On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 01:32:50PM +0000, Roland Perry wrote:
on Fri, 13 Feb 2015, remarked:
The failure mechanism would appear to be someone touching in, and
then touching out on a gate but failing to go through the gate. So
they are still "airside", and capable of catching a train somewhere.

This is such a fundamental fraud vector that whoever designed the
system to allow it (while penalising innocent passengers whose
platform was changed at the last minute) should be hung out to dry.
What do you suggest?
Landside validators to confirm you've left the platform.

Adding more complication and putting yet more of a burden on passengers
who already struggle to use the damned system correctly is not a useful
solution.

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

Repent through spending

On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 13:02:49 +0000
David Cantrell wrote:
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 11:40:00AM +0000, Roland Perry wrote:

Lack of transparency is a long term complaint that I (and others) have
with TfL's fares policy. Of course, this would never have happened if
they'd been re-nationalised. (Oh.. wait...)

I don't think that the problem is lack of transparency. The problem is
that the fare structure is too complex for any normal person to
remember.

I've said it before , I'll say it again - flat fares. Works in NYC, Moscow
and dozens of other systems so no reason it can't work here. Christ, even our
buses are a flat fare so its not like its unprecedented.

--
Spud

In message , David
Cantrell writes
Lack of transparency is a long term complaint that I (and others) have
with TfL's fares policy. Of course, this would never have happened if
they'd been re-nationalised. (Oh.. wait...)

I don't think that the problem is lack of transparency. The problem is
that the fare structure is too complex for any normal person to
remember.

It's both; and as a result even an abnormal person hasn't got enough
information to understand it.
--
Roland Perry

In message , David
Cantrell writes
Or you just wait 'til the following day and go to the Oyster website
(assuming your card is registered) or phone the Helpdesk and they'll
sort it out for you with significantly less faffing around...

And that's what I did - or rather, I emailed them.

But the problem isn't that it's a pain to get a refund - given that you
can just email them and it'll get sorted out, it's *not* a pain.

Assuming they have a good record of sorting things out. My experience of
National Rail TOCs and their sorting out of compensation claims is that
you have to have a system to track every one.
--
Roland Perry

In message , David
Cantrell writes
The failure mechanism would appear to be someone touching in, and
then touching out on a gate but failing to go through the gate. So
they are still "airside", and capable of catching a train somewhere.

This is such a fundamental fraud vector that whoever designed the
system to allow it (while penalising innocent passengers whose
platform was changed at the last minute) should be hung out to dry.
What do you suggest?
Landside validators to confirm you've left the platform.

Adding more complication and putting yet more of a burden on passengers
who already struggle to use the damned system correctly is not a useful
solution.

Although I think it could be implemented without too much of a struggle
for customers. They'd just have to know that if they abandoned a
touch-in by touching out again that they could reset themselves to their
earlier state with one simple swipe.
--
Roland Perry

On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 04:50:25PM +0000, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , David
Cantrell writes
Or you just wait 'til the following day and go to the Oyster website
(assuming your card is registered) or phone the Helpdesk and they'll
sort it out for you with significantly less faffing around...
And that's what I did - or rather, I emailed them.
But the problem isn't that it's a pain to get a refund - given that you
can just email them and it'll get sorted out, it's *not* a pain.
Assuming they have a good record of sorting things out. My experience of
National Rail TOCs and their sorting out of compensation claims is that
you have to have a system to track every one.

All Oyster charging errors are dealt with by TfL, so thankfully I don't
need to get SWT involved.

And TfL do have a good record of sorting out all the cock-ups they make
on my Oyster card - they've never quibbled at all. Although for this
most recent one, I told them in my email that I wanted to pick up the
refund at Thornton Heath, and their reply said something along the lines
of "thankyou for your email, your refund is waiting for you at Canary
Wharf" :-)

--
David Cantrell | Nth greatest programmer in the world

I remember when computers were frustrating because they did
exactly what you told them to. That seems kinda quaint now.
-- JD Baldwin, in the Monastery

On Thursday, 12 February 2015 12:55:23 UTC, David Cantrell wrote:
I've found another way in which Oyster incorrectly charges people too
much.

On Tuesday evening I touched in and got on a train at Waterloo. A few
minutes later we were told that there was no driver. So I got off,
touched out, found the next train on the departures board, touched in,
and travelled.

The result - I was charged for entering and exiting at Waterloo, and
then charged again for my actual journey.

Now, I've emailed the helpline and I'm sure I'll get a refund in a few
days, but most people aren't aware of how error-prone Oyster is and
consequently that they should check their journey history. I wonder how
much TfL and SWT made from that train full of people going nowhere.

--
David Cantrell | Godless Liberal Elitist

Only some sort of ghastly dehumanised moron would want to get
rid of Routemasters
-- Ken Livingstone, four years before he got rid of 'em

Happens all the time at Paddington. Pax. touch in at platform 12 for the Heathrow Connect. But frequently in the late evening the HConn comes into another platform. So pax. then have to touch out - or worse are allowed through the gates by obliging staff - only to touch in again at say 10. I understand that this incurrs a penalty charge. CJB.

On 2015-02-24 18:21:23 +0000, CJB said:

Happens all the time at Paddington. Pax. touch in at platform 12 for
the Heathrow Connect. But frequently in the late evening the HConn
comes into another platform. So pax. then have to touch out - or worse
are allowed through the gates by obliging staff - only to touch in
again at say 10. I understand that this incurrs a penalty charge. CJB.

Is this a platform alteration, or just not on the displays until it
arrives? If the latter, the passengers trying to "jump the gun" have
only themselves to blame.

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

Looking at the layout of Paddington station on the National Rail website, if you are "airside" on platform 12 then you can switch to any of platforms 10-14 without passing through any ticket barriers. I can't comment on how clearly such routes are signposted.

On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 04:38:15AM -0800, Steve Lewis wrote:

Looking at the layout of Paddington station on the National Rail website, i=
f you are "airside" on platform 12 then you can switch to any of platforms =
10-14 without passing through any ticket barriers. I can't comment on how c=
learly such routes are signposted.

I could have done the same at Waterloo in the incident that started this
thread, if I knew what platform I wanted to change to. However, I needed
to leave the gated area to see the departure boards.

--
David Cantrell | Enforcer, South London Linguistic Massive

Sobol's Law of Telecom Utilities:
Telcos are malicious; cablecos are simply clueless.