Debit card declined

[LWB]

The new limit is £30 to start in September but for some reason it seems to work now.

 

[WillPS]

The new limit is £30

There is no universal limit. My Barclaycard allows me to spend far more than that in sub-£20 amounts.

 

[island]

The new limit is £30

Also wrong. It varies from bank to bank and potentially from account to account.

 

[WillPS]

How are you going to do on-line transactions where there is no mobile signal?

I acknowledge pretty clearly that you cannot. In the case of there actually being absolutely no coverage, you would be no better off than now.

It is worth remembering that a tiny amount of data is exchanged as part of an online authorisation; even with EDGE speed you would only need a good connection for a few seconds at most times.

 

[Robson689]

Pretty sure there is a per transaction limit of £20 (going up to £30) which is where the confusion is. You can spend thousands on your contactless each day but not more than £20 at a time.

 

[transportphoto]

The PDQ machines I work with do not offer Contactless as a payment option for transactions over £20.01 (inclusive)... they simply say 'Insert or Swipe Card' rather than give the 'Present, Insert or Swipe Card' along with the contactless logo. Certainly don't (yet) allow any transaction above £20 to be Contactless.

TP

 

[PermitToTravel]

A few terminals have limits like that, presumably either hardcoded or stipulated by a merchant agreement. Many more don't.

 

[Llanigraham]

I acknowledge pretty clearly that you cannot. In the case of there actually being absolutely no coverage, you would be no better off than now.

It is worth remembering that a tiny amount of data is exchanged as part of an online authorisation; even with EDGE speed you would only need a good connection for a few seconds at most times.

There are lines in Wales that don't get a phone signal for a long time, and I am sure there are just as many in England and Scotland.
Sorry but your idea will not work.

 

[GaryMcEwan]

This is wrong.

Care to elaborate?

 

[30907]

A gentle reminder to all: Please use the 'new thread' (

) button when you want to go off on a tangent, or discuss a separate, even if related, matter (such as a debate about people not bringing cash with them and paying for everything by card), rather than the reply button within a thread (and, in particular a thread about a specific dispute).

Point taken, but if said button appeared as an option each time one clicked on Reply it would be easier. Is this a change that could be made? Sorry for OT post but I can't find the button (OK it's at the head of this forum!)

 

[najaB]

Care to elaborate?

I don't see anything in the link you provided (now removed) that indicates a per-day limit.

 

[MikeWh]

The PDQ machines I work with do not offer Contactless as a payment option for transactions over £20.01 (inclusive)... they simply say 'Insert or Swipe Card' rather than give the 'Present, Insert or Swipe Card' along with the contactless logo. Certainly don't (yet) allow any transaction above £20 to be Contactless.

TP

At risk of going further off-topic, it is possible to incur a transaction greater than £20 using contactless technology. You'd probably have to include a few incomplete journeys on the Oyster/contactless system, but the end of day transaction can be for as much as TfL deem it to be needed. Of course transit mode contactless is a semi-authorised system so there is less risk.

 

[WillPS]

There are lines in Wales that don't get a phone signal for a long time, and I am sure there are just as many in England and Scotland.
Sorry but your idea will not work.

Are such lines the exception or the norm? I've used the railways a fair bit with my laptop out tethered to my phone, and I honestly can't remember the last time I had a (non-tunnel, moving) drop-out of more than a couple of minutes.

You can apologise insincerely all you like, the issue is real; the current non-solution makes genuine customers feel like they are doing wrong whilst also paving a near risk-free route for the so-minded to evade fare payment.

The lack of even acknowledgment of the issue is a farce.

 

[alxndr]

Is there not an option for signing for a transaction when it is declined through not being authorised for offline use?

A few years ago I was on my way to college and my card was declined for this reason (although I didn't know why at the time, it happened one before and both times none of the guards seemed clued up on why other than Lloyds was known to be a bit funny with them) and I was asked to sign for the transaction, which I did, and the money successfully left my account as usual.

And before anyone complains I should have paid before/cash, this was at a station with no ticket office/machine or penalty fare, and there is no cash machine I know of within a fifteen minute walk either, and no one had ever been able to explain why it didn't work, either for me or for other passengers nearby when it happened to them.

 

[najaB]

Are such lines the exception or the norm? I've used the railways a fair bit with my laptop out tethered to my phone, and I honestly can't remember the last time I had a (non-tunnel, moving) drop-out of more than a couple of minutes.

As I mentioned above, there are still not-spots though I agree that they are getting a lot less common. There are quite a few along the WCLM, though I believe that may well be due to the fact that Voyagers and Pendolios appear to be near perfect Faraday cages. I've not been that way recently in a 350 to compare (and I avoid the 185's if possible).

ECML between Durham and Darlington and Morpeth and Dunbar is more miss than hit as well.

 

[Llanigraham]

Are such lines the exception or the norm? I've used the railways a fair bit with my laptop out tethered to my phone, and I honestly can't remember the last time I had a (non-tunnel, moving) drop-out of more than a couple of minutes.

You can apologise insincerely all you like, the issue is real; the current non-solution makes genuine customers feel like they are doing wrong whilst also paving a near risk-free route for the so-minded to evade fare payment.

The lack of even acknowledgment of the issue is a farce.

It doesn't matter whether they are the exception or not, so your "attitude" towards me is unwarranted.

If you want a system to work then it has to work over the whole system and not just most of it. I know of sections of the Cambrian, the Marches and the Heart of Wales where you cannot get a phone signal of any sort. I am also sure that there are lines in England and Scotland that are exactly the same.

Therefore your "system" cannot work.

 

[najaB]

If you want a system to work then it has to work over the whole system and not just most of it.

I disagree with that, depending on exactly how much 'most' means. If it only works 60% of the time, then it's a non-starter. If it works, for example, 98% of the time, then it's worth doing as long as there's a thought out process for the occasions where it fails.

I don't believe that any system is ever designed with a 100% availability target - even nuclear power station control systems are designed to be fault tolerant.

 

[ian959]

Okay so just to put me at ease my card was declined he didn't take any details. But said I would get a letter will I or won't I? I know some of you think I won't but I'm still worried.

Highly doubtful that you will get a letter without having details recorded, I think you can stop worrying

 

[WillPS]

It doesn't matter whether they are the exception or not, so your "attitude" towards me is unwarranted.

If you want a system to work then it has to work over the whole system and not just most of it. I know of sections of the Cambrian, the Marches and the Heart of Wales where you cannot get a phone signal of any sort. I am also sure that there are lines in England and Scotland that are exactly the same.

Therefore your "system" cannot work.

Not sure where you're quoting "attidude" or "system" from; yourself?

In the case you outline, you would be back to where you are now. I've never claimed it to be a perfect "system". All I am claiming is it'll stop people performing the "offline card" trick in areas where signal is plentiful.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

As I mentioned above, there are still not-spots though I agree that they are getting a lot less common. There are quite a few along the WCLM, though I believe that may well be due to the fact that Voyagers and Pendolios appear to be near perfect Faraday cages. I've not been that way recently in a 350 to compare (and I avoid the 185's if possible).

ECML between Durham and Darlington and Morpeth and Dunbar is more miss than hit as well.

The last journey I did on the WCML I got a near-perfect T-Mobile (which shows you how long ago it was!) signal all the way from Glasgow to Preston; I believe the signal is boosted along the line for the internal wifi?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Is there not an option for signing for a transaction when it is declined through not being authorised for offline use?

A few years ago I was on my way to college and my card was declined for this reason (although I didn't know why at the time, it happened one before and both times none of the guards seemed clued up on why other than Lloyds was known to be a bit funny with them) and I was asked to sign for the transaction, which I did, and the money successfully left my account as usual.

And before anyone complains I should have paid before/cash, this was at a station with no ticket office/machine or penalty fare, and there is no cash machine I know of within a fifteen minute walk either, and no one had ever been able to explain why it didn't work, either for me or for other passengers nearby when it happened to them.

If the merchant swipes your card they effectively override the "online only" instruction on the card's chip. If they do this, and you complain the bank is likely to reverse the transaction.

 

[najaB]

The last journey I did on the WCML I got a near-perfect T-Mobile (which shows you how long ago it was!) signal all the way from Glasgow to Preston; I believe the signal is boosted along the line for the internal wifi?

I believe you are correct about the boosted signal, however the onboard POS terminal has problems making a connection between Shap/Tebay and Penrith at the very least as based on the extended time it took to buy a drink and sandwich a while back. This may have improved now.

 

[ADRboy]

It doesn't matter whether they are the exception or not, so your "attitude" towards me is unwarranted.

If you want a system to work then it has to work over the whole system and not just most of it. I know of sections of the Cambrian, the Marches and the Heart of Wales where you cannot get a phone signal of any sort. I am also sure that there are lines in England and Scotland that are exactly the same.

Therefore your "system" cannot work.

The replacement for Avantix will be online and here within a year. It'll work fine. 'notspots' apart.

 

[Elecman]

All these problems will disappear when Network Rail Telecom finally releases the GSMR / FTNx network to commercial use. I would presume the TOCs would be the first users so as to overcome the Notspot problems with thier various retail systems on trains.

 

[Flamingo]

The replacement for Avantix will be online and here within a year. It'll work fine. 'notspots' apart.

Will it? I wonder how long it'll take TOC's to roll it out. I know the new EPOS for buffets are coming within months.

 

[najaB]

All these problems will disappear when Network Rail Telecom finally releases the GSMR / FTNx network to commercial use..

I thought they weren't allowed to use it for 'non operational' purposes, or has that restriction been removed/overcome?

 

[cjmillsnun]

I thought they weren't allowed to use it for 'non operational' purposes, or has that restriction been removed/overcome?

Would revenue collection not qualify as operational purposes?

 

[najaB]

Would revenue collection not qualify as operational purposes?

I thought it was classed as a commercial, rather than operational activity. My understanding, and I'm an outsider, is that operational purposes constitute those activities required for the safe operation of the railway and delivery of the timetable (i.e. control, signalling and communications) regardless of if the trains actually have passengers on board.

Happy to be corrected though.

 

[cjmillsnun]

I thought it was classed as a commercial, rather than operational activity. My understanding, and I'm an outsider, is that operational purposes constitute those activities required for the safe operation of the railway and delivery of the timetable (i.e. control, signalling and communications) regardless of if the trains actually have passengers on board.

Happy to be corrected though.

You could be right there, as an outsider, I'm not in the know either.

 

[IanXC]

I thought they weren't allowed to use it for 'non operational' purposes, or has that restriction been removed/overcome?

My understanding is that this all stems from using permitted development rights to erect the masts? So I'd guess the question is more whether they are required to operate a railway or not - I'd say collecting revenue is?

 

[najaB]

My understanding is that this all stems from using permitted development rights to erect the masts? So I'd guess the question is more whether they are required to operate a railway or not - I'd say collecting revenue is?

This is the kind of thing that could keep a firm of solicitors gainfully employed for quite a while. My understanding is that NR used its permitted development rights as the infrastructure operator to build the masts, but revenue protection is a responsibility of the train operator so they wouldn't be allowed to use GSM-R for this purpose.

 

[455driver]

Do we have to do this over and over again?

Apparently so, just like all the other regurgitated threads that go round and round.:roll: