Minimum spend on card at booking offices?

[MidnightFlyer]

My apologies if this has been done before, I tried the search function but we all know how useful that is.

Whenever I use booking offices, I always try to use either cash throughout, or card for larger transactions. However, today I ended up with my card as the only means of payment for an 80p fare. I realise this isn't brilliant and apologised to the clerk, however he insisted that he normally would only let users pay by card for transactions in excess of one pound, owing to the cost incurred to the Toc for using the machines for transactions (I won't use his exact figures, but apparently over half of that 80p would have been lost).

I had never heard of this 'rule' or way of working prior to today, and was wondering if there was any precedent for Tocs or booking offices implementing minimum spends for card use, where such would be stated, and / or whether it is at the individual clerk's discretion to implement one?

 

[Bletchleyite]

No such rule.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

No such rule.

Cheers. Is implementation of such a rule at an operator's discretion banned outright? I've used endless booking offices all over the country and never heard of or seen (in action or written) such restrictions...

 

[mikeg]

Cheers. Is implementation of such a rule at an operator's discretion banned outright? I've used endless booking offices all over the country and never heard of or seen (in action or written) such restrictions...

Chip and pin debit or credit card with offline authorisation facilities issued by visa or MasterCard are acceptable means of payment according to the national rail conditions of travel. It is a nationally agreed arrangement among atoc members and therefore there is no operator discretion. Where a method of payment is at operator's discretion, such as cheques, this is mentioned (and usually the answer to that is no).

 

[yorkie]

Cheers. Is implementation of such a rule at an operator's discretion banned outright? I've used endless booking offices all over the country and never heard of or seen (in action or written) such restrictions...

It's a valid payment method, so if they won't take payment, I would argue that there is no 'opportunity to buy' before boarding, thus entitling you to the full range of fares on-board.

I'd ask if it was possible to put that in writing, but I suspect the chances are they'd say no to that.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Thanks both, I suspected that was the case. I was tempted to ask the clerk if it was an official line, but thought the better of it. There were no notices or prior mention of the clerk's 'rule'.

Is this sort of action worth pursuing with the Toc? I realise it's trivial and impacts practically nobody, but if staff are refusing to adhere to the Conditions of Travel then I am slightly concerned.

 

[sheff1]

The cost incurred by the TOC in a specific transaction should be of zero concern to an individual booking clerk.

If a TOC wants to introduce restrictions on which payment methods are acceptable for which type of transaction they can only do so in accordance with the Conditions/Terms etc they sign up to when taking on a franchise. As far as I am aware there is no option for a TOC to introduce a minimum card spend 'rule'.

 

[RJ]

Thanks both, I suspected that was the case. I was tempted to ask the clerk if it was an official line, but thought the better of it. There were no notices or prior mention of the clerk's 'rule'.

Is this sort of action worth pursuing with the Toc? I realise it's trivial and impacts practically nobody, but if staff are refusing to adhere to the Conditions of Travel then I am slightly concerned.

Honestly, don't bother wasting your time.

 

[paul1609]

The agreements between the card merchants and retailers normally prohibit minimum transaction charges or restrictions and have done since before contactless was introduced.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Cheers. Is implementation of such a rule at an operator's discretion banned outright? I've used endless booking offices all over the country and never heard of or seen (in action or written) such restrictions...

Merseyrail (the current franchise) tried it at the start, following Dutch practice. I believe they were told to pack it in as it was in breach of their franchise agreement.

The agreements between the card merchants and retailers normally prohibit minimum transaction charges or restrictions and have done since before contactless was introduced.

They don't, as this was ruled anticompetitive.

 

[AlterEgo]

Is this a TOC policy or just another member of booking office staff making up their own rules to alleviate the boredom?

Which TOC was this, OP?

 

[maniacmartin]

With the recent EU rules on interchange rates, I wouldn't be surprised if the TOC has negotiated new rates with their card processor such that using a card for an 80p purchase isn't that bad for them any more

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Is this a TOC policy or just another member of booking office staff making up their own rules to alleviate the boredom?

Which TOC was this, OP?

Greater Anglia. Never heard of such a policy whenever I've used them before, including the several other booking offices of theirs I used yesterday!

 

[shredder1]

Not heard of it on the railways before, but some shops try this on, I just refuse to pay and walk out, its their business cost not ours, they don`t share their profits with us do they, if they begruge paying card fees, then they shouldnt accept them, end of.

 

[Bletchleyite]

With the recent EU rules on interchange rates, I wouldn't be surprised if the TOC has negotiated new rates with their card processor such that using a card for an 80p purchase isn't that bad for them any more

Card companies are going after small payments in a big way with contactless etc, so I indeed suspect they will not be offering contracts that would cause a retailer to lose money when conducting such transactions.

 

[paddington]

A few months ago, I stuck some stamps with a numerical value on a parcel that I was going to post, but I had miscalculated and I was 2p short. I offered to pay by card, as I only had my emergency £20 in my wallet and I didn't really want £19.98 in change.

The post office clerk decided to give me the 2p stamp for free as she thought their acquiring bank would charge them more than 2p for a 2p transaction.


I am not privy to agreements between TOCs and their banks, and I don't know why a ticket office staff member would be.

TOCs are large companies that process millions of card transactions; they are not small businesses run by a single person in their homes. For small transactions, debit cards may be more costly than credit cards. The fee for a debit card would probably be around 5p but may be as high as 25p, and for a credit card, it could be lower than 1% (0.8p); business cards could charge 3% (2.4p) possibly plus a fixed fee too, but unlikely to exceed 25p in total.

Amex traditionally is assumed to be more expensive for retailers but this is not really true any more. Unless the TOC has not renegotiated an agreement in many years, I highly doubt the booking clerk's assertion that the fee would exceed more than half the cost of the payment.

I bet he would have complained if you tried to pay 80p in 5p coins too.

On the other hand I had excellent service from an FGW (now GWR) booking clerk who spent 10 minutes helping me when I needed a 20p excess (and I paid in coins).

 

[Deafdoggie]

Generally, debit cards incur a fixed fee per transaction, and credit cards a percentage (subject to a minimum fee) of the transaction. Therefore small payments on a debit card can cost a business more. However, most transaction rates were negotiated with the advent of contactless, which is why you see less "minimum transactions" signs now.

That said, larger companies, of course, have more muscle than small retailers, so can get much better rates. I used to work for a well known supermarket. They basically bullied AMEX into charging the same as other credit card companies, by saying they would simply not accept it if they didn't! Equally they did the same with VISA and Mastercard, and although that might have been cutting their noses off to spite their faces, neither VISA nor Mastercard, wanted payments accepted by the other, and not them. They therefore had to reduce their charges. Small businesses can't make those demands, and therefore need a minimum spend to justify the cost. But, contactless did change that.

Can't believe a rail company is too affected by it, as generally, the fares are high enough to make the charge justifiable. an occasional small transaction will not be noticed, if everyone paid 80p fares by card, it is more of an issue. Remember cash isn't free-it has to be collected, counted, banked, stored securely, etc.

 

[fairysdad]

Card companies are going after small payments in a big way with contactless etc, so I indeed suspect they will not be offering contracts that would cause a retailer to lose money when conducting such transactions.

There's a canteen where I work; the company has to pay for chip and pin transactions under a certain amount, but not on contactless payments - even if it is the same physical card that is being used! (This charge isn't passed on to the customer, I only found out from idle conversation with the person behind the counter when getting my lunch!)

 

[tsr]

I quite enjoy the amusement value of somebody using a card to pay for a 5p excess fare, particularly if the card is online-only and takes an age to process! Happens quite regularly in my area if someone has only bought a single ticket and wants to excess up to a return for a short-distance journey. Most people are quite amused at the low value and yet how long it can take to give them that extra coupon!

Obviously on a few occasions it is indeed more practical to waive the fare, and just sort it out of loose coppers from the float.

 

[philjo]

There is a shop near us that charges customers 50p extra for card payments on transactions costing under £5.
I think the items I purchased cost £2.90 so they wanted to charge me the 50p extra for using contactless.
I then gave them a £20 note instead - which the cashier moaned about saying it would use all of their change (it was the smallest note I had).

 

[shredder1]

There is a shop near us that charges customers 50p extra for card payments on transactions costing under £5.
I think the items I purchased cost £2.90 so they wanted to charge me the 50p extra for using contactless.
I then gave them a £20 note instead - which the cashier moaned about saying it would use all of their change (it was the smallest note I had).

Take your custom elsewhere and see if he moans then.

 

[tsr]

Take your custom elsewhere and see if he moans then.

Good luck if you live in a rural area where it may be the only shop for several miles.

There are quite a few such places in the UK!

 

[najaB]

Good luck if you live in a rural area where it may be the only shop for several miles.

Indeed, they are local shops​ for local people.

 

[TUC]

The shop at work has switched to card only transactions, so cards are needed even for 30p chocolate bars. Clearly cards are becoming increasingly the norm and someone who suggests not taking them for under £1 is probably behind the times.

 

[gray1404]

I would make the TOC aware of what happened, perhaps a simple Tweet. It is wrong that someone in a customer service role is making it up as they go along and possibly denying customers the right to buy a ticket. Preventing someone from buying a ticket could have very adverse consequences as we know.