pass somewhere 'clever', then have a mild panic when I can't instantly find it! |
Card clash
On 21/03/2014 11:29, Richard J. wrote:
Do a Google image search for "trifold wallet". You can keep two RFID cards in the outer flaps and all the other cards in the centre. When touching in, you just fold out the flap with the Oyster in it. Simple. But I *already* have 3 RFID cards that I need to use frequently (Oyseter, Credit Card, Bus Pass) and I've not doubt more will follow when all the banks and credit card companies feel the need to push them at us. A tri-fold wallet won't be enough. -- Clive Page |
Card clash
On 28/03/2014 21:52, Clive Page wrote:
On 21/03/2014 11:29, Richard J. wrote: Do a Google image search for "trifold wallet". You can keep two RFID cards in the outer flaps and all the other cards in the centre. When touching in, you just fold out the flap with the Oyster in it. Simple. But I *already* have 3 RFID cards that I need to use frequently (Oyseter, Credit Card, Bus Pass) and I've not doubt more will follow when all the banks and credit card companies feel the need to push them at us. A tri-fold wallet won't be enough. I was going to try keeping one of them in an anti static bag, will it work? --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 03:28 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk