In message , at
16:04:04 on Sun, 13 Jul 2008, Steve Dulieu
remarked:
"Customers who present disabled cards should be referred to the ticket
office.

A rare use in the transport industry of the word "disabled" to mean
"non-functional", rather than "for wheelchair users".
--
Roland Perry

On 13 Jul, 17:04, "Steve Dulieu"
wrote:
"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 10:36:33
on Sun, 13 Jul 2008, Steve Dulieu
remarked:
If the card is of a type that cannot be replaced at a ticket office - eg a
freedom pass - then the customer should be advised to follow the usual
replacement procedure. Freedom pass holders should be advised to contact the
council of issue. Child photocard holders should apply for a replacement by
using the number on the back of the card."

This is iniquitous. Those who have most need for the card (Freedom
pass - which includes the handicapped (not using disabled to present
confusion)) have the longest to wait to get their cards replaced. I
would have thought TfL should have made strenuous efforts to ensure
this group were not disadvantaged compared to 'ordinary' Oyster card
holders.

Sid

wrote:
On 13 Jul, 17:04, "Steve Dulieu"
wrote:
"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at
10:36:33 on Sun, 13 Jul 2008, Steve Dulieu
remarked:
If the card is of a type that cannot be replaced at a ticket office
- eg a freedom pass - then the customer should be advised to follow
the usual replacement procedure. Freedom pass holders should be
advised to contact the council of issue. Child photocard holders
should apply for a replacement by using the number on the back of
the card."

This is iniquitous. Those who have most need for the card (Freedom
pass - which includes the handicapped (not using disabled to present
confusion)) have the longest to wait to get their cards replaced. I
would have thought TfL should have made strenuous efforts to ensure
this group were not disadvantaged compared to 'ordinary' Oyster card
holders.

They are not disadvantaged. "Our staff will be instructed to allow these
card holders to continue to travel whilst replacements are issued."

For most boroughs (all except Barking and Dagenham, Havering, Sutton,
Wandsworth), replacement of a damaged older person's Freedom Pass can be
done at a Post Office, according to www.freedompass.org.
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

On 14 Jul, 09:39, "Richard J." wrote:
wrote:
On 13 Jul, 17:04, "Steve Dulieu"
wrote:
"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at
10:36:33 on Sun, 13 Jul 2008, Steve Dulieu
remarked:
If the card is of a type that cannot be replaced at a ticket office
- eg a freedom pass - then the customer should be advised to follow
the usual replacement procedure. Freedom pass holders should be
advised to contact the council of issue. Child photocard holders
should apply for a replacement by using the number on the back of
the card."

This is iniquitous. Those who have most need for the card (Freedom
pass - which includes the handicapped (not using disabled to present
confusion)) have the longest to wait to get their cards replaced. I
would have thought TfL should have made strenuous efforts to ensure
this group were not disadvantaged compared to 'ordinary' Oyster card
holders.

They are not disadvantaged. "Our staff will be instructed to allow these
card holders to continue to travel whilst replacements are issued."

For most boroughs (all except Barking and Dagenham, Havering, Sutton,
Wandsworth), replacement of a damaged older person's Freedom Pass can be
done at a Post Office, according towww.freedompass.org.

I stand corrected. I was going by the quoted text in an earlier
posting in this Usenet thread where that text is not present. Having
read the page on TfL's website now, I see you are correct.

Being of a suspicious mind, I wonder if the statement was amended at
some point? Either way, the result is the same for any Freedom Pass
holders disadvantaged by the TfL systems failure, which is a good
thing. I'm of the mind that says that you can tell a lot about the
quality of an organisation by how it handles things after a cock-up -
providing good service when everything is working is taken for
granted: it's how service if provided when everything goes to pot that
is important and leaves long-lasting impressions.

Cheers,

Sid

On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 01:09:59 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

This is iniquitous. Those who have most need for the card (Freedom
pass - which includes the handicapped (not using disabled to present
confusion)) have the longest to wait to get their cards replaced. I
would have thought TfL should have made strenuous efforts to ensure
this group were not disadvantaged compared to 'ordinary' Oyster card
holders.

Especially given that, unlike any other Oyster card, a Freedom Pass
can be validated by sight as it contains a photograph and validity
details. The appropriate action would therefore be to tell bus
drivers and Tube gateline staff to accept Freedom Passes on sight for
a fixed, realistic period in the event that it fails to operate the
Oyster pad. I reckon two months would be realistic.

Neil

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

On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 08:39:38 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote:

They are not disadvantaged. "Our staff will be instructed to allow these
card holders to continue to travel whilst replacements are issued."

Ah, I see. Looks like they did do what was suggested.

Neil

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

On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 08:39:38 GMT, Richard J. wrote:

If the card is of a type that cannot be replaced at a ticket office
- eg a freedom pass - then the customer should be advised to follow
the usual replacement procedure. Freedom pass holders should be
advised to contact the council of issue. Child photocard holders
should apply for a replacement by using the number on the back of
the card."

This is iniquitous. Those who have most need for the card (Freedom
pass - which includes the handicapped (not using disabled to present
confusion)) have the longest to wait to get their cards replaced. I
would have thought TfL should have made strenuous efforts to ensure
this group were not disadvantaged compared to 'ordinary' Oyster card
holders.

They are not disadvantaged. "Our staff will be instructed to allow these
card holders to continue to travel whilst replacements are issued."

Having to re-apply for a pass is a disadvantage. Why can't
replacements just be sent out automatically?

In message , at 00:02:34 on
Tue, 15 Jul 2008, asdf remarked:
Having to re-apply for a pass is a disadvantage. Why can't
replacements just be sent out automatically?

Maybe they don't know which passes were used on Saturday morning and are
therefore disabled?
--
Roland Perry

On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 08:41:02 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:

Having to re-apply for a pass is a disadvantage. Why can't
replacements just be sent out automatically?

Maybe they don't know which passes were used on Saturday morning and are
therefore disabled?

Surely their giant information-hoovering privacy-invading (etc)
database has that data?

But even if it doesn't, they could at least have a fast-track
replacement procedure. Something like: phone a number, give your name,
and they post out a duplicate pass to the registered address.

On 15 Jul, 23:48, asdf wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 08:41:02 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
Having to re-apply for a pass is a disadvantage. Why can't
replacements just be sent out automatically?

Maybe they don't know which passes were used on Saturday morning and are
therefore disabled?

Surely their giant information-hoovering privacy-invading (etc)
database has that data?

But even if it doesn't, they could at least have a fast-track
replacement procedure. Something like: phone a number, give your name,
and they post out a duplicate pass to the registered address.

This is a guess, and only a guess.

The disabled cards have been put on a blacklist referenced by all
Oyster validators. To keep the storage of such a blacklist small, it
will have the minimum amount of info in it: in other words, only the
id numbers of the blacklisted cards.

The application that generates the blacklist probably generates the
blacklist directly - after all, "it's only ever going to be added to
isn't it?" . So there's no need to record the date on which a card
entered the blacklist. Hence, TfL quite possibly have no way of
knowing when a particular card was blacklisted, and so can't reverse
the operational error. Oops.

It would be sensible for a database somewhere (not the blacklist
itself, which is downloaded to all sorts of memory restricted devices)
to keep records of when a card is blacklisted, and the location it was
last used in.

Alternatively, TfL do have the info, but don't want the bother of
running the report to identify the cards blacklisted on Saturday.

Cheers,

Sid