Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
 

On Friday, 18 April 2014 16:56:11 UTC+1, David Cantrell wrote:
For the last few days I've been using a PAYG Oyster card instead of my

normal paper Travelcard.



I did one of my usual journeys - tube from Waterloo to Balham, then

train to Thornton Heath - on Wednesday evening. But the Oyster card

reader at Balham didn't work properly. The gate opened but didn't record

my touch-out, so I've got an unresolved journey.



TfL, despite knowing my email address because that's what I use to sign

in to their website to make sure they haven't ripped me off, couldn't be

bothered to notify me. I only know about the unresolved journey because

I don't trust Oyster and went and checked.



And of course I can't submit my claim for a refund using my normal web

browser which works on every other site. I have to use Firefox instead.



It remains to be seen whether I actually end up being charged the right

amount or not. And, of course, I have to use Oyster again to pick up my

refund. I didn't see any option on the website for "refund my credit

card" or "send me a cheque", they just blithely assume that I use Oyster

all the time, when in fact I was planning on getting a Travelcard

again on Tuesday and not using the trains at all this weekend.



--

David Cantrell | top google result for "topless karaoke murders"



More people are driven insane through religious hysteria than

by drinking alcohol. -- W C Fields

And now TfL want to replace Oyster with Barclay Debit / Credit Cards or whatever. This means that they can directly debit your card with the cost of a journey whether that cost is correct or not. Who will then have the responsibility to correct an unresolved journey for which the maximum free has been charged? And what if a user exceeds his / her credit limit on a card. If NR and TfL aren't that interested in correcting matters then I'm damned sure that the banks aren't. Overcharging and then refusing to refund is tantamount to deliberate fraud - but then the banks know how to do that anyway. But TfL have at least admitted that they make millions from overcharging on unresolved journeys yet still they are moving towards using 'contactless' bank cards. CJB.

Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
 

David Cantrell wrote:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 02:50:13PM +0100, Mike Bristow wrote:
In article ,
David Cantrell wrote:
Tue 15 Apr
09:15 - 10:14 Thornton Heath - Aldgate East: GBP 5.30
18:49 - 19:56 Aldgate East - Thornton Heath: GBP 5.30

The Aldgate East - Victoria Fare is 2.20 peak/offpeak.
The Victoria - Thornton Heath fare is 3.70 peak, 2.60 offpeak.
Off peak starts in the evening at 19:00.
So there are _four_ possible fares for the journey home:
as a "two leg" trip, with both legs peak: 5.90.
as a "single leg" trip at peak time: 5.30.
as a "two leg trip", with the Vic - Thornton leg offpeak: 4.80
as a "single leg" trip at offpeak: 4.10

That means that if I leave Aldgate East at 18:49 I should be charged
a total of 4.80, because I won't go through the NR barriers at Victoria
until after 19:00. But I'm actually charged 5.30.

That looks correct -- the fare is based on when you entered, not left, the
system. So a journey starting at 18:49 is charged at peak prices.

Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
 

In article ,
(Piatkow) wrote:

Go through a gate that opens in front of you and discover the touch
hasn't been registered,

I have never seen that happen when it was definitely my own card that
opened the gate. When a large crowd is pushing through the gate may
have opened for the person in front or the person behind. Even so the
problem is more likely to be somebody trying to slip through as the
gates open for you.

Whatever. She managed it twice in one day.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
 

In article
,
(Recliner) wrote:

David Cantrell wrote:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 02:50:13PM +0100, Mike Bristow wrote:
In article ,
David Cantrell wrote:
Tue 15 Apr
09:15 - 10:14 Thornton Heath - Aldgate East: GBP 5.30
18:49 - 19:56 Aldgate East - Thornton Heath: GBP 5.30

The Aldgate East - Victoria Fare is 2.20 peak/offpeak.
The Victoria - Thornton Heath fare is 3.70 peak, 2.60 offpeak.
Off peak starts in the evening at 19:00.
So there are _four_ possible fares for the journey home:
as a "two leg" trip, with both legs peak: 5.90.
as a "single leg" trip at peak time: 5.30.
as a "two leg trip", with the Vic - Thornton leg offpeak: 4.80
as a "single leg" trip at offpeak: 4.10

That means that if I leave Aldgate East at 18:49 I should be charged
a total of 4.80, because I won't go through the NR barriers at Victoria
until after 19:00. But I'm actually charged 5.30.

That looks correct -- the fare is based on when you entered, not left, the
system. So a journey starting at 18:49 is charged at peak prices.

The difference is if the journey is split into two. I am not clear why this
journey might or might not be so split, given that touch out and in at
Victoria must happen.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
 

In article ,
(Peter Johnson) wrote:

On Wed, 23 Apr 2014 18:08:41 +0100, Paul Corfield
wrote:

However the alternative is that thousands of journey combinations are
priced via Zone 1 *regardless* of the fact that for a lot of journeys
orbital routes avoiding Zone 1 are now feasible. The DLR and
Overground have facilitated a lot of that extra choice.

I, for one, would object enormously to be charged via Zone 1 when I'd
never been through the centre! If I *do* go via Zone 1 then fair
enough I'll pay the extension fare but at least I've decided to do
that rather than some system imposing it on me even when I have *not*
been via Zone. If I need to tap a pink reader to stay in the rule set
then that's OK, if a little tiresome.

I came up against that at Willesden Junction when the new
inter-platform route was opened; I used it but there is no pink reader
there and no warning that it must be used. There was no way that I
could have got from Stonebridge Park to Kew in the time taken if I had
gone via Zone 1 but neither LOR nor TfL were interested in putting
things right.

I thought the pink validator was on the route between those lines at
Willesden Junction? It was somewhere around there when I had to walk from
the LO platforms and back to use it.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
 

In article ,
(David Cantrell) wrote:

*Subject:* Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
*From:* David Cantrell
*Date:* Thu, 24 Apr 2014 12:44:59 +0100

On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 09:46:19AM -0500,
wrote:
In article ,
(David Cantrell) wrote:
Oh, there are lots of other things displayed. But unless I stop
and look
carefully while people queue up behind me, and then pull my phone
out,
navigate to the right page on TfL's website, and carefully
compare the
two - the "information" isn't useful information at all.
It tells you the fare deducted and the new card balance if it's not
one of the old gates.

Not useful, unless you're in the tiny minority that have memorised
what
the fares should be and who know what their card balance is at all
times. And you still have to stop and bend down to see what it says
while the person behind is trying to push you through the gate because
they're not expecting you to stop and admire the scenery.

I think you exaggerate somewhat. The gates that tell are easy enough to with
minimal delay. Most in central London don't give out the information though.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
 

wrote:
In article
,
(Recliner) wrote:

David Cantrell wrote:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 02:50:13PM +0100, Mike Bristow wrote:
In article ,
David Cantrell wrote:
Tue 15 Apr
09:15 - 10:14 Thornton Heath - Aldgate East: GBP 5.30
18:49 - 19:56 Aldgate East - Thornton Heath: GBP 5.30

The Aldgate East - Victoria Fare is 2.20 peak/offpeak.
The Victoria - Thornton Heath fare is 3.70 peak, 2.60 offpeak.
Off peak starts in the evening at 19:00.
So there are _four_ possible fares for the journey home:
as a "two leg" trip, with both legs peak: 5.90.
as a "single leg" trip at peak time: 5.30.
as a "two leg trip", with the Vic - Thornton leg offpeak: 4.80
as a "single leg" trip at offpeak: 4.10

That means that if I leave Aldgate East at 18:49 I should be charged
a total of 4.80, because I won't go through the NR barriers at Victoria
until after 19:00. But I'm actually charged 5.30.

That looks correct -- the fare is based on when you entered, not left, the
system. So a journey starting at 18:49 is charged at peak prices.

The difference is if the journey is split into two. I am not clear why this
journey might or might not be so split, given that touch out and in at
Victoria must happen.

Presumably it's an OSI, so it would be treated as one peak journey.

Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
 

In article
,
(Recliner) wrote:

wrote:
In article
,
(Recliner) wrote:

David Cantrell wrote:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 02:50:13PM +0100, Mike Bristow wrote:
In article ,
David Cantrell wrote:
Tue 15 Apr
09:15 - 10:14 Thornton Heath - Aldgate East: GBP 5.30
18:49 - 19:56 Aldgate East - Thornton Heath: GBP 5.30

The Aldgate East - Victoria Fare is 2.20 peak/offpeak.
The Victoria - Thornton Heath fare is 3.70 peak, 2.60 offpeak.
Off peak starts in the evening at 19:00.
So there are _four_ possible fares for the journey home:
as a "two leg" trip, with both legs peak: 5.90.
as a "single leg" trip at peak time: 5.30.
as a "two leg trip", with the Vic - Thornton leg offpeak: 4.80
as a "single leg" trip at offpeak: 4.10

That means that if I leave Aldgate East at 18:49 I should be charged
a total of 4.80, because I won't go through the NR barriers at
Victoria until after 19:00. But I'm actually charged 5.30.

That looks correct -- the fare is based on when you entered, not left,
the system. So a journey starting at 18:49 is charged at peak prices.

The difference is if the journey is split into two. I am not clear
why this journey might or might not be so split, given that touch
out and in at Victoria must happen.

Presumably it's an OSI, so it would be treated as one peak journey.

Indeed, but one example given in this thread managed to notice the
possibility of splitting and did so to minimise the fare.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
 

In article ,
(Paul Corfield) wrote:

On Thu, 24 Apr 2014 10:47:36 -0500, wrote:

In article ,
(Peter Johnson) wrote:

On Wed, 23 Apr 2014 18:08:41 +0100, Paul Corfield
wrote:

However the alternative is that thousands of journey combinations are
priced via Zone 1 *regardless* of the fact that for a lot of journeys
orbital routes avoiding Zone 1 are now feasible. The DLR and
Overground have facilitated a lot of that extra choice.

I, for one, would object enormously to be charged via Zone 1 when I'd
never been through the centre! If I *do* go via Zone 1 then fair
enough I'll pay the extension fare but at least I've decided to do
that rather than some system imposing it on me even when I have *not*
been via Zone. If I need to tap a pink reader to stay in the rule set
then that's OK, if a little tiresome.

I came up against that at Willesden Junction when the new
inter-platform route was opened; I used it but there is no pink reader
there and no warning that it must be used. There was no way that I
could have got from Stonebridge Park to Kew in the time taken if I had
gone via Zone 1 but neither LOR nor TfL were interested in putting
things right.

I thought the pink validator was on the route between those lines at
Willesden Junction? It was somewhere around there when I had to walk
from the LO platforms and back to use it.

Mr J is correct. There are *two* routes between the NLL and DC
platforms at WJ. if you go the old route down the narrow stairs and
"up and down" corridor then you do fall across the pink validators
(near the stairs down to the n/b DC platform). However if you use
the new link at the eastern end of the NLL platform it takes you round
in the open and you can reach the DC platforms without encountering a
pink validator.

For a while there was a similar issue when they created a new wide
stairway from the e/b NLL platform to the GOBLIN bay at Gospel Oak.
The pink validator is located on the narrow ramp so it was entirely
possible to dash between a NLL and GOBLIN train on the new stairs and
not see a pink validator. I *think* TfL have installed an extra pink
validator on the stepped route. Nonethless it was all too easy for
people to change trains and not validate.

They don't seem to be helping do they?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
 

wrote:
In article
,
(Recliner) wrote:

wrote:
In article
,
(Recliner) wrote:

David Cantrell wrote:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 02:50:13PM +0100, Mike Bristow wrote:
In article ,
David Cantrell wrote:
Tue 15 Apr
09:15 - 10:14 Thornton Heath - Aldgate East: GBP 5.30
18:49 - 19:56 Aldgate East - Thornton Heath: GBP 5.30

The Aldgate East - Victoria Fare is 2.20 peak/offpeak.
The Victoria - Thornton Heath fare is 3.70 peak, 2.60 offpeak.
Off peak starts in the evening at 19:00.
So there are _four_ possible fares for the journey home:
as a "two leg" trip, with both legs peak: 5.90.
as a "single leg" trip at peak time: 5.30.
as a "two leg trip", with the Vic - Thornton leg offpeak: 4.80
as a "single leg" trip at offpeak: 4.10

That means that if I leave Aldgate East at 18:49 I should be charged
a total of 4.80, because I won't go through the NR barriers at
Victoria until after 19:00. But I'm actually charged 5.30.

That looks correct -- the fare is based on when you entered, not left,
the system. So a journey starting at 18:49 is charged at peak prices.

The difference is if the journey is split into two. I am not clear
why this journey might or might not be so split, given that touch
out and in at Victoria must happen.

Presumably it's an OSI, so it would be treated as one peak journey.

Indeed, but one example given in this thread managed to notice the
possibility of splitting and did so to minimise the fare.

You'd need to spend long enough in Victoria to exceed the OSI limit for it
to be treated as two journeys.

Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
 

In article
,
(Recliner) wrote:

wrote:
In article
,
(Recliner) wrote:

wrote:
In article
,
(Recliner) wrote:

David Cantrell wrote:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 02:50:13PM +0100, Mike Bristow wrote:
In article ,
David Cantrell wrote:
Tue 15 Apr
09:15 - 10:14 Thornton Heath - Aldgate East: GBP 5.30
18:49 - 19:56 Aldgate East - Thornton Heath: GBP 5.30

The Aldgate East - Victoria Fare is 2.20 peak/offpeak.
The Victoria - Thornton Heath fare is 3.70 peak, 2.60 offpeak.
Off peak starts in the evening at 19:00.
So there are _four_ possible fares for the journey home:
as a "two leg" trip, with both legs peak: 5.90.
as a "single leg" trip at peak time: 5.30.
as a "two leg trip", with the Vic - Thornton leg offpeak: 4.80
as a "single leg" trip at offpeak: 4.10

That means that if I leave Aldgate East at 18:49 I should be charged
a total of 4.80, because I won't go through the NR barriers at
Victoria until after 19:00. But I'm actually charged 5.30.

That looks correct -- the fare is based on when you entered, not
left, the system. So a journey starting at 18:49 is charged at peak
prices.

The difference is if the journey is split into two. I am not clear
why this journey might or might not be so split, given that touch
out and in at Victoria must happen.

Presumably it's an OSI, so it would be treated as one peak journey.

Indeed, but one example given in this thread managed to notice the
possibility of splitting and did so to minimise the fare.

You'd need to spend long enough in Victoria to exceed the OSI limit for it
to be treated as two journeys.

Look back up the thread:

Explain this:

Tue 15 Apr
09:15 - 10:14 Thornton Heath - Aldgate East: GBP 5.30
18:49 - 19:56 Aldgate East - Thornton Heath: GBP 5.30
Total: GBP10.60

OK, that looks sane. Same amount in both directions.

Thu 17 Apr
09:07 - 10:16 Thornton Heath - Aldgate East: GBP 5.30
18:41 - 19:01 Aldgate East - Victoria : GBP 2.20
19:50 - 20:26 Victoria - Thornton Heath : GBP 2.60
Total: GBP10.10

Are you saying the cheaper fare on 17 April was only charged because of the
49 minute gap at Victoria exceeding the OSI limit?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
 

On Thu, 24 Apr 2014 01:14:58 +0100
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2014 19:35:10 GMT, d wrote:

On Wed, 23 Apr 2014 18:15:39 +0100
Paul Corfield wrote:
I am amazed that ordinary punters manage to miss those headlines. I
agree it would not be usual fare for tourists to see that info but
then again I've no idea what rip offs there are with the Navigo
smartcard in Paris or Miki in Melbourne.

Most cities don't have to worry about all this nonsense in the first place.
They charge flat fares - problem solved.

And yes it *could* be done in London - its done in new york and moscow, both
of which are larger systems than the underground.

I deliberately ruled out a flat fare as I knew you'd be along to
propose it. :-)

Naturally :) Because it makes sense.

The government and Mayor are forcing TfL to make their rail services
all run at an operating profit and make surpluses to fund some of
their investment funding. New York's transit funding is notoriously
bad and unpredictable and looking at their current budget there is a
massive operating loss of nearly $6bn just on the Subway and Staten

You see there you , the usual railway operating at a loss statistic. No one
ever accuses roads of running at a loss - how much money has the M1 made for
itself since it was built? Not a penny. Its the profits made by companies
using the infrastructure that matters, not profits made by the infrastructure
itself. That $6bn pales into insignificance compared to the money that Wall
Street makes every week thanks to employees getting their by subway. And its
the same story in london.

--
Spud

Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
 

On Wed, 23 Apr 2014 21:07:04 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at 20:51:18 on
Wed, 23 Apr 2014, Richard remarked:
a user should be able to keep to the "always touch in and out"
requirement -- regular, tourist or whatever. It isn't difficult!

There are still bear-traps for the unwary. For example getting off a
train at a London terminus having travelled that far on a paper ticket,
clutching an Oyster for onward tube travel, and using it to "always
touch out" at the barrier line, results in an unresolved journey.

Then I'll add another item to my "requirements", something I thought
of today and David Cantrell mentioned: make sure that NR stations can
do basic Oyster operations. There is, I think, only one system that
can, predictably the one made by Cubic. In its last days, APTIS could
do Oyster with the right extra hardware, but most of its replacements
couldn't. Fixing an unresolved journey and undoing a journey that was
started in error are the least NR should be able to do. Alternatively
give us a smartphone app to do it! (Some places sell tickets
"through" a smartphone app to a card -- I think RMV in Germany can do
this.)

Richard.

Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
 

wrote:
In article
,
(Recliner) wrote:

wrote:
In article
,
(Recliner) wrote:

wrote:
In article
,
(Recliner) wrote:

David Cantrell wrote:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 02:50:13PM +0100, Mike Bristow wrote:
In article ,
David Cantrell wrote:
Tue 15 Apr
09:15 - 10:14 Thornton Heath - Aldgate East: GBP 5.30
18:49 - 19:56 Aldgate East - Thornton Heath: GBP 5.30

The Aldgate East - Victoria Fare is 2.20 peak/offpeak.
The Victoria - Thornton Heath fare is 3.70 peak, 2.60 offpeak.
Off peak starts in the evening at 19:00.
So there are _four_ possible fares for the journey home:
as a "two leg" trip, with both legs peak: 5.90.
as a "single leg" trip at peak time: 5.30.
as a "two leg trip", with the Vic - Thornton leg offpeak: 4.80
as a "single leg" trip at offpeak: 4.10

That means that if I leave Aldgate East at 18:49 I should be charged
a total of 4.80, because I won't go through the NR barriers at
Victoria until after 19:00. But I'm actually charged 5.30.

That looks correct -- the fare is based on when you entered, not
left, the system. So a journey starting at 18:49 is charged at peak
prices.

The difference is if the journey is split into two. I am not clear
why this journey might or might not be so split, given that touch
out and in at Victoria must happen.

Presumably it's an OSI, so it would be treated as one peak journey.

Indeed, but one example given in this thread managed to notice the
possibility of splitting and did so to minimise the fare.

You'd need to spend long enough in Victoria to exceed the OSI limit for it
to be treated as two journeys.

Look back up the thread:

Explain this:

Tue 15 Apr
09:15 - 10:14 Thornton Heath - Aldgate East: GBP 5.30
18:49 - 19:56 Aldgate East - Thornton Heath: GBP 5.30
Total: GBP10.60

OK, that looks sane. Same amount in both directions.

Thu 17 Apr
09:07 - 10:16 Thornton Heath - Aldgate East: GBP 5.30
18:41 - 19:01 Aldgate East - Victoria : GBP 2.20
19:50 - 20:26 Victoria - Thornton Heath : GBP 2.60
Total: GBP10.10

Are you saying the cheaper fare on 17 April was only charged because of the
49 minute gap at Victoria exceeding the OSI limit?

It looks like it, as it made the last journey off-peak.

Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
 

In article
,
(Recliner) wrote:

wrote:
In article


,
(Recliner) wrote:

wrote:
In article
,
(Recliner) wrote:

wrote:
In article
,
(Recliner) wrote:

David Cantrell wrote:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 02:50:13PM +0100, Mike Bristow wrote:
In article ,
David Cantrell wrote:
Tue 15 Apr
09:15 - 10:14 Thornton Heath - Aldgate East: GBP 5.30
18:49 - 19:56 Aldgate East - Thornton Heath: GBP 5.30

The Aldgate East - Victoria Fare is 2.20 peak/offpeak.
The Victoria - Thornton Heath fare is 3.70 peak, 2.60 offpeak.
Off peak starts in the evening at 19:00.
So there are _four_ possible fares for the journey home:
as a "two leg" trip, with both legs peak: 5.90.
as a "single leg" trip at peak time: 5.30.
as a "two leg trip", with the Vic - Thornton leg offpeak: 4.80
as a "single leg" trip at offpeak: 4.10

That means that if I leave Aldgate East at 18:49 I should be
charged a total of 4.80, because I won't go through the NR
barriers at Victoria until after 19:00. But I'm actually charged
5.30.

That looks correct -- the fare is based on when you entered, not
left, the system. So a journey starting at 18:49 is charged at peak
prices.

The difference is if the journey is split into two. I am not clear
why this journey might or might not be so split, given that touch
out and in at Victoria must happen.

Presumably it's an OSI, so it would be treated as one peak journey.

Indeed, but one example given in this thread managed to notice the
possibility of splitting and did so to minimise the fare.

You'd need to spend long enough in Victoria to exceed the OSI limit for
it to be treated as two journeys.

Look back up the thread:

Explain this:

Tue 15 Apr
09:15 - 10:14 Thornton Heath - Aldgate East: GBP 5.30
18:49 - 19:56 Aldgate East - Thornton Heath: GBP 5.30
Total: GBP10.60

OK, that looks sane. Same amount in both directions.

Thu 17 Apr
09:07 - 10:16 Thornton Heath - Aldgate East: GBP 5.30
18:41 - 19:01 Aldgate East - Victoria : GBP 2.20
19:50 - 20:26 Victoria - Thornton Heath : GBP 2.60
Total: GBP10.10

Are you saying the cheaper fare on 17 April was only charged
because of the 49 minute gap at Victoria exceeding the OSI limit?

It looks like it, as it made the last journey off-peak.

As would the 15 April journey I expect if split at Victoria.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
 

wrote:
In article
,
(Recliner) wrote:

wrote:
In article


,
(Recliner) wrote:

wrote:
In article
,
(Recliner) wrote:

wrote:
In article
,
(Recliner) wrote:

David Cantrell wrote:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 02:50:13PM +0100, Mike Bristow wrote:
In article ,
David Cantrell wrote:
Tue 15 Apr
09:15 - 10:14 Thornton Heath - Aldgate East: GBP 5.30
18:49 - 19:56 Aldgate East - Thornton Heath: GBP 5.30

The Aldgate East - Victoria Fare is 2.20 peak/offpeak.
The Victoria - Thornton Heath fare is 3.70 peak, 2.60 offpeak.
Off peak starts in the evening at 19:00.
So there are _four_ possible fares for the journey home:
as a "two leg" trip, with both legs peak: 5.90.
as a "single leg" trip at peak time: 5.30.
as a "two leg trip", with the Vic - Thornton leg offpeak: 4.80
as a "single leg" trip at offpeak: 4.10

That means that if I leave Aldgate East at 18:49 I should be
charged a total of 4.80, because I won't go through the NR
barriers at Victoria until after 19:00. But I'm actually charged
5.30.

That looks correct -- the fare is based on when you entered, not
left, the system. So a journey starting at 18:49 is charged at peak
prices.

The difference is if the journey is split into two. I am not clear
why this journey might or might not be so split, given that touch
out and in at Victoria must happen.

Presumably it's an OSI, so it would be treated as one peak journey.

Indeed, but one example given in this thread managed to notice the
possibility of splitting and did so to minimise the fare.

You'd need to spend long enough in Victoria to exceed the OSI limit for
it to be treated as two journeys.

Look back up the thread:

Explain this:

Tue 15 Apr
09:15 - 10:14 Thornton Heath - Aldgate East: GBP 5.30
18:49 - 19:56 Aldgate East - Thornton Heath: GBP 5.30
Total: GBP10.60

OK, that looks sane. Same amount in both directions.

Thu 17 Apr
09:07 - 10:16 Thornton Heath - Aldgate East: GBP 5.30
18:41 - 19:01 Aldgate East - Victoria : GBP 2.20
19:50 - 20:26 Victoria - Thornton Heath : GBP 2.60
Total: GBP10.10

Are you saying the cheaper fare on 17 April was only charged
because of the 49 minute gap at Victoria exceeding the OSI limit?

It looks like it, as it made the last journey off-peak.

As would the 15 April journey I expect if split at Victoria.

Yes, it's one of the mysteries of OSI, which was designed to benefit users,
but sometimes costs them for reasons that aren't instantly obvious. I
hadn't come across this variant before; more commonly, it attempts to
combine two fairly lengthy but legit journeys to create one that breaks
journey time limits, thus creating two (expensive) unresolved journeys. I
really think the algorithm in that case should be smarter, and it should
abort the attempted combination of multiple OSI journeys if it would lead
to unresolved compound journeys.

The Cost and Funding of Transit Systems
 

On Thu, 24 Apr 2014 18:47:07 GMT, d wrote:

On Thu, 24 Apr 2014 01:14:58 +0100
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2014 19:35:10 GMT, d wrote:

On Wed, 23 Apr 2014 18:15:39 +0100
Paul Corfield wrote:
I am amazed that ordinary punters manage to miss those headlines. I
agree it would not be usual fare for tourists to see that info but
then again I've no idea what rip offs there are with the Navigo
smartcard in Paris or Miki in Melbourne.

Most cities don't have to worry about all this nonsense in the first place.
They charge flat fares - problem solved.

And yes it *could* be done in London - its done in new york and moscow, both
of which are larger systems than the underground.

I deliberately ruled out a flat fare as I knew you'd be along to
propose it. :-)

Naturally :) Because it makes sense.

The government and Mayor are forcing TfL to make their rail services
all run at an operating profit and make surpluses to fund some of
their investment funding. New York's transit funding is notoriously
bad and unpredictable and looking at their current budget there is a
massive operating loss of nearly $6bn just on the Subway and Staten

This time Boltar, I am absolutely with you. Much as I would like to
see TfL replaced with a smarter, more humane, customer focused
organization, starving the Underground, buses et al of funds is no
solution.

Transportation (cue the parish language police) systems are enablers
of other activities. Nowhere is this truer than with urban transit
systems. An affordable transit network is a major boost to the
economy.

You see there you , the usual railway operating at a loss statistic. No one
ever accuses roads of running at a loss - how much money has the M1 made for
itself since it was built? Not a penny. Its the profits made by companies
using the infrastructure that matters, not profits made by the infrastructure
itself. That $6bn pales into insignificance compared to the money that Wall
Street makes every week thanks to employees getting their by subway. And its
the same story in london.

It pales in significance when compared the benefits of enabling
working people to reach decent jobs by safe and affordable means.

September 1, this penny pinching madness will affect the rest of the
UK. Network Rail will no longer be able to borrow against its assets
like a private business. It will be subject to the availability of
funds from HM Treasury. The chancellor will have to balance railway
infrastructure improvements against funds for hospitals and schools.

We have enjoyed a period of continual improvement. Capacity has been
increased with improved junctions and enlarged facilities.

Reading may be the last hurrah. It is back to Penney pinching
decline. Single lead junctions anyone?

--

http://www.991fmtalk.com/ The DMZ in Reno

Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
 

wrote:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2014 01:14:58 +0100
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2014 19:35:10 GMT, d wrote:

On Wed, 23 Apr 2014 18:15:39 +0100
Paul Corfield wrote:
I am amazed that ordinary punters manage to miss those headlines. I
agree it would not be usual fare for tourists to see that info but
then again I've no idea what rip offs there are with the Navigo
smartcard in Paris or Miki in Melbourne.

Most cities don't have to worry about all this nonsense in the first place.
They charge flat fares - problem solved.

And yes it *could* be done in London - its done in new york and moscow, both
of which are larger systems than the underground.

I deliberately ruled out a flat fare as I knew you'd be along to
propose it. :-)

Naturally :) Because it makes sense.

The government and Mayor are forcing TfL to make their rail services
all run at an operating profit and make surpluses to fund some of
their investment funding. New York's transit funding is notoriously
bad and unpredictable and looking at their current budget there is a
massive operating loss of nearly $6bn just on the Subway and Staten

You see there you , the usual railway operating at a loss statistic. No one
ever accuses roads of running at a loss - how much money has the M1 made for
itself since it was built? Not a penny. Its the profits made by companies
using the infrastructure that matters, not profits made by the infrastructure
itself. That $6bn pales into insignificance compared to the money that Wall
Street makes every week thanks to employees getting their by subway. And its
the same story in london.

Presumably you're ignoring the taxes and duties made on road vehicle sales,
fuel and ownership, all of which rise with more roads and their usage?
They greatly exceed the cost of building and maintaining roads. Roads make
a clear direct profit for the Treasury and the economy, while railway
investment has to rely on more intangible questions of overall societal
business benefits, which may well be huge, but are hard to measure, let
alone predict. Hence the HS2 debate.

The Cost and Funding of Transit Systems
 

On 25/04/2014 07:12, Hils wrote:
On 2014-04-25 02:22, Aurora wrote:
September 1, this penny pinching madness will affect the rest of the
UK. Network Rail will no longer be able to borrow against its assets
like a private business. It will be subject to the availability of
funds from HM Treasury. The chancellor will have to balance railway
infrastructure improvements against funds for hospitals and schools.

We have enjoyed a period of continual improvement. Capacity has been
increased with improved junctions and enlarged facilities.

Reading may be the last hurrah. It is back to Penney pinching
decline. Single lead junctions anyone?

I wouldn't bank on there being many new hospitals or schools either. The
oligarchs don't want taxpayers money to do anything useful like build
public infrastructure when they can get it into their own pockets directly.

I see comments like this all over the Internet on all kinds of subjects.
When are we going to do something about it?

--
Myth, after all, is what we believe naturally. History is what we must
painfully learn and struggle to remember. -Albert Goldman

The Cost and Funding of Transit Systems
 

Hils wrote:
On 2014-04-25 02:22, Aurora wrote:
September 1, this penny pinching madness will affect the rest of the
UK. Network Rail will no longer be able to borrow against its assets
like a private business. It will be subject to the availability of
funds from HM Treasury. The chancellor will have to balance railway
infrastructure improvements against funds for hospitals and schools.

We have enjoyed a period of continual improvement. Capacity has been
increased with improved junctions and enlarged facilities.

Reading may be the last hurrah. It is back to Penney pinching
decline. Single lead junctions anyone?

I wouldn't bank on there being many new hospitals or schools either. The
oligarchs don't want taxpayers money to do anything useful like build
public infrastructure when they can get it into their own pockets directly.

Those mysterious oligarchs are obviously deeply incompetent:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-23080327
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-s...wales-26526380
http://www.theconstructionindex.co.u...-hs2-engineers
http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/imperialwest
http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news...-queen-4870398
http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/wy...-trust-6293381
http://www.papworthhospital.nhs.uk/c...worth_hospital
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...-fife-26465478

The Cost and Funding of Transit Systems
 

On 2014-04-25 08:51, Recliner wrote:
Hils wrote:
On 2014-04-25 02:22, Aurora wrote:
September 1, this penny pinching madness will affect the rest of the
UK. Network Rail will no longer be able to borrow against its assets
like a private business. It will be subject to the availability of
funds from HM Treasury. The chancellor will have to balance railway
infrastructure improvements against funds for hospitals and schools.

We have enjoyed a period of continual improvement. Capacity has been
increased with improved junctions and enlarged facilities.

Reading may be the last hurrah. It is back to Penney pinching
decline. Single lead junctions anyone?

I wouldn't bank on there being many new hospitals or schools either. The
oligarchs don't want taxpayers money to do anything useful like build
public infrastructure when they can get it into their own pockets directly.

Those mysterious oligarchs are obviously deeply incompetent:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-23080327

Refurbishing or replacing existing schools.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-s...wales-26526380

Wales. Old Labour. :-)

http://www.theconstructionindex.co.u...-hs2-engineers

"Plans... intention..." And who needs HS2 anyway? :-)

http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news...-queen-4870398

"Private Finance Initiative".

http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/wy...-trust-6293381

"Private Finance Initiative". Costs were cut not by throwing out the PFI
but by reducing the size of the hospital originally planned.

http://www.papworthhospital.nhs.uk/c...worth_hospital

"PFI".

I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't PFIs resulted
in taxpayers paying huge amounts into hedge funds for the hire of
hospitals and schools?[*] Let me guess... the Conservative-led
coalition's PFIs will be different from New Labour's PFIs...

BTW most of the projects mentioned are replacements for existing
facilities. This may not meet everyone's idea of "new" since few
additional hospital beds or school places are likely to result.
[*] One of my friends teaches at a PFI school. If the teachers organise
any event outside strict school hours, they have to organise it well in
advance through a Japanese facilities management company. I daresay the
investors, managers and investment managers of the facilities management
company like this arrangement, but ISTM that it sucks.

Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
 

In article
,
(Recliner) wrote:

Yes, it's one of the mysteries of OSI, which was designed to benefit
users, but sometimes costs them for reasons that aren't instantly obvious.
I hadn't come across this variant before; more commonly, it attempts to
combine two fairly lengthy but legit journeys to create one that breaks
journey time limits, thus creating two (expensive) unresolved journeys. I
really think the algorithm in that case should be smarter, and it should
abort the attempted combination of multiple OSI journeys if it would lead
to unresolved compound journeys.

I agree. OSIs are nothing like as helpful as they are touted and should have
sanity checks. In fact any putative unresolved journey should be subject to
sanity checks for possibly legitimate journeys. I realise that may be
impossible for the original Oyster technology but the system is changing.
The helpline should be a lot more generous about refunds in the meantime.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
 

On Thu, 24 Apr 2014 10:47:36 -0500, wrote:
Not useful, unless you're in the tiny minority that have memorised
what
the fares should be and who know what their card balance is at all
times. And you still have to stop and bend down to see what it says
while the person behind is trying to push you through the gate because
they're not expecting you to stop and admire the scenery.

I think you exaggerate somewhat. The gates that tell are easy enough to with
minimal delay. Most in central London don't give out the information though.

The older pneumatic gates should have a display on exit like the one
in http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ter-Reader.jpg

Is VAT still charged on motor insurance policies? A very nice earner for The Treasury.

Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
 

wrote

(Recliner) wrote:

Yes, it's one of the mysteries of OSI, which was designed to benefit
users, but sometimes costs them for reasons that aren't instantly
obvious. I hadn't come across this variant before; more commonly, it
attempts to combine two fairly lengthy but legit journeys to create one
that breaks journey time limits, thus creating two (expensive)
unresolved journeys. I really think the algorithm in that case should be
smarter, and it should
abort the attempted combination of multiple OSI journeys if it would lead
to unresolved compound journeys.

I agree. OSIs are nothing like as helpful as they are touted and should
have
sanity checks. In fact any putative unresolved journey should be subject to
sanity checks for possibly legitimate journeys. I realise that may be
impossible for the original Oyster technology but the system is changing.
The helpline should be a lot more generous about refunds in the meantime.


As noted elsethread the contactless card implementation should be able to do
better since it can see the whole day.
Oyster has to make its decisions step by step with a possible batch refund
the next day - do these still occur ?


--
Mike D

Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
 

Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
 

In article ,
(David Walters) wrote:

On Thu, 24 Apr 2014 10:47:36 -0500, wrote:
Not useful, unless you're in the tiny minority that have memorised what
the fares should be and who know what their card balance is at all
times. And you still have to stop and bend down to see what it says
while the person behind is trying to push you through the gate because
they're not expecting you to stop and admire the scenery.

I think you exaggerate somewhat. The gates that tell are easy
enough to with minimal delay. Most in central London don't give out
the information though.

The older pneumatic gates should have a display on exit like the onein
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ter-Reader.jpg

I'm not sure they all have that display next to the touch pad. I think they
didn't use to.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
 

On Thu, 24 Apr 2014 20:34:46 -0500
Recliner wrote:
Presumably you're ignoring the taxes and duties made on road vehicle sales,
fuel and ownership, all of which rise with more roads and their usage?
They greatly exceed the cost of building and maintaining roads. Roads make
a clear direct profit for the Treasury and the economy, while railway

Got any proof of that? Ie returns on vehicle tax and fuel vs road maintenance
and building budget.

--
Spud

Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
 

On Thu, 24 Apr 2014 23:18:16 +0100
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2014 18:47:07 GMT, d wrote:
Naturally :) Because it makes sense.

Modest as ever I see.

One tries, but its so hard sometimes surrounded by intellectual pygmies ;)

I don't disagree with what you say but I'm not the person who has to
be persuaded.

Fair enough.

--
Spud

The Cost and Funding of Transit Systems
 

On Thu, 24 Apr 2014 18:22:44 -0700
Aurora wrote:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2014 18:47:07 GMT, d wrote:
The government and Mayor are forcing TfL to make their rail services
all run at an operating profit and make surpluses to fund some of
their investment funding. New York's transit funding is notoriously
bad and unpredictable and looking at their current budget there is a
massive operating loss of nearly $6bn just on the Subway and Staten

This time Boltar, I am absolutely with you. Much as I would like to

Boltar? Never heard of him. Sounds like the sort of name someone who was
usually right would have though...

September 1, this penny pinching madness will affect the rest of the
UK. Network Rail will no longer be able to borrow against its assets
like a private business. It will be subject to the availability of
funds from HM Treasury. The chancellor will have to balance railway
infrastructure improvements against funds for hospitals and schools.

Nothing the treasury does surprised me. Bunch of washed up idiots with no
clue about basic economics its seems to me. Any idiot can cut everything
tory style of empty the piggy bank labour style, it takes someone smart to
figure out a 3rd option.

--
Spud

Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
 

On Fri, 25 Apr 2014 13:38:19 -0500, wrote:
In article ,
(David Walters) wrote:

On Thu, 24 Apr 2014 10:47:36 -0500, wrote:
Not useful, unless you're in the tiny minority that have memorised what
the fares should be and who know what their card balance is at all
times. And you still have to stop and bend down to see what it says
while the person behind is trying to push you through the gate because
they're not expecting you to stop and admire the scenery.

I think you exaggerate somewhat. The gates that tell are easy
enough to with minimal delay. Most in central London don't give out
the information though.

The older pneumatic gates should have a display on exit like the onein
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ter-Reader.jpg

I'm not sure they all have that display next to the touch pad. I think they
didn't use to.

I've not seen an exit gate without one. Too often I find an exit gate
where the display is broken or shows 'CLOSED'. Occasionally I've reported
it to the ticket line staff but they don't seem to care.

Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
 

wrote in message ...

In article ,
(David Cantrell) wrote:

*Subject:* Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
*From:* David Cantrell
*Date:* Thu, 24 Apr 2014 12:44:59 +0100

On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 09:46:19AM -0500,
wrote:
In article ,
(David Cantrell) wrote:
Oh, there are lots of other things displayed. But unless I stop
and look
carefully while people queue up behind me, and then pull my phone
out,
navigate to the right page on TfL's website, and carefully
compare the
two - the "information" isn't useful information at all.
It tells you the fare deducted and the new card balance if it's not
one of the old gates.

Not useful, unless you're in the tiny minority that have memorised
what
the fares should be and who know what their card balance is at all
times. And you still have to stop and bend down to see what it says
while the person behind is trying to push you through the gate because
they're not expecting you to stop and admire the scenery.

I think you exaggerate somewhat.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don 't

that's exactly what I have to do to read the display. The character just
aren't big enough

tim

Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
 

Robin9 wrote:
'Recliner[_2_ Wrote:
wrote:-
On Thu, 24 Apr 2014 01:14:58 +0100
Paul Corfield wrote:-
On Wed, 23 Apr 2014 19:35:10 GMT, d wrote:
-
On Wed, 23 Apr 2014 18:15:39 +0100
Paul Corfield wrote:
I am amazed that ordinary punters manage to miss those headlines. I
agree it would not be usual fare for tourists to see that info but
then again I've no idea what rip offs there are with the Navigo
smartcard in Paris or Miki in Melbourne.

Most cities don't have to worry about all this nonsense in the first
place.
They charge flat fares - problem solved.

And yes it *could* be done in London - its done in new york and moscow,
both
of which are larger systems than the underground.-

I deliberately ruled out a flat fare as I knew you'd be along to
propose it. :-)-

Naturally :) Because it makes sense.
-
The government and Mayor are forcing TfL to make their rail services
all run at an operating profit and make surpluses to fund some of
their investment funding. New York's transit funding is notoriously
bad and unpredictable and looking at their current budget there is a
massive operating loss of nearly $6bn just on the Subway and Staten-

You see there you , the usual railway operating at a loss statistic. No
one
ever accuses roads of running at a loss - how much money has the M1
made for
itself since it was built? Not a penny. Its the profits made by
companies
using the infrastructure that matters, not profits made by the
infrastructure
itself. That $6bn pales into insignificance compared to the money that
Wall
Street makes every week thanks to employees getting their by subway.
And its
the same story in london.-

Presumably you're ignoring the taxes and duties made on road vehicle
sales,
fuel and ownership, all of which rise with more roads and their usage?
They greatly exceed the cost of building and maintaining roads. Roads
make
a clear direct profit for the Treasury and the economy, while railway
investment has to rely on more intangible questions of overall societal
business benefits, which may well be huge, but are hard to measure, let
alone predict. Hence the HS2 debate.

Is VAT still charged on motor insurance policies? A very nice earner for
The Treasury.

No, VAT has never been charged on insurance policies. But IPT of 6%
applies.

Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
 

In article , (Peter Smyth) wrote:

wrote:

You'd need to spend long enough in Victoria to exceed the OSI limit
for it to be treated as two journeys.

Look back up the thread:

Explain this:

Tue 15 Apr
09:15 - 10:14 Thornton Heath - Aldgate East: GBP 5.30
18:49 - 19:56 Aldgate East - Thornton Heath: GBP 5.30
Total: GBP10.60

OK, that looks sane. Same amount in both directions.

Thu 17 Apr
09:07 - 10:16 Thornton Heath - Aldgate East: GBP 5.30
18:41 - 19:01 Aldgate East - Victoria : GBP 2.20
19:50 - 20:26 Victoria - Thornton Heath : GBP 2.60
Total: GBP10.10

Are you saying the cheaper fare on 17 April was only charged because
of the 49 minute gap at Victoria exceeding the OSI limit?

The allowed time for the LU - NR OSI at Victoria is 40 minutes. If the
gap between the LU touch-out and the NR touch-in is longer than this,
it will be charged as two separate journeys. In most cases this will
cost more, but in some circumstances can be beneficial.

If it is beneficial, like the second leg being out of peak hours as here,
why isn't it charged that way? Most unfair.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off
 

wrote:
In article , (Peter Smyth) wrote:

wrote:

You'd need to spend long enough in Victoria to exceed the OSI limit
for it to be treated as two journeys.

Look back up the thread:

Explain this:

Tue 15 Apr
09:15 - 10:14 Thornton Heath - Aldgate East: GBP 5.30
18:49 - 19:56 Aldgate East - Thornton Heath: GBP 5.30
Total: GBP10.60

OK, that looks sane. Same amount in both directions.

Thu 17 Apr
09:07 - 10:16 Thornton Heath - Aldgate East: GBP 5.30
18:41 - 19:01 Aldgate East - Victoria : GBP 2.20
19:50 - 20:26 Victoria - Thornton Heath : GBP 2.60
Total: GBP10.10

Are you saying the cheaper fare on 17 April was only charged because
of the 49 minute gap at Victoria exceeding the OSI limit?

The allowed time for the LU - NR OSI at Victoria is 40 minutes. If the
gap between the LU touch-out and the NR touch-in is longer than this,
it will be charged as two separate journeys. In most cases this will
cost more, but in some circumstances can be beneficial.

If it is beneficial, like the second leg being out of peak hours as here,
why isn't it charged that way? Most unfair.

The current Oyster rules are relatively simple and deterministic -- it
doesn't look at all the possible ways of charging for a complex journey and
then choose the cheapest one. It just has a simple algorithm to determine
whether multiple journeys should be combined, and then charges for the
compound journey once it concludes. It doesn't go back and calculate if
other combinations would have been cheaper.

The Cost and Funding of Transit Systems
 

On 25/04/2014 20:32, d wrote:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2014 18:22:44 -0700
Aurora wrote:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2014 18:47:07 GMT, d wrote:
The government and Mayor are forcing TfL to make their rail services
all run at an operating profit and make surpluses to fund some of
their investment funding. New York's transit funding is notoriously
bad and unpredictable and looking at their current budget there is a
massive operating loss of nearly $6bn just on the Subway and Staten

This time Boltar, I am absolutely with you. Much as I would like to

Boltar? Never heard of him. Sounds like the sort of name someone who was
usually right would have though...

September 1, this penny pinching madness will affect the rest of the
UK. Network Rail will no longer be able to borrow against its assets
like a private business. It will be subject to the availability of
funds from HM Treasury. The chancellor will have to balance railway
infrastructure improvements against funds for hospitals and schools.

Nothing the treasury does surprised me. Bunch of washed up idiots with no
clue about basic economics its seems to me. Any idiot can cut everything
tory style of empty the piggy bank labour style, it takes someone smart to
figure out a 3rd option.

--
Spud


It is not widely known that, while the rest of the Civil Service is
headed by people from many universities, the Treasury is almost wholly
Oxbridge.

--
Myth, after all, is what we believe naturally. History is what we must
painfully learn and struggle to remember. -Albert Goldman

Looking ahead to National PAYG (was Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off)
 

In message , at 17:38:19
on Fri, 25 Apr 2014, remarked:
Tue 15 Apr
09:15 - 10:14 Thornton Heath - Aldgate East: GBP 5.30
18:49 - 19:56 Aldgate East - Thornton Heath: GBP 5.30
Total: GBP10.60

OK, that looks sane. Same amount in both directions.

Thu 17 Apr
09:07 - 10:16 Thornton Heath - Aldgate East: GBP 5.30
18:41 - 19:01 Aldgate East - Victoria : GBP 2.20
19:50 - 20:26 Victoria - Thornton Heath : GBP 2.60
Total: GBP10.10

Are you saying the cheaper fare on 17 April was only charged because
of the 49 minute gap at Victoria exceeding the OSI limit?

The allowed time for the LU - NR OSI at Victoria is 40 minutes. If the
gap between the LU touch-out and the NR touch-in is longer than this,
it will be charged as two separate journeys. In most cases this will
cost more, but in some circumstances can be beneficial.

If it is beneficial, like the second leg being out of peak hours as here,
why isn't it charged that way? Most unfair.

Surely this is simply a variation on the theme of "splitting tickets",
which National Rail ticket offices fail to do if you buy for a journey
starting in the morning peak but ending off-peak.

For example, Nottingham-Manchester:

NOT Depart 08.47 £53.50 Anytime Return
MAN Arrive 10.36

NOT Depart 08.47 £23.00 Anytime Return
SHF Arrive 09.37
SHF Depart 09.41 £18.30 Off Peak Day Return
MAN Arrive 10.36

Saving £12.20; you'd have to travel an hour later to get the "through"
off-peak ticket, albeit that saves even more (being priced at just
£29.70).

What's more worrying is that if there's ever a National PAYG scheme,
whether by paywave or ITSO, then it'll undoubtedly fail to volunteer to
save the traveller that £12.20 - unless perhaps they manage to dash out
of the barriers and back in the four minutes available.
--
Roland Perry

Looking ahead to National PAYG (was Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off)
 

In message , at 08:07:43 on Sat, 26 Apr
2014, Roland Perry remarked:
In message , at 17:38:19
on Fri, 25 Apr 2014, remarked:
Tue 15 Apr
09:15 - 10:14 Thornton Heath - Aldgate East: GBP 5.30
18:49 - 19:56 Aldgate East - Thornton Heath: GBP 5.30
Total: GBP10.60

OK, that looks sane. Same amount in both directions.

Thu 17 Apr
09:07 - 10:16 Thornton Heath - Aldgate East: GBP 5.30
18:41 - 19:01 Aldgate East - Victoria : GBP 2.20
19:50 - 20:26 Victoria - Thornton Heath : GBP 2.60
Total: GBP10.10

Are you saying the cheaper fare on 17 April was only charged because
of the 49 minute gap at Victoria exceeding the OSI limit?

The allowed time for the LU - NR OSI at Victoria is 40 minutes. If the
gap between the LU touch-out and the NR touch-in is longer than this,
it will be charged as two separate journeys. In most cases this will
cost more, but in some circumstances can be beneficial.

If it is beneficial, like the second leg being out of peak hours as here,
why isn't it charged that way? Most unfair.

Surely this is simply a variation on the theme of "splitting tickets",
which National Rail ticket offices fail to do if you buy for a journey
starting in the morning peak but ending off-peak.

For example, Nottingham-Manchester:

NOT Depart 08.47 £53.50 Anytime Return
MAN Arrive 10.36

NOT Depart 08.47 £23.00 Anytime Return
SHF Arrive 09.37
SHF Depart 09.41 £18.30 Off Peak Day Return
MAN Arrive 10.36

Saving £12.20;

Thinking about this some more, if you split tickets at Alfreton (on that
same train) you'll save £18.40

you'd have to travel an hour later to get the "through" off-peak
ticket, albeit that saves even more (being priced at just £29.70).

What's more worrying is that if there's ever a National PAYG scheme,
whether by paywave or ITSO, then it'll undoubtedly fail to volunteer to
save the traveller that £12.20 - unless perhaps they manage to dash out
of the barriers and back in the four minutes available.

--
Roland Perry

Looking ahead to National PAYG (was Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off)
 

In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

Surely this is simply a variation on the theme of "splitting
tickets", which National Rail ticket offices fail to do if you buy
for a journey starting in the morning peak but ending off-peak.

For example, Nottingham-Manchester:

NOT Depart 08.47 £53.50 Anytime Return
MAN Arrive 10.36

NOT Depart 08.47 £23.00 Anytime Return
SHF Arrive 09.37
SHF Depart 09.41 £18.30 Off Peak Day Return
MAN Arrive 10.36

Saving £12.20; you'd have to travel an hour later to get the
"through" off-peak ticket, albeit that saves even more (being priced
at just £29.70).

What's more worrying is that if there's ever a National PAYG scheme,
whether by paywave or ITSO, then it'll undoubtedly fail to volunteer
to save the traveller that £12.20 - unless perhaps they manage to
dash out of the barriers and back in the four minutes available.

Surely it's time that train operators were required to offer passengers the
cheapest fares, allowing for options like this and have done with it? Why
should only those good at gaming the system benefit? It's overcharging by
stealth which shouldn't be allowed.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Looking ahead to National PAYG (was Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off)
 

In message , at 05:37:22
on Sat, 26 Apr 2014, remarked:
Surely this is simply a variation on the theme of "splitting
tickets", which National Rail ticket offices fail to do if you buy
for a journey starting in the morning peak but ending off-peak.

For example, Nottingham-Manchester:

NOT Depart 08.47 £53.50 Anytime Return
MAN Arrive 10.36

NOT Depart 08.47 £23.00 Anytime Return
SHF Arrive 09.37
SHF Depart 09.41 £18.30 Off Peak Day Return
MAN Arrive 10.36

Saving £12.20; you'd have to travel an hour later to get the
"through" off-peak ticket, albeit that saves even more (being priced
at just £29.70).

What's more worrying is that if there's ever a National PAYG scheme,
whether by paywave or ITSO, then it'll undoubtedly fail to volunteer
to save the traveller that £12.20 - unless perhaps they manage to
dash out of the barriers and back in the four minutes available.

Surely it's time that train operators were required to offer passengers the
cheapest fares, allowing for options like this and have done with it?

They prefer to sell end-to-end tickets, and have all sorts of excuses
why splitting tickets is a bad idea. Near London, the rule of "train
arrives London after 10am [or whatever]" does level the playing field
for everyone en-route. But in the rest of the country people have a
"train departs this station after 9am [or whatever]" rule, which is at
least simpler to describe even if it provides opportunities for splits.

Why should only those good at gaming the system benefit? It's
overcharging by stealth which shouldn't be allowed.

Ultimately, I suppose, there would need to be a system which made the
"polluter pay" according to the congestion on each individual station
pair. But that would probably introduce anomalies depending on whether
your train was fast or semi-fast. ie the fast train would have to be
high-price all the way, whereas a semi-fast might change to a lower
pricing band halfway home when the first tranche of passengers had
already got off.
--
Roland Perry