There are posters on the Underground which say that people should always
swipe in and out so as to get the best fare.
If by 'best' they mean cheapest they are wrong.
Surely if you have the chance you should either not swipe in or swipe out,
or both.

--
Work like the ponies in coalmines.
Dance like the teardrop explodes.
Love like you're Frank in Blue Velvet.
Sing as though your little throat would burst.

I think they've changed the propaganda to say "pay the *right* fare",
not quite so positive a message.

Alan OBrien wrote:
There are posters on the Underground which say that people should always
swipe in and out so as to get the best fare.
If by 'best' they mean cheapest they are wrong.
Surely if you have the chance you should either not swipe in or swipe out,
or both.

If you do neither, then you do not have a valid ticket and are
deliberately trying to avoid the fare, rendering you liable for either a
penalty fare or prosecution. If you deliberately don't touch in or out,
then the same presumably applies.

Additionally, if you only do one, then you incur an unresolved journey
which may be charged at a high rate (e.g. exiting mainline gates at
London rail terminals), may prevent you from using your card (thus
losing your deposit if you don't top up) and will definitely prevent
capping from working (thus resulting in more expense).

The cheapest fare is the cheapest valid ticket for your journey. If you
don't have a valid ticket at all and don't intend to obtain one, you are
essentially a thief!

You could equally accuse Tesco of false advertising for saying that
their baked beans are cheaper than any other place's - Sainsbury's baked
beans are "free" if you shoplift them.

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

Dave Arquati wrote:
Alan OBrien wrote:
There are posters on the Underground which say that people should always
swipe in and out so as to get the best fare.
If by 'best' they mean cheapest they are wrong.
Surely if you have the chance you should either not swipe in or swipe out,
or both.

If you do neither, then you do not have a valid ticket and are
deliberately trying to avoid the fare, rendering you liable for either a
penalty fare or prosecution. If you deliberately don't touch in or out,
then the same presumably applies.

With Oyster there is this new scenario that hasn't as far as I can see
occured before in transport ticketing - to have a valid ticket fore the
whole journey a passenger must perform the correct action at the end of
that journey i.e. touching out. Obviously when a stations automatic
gates are in operation enforcing this is easy, but otherwise it relies
on the passenger doing the right thing.

There are ways to encourage this to happen: having inspectors at the
exit station checking that people have touched out; the daily cap only
working if a user touches in and out for every journey: and the
possibility of a financial penalty if a user doesn't touch in and out
each time (so far only implemented on journeys through National Rail
mainline stations).

These are problems that will come to the fore when Oyster is
implemented across National Rail in London, given that number of
ungated stations.


Additionally, if you only do one, then you incur an unresolved journey
which may be charged at a high rate (e.g. exiting mainline gates at
London rail terminals), may prevent you from using your card (thus
losing your deposit if you don't top up) and will definitely prevent
capping from working (thus resulting in more expense).

I wonder if there are any plans to penalise those with unresolved
journeys (other than in the case of NR terminals). It would make the
system less open to abuse especially once it's been implemented across
NR in London, though I'm sure it would cause a fuss as well.

Dave - where you say above if you don't touch in/out this "may prevent
you from using your card (thus losing your deposit if you don't top
up)" what do you mean? From what I've seen unresolved journeys don't
lock up someones card, not yet at least.


The cheapest fare is the cheapest valid ticket for your journey. If you
don't have a valid ticket at all and don't intend to obtain one, you are
essentially a thief!

You could equally accuse Tesco of false advertising for saying that
their baked beans are cheaper than any other place's - Sainsbury's baked
beans are "free" if you shoplift them.

A strong point that essentially deals with the original question -
though the original poster was welcome in pondering on the language
used by LU and sharing his thoughts here.

Mizter T wrote:
Dave Arquati wrote:
Alan OBrien wrote:
There are posters on the Underground which say that people should always
swipe in and out so as to get the best fare.
If by 'best' they mean cheapest they are wrong.
Surely if you have the chance you should either not swipe in or swipe out,
or both.
If you do neither, then you do not have a valid ticket and are
deliberately trying to avoid the fare, rendering you liable for either a
penalty fare or prosecution. If you deliberately don't touch in or out,
then the same presumably applies.

With Oyster there is this new scenario that hasn't as far as I can see
occured before in transport ticketing - to have a valid ticket fore the
whole journey a passenger must perform the correct action at the end of
that journey i.e. touching out. Obviously when a stations automatic
gates are in operation enforcing this is easy, but otherwise it relies
on the passenger doing the right thing.

There are ways to encourage this to happen: having inspectors at the
exit station checking that people have touched out; the daily cap only
working if a user touches in and out for every journey: and the
possibility of a financial penalty if a user doesn't touch in and out
each time (so far only implemented on journeys through National Rail
mainline stations).

These are problems that will come to the fore when Oyster is
implemented across National Rail in London, given that number of
ungated stations.

Indeed. I imagine the solution will be to make sure that touching in and
out is always in the user's best interest, and this will probably be
achieved by combining "refund-at-exit" as you mention (i.e. charging a
higher fare at entry and refunding if necessary at exit) with the
lock-ups of users' cards if too many unresolved journeys occur (as
mentioned below).

Additionally, if you only do one, then you incur an unresolved journey
which may be charged at a high rate (e.g. exiting mainline gates at
London rail terminals), may prevent you from using your card (thus
losing your deposit if you don't top up) and will definitely prevent
capping from working (thus resulting in more expense).

I wonder if there are any plans to penalise those with unresolved
journeys (other than in the case of NR terminals). It would make the
system less open to abuse especially once it's been implemented across
NR in London, though I'm sure it would cause a fuss as well.

Fuss could probably be avoided if TfL improved the publicity and signage
regarding when to touch in and out, and provided explicitly clear
instructions and examples on how the damn system works! At the moment,
most of the Oyster knowledge on the group is a combination of collected
experience, inside knowledge and educated guesswork. As well as the
easy-to-understand "guides to Oyster" at stations, there should be a
detailed resource available.

Dave - where you say above if you don't touch in/out this "may prevent
you from using your card (thus losing your deposit if you don't top
up)" what do you mean? From what I've seen unresolved journeys don't
lock up someones card, not yet at least.

This is just from hearsay, but I think *multiple* unresolved journeys
prevent the card from working.

The cheapest fare is the cheapest valid ticket for your journey. If you
don't have a valid ticket at all and don't intend to obtain one, you are
essentially a thief!

You could equally accuse Tesco of false advertising for saying that
their baked beans are cheaper than any other place's - Sainsbury's baked
beans are "free" if you shoplift them.

A strong point that essentially deals with the original question -
though the original poster was welcome in pondering on the language
used by LU and sharing his thoughts here.

True, it was just that the original poster's language implied that
fare-dodging was the desirable course of action, rather than merely a
possible one ("you should not swipe in..." rather than "you *could*
avoid swiping in"...). Probably just my over-reaction!

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 14:35:51 +0100, Dave Arquati wrote:

With Oyster there is this new scenario that hasn't as far as I can see
occured before in transport ticketing - to have a valid ticket fore the
whole journey a passenger must perform the correct action at the end of
that journey i.e. touching out. Obviously when a stations automatic
gates are in operation enforcing this is easy, but otherwise it relies
on the passenger doing the right thing.

These are problems that will come to the fore when Oyster is
implemented across National Rail in London, given that number of
ungated stations.

Indeed. I imagine the solution will be to make sure that touching in and
out is always in the user's best interest, and this will probably be
achieved by combining "refund-at-exit" as you mention (i.e. charging a
higher fare at entry and refunding if necessary at exit) with the
lock-ups of users' cards if too many unresolved journeys occur (as
mentioned below).

And, as has been mentioned, that's what happens on NR at the moment.
AIUI, £5.00 is quite literally deducted from your pre-pay balance as
soon as you touch in at Marylebone, Euston, Liverpool Street, or
Fenchurch Street NR. The difference between that and the correct fare
is then refunded when (if!) you get off at a station pre-pay is valid
to, and touch out on a reader there.

Dave - where you say above if you don't touch in/out this "may prevent
you from using your card (thus losing your deposit if you don't top
up)" what do you mean? From what I've seen unresolved journeys don't
lock up someones card, not yet at least.

This is just from hearsay, but I think *multiple* unresolved journeys
prevent the card from working.

In the early months of pre-pay, when querying an unresolved journey at
a Tube ticket office, I was told that if you picked up too many
unresolved journeys (without getting them sorted out by the Helpline),
your card would/might* stop working. I don't know of any reports of it
actually happening though.

*I can't remember his exact words; perhaps he was just speculating.

The cheapest fare is the cheapest valid ticket for your journey. If you
don't have a valid ticket at all and don't intend to obtain one, you are
essentially a thief!

You could equally accuse Tesco of false advertising for saying that
their baked beans are cheaper than any other place's - Sainsbury's baked
beans are "free" if you shoplift them.

A strong point that essentially deals with the original question -
though the original poster was welcome in pondering on the language
used by LU and sharing his thoughts here.

True, it was just that the original poster's language implied that
fare-dodging was the desirable course of action, rather than merely a
possible one ("you should not swipe in..." rather than "you *could*
avoid swiping in"...). Probably just my over-reaction!

Perhaps he meant "best" fare as in the best of all possible fares that
could theoretically exist, rather than just the actual ones in the
table in the fares leaflet. Which would of course be £0.00 (at least
from the passenger's point of view, though perhaps not from the
taxpayer's). ;-)

Mizter T wrote:
Dave Arquati wrote:
Alan OBrien wrote:
There are posters on the Underground which say that people should always
swipe in and out so as to get the best fare.
If by 'best' they mean cheapest they are wrong.
Surely if you have the chance you should either not swipe in or swipe out,
or both.
If you do neither, then you do not have a valid ticket and are
deliberately trying to avoid the fare, rendering you liable for either a
penalty fare or prosecution. If you deliberately don't touch in or out,
then the same presumably applies.

With Oyster there is this new scenario that hasn't as far as I can see
occured before in transport ticketing - to have a valid ticket fore the
whole journey a passenger must perform the correct action at the end of
that journey i.e. touching out. Obviously when a stations automatic
gates are in operation enforcing this is easy, but otherwise it relies
on the passenger doing the right thing.

I believe there are some commuter type bus opperations somewhere (US, I
think), where in the evening peak, everyone boards at the start, and
pays their fare as they alight, so that the huge queue to pay on
boarding is avoided (because you all board together, but alight along a
spread out route).

Robin

With Oyster there is this new scenario that hasn't as far as I can see
occured before in transport ticketing - to have a valid ticket fore the
whole journey a passenger must perform the correct action at the end of
that journey i.e. touching out. ...

I believe there are some commuter type bus opperations somewhere (US, I
think), where in the evening peak, everyone boards at the start, and
pays their fare as they alight, so that the huge queue to pay on
boarding is avoided (because you all board together, but alight along a
spread out route).

Not only commuter. I don't know if it still is, but it used to be the
rule in Seattle on the ordinary city transit buses that on an outward
trip from the city center you paid on exit. Payment on exit has also
been used on the Rockaways line of the New York subway, and on some
parts of the Boston transit system. In Toronto, some TTC trips outside
the city use it. These last three cases have all been done as a way of
implementing fare zones without requiring people to produce a ticket
both on entry and on exit.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto,
"Have you ever heard [my honesty] questioned?"
"I never even heard it mentioned." -- Every Day's a Holiday

My text in this article is in the public domain.

In message , Mark Brader
writes
With Oyster there is this new scenario that hasn't as far as I can see
occured before in transport ticketing - to have a valid ticket fore the
whole journey a passenger must perform the correct action at the end of
that journey i.e. touching out. ...

I believe there are some commuter type bus opperations somewhere (US, I
think), where in the evening peak, everyone boards at the start, and
pays their fare as they alight, so that the huge queue to pay on
boarding is avoided (because you all board together, but alight along a
spread out route).

Not only commuter. I don't know if it still is, but it used to be the
rule in Seattle on the ordinary city transit buses that on an outward
trip from the city center you paid on exit. Payment on exit has also
been used on the Rockaways line of the New York subway, and on some
parts of the Boston transit system. In Toronto, some TTC trips outside
the city use it. These last three cases have all been done as a way of
implementing fare zones without requiring people to produce a ticket
both on entry and on exit.

I *think* there's an interurban or suburban tramway somewhere in the US
that does the exact opposite of this, ie you pay at exit on inward
journeys and at entry on outward. This was done in order to
concentrate the majority of revenue on one point which was (presumably)
a large and well-equipped City Centre terminal station.

It might have been in Philadelphia, but I could be wrong.
--
Ian Jelf, MITG
Birmingham, UK

Registered Blue Badge Tourist Guide for London and the Heart of England
http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk

Alan OBrien wrote:
There are posters on the Underground which say that people should always
swipe in and out so as to get the best fare.
If by 'best' they mean cheapest they are wrong.
Surely if you have the chance you should either not swipe in or swipe out,
or both.

Remember "best" can also mean "morally best"/"rightest", as well as
"most advantageous to yourself".

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