Paul Corfield wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 01:58:28 -0500, wrote:

Right... bear with me on this one. I am on the verge of losing it with the Oyster helpdesk.

My commute to work uses zones 2 to 5. My journey starts at a National Rail station. I then subsequently use the underground.
I dont normally know until the last minute (due to partner's unpredictable shift pattern) whether I will drive or get public transport to work that week so unable to buy travelcard in advance.

So, on a Monday morning I arrive at the station and need to buy a 7 day travelcard.
They cannot sell me a ticket on Oyster so insist I purchase a paper ticket.
The only downside to this is I often (2 or 3 times a week) start my commute home from zone 1.
This is where the problems start. I can't enter the station at zone 1 using my paper ticket as it's not valid.
And I cant touch in with my prepay Oyster as when I touch out I will charged for the whole journey although I have zones 2 to 5 on a travelcard.

For the first few weeks this was a problem (using prepay to enter/exit) I contacted the helpdesk and they credited the cash back to my Oyster card.
However, they now refuse to do this, say I will have to buy a (high priced) paper ticket to cover the zone 1 leg of my journey.
I've even begged the National Rail station to issue me with a permit to travel so I can get my ticket on Oyster at the first available point (when I interchange to the tube) - but they wont let me.
On the one week where I knew in advance I would be commuting the following week I went to the tube station to get a travelcard on my Oyster in advance.
And guess what (which didnt come to light until 4 days later)? The moron started it from that day, therefore making me have 2 travelcards running simultaneously on the same Oyster card for 3 days.
When I contacted the helpdesk they offered me a £10 refund, which would credit the next time I went through the barriers. 2 weeks and FOUR phone calls later they finally added the credit to my card.

Meant to make you life easier? What a f*cking joke.

As someone has suggested the nearest Oyster ticket stop is going to be
the best option - assuming you have one nearby. I think any system
might struggle to provide you with the flexibility you demand given how
unpredictable your mode of transport is for any given week. That's not
to blame you - it's just it is difficult to cope with every possible set
of circumstances.

I can assure you that huge efforts were made to try to get National Rail
stations to join in with Oyster (in terms of being able to sell tickets
on the cards or add value) but the train companies were not interested.
They cannot be forced by TfL to adopt the technology so for now there is
a split level of service between LU / DLR locations and almost all TOC
stations. It is in the process of being resolved but will take a number
of years to implement - sorry.


So don't impose the punishments for not using Oyster until it has been
implemented.

On 28 Oct 2006 17:21:31 -0700, "MIG"
wrote:


So don't impose the punishments for not using Oyster until it has been
implemented.

I do not understand why you see the rules of using Oyster as being a
punishment. It's simple enough - touch in and touch out. There have to
be incentives to make sure that people do these simple tasks otherwise
we might as well have free travel everywhere.

With hindsight the concept of the high charge for non validation should
have been introduced at the start of PAYG not now. The howls of
complaint are only coming because people have got used to a more lenient
system which, if exploited, results in fraud.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

Paul Corfield wrote:
On 28 Oct 2006 17:21:31 -0700, "MIG"
wrote:


So don't impose the punishments for not using Oyster until it has been
implemented.

I do not understand why you see the rules of using Oyster as being a
punishment. It's simple enough - touch in and touch out. There have to
be incentives to make sure that people do these simple tasks otherwise
we might as well have free travel everywhere.

With hindsight the concept of the high charge for non validation should
have been introduced at the start of PAYG not now. The howls of
complaint are only coming because people have got used to a more lenient
system which, if exploited, results in fraud.


What about the £4 singles and extensions for people who live near NR
or DLR and have paper tickets? Aren't they punishment for not using a
system which is not fully available? To me they are. The reasons why
I have ended up with unresolved journeys are entirely to do with this
(ie when I haven't got time to leave and reenter a station half way
through my journey because, believe it or not, I was travelling because
I needed to get somewhere).

Maybe there is a ticket stop selling Oyster somewhere in the opposite
direction from the local station (often there isn't), but why should I
be punished for turning up at my local station and paying my fare in
the most available way?

You're confusing not getting a special offer with a punishment. By that
logic you'll always be punished, whatever you do.

d wrote:
You're confusing not getting a special offer with a punishment. By that
logic you'll always be punished, whatever you do.


So you are saying that Oyster is just a special offer and not the
normal way that people are intended to pay?

So in that case, all the claims about PAYG capping are not true, and
the one-day travelcard has simply been withdrawn, which is a huge
increase in fares.

I don't think you'll get TfL to admit that.

"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
...
On 28 Oct 2006 17:21:31 -0700, "MIG"
wrote:


So don't impose the punishments for not using Oyster until it has been
implemented.

I do not understand why you see the rules of using Oyster as being a
punishment.

I presume he was talking about the fares.

Hint, he said: punishment for not using Oyster.
he didn't say: punishment for not using Oyster correctly.

tim

Paul Corfield wrote:
I do not understand why you see the rules of using Oyster as being a
punishment. It's simple enough - touch in and touch out. There have to
be incentives to make sure that people do these simple tasks otherwise
we might as well have free travel everywhere.

Touch in and touch out within an unspecified time period (and if you
exceed that unspecified time period, you're subject to an £8 penalty).
And maybe at some interchange points too, but nobody seems to know for
sure (e.g., Bank).

What I don't understand is why the presumption is that PAYG users are
trying to cheat the system while TravelCard holders are traveling within
their zones. (If a dishonest TravelCard holder travels outside his
zones and exits the system at a station without gates, what possible
reason would he have to touch out? Why is nobody concerned with his
fare evasion? On the flip side, if the TravelCard holder is granted the
benefit of the doubt, why not treat the PAYG user with the same courtesy?)

It seems like the goal is to penalize infrequent riders, especially
tourists. Tourists generally don't stay in town long enough for a
TravelCard to be worthwhile. Now, when they get lost in the system and
take a bit longer than the system expects to reach their destination,
and they get hit with an £8 penalty, they can't get it eliminated at the
ticket window -- no, they have to call the Oyster helpdesk and then jump
through whatever hoops the helpdesk imposes to collect a refund.

And to add insult to injury, the penalty was (supposedly) set at £4 to
reflect the maximum possible fare, yet the penalty doesn't count towards
a Z1-6 cap. If we're going to assume that somebody who forgot to touch
out might have traveled to the opposite end of the Underground map, we
could at least give him credit for that trip towards his daily cap.

With hindsight the concept of the high charge for non validation should
have been introduced at the start of PAYG not now. The howls of
complaint are only coming because people have got used to a more lenient
system which, if exploited, results in fraud.

But the new, more stringent system is still wide open to fraud.

If you want to seriously reduce fraud, install gates at the stations
that don't have them.
--
David of Broadway
New York, NY, USA

On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 16:08:02 GMT, David of Broadway
wrote:

What I don't understand is why the presumption is that PAYG users are
trying to cheat the system while TravelCard holders are traveling within
their zones. (If a dishonest TravelCard holder travels outside his
zones and exits the system at a station without gates, what possible
reason would he have to touch out? Why is nobody concerned with his
fare evasion? On the flip side, if the TravelCard holder is granted the
benefit of the doubt, why not treat the PAYG user with the same courtesy?)

By assuming that they started/ended their journey where, precisely?

James Farrar wrote:
On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 16:08:02 GMT, David of Broadway
wrote:

What I don't understand is why the presumption is that PAYG users are
trying to cheat the system while TravelCard holders are traveling within
their zones. (If a dishonest TravelCard holder travels outside his
zones and exits the system at a station without gates, what possible
reason would he have to touch out? Why is nobody concerned with his
fare evasion? On the flip side, if the TravelCard holder is granted the
benefit of the doubt, why not treat the PAYG user with the same courtesy?)

By assuming that they started/ended their journey where, precisely?


Within the same capping zones that they ended/started it. That still
inolves taking a fare, which is more than would happen if a travelcard
holder strayed out of their zones.

Why is it more reasonable to assume that someone who forgets to touch
out of the DLR immediately heads for Amersham, having advanced
purchased a ticket from Amersham to Stoke Mandeville, just to try to
avoid paying the outer zone part of the LU journey? (Assuming there
are gates at Amersham, but if there aren't, it's the previous
suggestion. Install gates so that there aren't any places out of zones
that someone could escape through.)

This is not as important as making it possible for people to combine
paper and Oyster without jumping through ridiculous hoops.

MIG wrote:

Why is it more reasonable to assume that someone who forgets to touch
out of the DLR immediately heads for Amersham, having advanced
purchased a ticket from Amersham to Stoke Mandeville, just to try to
avoid paying the outer zone part of the LU journey? (Assuming there
are gates at Amersham, but if there aren't,

There are.

it's the previous
suggestion. Install gates so that there aren't any places out of zones
that someone could escape through.)

Right - so TfL should install gates across the entire GB network? Staying
entirely within the gateline the number of destinations outside London is
huge.

And a lot of stations just aren't physically designed for gates. Try, say,
Motspur Park where the entire station is on the island platform (and the
bridge to it doubles as a route over the rails). Access to the platform is
before the ticket office. There doesn't seem to be any way to physically
install side gates.

Or for some better examples, my local stations of Wantsead Park and Forest
Gate. The former is located on a viaduct and each platform is accessed by
stairs from street level within an arch over the pavement, with no current
ticket office. Where would you put the barrier? Or Forest Gate, where even
the ticket inspectors have to effectively split the "fares only area" into
three - platform 4 (only accessible by going out onto the street), whilst
the corridors and junction for platforms 1 and 2/3 don't leave an easy spot
to create a row of barriers (short of putting the ticket office behind the
gateline!).

This is not as important as making it possible for people to combine
paper and Oyster without jumping through ridiculous hoops.

I agree - it's the price of paper extensions and the lack of one day
travelcards being available on Oyster that I find to be the biggest
irritant.