Not good if you stocked up....

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/englan...on/6397239.stm

Nicks wrote:
Not good if you stocked up....

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/englan...on/6397239.stm

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/press-cent....asp?prID=1069

"The current design will no longer be accepted on London Buses after 30
June 30, and we would advise anyone with spare tickets at home to use
them over the next four months as there will be no refund or exchange of
tickets."

Can this be legal? If there was never any indication that the Bus Savers
could expire, then it seems like it would be a violation of the Unfair
Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations.
--
Michael Hoffman

"Michael Hoffman" wrote:

Can this be legal? If there was never any indication that the Bus Savers
could expire, then it seems like it would be a violation of the Unfair
Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations.

But did TfL say the tickets would never expire? I bet they didn't.

Allowing four months to use up residual stocks doesn't sound like an unfair
contract to me, anyway.

If anyone does sue TfL successfully on this matter, remind me to let my mum
know. She's still walking around with a purse full of Multi Ride tickets and
'scratch panel' One Day Bus Passes!

Chris

Chris Read wrote:
"Michael Hoffman" wrote:

Can this be legal? If there was never any indication that the Bus Savers
could expire, then it seems like it would be a violation of the Unfair
Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations.

But did TfL say the tickets would never expire? I bet they didn't.

It doesn't matter. If they didn't provide an expiration date when the
contract was made, then the contract should be enforceable at law until
the six year statute of limitations runs out. It is unfair for them to
be able to unilaterally decide on an expiration date later without
providing a refund. This seems to fall under several of the unfair terms:

(d) permitting the seller or supplier to retain sums paid by the
consumer where the latter decides not to conclude or perform the
contract, without providing for the consumer to receive compensation of
an equivalent amount from the seller or supplier where the latter is the
party cancelling the contract;

(f) authorising the seller or supplier to dissolve the contract on a
discretionary basis where the same facility is not granted to the
consumer, or permitting the seller or supplier to retain the sums paid
for services not yet supplied by him where it is the seller or supplier
himself who dissolves the contract;

(g) enabling the seller or supplier to terminate a contract of
indeterminate duration without reasonable notice except where there are
serious grounds for doing so;

(i) irrevocably binding the consumer to terms with which he had no real
opportunity of becoming acquainted before the conclusion of the contract;

(j) enabling the seller or supplier to alter the terms of the contract
unilaterally without a valid reason which is specified in the contract;

(o) obliging the consumer to fulfil all his obligations where the seller
or supplier does not perform his;

Allowing four months to use up residual stocks doesn't sound like an unfair
contract to me, anyway.

When it has previously been much longer than four months, even when the
price for new savers has gone up, I don't think it is fair or reasonable
to change it now without warning.

If anyone does sue TfL successfully on this matter, remind me to let my mum
know. She's still walking around with a purse full of Multi Ride tickets and
'scratch panel' One Day Bus Passes!

If she bought them more than six years ago, then they are worthless.
--
Michael Hoffman

On Feb 26, 6:09 pm, "Nicks" wrote:
Not good if you stocked up....
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/englan...on/6397239.stm

I'm surprised they've bothered to change them and haven't just
discontinued them. They now work out at the same price as Oyster
Prepay, and the carnet ticket on the tube has been abolished too. In
addition, it would make Bendybus boarding easier - anyone could board
by any door.

As an aside, how do these tickets work when "revenue protection"
boards buses. How do they prove the torn off stub was actually given
to the driver and isn't still in your pocket?

On Feb 27, 10:07 am, wrote:

As an aside, how do these tickets work when "revenue protection"
boards buses. How do they prove the torn off stub was actually given
to the driver and isn't still in your pocket?

AIUI, RP collect the tickets from the driver first, then match them up
with the stubs retained by the pax.
--
Rob

Rob Hamadi wrote:

AIUI, RP collect the tickets from the driver first, then match them up
with the stubs retained by the pax.

Correct. I wondered about this too, until the day the inspectors boarded
my bus. They simply ask the driver if they've taken any Saver tickets on
that journey - usually there aren't many, if any. Then they go through
the bus with that ticket in their sticky mitt, looking for the relevant
stub. "Oh, it's you, is it, we wondered who had the Saver ticket."

And the Oyster cards of course are read by some clever kind of hand held
card reading device.
--
Joyce Whitchurch, Stalybridge, UK
=================================

On Feb 26, 8:14 pm, "Chris Read" wrote:

Allowing four months to use up residual stocks doesn't sound like an unfair
contract to me, anyway.

The Dutch typically allow one fare change, which I think basically
gives about a year (may be two) for Strippenkaarten.

Why not just withdraw Saver tickets completely? Surely Oyster has
superceded them to any practical extent?

Neil

On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 10:27:40 +0000, Joyce Whitchurch
wrote:

Rob Hamadi wrote:

AIUI, RP collect the tickets from the driver first, then match them up
with the stubs retained by the pax.

Correct. I wondered about this too, until the day the inspectors boarded
my bus. They simply ask the driver if they've taken any Saver tickets on
that journey - usually there aren't many, if any. Then they go through
the bus with that ticket in their sticky mitt, looking for the relevant
stub. "Oh, it's you, is it, we wondered who had the Saver ticket."

And the Oyster cards of course are read by some clever kind of hand held
card reading device.

I travelled on the RV1 on Saturday from London Bridge to Aldwych. The
bus was very busy and it was mildly amusing to watch people variously
touch their saver ticket on the Oyster pad, not know to tear their Saver
ticket in half along the perforation, show their Oyster card to the
driver but upside down and touch a One Day Travelcard on the Oyster pad.
I think all of the "victims" were tourists but it made me consider just
how confusing our various ticketing options are to them.

--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

Neil Williams wrote:

Why not just withdraw Saver tickets completely? Surely Oyster has
superceded them to any practical extent?

Too much faffing about for the occasional visitor, especially tourists.
You have to pay 3 quid deposit to get an Oyster in the first place, then
claim a refund when you hand it in.
--
Joyce Whitchurch, Stalybridge, UK
=================================
Old enough to remember something
similar to Saver tickets in Glasgow
some twenty-odd years ago