TfL contactless bus oddity

[Bletchleyite]

Had an interesting one today.

Boarded a 68 at Euston at the rear and touched in with my credit card. Got a single beep, a green light and "Card accepted" on the screen.

Later on inspectors boarded, and said their machine said I hadn't touched in, they also showed me someone else's card registering that it had. I explained what had happened and he said he thought my story checked out so no PF, but he recorded the last 4 digits of the card (not enough to identify me, but I guess enough to identify if I was trying it on and tried it again that day) and issued a "ticket without payment", so I guess I got it free. He did not take any personal details at all.

But how did this happen? It *definitely* accepted the card, I always watch quite carefully because of the expensive consequences of it not doing so. Why, if the tap in was not successful, did the validator not show red and reject the card with two bleeps and a relevant message? Was the driver perhaps still signed in on his previous journey when I boarded, then he signed in on the new one which cleared it? He may have been distracted as a wheelchair user was boarding using the ramp?

 

[Teflon Lettuce]

Had an interesting one today.

Boarded a 68 at Euston at the rear and touched in with my credit card. Got a single beep, a green light and "Card accepted" on the screen.

Later on inspectors boarded, and said their machine said I hadn't touched in, they also showed me someone else's card registering that it had. I explained what had happened and he said he thought my story checked out so no PF, but he recorded the last 4 digits of the card (not enough to identify me, but I guess enough to identify if I was trying it on and tried it again that day) and issued a "ticket without payment", so I guess I got it free. He did not take any personal details at all.

But how did this happen? It *definitely* accepted the card, I always watch quite carefully because of the expensive consequences of it not doing so. Why, if the tap in was not successful, did the validator not show red and reject the card with two bleeps and a relevant message? Was the driver perhaps still signed in on his previous journey when I boarded, then he signed in on the new one which cleared it? He may have been distracted as a wheelchair user was boarding using the ramp?

I don't know the answer to that one... but if you had told the inspectors that you had got on at the Terminus then perhaps the reason why the inspectors took the card number was so they could later check the previous journey's data... strange thing is why was the driver allowing you to board before "doing his numbers" after all London's buses aren't exactly renowned for coming in and going straight back out from a terminus are they?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don't know the answer to that one... but if you had told the inspectors that you had got on at the Terminus then perhaps the reason why the inspectors took the card number was so they could later check the previous journey's data... strange thing is why was the driver allowing you to board before "doing his numbers" after all London's buses aren't exactly renowned for coming in and going straight back out from a terminus are they?

Indeed not, 68s sit there for some time. I'll have a look at my account tomorrow (journeys from today don't seem to be on there yet) to see if I was actually charged for it, and if so on what basis.

But if I wasn't...how I wonder did that happen? That's quite a serious bug on a system where you get no proof that you did touch in aside from the actual touch-in.

 

[MikeWh]

Indeed not, 68s sit there for some time. I'll have a look at my account tomorrow (journeys from today don't seem to be on there yet) to see if I was actually charged for it, and if so on what basis.

But if I wasn't...how I wonder did that happen? That's quite a serious bug on a system where you get no proof that you did touch in aside from the actual touch-in.

Were you looking for todays travel under the normal journey history? There is actually a separate block for it on your account dashboard.

Is Euston the beginning of the route? I guess it is possible that the driver forgot to start the new journey until after you had boarded, assuming it is done by them and not automatically by the iBus system. Otherwise it definitely should have been there. The inspector downloads the card list when they board the bus hence they know which cards to accept.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Were you looking for todays travel under the normal journey history? There is actually a separate block for it on your account dashboard.

Is Euston the beginning of the route? I guess it is possible that the driver forgot to start the new journey until after you had boarded, assuming it is done by them and not automatically by the iBus system. Otherwise it definitely should have been there. The inspector downloads the card list when they board the bus hence they know which cards to accept.

Yes 68s start at Euston.

Here's what happened (attached). You can see the touch-in and me being charged for the journey, then the failed inspection. Makes no sense, other than as you say if the bus was still logged on its previous journey. I've emailed TfL to ask what went on.

 

[Deerfold]

Is Euston the beginning of the route? I guess it is possible that the driver forgot to start the new journey until after you had boarded, assuming it is done by them and not automatically by the iBus system. Otherwise it definitely should have been there. The inspector downloads the card list when they board the bus hence they know which cards to accept.

Drivers log into a trip in a "block" of journeys. After the first trip they've logged into the system updates the journey they are on based on their position. The driver or controller can change which trip they're logged into but usually they don't. Sometimes the bus can be past the first stop before the change of journey triggers.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Drivers log into a trip in a "block" of journeys. After the first trip they've logged into the system updates the journey they are on based on their position. The driver or controller can change which trip they're logged into but usually they don't. Sometimes the bus can be past the first stop before the change of journey triggers.

This would seem to provide an explanation - but isn't really acceptable given that the passenger has no on the spot evidence of their touch-in, and (while an appeal would have succeeded due to the data stored) being confronted by an inspector, however polite (and he was extremely polite, to be fair), is quite embarrassing to someone who is honest and always pays their fare, and would not consider trying to dodge it whether the inspector was present or not.

I guess in that case the person sitting opposite whose card did work had boarded after the terminus. I wasn't really paying attention to the other passengers until that point.

I do await with some interest what TfL have to say on the matter when they reply. It does sound to me like a design flaw; perhaps once the last stop on the previous journey has been passed, the next one should be automatically logged in to prevent this, or the validators disabled until such time as it has been marked as started. Or, at least, the inspector being provided with a way to check if the card had been touched in on the previous journey in such a way that would give rise to suspicion this has occurred (maybe he did do this, he didn't say).

 

[MikeWh]

This would seem to provide an explanation - but isn't really acceptable given that the passenger has no on the spot evidence of their touch-in, and (while an appeal would have succeeded due to the data stored) being confronted by an inspector, however polite (and he was extremely polite, to be fair), is quite embarrassing to someone who is honest and always pays their fare, and would not consider trying to dodge it whether the inspector was present or not.

I guess in that case the person sitting opposite whose card did work had boarded after the terminus. I wasn't really paying attention to the other passengers until that point.

I do await with some interest what TfL have to say on the matter when they reply. It does sound to me like a design flaw; perhaps once the last stop on the previous journey has been passed, the next one should be automatically logged in to prevent this, or the validators disabled until such time as it has been marked as started. Or, at least, the inspector being provided with a way to check if the card had been touched in on the previous journey in such a way that would give rise to suspicion this has occurred (maybe he did do this, he didn't say).

I agree that there does appear to be a flaw here. Yes, wait to see what TfL say, but if it is not 100% clear then I advise you to ask them to confirm that the failed revenue inspection has been completely wiped from all their systems. The reason is that after a third failed inspection your card may be black-listed.

 

[Hophead]

I can't believe it's a design flaw, though: after all, you'll not be the first person to have ever boarded at the start point of the route and subsequently had your ticket checked. Maybe (and this really is a guess) the bus had arrived early and the inspector had not downloaded sufficiently far back to get your tap-in. I note that you boarded at the back so the driver will possibly not have seen you get on. Was the driver perhaps not actually aboard at the time? Were you the first on, did you notice?

 

[Deerfold]

I do await with some interest what TfL have to say on the matter when they reply. It does sound to me like a design flaw; perhaps once the last stop on the previous journey has been passed, the next one should be automatically logged in to prevent this, or the validators disabled until such time as it has been marked as started. Or, at least, the inspector being provided with a way to check if the card had been touched in on the previous journey in such a way that would give rise to suspicion this has occurred (maybe he did do this, he didn't say).

The system has in-service journeys and out-of-service journeys.

Once the system reaches the last stop it switches to the out-of-service journey.

It then switches to the next in-service journey when the bus starts the next journey. This enables the bus company to seamlessly swap buses at this point (the data is also used to calculate contractual payments to the companies).
The system predates cashless payments and full integration between the iBus and ticketing systems.

If you're noted as touching in on the out-of-service journey then you must have been travelling on the next in-service journey.

 

[Busaholic]

I can't believe it's a design flaw, though: after all, you'll not be the first person to have ever boarded at the start point of the route and subsequently had your ticket checked. Maybe (and this really is a guess) the bus had arrived early and the inspector had not downloaded sufficiently far back to get your tap-in. I note that you boarded at the back so the driver will possibly not have seen you get on. Was the driver perhaps not actually aboard at the time? Were you the first on, did you notice?

Is this a problem that will be confined to the 1,000 or so Borismasters then?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I can't believe it's a design flaw, though: after all, you'll not be the first person to have ever boarded at the start point of the route and subsequently had your ticket checked. Maybe (and this really is a guess) the bus had arrived early and the inspector had not downloaded sufficiently far back to get your tap-in.

It is possible that that happened - but that should not be able to happen. This isn't acceptable as a "false negative", as with a less friendly inspector and a less knowledgeable passenger an £80 PF could have been fraudulently issued and not appealed, with the passenger assuming they didn't actually touch in properly. The fact that this happened - even once - means there is by definition a design flaw in the system - be that an IT part or a human part. And if you don't believe it did happen....well, see my journey history upthread that confirms that it indeed did!

It should not be possible under any circumstances for a touch-in to appear to have succeeded but in fact have failed in some way. If it is, the system is flawed and therefore the base assumption should be that the passenger is innocent - without them even having to explain it. Obviously that would make revenue protection difficult or impossible.

I note that you boarded at the back so the driver will possibly not have seen you get on. Was the driver perhaps not actually aboard at the time? Were you the first on, did you notice?

68s don't lay over at the departure stop at Euston. They sit in a "siding" and run onto the stop only a minute or so before scheduled departure, as it has to remain clear for 59s and another couple of routes to enter it. The driver was probably distracted as a wheelchair user was boarding at the centre at the time using the ramp, but the driver has nothing to do with a contactless touch-in.

No, I wasn't the first on, I actually nearly missed the bus and others had boarded first. Though I don't know if any of them used contactless as distinct from Oyster (the latter records the touch-in on the card so can't suffer the same issue).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Is this a problem that will be confined to the 1,000 or so Borismasters then?

Certainly Borismasters are the only buses fitted with remote card validators (which I half recall are wireless), and it is quite possible that the issue is connected with these in some way, such as them not communicating correctly with the ticket machine in some cases. That may well explain why I was the only passenger who had the issue - there is still a culture of boarding only at the front even though Borismasters have all-door boarding in theory - indeed, the only reason I actually did board at the rear was because the wheelchair ramp and wheelchair user lining up with it was in the way of me reaching the front, and it seemed more sensible to board at the rear and go straight upstairs rather than wait for the wheelchair user to board and thus cause delay.

 

[Busaholic]

Certainly Borismasters are the only buses fitted with remote card validators (which I half recall are wireless), and it is quite possible that the issue is connected with these in some way, such as them not communicating correctly with the ticket machine in some cases. That may well explain why I was the only passenger who had the issue - there is still a culture of boarding only at the front even though Borismasters have all-door boarding in theory - indeed, the only reason I actually did board at the rear was because the wheelchair ramp and wheelchair user lining up with it was in the way of me reaching the front, and it seemed more sensible to board at the rear and go straight upstairs rather than wait for the wheelchair user to board and thus cause delay.

Umm, yet another stick to beat the Borismaster with, along with the 'rear door opening of its own accord while in motion' that has reared its head, so to speak. I still say they won't last too long in central London service.

 

[JaJaWa]

I wouldn't want a "Failed Revenue Inspection" on my account! I suppose he didn't need many details as his machine automatically logged it.

 

[mark-h]

If the system does not always get the chageover point in the right place it would be better if touch ins from the previous journey were also considered valid (the only unpaid travel that this would allow would be people who did not get off at the terminus).

TFL is subject to FOI legislation so that may be a way to get (non personal) information if not otherwise forthcoming. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/body/tfl

 

[Teflon Lettuce]

Had an interesting one today.

Boarded a 68 at Euston at the rear and touched in with my credit card. Got a single beep, a green light and "Card accepted" on the screen.

Later on inspectors boarded, and said their machine said I hadn't touched in, they also showed me someone else's card registering that it had. I explained what had happened and he said he thought my story checked out so no PF, but he recorded the last 4 digits of the card (not enough to identify me, but I guess enough to identify if I was trying it on and tried it again that day) and issued a "ticket without payment", so I guess I got it free. He did not take any personal details at all.

But how did this happen? It *definitely* accepted the card, I always watch quite carefully because of the expensive consequences of it not doing so. Why, if the tap in was not successful, did the validator not show red and reject the card with two bleeps and a relevant message? Was the driver perhaps still signed in on his previous journey when I boarded, then he signed in on the new one which cleared it? He may have been distracted as a wheelchair user was boarding using the ramp?

just a thought... was this your 2nd tap in within an hour?

 

[Bletchleyite]

just a thought... was this your 2nd tap in within an hour?

No, there wasn't a second tap in. One tap in, one bus journey.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If the system does not always get the chageover point in the right place it would be better if touch ins from the previous journey were also considered valid (the only unpaid travel that this would allow would be people who did not get off at the terminus).

TFL is subject to FOI legislation so that may be a way to get (non personal) information if not otherwise forthcoming. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/body/tfl

They haven't replied yet, hopefully this is because it's either in a queue or they are taking the time to find out properly what the bug is (and there is definitely a bug of some kind - it should not have been possible for what did happen to happen).

 

[jon0844]

I would hope that if they were going to seek a prosecution, they'd see the details and realise the mistake - and take things no further.

But as said, what if a PF had already been issued? Lots of hassle for the passenger.

And, more importantly, when they realise the mistake - how do they handle it from there? Issue an apology and cast iron guarantee that all details recorded are removed?

I do hope that TfL does the right thing here. I do have a bit more confidence than if it was a train operator. Waiting ages would likely still only result in a 'Serco-customer-service-on-the-cheap' automated reply, by patching together pre-written sentences, apologising for the inconvenience and then saying how much money is being invested in X, Y or Z and other irrelevant nonsense.

 

[34D]

From my memory, when the wayfarer in the cab changes from one journey to the next its oyster pad orange light goes red then to orange on the new route.

Does the rear pad on a Borismaster also go red at this juncture? I wonder?

 

[Bletchleyite]

From my memory, when the wayfarer in the cab changes from one journey to the next its oyster pad orange light goes red then to orange on the new route.

Does the rear pad on a Borismaster also go red at this juncture? I wonder?

I wonder if it perhaps doesn't, and I touched in at this precise moment. TfL will have the data to tell them that (it isn't visible on the journey history for me to see it, though, it just shows as a timed touch in on the 68).

 

[Bletchleyite]

So, I just had a call from someone at TfL who suggested it might be the case that there is a known issue with downloading contactless touch-ins to the inspectors' machines from the ticket machine, and therefore that they are supposed to get a printout from the driver to check the card number before suggesting anyone hadn't paid or making any comments about penalty fares.

Does that sound right? We discussed it in some detail, and she said it would be escalated to the next level to see if that was indeed what happened. Apparently at the customer services level they get no more detail on their screens than we can see on the website, so she couldn't identify if the bus was logged in on the previous journey when I touched in - they just get time and route number.

Any other thoughts?

 

[Busaholic]

So, I just had a call from someone at TfL who suggested it might be the case that there is a known issue with downloading contactless touch-ins to the inspectors' machines from the ticket machine, and therefore that they are supposed to get a printout from the driver to check the card number before suggesting anyone hadn't paid or making any comments about penalty fares.

Does that sound right? We discussed it in some detail, and she said it would be escalated to the next level to see if that was indeed what happened. Apparently at the customer services level they get no more detail on their screens than we can see on the website, so she couldn't identify if the bus was logged in on the previous journey when I touched in - they just get time and route number.

Any other thoughts?

'A call'? I'd want something that couldn't be denied later. If there is indeed 'a known issue' then you have been treated shabbily, at the very least. Was the issue known to the inspector who dealt with you and, if not, why not? This issue needs addressing urgently imo. It certainly needs to go to a higher level.

 

[Bletchleyite]

'A call'? I'd want something that couldn't be denied later.

As no intention has been stated (other than initially on the bus until after the explanation) to Penalty Fare me, nor to prosecute, and it is evident on my account that I paid the correct fare for the journey, I can't see that there would be any risk of a prosecution being carried out either, and if one was my account has plenty of evidence that would cause it to fail.

OTOH, it really does need to be sorted out in case someone with less understanding of the system ends up paying 80 quid unnecessarily.

 

[simple simon]

If you have cast iron proof of having paid the fare and yet they decide to take action then maybe a "no win no fee" lawyer would become interested.

On the other hand, before it reaches a court of law maybe your GLA member and / or a body such as London Travelwatch would also be able to help you.

Simon

 

[Bletchleyite]

If you have cast iron proof of having paid the fare and yet they decide to take action then maybe a "no win no fee" lawyer would become interested.

On the other hand, before it reaches a court of law maybe your GLA member and / or a body such as London Travelwatch would also be able to help you.

Cheeres, though I don't have any concern at all that this will happen. What I'm interested in is (a) why it happened, and (b) how it can be stopped from happening to someone else who might encounter a less friendly inspector and get PFed.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Those of us who dress well and can communicate well will probably pass the attitude test and have the same outcome as Neil.

I'd be worried about those who don't fit into these categories, especially when you think how many tourists use buses in zone 1. It needs a proper answer.

 

[Mike395]

Certainly Borismasters are the only buses fitted with remote card validators (which I half recall are wireless)...

Just to unnecessarily nitpick :P The Mercedes Citaros running on the 507/521 commuter routes also have remote validators.

 

[Be3G]

I would hope that if they were going to seek a prosecution, they'd see the details and realise the mistake - and take things no further.

But as said, what if a PF had already been issued? Lots of hassle for the passenger.

And, more importantly, when they realise the mistake - how do they handle it from there? Issue an apology and cast iron guarantee that all details recorded are removed?

So, I just had a call from someone at TfL who suggested it might be the case that there is a known issue with downloading contactless touch-ins to the inspectors' machines from the ticket machine, and therefore that they are supposed to get a printout from the driver to check the card number before suggesting anyone hadn't paid or making any comments about penalty fares.

I've had two failed inspection instances recorded on my contactless account, both erroneously because the inspector's gadget was set to the wrong bus route (e.g. one case was where I apparently failed an inspection on route 25 about three minutes after boarding a 313). Both times I reported this to TfL by e-mail and they responded that I shouldn't worry about it, so I gather there is a general appreciation by TfL that contactless inspections on buses aren't 100% infallible.

That doesn't help if an inspector does try PF'ing someone on a bus, but we shouldn't necessarily underestimate TfL's bus inspectors just based on our experiences of rail ones: perhaps the reality is that they will only issue a PF if they can be absolutely certain the customer passenger has tried to evade their fare, with full consideration of the possibility of cases such as Neil's.