Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Another Oyster Rip-off
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 14:11:42 on Sun, 8 Aug 2010, CJB remarked: TfL explained that it could not be aware of any over-charging until the issue was reported by a passenger. Apart, of course, from looking for cards where there were two top-up [bank charges] on the same day. Yes - some passengers will do that, but that doesn't actually matter. What you are looking for is top-ups where there were two debits but only one amount of credit added. Not holding an Oyster card, I wouldn't know, but in many cases the financial part of e-transactions is handled separately for security reasons. If that is the case here, then how would TfL know in detail about the debits? -- http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9632943.html (43 033 at Reading, 27 Apr 1985) |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Another Oyster Rip-off
In message , at 10:33:30 on
Mon, 9 Aug 2010, Chris Tolley remarked: TfL explained that it could not be aware of any over-charging until the issue was reported by a passenger. Apart, of course, from looking for cards where there were two top-up [bank charges] on the same day. Yes - some passengers will do that, but that doesn't actually matter. What you are looking for is top-ups where there were two debits but only one amount of credit added. Not holding an Oyster card, I wouldn't know, but in many cases the financial part of e-transactions is handled separately for security reasons. If that is the case here, then how would TfL know in detail about the debits? That's potentially why you need the people handling the payments to give you a list (presumably quite a short one) of all the Oyster cards that requested a debit, and you could then correlate that with the credits registered against the cards. Also, this "double dipped" money will also be sitting in some kind of suspense account, because the books won't balance. In simple terms, you've got more income than the services you've supplied. -- Roland Perry |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Another Oyster Rip-off
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:33:30 on Mon, 9 Aug 2010, Chris Tolley remarked: TfL explained that it could not be aware of any over-charging until the issue was reported by a passenger. Apart, of course, from looking for cards where there were two top-up [bank charges] on the same day. Yes - some passengers will do that, but that doesn't actually matter. What you are looking for is top-ups where there were two debits but only one amount of credit added. Not holding an Oyster card, I wouldn't know, but in many cases the financial part of e-transactions is handled separately for security reasons. If that is the case here, then how would TfL know in detail about the debits? That's potentially why you need the people handling the payments to give you a list (presumably quite a short one) of all the Oyster cards that requested a debit, and you could then correlate that with the credits registered against the cards. Also, this "double dipped" money will also be sitting in some kind of suspense account, because the books won't balance. In simple terms, you've got more income than the services you've supplied. I would have thought that the question of matching things up between TfL and whoever holds the financial records is possibly irrelevant. All that's needed, surely, is for the bank to trawl through the credits, and if it finds identical amounts with identical timestamps (and possibly identical (or consecutive) transaction-ids) then just refund one of them. -- http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9683648.html (Class 105 twin set led by 51298, in all-over blue at Colchester, 1980) |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Another Oyster Rip-off
In message , at 11:33:50 on
Mon, 9 Aug 2010, Chris Tolley remarked: I would have thought that the question of matching things up between TfL and whoever holds the financial records is possibly irrelevant. All that's needed, surely, is for the bank to trawl through the credits, and if it finds identical amounts with identical timestamps (and possibly identical (or consecutive) transaction-ids) then just refund one of them. tfl's bank, you mean? Yes, that's in effect getting tfl to do it. I wasn't going to assume all the double-debits were identically timed though - rather, starting off with "being on the same day" and see where it went from there. -- Roland Perry |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Another Oyster Rip-off
On Aug 9, 10:33*am, Chris Tolley (ukonline really) wrote: Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 14:11:42 on Sun, 8 Aug 2010, CJB remarked: TfL explained that it could not be aware of any over-charging until the issue was reported by a passenger. Apart, of course, from looking for cards where there were two top-up [bank charges] on the same day. Yes - some passengers will do that, but that doesn't actually matter. What you are looking for is top-ups where there were two debits but only one amount of credit added. Not holding an Oyster card, I wouldn't know, but in many cases the financial part of e-transactions is handled separately for security reasons. If that is the case here, then how would TfL know in detail about the debits? If by 'e-transactions' you are talking about an e-commerce (i.e. online purchase) situation, then that wouldn't apply here as this concerns people topping up their Oyster cards in person at self- service ticket machines at LU stations. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Another Oyster Rip-off
"Mizter T" wrote in message
On Aug 9, 10:33 am, Chris Tolley (ukonline really) wrote: Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 14:11:42 on Sun, 8 Aug 2010, CJB remarked: TfL explained that it could not be aware of any over-charging until the issue was reported by a passenger. Apart, of course, from looking for cards where there were two top-up [bank charges] on the same day. Yes - some passengers will do that, but that doesn't actually matter. What you are looking for is top-ups where there were two debits but only one amount of credit added. Not holding an Oyster card, I wouldn't know, but in many cases the financial part of e-transactions is handled separately for security reasons. If that is the case here, then how would TfL know in detail about the debits? If by 'e-transactions' you are talking about an e-commerce (i.e. online purchase) situation, then that wouldn't apply here as this concerns people topping up their Oyster cards in person at self- service ticket machines at LU stations. But using chip and pin bank cards to do so. It's also not clear if it only happens with debit cards, or credit cards as well. And I don't quite understand whether the problem is at certain machines, or all machines at certain stations. But it does seem slightly suspicious that it seems mainly to happen at large Tube+mainline stations with OSI time-out potential... |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Another Oyster Rip-off
On Aug 9, 12:44*pm, "Recliner" wrote: "Mizter T" wrote: On Aug 9, 10:33 am, Chris *Tolley (ukonline really) wrote: Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 14:11:42 on Sun, 8 Aug 2010, CJB remarked: TfL explained that it could not be aware of any over-charging until the issue was reported by a passenger. Apart, of course, from looking for cards where there were two top-up [bank charges] on the same day. Yes - some passengers will do that, but that doesn't actually matter. What you are looking for is top-ups where there were two debits but only one amount of credit added. Not holding an Oyster card, I wouldn't know, but in many cases the financial part of e-transactions is handled separately for security reasons. If that is the case here, then how would TfL know in detail about the debits? If by 'e-transactions' you are talking about an e-commerce (i.e. online purchase) situation, then that wouldn't apply here as this concerns people topping up their Oyster cards in person at self- service ticket machines at LU stations. But using chip and pin bank cards to do so. It's also not clear if it only happens with debit cards, or credit cards as well. And I don't quite understand whether the problem is at certain machines, or all machines at certain stations. Does using a hip-and-pin card qualify it to have the 'e-transactions' label? But it does seem slightly suspicious that it seems mainly to happen at large Tube+mainline stations with OSI time-out potential... Yes, that was a factor in my earlier suspicion (though I subsequently revisited this thread and doubted whether there could any connection... but maybe...). Basically, more information required - we're rather stabbing in the dark otherwise. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Another Oyster Rip-off
Mizter T wrote:
Does using a hip-and-pin card qualify it to have the 'e-transactions' label? Occasionally people use expressions without knowing that others reckon they are jargon. It's a bit like spelling mistakes - astute readers can see past them, whilst some might feel the need to point them out. ;-) -- http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9633122.html (66 095 at Bridgend, 2 Jul 1999) |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Another Oyster Rip-off
On Aug 9, 2:18*pm, Chris Tolley (ukonline really) wrote: Mizter T wrote: Does using a hip-and-pin card qualify it to have the 'e-transactions' label? Occasionally people use expressions without knowing that others reckon they are jargon. It's a bit like spelling mistakes - astute readers can see past them, whilst some might feel the need to point them out. ;-) Don't smiley face me. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Another Oyster Rip-off
On Aug 9, 2:44*pm, Mizter T wrote: On Aug 9, 2:18*pm, Chris *Tolley (ukonline really) wrote: Mizter T wrote: Does using a chip-and-pin card qualify it to have the 'e-transactions' label? Occasionally people use expressions without knowing that others reckon they are jargon. It's a bit like spelling mistakes - astute readers can see past them, whilst some might feel the need to point them out. ;-) Don't smiley face me. Sorry, that was unnecessarily aggressive - I've read your other substantive reply to my point/ question about what you meant by an 'e- transaction'. Though I still don't quite see the need for the somewhat snide put-down - especially in the context of the other 'Ipswich idiocy' thread (which I intend to return to, if and when I can summon up the requisite motivation), where I think it may not have been me that was the one who was lacking in astuteness. That aside, I didn't intend to suggest that the term 'e-transaction' had some definitive meaning - my intention was merely to work clarify what you mean by it. |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Oyster: still an unreliable rip-off | London Transport | |||
Anger at Oyster cards 'rip-off' as millions hit for not 'touching out' | London Transport | |||
Oyster - a 60 million a year rip-off | London Transport | |||
Southall - Zonal fare rip-off? | London Transport | |||
Microsoft's rip-off of Google Earth | London Transport |