|
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
Michael R N Dolbear ) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying : For a single this is unlikely but since in your example even an Z1-6 Travelcard is less than twice a £3.40 fare Look past Zone 6. For me, a pair of singles is over £3 cheaper than an ODTC - there used to be an LT card in the middle, but that got pulled. When is 7DTC capping coming in on Oyster? |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
On 31/10/05 12:49 am, in article ,
"James Farrar" wrote: Giving a *bigger* discount is a *rip-off*? Yes, because the base fare which the discount is being applied to is unreasonably high. It isn't just passing on the cost benefits to TfL of Oyster to its regular travellers; it's an attempt to force everyone to use oyster pre-pay regardless of whether they want to or not. To quote from the official tfl press release:- The Mayor wants to build on the success of Oyster by encouraging more passengers to use Oyster to pay as they go, rather than cash, to make journeys quicker and easier. If it's such a success, why do we need to coerce people into using it? The truth is it isn't a success, in the sense that not enough people from TfL's point of view are using it. Single cash fares will increase to support the drive to shift passengers from cash to Oyster. * Cash single fares rise to encourage the switch to Oyster. The minimum Tube adult cash fare rises to £3 and the cash single bus or tram fare to £1.50 [snip] Speaking at City Hall, the Mayor said: "This proposed fares package focuses on halving the number of cash journeys made in 2006, to speed up journeys and improve the efficiency of the network. Now, why not just pass on the savings from Oyster efficiencies to Oyster users instead? Then there would be no ludicrous £3 short hop tube fare. Switch and save money The simple message is that you don't have to pay the new cash fares - switch to Oyster and pay as you go and you will save money as well as time. As has been pointed out here, some people, myself included, will from time to time pay cash. We will be ripped off. If it was really possible that "you don't have to pay the new cash fares" they should stop taking cash. -- U n d e r a c h i e v e r |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
|
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
In article ,
(Paul Corfield) wrote: On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 15:16 +0000 (GMT Standard Time), (Colin Rosenstiel) wrote: In article , (James Farrar) wrote: So why are you worrying about tube singles? Because on occasion, e.g. twice (on the same visit) this year I couldn't use Travelcards because they only work with day return tickets from Cambridge and I needed to make journeys beyond what is permitted on a Saver Return to Underground Zones 1 and 2. Yesterday and today I am making such journeys within what is permitted and don't need to buy any singles. I suspect you will still disagree on the basis of "too much hassle" but given that you need an element of "beyond Z12" flexibility I would still have an Oyster Pre-Pay and load it with the bare minimum amount of value for the trips you are likely to make and on the final trip allow the card to go negative. This means you get discounted fares and value from the deposit - i.e. you're using it rather than TfL banking it. When you next need to use the card you simply top up again. This obviously requires a bit of calculation and forward planning on your part and you could legitimately say "why should I have to worry" but there are "tunes" you can play with the Oyster concept if you so wish. Actually, all my non-travelcard travel in London is in Zones 1 and 2 (because Putney is on the boundary of Zones 2 and 3). I use one day Travelcards if at all possible. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 12:44:17 +0000, Paul Terry
wrote: In message , Clive writes If you can beat Oyster fares then why are you whinging? I think Colin's point, with which I agree, is that there are a number of types of journey that are more expensive using Oyster. However, whenever anyone mentions this, we seem to be dubbed "the anti-Oyster brigade" by people whose knowledge of travel patterns other than their own seems somewhat limited. They get accused of being anti-Oyster when they complain about a "rip-off" that is, in fact, not charging more to anyone but the paranoid and the lazy. -- James Farrar . @gmail.com |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
I think Colin's point, with which I agree, is that there are a number of
types of journey that are more expensive using Oyster. That does indeed seem to be one point he has made and I totally agree too. It is not the whole argument though, which seems to revolve around his occasionally needing to make a journey that is cheaper with Oyster Pre-Pay than with cash, and the difference being due to increase substantially in the New Year. However, whenever anyone mentions this, we seem to be dubbed "the anti-Oyster brigade" by people whose knowledge of travel patterns other than their own seems somewhat limited. You think so? It seems to me that most people actually acknowledge this issue and where heated discussion arises it is where the root of someones argument is actually, and I paraphrase, "I could use Oyster but I choose not to". Fine by me and most others I've seen contributing on here. However when the argument is extended to what seems to be little more than "I could use Oyster but I choose not to, but I don't want to be penalised for that choice" then that is where a lot of people feel the argument is extremely weak. Personally, I am not "anti Oyster" at all - and I don't suppose Colin is. I just wish the damn thing could actually manage to be as useful as a daily travel card. Unfortunately it remains useless for occasional travel on London's suburban rail network. I totally agree, but I think we should express it differently. It is absence of Oyster that is the issue. Oyster itself is excellent as far as it goes, and it has to start somewhere. |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
|
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
In message , Graham J
writes However, whenever anyone mentions this, we seem to be dubbed "the anti-Oyster brigade" by people whose knowledge of travel patterns other than their own seems somewhat limited. You think so? It seems to me that most people actually acknowledge this issue and where heated discussion arises it is where the root of someones argument is actually, and I paraphrase, "I could use Oyster but I choose not to". Well, I choose not to use Oyster because it is more expensive for the journeys I make within London. I don't think I am unique, this matter has been raised in the London Assembly. Fine by me and most others I've seen contributing on here. However when the argument is extended to what seems to be little more than "I could use Oyster but I choose not to, but I don't want to be penalised for that choice" then that is where a lot of people feel the argument is extremely weak. I don't think you *can* choose to use Oyster if part of your journey within London involves travel on the many TOCs that won't accept Oyster for occasional journeys. Am I wrong? Are you saying that I can *choose* to use Oyster for my occasional journeys from Richmond to Waterloo on SWT? If I am right, I cannot see the *choice* you mention. I can brandish my pre-pay Oyster as many times as I like to the inspectors on SWT, but I will still be given a penalty fare, since the thing is invalid on huge swathes of London's rail network. Personally, I am not "anti Oyster" at all - and I don't suppose Colin is. I just wish the damn thing could actually manage to be as useful as a daily travel card. Unfortunately it remains useless for occasional travel on London's suburban rail network. I totally agree, but I think we should express it differently. It is absence of Oyster that is the issue. Oyster itself is excellent as far as it goes, and it has to start somewhere. Which is why I said I am not "anti-Oyster" - I am just one of the huge number of people for whom Oyster offers nothing but increased expense. Until Uncle Ken can address that issue, the take-up of Oyster will remain limited, and will discriminate (as the London Assembly has pointed out) against many Londoners who don't rely on TfL for their entire journey. -- Paul Terry |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
In message ,
Colin Rosenstiel writes Er, charging twice as much for cash as on Oyster isn't a rip-off? What is this world you inhabit? In the lakes, we would call it reality, but where you come from, where being lazy or anti TfL rules, I expect you have a different name, like blame the other party, because they don't do exactly as we want, etc.. -- Clive |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
On Tue, 1 Nov 2005 19:45:33 +0000, Paul Terry
wrote: Fine by me and most others I've seen contributing on here. However when the argument is extended to what seems to be little more than "I could use Oyster but I choose not to, but I don't want to be penalised for that choice" then that is where a lot of people feel the argument is extremely weak. I don't think you *can* choose to use Oyster if part of your journey within London involves travel on the many TOCs that won't accept Oyster for occasional journeys. Correct, but that's not the situation we're talking about - you're not getting "penalised" for not using Oyster. You would be only if you were buying tube or bus single tickets. |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
In message , Paul Terry
writes Which is why I said I am not "anti-Oyster" - I am just one of the huge number of people for whom Oyster offers nothing but increased expense. Until Uncle Ken can address that issue, the take-up of Oyster will remain limited, and will discriminate (as the London Assembly has pointed out) against many Londoners who don't rely on TfL for their entire journey. And as uncle Ken has pointed out, he has offered to put in for free all the Oyster readers on any NR station in the zonal area but NR are the ones dragging their feet. Perhaps it's to NR that you should really complain. -- Clive |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
They get accused of being anti-Oyster when they complain about a "rip-off" that is, in fact, not charging more to anyone but the paranoid and the lazy. Er, charging twice as much for cash as on Oyster isn't a rip-off? What is this world you inhabit? No. It is lack of thrift on your part not a 'rip-off'. |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
However, whenever anyone mentions this, we seem to be dubbed "the
anti-Oyster brigade" by people whose knowledge of travel patterns other than their own seems somewhat limited. You think so? It seems to me that most people actually acknowledge this issue and where heated discussion arises it is where the root of someones argument is actually, and I paraphrase, "I could use Oyster but I choose not to". Well, I choose not to use Oyster because it is more expensive for the journeys I make within London. Indeed, and from what I can see most people would think that was an excellent reason for not doing so and it would not be the cause of any debate. My point is that the sort of discussion where accusations of being 'anti-Oyster' sometimes come up tend to be triggered by cases where someone acknowledges that Oyster is available and the cheapest option and yet elects not to use it for various reasons. Fine by me and most others I've seen contributing on here. However when the argument is extended to what seems to be little more than "I could use Oyster but I choose not to, but I don't want to be penalised for that choice" then that is where a lot of people feel the argument is extremely weak. I don't think you *can* choose to use Oyster if part of your journey within London involves travel on the many TOCs that won't accept Oyster for occasional journeys. Am I wrong? Are you saying that I can *choose* to use Oyster for my occasional journeys from Richmond to Waterloo on SWT? If I am right, I cannot see the *choice* you mention. I can brandish my pre-pay Oyster as many times as I like to the inspectors on SWT, but I will still be given a penalty fare, since the thing is invalid on huge swathes of London's rail network. Indeed. So clearly I could not have been referring to you in particular. As I said previously the heated debates come about not in cases like yours, but in cases where Oyster is a sensible option that is readily available yet still not used. That in itself doesn't trigger the debate, it is when there are then complaints about being treated unfairly as a result of that free choice. Personally, I am not "anti Oyster" at all - and I don't suppose Colin is. I just wish the damn thing could actually manage to be as useful as a daily travel card. Unfortunately it remains useless for occasional travel on London's suburban rail network. I should say I don't suppose Colin is particularly anti-Oyster either. He is against the idea of there being an apparently excessive difference between Oyster and cash prices for single journeys. I personally think the force of his argument is not matched by the weight of his case but there you go. I totally agree, but I think we should express it differently. It is absence of Oyster that is the issue. Oyster itself is excellent as far as it goes, and it has to start somewhere. Which is why I said I am not "anti-Oyster" - I am just one of the huge number of people for whom Oyster offers nothing but increased expense. Until Uncle Ken can address that issue, the take-up of Oyster will remain limited, and will discriminate (as the London Assembly has pointed out) against many Londoners who don't rely on TfL for their entire journey. I'm not really clear where the increased expense comes in. I also think the discrimination argument is rather flimsy. Most of my journeys have a National Rail component and I don't feel at all discriminated against. I just take the convenience and cost benefits of Oyster where I can. |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
|
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 22:18:36 +0000, U n d e r a c h i e v e r
wrote: On 31/10/05 12:49 am, in article , "James Farrar" wrote: Giving a *bigger* discount is a *rip-off*? Yes, because the base fare which the discount is being applied to is unreasonably high. Another view is that the base fare is the Oyster fare; those who choose to buy paper tickets can pay extra to do so. As has been pointed out here, some people, myself included, will from time to time pay cash. You will choose to pay more than you need to? Why? -- James Farrar . @gmail.com |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 22:06:14 +0000, U n d e r a c h i e v e r
wrote: On 30/10/05 2:29 am, in article , "James Farrar" wrote: Anyone not buying tickets often enough to bother to pay the £3 deposit, If you're not bothered to pay a deposit you'll get back in as few as two journeys, you deserve to pay through the nose. My elderly father makes about two or three journeys per year by public transport in London. He does not 'deserve' to pay through the nose. If he chooses to pay more than he needs to, he does. -- James Farrar . @gmail.com |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
Adrian wrote
Michael R N Dolbear ) gurgled happily, For a single this is unlikely but since in your example even an Z1-6 Travelcard is less than twice a £3.40 fare Look past Zone 6. For me, a pair of singles is over £3 cheaper than an ODTC - there used to be an LT card in the middle, but that got pulled. Not understood. I carried on with the OP's example. If you have a further example let's see the details. When is 7DTC capping coming in on Oyster? Probably never, the complexities, such as ODTC capping day by day, were glanced at in a post on this NG. -- Mike D |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
|
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
Michael R N Dolbear ) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying : For a single this is unlikely but since in your example even an Z1-6 Travelcard is less than twice a £3.40 fare Look past Zone 6. For me, a pair of singles is over £3 cheaper than an ODTC - there used to be an LT card in the middle, but that got pulled. Not understood. I carried on with the OP's example. If you have a further example let's see the details. I'm in Zone B. Single is £4.60 ODTC is £12.40 7DTC is £45.80 There used to be a thing called an "LT card" that was effectively an ODTC except for not allowing use of (non-tube-fare) overland trains within the zones. It was a tenner. It got pulled completely about a year ago. When is 7DTC capping coming in on Oyster? Probably never, the complexities, such as ODTC capping day by day, were glanced at in a post on this NG. Shame. It would be the single biggest killer-app in terms of Oyster functionality for me. I'm not in town every day - but some weeks I can be in four or five times - but I don't usually know in advance how many. Do I start the week with a 7DTC and risk over-paying because I'll only be in three times? Do I go for ODTCs and risk over-paying because I'll be in every weekday and possibly at the weekend? I doubt I'm unique, but it's magnified because of the ticket cost from here. |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
In message ,
Colin Rosenstiel writes In article , (TKD) wrote: They get accused of being anti-Oyster when they complain about a "rip-off" that is, in fact, not charging more to anyone but the paranoid and the lazy. Er, charging twice as much for cash as on Oyster isn't a rip-off? What is this world you inhabit? No. It is lack of thrift on your part not a 'rip-off'. I'm alright because I hardly use the things but what about the tourists? I'm a tourist, what's the problem? -- Clive |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
In message , James Farrar
writes A world when choosing to pay more is not being ripped off. For single journeys, use Oyster or pay for the privilege of using a paper ticket. I can see the disadvantage to LT of paper tickets, they have to employ people to issue them, have to have cash securely collected etc., whereas Oyster can be topped up electronically with no wages to pay and no cash to worry about. -- Clive |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
Clive typed
I'm alright because I hardly use the things but what about the tourists? I'm a tourist, what's the problem? You won't have a problem as you are English-speaking and well-informed, I will make sure that visiting relatives use Oyster when appropriate. I think there *is* a potential problem for ill-informed visitors, especially if they don't read English. -- Helen D. Vecht: Edgware. |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
"James Farrar" wrote in message ... On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 22:18:36 +0000, U n d e r a c h i e v e r wrote: On 31/10/05 12:49 am, in article , "James Farrar" wrote: Giving a *bigger* discount is a *rip-off*? Yes, because the base fare which the discount is being applied to is unreasonably high. Another view is that the base fare is the Oyster fare; those who choose to buy paper tickets can pay extra to do so. As has been pointed out here, some people, myself included, will from time to time pay cash. You will choose to pay more than you need to? Why? Because it gives me a receipt that my employer will refund. I've no idea what a printout of Oyster journeys looks like, but it wouldn't suprise me if it was insufficient proof of the expense for some country's tax authorities. tim |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
tim (moved to sweden) ) gurgled happily,
sounding much like they were saying : I've no idea what a printout of Oyster journeys looks like, I have no idea where to get one from. but it wouldn't suprise me if it was insufficient proof of the expense for some country's tax authorities. Mmmm. A damn fine point. I'd not thought of that, despite having a bloody great big stack of tickets on the windowsill for expense claims. |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
Adrian typed
tim (moved to sweden) ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying : I've no idea what a printout of Oyster journeys looks like, I have no idea where to get one from. Ask someone (nicely) at any open Tube Ticket Office. -- Helen D. Vecht: Edgware. |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
In message , Graham J
writes I'm not really clear where the increased expense comes in. I didn't repeat the whole saga that I outlined here a few weeks ago, but in brief ... Bus to Richmond Station, SWT to Waterloo, tube to office (and return): Using a One-day Peak Travel card: £8. Using Oyster (+ the £5.90 SWT train fare): £11.30 In other words, yes I could use Oyster - but it will be more than 40% more expensive, and it fails to give me the additional flexibility of using most other NR services at no extra cost should I wish to. I also think the discrimination argument is rather flimsy. From the 2nd January, my ODTC will cost £8.40 But if I used Oyster, the TfL component of this journey would go down from £5.40 to £4.80. So, while ODTC is still the better option, I do not get the advantage of cheaper Oyster fares that are being offered to many Londoners, although I think I pay the same GLA precept as anyone else. Most of my journeys have a National Rail component and I don't feel at all discriminated against. I just take the convenience and cost benefits of Oyster where I can. I hardly ever have that luxury. Perhaps one of several nubs of the problem is the fact that transport charging fails to take into account the needs of many of us who now work largely from home - in several of the companies I work for, staff now only go into the central London office two or three times a week (and I only go in once or twice a month). This is environmentally to the advantage of all, and yet such occasional travellers actually pay more - not less - than those who use up power resources every day in their travel. Not much of an incentive to cut congestion in London, is it? -- Paul Terry |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
In message , asdf
writes Correct, but that's not the situation we're talking about - you're not getting "penalised" for not using Oyster. You would be only if you were buying tube or bus single tickets. See my response to Graham. I am indeed talking of a three-part journey from Richmond to central London that involves bus + SWT + tube. -- Paul Terry |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
Helen Deborah Vecht ) gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying : I've no idea what a printout of Oyster journeys looks like, I have no idea where to get one from. Ask someone (nicely) at any open Tube Ticket Office. What do you get? A printout with just A-B for a specific journey, or a full time/station listing for every journey? I'm not sure that many employers really need that. I can't see it being very popular, either with the poor sod that's got to fight through it to process the expenses nor with the person who many not want their exact movements for the last month broadcast to their employer. "Umm, that morning that you had to be up early for the important meeting - why did you enter Piccadilly Circus at damn near midnight?" |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
Adrian typed
Helen Deborah Vecht ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying : I've no idea what a printout of Oyster journeys looks like, I have no idea where to get one from. Ask someone (nicely) at any open Tube Ticket Office. What do you get? A printout with just A-B for a specific journey, or a full time/station listing for every journey? The latter. I'm not sure that many employers really need that. I can't see it being very popular, either with the poor sod that's got to fight through it to process the expenses nor with the person who many not want their exact movements for the last month broadcast to their employer. "Umm, that morning that you had to be up early for the important meeting - why did you enter Piccadilly Circus at damn near midnight?" Understandable. I don't think there's an answer to that one. -- Helen D. Vecht: Edgware. |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
"Helen Deborah Vecht" wrote in message ... Adrian typed Helen Deborah Vecht ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying : I've no idea what a printout of Oyster journeys looks like, I have no idea where to get one from. Ask someone (nicely) at any open Tube Ticket Office. What do you get? A printout with just A-B for a specific journey, or a full time/station listing for every journey? The latter. Self printed from the web site or by an employee at a station (where-ever)? I've been to the web site. Found "Ask Oyster" and downloaded the pdf guide, but still can't see how one is supposed to get a receipt for specific journeys for 'employer' refund. I think I'm going to have to mail them a question, if no one else knows tim |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
tim (moved to sweden) wrote:
"James Farrar" wrote in message ... On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 22:18:36 +0000, U n d e r a c h i e v e r wrote: As has been pointed out here, some people, myself included, will from time to time pay cash. You will choose to pay more than you need to? Why? Because it gives me a receipt that my employer will refund. I don't understand this insistence on having a receipt for a tube journey in order to claim expenses. What happened pre-Oyster? You got a single ticket which was swallowed by the exit gate. So you claimed without a receipt. That's the way it always used to happen for public transport fares, or at any rate low-value ones. There's no VAT to reclaim on fares, so it's just a question of satisfying your employer that your claim is reasonable. Provided the rules are clear within the company, Revenue & Customs should be happy. At least, that's the way it used to work 5 years or so ago in the company I worked for. If managers are spending time poring over claims for tube fares, they are probbaly neglecting more important aspects of the job. -- Richard J. (to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address) |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
Richard J. ) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying : I don't understand this insistence on having a receipt for a tube journey in order to claim expenses. What happened pre-Oyster? You got a single ticket which was swallowed by the exit gate. You asked the blokey (or machine) for a receipt when you bought the ticket... Or attached the ODTC. |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
"Richard J." wrote in message o.uk... tim (moved to sweden) wrote: "James Farrar" wrote in message ... On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 22:18:36 +0000, U n d e r a c h i e v e r wrote: As has been pointed out here, some people, myself included, will from time to time pay cash. You will choose to pay more than you need to? Why? Because it gives me a receipt that my employer will refund. I don't understand this insistence on having a receipt for a tube journey in order to claim expenses. What happened pre-Oyster? You got a single ticket which was swallowed by the exit gate. So you claimed without a receipt. That's the way it always used to happen for public transport fares, or at any rate low-value ones. There's no VAT to reclaim on fares, so it's just a question of satisfying your employer that your claim is reasonable. Provided the rules are clear within the company, Revenue & Customs should be happy. Other country's tax collectors are not so forgiving. You have to jump through hoops to get a piece of paper. Often this means overpaying to get a one day pass.... ....but if they move to oyster as well :-( tim |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
|
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
|
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
tim (moved to sweden) wrote [...] I've been to the web site. Found "Ask Oyster" and downloaded the pdf guide, but still can't see how one is supposed to get a receipt for specific journeys for 'employer' refund. I think I'm going to have to mail them a question, if no one else knows But, given capping, the cost of a 'specific journey' might be 0p -- Mike D |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
Adrian wrote Michael R N Dolbear ) gurgled happily For a single this is unlikely but since in your example even an Z1-6 Travelcard is less than twice a £3.40 fare Look past Zone 6. For me, a pair of singles is over £3 cheaper than an ODTC - there used to be an LT card in the middle, but that got pulled. Not understood. I carried on with the OP's example. If you have a further example let's see the details. I'm in Zone B. Single is £4.60 ODTC is £12.40 7DTC is £45.80 There used to be a thing called an "LT card" that was effectively an ODTC [...] The LT card and the ODTC and 7D prices you mention cover peak (before 09:30) travel. The single fare is the same price 06:30-19:00 so you also need to look at the "shoppers price" where an ODTC would be cheaper. Down my way "past zone 6" means NR, so the single might be cheaper after 09:30 and CDR and CDR+ODTC are also on offer after that time. -- Mike D |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
I'm not really clear where the increased expense comes in.
I didn't repeat the whole saga that I outlined here a few weeks ago, but in brief ... [...snip...] In other words, yes I could use Oyster - but it will be more than 40% more expensive, and it fails to give me the additional flexibility of using most other NR services at no extra cost should I wish to. I don't really see that as Oyster offering you increased expense given that you don't use it, but I do see the point. I also think the discrimination argument is rather flimsy. From the 2nd January, my ODTC will cost £8.40 But if I used Oyster, the TfL component of this journey would go down from £5.40 to £4.80. So, while ODTC is still the better option, I do not get the advantage of cheaper Oyster fares that are being offered to many Londoners, although I think I pay the same GLA precept as anyone else. Yes I understand that but it still seems rather strong to consider it discrimination. It's like people who only use TfL feeling discriminated against because they don't have some of the fares that are available from National Rail stations. Most of my journeys have a National Rail component and I don't feel at all discriminated against. I just take the convenience and cost benefits of Oyster where I can. I hardly ever have that luxury. Perhaps one of several nubs of the problem is the fact that transport charging fails to take into account the needs of many of us who now work largely from home - in several of the companies I work for, staff now only go into the central London office two or three times a week (and I only go in once or twice a month). This is environmentally to the advantage of all, and yet such occasional travellers actually pay more - not less - than those who use up power resources every day in their travel. That is an interesting point and ties in with my thoughts that the whole pricing model really should be up for grabs. Oyster Pre-Pay means that avoiding the need to buy a ticket every day is no longer an argument in favour of period tickets. Annual travelcard would seem to have their merits but I am not convinced the case for monthly tickets is as strong as it once was and seven day tickets must surely be living on borrowed time and probably only being saved by the lack of Oyster roll out onto National Rail. |
New fares from 2 January 2006 - pdf
Michael R N Dolbear ) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying : I'm in Zone B. Single is £4.60 ODTC is £12.40 7DTC is £45.80 There used to be a thing called an "LT card" that was effectively an ODTC [...] The LT card and the ODTC and 7D prices you mention cover peak (before 09:30) travel. Which is when I tend to go in. An after-9.30 ODTC is £6.40 Down my way "past zone 6" means NR Yes, but we were talking about tube ticket prices. There's four zones outside Zone 6. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 05:43 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk