"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7071356.stm

This (and perhaps other similar?) scams is presumably what lay behind
TfL's decision to change the design of the Bus Saver ticket earlier
this year.

Before Oyster PAYG, I was a big fan of the Bus Saver tickets, and they
can still come in useful when travelling on the bus with an Oyster-
less visitor from out of town. Nonetheless by their very nature
they're vulnerable to fraud.

I wonder how many Ticket Stops (i.e. newsagents and other shops
selling TfL tickets) bought these forged Saver tickets from these
crooks to sell on to punters - I'm minded to think that quite a few
did, given that it was an easy earner for them. I guess that one way
to counter this fraud would be for TfL to threaten to expel shops from
the Ticket Stop scheme should they be caught selling forged Saver
tickets, which is such an obvious suggestion I wouldn't be surprised
if they've already done just that.

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

Mizter T wrote:

I guess that one way to counter this fraud would be for TfL to threaten
to expel shops from the Ticket Stop scheme should they be caught selling
forged Saver
tickets, which is such an obvious suggestion I wouldn't be surprised
if they've already done just that.

I would have though the obvious suggestion would have been to apply the
full weight of the law and send everyone involved in the scheme to
prison. In these perverse, pseudo-liberal times however, punishing
criminal acts is frowned upon and fraud is 'victimless', so why bother?
Just give them 100 hours community service and let them enjoy the
proceeds of their criminal undertakings. They obviously earned it.

ESB

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

On 1 Nov, 00:29, Ernst S Blofeld
wrote:
Mizter T wrote:
I guess that one way to counter this fraud would be for TfL to threaten
to expel shops from the Ticket Stop scheme should they be caught selling
forged Saver
tickets, which is such an obvious suggestion I wouldn't be surprised
if they've already done just that.

I would have though the obvious suggestion would have been to apply the
full weight of the law and send everyone involved in the scheme to
prison. In these perverse, pseudo-liberal times however, punishing
criminal acts is frowned upon and fraud is 'victimless', so why bother?
Just give them 100 hours community service and let them enjoy the
proceeds of their criminal undertakings. They obviously earned it.

ESB

My suggestion was more about how TfL could attempt to prevent such
frauds flourishing in the first place.

The article makes no mention of anyone else who was involved in this
fraud having got caught. Maybe others have got caught, in which case
I'd expect to hear more on this story in the future as cases come to
court. Then again maybe no-one else has been nabbed - a possibility if
it was a 'professional' operation, with distance between the 'foot
soldiers' such as this guy and the 'masterminds'.

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

On Oct 31, 9:44 pm, Mizter T wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7071356.stm

This (and perhaps other similar?) scams is presumably what lay behind
TfL's decision to change the design of the Bus Saver ticket earlier
this year.

Before Oyster PAYG, I was a big fan of the Bus Saver tickets, and they
can still come in useful when travelling on the bus with an Oyster-
less visitor from out of town. Nonetheless by their very nature
they're vulnerable to fraud.

I was amazed when I heard TfL was changing the design. I have never
seen the point of these tickets, and to persevere with them after
Oyster became widespread seemed like the decision of someone
completely & utterly doolally. It is like a return to the 1860s! Do
they have a 'No expectorating' warning on the back?

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

Mizter T wrote:
My suggestion was more about how TfL could attempt to prevent such
frauds flourishing in the first place.

I appreciate that point exactly. Custodial sentences have three main
effects; they act as punishment, they help prevent further undesirable
acts from being perpetrated by the same individual (for the duration of
the custody) and finally, they act as a deterrent to those that would
otherwise commit the crime in the first place. In not adequately
punishing those responsible they are giving implicit approval to anyone
that cares to emulate them. Alas, the notion of deterrence has been lost
to political expediency.

ESB

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

Offramp wrote:
It is like a return to the 1860s!
Do they have a 'No expectorating' warning on the back?

Given the prevalence of TB in these parts, it seems like that piece of
advice would be entirely suitable once again!

ESB

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

On Nov 1, 2:21 am, Ernst S Blofeld
wrote:
Mizter T wrote:
My suggestion was more about how TfL could attempt to prevent such
frauds flourishing in the first place.

I appreciate that point exactly. Custodial sentences have three main
effects; they act as punishment, they help prevent further undesirable
acts from being perpetrated by the same individual (for the duration of
the custody) and finally, they act as a deterrent to those that would
otherwise commit the crime in the first place. In not adequately
punishing those responsible they are giving implicit approval to anyone
that cares to emulate them. Alas, the notion of deterrence has been lost
to political expediency.

ESB

The judge may have thought that Tfl was itself mainly to blame in
introducing a ticket that is so irrational, and is merely a pivot for
all types of fraud.

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 02:36:15 -0000, Offramp
wrote:

The judge may have thought that Tfl was itself mainly to blame in
introducing a ticket that is so irrational, and is merely a pivot for
all types of fraud.

That's like saying it's OK to burgle a house that's been left
unlocked. How ridiculous.

Neil

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

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

On Nov 1, 6:22 am, (Neil Williams)
wrote:
On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 02:36:15 -0000, Offramp
wrote:

The judge may have thought that Tfl was itself mainly to blame in
introducing a ticket that is so irrational, and is merely a pivot for
all types of fraud.

That's like saying it's OK to burgle a house that's been left
unlocked. How ridiculous.

Insurance companies would seem not to agree with you.

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

On 1 Nov, 02:36, Offramp wrote:
On Nov 1, 2:21 am, Ernst S Blofeld
wrote:

Mizter T wrote:
My suggestion was more about how TfL could attempt to prevent such
frauds flourishing in the first place.

I appreciate that point exactly. Custodial sentences have three main
effects; they act as punishment, they help prevent further undesirable
acts from being perpetrated by the same individual (for the duration of
the custody) and finally, they act as a deterrent to those that would
otherwise commit the crime in the first place. In not adequately
punishing those responsible they are giving implicit approval to anyone
that cares to emulate them. Alas, the notion of deterrence has been lost
to political expediency.

ESB

The judge may have thought that Tfl was itself mainly to blame in
introducing a ticket that is so irrational, and is merely a pivot for
all types of fraud.


How is it an irrational ticket?

How is it a pivot for "all types of fraud"?

I can see it is open to one type of fraud, which is the fraud in
question.

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

Offramp wrote:
On Nov 1, 6:22 am, (Neil Williams)
wrote:
On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 02:36:15 -0000, Offramp
wrote:

The judge may have thought that Tfl was itself mainly to blame in
introducing a ticket that is so irrational, and is merely a pivot for
all types of fraud.
That's like saying it's OK to burgle a house that's been left
unlocked. How ridiculous.

Insurance companies would seem not to agree with you.

Good thing that the law isn't determined by insurance companies then.
Well, at least not solely by insurance companies.
--
Michael Hoffman

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

On 1 Nov, 02:21, Ernst S Blofeld
wrote:
My suggestion was more about how TfL could attempt to prevent such
frauds flourishing in the first place.

I appreciate that point exactly. Custodial sentences have three main
effects; they act as punishment, they help prevent further undesirable
acts from being perpetrated by the same individual (for the duration of
the custody) and finally, they act as a deterrent to those that would
otherwise commit the crime in the first place. In not adequately
punishing those responsible they are giving implicit approval to anyone
that cares to emulate them. Alas, the notion of deterrence has been lost
to political expediency.

What rot. The public, being ignorant, are massively keen on hangin'
'n' floggin' an' lockin' up, and if a politician wants to buy some
cheap votes all he needs to do is announce some new draconian
measures.

But the thing about deterrence w.r.t prison sentences is that *it
doesn't work*. The only correlation that has been demonstrated between
punishment and crime rates is % of convictions (i.e. the more certain
a crim is to get caught, the less likely he is to do crime).

So your ingenious plan would cut crime *exclusively* by taking the
relevant miscreants out of circulation for the duration of their
sentence (and then raise it again when they were released, given that
prison has a worse reoffending rate than other forms of punishment).

I can understand the logic in paying £40k a year to keep a mugger or a
rapist off the streets. But it seems like a crap investment to do the
same for a chap who sells photocopied bus tickets...

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

[OT] "Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

John B wrote:

What rot. The public, being ignorant, are massively keen on hangin'
'n' floggin' an' lockin' up, and if a politician wants to buy some
cheap votes all he needs to do is announce some new draconian
measures.

If that were the only kind of political expediency then the sentences
for most things would have been ratcheted up years ago. However, the
reality is that hardly anyone serves the full sentence let alone suffers
a draconian one.

But the thing about deterrence w.r.t prison sentences is that *it
doesn't work*. The only correlation that has been demonstrated between
punishment and crime rates is % of convictions (i.e. the more certain
a crim is to get caught, the less likely he is to do crime).

That's not true if you consider the various *types* of crime.
White-collar crime and fraud - where exercise of thought is usual - are
significantly deterred by the prospect of sentencing. Indeed fear of
'being caught' in and of itself is meaningless without consideration of
the consequences.

So your ingenious plan would cut crime *exclusively* by taking the
relevant miscreants out of circulation for the duration of their
sentence (and then raise it again when they were released, given that
prison has a worse reoffending rate than other forms of punishment).

It isn't a 'plan'. It's merely a description of the purpose of prisons
and our existing legislation. The reason custodial sentences are being
discouraged is not through a wide recognition that they fail but because
the prisons are at capacity.

I can understand the logic in paying £40k a year to keep a mugger or a
rapist off the streets. But it seems like a crap investment to do the
same for a chap who sells photocopied bus tickets...

Well, if that's your attitude then why bother making fraud punishable at
all ? The return on investment is a society that respects the law.
Perhaps the £40k per annum should be reduced or be recovered like a
student loan, but that's another story...

ESB

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

John B wrote:

I can understand the logic in paying £40k a year to keep a mugger or a
rapist off the streets. But it seems like a crap investment to do the
same for a chap who sells photocopied bus tickets...

Fine the guy 40 grand as well as putting him in prison for a year. I bought
several bus savers just before they put the price up significantly, and I
use buses so rarely that I still had about 10 rides left unused when the old
design was invalidated because of this sort of fraud. These crooks have left
me out of pocket, and there must be many thousands like me, so it's not a
victimless crime

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

On 1 Nov, 12:16, Ernst S Blofeld
wrote:
But the thing about deterrence w.r.t prison sentences is that *it
doesn't work*. The only correlation that has been demonstrated between
punishment and crime rates is % of convictions (i.e. the more certain
a crim is to get caught, the less likely he is to do crime).

That's not true if you consider the various *types* of crime.
White-collar crime and fraud - where exercise of thought is usual - are
significantly deterred by the prospect of sentencing. Indeed fear of
'being caught' in and of itself is meaningless without consideration of
the consequences.

But white-collar crime *doesn't* require prison for the deterrent to
be effective, because (e.g.) a finance clerk convicted of a dishonesty
offence has already lost his career and ruined his life prospects
*whether or not* you jail him. If he has his hands in the till, it's
because he thinks he won't be caught, not because he thinks that if he
is caught then it won't matter.

I can understand the logic in paying £40k a year to keep a mugger or a
rapist off the streets. But it seems like a crap investment to do the
same for a chap who sells photocopied bus tickets...

Well, if that's your attitude then why bother making fraud punishable at
all ? The return on investment is a society that respects the law.

But you don't need to put people in prison to make them respect the
law. You just need to make them believe that you'll find them out. If
they don't believe they'll be found out, then even hanging isn't a
deterrent; if they do believe they'll be found out, then prison isn't
necessary.

Perhaps the £40k per annum should be reduced or be recovered like a
student loan, but that's another story...

....which is a bit of a problem if the chap in question is supposedly
being deported, as with this bloke (I'm not quite sure why the judge
didn't have the power to give him a non-custodial sentence but then
have him taken to a secure migrant detention centre before
deportation, but that's another story too...)

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

"John Rowland" wrote in message
...
John B wrote:

I can understand the logic in paying £40k a year to keep a mugger or a
rapist off the streets. But it seems like a crap investment to do the
same for a chap who sells photocopied bus tickets...

Fine the guy 40 grand as well as putting him in prison for a year. I
bought several bus savers just before they put the price up significantly,
and I use buses so rarely that I still had about 10 rides left unused when
the old design was invalidated because of this sort of fraud. These crooks
have left me out of pocket, and there must be many thousands like me, so
it's not a victimless crime


Did you miss the (apparently little publicised) decision to trade the old
design for new? IIRC it came after some pressure from the public, and was
mentioned here a while ago...

Paul

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

On 1 Nov, 12:50, "John Rowland"
wrote:
I can understand the logic in paying £40k a year to keep a mugger or a
rapist off the streets. But it seems like a crap investment to do the
same for a chap who sells photocopied bus tickets...

Fine the guy 40 grand as well as putting him in prison for a year.

To be paid how exactly? You may wish to bear in mind that the judge in
this case specifically didn't impose a fine on the grounds that the
guy had no money and would only be able to obtain any through working
illegally.

I bought
several bus savers just before they put the price up significantly, and I
use buses so rarely that I still had about 10 rides left unused when the old
design was invalidated because of this sort of fraud. These crooks have left
me out of pocket, and there must be many thousands like me, so it's not a
victimless crime

I agree. But it's still a *trivial* crime. Having £15 nicked is mildly
annoying for a few minutes; it's grossly disproportionate to the cost
to society (and the harm inflicted on the criminal) of sending someone
to jail.

[equally, the £15 you lost was £15 that TfL got to keep and spend on
improving public transport for Londoners in general. Cheers for that.]

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

Paul Scott wrote:
"John Rowland" wrote in
message ...

I
bought several bus savers just before they put the price up
significantly, and I use buses so rarely that I still had about 10
rides left unused when the old design was invalidated because of
this sort of fraud. These crooks have left me out of pocket, and
there must be many thousands like me, so it's not a victimless crime


Did you miss the (apparently little publicised) decision to trade the
old design for new? IIRC it came after some pressure from the public,
and was mentioned here a while ago...

I remember it, but there wasn't a lot I could do, apart from make lots of
bus rides I didn't need to make.

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

On 1 Nov, 14:09, "John Rowland"
wrote:
Paul Scott wrote:
"John Rowland" wrote:

I bought several bus savers just before they put the price up
significantly, and I use buses so rarely that I still had about 10
rides left unused when the old design was invalidated because of
this sort of fraud. These crooks have left me out of pocket, and
there must be many thousands like me, so it's not a victimless crime

Did you miss the (apparently little publicised) decision to trade the
old design for new? IIRC it came after some pressure from the public,
and was mentioned here a while ago...

I remember it, but there wasn't a lot I could do, apart from make lots of
bus rides I didn't need to make.


Why don't you still attempt to exchange the old Saver tickets for new
ones now?

Try emailing London Buses customer services via email:


Or use the web contact form he
https://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/contact/default.asp?type=buses

Alternatively write to them or call them - all the contact details are
on this page:
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/contact/4417.aspx

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

On Nov 1, 9:39 am, Mizter T wrote:
On 1 Nov, 02:36, Offramp wrote:

I can see it is open to one type of fraud, which is the fraud in
question

....And they have been offered up on Tube trains as tickets for
travel... Believe me!

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

Offramp wrote:

On Nov 1, 9:39 am, Mizter T wrote:
On 1 Nov, 02:36, Offramp wrote:

I can see it is open to one type of fraud, which is the fraud in
question

...And they have been offered up on Tube trains as tickets for
travel... Believe me!


Yeah, sure - as have bus passes and National Rail tickets with no
validity on the Underground. So what?

That's a rubbish argument and is not a demonstration of a different
type of proper, organised, systematic fraud.

You've failed to answer any of the questions I posed in relation to
your comments.

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

On Nov 1, 3:55 pm, Mizter T wrote:

You've failed to answer any of the questions I posed in relation to
your comments.

Can you repeat what your questions were as I cannot find them?

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 00:16:19 -0700, Offramp
wrote:

Insurance companies would seem not to agree with you.

Insurance companies won't pay out if you leave your house open; this
is merely a way of reducing paying out, that after all being the
object of an insurance company, like it or not. This is rather a
different issue from the fact that theft is still a crime, regardless
of whether the item being stolen is secured or not.

Neil

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

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

On 1 Nov, 17:56, Offramp wrote:
On Nov 1, 3:55 pm, Mizter T wrote:

You've failed to answer any of the questions I posed in relation to
your comments.

Can you repeat what your questions were as I cannot find them?

OK, if you want - here they are again, copied from upthread...


On 1 Nov, 09:39, Mizter T wrote:
On 1 Nov, 02:36, Offramp wrote:

(snip)

The judge may have thought that Tfl was itself mainly to blame in
introducing a ticket that is so irrational, and is merely a pivot for
all types of fraud.

How is it an irrational ticket?

How is it a pivot for "all types of fraud"?

I can see it is open to one type of fraud, which is the fraud in
question.

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

On Nov 1, 8:52 pm, Mizter T wrote:
On 1 Nov, 17:56, Offramp wrote:

How is it an irrational ticket?

It has no point. It merely duplicates what can be bought elsewhere,
except that it has the added drawback of delaying bendybuses.

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 14:23:20 -0700, Offramp
wrote:

It has no point. It merely duplicates what can be bought elsewhere,
except that it has the added drawback of delaying bendybuses.

It doesn't delay anything; it takes as long to throw a receipt on the
desk as it does to touch in with an Oyster. It does have some uses in
being transferable (in the sense that I could give one to someone
travelling with me without requiring a separate card and a separate
balance) unlike Oyster Pre-Pay.

I will admit to being surprised it wasn't abolished, though.

Neil

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

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 21:27:21 +0000, Paul Corfield
wrote:

I was gobsmacked when the Saver ticket was introduced as it went against
years and years of concerted effort to remove a source of easy fraud.

Yet, prior to Oyster, it was a very, very useful ticket for the
occasional passenger who didn't want to fumble for change and would
just keep a book in their wallet.

The one and only time I've bought a book it was on behalf of a group
of Scouts (12 kids for free, 6 adults who had to pay) going from
Euston to Victoria at about 5am (only wanting one single journey).
The alternative would have been to pay twice as much in cash and to
have to carry 12 quid in coins to do so.

Neil

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

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

"Offramp" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Nov 1, 2:21 am, Ernst S Blofeld
wrote:
Mizter T wrote:
My suggestion was more about how TfL could attempt to prevent such
frauds flourishing in the first place.

I appreciate that point exactly. Custodial sentences have three main
effects; they act as punishment, they help prevent further undesirable
acts from being perpetrated by the same individual (for the duration of
the custody) and finally, they act as a deterrent to those that would
otherwise commit the crime in the first place. In not adequately
punishing those responsible they are giving implicit approval to anyone
that cares to emulate them. Alas, the notion of deterrence has been lost
to political expediency.

ESB

The judge may have thought that Tfl was itself mainly to blame in
introducing a ticket that is so irrational,

Have is the bus saver irrational?

It is the normal type of ticket in many European countries (usually
issued in the form of strip card rather than a carnet)

tim

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

"Offramp" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Nov 1, 8:52 pm, Mizter T wrote:
On 1 Nov, 17:56, Offramp wrote:

How is it an irrational ticket?

It has no point. It merely duplicates what can be bought elsewhere,

But it does so in a way that offers a dicount for making
a bulk pre-purchase.

What you are saying is that it is irrational for shops to sell
six packs of beer because cans can be bought individually.

tim

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 02:39:55 -0700, Mizter T wrote:

On 1 Nov, 02:36, Offramp wrote:
Mizter T wrote:
My suggestion was more about how TfL could attempt to prevent such
frauds flourishing in the first place.

The judge may have thought that Tfl was itself mainly to blame in
introducing a ticket that is so irrational, and is merely a pivot for
all types of fraud.

How is it an irrational ticket?
How is it a pivot for "all types of fraud"?
I can see it is open to one type of fraud, which is the fraud in
question.

The intrinsic problem with the Bus Saver ticket is that it is "value
stock" - i.e. the ticket when printed at the factory is of specific
value and thus worth duplicating. LT and LU went to enormous trouble to
remove value stock when UTS was installed and the Pass agent machines
provided. The only way you get a valid ticket is if a ticket blank of no
value is passed through a genuine machine and printed and encoded.
While not impossible to copy they take a damn sight more effort to get
right than the simplistic design of the Saver ticket.

I was gobsmacked when the Saver ticket was introduced as it went against
years and years of concerted effort to remove a source of easy fraud.
Now whether the judge took any view of this change of practice in
reaching his decision I really cannot say.

I can't believe that a judge is going to be the slightest bit
interested in the operating practice of LT.

Now the Saver ticket was clearly put in place to encourage pre-purchase
of bus tickets and was done in a hurry to meet what I would speculate as
being a political timetable "for something to be done".

To solve what problem? Personally, I find the ability to buy
tickets in advance quite useful and can see good reasons for
providing such tickets

tim

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

On Nov 3, 9:19 pm, "tim....." wrote:
"Offramp" wrote in message

ups.com...

On Nov 1, 8:52 pm, Mizter T wrote:
On 1 Nov, 17:56, Offramp wrote:

How is it an irrational ticket?

It has no point. It merely duplicates what can be bought elsewhere,

But it does so in a way that offers a dicount for making
a bulk pre-purchase.

What you are saying is that it is irrational for shops to sell
six packs of beer because cans can be bought individually.

tim

I assumed that by 'what can be bought elsewhere' Offramp meant Oyster
prepay. Saver tickets seemed a good idea compared to cash fares when
they were introduced, since they should have sped up boarding and
reduced the amount of cash carried on buses. But given we now have
Oyster, which allows people to pay for travel in advance and thus get
discounted travel, and is presumably less open to fraud, why haven't
TfL scrapped savers entirely?

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 15:15:08 -0700, brixtonite
wrote:

I assumed that by 'what can be bought elsewhere' Offramp meant Oyster
prepay. Saver tickets seemed a good idea compared to cash fares when
they were introduced, since they should have sped up boarding and
reduced the amount of cash carried on buses. But given we now have
Oyster, which allows people to pay for travel in advance and thus get
discounted travel, and is presumably less open to fraud, why haven't
TfL scrapped savers entirely?

It surprises me that they haven't, though I did explain one reason why
they offer a feature that Oyster doesn't (the ability to buy a book
and split between people). Do Tube Carnets still exist? If so, it's
probably the same reason.

Neil

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

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

"brixtonite" wrote in message
ps.com...
On Nov 3, 9:19 pm, "tim....." wrote:
"Offramp" wrote in message

ups.com...

On Nov 1, 8:52 pm, Mizter T wrote:
On 1 Nov, 17:56, Offramp wrote:

How is it an irrational ticket?

It has no point. It merely duplicates what can be bought elsewhere,

But it does so in a way that offers a dicount for making
a bulk pre-purchase.

What you are saying is that it is irrational for shops to sell
six packs of beer because cans can be bought individually.

tim

I assumed that by 'what can be bought elsewhere' Offramp meant Oyster
prepay.

Which is useless for a family of four who go to London once
a year.

tim

"Bus [Saver] ticket scammer escapes jail"
 

In message , tim.....
writes
Now the Saver ticket was clearly put in place to encourage pre-purchase
of bus tickets and was done in a hurry to meet what I would speculate as
being a political timetable "for something to be done".

To solve what problem? Personally, I find the ability to buy
tickets in advance quite useful and can see good reasons for
providing such tickets

There's one further way they can be useful, for sending to people who
make one off trips. It's a fairly nicehe market admittedly, but I used
to work for a drugs rehabilitation/management charity that would give
their clients (undated) bus saver tickets and pre-date-stamped one day
travelcards for the client's next visit so they could attend their next
session without paying for travel.

--
Paul G
Typing from Barking