Revenue Protection Inspectors
 

I boarded a London Bus with an Oyster Card that had insufficient credit for the journey. I had used it twice previously during the day and was unaware that the credit was running low.

However the Revenue Inspector simply asked to see the card, told me that there was insufficient credit and asked for my details. She did not confiscate the card, issue an intention to prosecute notice, or even a fixed penalty, nor was i advised of any rights to appeal.

She did however say that TFL would write to me. So now what? Everything i've read on this subject suggests that Revenue Inspectors are supposed to either issue a penalty fare or advise you of their intention to prosecute.

Revenue Protection Inspectors
 

traveller wrote:
I boarded a London Bus with an Oyster Card that had insufficient
credit for the journey. I had used it twice previously during the
day and was unaware that the credit was running low.

So you boarded the bus and touched in, which would have produced a
reject status/light/sound from the reader? Then what did you do?

However the Revenue Inspector simply asked to see the card, told me
that there was insufficient credit and asked for my details. She did
not confiscate the card, issue an intention to prosecute notice, or
even a fixed penalty, nor was i advised of any rights to appeal.

She did however say that TFL would write to me. So now what?
Everything i've read on this subject suggests that Revenue
Inspectors are supposed to either issue a penalty fare or advise
you of their intention to prosecute.

I think we've had similar situations to yours reported here before.
You'll just have to wait for their letter. Meanwhile you might like to
read about auto top-up. See http://tinyurl.com/2z6fm3

--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

I got on the bus because i didn't hear the 'reject' sound, it's an easy mistake to make. There was a scrum of people crowding onto the bus, you have a split second to swipe your card before the person behind you swipes theirs (it wasn't a 'bendy-bus') However i wasn't aware of the top-up scheme, so many thanks for pointing that out. I've had to get off the bus on more than one occaision because there were insufficient funds on the card, only to have to walk half a mile to the nearest newsagents to top it up. Perhaps if TFL spent as much money publicising the top-up schemes available to pay-as-you-go users as they do threatening people with legal action, the problem would be reduced. However i'm still curious to know why the Revenue Inspector did not follow procedure.

Revenue Protection Inspectors
 

On May 27, 2:10 pm, traveller
wrote:
I got on the bus because i didn't hear the 'reject' sound, it's an easy
mistake to make. There was a scrum of people crowding onto the bus, you
have a split second to swipe your card before the person behind you
swipes theirs (it wasn't a 'bendy-bus') However i wasn't aware of the
top-up scheme, so many thanks for pointing that out. I've had to get
off the bus on more than one occaision because there were insufficient
funds on the card, only to have to walk half a mile to the nearest
newsagents to top it up. Perhaps if TFL spent as much money publicising
the top-up schemes available to pay-as-you-go users as they do
threatening people with legal action, the problem would be reduced.
However i'm still curious to know why the Revenue Inspector did not
follow procedure.




Can a Revenue Inspector tell from their reader whether an Oyster is
registered or not? If they can, it might make a difference to the
procedure.

Revenue Inspectors can tell whether a card is registered but mine isn't. I've seen Revenue Inspectors in action in the past. They confiscate the card, issue a ticket for the remainder of the journey, and take the name, address and date of birth of the passenger which they check. They then issue either a penalty fine or a notice to prosecute and advise the passenger of their right to appeal. The inspector who i spoke to, asked me to write my details in her notebook (rather than taking the details herself) she then disappeared to the lower deck for a couple of minutes, presumably to check my details, before giving me the card back!

Revenue Protection Inspectors
 

"traveller" wrote in message
...

I got on the bus because i didn't hear the 'reject' sound, it's an easy
mistake to make. There was a scrum of people crowding onto the bus, you
have a split second to swipe your card before the person behind you
swipes theirs

This is a different bus to the one that I last got on.

On that you stand in front of the pad and the person
behind has no chance to touch it with their card until
you get out of the way. It's your choice to do that in
'a second', not theirs.

tim

Revenue Protection Inspectors
 

On Sun, 27 May 2007 10:59:12 +0100, traveller
wrote:

I boarded a London Bus with an Oyster Card that had insufficient credit
for the journey. I had used it twice previously during the day and was
unaware that the credit was running low.

This is either a troll or a person who did not check for the bleep and
green light on boarding.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

Revenue Protection Inspectors
 

Neil Williams wrote:
On Sun, 27 May 2007 10:59:12 +0100, traveller
wrote:

I boarded a London Bus with an Oyster Card that had insufficient credit
for the journey. I had used it twice previously during the day and was
unaware that the credit was running low.

This is either a troll or a person who did not check for the bleep and
green light on boarding.

Probably the latter. I doubt everybody instinctively knows to wait for
a bleep and a green light.

Seeing as this wasn't a bendy-bus, why didn't the driver point out
traveller's error right away? That's what the drivers here do when the
farebox gives a boop instead of a beep.
--
David of Broadway
New York, NY, USA

If you think that everyone queues up, patiently waiting to touch their card against the reader, you've obviously never travelled on a London bus.

The driver wouldn't have had much idea whose card it was when there are a scrum of people pushing and shoving their way onto the bus all at once.

Revenue Protection Inspectors
 

On Sun, 27 May 2007 22:12:25 -0400, David of Broadway
wrote:

Neil Williams wrote:
On Sun, 27 May 2007 10:59:12 +0100, traveller
wrote:

I boarded a London Bus with an Oyster Card that had insufficient credit
for the journey. I had used it twice previously during the day and was
unaware that the credit was running low.

This is either a troll or a person who did not check for the bleep and
green light on boarding.

Probably the latter. I doubt everybody instinctively knows to wait for
a bleep and a green light.

I think almost everyone knows that the machine beeps and the lights
change. Pre-pay users tend to squint at the machine display the see
their total - I still think the displays are appalling in this respect.

For those of us who are colour blind the lights are useless given that
there is only one small "pinhole" light that changes colour. The old
trial on route 212 had a clear display and obvious illuminated segments,
like a traffic light, which were lit depending on the card status. At
least then the relative position of the lights was an aid to those who
are colour blind.

Seeing as this wasn't a bendy-bus, why didn't the driver point out
traveller's error right away? That's what the drivers here do when the
farebox gives a boop instead of a beep.

There is an awful lot of inconsistent behaviour from drivers coupled
with equipment that even now performs in a rather variable fashion.
Although total reader failures seem to be lower than before they still
happen and drivers simply have to wave people on. Other readers misread
some cards but not all - this again can result in "wave on" syndrome or
else passengers trying their cards 3-4 times. The height at which
readers recognise cards also varies which I find most odd - this should
be consistently set. I saw someone have to press their card almost
inside the reader before it read the card. Goodness knows what was going
on there. The other remaining issue is the small minority of passengers
who have no intention of paying and board with an empty PAYG card and
then allege card failure, reader failure, a sob story of having no money
to pay etc and then hoping the driver is in "wave on" mode. While I
sympathise with the drivers when the kit completely fails I think there
is a little too much discretion shown by some drivers in the more
marginal "failure" modes.

The lack of clarity from TfL was to what is or is not to be done with
failed equipment or failed cards does not help. In Hong Kong it is
clear - a failed reader (rare these days) means you pay cash on the bus
or wait for the next one. Cards can be replaced at MTR stations if your
card has failed otherwise a defective gate (a very rare occurrence) is
taken out of service. TfL really needs to get kit reliability sorted
once and for all and also to publish some clear rules on what happens
when the system does fail. At present it is open to too much
interpretation and people taking a punt on fare evasion as a result.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

Interesting answer but i had used my card twice earlier during the day so i wasn't trying to deliberately evade payment, i simply didn't know that there were insufficient funds on the card. The fact that the card reader would have registered this isn't of much use as i didn't realise that the machine had bleeped twice and obviously nor did the driver, since he made no attempt to stop me boarding the bus. Do you think that TFL will consider this a deliberate attempt to evade payment or not? I'm still curious to know why the Revenue Inspector gave me the card back and didn't issue either a notice to prosecute or a penalty fare.

Revenue Protection Inspectors
 

On Mon, 28 May 2007 10:35:26 +0100, Paul Corfield wrote:

Seeing as this wasn't a bendy-bus, why didn't the driver point out
traveller's error right away? That's what the drivers here do when the
farebox gives a boop instead of a beep.

There is an awful lot of inconsistent behaviour from drivers coupled
with equipment that even now performs in a rather variable fashion.
Although total reader failures seem to be lower than before they still
happen and drivers simply have to wave people on. Other readers misread
some cards but not all - this again can result in "wave on" syndrome or
else passengers trying their cards 3-4 times. The height at which
readers recognise cards also varies which I find most odd - this should
be consistently set. I saw someone have to press their card almost
inside the reader before it read the card. Goodness knows what was going
on there.

Failing card?

The other remaining issue is the small minority of passengers
who have no intention of paying and board with an empty PAYG card and
then allege card failure, reader failure, a sob story of having no money
to pay etc and then hoping the driver is in "wave on" mode.

The trick I see most often is to wave the card just briefly in the
vicinity of the reader, causing it to give the error beeps and display
something like "card communication error", and then walk on. Often,
the driver doesn't bother calling the passenger back for another try,
and even if they do, they just pay the normal PAYG fare - no risk of
being kicked off and having to wait for the next bus.

While I
sympathise with the drivers when the kit completely fails I think there
is a little too much discretion shown by some drivers in the more
marginal "failure" modes.

Agreed.

The lack of clarity from TfL was to what is or is not to be done with
failed equipment or failed cards does not help. In Hong Kong it is
clear - a failed reader (rare these days) means you pay cash on the bus
or wait for the next one.

Do TfL bus ticket machines even have the ability to issue £1 singles
to Oyster card holders (for when the reader fails)?

Revenue Protection Inspectors
 

On Mon, 28 May 2007 10:19:12 +0100, traveller wrote:

I got on the bus because i didn't hear the 'reject' sound, it's an
easy
mistake to make. There was a scrum of people crowding onto the bus,
you
have a split second to swipe your card before the person behind you
swipes theirs-

This is a different bus to the one that I last got on.

On that you stand in front of the pad and the person
behind has no chance to touch it with their card until
you get out of the way. It's your choice to do that in
'a second', not theirs.

If you think that everyone queues up, patiently waiting to touch their
card against the reader, you've obviously never travelled on a London
bus.

Are you talking about a different London? I use London buses all the
time and that's exactly what happens.

Revenue Protection Inspectors
 

On Mon, 28 May 2007 11:32:37 +0100, traveller
wrote:


Interesting answer but i had used my card twice earlier during the day
so i wasn't trying to deliberately evade payment, i simply didn't know
that there were insufficient funds on the card.

To be fair I was not responding to your original question. I was
responding to what David of Broadway had written and I was sharing my
own observations and views.

The fact that the card
reader would have registered this isn't of much use as i didn't realise
that the machine had bleeped twice and obviously nor did the driver,
since he made no attempt to stop me boarding the bus. Do you think that
TFL will consider this a deliberate attempt to evade payment or not? I'm
still curious to know why the Revenue Inspector gave me the card back
and didn't issue either a notice to prosecute or a penalty fare.

You wouldn't get a notice to prosecute on the spot AIUI.

I really do not know where the burden of responsibility sits in a case
like yours - is it down to you, the equipment or the driver. My guess is
that the responsibility will be said to be yours.

My *guess* is that you will receive a notice of intent to prosecute for
evading your fare. This is based on the fact you were not given a
penalty fare but they did take your personal details. Is your card
registered? If it is then it will be perfectly possible to retrieve the
card balance and transaction history from the central system to
demonstrate the status of the card at the time you were checked on bus.

Please note that I do not know how fare evasion prosecutions are handled
these days with the advent of Oyster and PAYG so my comments above
should be treated with due caution. I think you should contact TfL
Buses Customer Services to find out what is happening.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

Thanks Paul, however here's what TFL's own guidelines say about Revenue Protection Inspectors:

'Revenue Protection Inspectors issue either a Penalty Fare or a prosecution notice and clear guidelines are provided for determining which sanction is appropriate. Broadly speaking, penalty fares are issued in cases of suspected passenger misunderstanding or less severe fare evasion. Prosecution notices are issued in cases of suspected intention to evade or more severe fare evasion, e.g., non-payment.'

I also believe that the card in question is always confiscated rather than being returned to the passenger. If the card isn't registered, how do they even prove that it's the one that was used, since they will obviously not be able to produce the original card?

Revenue Protection Inspectors
 

On Mon, 28 May 2007 12:28:03 +0100, asdf
wrote:

Do TfL bus ticket machines even have the ability to issue £1 singles
to Oyster card holders (for when the reader fails)?

I'm fairly sure the original policy was that if your card couldn't be
read you had to pay full fare. However, there is the issue of
practicality surrounding that, and as such just waving people on if it
doesn't work when you try touching the second time is most likely the
most practical solution for both driver safety and for keeping
passengers moving.

Perhaps there is a need to make the display of whether a touch-in was
successful or not larger, and perhaps relocate it to be readable when
you've passed the machine?

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

Revenue Protection Inspectors
 

On Mon, 28 May 2007 12:29:14 +0100, asdf
wrote:

Are you talking about a different London? I use London buses all the
time and that's exactly what happens.

Funnily enough I was thinking that. Indeed, I sometimes keep my card
in my wallet and touch my wallet on the reader, which seems to work
90% of times. When it hasn't, I've never felt that I would be causing
a dangerous situation, nor have I been barged by others, when taking
the few seconds to remove the card from my wallet and touch it
straight onto the machine.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

Revenue Protection Inspectors
 

Paul Corfield wrote:
On Sun, 27 May 2007 22:12:25 -0400, David of Broadway
wrote:

Neil Williams wrote:
On Sun, 27 May 2007 10:59:12 +0100, traveller
wrote:

I boarded a London Bus with an Oyster Card that had insufficient credit
for the journey. I had used it twice previously during the day and was
unaware that the credit was running low.
This is either a troll or a person who did not check for the bleep and
green light on boarding.
Probably the latter. I doubt everybody instinctively knows to wait for
a bleep and a green light.

I think almost everyone knows that the machine beeps and the lights
change. Pre-pay users tend to squint at the machine display the see
their total - I still think the displays are appalling in this respect.

People who ride the bus every day probably are as you describe.

People who ride the bus occasionally probably are not.

Tourists certainly are not.

(And we also have terrible displays in New York -- they only display a
single line at a time, so people stand and wait around to see the
balance remaining or the expiration date while the rest of the crowd is
still waiting outside in the rain.)

For those of us who are colour blind the lights are useless given that
there is only one small "pinhole" light that changes colour. The old
trial on route 212 had a clear display and obvious illuminated segments,
like a traffic light, which were lit depending on the card status. At
least then the relative position of the lights was an aid to those who
are colour blind.

Interesting point. I don't think we have colo(u)red lights -- we have
the text display and a beep or boop. We also have a display mounted on
the wall /behind/ the driver (out of view to both the driver and the
boarding passenger) indicating the type of fare paid; this is nicknamed
the beakie box and is used by supervisors to ensure that the driver is
applying the correct fares.

Seeing as this wasn't a bendy-bus, why didn't the driver point out
traveller's error right away? That's what the drivers here do when the
farebox gives a boop instead of a beep.

There is an awful lot of inconsistent behaviour from drivers coupled
with equipment that even now performs in a rather variable fashion.
Although total reader failures seem to be lower than before they still
happen and drivers simply have to wave people on. Other readers misread
some cards but not all - this again can result in "wave on" syndrome or
else passengers trying their cards 3-4 times. The height at which
readers recognise cards also varies which I find most odd - this should
be consistently set. I saw someone have to press their card almost
inside the reader before it read the card. Goodness knows what was going
on there. The other remaining issue is the small minority of passengers
who have no intention of paying and board with an empty PAYG card and
then allege card failure, reader failure, a sob story of having no money
to pay etc and then hoping the driver is in "wave on" mode. While I
sympathise with the drivers when the kit completely fails I think there
is a little too much discretion shown by some drivers in the more
marginal "failure" modes.

The lack of clarity from TfL was to what is or is not to be done with
failed equipment or failed cards does not help. In Hong Kong it is
clear - a failed reader (rare these days) means you pay cash on the bus
or wait for the next one. Cards can be replaced at MTR stations if your
card has failed otherwise a defective gate (a very rare occurrence) is
taken out of service. TfL really needs to get kit reliability sorted
once and for all and also to publish some clear rules on what happens
when the system does fail. At present it is open to too much
interpretation and people taking a punt on fare evasion as a result.

IMO, the Hong Kong policy is overly strict. The policy in New York is
that if a bus farebox is broken -- either the MetroCard slot or the coin
slot -- then everybody boards for free, at least until the end of the
run, when (IINM) a determination is made whether to keep the bus in
service or to swap it with a bus with a working farebox. If the farebox
itself is working but a MetroCard isn't, then, officially, the customer
is given an envelope (to mail in the card for a replacement or refund)
and is expected to pay by some other means (cash or a different
MetroCard); in practice, however, most drivers will simply allow the
customer to board. (Not so on the subway! I've had MetroCards die
prematurely on several occasions -- on one of those occasions it had
been killed by an errant bus farebox that morning! -- and I have always
been required to use another card to enter the system.)
--
David of Broadway
New York, NY, USA

Well pardon me but i wasn't aware that either of you were on the bus that i used. Can the holier-than-thou brigade just give it a rest? The original question i posed was about procedure carried out by Revenue Protection Officers. If you haven't got anything relevant to contribute then don't waste my time or yours posting!

Revenue Protection Inspectors
 

"traveller" wrote in message
...

tim..... Wrote:
"traveller" wrote in message
...-

I got on the bus because i didn't hear the 'reject' sound, it's an
easy
mistake to make. There was a scrum of people crowding onto the bus,
you
have a split second to swipe your card before the person behind you
swipes theirs-

This is a different bus to the one that I last got on.

On that you stand in front of the pad and the person
behind has no chance to touch it with their card until
you get out of the way. It's your choice to do that in
'a second', not theirs.

tim

If you think that everyone queues up, patiently waiting to touch their
card against the reader, you've obviously never travelled on a London
bus.

Why is it obvious (and I can assure you it is false)

I didn't say that everyone qued up patiently. I said that
whether the next person pushes in front of you is
entirely up to you.

If you have a PAYG card, it is in your interest to make
sure that they don't. Not doing so is not an excuse for
missing the 'fail' beep.

tim

What you completely fail to acknowledge is that the driver also has a responsibility to alert the passenger to the fact that their card has not registered. Some do and some don't. I suspect that the driver didn't do it in this case because, like me, he didn't hear the machine beep twice in the scrum of passengers attempting to board the bus.

Revenue Protection Inspectors
 

traveller wrote:
Neil Williams Wrote:
On Mon, 28 May 2007 12:29:14 +0100, asdf lid
wrote:
-
Are you talking about a different London? I use London buses all
the time and that's exactly what happens.-

Funnily enough I was thinking that. Indeed, I sometimes keep my
card in my wallet and touch my wallet on the reader, which seems
to work 90% of times. When it hasn't, I've never felt that I
would be causing a dangerous situation, nor have I been barged by
others, when taking the few seconds to remove the card from my
wallet and touch it straight onto the machine.

Well pardon me but i wasn't aware that either of you were on the bus
that i used. Can the holier-than-thou brigade just give it a rest?
The original question i posed was about procedure carried out by
Revenue Protection Officers. If you haven't got anything relevant
to contribute then don't waste my time or yours posting!

Discussion of how to go about touching-in so that you *do* notice the
response from the machine is entirely relevant to the situation you find
yourself in. You might even learn how to avoid it happening again.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Revenue Protection Inspectors
 

On Mon, 28 May 2007 09:59:11 -0400, David of Broadway
wrote:

Paul Corfield wrote:

For those of us who are colour blind the lights are useless given that
there is only one small "pinhole" light that changes colour. The old
trial on route 212 had a clear display and obvious illuminated segments,
like a traffic light, which were lit depending on the card status. At
least then the relative position of the lights was an aid to those who
are colour blind.

Interesting point. I don't think we have colo(u)red lights -- we have
the text display and a beep or boop.

I've not noticed any coloured lights on the subway thus far - just a
dot matrix display that says "GO" when you can go. (I'm yet to
discover what it says when you can't go, and also yet to take a bus.
But I'm here for a few more days yet, so I'll keep 'em peeled...)

Revenue Protection Inspectors
 

traveller wrote:
tim..... Wrote:

I didn't say that everyone qued up patiently. I said that
whether the next person pushes in front of you is
entirely up to you.

If you have a PAYG card, it is in your interest to make
sure that they don't. Not doing so is not an excuse for
missing the 'fail' beep.

What you completely fail to acknowledge is that the driver also has
a responsibility to alert the passenger to the fact that their card
has not registered. Some do and some don't. I suspect that the
driver didn't do it in this case because, like me, he didn't hear
the machine beep twice in the scrum of passengers attempting to
board the bus.

What you completely fail to acknowledge, apparently, is that it's your
responsibility to ensure that you pay for your journey. If you use a
PAYG Oyster without knowing what the balance is, and neglect to notice
both the red light and the reject bleep, then it's *your fault*. Stop
trying to blame the driver and the revenue inspector for your own
negligence.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Revenue Protection Inspectors
 

On 27 May, 15:52, traveller
wrote:
Revenue Inspectors can tell whether a card is registered but mine isn't.

Its quite simple to register a card to a false address, just make up
one when you fill the form in. In my experience they never seem to ask
for proof.

B2003

Remind us all who said the following on another thread:

'There is indeed a coloured light that you could hardly miss if you were
interested in it, but TfL have never AFAIK told passengers to check that
it changes to green when they touch their Oyster cards on the reader.
In the absence of such advice, it's not surprising that people ignore
this unlabelled light and don't understand its significance.'

Oh that's right, it was YOU wasn't it, 'Richard J.'?! Make your mind up Mr. Self-Righteous!!!

Revenue Protection Inspectors
 

traveller wrote:
Richard J. Wrote:
What you completely fail to acknowledge, apparently, is that it's
your responsibility to ensure that you pay for your journey. If
you use a PAYG Oyster without knowing what the balance is, and
neglect to notice both the red light and the reject bleep, then
it's *your fault*. Stop trying to blame the driver and the
revenue inspector for your own negligence.

Remind us all who said the following on another thread:

'There is indeed a coloured light that you could hardly miss if you
were interested in it, but TfL have never AFAIK told passengers to
check that it changes to green when they touch their Oyster cards on
the
reader. In the absence of such advice, it's not surprising that
people ignore this unlabelled light and don't understand its
significance.'

Oh that's right, it was YOU wasn't it, 'Richard J.'?! Make your
mind up Mr. Self-Righteous!!!

There's no inconsistency. If a passenger ignored the lights through
ignorance, he would still be responsible for ensuring that his Oyster
card had enough credit, just as, if he had a season ticket, he would be
responsible for ensuring it hadn't expired.

But that old post of mine that you discovered (full marks for detective
work!) was sent in October 2005, and the bit about the lack of advice
from TfL is no longer true. Since September 2006, the TfL fares
leaflets have included advice to check for the green light. The January
2007 edition says "Please check for the green light when you touch in
and/or out to ensure that your Oyster card has been validated. Failure
to touch in and/or out may result in a penalty fare or you being
prosecuted."

--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Revenue Protection Inspectors
 

Richard J. wrote:

But that old post of mine that you discovered (full marks for detective
work!) was sent in October 2005, and the bit about the lack of advice
from TfL is no longer true. Since September 2006, the TfL fares
leaflets have included advice to check for the green light. The January
2007 edition says "Please check for the green light when you touch in
and/or out to ensure that your Oyster card has been validated. Failure
to touch in and/or out may result in a penalty fare or you being
prosecuted."

Is everyone supposed to read the small print in the fares leaflet every
year?
--
Michael Hoffman

Revenue Protection Inspectors
 

On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 12:56:49PM +0100, traveller wrote:
'There is indeed a coloured light that you could hardly miss if you
were
interested in it, but TfL have never AFAIK told passengers to check
that
it changes to green when they touch their Oyster cards on the reader.

That's covered in the instructions stuck up on the ceiling on the no 38
bus. But by the time you can see them, you're already on board and the
driver has moved off, making them pretty pointless. The instructions
should be at bus stops so that you have a reasonable chance of reading
them before disobeying them by mistake.

--
David Cantrell | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david

I don't do .INI, .BAT, or .SYS files. I don't assign apps to files.
I don't configure peripherals or networks before using them. I have
a computer to do all that. I have a Macintosh, not a hobby.
-- Fritz Anderson

Revenue Protection Inspectors
 

Michael Hoffman wrote:
Richard J. wrote:

But that old post of mine that you discovered (full marks for
detective work!) was sent in October 2005, and the bit about the
lack of advice from TfL is no longer true. Since September 2006,
the TfL fares leaflets have included advice to check for the green
light. The January 2007 edition says "Please check for the green
light when you touch in and/or out to ensure that your Oyster card
has been validated. Failure to touch in and/or out may result in
a penalty fare or you being prosecuted."

Is everyone supposed to read the small print in the fares leaflet
every year?

TfL, much to their credit, don't do small print. Their document design
standards forbid text in leaflets smaller than 12-point, with exceptions
only where unavoidable (e.g. the pocket Tube map).

I gave it as an example of the advice they offer, and I assume that it's
also given elsewhere. Another example has already been posted on this
thread.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Revenue Protection Inspectors
 

Richard J. wrote:
Michael Hoffman wrote:
Richard J. wrote:

But that old post of mine that you discovered (full marks for
detective work!) was sent in October 2005, and the bit about the
lack of advice from TfL is no longer true. Since September 2006,
the TfL fares leaflets have included advice to check for the green
light. The January 2007 edition says "Please check for the green
light when you touch in and/or out to ensure that your Oyster card
has been validated. Failure to touch in and/or out may result in
a penalty fare or you being prosecuted."

Is everyone supposed to read the small print in the fares leaflet
every year?

TfL, much to their credit, don't do small print. Their document design
standards forbid text in leaflets smaller than 12-point, with exceptions
only where unavoidable (e.g. the pocket Tube map).

That's still small compared to the massive advertising campaigns when
other bits of advice about Oyster have changed.
--
Michael Hoffman

Here's a question for everyone other than Mr. Self Righteous (i think we can all guess what your response will be, so save yourself the trouble of posting it)

If a passenger says that they didn't hear the card reader emit the 'fail' signal (and the inspector wasn't on the bus to disprove this version of events) how can TFL possibly prosecute them for DELIBERATE fare evasion? Surely it's up to TFL to PROVE that this is NOT the case by taking witness statements from passengers, the driver and examining CCTV evidence. If NONE of this evidence is presented, how can the magistrate possibly return a guilty verdict?!

Revenue Protection Inspectors
 

traveller wrote:
Here's a question for everyone other than Mr. Self Righteous (i think we
can all guess what your response will be, so save yourself the trouble
of posting it)

If a passenger says that they didn't hear the card reader emit the
'fail' signal (and the inspector wasn't on the bus to disprove this
version of events) how can TFL possibly prosecute them for DELIBERATE
fare evasion?

Traveling on a bus without paying is a strict liability offence. So
deliberate fare evasion need not be proven, only that the fare was not paid.
--
Michael Hoffman

Revenue Protection Inspectors
 

On 31 May, 18:08, traveller
wrote:
If a passenger says that they didn't hear the card reader emit the
'fail' signal

I can't answer the legal question, but hearing or not hearing the beep
is irrelevant. If you don't see a green light, you shouldn't get on,
because you haven't paid for the journey. In other words, the onus is
on the passenger to ensure they've paid, not on TfL to inform them
they haven't.

(NB I don't necessarily agree with this, I'm just trying to explain
the system)

U

Revenue Protection Inspectors
 

"Michael Hoffman" wrote in message
...
traveller wrote:
Here's a question for everyone other than Mr. Self Righteous (i think we
can all guess what your response will be, so save yourself the trouble
of posting it)

If a passenger says that they didn't hear the card reader emit the
'fail' signal (and the inspector wasn't on the bus to disprove this
version of events) how can TFL possibly prosecute them for DELIBERATE
fare evasion?

Traveling on a bus without paying is a strict liability offence.

Only if a PF is issued. For a criminal conviction 'intent' must
be shown.

tim

Revenue Protection Inspectors
 

tim..... wrote:
"Michael Hoffman" wrote in message
...
traveller wrote:
Here's a question for everyone other than Mr. Self Righteous (i think we
can all guess what your response will be, so save yourself the trouble
of posting it)

If a passenger says that they didn't hear the card reader emit the
'fail' signal (and the inspector wasn't on the bus to disprove this
version of events) how can TFL possibly prosecute them for DELIBERATE
fare evasion?
Traveling on a bus without paying is a strict liability offence.

Only if a PF is issued. For a criminal conviction 'intent' must
be shown.

Not true. See the Public Passenger Vehicles Act 1981 s25(3) and The
Public Service Vehicles (Conduct of Drivers, Inspectors, Conductors and
Passengers) Regulations 1990 s7(2)(b)(ii).
--
Michael Hoffman

10. Suspected fare evasion and prosecutions

10.1. If you are travelling on any of our services without either:

• a ticket that is valid and available for the journey you are making
• an Oyster card containing a valid season ticket
• an Oyster card, when you are paying as you go, showing a record of the start of your trip
or
• a valid 14-15 Oyster photocard if you are aged 14 or 15 and are travelling free on a bus
• a valid 16-17 Oyster photocard if you are aged 16 or 17 and are travelling free on a bus

AND we believe that you are trying to avoid paying the correct fare, you may be prosecuted.

So in addition to travelling without the appropriate ticket it seems that it is also neccessary to establish a that the passenger is 'trying to avoid paying the correct fare'. Surely this involves some proof that the passenger hasn't simply made a mistake?

Revenue Protection Inspectors
 

traveller wrote:

If you are travelling on any of our services without either:

• a ticket that is valid and available for the journey you are making
• an Oyster card containing a valid season ticket
• an Oyster card, when you are paying as you go, showing a record of
the start of your trip
[...]
AND we believe that you are trying to avoid paying the correct fare,
you may be prosecuted.

So in addition to travelling without the appropriate ticket it seems
that it is also neccessary to establish a that the passenger is 'trying
to avoid paying the correct fare'. Surely this involves some proof that
the passenger hasn't simply made a mistake?

No. Under the statute TfL uses to prosecute bus fare non-payment, no
such proof is necessary. They only have to prove that you did not pay
the correct fare. What you are quoting is their policy that they will
only prosecute you if they think that you are trying to avoid the
correct fare. But they do not need to prove what they think to make the
prosecution stick.
--
Michael Hoffman

Revenue Protection Inspectors
 

traveller wrote:
Michael Hoffman Wrote:
Traveling on a bus without paying is a strict liability offence. So
deliberate fare evasion need not be proven, only that the fare was
not paid.
--
Michael Hoffman

10. Suspected fare evasion and prosecutions

10.1. If you are travelling on any of our services without either:

• a ticket that is valid and available for the journey you are
making
• an Oyster card containing a valid season ticket
• an Oyster card, when you are paying as you go, showing a record of
the start of your trip
or
• a valid 14-15 Oyster photocard if you are aged 14 or 15 and are
travelling free on a bus
• a valid 16-17 Oyster photocard if you are aged 16 or 17 and are
travelling free on a bus

AND we believe that you are trying to avoid paying the correct fare,
you may be prosecuted.

So in addition to travelling without the appropriate ticket it seems
that it is also neccessary to establish a that the passenger is
'trying to avoid paying the correct fare'. Surely this involves
some proof that the passenger hasn't simply made a mistake?

All that TfL are saying is that they will prosecute if they *believe*
that avoidance was deliberate. But the act under which they take you to
court is, I think (for buses), the Public Passenger Vehicles Act 1981,
section 25(3). That basically says that travelling without paying the
fare is an offence, without any mention of intent.

HOWEVER, it is subject to section 68(1), which says "It shall be a
defence for a person charged with an offence ... to prove that there was
a reasonable excuse for the act or omission in respect of which he is
charged."

So IF you can persuade the magistrate that you couldn't hear the reject
bleep AND you didn't see or understand the red light AND you didn't read
the text on the screen, even though you've been using Oyster on buses
for the last x years, AND you thought that you had enough credit on your
card, then you might be able to escape conviction.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)