Penalty fare notice - card blocked by TfL

[TigerCap]

Good afternoon all

I'm hoping for some advice regarding two penalty fares I have been issued with, both given because the revenue inspector's card reader showed that my card was blocked by TfL.

14th April - I travelled on the return leg of my commute from St James' Park tube to Victoria tube, and then from Victoria station to Shortlands (I do this journey twice a week). I used the card on my ApplePay Express Travel function to touch in and touch out on the tube, and again to touch in at Victoria before boarding the train. On the train there was a Southeastern revenue inspection, and my card came up on the reader as being blocked by TfL. I was pretty shocked at this because I had been using this payment method for months with no issues on tapping and out (single beeps and green lights all the time), but complied with the inspection and was issued with the PFN. I asked the inspector how I could have entered the ticket barrier at Victoria if the card was blocked, as presumably the gates wouldn't have opened, and he was unable to explain this.

When I got home I called TfL who confirmed there was no block on the card and no outstanding charges or unpaid fares on my account. I looked back over my journey history since July 2025 when I started using this card, and the only anomaly I can see is an incident in January 2026 where I forgot to touch out at Shortlands, but TfL had auto-corrected it based on my journey history and deducted the correct fare. I sent off an appeal citing the above and providing screenshots of the journey history for that day and for the 3 months prior showing no history of unpaid fares, failure to tap in/out etc.

28th April - Stupidly, I carried on using the ApplePay card to pay for my travel for the next couple of weeks, since TfL had confirmed there was no block on it, and was issued with another PFN by Southeastern on 28th April when I was leaving Shortlands, again with the card reader showing the card was blocked. Again, I had been travelling with no issue, getting single beeps and green lights, barriers opening etc, no indication that there was any restriction on my travel. Again, the inspector could not explain how I had been allowed through the barriers with a card which was supposedly blocked. Again, TfL have confirmed there is no block. Again, I have sent off an appeal citing similar grounds to the first one.

I've now received back the first level appeal decision on the 14th April PFN, rejecting the appeal on the grounds that my card had not been validated before boarding the train, which is (a) incorrect and (b) not even the reason the PFN was issued in the first place! I will be appealing this to the second assessor, and am still awaiting the outcome of the 28th April PFN first level appeal, but would greatly appreciate any advice in the meantime. I found the below thread from last year which is very similar to my situation, and posters there have mentioned that the card reader may contain an out of date list of blocked cards - I'm not aware of my card having ever been blocked, but I suppose it could have happened without me being aware of it? Or can the data sometimes just be wrong rather than old?

https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...contactless-card-“declined-by-issuer”.287648/

Ironically, on 30th April I had a revenue inspection from TfL, not Southeastern, and there was no problem at all, but I've since started using an Oystercard to pay for my travel because I'm worried about future inspections.

I've attached the 14th April PFN and my journey history for that day

Thanks very much for looking

 

[njr001]

Did you present your phone for inspection or the contactless card linked via Applepay. I'm no expert but I believe if you present the physical card when using Express travel mode it won't be recognised. Did you send your journey history with your appeal, if not download your history as you can only go back six weeks ( I think)

 

[Bletchleyite]

Is your Express Travel card and your normal default card different?

 

[Buzby]

Is your Express Travel card and your normal default card different?

For security they have different numbers (to prevent cloning attacks).

 

[Adam Williams]

This is an interesting case. Did the revenue inspection device confirm what it thought the card number was at any point in the process? It's a bit stupid it's not (at least partially redacted) printed on the PFN.

Enhanced Contactless Polling (ECP) is a proprietary extension to the ISO/IEC 14443 (A/B) standard developed by Apple.

It defines a custom data frame that a contactless reader has to transmit during the polling sequence, providing an end device with contextual info about the reader field, allowing it to decide if it wants to resolve routing to a particular applet or system feature even before any back-and-forth communication starts.

Presumably RID2 and any other inspection devices all implement this extension in order to trigger the Express Travel Card, and it is known to work reliably - anyone know?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Presumably RID2 and any other inspection devices all implement this extension in order to trigger the Express Travel Card, and it is known to work reliably - anyone know?

It has certainly come to my attention recently that this is NOT correctly implemented on the devices used by Manchester Metrolink, which is causing a load of incorrect automatic penalties which then need faffy appealing.

Doesn't seem implausible that this could have happened here, particularly if the original poster double tapped the button which I think would make it use the payment card, not the express travel card?

 

[kacper]

Something doesn’t add up because even if a incorrect contactless card was presented it would accept on the revenue device then charge a failed revenue inspection later on

 

[Adam Williams]

It has certainly come to my attention recently that this is NOT correctly implemented on the devices used by Manchester Metrolink, which is causing a load of incorrect automatic penalties which then need faffy appealing.

Doesn't seem implausible that this could have happened here, particularly if the original poster double tapped the button which I think would make it use the payment card, not the express travel card?

Yeah, it sounds exactly like this doesn't it...

I am speculating because I've not seen these devices first-hand, but if most of these revenue inspection devices are running on commodity hardware, I think it'd be very difficult to implement support for something like Apple's magic polling protocol. It's simply too low level, and the existing abstractions provided in Android's SDK for doing e.g. EMV interrogation are likely to be too *far away". They're designed for doing standard things and this is very much "off the beaten path".

Not that I think that magically makes it okay; if I am correct then fundamentally the revenue inspection devices won't trigger the phone to select the payment card in the same way as a gateline would, which would seem rather unsatisfactory in the case where one card in the wallet is blocked but the customer has been legitimately paying with a different unblocked, Express Transport card.

 

[Mattplans]

Agreed with post #7.

And if the running hypothesis was true, then surely we would be seeing incomplete journey charges if you used express travel (at the start of your journey) and then double tapped the power button for your 'true' contactless card at the end of your journey?

Even if they do have different numbers, there must be something done by TfL to avoid the above.

To the OP, I'm wondering if any of these inspections are reflecting on https://contactless.tfl.gov.uk/ ?

And in your next appeal I would collect your reference ID for your card (can be found at website linked above). Since this proves when you tapped in, and out, which can be cross-checked with the time the penalty fare was issued, and provided you've explained all you have here
.... but it sometimes takes until the 3rd round of appeals to get somewhere.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 May 2026 ==

if I am correct then fundamentally the revenue inspection devices won't trigger the phone to select the payment card in the same way as a gateline would

You are correct in saying this, though

We have seen some complaints on this forum about customers who expected to be able to validate their payment card during inspection when their phone had died, as they were able to enter the network using express mode

 

[island]

For security they have different numbers (to prevent cloning attacks).

This isn't correct. The same device card will not present different DANs depending whether it is presented by Express Transit Mode or a normal payment invocation. If it does, the device is not following card scheme rules.

If on the other hand a passenger has for whatever reason chosen a different card for Express Transit mode to the default card they use for normal payments, it's possible things might go wrong with inspections, which require a card to be activated as though for payment. Passengers who have chosen to do this need to take extra care if inspected.

 

[Adam Williams]

Passengers who have chosen to do this need to take extra care if inspected.

Why is the burden for this being placed on passengers when it's the card reading device at fault for not acting like a gateline would?

This is nothing but shoddy design.

 

[talldave]

Why is the burden for this being placed on passengers when it's the card reading device at fault for not acting like a gateline would?

This is nothing but shoddy design.

Agreed. But how can us mere mortals get this raised to a level where someone will understand the issue? I doubt anyone in TfL has the knowledge to understand. We need a one-page summary to fire at RDG, DfT and the relevant minister.

Alternatively, get ITV to make a drama about it?!

 

[Benjwri]

Agreed. But how can us mere mortals get this raised to a level where someone will understand the issue? I doubt anyone in TfL has the knowledge to understand. We need a one-page summary to fire at RDG, DfT and the relevant minister.

Alternatively, get ITV to make a drama about it?!

What can TfL do to solve it though? When I was revenue inspected on the DLR a month ago it accepted express transit. So if it’s happening on TfL it’s the customer bringing up the card before tapping and selecting a different card.

 

[Haywain]

I doubt anyone in TfL has the knowledge to understand.

Why TfL? The issue occurred on Southeastern.

 

[Doppelganger]

Agreed. But how can us mere mortals get this raised to a level where someone will understand the issue? I doubt anyone in TfL has the knowledge to understand. We need a one-page summary to fire at RDG, DfT and the relevant minister.

Alternatively, get ITV to make a drama about it?!

Sounds like the Post Office scandal all over again...

 

[rmHawk765]

What even is the purpose of an 'Express Travel Card'? How does it speed up going through the gateline? All I can think of is it somehow recognising when you tap an Oyster reader and not requiring authentication for those specific transactions, but I wouldn't use such a feature as someone could probably spoof this.

 

[Adam Williams]

How does it speed up going through the gateline?

The phone doesn't need to be unlocked/faffed with.

What even is the purpose of an 'Express Travel Card'

You can decide to route travel transactions to a specific card; perhaps one with additional funds that you don't use for day to day spending; or an expenses card linked to a business.

I believe it can also be used when the phone would otherwise lack the battery to function in its usual way.

but I wouldn't use such a feature as someone could probably spoof this.

Yes, it can be spoofed.

 

[rmHawk765]

The phone doesn't need to be unlocked/faffed with.

Yeah I guessed so.

You can decide to route travel transactions to a specific card; perhaps one with additional funds that you don't use for day to day spending; or an expenses card linked to a business.

So I'm guessing it doesn't actually have anything to do with how the transaction is made, as it just goes to whatever real card is chosen? How is it relevant to ticket checks in that case? I can only think of the phone somehow giving the machine the wrong card details but if it works with TfL equipment I struggle to see how that could be the case.

 

[Adam Williams]

So I'm guessing it doesn't actually have anything to do with how the transaction is made, as it just goes to whatever real card is chosen? How is it relevant to ticket checks in that case?

It's only really relevant if there are a) multiple cards in the wallet and b) the default used for non-transport payments is different (perhaps a card which has previously been blocked by a transport operator) to a selected Express Transport payment card - let's assume one that is not blocked and has been used to legitimately pay.

 

[island]

Why is the burden for this being placed on passengers when it's the card reading device at fault for not acting like a gateline would?

This is nothing but shoddy design.

It's no different to a passenger presenting one physical card at the gate and a different one to the inspection. Setting a different default card for normal transactions and for express transit is an extremely unusual thing to do and there should be no expectation on TfL to accommodate such niche use cases, particularly when the passenger can simply select the correct card when presenting their device for inspection.

 

[blimmo]

It's no different to a passenger presenting one physical card at the gate and a different one to the inspection. Setting a different default card for normal transactions and for express transit is an extremely unusual thing to do and there should be no expectation on TfL to accommodate such niche use cases, particularly when the passenger can simply select the correct card when presenting their device for inspection.

I think it's reasonable for the passenger to expect the gate readers and the inspection readers to work the same. Tbh I would have expected working as similarly as possible as the gates to be one of the primary considerations when designing the inspection reader.

 

[saismee]

What even is the purpose of an 'Express Travel Card'? How does it speed up going through the gateline? All I can think of is it somehow recognising when you tap an Oyster reader and not requiring authentication for those specific transactions, but I wouldn't use such a feature as someone could probably spoof this.

Adding onto what Adam said, it's just to allow people to tap at gatelines/on buses without unlocking their phone, dramatically speeding up the gatelines.

It can be spoofed but only for "low-value" transactions (I'm not clear on how much this is). You would also need to tap your phone on a dodgy reader, so it's not really a risk.

There is an exploit involving specifically iPhones and Visa cards, but it has been around a long time and Apple/Visa deem it unlikely (it has been around for a good few years).

 

[talldave]

Why TfL? The issue occurred on Southeastern.

The issue occurred because the "card" was apparently blocked by TfL, which it wasn't.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 May 2026 ==

It can be spoofed but only for "low-value" transactions (I'm not clear on how much this is). You would also need to tap your phone on a dodgy reader, so it's not really a ririsk.

The sort of reader presented by a dodgy guy wearing hi-vis on a train pretending to be an RPI, for example??

 

[saismee]

The issue occurred because the "card" was apparently blocked by TfL, which it wasn't.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 May 2026 ==


The sort of reader presented by a dodgy guy wearing hi-vis on a train pretending to be an RPI, for example??

Possibly, but there have been no known attacks with this method, and no known "fake RPIs" on TfL trains. Visa say they will reimburse you if affected.

I think it is a bit of a silly way of committing fraud as everything links back to you and its very traceable, with CCTV showing you committing the act too! Very good way to spend a long time locked away.

 

[Snow1964]

The issue occurred because the "card" was apparently blocked by TfL, which it wasn't.

So SouthEastern are apparently picking up blocks by others in error, and issuing penalty fares on this basis.

This seems worryingly odd to me, as customer has no idea why it is showing as blocked, they could just as easily say been blocked by say Transport for Wales, or Dutch Railways.

So where is SouthEastern getting this fantasy blocked info from, if the organisation they say (in this case TfL) says isn't blocked, but SouthEastern say they think TfL has blocked it. Suggests they are sharing info (but messing up the sharing)

 

[Benjwri]

So SouthEastern are apparently picking up blocks by others in error, and issuing penalty fares on this basis.

This seems worryingly odd to me, as customer has no idea why it is showing as blocked, they could just as easily say been blocked by say Transport for Wales, or Dutch Railways.

So where is SouthEastern getting this fantasy blocked info from, if the organisation they say (in this case TfL) says isn't blocked, but SouthEastern say they think TfL has blocked it. Suggests they are sharing info (but messing up the sharing)

There isn't a 'sharing' of info beyond that Southeastern runs within the TfL managed contactless area? Their card, at least according to that machine, has been blocked by the TfL scheme according to this reader.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 May 2026 ==

as customer has no idea why it is showing as blocked

Cards are normally blocked automatically for things such as the payment being declined when it is taken at the end of the day, or behavior which represents fare evasion.

The customer shouldn't be unaware as the gateline/validator will reject the card on entry.

It is highly unlikely that the OP would've come across two inspection devices with the same fault. I think the suggestion by others that it is a different card that is being inspected to the one they are tapping with, and that is blocked is most likely.

 

[rmHawk765]

It is highly unlikely that the OP would've come across two inspection devices with the same fault.

Very possible as they are likely running the exact same software.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 May 2026 ==

If I remember correctly SE is in a transition process from one type of system to another, though they probably have more of one type so the chance of coming across two of the same devices isn't any less likely.

 

[commuter41]

This is a good video which outlines how "express tranist mode" works in the context of messages sent between the reader and device, as well as, the high vs low value regime.

Veritasium YouTube video (from 6:15)

 

[Buzby]

The same device card will not present different DANs depending whether it is presented by Express Transit Mode or a normal payment invocation.

I never said it would. The point was the physical card when selected for express pay (or indeed Apple or Google Pay) bears a different number. So, if the user presents the actual card because (say) their phone ran out of power, the accounts are not linked in any meaningful way their scanning could identify.

 

[Mattplans]

I read post #4 as the “normal default card” meaning the contactless card presented by Apple Pay NOT express transit mode - I think this is where the confusion arose from with others as well.

It’s a bit of a moot point anyway because we know OP did not present their physical card.