Tap-out at Prince Regent

[Shadow Cat]

When getting off the DLR at Prince Regent the DLR staff on the platform informed members of the public that Tapping out was not needed at the station and all the tap-out points were covered (I noticed the Tap In points were not covered but these were on a divided section that was not accessible to people leaving the station heading towards Excel)

I'm just wondering why this happened as you're required to tap out otherwise you will get an incomplete journey and be charged a maximum fare, be issued with a penalty fare, or even be prosecuted.

Thankfully I use train + 1-6 travel cards as it works out nearly the same price but there were quite a few people with oyster cards in hand looking really confused and even asked one of the people if that information was correct and was reassured it was

Now I've seen a few friends who were also as the convention have £10 charges on their oyster card for incomplete journeys what I told them to dispute

But why did this happen? I've seen mentions that the card readers were working (Can someone confirm this) so why were they covered and told otherwise?

__________

Edit: need to mention this information was from 2 people in DLR uniform and what I assume is the DLR Mascot at around 10:00~10:30 on Saturday Morning

 

[MikeWh]

It may be because large crowds touching out would cause congestion, especially with the other ExCell station closed. I would expect journeys to be auto completed by the Oyster system and any associated over charge refunded to the card on a later touch in.

There would certainly be no danger of penalty fares or prosecutions at the station as the situation was known.

 

[island]

They will resolve the incomplete journeys in a few days and credits will be sent to people's most used stations to collect.

Poor show really mind you; not everyone can afford to be out of pocket for the best part of twenty quid (if going to all three days of MCM) for that time.

 

[Surreytraveller]

It may be because large crowds touching out would cause congestion, especially with the other ExCell station closed. I would expect journeys to be auto completed by the Oyster system and any associated over charge refunded to the card on a later touch in.

But how can the system auto complete journeys when the system cannot know where people are going? Surely TfL are committing a criminal offence by falsely causing people to be overcharged? Or they must be in breach of agreements they have with credit card companies - any customer would be well within their rights to chargeback amounts overcharged by those using contactless?
It makes me laugh how they will prosecute and penalty fare people on a whim, but then just 'switch off' the rules when they feel like it and inconvenience and deliberately overcharge those who try to adhere to the rules.

 

[najaB]

Surely TfL are committing a criminal offence by falsely causing people to be overcharged?

Interesting. What law would they be breaking?

 

[Surreytraveller]

They will resolve the incomplete journeys in a few days and credits will be sent to people's most used stations to collect.

Poor show really mind you; not everyone can afford to be out of pocket for the best part of twenty quid (if going to all three days of MCM) for that time.

Trouble is, a lot of people travelling to big events won't have a 'most used' station - they will be one-off travellers. Unless the system will automatically assume that those who touched in on the DLR and have no touch-out will be going to Prince Regent.

 

[Surreytraveller]

Interesting. What law would they be breaking?

I wouldn't know. But it sounds very dodgy that they can 'steal' money from people by not allowing them to touch out. It is all very one-sided - they can prosecute people for not paying the correct fare, but they don't actually allow people to pay the correct fare.

 

[Clip]

I wouldn't know. But it sounds very dodgy that they can 'steal' money from people by not allowing them to touch out. It is all very one-sided - they can prosecute people for not paying the correct fare, but they don't actually allow people to pay the correct fare.

Oh dear 'steal' is pretty harsh wording when the same thing happens at other places when big events are on too to assist with crowd control.

 

[Hadders]

It's done to prevent overcrowding at major events. In the instance described above if you touched back in at Prince Regent on your return journey then it'll auto-complete the outward journey to Prince Regent too.

In the circumstances it probably the least worst option.

 

[island]

Trouble is, a lot of people travelling to big events won't have a 'most used' station - they will be one-off travellers. Unless the system will automatically assume that those who touched in on the DLR and have no touch-out will be going to Prince Regent.

One off travellers will be most likely to use contactless or paper tickets, neither of which attract the particular problem in question. But everyone with an Oyster card has a most-used station; even if they just got it that day, it's the station where they touched in.

 

[Surreytraveller]

One off travellers will be most likely to use contactless or paper tickets, neither of which attract the particular problem in question. But everyone with an Oyster card has a most-used station; even if they just got it that day, it's the station where they touched in.

Paper ticket fair enough, but how will the system deal with a contactless passenger? Or someone with an Oystercard who uses it once in a blue moon? They then have to waste their time and money ringing up the helpline, and if they might not have any spare money and cannot afford to be overcharged. Perhaps the DLR should just be free for the day?

 

[Surreytraveller]

Oh dear 'steal' is pretty harsh wording.

I don't think so. Its not a harsh word when it is they other way around and someone has innocently not touched in for some reason!

 

[island]

Paper ticket fair enough, but how will the system deal with a contactless passenger? Or someone with an Oystercard who uses it once in a blue moon? They then have to waste their time and money ringing up the helpline, and if they might not have any spare money and cannot afford to be overcharged. Perhaps the DLR should just be free for the day?

A passenger using contactless will either be charged the correct fare with the system set to assume the journey completed at Prince Regent, or will be charged an incomplete journey with the difference refunded a few days later, or will be charged an incomplete journey and need to ring up for a refund. But almost certainly one of the first two.

I agree with the rest of the assessment. In particular someone who is sent a refund to collect at a station they are unlikely to use in the foreseeable future then needs to ring up and get it resent to a different station or to a bank account.

Given that the security checkpoint queue for MCM, the event that they would have been going to at Prince Regent, was over a thousand people long, it would have been considerably easier for TfL staff* to just let the passengers touch out.

*As always before the pedants jump down my throat, I use the term "TfL staff" as an umbrella term to include staff, contractors, and authorised persons representing TfL, its subsidiaries and its concessionaires.

 

[najaB]

Paper ticket fair enough, but how will the system deal with a contactless passenger? Or someone with an Oystercard who uses it once in a blue moon?

If they use it 'once in a blue moon' then the auto-reconciliation would likely have happened by the time they use it again.

 

[island]

That's exactly the problem. The auto-reconciliation will generate a refund to be collected at the passenger's most-used station within the next 8 days. If the passenger doesn't use that station during that time the refund will drop off and the passenger will need to phone TfL to have it sent to the same or another station which he/she will use within 8 days, or by BACS.

However, since the passenger is an infrequent Oyster user, he/she probably doesn't have the card registered so will not get an email regarding the refund to collect nor realise that it even exists, and will just notice that his/her Oyster credit is running out much faster than usual and curse the system/go back to paper tickets/travel less.

 

[najaB]

However, since the passenger is an infrequent Oyster user, he/she probably doesn't have the card registered so will not get an email regarding the refund to collect nor realise that it even exists, and will just notice that his/her Oyster credit is running out much faster than usual and curse the system/go back to paper tickets/travel less.

I suppose so. But I'm imagining that if they really are in infrequent user then they probably won't even notice that their credit has disappeared. I've got an Oyster card that I use maybe four times a year - I really couldn't tell you the balance. I get the feeling it should be about £4 but honestly I wouldn't be surprised if it was £20 or 20p.

Not that I'm saying it's right, just that it is unlikely to cause major outrage. And, given that they can get the money back if they want to, I can't see what 'crime' has been committed.

 

[MikeWh]

A passenger using contactless will either be charged the correct fare with the system set to assume the journey completed at Prince Regent, or will be charged an incomplete journey with the difference refunded a few days later, or will be charged an incomplete journey and need to ring up for a refund. But almost certainly one of the first two.

If there is an incomplete journey at the end of the day when contactless is preparing the charge to make they will delay taking the money. Usually this allows for the missing touch to turn up a bit late, but in the case of an event it will very likely allow the auto-completion to be made before the charge is processed.

 

[Surreytraveller]

If they use it 'once in a blue moon' then the auto-reconciliation would likely have happened by the time they use it again.

Is there not a time-limit on when it can be collected? And how would the system know which station to collect it? It is all set up to be very inconvenient for the passengers.

 

[Surreytraveller]

A passenger using contactless will either be charged the correct fare with the system set to assume the journey completed at Prince Regent, or will be charged an incomplete journey with the difference refunded a few days later, or will be charged an incomplete journey and need to ring up for a refund. But almost certainly one of the first two.

Are there notices to advise the passengers of this, though?

 

[island]

I think you can readily guess the answer to that.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Surely TfL are committing a criminal offence by falsely causing people to be overcharged?. . . . .

Surely? I can't think of a single offence with a high level of uncertainty.

It makes me laugh how they will prosecute and penalty fare people on a whim, . . . . .

It makes me laugh that people think that there are so many laws that all the actions they dislike will be crimes. If there were so many laws, then I'm sure we'd be having much, much more to complain about!
Anyway, it is unreasonable to claim that 'they' prosecute on a whim. There are excellent deterrents and disincentives to doing so, most specifically, the lack of financial advantage of doing so.

. . . . it sounds very dodgy that they can 'steal' money from people by not allowing them to touch out. . . . . .

That temporary deduction of a higher fare is not 'stealing'. Not even anywhere near it.

It's a poor solution to a temporary surge in demand, and more constructive solutions which are realistic, practical and viable to implement would be helpful. It is not 'stealing'. It is not criminal.

Arguably, there is a basis for a civil recovery action [without much prospect of it being a productive use of time and money], and that is also the legal framework which many on this forum would prefer for the recovery of ticketless travel. But its so improbably that I really don't think its worth even discussing that action.

It's done to prevent overcrowding at major events.

. . .

In the circumstances it probably the least worst option.

I agree, though I'd hope that in such foreseeable circumstances, an alternative method which is technologically, practically and commercially realistic could be implemented.

I don't think so. Its not a harsh word . . . .

It's just plain wrong!

 

[DaveB10780]

I have a slightly different slant here. I dropped off my daughter on Saturday and Sunday and had no problems tapping out and in. This was fortunate since she has Oyster/Railcard combo with minimum credit. On Saturday just one on the leaving side was working but she could pop over. On Sunday one each side was working. I thought they were taped up due to faulty machines but may have been deliberate I suppose.

The staff might possibly have given some confusing advice but in general they did a great job on a very busy day in trying circumstances so I give them high praise.

 

[tsr]

The problem with doing this with contactless cards for multi-day events is that the situation is actually worse for those users with multiple incomplete journeys, not better. Although the system may be able to calculate a probable journey in some circumstances, large events will, by definition, usually attract people from all over London and beyond, who may have touched in at a variety of seemingly unrelated stations, and interchanged at locations where it is not compulsory to separately touch in for the DLR (there are a number of interchanges between outlying Tube stations and the DLR network at the likes of Bank/Monument, as well as potentially elsewhere). The system therefore has no idea if someone touching in at West Ruislip, High Barnet etc. will have actually gone on to use the DLR, and large as an event or exhibition may be, there is no useful way to definitively say that all incomplete journeys have gone there. Regrettably, "chancers", other fare evaders, and those making "genuine" mistakes will probably have totalled a far higher number of incomplete journeys on any such day.

If someone is staying with friends one day and a hotel for the next two, or making their way to some other event at another point during their stay, their travel patterns (for which PAYG via contactless is ideally suited at other times) quickly become very messy, and probably unlikely to be resolved without some form of human input.

Now comes the catch: unfortunately, contactless payment cards are usually limited to 3 incomplete journeys before the next occasion results in the card being refused for travel as it is no longer authorised. If this next occasion also happens to coincide with a major event where it becomes impossible to touch in, the user will happen to then be travelling around a potentially sizeable chunk of London with a card which will display one of the various "not authorised for travel" messages when read by a RID held by an inspector or other staff. At this point, the best case scenario is for it to be dismissed as an anomaly, if the passenger can explain themselves. The worst is that the passenger's details are taken on a TIR and they are reported to an operator's prosecutions department for travelling without authority or a ticket - or even, potentially, means to pay.

Further to this, if the passenger attempts to travel with only a contactless card (which, lest we forget, may be the best value way to pay for their journey, or the only one which they wish to account for) and is then prevented from doing so by a gateline, they may be put at a time or financial penalty which is unreasonable, having been told (effectively) to previously invalidate their card by staff.

All this means that if TfL staff, or their contractors, are being told to cover up validators and expect people not to use them for multiple journeys, the system could potentially put contactless users at a significant disadvantage, having had this method of payment promoted to them by TfL, even being told that it may be cheaper for some multi-day journey uses.

So, as you can see, this tactic is very difficult to consider as fair or correct by the informed observer, unless the contactless payment methodology is subject to wholesale change, including at the agreement of the card issuers et al. Now, when we look at just how many people can use a proper gateline at a major London mainline terminus in the peaks, it does not seem like it would be a foolish step to equip the better-used DLR stations with this sort of equipment, which can actually also be useful for crowd control anyway...

 

[MikeWh]

tsr: Do you have a source for any of this?

My understanding is that incomplete journeys are fine unless they are created by a revenue check when you weren't touched in. In that instance it is three strikes and you're out, but normally you'll just get charged the maximum fare if a corresponding touch fails to show up after a day.

 

[island]

So, as you can see, this tactic is very difficult to consider as fair or correct by the informed observer, unless the contactless payment methodology is subject to wholesale change, including at the agreement of the card issuers et al. Now, when we look at just how many people can use a proper gateline at a major London mainline terminus in the peaks, it does not seem like it would be a foolish step to equip the better-used DLR stations with this sort of equipment, which can actually also be useful for crowd control anyway...

There is a pop quiz around which are the only two DLR-operated gatelines, but I think we're in the wrong forum for that.

As Mike already said upthread, if an unmatched touch in or out is found during reconciliation of the contactless fares overnight, the system will wait a couple of days before charging the maximum fare.

 

[tsr]

tsr: Do you have a source for any of this?

My understanding is that incomplete journeys are fine unless they are created by a revenue check when you weren't touched in. In that instance it is three strikes and you're out, but normally you'll just get charged the maximum fare if a corresponding touch fails to show up after a day.

Yes, the source is multiple TOC training sessions attended by myself, using materials endorsed by TfL, relating to contactless payment checking and enforcement.

I can't say too much more on specifics, but suffice to say that it would be silly (given the sheer volume of passengers versus ticket checks, especially on crowded trains operating from a whole host of stations with part time or no gatelines) for ticket checks to be the only way that incorrect travel was flagged up. An incomplete journey is always an incomplete journey, regardless of where it is first found.

If there is a card which is repeatedly checked onboard and yet is neither touched in nor out, this is potentially one very good reason why use of that card might not be allowed again, if blocked as a result.

There is a pop quiz around which are the only two DLR-operated gatelines, but I think we're in the wrong forum for that.

As Mike already said upthread, if an unmatched touch in or out is found during reconciliation of the contactless fares overnight, the system will wait a couple of days before charging the maximum fare.

I believe it will wait a couple of days for a transaction for a maximum fare to be completed, to allow manual completion of a journey's history to result in the pending maximum fare transaction being cancelled, vice charged then refunded and reprocessed.

 

[maniacmartin]

One possible alternative would be for TfL to have a load of portable Oyster readers that could be taken to large events so more people could touch in an out at once. Or just accept that exhibition centres will have very busy periods, so install a vast number of Oyster readers to cope with the demand.

An even cheaper solution would be to direct anyone claiming to hold a Travelcard to bypass the readers, but require PAYG users to still use the readers.

Trying to second-guess people's movements after the fact in the backoffice sounds doomed to fail to me, because visiting a large event will not be similar to a passenger's normal travel patterns so you can't just see what they did on other days and assume they made the same journey.

 

[edwin_m]

Trying to second-guess people's movements after the fact in the backoffice sounds doomed to fail to me, because visiting a large event will not be similar to a passenger's normal travel patterns so you can't just see what they did on other days and assume they made the same journey.

Indeed. What happens if someone arrives by DLR then leaves by Dangleway or bus or walks to Canning Town or stays in a local hotel?

 

[methethpropbut]

An even cheaper solution would be to direct anyone claiming to hold a Travelcard to bypass the readers, but require PAYG users to still use the readers.

That's precisely what they did at Wembley on Monday for the match actually, barriers were open and the staff were constantly repeating "Paper tickets walk straight through, oyster and contactless touch out" or something to that effect. Effective, seemed to work well, and well if someone doesn't touch out that's completely on them.