On Jan 17, 11:12*am, Matthew Dickinson
wrote:
On 17 Jan, 09:53, MIG wrote:

On Jan 17, 12:12*am, John B wrote:

On 16 Jan, 21:09, Paul Corfield wrote:

I think SWT will simply work on the basis that they will have to accept
some "leakage" risk in the AM Peak which I believe is the only time the
steps and subways from the platforms are open.

It isn't [IMX all day weekdays and sometimes even at weekends], but it
doubtless will be once the barriers are imposed. Yay progress.

Given that SWT is going to introduce Oyster, leaving gaps at Waterloo
will presumably earn revenue, if every unresolved journey from Clapham
Junction is charged as an open single to Weymouth.

They won't be introducing Oyster outside Greater London. Their
commitment is to introduce ITSO, which is unlikely to include a PAYG
type product. (ITSO seems likely to be able to hold seasons, carnets
and 'stored journey rights')

Although different assumptions of fraud seem to be attached to PAYG on
LU compared with travelcards.

That is, if I use my travelcard to enter a zone 2 station with a 1/2
travelcard and don't need to use a gate to get out wherever I happen
to end up, it isn't assumed that I've been beyond my zones and I am
not required to prove that I haven't.

If I do the same with PAYG, it's assumed that I must have taken the
longest possible journey on LU and I will be charged unless I can
prove that I haven't.

So who knows what deductions will be made by SWT from people who touch
in at Clapham Junction and don't touch out. Reasonableness need not
be assumed.

MIG wrote:
On Jan 17, 11:12 am, Matthew Dickinson
wrote:
They won't be introducing Oyster outside Greater London. Their
commitment is to introduce ITSO, which is unlikely to include a PAYG
type product. (ITSO seems likely to be able to hold seasons, carnets
and 'stored journey rights')

Although different assumptions of fraud seem to be attached to PAYG on
LU compared with travelcards.

That is, if I use my travelcard to enter a zone 2 station with a 1/2
travelcard and don't need to use a gate to get out wherever I happen
to end up, it isn't assumed that I've been beyond my zones and I am
not required to prove that I haven't.

If I do the same with PAYG, it's assumed that I must have taken the
longest possible journey on LU and I will be charged unless I can
prove that I haven't.

So who knows what deductions will be made by SWT from people who touch
in at Clapham Junction and don't touch out. Reasonableness need not
be assumed.

Why SWT though? How can they decide if the problem isn't an unresolved
Southern or Overground journey, which is presumably the case at the moment?
Presumably TfL's back office divides up the 'max cash fare' between all
possible service providers...

Paul S

On 17 Jan, 11:53, MIG wrote:
On Jan 17, 11:12*am, Matthew Dickinson
wrote:





On 17 Jan, 09:53, MIG wrote:

On Jan 17, 12:12*am, John B wrote:

On 16 Jan, 21:09, Paul Corfield wrote:

I think SWT will simply work on the basis that they will have to accept
some "leakage" risk in the AM Peak which I believe is the only time the
steps and subways from the platforms are open.

It isn't [IMX all day weekdays and sometimes even at weekends], but it
doubtless will be once the barriers are imposed. Yay progress.

Given that SWT is going to introduce Oyster, leaving gaps at Waterloo
will presumably earn revenue, if every unresolved journey from Clapham
Junction is charged as an open single to Weymouth.

They won't be introducing Oyster outside Greater London. Their
commitment is to introduce ITSO, which is unlikely to include a PAYG
type product. (ITSO seems likely to be able to hold seasons, carnets
and 'stored journey rights')

Although different assumptions of fraud seem to be attached to PAYG on
LU compared with travelcards.

That is, if I use my travelcard to enter a zone 2 station with a 1/2
travelcard and don't need to use a gate to get out wherever I happen
to end up, it isn't assumed that I've been beyond my zones and I am
not required to prove that I haven't.

If I do the same with PAYG, it's assumed that I must have taken the
longest possible journey on LU and I will be charged unless I can
prove that I haven't.

So who knows what deductions will be made by SWT from people who touch
in at Clapham Junction and don't touch out. *Reasonableness need not
be assumed.- Hide quoted text -


Until all stations in a particular zone have either validators or
gates, there will always be the possibility of starting or finishing a
journey at a station without either when using a travelcard, so
incomplete journeys within zone validity will have to be allowed.

MIG wrote:

On Jan 17, 11:12am, Matthew Dickinson
wrote:
On 17 Jan, 09:53, MIG wrote:

On Jan 17, 12:12am, John B wrote:

On 16 Jan, 21:09, Paul Corfield wrote:

I think SWT will simply work on the basis that they will have to accept
some "leakage" risk in the AM Peak which I believe is the only time the
steps and subways from the platforms are open.

It isn't [IMX all day weekdays and sometimes even at weekends], but it
doubtless will be once the barriers are imposed. Yay progress.

Given that SWT is going to introduce Oyster, leaving gaps at Waterloo
will presumably earn revenue, if every unresolved journey from Clapham
Junction is charged as an open single to Weymouth.

They won't be introducing Oyster outside Greater London. Their
commitment is to introduce ITSO, which is unlikely to include a PAYG
type product. (ITSO seems likely to be able to hold seasons, carnets
and 'stored journey rights')

Although different assumptions of fraud seem to be attached to PAYG on
LU compared with travelcards.

That is, if I use my travelcard to enter a zone 2 station with a 1/2
travelcard and don't need to use a gate to get out wherever I happen
to end up, it isn't assumed that I've been beyond my zones and I am
not required to prove that I haven't.

If I do the same with PAYG, it's assumed that I must have taken the
longest possible journey on LU and I will be charged unless I can
prove that I haven't.

Yes, different assumptions are made, and this is for a very simple
reason - most ungated National Rail stations are not fitted with an
Oyster validator. If a passenger enters through the Clapham Junction
ticket gates with a zones 1&2 Travelcard (loaded on an Oyster) and
gets off at say Wandsworth Town or Battersea Park there is no facility
at these stations for them to touch-out (and there is no such Oyster
reader at these stations because Oyster PAYG is not valid there).

Meanwhile all passengers who use Oyster PAYG on routes where PAYG is
valid are able to (and indeed should) touch-in and out at the start
and end of each journey. And they can't use Oyster PAYG for journeys
from Clapham Jn to Wandsworth Town or Battersea Park because PAYG is
not valid on these routes.


So who knows what deductions will be made by SWT from people who touch
in at Clapham Junction and don't touch out. Reasonableness need not
be assumed.

Reasonableness should indeed be assumed - Oyster is a logical system,
and the logic employed is reasonable.

How ITSO smartcard ticketing will be implemented by SWT and other
operators is yet to become totally clear - as Matthew Dickinson says
above, it is possible that it won't offer a PAYG function, at least
for journeys outside of London. How ITSO will mesh with the Oyster
system (or not) is also another big question.

On 17 Jan, 12:47, Matthew Dickinson
wrote:
On 17 Jan, 11:53, MIG wrote:

(snip)

Although different assumptions of fraud seem to be attached to PAYG on
LU compared with travelcards.

That is, if I use my travelcard to enter a zone 2 station with a 1/2
travelcard and don't need to use a gate to get out wherever I happen
to end up, it isn't assumed that I've been beyond my zones and I am
not required to prove that I haven't.

If I do the same with PAYG, it's assumed that I must have taken the
longest possible journey on LU and I will be charged unless I can
prove that I haven't.

So who knows what deductions will be made by SWT from people who touch
in at Clapham Junction and don't touch out. Reasonableness need not
be assumed.- Hide quoted text -

Until all stations in a particular zone have either validators or
gates, there will always be the possibility of starting or finishing a
journey at a station without either when using a travelcard, so
incomplete journeys within zone validity will have to be allowed.


When all National Rail stations in London have smartcard validators
(whether Oyster or an Oyster/ITSO hyrbrid) then requiring passengers
to touch-in and out with their smartcard (Oyster or indeed ITSO) even
if they hold a Travelcard would be technically possible - of course
this could in itself present further issues, as some ungated stations
would be likely to need several validators to cope with busy times.
This wouldn't be an insuperable problem of course - the simple answer
being to fit more validators.

On 17 Jan, 11:26, "Paul Scott" wrote:

(snip)

I'm not too familiar with the subway setup, mainly cos IMX it's hardly ever
open when I've arrived (off peak & weekends) in recent years, but does the
W&C line have a separate gateline to the rest of the underground, or just
validators?

Paul

The W&C line at Waterloo doesn't have a separate gateline (and as you
know but others might not the W&C platforms are not within the
gateline of the rest of the Underground station), and so just has
Oyster validators.

On 17 Jan, 13:11, Mizter T wrote:
When all National Rail stations in London have smartcard validators
(whether Oyster or an Oyster/ITSO hyrbrid) then requiring passengers
to touch-in and out with their smartcard (Oyster or indeed ITSO) even
if they hold a Travelcard would be technically possible - of course
this could in itself present further issues, as some ungated stations
would be likely to need several validators to cope with busy times.
This wouldn't be an insuperable problem of course - the simple answer
being to fit more validators.

No, the simple answer would be not to start forcing Travelcard
passengers to touch out at ungated stations.

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

On Jan 17, 1:02*pm, Mizter T wrote:
MIG wrote:
On Jan 17, 11:12am, Matthew Dickinson
wrote:
On 17 Jan, 09:53, MIG wrote:

On Jan 17, 12:12am, John B wrote:

On 16 Jan, 21:09, Paul Corfield wrote:

I think SWT will simply work on the basis that they will have to accept
some "leakage" risk in the AM Peak which I believe is the only time the
steps and subways from the platforms are open.

It isn't [IMX all day weekdays and sometimes even at weekends], but it
doubtless will be once the barriers are imposed. Yay progress.

Given that SWT is going to introduce Oyster, leaving gaps at Waterloo
will presumably earn revenue, if every unresolved journey from Clapham
Junction is charged as an open single to Weymouth.

They won't be introducing Oyster outside Greater London. Their
commitment is to introduce ITSO, which is unlikely to include a PAYG
type product. (ITSO seems likely to be able to hold seasons, carnets
and 'stored journey rights')

Although different assumptions of fraud seem to be attached to PAYG on
LU compared with travelcards.

That is, if I use my travelcard to enter a zone 2 station with a 1/2
travelcard and don't need to use a gate to get out wherever I happen
to end up, it isn't assumed that I've been beyond my zones and I am
not required to prove that I haven't.

If I do the same with PAYG, it's assumed that I must have taken the
longest possible journey on LU and I will be charged unless I can
prove that I haven't.

Yes, different assumptions are made, and this is for a very simple
reason - most ungated National Rail stations are not fitted with an
Oyster validator. If a passenger enters through the Clapham Junction
ticket gates with a zones 1&2 Travelcard (loaded on an Oyster) and
gets off at say Wandsworth Town or Battersea Park there is no facility
at these stations for them to touch-out (and there is no such Oyster
reader at these stations because Oyster PAYG is not valid there).

Meanwhile all passengers who use Oyster PAYG on routes where PAYG is
valid are able to (and indeed should) touch-in and out at the start
and end of each journey. And they can't use Oyster PAYG for journeys
from Clapham Jn to Wandsworth Town or Battersea Park because PAYG is
not valid on these routes.



So who knows what deductions will be made by SWT from people who touch
in at Clapham Junction and don't touch out. *Reasonableness need not
be assumed.

Reasonableness should indeed be assumed - Oyster is a logical system,
and the logic employed is reasonable.

But the logic has a different purpose from that behind travelcards.
Travelcards are a simple case of ensuring cash flow pay getting cash
up front for a cheaper offer.

PAYG has a different purpose which is to ensure that maximum cash is
extracted with minimal effort as the journeys are made. It's this
purpose, rather than the logic, that might be considered unreasonable,
and lead one to be wary of how the same logic might be applied on a
larger scale.

The claims that the programming is done that way to prevent fraud
don't make sense while the same assumption of fraud doesn't apply to
travelcards or any other tickets, ie that anyone who wasn't monitored
at one end of their journey must be billed for the longest journey
that they might have made while not being monitored.


How ITSO smartcard ticketing will be implemented by SWT and other
operators is yet to become totally clear - as Matthew Dickinson says
above, it is possible that it won't offer a PAYG function, at least
for journeys outside of London. How ITSO will mesh with the Oyster
system (or not) is also another big question.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On 17 Jan, 13:36, MIG wrote:
The claims that the programming is done that way to prevent fraud
don't make sense while the same assumption of fraud doesn't apply to
travelcards or any other tickets, ie that anyone who wasn't monitored
at one end of their journey must be billed for the longest journey
that they might have made while not being monitored.

The difference is that all stations where you can begin or end a PAYG
journey have validators, while most stations where Travelcards are
valid do not, so it's impossible to be consistent between the two. Can
you suggest a better system?

U

--
http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/
A blog about transport projects in London

On 17 Jan, 14:37, Mr Thant
wrote:
On 17 Jan, 13:36, MIG wrote:

The claims that the programming is done that way to prevent fraud
don't make sense while the same assumption of fraud doesn't apply to
travelcards or any other tickets, ie that anyone who wasn't monitored
at one end of their journey must be billed for the longest journey
that they might have made while not being monitored.

The difference is that all stations where you can begin or end a PAYG
journey have validators, while most stations where Travelcards are
valid do not, so it's impossible to be consistent between the two. Can
you suggest a better system?

U



This, MIG, is exactly the point - there simply isn't the kit at the
majority of National Rail stations in London for passengers to touch-
in or out. If validators were fitted at all stations in London then
requiring those with a Travelcard on Oyster (or in the future on an
ITSO smartcard) to touch-in and touch-out would be possible. Until
then it isn't.