Penalty fare for travel outside London Transport zones on Oyster Card

Oyster cards are quite primitive really and only have four bits (1s or 0s) that can be used to define the zones for journey history/charging purposes. Hence a maximum of 15 zones can exist in the Oyster system (2 to the power of 4, less one for "no zone" presumably).

Gatwick simply had the good fortune to come first in terms of the Oyster rollout, and so the highest zones are used for travel to Gatwick. The only way of expanding Oyster to be valid at Stansted would be "align" the fares (i.e. increase them to the extortionate Stansted rate), which I'm sure would be popular...

Watershed said:

Oyster cards are quite primitive really and only have four bits (1s or 0s) that can be used to define the zones for journey history/charging purposes. Hence a maximum of 15 zones can exist in the Oyster system (2 to the power of 4, less one for "no zone" presumably).

Gatwick simply had the good fortune to come first in terms of the Oyster rollout, and so the highest zones are used for travel to Gatwick. The only way of expanding Oyster to be valid at Stansted would be "align" the fares (i.e. increase them to the extortionate Stansted rate), which I'm sure would be popular...

Click to expand...

Thanks for such an informative explanation.

MarlowDonkey said:

Hasn't Oyster been around long enough that London residents at least should be aware that unless it's a detailed exception, it doesn't extend beyond the boundaries of Greater London?

Click to expand...

I don't think most people know off the top of their head where the boundary of Greater London is. If I didn't live in Hillingdon I wouldn't have been able to tell you that Heathrow was within Greater London whilst Gatwick wasn't. They're completely interchangeable to most people.

MarlowDonkey said:

Hasn't Oyster been around long enough that London residents at least should be aware that unless it's a detailed exception, it doesn't extend beyond the boundaries of Greater London?

Click to expand...

Kilopylae said:

I don't think most people know off the top of their head where the boundary of Greater London is. If I didn't live in Hillingdon I wouldn't have been able to tell you that Heathrow was within Greater London whilst Gatwick wasn't. They're completely interchangeable to most people.

Click to expand...

I do wonder how many people - even those who perhaps should know, rather than the nerds who actually study such things - could actually just say, and swear to it, from any station whence PAYG (of one or or other system) is valid, whither it (and by what route) is actually valid.
Case in point: National Rail Enquiries has just quoted me a fare of £15.70 by contactless for 2258 from Clapham Junction, change at Wokingham, to Reading arrive 0015.

I suspect, Clapham Junction or Wimbledon, where you have four PAYG systems (SWR's and GTR's KeyGo, as well as Oyster and CPAY) are probably worst (and, with TfL Tubes and Trams to consider, Wimbledon the very worst) for this sort of exercise.

Getting back to Tottenham Hale, looking at the 'Tap Tap and Away' posters, it's not at all clear (without reading the small print) that they only apply to Contactless, not Oyster - if I didn't know, I doubt I'd have appreciated that they didn't.

And - as signs being in 'several languages' have been mentioned, the images posted only show them in Spanish and Italian. Why only two? And why those two?

etr221 said:

And - as signs being in 'several languages' have been mentioned, the images posted only show them in Spanish and Italian. Why only two? And why those two?

Click to expand...

I must admit I thought there were 3 extras, but I wasn't paying attention between taking the pic and posting. There are, of course, 3 languages if you include English. I've no idea why Spanish and Italian - are they the most popular destinations from Stansted? It is better than just English, however random the languages are.

MikeWh said:

I must admit I thought there were 3 extras, but I wasn't paying attention between taking the pic and posting. There are, of course, 3 languages if you include English

Click to expand...

Perhaps you're thinking of the Gatwick Express, which does English, Spanish, Italian and French?

MarlowDonkey said:

Hasn't Oyster been around long enough that London residents at least should be aware that unless it's a detailed exception, it doesn't extend beyond the boundaries of Greater London?

Click to expand...

Given that in common parlance oyster and contactless are synonymous I think the boundary of Greater London is a bit of a red herring here. It is only relatively recently that there has been any difference in validity between an Oyster and contactless card and I don't think that new distinction has been widely talked about.

Harratt4 said:

Given that in common parlance oyster and contactless are synonymous I think the boundary of Greater London is a bit of a red herring here. It is only relatively recently that there has been any difference in validity between an Oyster and contactless card and I don't think that new distinction has been widely talked about.

Click to expand...

From my site: https://oysterfares.com/south-east-rail-pay-as-you-go-with-contactless/

A brief history​

On September 16th 2014 TfL launched the ability to use contactless cards and devices to make PAYG journeys wherever Oyster was accepted. This was a game changer because you no longer needed to worry about topping up. Nearly 5 years later on August 29th 2019 Brookmans Park became the first station to accept contactless but not Oyster. A few weeks later the same arrangements were extended to Luton Airport Parkway, and then to Welwyn Garden City in November. These were the pilots for the major extension for TfL’s pre-Elizabeth line service to Reading which went live on January 2nd 2020.

Click to expand...

So you're saying that more than half the time that contactless has been a thing is "relatively recently"? I agree that the difference hasn't been talked about enough, but TfL have certainly been talking about it with respect to Reading.

MikeWh said:

From my site: https://oysterfares.com/south-east-rail-pay-as-you-go-with-contactless/


So you're saying that more than half the time that contactless has been a thing is "relatively recently"? I agree that the difference hasn't been talked about enough, but TfL have certainly been talking about it with respect to Reading.

Click to expand...

The fact that I had no idea, perhaps proves my point

Harratt4 said:

The fact that I had no idea, perhaps proves my point

Click to expand...

Quite!

Watershed said:

Hence a maximum of 15 zones can exist in the Oyster system (2 to the power of 4, less one for "no zone" presumably).

Click to expand...

There is still a "Zone F" (1111) which was originally intended for Oyster out to Reading on Elizabeth Line but wasn't used. As far as I know, "Zone F" remains available if a final extension to Oyster was ever desired, but I doubt it will ever be used, especially if Railcards on contactless are finally looking to be on the horizon.

I would guess that a "Zone 0" is used for things like buses and trams.

Hi,

Just wanted to provide an update on this case. I submitted my 2nd appeal, and have just got a letter back saying that this appeal was rejected. They said:

"I acknowledge the points raised by yourself and this case has been fully reviewed. Whilst I acknowledge the
points made in your appeal, it is the passenger's responsibility to check that Oyster payment is accepted for their
whole journey prior to boarding the train. With regard to your point about signage, under the Amended
Regulations 2022, Greater Anglia is not required to provide this additional signage. The penalty fare warning signs
that are required under the current regulations are displayed throughout the station and are fully compliant with
the statutory requirements.
Being confident that AS have followed the correct procedure, I can confirm that our initial decision remains and
payment of the outstanding balance of £72.00 is now due."

I really do not agree that the penalty fare warnings are "displayed throughout the station and are fully compliant with the statutory requirements". I found only two notices about penalty fares in the entire station (or at least visible when transferring from the underground) - as you can see from the picture both of these are completely obscurred in some way or another. One is behind the black box on the left, and the other is on the wall behind the person in the middle (also obscurred by the big sign when approaching from the underground). I did not even notice them until another user on here pointed them out to me; I did not spot them at all on my second visit to the station. There is no way that these are adequate if I can't find them when I am directly looking for them.

I intend to submit a third appeal on this matter. I would really appreciate any advice anyone can give me for this, I really don't feed like this is a fair outcome.

Thanks

Trying to suggest that a sign is not compliant because a passenger is standing in front of it is laughable. It's on the wall, at eye level, where it should be, and is readily visible except for the fact you took the picture when someone is stood in front of it. You need only one to satisfy the regulations. That location appears sensible and normal for a penalty fares sign

The test of adequate signage is not that literally every passenger be forced to read it unavoidably, there simply has to be a minimum of one sign readily visible, which in plain language means "can be seen". I could not tell you where the PF notices are at Rugby, a station I use regularly, but that doesn't mean they aren't compliant.

All you can do is make the same argument to the third appeal panel to see if they will accept it, but I must say the objection to the signage is not well founded in my view.

I would go back to this previous thread which was created regarding very similar circumstances and copy some (if not all) of the wording from that. That appeal was successful in the end.

AlterEgo said:

Trying to suggest that a sign is not compliant because a passenger is standing in front of it is laughable. It's on the wall, at eye level, where it should be, and is readily visible except for the fact you took the picture when someone is stood in front of it. You need only one to satisfy the regulations. That location appears sensible and normal for a penalty fares sign

The test of adequate signage is not that literally every passenger be forced to read it unavoidably, there simply has to be a minimum of one sign readily visible, which in plain language means "can be seen". I could not tell you where the PF notices are at Rugby, a station I use regularly, but that doesn't mean they aren't compliant.

All you can do is make the same argument to the third appeal panel to see if they will accept it, but I must say the objection to the signage is not well founded in my view.

Click to expand...

If the drafters of the Regulation merely meant "can be seen", they would not have included the adjective "readily". That suggests it must have a certain degree of prominence. I don't think a sign that's merely on the left hand side of a wide gateline, often hidden by a member of gateline staff standing in front of it, can be regarded as "readily visible". If you enter at the middle of the gateline it simply wouldn't be in your field of vision.

There might be more of an argument about the sign that's hidden by the person standing at the gates in the picture attached above, but we would need to see a clearer shot to say. In any case there is high chance the wording on it is non-compliant.

Watershed said:

There might be more of an argument about the sign that's hidden by the person standing at the gates in the picture attached above, but we would need to see a clearer shot to say. In any case there is high chance the wording on it is non-compliant.

Click to expand...

They only need one sign to be readily visible, the one on the wall in the middle of will definitely almost certainly fit that requirement.

AlterEgo said:

They only need one sign to be readily visible, the one on the wall in the middle of will definitely almost certainly fit that requirement.

Click to expand...

The Regulation says:

displayed at sufficient locations around the station so that at least one notice is readily visible to passengers prior to boarding a train at the station

Click to expand...

The way I read that is that at least one notice needs to be readily visible to all passengers, not just some passengers. Otherwise there would be no point including this sentence and they could just leave it with what Regulation 8(2) says:

a notice complying with the requirements of paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Schedule 1 (“a standard notice”) must be displayed at that entrance

Click to expand...

But again we are somewhat guessing in the dark without a picture of what the sign actually says in terms of wording, and its location and size.

The exact requirement in the PF regs where a Compulsory Ticket Area is not involved is:

The Railways (Penalty Fares) Regulations 2018 said:

(2) Where any entrance onto a platform at the station is not the entrance to, or situated within, a compulsory ticket area, a notice complying with the requirements of paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Schedule 1 (“a standard notice”) must be displayed at that entrance.

Click to expand...

Traditionally that has been interpreted as meaning the notice(s) should be displayed on the unpaid side of a gateline.

The regs also state:

(4) Standard notices and compulsory ticket area notices must also be displayed at sufficient locations around the station so that at least one notice is readily visible to passengers prior to boarding a train at the station, including passengers changing from one train to another train.

Click to expand...