On 11 July, 17:40, Mr Thant
wrote:
On 11 July, 17:28, Roy Badami wrote:

Is there any statutory basis for this penalty? *The recent furore about
penalties for unauthorised overdrafts has brought up an important point
which is that consumer contracts essentially aren't allowed to contain
provisions that permit the service provider to 'fine' the consumer -
they can only charge the consumer the actual reasonable administrative
costs incurred as a result of the consumer's breach of contract.

TfL call it the "maximum cash fare", and the principle is that there's
a discount from this for using the system correctly (touching in and
out in the specified time, etc). Since the price of a single ticket is
indeed £4, I can't imagine a challenge would be too successful.

U

But the cash fare only went up to £4 to coerce people to use Oyster.
It was not the existing cash fare, so they can't really argue that
one. Or is that the real reason why they didn't charge the maximum
for unresolved journeys straight away, ie to be able to argue that
that the maximum cash fare existed first?