On 14 May, 13:41, Chris wrote:
On 14 May, 00:05, Barry Salter wrote:





So, here we are with what would need to be done at a National Rail
station (again, LU is probably similar, but I can't comment on that).

Step 1a - Calculate ACTUAL number of days for the new ticket.

In this case, that's 12th May 2009 to 30th December 2009.

*From a calendar, that works out at 233 days.

Step 1b - Calculate base rate for the OLD ticket, to the nearest penny.

Already done in my previous post, but this is £968 (i.e. the original
price of the ticket) divided by 365 days, or £2.65.

Step 1c - Calculate credit due on OLD ticket.

£2.65 x 233 days = £617.45
Step 2a - Calculate cost of NEW ticket for the *same period* as the old one.

This would be £1136.00 for an Annual Zones 1 to 3 for 31st December 2008
to 30th December 2009.

Step 2b - Calculate the base rate for the NEW ticket.

Again, we've already done this, £1136 / 365 = £3.11 per day to the
nearest penny.

Step 2c - Calculate charge due for NEW ticket.

£3.11 x 233 days = £724.63.

Hmmm - isn't the base rate worked on *working* days - i.e. 260 in a
full year? 52 x 5?
Secondly, I think an allowance is then given for holidays - 4 weeks /
20 days?
So the base rate is worked out on 240 days in a year, I think....
.....

No, because the ticket was originally valid for 365 days. Seasons are
still valid on weekends, so why should they be excluded from the
calculations? The only time when this doesn't work is when you have
less time left on the ticket than the minimum that the refund will be
given for (I think this is four weeks for an annual, but that's just
from memory).

On 14/5/09 06:01, in article ,
"Graham Harrison" wrote:

Well, you've led a sheltered life! My butcher has one which shows you the
amount (can't remember where), you then push the green, enter button, the
amount disappears and then you enter the pin and push enter again. He's
very good and always runs you through that process.

Before they closed down on Christmas Eve last year Turtles had one like
this, and I've seen them in a few other places. The Turtles staff sometimes
pressed the green 'enter' button before handing you the pad, so that the
amount was not visible, and I asked them to do it again under these
circumstances. It's badly written software; it should always be possible to
see the amount as you key in the PIN.

Conversely, I made a
purchase in a different shop, away from home, last week as it happens; I was
presented with a screen which only showed the PIN entry. I declined and
asked the assistant to stop at the screen showing the amount. She
cancelled the transaction (I have the little cancelled print out) and we
started again and this time I followed what you might call my "butchers
instructions".

Something else that I'm not totally happy about is the way it works at the
hotel I stayed at recently. When you check-in they obtain 'pre
authorisation' for an amount equal to the cost of the room plus £30, and for
this you have to enter a PIN. When you check out they charge the actual
amount to your card, and for this you again have to enter the PIN. As far as
I could see there was nothing on the screen to indicate whether this was a
'Pre-authorisation', or an actual charge. I did check my account, and it
does seem to work the way they say it does, only one amount was taken, but
it should always be very clear to the customer exactly what they are
authorising when they key in the PIN, and it isn't.

I also discovered what seems to be a serious security hole in certain early
Chip and Pin systems if what I was told by the company that installed ours
at work is true, but this is not something to discuss in a public forum. I
believe that this was indeed true due to something which happened to several
other people in a local shop, but I'm surprised that the system would have
been designed in that way.

Chris wrote:

Hmmm - isn't the base rate worked on *working* days - i.e. 260 in a
full year? 52 x 5?
Secondly, I think an allowance is then given for holidays - 4 weeks /
20 days?
So the base rate is worked out on 240 days in a year, I think....
.....

For changeover purposes, the base rate is calculated on the basis of one
month being 30 days and one year being 365 days.

The concept of "working" days applies when calculating refunds due to
"void days" (i.e. where a TOC has given up on the service for whatever
reason and has it so doesn't count towards that month's punctuality and
reliability figures).

For void day purposes: One week = 5 days, one month = 22 days, and one
year = 260 days.

So if, for example, you had an Annual Season costing £2600, and void
days were declared, each one would entitle you to a £10 refund.

Alternatively, you can have them added on to the ticket upon renewal
(with an adjustment to take into account a weekend if needed).

Normal season ticket refunds, on the other hand, are based on the
ticket(s) you would have needed to buy had you decided to travel just
for the given period from the outset.

Cheers,

Barry

Something else that I'm not totally happy about is the way it works at the
hotel I stayed at recently. When you check-in they obtain 'pre
authorisation' for an amount equal to the cost of the room plus £30, and
for
this you have to enter a PIN. When you check out they charge the actual
amount to your card, and for this you again have to enter the PIN. As far
as
I could see there was nothing on the screen to indicate whether this was a
'Pre-authorisation', or an actual charge. I did check my account, and it
does seem to work the way they say it does, only one amount was taken, but
it should always be very clear to the customer exactly what they are
authorising when they key in the PIN, and it isn't.




Pre authorisation reduces the amount of credit available to you. If, at
the time of actual payment, they fail to link to the pre authorisation it
can stay on your account, reducing the available credit for as long as 28
days. If the link is made the pre authorisation is reversed, giving you
your available credit back and the actual debit is applied. Mind you, it
certainly used to be the case that the two transactions were not always
simultaneous and, of course, the correct debit was applied before the
reversal of pre authorisation occurred. IT is, unfortunately, standard
practice in hotels.

Thanks, all.

Just to keep you all in the loop, spoke to Oystercard who couldn't
help me because the transaction never went through them but was
carried out locally at Mansion House. But I was put through to a
charming and professional young lady by the name of Jennifer who was
very helpful indeed, and very sorry to hear my story. Rather than fill
in an online form with the details, she gave me an email address and a
reference number, and I emailed all the details to her. My mortgage
came out today and I am heavily overdrawn, so I'm hoping that it will
be fixed asap.

Obviously there will need to be an internal investigation that may
take some time, but in the short term I am hoping that they will see
that there has been a serious error whereby I have clearly lost
hundreds of pounds and that this will be refunded before the
investigation starts. I certainly got that impression in any case.

Fingers crossed! Have scanned and emailed them everything, from my
gold cards to my receipts to even my bank statements from last
December and from this month, to show that the money has come out,
nothing's been repaid, etc.

Thanks all of you for your various tips etc.

TRISTÁN

In message , at 21:22:56 on Thu, 14
May 2009, Stephen Furley remarked:
Something else that I'm not totally happy about is the way it works at the
hotel I stayed at recently. When you check-in they obtain 'pre
authorisation' for an amount equal to the cost of the room plus £30, and for
this you have to enter a PIN. When you check out they charge the actual
amount to your card, and for this you again have to enter the PIN. As far as
I could see there was nothing on the screen to indicate whether this was a
'Pre-authorisation', or an actual charge. I did check my account, and it
does seem to work the way they say it does, only one amount was taken, but
it should always be very clear to the customer exactly what they are
authorising when they key in the PIN, and it isn't.

That reminds me - I stayed at a foreign hotel about a month ago and they
insisted on making a 10-euro test-payment using their C&P machine. This
was for "extras" and in fact I didn't incur any. When I checked out
there was some confusion about whether or not the 10-euros needed to be
explicitly refunded, or whether it just "expired" in some strange way. I
must check my statements...
--
Roland Perry

On Fri, 15 May 2009 11:53:26 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote:

That reminds me - I stayed at a foreign hotel about a month ago and they
insisted on making a 10-euro test-payment using their C&P machine. This
was for "extras" and in fact I didn't incur any. When I checked out
there was some confusion about whether or not the 10-euros needed to be
explicitly refunded, or whether it just "expired" in some strange way. I
must check my statements...

I've seen that - it seems that while taking the "swipe"
(pre-authorisation for things like the minibar) some badly-designed
terminals show it as an actual purchase with an amount and require a
PIN, but it isn't an actual transaction and doesn't go on the
statement.

I'd still check, though, to make sure they didn't do it wrong.

Neil

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

Neil Williams wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 11:53:26 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote:

That reminds me - I stayed at a foreign hotel about a month ago and they
insisted on making a 10-euro test-payment using their C&P machine. This
was for "extras" and in fact I didn't incur any. When I checked out
there was some confusion about whether or not the 10-euros needed to be
explicitly refunded, or whether it just "expired" in some strange way. I
must check my statements...

I've seen that - it seems that while taking the "swipe"
(pre-authorisation for things like the minibar) some badly-designed
terminals show it as an actual purchase with an amount and require a
PIN, but it isn't an actual transaction and doesn't go on the
statement.

On the occasions I've been asked to provide a card for authorisation in
a hotel, it's generally said "Pre-Auth" (or similar) on the display on
the PED.

On a similar subject, I went into a branch of NatWest last week to pay a
cheque in, over the counter, and was asked to use Chip & PIN to confirm
the deposit. That's a new one on me.

Cheers,

Barry

In article ,
(Barry Salter) wrote:

Neil Williams wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 11:53:26 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote:

That reminds me - I stayed at a foreign hotel about a month ago and
they insisted on making a 10-euro test-payment using their C&P
machine. This was for "extras" and in fact I didn't incur any. When
I checked out there was some confusion about whether or not the
10-euros needed to be explicitly refunded, or whether it just
"expired" in some strange way. I must check my statements...

I've seen that - it seems that while taking the "swipe"
(pre-authorisation for things like the minibar) some badly-designed
terminals show it as an actual purchase with an amount and require a
PIN, but it isn't an actual transaction and doesn't go on the
statement.

On the occasions I've been asked to provide a card for
authorisation in a hotel, it's generally said "Pre-Auth" (or
similar) on the display on the PED.

On a similar subject, I went into a branch of NatWest last week to
pay a cheque in, over the counter, and was asked to use Chip & PIN
to confirm the deposit. That's a new one on me.

I generally pay cheques in at cash machines these days.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In message , at 00:04:21 on Sun, 17
May 2009, Barry Salter remarked:
That reminds me - I stayed at a foreign hotel about a month ago and
they insisted on making a 10-euro test-payment using their C&P
machine. This was for "extras" and in fact I didn't incur any. When
I checked out there was some confusion about whether or not the
10-euros needed to be explicitly refunded, or whether it just
"expired" in some strange way. I must check my statements...

I've seen that - it seems that while taking the "swipe"
(pre-authorisation for things like the minibar) some badly-designed
terminals show it as an actual purchase with an amount and require a
PIN, but it isn't an actual transaction and doesn't go on the
statement.

On the occasions I've been asked to provide a card for authorisation in
a hotel, it's generally said "Pre-Auth" (or similar) on the display on
the PED.

The thing that was strange was being asked for a PIN - that's the first
time a pre-authorisation has worked like that (and I've stayed in
literally hundreds of hotels). But C&P is beginning to spread - I had to
use a PIN to pay my hotel bill for the first time in Geneva earlier this
week, and oddly they didn't ask for a CC when I checked in (although
they had a number via the booking agency to guarantee the booking, but
that doesn't normally stop people asking again).

On a similar subject, I went into a branch of NatWest last week to pay
a cheque in, over the counter, and was asked to use Chip & PIN to
confirm the deposit. That's a new one on me.

Any card, or one of theirs?
--
Roland Perry