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?

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.

Given that TfL is a public authority, fares and fare policy must be
'reasonable' with respect to administrative law. IANAL but I don't think
these fares are reasonable.

--

U n d e r a c h i e v e r

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

In article ,
(Colin Rosenstiel) wrote:

As it happens I travelled to

Oops! I must have been interrupted!

As it happens I travelled to East Putney on Sunday night from Cambridge
and returned via Westminster on Monday. Because I travelled after 10am I
could use the return half, or so I thought. See separate posting.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

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

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

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.

In article ,
(James Farrar) wrote:

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.

Er, charging twice as much for cash as on Oyster isn't a rip-off? What
is this world you inhabit?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

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

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