ScotRail Credit/Debit Cards not being accepted, again

[mbreckers]

The problem that ScotRail suffered recently, which resulted in all their TVM's being unable to accept credit or debit cards, has seemingly resurfaced again, with ScotRail twitter putting out an advisory at 1426 on Xmas Eve of all days.

ADVISORY: Due to a fault, passengers are unable to use Credit/debit cards in automated ticket machines until further notice ^GM

 

[route:oxford]

The problem that ScotRail suffered recently, which resulted in all their TVM's being unable to accept credit or debit cards, has seemingly resurfaced again, with ScotRail twitter putting out an advisory at 1426 on Xmas Eve of all days.

On Tuesday afternoon the machine at Edinburgh Park failed with time-outs on card acceptance for Credit, Debit and Charge cards.

I, and others, had to thrust our way through the unmanned barriers (Sighthill side) in order to board the train.

The handheld machine on board had also failed so it was a complementary journey courtesy of the people of the Netherlands to my unmanned destination.

 

[asylumxl]

I don't know if it's related, but I am currently in Edinburgh and yesterday it seemed a few retailers in the city centre had issues. Could it have been a wider issue than just the railways?

 

[Holly]

On Tuesday afternoon the machine at Edinburgh Park failed with time-outs on card acceptance for Credit, Debit and Charge cards.

I, and others, had to thrust our way through the unmanned barriers (Sighthill side) in order to board the train.

The handheld machine on board had also failed so it was a complementary journey courtesy of the people of the Netherlands to my unmanned destination.

Electronic "money" can be expected to fail from time to time. The railway should have insisted that you pay by cheque if you have insufficient cash.

 

[LowLevel]

Electronic "money" can be expected to fail from time to time. The railway should have insisted that you pay by cheque if you have insufficient cash.

Of course not. Correct procedure is an unpaid fare notice but if the whole network is down it's not really feasible to handwrite one for the whole train. The railway generally doesn't accept personal cheques anyway, only business cheques for season tickets.

 

[Tim R-T-C]

Electronic "money" can be expected to fail from time to time. The railway should have insisted that you pay by cheque if you have insufficient cash.

Because so many people have chequebooks with them when they travel by train. I don't even have a chequebook.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Cheques are dead, the banks should have had the guts to properly kill them.

 

[najaB]

Cheques are dead, the banks should have had the guts to properly kill them.

They tried. You can thank Age Concern (among others) for causing them to drop the plans.

 

[cjmillsnun]

They tried. You can thank Age Concern (among others) for causing them to drop the plans.

Parish councils HAVE to pay by cheque or direct debit. They cannot legally issue a debit card to the financial officer as all cheques and direct debit requests have to be countersigned by two councillors. Therefore without a change in the law, cheques have to be maintained.

 

[najaB]

Therefore without a change in the law, cheques have to be maintained.

Okay, Age Concern, parish councils, and others. A change in the law and eight digit PINs would solve that issue for you though.

 

[route:oxford]

Parish councils HAVE to pay by cheque or direct debit. They cannot legally issue a debit card to the financial officer as all cheques and direct debit requests have to be countersigned by two councillors. Therefore without a change in the law, cheques have to be maintained.

Just need to use dual authority electronic payments. Banks have offered these business services for at least 25 years now.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Electronic "money" can be expected to fail from time to time. The railway should have insisted that you pay by cheque if you have insufficient cash.

I have half a dozen chequebooks for my various accounts in my safe at home. I haven't used one this century! Can you imagine London Underground operating with people writing cheques for a couple of £ if Oyster failed?

Why would I carry cash either? Dirty notes and coins that have spent their days in warm and sweaty pockets next to the genitals of strangers. Yuck.

Merchant providers have strict rules on the processing of transactions when services fail (manual fallback). The onus is entirely on the service provider or retailer not the customer.

 

[headshot119]

Parish councils HAVE to pay by cheque or direct debit. They cannot legally issue a debit card to the financial officer as all cheques and direct debit requests have to be countersigned by two councillors. Therefore without a change in the law, cheques have to be maintained.

Rubbish, a charity organisation I'm a part of simply requires a second person to authorise any payments over X amount by logging into the online banking for that account.

(X can be set at 0 so all payments need to be authorised.)

 

[anme]

Rubbish, a charity organisation I'm a part of simply requires a second person to authorise any payments over X amount by logging into the online banking for that account.

(X can be set at 0 so all payments need to be authorised.)

Indeed, this is a red herring. Many European countries have abolished cheques altogether and all of these requirements can still be met.

 

[AM9]

Rubbish, a charity organisation I'm a part of simply requires a second person to authorise any payments over X amount by logging into the online banking for that account.

(X can be set at 0 so all payments need to be authorised.)

I have been a treasurer of a small society for over three years. Dual signing works for us and long may it do so. There is no reason why the banks can't or shouldn't continue to provide cheque services for those who need them, except for pressure to increase profits and pressure from those who don't have any need for them. If you don't want them then don't use or even have them.
As far as a TOC suddenly losing its ability to accept electronic transactions, given that they have always encouraged them, it's their problem and the nature of travel is that a refusal to offer an alternative payment solution is an obligation. The passengers have fulfilled their side of the deal so if travel is refused, the passenger would have a case for compensation, (e.g. travel to the departing station, parking costs, consequence of being late etc.). By compensation, that would not be any version of delay-repay as no purchase would have been made.

 

[najaB]

Just need to use dual authority electronic payments. Banks have offered these business services for at least 25 years now

It would require a change in the law though. I was curious about cjmillsnun's comment so had a look. It's in the Local Government Act 1894 (Schedule 1, Part 2, Paragraph 14 to save some time):

Every cheque or other order for payment of money by a parish council shall be signed by two members of the council.

I'm not sure, does entering a PIN have the same legal standing as a signature?

 

[cjmillsnun]

Rubbish, a charity organisation I'm a part of simply requires a second person to authorise any payments over X amount by logging into the online banking for that account.

(X can be set at 0 so all payments need to be authorised.)

It's not rubbish... It is part of the Local Government Act 1972. I know the technology exists, however without reform to the law (which hasn't happened yet), cheques MUST still be used. Up until May this year I was a Parish Councillor and it was investigated whether we could move to electronic authorisation. We already knew DDs were OK (they were in use and the are signed by two councillors, thus being in-line with the law), however DCLG said no to any other form of electronic banking payments, despite offering that two councillors must sign into the banking system and approve the transaction.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It would require a change in the law though. I was curious about cjmillsnun's comment so had a look. It's in the Local Government Act 1894 (Schedule 1, Part 2, Paragraph 14 to save some time):I'm not sure, does entering a PIN have the same legal standing as a signature?

The act was reformed in 1972 However that line still stands. A PIN or any other electronic "signature" is not sufficient to cover the provisions of the act. DCLG confirmed that in investigations that we had at our parish.

That said, reform of the rule is on the cards, which I would welcome.

 

[najaB]

The act was reformed in 1972 However that line still stands. A PIN or any other electronic "signature" is not sufficient to cover the provisions of the act. DCLG confirmed that in investigations that we had at our parish.

D'oh! For some reason the 1958 Act was the first one in the Google results and that referred to the older Act. Never thought to look for a newer one!

 

[headshot119]

It's not rubbish... It is part of the Local Government Act 1972. I know the technology exists, however without reform to the law (which hasn't happened yet), cheques MUST still be used. Up until May this year I was a Parish Councillor and it was investigated whether we could move to electronic authorisation. We already knew DDs were OK (they were in use and the are signed by two councillors, thus being in-line with the law), however DCLG said no to any other form of electronic banking payments, despite offering that two councillors must sign into the banking system and approve the transaction.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


The act was reformed in 1972 However that line still stands. A PIN or any other electronic "signature" is not sufficient to cover the provisions of the act. DCLG confirmed that in investigations that we had at our parish.

That said, reform of the rule is on the cards, which I would welcome.

Electronic signatures have the same standing in law as paper ones do.

Every house I've ever rented has been signed electronically. And most direct debits I've set up have been signed electronically.

Just another excuse to hang onto outdated technology that should have been abolished long ago.

 

[najaB]

Electronic signatures have the same standing in law as paper ones do.

True in most cases, but I'no reason to believe that cjmillsnun is telling porkies. For parish councils (and I'm sure a few other niche cases) it would take legislative changes to abolish cheques.

 

[AM9]

True in most cases, but I'no reason to believe that cjmillsnun is telling porkies. For parish councils (and I'm sure a few other niche cases) it would take legislative changes to abolish cheques.

The problem with an 'electronic signature' if that means a PIN is that there is no verification that the signatory actually authorised the transaction. Once a PIN has been compromised, either by stealth or by force, there is no way to discriminate between legitimate or fraudulent use. With a handwritten signature, there is a reasonable chance that a forged signatory could be detected, or in the case of a signature under duress, there would likely be other evidence of the act.

 

[jopsuk]

This is all barely relevant to Scotrail being temporarily unable to accept payment by a method advertised as being accepted

 

[route:oxford]

True in most cases, but I'no reason to believe that cjmillsnun is telling porkies. For parish councils (and I'm sure a few other niche cases) it would take legislative changes to abolish cheques.

Not really. It would just take individuals and businesses to refuse to issue or accept them to settle a debt and they would die out naturally.

Besides. Looking through the existing Parish Council legislation, I cannot find anything to say that settlement by means other than cheque is forbidden.

Indeed, I'm aware that a number of Parish Councils have Credit Cards (a Credit Card in this case merely creating a temporary debt that is settled in full monthly by a dual signature direct debit) and my own local one has an account with a national chain of building suppliers that is settled monthly in fully be direct debit.

So really, we seem to have up to hand-wringing 9000 parish clerks fiddling around with 1970s legislation - probably terrified about using emails rather than writing and posting memos too. When the sensible ones have taken a forward thinking and pro-active stance and decided that there is no way they'd be going to jail for choosing to make a dual authorisation electronic payment instead of claiming expenses to drive to their nearest bank, pay to park and waste a lunch hour.

But heading back to topic...

The rail and other service industries undertook a risk analysis and made a business decision over their choice of settlement methods. At times of failure, the loss of income through customer's reasonable expectations of availability of payment methods is likely to be significantly lower than the costs of implementing fallbacks.