Why don't e-tickets offer compostage?

[JonathanH]

And even in the south-east there are huge numbers of journeys being undertaken by people using eTickets and smartcards, so the statement is valid even there.

And Project Oval will remove a lot of paper ticket use once it reaches its expected boundaries, even with the possibility of higher fares for Contactless travel, which of course comes with a requirement to touch in at the initial station.

 

[Krokodil]

Yes, but for the purposes of this thread we are concerned only with the re-use of open returns where they weren't scanned the first time they were used, surely?

The point being that while I'm spotting three previous uses of the same ticket (sometimes on the same train, they have been known to try sharing the ticket between themselves) there are certainly more previous uses that didn't get recorded because the passenger gets on an Avanti service (on the odd occasion that it actually runs) or whatever.

Always assuming the cases you're talking about are all cases of re-use, as distinct from piecemeal use.

I'm presented with a time, date, and service number (or station name for barrier scans) of previous scans. It isn't difficult to work out from this information where precisely they were when the ticket was previously scanned. Pretty much all of the fares I'm speaking of have a BoJ restriction anyway.

I would also to like ask (without pretending to know the answer) whether you think these international students and others would believe they could get away with re-using the return portion of an open return ticket if somebody had stamped it, punched a hole in it, or scribbled something on it to indicate it was used?

Well in the case of the ones with CCSTs, you certainly see their faces fall when you remove the ticket from the wallet and date it. We've had to be careful to use pens that can't be washed off because we've spotted tickets that have been wiped clean but haven't lost the groove in the card from the pen's nib.

Ideally we'd still have the ticket stampers that both date the ticket and punch a small hole into the ticket. Those are too expensive, apparently.

 

[Starmill]

Open return re-use is a massive issue. It seems to be particularly endemic with international students who are living in major cities and commuting quite long distances (often two hours each way) to provincial universities. No idea why they don't just rent locally.

I wonder if they're medicine students who've been offered one of the extra places the government created at late notice. I guess it depends if the university they're guessed to be attending does medicine, but there seems to be a pattern of this happening in some places and the university can't get them any accommodation in the town or city they're actually studying in at all. I'm surprised there's meaningful attempts to dodge fares among these groups though.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Jul 2024 ==

Could we call it 'validation' or some other term that is clear in english please.

It's a loan word. Unless you suggest we also call it the evening meal instead of dinner and coffee house instead of café.

 

[NER1621]

It's a loan word. Unless you suggest we also call it the evening meal instead of dinner and coffee house instead of café.

“Validation” is also a loan word (from Latin, validus: strong, worthy) but it’s one which is already well understood in English. Neologisms are great if they give us a word for a concept for which we previously had no handy term, but that’s not the case here.

Rail ticketing systems are complex enough for most travellers without introducing an unnecessary unintuitive new term. I like to think of myself as reasonably well-educated and informed, and I too had never heard the word “compostage” used in any context in English until the first post in this thread. In fact I had to read the first post a couple of times to work out to what it was referring.

 

[TUC]

PDF e-tickets are excellent for passengers with their convenience and flexibility. No need to queue to collect them, accessible from any electronic device, able to be backed up as many times as needed (including by printing a copy) and easy to forward to another passenger if purchased on their behalf.

On the other hand, they can be fraudulently reused if they are not scanned by a guard or ticket machine (which, in my experience of long-distance journeys across the UK, happens the majority of the time).

Additionally, for honest passengers - particularly those, like myself, who travel often and sporadically - using an e-ticket for period returns (valid for one calendar month) makes it easy to forget whether the return portion has already been used. Even if the e-ticket is scanned, there is no mark on the e-ticket to say it has been used.

Why, then, doesn't the rail industry require compostage for e-tickets? It would solve both of the above issues. If e-tickets included a URL which passengers were required to tap/access before commencing their journey to "register" their ticket, this would ensure that the ticket could only be used/registered once and would allow the rail industry to tell the passenger if the ticket has already been used. The ability to break a journey could be retained, by allowing passengers the option to specify an intermediate station as the next destination in their journey.

Thoughts?

This does seem a classic example of rail enthusiasts both having travel patterns few others have, but equally being out of touch with what would work for most people.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Jul 2024 ==

Nearly all stations in the Southeast are CCST only it's hardly like the dodo

So one local part of the country still has a number of them. That's not a guide to the majority of GB. Have you been on a Northern train and heard thr number of beeps as the conductor checks tickets?

 

[redreni]

The point being that while I'm spotting three previous uses of the same ticket (sometimes on the same train, they have been known to try sharing the ticket between themselves) there are certainly more previous uses that didn't get recorded because the passenger gets on an Avanti service (on the odd occasion that it actually runs) or whatever.

I'm presented with a time, date, and service number (or station name for barrier scans) of previous scans. It isn't difficult to work out from this information where precisely they were when the ticket was previously scanned. Pretty much all of the fares I'm speaking of have a BoJ restriction anyway.

Right, but I think we're slightly at crossed purposes. I wasn't saying there's no significant problem of people trying to re-use open return tickets.

I was doubting that there's a significant problem of people trying to re-use open return tickets that would be fixed if the OP's suggestion were implemented.

A lot of what you're describing would mean, unless I'm very much mistaken, that the used ticket that the person holds when you check it is basically useless, no? Okay, they might have got away with it if, for some reason, you didn't get around to checking their ticket, but that would equally be true if a passenger has no ticket at all. And a requirement to validate before boarding presumably wouldn't much affect people who are already breaking the rules fairly flagrantly.

As I understood the original concern, it was that the return portion of a ticket could be wholly used without ever being scanned, in which case the passenger would know this and may decide to use it again. In which case, if you scanned it when they were using it for a second time, you wouldn't know it had been used before as there would be no previous scans. We can only speculate how common or uncommon this may be, since if it's happening, it is by (almost by definition) not being noticed either by staff or by the system. The OP seemed to think it might be happening a lot, but I thought it seemed unlikely.

People presenting clearly used tickets for inspection isn't really the issue, as far as I can tell, as that's already detectable. Barcode tickets are actually better in this regard as previous use of the ticket can be inferred from scans at ticket barriers, whereas the use of CCSTs at barriers isn't logged, so there is great reliance on ticket checkers marking the ticket (which is actually quite hit and miss in my experience - but maybe I've got an honest looking face).

 

[Haywain]

Rail ticketing systems are complex enough for most travellers without introducing an unnecessary unintuitive new term. I like to think of myself as reasonably well-educated and informed, and I too had never heard the word “compostage” used in any context in English until the first post in this thread.

As compostage or validation of the sort suggested is very unlikely to happen we really don't need to worry causing confusion amongst anyone other than denizens of this forum.

 

[renegademaster]

So one local part of the country still has a number of them. That's not a guide to the majority of GB

I wouldn't be surprised though if the NSE area makes up a majority of journeys and revenue though

 

[Krokodil]

I guess it depends if the university they're guessed to be attending does medicine

I don't believe so.

As I understood the original concern, it was that the return portion of a ticket could be wholly used without ever being scanned, in which case the passenger would know this and may decide to use it again. In which case, if you scanned it when they were using it for a second time, you wouldn't know it had been used before as there would be no previous scans.

Such as if they boarded an Avanti service yesterday (Avanti TMs aren't scanning)? Yes, that was my point. When Avanti actually run (it's 50:50 for this particular service at the moment) the passengers are getting away with just a visual check, which will leave no record that it has taken place.

In theory the OP's suggestion would mean that the passengers are forced to record their own entry onto the platform (presumably on the basis that if you don't validate and get caught, you're treated as if you are ticketless), even if they're boarding at an unbarriered station (or a barriered one outside of staffed hours).

While I think that the OP's suggestion would be too much of for the UK (so I'm not in favour), it would close that particular loophole of passengers reusing an open return when it didn't get scanned yesterday.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Jul 2024 ==

I wouldn't be surprised though if the NSE area makes up a majority of journeys and revenue though

How many people in the NSE area are still using CCSTs (other than seasons) these days? I bet that it's a minority, most will be using some combination of eTickets and contactless if they aren't using a season ticket.

 

[Adam Williams]

Rail ticketing systems are complex enough for most travellers without introducing an unnecessary unintuitive new term. I like to think of myself as reasonably well-educated and informed, and I too had never heard the word “compostage” used in any context in English until the first post in this thread. In fact I had to read the first post a couple of times to work out to what it was referring.

I am not convinced the term sees any usage in English myself, either.

The only people I know who have used it are those familiar with e.g. SNCF's practices and are using some kind of "Euro English".

For it to be a loanword it actually needs to be assimilated into English and used in regular day-to-day parlance. "Compostage" does not meet this bar. It's not used within the industry either.

Composters exist in the garden. Perhaps compost machines could be introduced to stations to help us to dispose of our used CCST and PRT tickets in an environmentally friendly way, but they have no function in validating tickets :P

 

[Starmill]

“Validation” is also a loan word (from Latin, validus: strong, worthy) but it’s one which is already well understood in English. Neologisms are great if they give us a word for a concept for which we previously had no handy term, but that’s not the case here.

Rail ticketing systems are complex enough for most travellers without introducing an unnecessary unintuitive new term. I like to think of myself as reasonably well-educated and informed, and I too had never heard the word “compostage” used in any context in English until the first post in this thread. In fact I had to read the first post a couple of times to work out to what it was referring.

It's a commonly-understood word outside of France. It's unfamiliar in the UK, obviously, because it's concept really doesn't exist here at all. Disliking a word for being of French origin is simply par for the course among some people sadly.

Validation entered English so long ago now it's not really distinguishable as a loan word any more. Also classical Latin isn't widely in use any longer either.

Hopefully compostage will never be relevant or required here, so no need to worry about how to name it.

 

[redreni]

How many people in the NSE area are still using CCSTs (other than seasons) these days? I bet that it's a minority, most will be using some combination of eTickets and contactless if they aren't using a season ticket.

Fewer and fewer. I used to use CCSTs a lot at weekends because of the Network Railcard discount on day travelcards, but now I put these on a smartcard instead because of the ridiculous amount of friction at gatelines if you try to use a paper ticket. I still use cross-London tickets and tickets to LU zones occasionally, but when you travel around London you rarely see anyone with a paper ticket.

The TOCs in the NSE area push smartcards for season tickets pretty hard as well. They're a good idea for Travelcard seasons, but there was a thread a few weeks ago pointing out that they're disadvantageous if you have a National Rail-only season ticket because LU won't accept them even when ticket acceptance on LU has supposedly been put in place during disruption or planned engineering work, because they can't read them. I think there's a trial happening now where LU gateline staff have been given handheld readers, but it's only at a few stations (and not the ones you'd hope).

Obviously if you're a season ticket holder, it's a case of when rather than if there will be disruption, so not being able to avail of LU ticket acceptance when it is offered is a significant drawback. Similarly, a lot of people overpay on contactless when it would be cheaper to buy a paper cross-London ticket. Still, it all helps cover costs, I suppose!

 

[185]

The horrid Compostage took about 40 years in France to be binned and confined to Room 101 - few if any countries still have it. Certainly don't want any of that revenue trap nonsense in Britain.

What could be an option is a function on a TVM to scan barcodes in 'read only' mode, to tell you if it's been used. Also, sales websites could offer customers a function to input the 11 digit code (with a where from & to question to ensure it's their ticket) which would also show usage.

 

[Starmill]

I am not convinced the term sees any usage in English myself, either.

The only people I know who have used it are those familiar with e.g. SNCF's practices and are using some kind of "Euro English".

For it to be a loanword it actually needs to be assimilated into English and used in regular day-to-day parlance. "Compostage" does not meet this bar. It's not used within the industry either.

Composters exist in the garden. Perhaps compost machines could be introduced to stations to help us to dispose of our used CCST and PRT tickets in an environmentally friendly way, but they have no function in validating tickets :P

Why would it have been assimilated into British English? Are there any countries in the world where English is the dominant language and also the date not being applied to a public transport ticket upon purchase, and instead being applied later by a machine immediately prior to boarding, is the custom?

 

[Adam Williams]

Why would it have been assimilated into British English? Are there any countries in the world where English is the dominant language and also the date not being applied to a public transport ticket upon purchase, and instead being applied later by a machine immediately prior to boarding, is the custom?

Even if it wasn't the custom, you'd expect there to be discussion of alternative revenue protection practices (and indeed there are) such as activating / validating / checking-in a ticket because no society ever thinks they've 100% solved a problem, and we can always learn from other practices elsewhere.

I've seen lots of speculative proposals, but none of them ever discuss a customer needing to « compost » their ticket because it would just cause confusion, even if that's what e.g. SNCF call it. Instead, the terms I've mentioned are used.

 

[Starmill]

Even if it wasn't the custom, you'd expect there to be discussion of alternative revenue protection practices (and indeed there are) such as activating / validating / checking-in a ticket because no society ever thinks they've 100% solved a problem, and we can always learn from other practices elsewhere.

I've seen lots of speculative proposals, but none of them ever discuss a customer needing to « compost » their ticket because it would just cause confusion, even if that's what e.g. SNCF call it. Instead, the terms I've mentioned are used.

Did the OP just pick up the word from SNCF, only, because they're familiar with them, despite it having been all but phased out, or did they pick it because it's common in various countries where the requirement is mandatory? Say, the Prague Metro?

 

[Belperpete]

Did the OP just pick up the word from SNCF, only, because they're familiar with them, despite it having been all but phased out, or did they pick it because it's common in various countries where the requirement is mandatory? Say, the Prague Metro?

The dpp website says that you have to validate your ticket, no mention of composting it.

 

[Krokodil]

I've always known the term "validate" in English. "Validate" does get used in some ticketing contexts in the UK - in the context of smartcards.

 

[Bletchleyite]

M-tickets basically had compostage, and we know how well those went.

I would however prefer it if S-tickets had a form of it whereby you would just download a one-day e-ticket each day (which would work exactly the same as any other rover issued with a barcode) rather than the bodge they actually are, though.

 

[TUC]

Even if it wasn't the custom, you'd expect there to be discussion of alternative revenue protection practices (and indeed there are) such as activating / validating / checking-in a ticket because no society ever thinks they've 100% solved a problem, and we can always learn from other practices elsewhere.

The requirement to activate a ticket is what apps such as Northern's have thankfully recently got rid of. It never seemed right that a passenger who had bought a perfectly valid ticket should be treated as not having one because they hadn't 'activated' it before boarding.

 

[Adam Williams]

The requirement to activate a ticket is what apps such as Northern's have thankfully recently got rid of. It never seemed right that a passenger who had bought a perfectly valid ticket should be treated as not having one because they hadn't 'activated' it before boarding.

Yes indeed, and I'll always argue against further mTicket prevalence (hopefully north of Northern will be the last holdout to see the light). I think it's reasonable to have these conversations though and weigh up the pros/cons, as well as look to what else is being done (on the continent or indeed anywhere elsewhere) outside of GB.

 

[fandroid]

Why would it have been assimilated into British English? Are there any countries in the world where English is the dominant language and also the date not being applied to a public transport ticket upon purchase, and instead being applied later by a machine immediately prior to boarding, is the custom?

My fellow (British) couriers who travel a lot in Germany by train and tram know it as "stamping" their tickets, as that has been the conventional way of validating them. For local transport there nearly every ticket has a maximum time validity, so the value of the "stamp" is that it shows the start time of the journey. IIRC most digital tickets tend to be valid from the time of purchase, so don't need separate validation.

 

[Krokodil]

M-tickets basically had compostage, and we know how well those went.

It has it's place with carnet products such as TfW's multiflex, you're buying a dozen singles in one go, so it's logical that you need some kind of validation to prevent reuse.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It has it's place with carnet products such as TfW's multiflex, you're buying a dozen singles in one go, so it's logical that you need some kind of validation to prevent reuse.

Yes, as per the S-ticket a sensible approach would be that you download one as an e-ticket when you need it, and that acts as the activation.

 

[Krokodil]

Yes, as per the S-ticket a sensible approach would be that you download one as an e-ticket when you need it, and that acts as the activation.

The current method seems to work with this product. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

 

[Haywain]

Yes, as per the S-ticket a sensible approach would be that you download one as an e-ticket when you need it, and that acts as the activation.

The implementation of the S-ticket is designed to prevent the barcode being shared, which a single download would allow.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The implementation of the S-ticket is designed to prevent the barcode being shared, which a single download would allow.

It's as paranoid as the m-ticket and has similar flaws from a passenger perspective. We must surely all agree the m-ticket is the worst electronic ticketing format the railway has attempted in recent years.

 

[Haywain]

It's as paranoid as the m-ticket and has similar flaws from a passenger perspective.

Maybe, but the S-ticket has a far bigger fraudulent use possibility than an m-ticket. And it should be remembered that the format only exists at the behest of one particular retailer.

 

[Wallsendmag]

The implementation of the S-ticket is designed to prevent the barcode being shared, which a single download would allow.

Fairly pointless Smartcards are much better

 

[Starmill]

Maybe, but the S-ticket has a far bigger fraudulent use possibility than an m-ticket. And it should be remembered that the format only exists at the behest of one particular retailer.

Of course, the LNER app delivers flexi tickets as etickets anyway, not s-tickets.