On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 00:02:51 +0000, asdf
wrote:

On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 22:15:33 +0000, Paul Corfield wrote:

This is my journey history for last Saturday. I was already expecting
this all to go wrong, and I think it did here... but can anyone tell
me exactly what happened?

http://img.waffleimages.com/e8c5b57a...icture%201.png

I think the main issue here is that you went through two valid dlr - lul
out of station interchanges in short succession. Each time the card was
attempting to treat you as if you were still on your outward journey. As
you have correctly deduced you then got stymied at final exit at Clapham
Common because you exceeded the two hour limit hence the extra £4
charge.

ITYM £8.

Judging from the record I think your charges should really have been

£2 + £1.50 + £1 + £1 + £1.50 + £2 = £9 but then capped down to £6.20.
You were actually charged £11.50 which I think is accounted for by the
£4 max fare less the £1.50 journey not charged between Bow and Clapham.

He was actually charged £13.50. (£8 penalty + £5.50 in normal fares.)

(It's implied by the figures that he started the day with £7.90, but I
think you had it down as £5.90.)

Oh dear - shows how much I know then! Sorry.

I have to say the journey record is bloody confusing as it does not
differentiate between additions and deductions at the entries and exits.
I had to write this down to work out what was going on.

Indeed. The one given on the Tube touchscreen ticket machines is much
clearer - perhaps he could take a photo of that instead. ;-)

And I still got it wrong. I am now going to work it out all over again!
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

On 13 Feb 2007 03:39:19 -0800, "sweek"
wrote:

Haha, he didn't get it at all, but in the end he just said "alright
you seem to know what you're on about tell me how much I should refund
you", so that did work out.

Well as they say - nothing ventured, nothing gained. I have to say I'm
not impressed by the performance of the helpdesk in terms of them
understanding what your concern was.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 19:32:22 +0000, Paul Corfield
wrote:

On 13 Feb 2007 03:39:19 -0800, "sweek"
wrote:

Haha, he didn't get it at all, but in the end he just said "alright
you seem to know what you're on about tell me how much I should refund
you", so that did work out.

Well as they say - nothing ventured, nothing gained. I have to say I'm
not impressed by the performance of the helpdesk in terms of them
understanding what your concern was.

It doesn't surprise me when I learn any "helpdesk" is a misnomer...

On 13 Feb, 19:32, Paul Corfield wrote:
On 13 Feb 2007 03:39:19 -0800, "sweek"
wrote:

Haha, he didn't get it at all, but in the end he just said "alright
you seem to know what you're on about tell me how much I should refund
you", so that did work out.

Well as they say - nothing ventured, nothing gained. I have to say I'm
not impressed by the performance of the helpdesk in terms of them
understanding what your concern was.
--
I have a similar issue that has been ongoing for a month without
resolution. Using PAYG I touched out at an ungated station to meet a
friend from an exhibition, then 14 minutes later touched in to
commence a new journey. I noticed that when I touched in the free-
standing validator stated 'Exit' again, as it had done when I touched
out. I therefore tried to touch in several more times over the next
minute (on the other validator as well), but each time it bleeped,
green light, as 'Exit'. I got on the train anyway (no LU staff at
Olympia to speak to as far as I can tell), and on leaving at
Piccadilly Circus was hit with a £4 penalty.

I e-mailed the helpdesk explaining this in detail - no response after
two weeks. Phoned up, explained it, and the representative stated that
there was a known issue with elapsed time between exiting and re-
entering at ungated stations - the implication being that I should
have left much longer between exiting and re-entering, which is
ridiculous. Refund was promised, but still not arrived. I'm
particularly annoyed given the story on BBC London News this evening
about the number of incomplete journeys being recorded per day (approx
18,000), some of which at least are due to deficiencies in the
programming or operation of the Oyster software network.

On Feb 12, 10:59 pm, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 22:54:03 -0000, "tim....."

wrote:

"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
.. .

This is really quite difficult in that you really made two separate
trips on your outward journey; Hillingdon - Bow and then Bow - Clapham
Common. However the fact you went through two OSIs in short succession
made it impossible for the system to determine that. I could foresee
"officialdom" arguing that you were attempting to use PAYG as some form
of rover ticket.

What is daily capping meant to be if it isn't "some sort of rover ticket"?

Which is exactly what I went on to say!

sigh



If the systems knows exactly where you've been during the more than
two hours, what is the justification for the penalty if you take more
than two hours? Why not at least just charge for a double journey?

Is it because people are suspected of train-spotting, for which they
have to be penalised?

Another question, if you take more than two hours for a journey after
capping has applied, are you still charged £4?

In oups.com,
MIG typed:
On Feb 12, 10:59 pm, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 22:54:03 -0000, "tim....."

wrote:

"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
...

This is really quite difficult in that you really made two separate
trips on your outward journey; Hillingdon - Bow and then Bow -
Clapham Common. However the fact you went through two OSIs in
short succession made it impossible for the system to determine
that. I could foresee "officialdom" arguing that you were
attempting to use PAYG as some form of rover ticket.

What is daily capping meant to be if it isn't "some sort of rover
ticket"?

Which is exactly what I went on to say!

sigh


If the systems knows exactly where you've been during the more than
two hours, what is the justification for the penalty if you take more
than two hours? Why not at least just charge for a double journey?

Is it because people are suspected of train-spotting, for which they
have to be penalised?

Another question, if you take more than two hours for a journey after
capping has applied, are you still charged £4?


Yes. Such journeys which are penalised with the maximum fare are not
eligible for capping.







--
Bob

On 14 Feb, 10:10, "Bob Wood" wrote:
groups.com,
MIG typed:





On Feb 12, 10:59 pm, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 22:54:03 -0000, "tim....."

wrote:

"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
...

This is really quite difficult in that you really made two separate
trips on your outward journey; Hillingdon - Bow and then Bow -
Clapham Common. However the fact you went through two OSIs in
short succession made it impossible for the system to determine
that. I could foresee "officialdom" arguing that you were
attempting to use PAYG as some form of rover ticket.

What is daily capping meant to be if it isn't "some sort of rover
ticket"?

Which is exactly what I went on to say!

sigh
If the systems knows exactly where you've been during the more than
two hours, what is the justification for the penalty if you take more
than two hours? Why not at least just charge for a double journey?

Is it because people are suspected of train-spotting, for which they
have to be penalised?

Another question, if you take more than two hours for a journey after
capping has applied, are you still charged £4?

Yes. Such journeys which are penalised with the maximum fare are not
eligible for capping.

--
Bob-



I can slightly understand that in a case where someone simply stayed
in the system for longer than the journey should have taken and could
be assumed to have gone beyond the capping zones, had lunch in a place
with an ungated station, then gone back into the capping zones again
(although it's a bit much to be trapped in some kind of delay and then
get fined for it as well).

But in the case described in this thread, the card had been touched at
a number of places within time limits that would have made such a
suspicion impossible. So, as long as someone doesn't disappear
mysteriously, but continues touching in and out within their capping
zones (at "continuation" places like Bow and Canary Wharf etc), what
is the justification for assuming that they could have gone outside of
the zones and punishing them accordingly?

It's not even as if you couldn't do that within a two-hour period
anyway.

"MIG" wrote in message
oups.com...




I can slightly understand that in a case where someone simply stayed
in the system for longer than the journey should have taken and could
be assumed to have gone beyond the capping zones, had lunch in a place
with an ungated station, then gone back into the capping zones again
(although it's a bit much to be trapped in some kind of delay and then
get fined for it as well).

But in the case described in this thread, the card had been touched at
a number of places within time limits that would have made such a
suspicion impossible. So, as long as someone doesn't disappear
mysteriously, but continues touching in and out within their capping
zones (at "continuation" places like Bow and Canary Wharf etc), what
is the justification for assuming that they could have gone outside of
the zones and punishing them accordingly?


A coding error.

tim

MIG wrote:

But in the case described in this thread, the card had been touched at
a number of places within time limits that would have made such a
suspicion impossible. So, as long as someone doesn't disappear
mysteriously, but continues touching in and out within their capping
zones (at "continuation" places like Bow and Canary Wharf etc), what
is the justification for assuming that they could have gone outside of
the zones and punishing them accordingly?

The problem is with how the system has been coded. Until I saw the OP's
history, I assumed that if you touched a validator en route, it'd reset
your two hour time limit. As we've seen here, it doesn't.

Had the OP spent more than 15 minutes (or thereabouts) in Bow and/or
Canary Wharf, the Out of Station Interchanges would have "timed out" and
he would have been charged correctly, rather than the whole thing having
been treated as one journey.

Cheers,

Barry

On 15 Feb, 08:45, Barry Salter wrote:
MIG wrote:
But in the case described in this thread, the card had been touched at
a number of places within time limits that would have made such a
suspicion impossible. So, as long as someone doesn't disappear
mysteriously, but continues touching in and out within their capping
zones (at "continuation" places like Bow and Canary Wharf etc), what
is the justification for assuming that they could have gone outside of
the zones and punishing them accordingly?

The problem is with how the system has been coded. Until I saw the OP's
history, I assumed that if you touched a validator en route, it'd reset
your two hour time limit. As we've seen here, it doesn't.

Had the OP spent more than 15 minutes (or thereabouts) in Bow and/or
Canary Wharf, the Out of Station Interchanges would have "timed out" and
he would have been charged correctly, rather than the whole thing having
been treated as one journey.



I see that, but my suggestion was that, given that the various touches
were recorded, the timing out of the total journey ought to have at
worst resulted in it being treated as two journeys rather than as an
unresolved journey, since with the various touches involved there was
nothing unresolved about it. The system had a record of every entry
and exit.

Given that programming it one way must be as easy as programming it
the other way, my question was about the justification for programming
it to treat it as an unresolved journey when everything about it was
totally resolved.

Innocent mistake in the coding resulting in huge overcharging is a bit
hard to swallow.