Oyster touch not registering

[Urban Gateline]

And what about people who come in from further out with a ticket to somewhere not far from their origin, get off at Clapham Junction, touch in, get on next train to Waterloo and touch out?

This is Exactly the reason why validators are not provided in more places. Those that are already there on Platform 17 should really be set to "Exit only" which forces anyone wanting to touch in to come to a Gateline, so that their ticket entitleing them to arrive at Clapham Junction can be checked.

Many times I've caught people leaning over my Barriers to touch in and sometimes they cannot produce a valid ticket for being there or they "forgot to touch in" at their origin! Then don't get me started on those trying to stop short on Advance tickets and continue on Oyster, which is ripping the TOC's off as the Oyster fare from the London terminal they were booked into would be more than that from Clapham Junction! Similar situation with Megatrain!

Sorry but in light of the opportunities to fare evade that these validators encourage, I do not support them!

 

[maniacmartin]

What they need is a post that has a slot to insert your paper ticket like at a gateline, and also an oyster reader to touch in

 

[CNash]

And what about people who come in from further out with a ticket to somewhere not far from their origin, get off at Clapham Junction, touch in, get on next train to Waterloo and touch out?

Ah - I wasn't aware that you can touch in on pink validators. It's this function that's the problem - if the validators could only be used mid-route (so touching them without a prior touch-in would lead to an incomplete journey), there would be no problem with installing them at CJ.

 

[Deerfold]

What they need is a post that has a slot to insert your paper ticket like at a gateline, and also an oyster reader to touch in

And very careful programming on validities?

 

[Urban Gateline]

What they need is a post that has a slot to insert your paper ticket like at a gateline, and also an oyster reader to touch in

Sounds very expensive though, I wonder if LOROL would be willing to foot the majority of the bill for that as the majority use of Oyster is on their services out of Clapham Junction!

Also, that post would need to swallow the ticket if it is valid and ends at Clapham Junction, or simply encode the magstripe and return it if it has onward validity. All this before the Oyster reader allowing the person to touch in, thereafter the Oyster reader should deactivate again until another valid ticket is entered!

 

[maniacmartin]

I was joking about the post!

 

[clagmonster]

And what about people who come in from further out with a ticket to somewhere not far from their origin, get off at Clapham Junction, touch in, get on next train to Waterloo and touch out?

Presumably with no Oyster readers on the platform at Clapham, they will dumbell with paper tickets, thus not evading much less of the fare. The only real answer to this sort of evasion is on board checks coupled with barriers. Anybodys found to be dumbelling to be prosecuted under the RoRA.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Then don't get me started on those trying to stop short on Advance tickets and continue on Oyster, which is ripping the TOC's off as the Oyster fare from the London terminal they were booked into would be more than that from Clapham Junction!

Please can you clarify what these passengers are trying to do.

 

[yorkie]

Please can you clarify what these passengers are trying to do.

Avoid doubling-back between Clapham Jn & Waterloo.

e.g. Southampton - Clapham Jn - Richmond rather than Southampton - Clapham Jn - Waterloo - Clapham Jn - Richmond.

Common sense says that it is best that people change at Clapham Jn in such circumstances.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

But surely the only revenue SWT would lose by allowing validators at Clapham Junction would be revenue they were never truly entitled to in the first place? It's only because of the assumptions made by the Oyster system when it doesn't have enough data to know which route you've taken that it will "overcharge" you. Do SWT have the right to reap the benefits of customers not being charged correctly for the journeys they've undertaken?

I don't see how SWT can dictate what equipment is provided by LO at LO platforms.

At present people are overcharged for some journeys through Clapham Jn.

For example, Wimbledon to Whitechapel costs more than Raynes Park to Whitechapel!:roll: This is because they assume that you will use the incredibly slow and tedious District Line from Wimbledon, on the basis that people enjoy slow, but direct, trains!

But from Raynes Park you have to change somewhere, and you'd take the sensible option and change at Clapham Jn.

 

[maniacmartin]

Southern managed to wrangle it though - Platform 17 which usually has Southern services has yellow Oyster readers.

 

[Urban Gateline]

Please can you clarify what these passengers are trying to do.

Stop short at Clapham Junction on Advance Tickets that are to either Waterloo or Victoria, which is of course a breach of the Advance Ticket terms and conditions.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Southern managed to wrangle it though - Platform 17 which usually has Southern services has yellow Oyster readers.

And indeed I am against those readers being in use there. They should either be turned off or set to "Exit only". Anyone wanting to touch in Oyster should be using the Gatelines to prove they had a valid ticket to come to Clapham Junction in the first place. I agree that this doesn't solve dumbelling problems, which requires more on train checks to sort.

 

[transmanche]

Anyone wanting to touch in Oyster should be using the Gatelines to prove they had a valid ticket to come to Clapham Junction in the first place.

Why? Would you expect passengers who split their paper tickets at Clapham Junction (or anywhere) to alight from the train and go to the gateline? Why single out Oyster users?

 

[MikeWh]

Why? Would you expect passengers who split their paper tickets at Clapham Junction (or anywhere) to alight from the train and go to the gateline? Why single out Oyster users?

When using Oyster PAYG you have to get off to touch in/out - it's how the system works. If the Oyster holds a valid travelcard then there is no problem as you don't have to touch in/out when solely using it within the zones covered.

 

[transmanche]

When using Oyster PAYG you have to get off to touch in/out - it's how the system works. If the Oyster holds a valid travelcard then there is no problem as you don't have to touch in/out when solely using it within the zones covered.

I know that, but it doesn't answer my question in the context of Urban Gateline's assertion that he doesn't want the platform validators there.

I want to know why he thinks it appropriate for Oyster PAYG users to traipse all the way to the gateline to 'prove' their ticket validity - whereas those splitting paper tickets don't need to.

 

[Urban Gateline]

I know that, but it doesn't answer my question in the context of Urban Gateline's assertion that he doesn't want the platform validators there.

I want to know why he thinks it appropriate for Oyster PAYG users to traipse all the way to the gateline to 'prove' their ticket validity - whereas those splitting paper tickets don't need to.

Well put it this way, the validators on P17 are not well located anyway as that platform only has 1tph services most of the day, so someone would have to go out of their way to use them especially if wanting to travel on LOROL services on P1&2! So there is no reason to have those validators working on that platform except those using services on that platform or fare evaders touching in without having had a valid ticket in the first place.

It is actually quicker to use the Gatelines whatever platform you interchange at, as the P17 readers would require the person to walk down steps onto the platform and then walk up again if wanting another platform, the Gatelines take much less time to use.

 

[transmanche]

Well put it this way, the validators on P17 are not well located anyway as that platform only has 1tph services most of the day, so someone would have to go out of their way to use them especially if wanting to travel on LOROL services on P1&2! So there is no reason to have those validators working on that platform except those using services on that platform or fare evaders touching in without having had a valid ticket in the first place.

It is actually quicker to use the Gatelines whatever platform you interchange at, as the P17 readers would require the person to walk down steps onto the platform and then walk up again if wanting another platform, the Gatelines take much less time to use.

OK, so you think the validators n p17 are not useful. I can think of many routes through the station where it would be a PITA to have to go to the gateline to 'prove' my ticket was valid before going to p17.

Let's say I'm splitting paper tickets at Clapham Junction. I can arrive on an up train, walk across the footbridge, purchase a coffee and then wander down the stairs to p17. But if I'm splitting my journey with a paper ticket to CLJ and then using Oyster PAYG for my onward journey, you think I should walk to the gateline to 'prove' my ticket validity.

I still want to know why it's OK for paper ticket holders to go straight to their platform, whilst Oyster PAYG holders need to go to the gateline? One could argue that maybe paper tickets should be validated before use (as per on SNCF with the composter).

I see no reason for not having platform validators on p1 & p2 as well as p17.

 

[Urban Gateline]

OK, so you think the validators n p17 are not useful. I can think of many routes through the station where it would be a PITA to have to go to the gateline to 'prove' my ticket was valid before going to p17.

Let's say I'm splitting paper tickets at Clapham Junction. I can arrive on an up train, walk across the footbridge, purchase a coffee and then wander down the stairs to p17. But if I'm splitting my journey with a paper ticket to CLJ and then using Oyster PAYG for my onward journey, you think I should walk to the gateline to 'prove' my ticket validity.

I still want to know why it's OK for paper ticket holders to go straight to their platform, whilst Oyster PAYG holders need to go to the gateline? One could argue that maybe paper tickets should be validated before use (as per on SNCF with the composter).

I see no reason for not having platform validators on p1 & p2 as well as p17.

Well people have the choice over whether to use Oyster PAYG, Oyster seasons or Paper tickets for their Journey.

You mentioned exactly the reason for going to a Gateline, validation, that is the way Oyster works, it often offers cheaper fares than the paper ticket for the Journey so passengers must be willing to put in the extra effort to validate their Oyster card.

In your scenario I don't see how it would be quicker or even as quick as using a Gateline, especially for anyone who has come off Platforms 3 and 4 for example, where the Grant Rd exit is so much closer than to walk all the way along the footbridge and back again if wanting to use LOROL services!

 

[transmanche]

You mentioned exactly the reason for going to a Gateline, validation, that is the way Oyster works, it often offers cheaper fares than the paper ticket for the Journey so passengers must be willing to put in the extra effort to validate their Oyster card.

Well plenty of other interchange stations have platform validators - Highbury & Islington and Farringdon immediately spring to mind. Why is Clapham Junction a special case.

I don't accept that just because a passenger is using Oyster PAYG that they should need to "put in the extra effort" over and above what you'd expect someone using paper tickets to do.

In your scenario I don't see how it would be quicker or even as quick as using a Gateline, especially for anyone who has come off Platforms 3 and 4 for example, where the Grant Rd exit is so much closer than to walk all the way along the footbridge and back again if wanting to use LOROL services!

I don't think you read the scenario correctly, as it involved departing from p17. And I also stated that p1 & p2 should have validators too - so no need to walk back & forth if wanting a LO service.

 

[MikeWh]

Well plenty of other interchange stations have platform validators - Highbury & Islington and Farringdon immediately spring to mind. Why is Clapham Junction a special case.

Originally platform validators at interchange stations were so people changing onto the Underground could start an Oyster journey conveniently when almost no National Rail services accepted Oyster. The risk was minimal because the vast majority of Underground stations are gated. The problem is that putting validators on key interchange platforms where many journeys will be wholly on Oyster is a clear revenue risk, especially as the majority of NR stations are not gated. This is why FCC and Southeastern removed the validators from platforms 5 and 6 at London Bridge once they would not be the start of Oyster journeys across London.

I don't accept that just because a passenger is using Oyster PAYG that they should need to "put in the extra effort" over and above what you'd expect someone using paper tickets to do.

That's a poor turn of phrase really. The fact is that an Oyster card is not authority to travel unless it has a travelcard or has been validated at the start of the journey. Where you use two paper tickets you have both already at the point of changeover. With paper and Oyster PAYG you only have one ticket until the Oyster card is validated. The solution will be to allow smartcards to contain single tickets pre-bought, but that is unlikely to happen on Oyster. If the ITSO specification had been completed in time for TfL to use it we wouldn't have half the problems that we now have.

 

[transmanche]

This is why FCC and Southeastern removed the validators from platforms 5 and 6 at London Bridge once they would not be the start of Oyster journeys across London.

Well Southeastern in particular have 'form' historically regarding their treatment of Oyster passengers; by stopping them at the barrier and PFing those without an Oyster Extension Permit - even though the correct fare would have been charged when they touched out. Thankfully that nonsense has been dispensed with.

The fact is that an Oyster card is not authority to travel unless it has a travelcard or has been validated at the start of the journey. Where you use two paper tickets you have both already at the point of changeover. With paper and Oyster PAYG you only have one ticket until the Oyster card is validated.

Again, you're explaining to me how it operates, which is all well and good. But it doesn't address the issue I originally raised.

Anyone wanting to touch in Oyster should be using the Gatelines to prove they had a valid ticket to come to Clapham Junction in the first place.

it's unclear to me why someone transferring from paper to Oyster PAYG should need to "prove they had a valid ticket to come to Clapham Junction in the first place", whereas someone transferring from paper to paper does not.

 

[jon0844]

Paper tickets are paid for in advance.

Pay as you go is paid for as you go.

That's the difference.

 

[transmanche]

Paper tickets are paid for in advance.

Pay as you go is paid for as you go.

That's the difference.

Sorry, you've totally missed the point...

 

[Urban Gateline]

Sorry, you've totally missed the point...

So have you to be honest. Oyster is a different medium to Paper tickets, and the fact it requires validating when Paper tickets do not is a requirement of that medium, and that is something that won't change any time soon.

 

[transmanche]

So have you to be honest. Oyster is a different medium to Paper tickets, and the fact it requires validating when Paper tickets do not is a requirement of that medium, and that is something that won't change any time soon.

Yes, jolly good. But nothing to do with the question that I asked you!

The point that you've failed to explain (or justify) is this:

Anyone wanting to touch in Oyster should be using the Gatelines to prove they had a valid ticket to come to Clapham Junction in the first place.

No-one is disputing that Oyster PAYG you need to touch a validator.

I want to know why you feel only passengers who want continue their journey with Oyster PAYG need to prove their right to be there in the first place. Yet, you feel that people who are continuing their journey by any other means do not need to prove their right to be there in the first place.

It's a simple question...

 

[Urban Gateline]

Yes, jolly good. But nothing to do with the question that I asked you!

The point that you've failed to explain (or justify) is this:

No-one is disputing that Oyster PAYG you need to touch a validator.

I want to know why you feel only passengers who want continue their journey with Oyster PAYG need to prove their right to be there in the first place. Yet, you feel that people who are continuing their journey by any other means do not need to prove their right to be there in the first place.

It's a simple question...

I did not say that passengers not using Oyster as their ticket do not need to prove their right to be there in the first place.

I'm not sure what part of not needing to visit a Gateline when using paper split tickets you don't understand?

Anyone wanting to touch in on Oyster, must have a valid ticket up to the point where they want to touch in. The Gatelines are an effective check for this. As I said above, someone with Paper split tickets and/or Oyster season combinations will not have a reason to visit Gatelines, let alone come off the train at the station at all.

 

[maniacmartin]

The thing about paper splits is, whether you think they should have to undergo the same checks or not, there is no way it can be enforced.

 

[transmanche]

I'm not sure what part of not needing to visit a Gateline when using paper split tickets you don't understand?

I understand it perfectly. I don't understand why you feel it necessary for one group of people need to visit the gateline to prove they have a valid ticket - and not the other.

Anyone wanting to touch in on Oyster, must have a valid ticket up to the point where they want to touch in. The Gatelines are an effective check for this. As I said above, someone with Paper split tickets and/or Oyster season combinations will not have a reason to visit Gatelines, let alone come off the train at the station at all.

And my response is that people transferring to/from Oyster PAYG do not have a need to visit the gateline. Only the lack of platform validators at convenient locations forces them to do so.

Let's turn the journey around. If you believe that;

Anyone wanting to touch in Oyster should be using the Gatelines to prove they had a valid ticket to come to Clapham Junction in the first place.

It's fair to assume the reverse, i.e.: "Anyone wanting to touch out Oyster should be using the Gatelines to prove they had a valid ticket to continue onwards from Clapham Junction."

Say I'm travelling from Hampstead Heath to somewhere on the SWT network. I want to split my tickets at Clapham Junction. If I ise paper tickets for both parts, I can just carry on my merry way at CLJ. If I use Oyster PAYG to travel from Hampstead Heath to Clapham Junction, I'll need to visit the gateline at CLJ to touch out and show my onwards ticket - even though using a platform validator to touch out would be far more convenient. Why?

The only reason I can think of os that you feel people using Oyster PAYG are less honest than other passengers. That only those people should be forced to visit the gateline rather than using platform validators, because they cannot be trusted to have a paper ticket for the remainder of their journey.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The thing about paper splits is, whether you think they should have to undergo the same checks or not, there is no way it can be enforced.

Actually; If you read what I wrote, you'll see I'm arguing the reverse...

 

[maniacmartin]

Actually; If you read what I wrote, you'll see I'm arguing the reverse...

But how could you possible enforce it, given that paper tickets don't need validating on readers? Insist the magstripe had been encoded with a gateline? I can't see it being feasible.

 

[transmanche]

But how could you possible enforce it, given that paper tickets don't need validating on readers? Insist the magstripe had been encoded with a gateline? I can't see it being feasible.

But that's not what I asked...

 

[jon0844]

The thing about paper splits is, whether you think they should have to undergo the same checks or not, there is no way it can be enforced.

Wherever you might get stopped for a check, you'd have two paper tickets that - subject to condition 19 - would either be valid or invalid for that journey. If not stopped, it doesn't matter as you've got two tickets - one to let you enter and one to exit - and have paid the right amount.

 

[transmanche]

Wherever you might get stopped for a check, you'd have two paper tickets that - subject to condition 19 - would either be valid or invalid for that journey. If not stopped, it doesn't matter as you've got two tickets - one to let you enter and one to exit - and have paid the right amount.

Again, this is not under question. But no-one has been able to provide an explanation/justification for the principle that;

Anyone wanting to touch in Oyster should be using the Gatelines to prove they had a valid ticket to come to Clapham Junction in the first place.