Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
As long as your Oyster card is ‘tapped in’ when you’re inspected, you’re free travel by whatever route you choose.
There’s a common mis-conception around the fare finder information in that people assume the system always charges based on the route taken and try to use the fare finder information with that belief. While that’s true in cases where a specific route/fare combination is specified, it doesn’t apply to the ‘default fare’. In this case, it’s simply telling you what you’ll pay if you take any route that doesn’t meet the criteria for one of the specific route fares quoted.
The listing of specific fare zones accompanying the default is there to illustrate what is seen as the most likely route and thus justify the fare charged. it isn’t a requirement to actually take that route, however, or even to travel only within the zones listed.
Short answer…you’re fine as you are.
What does “official” mean in this context? It’s not a word TfL use so won’t have any formal meaning with them that you can rely on to prove a point.
If the charges you received tally with the fare finder numbers, you’ll be looking for a good-will gesture at best for any sort of payout, I’m afraid.
In the abstract, the word ‘Interchange’ isn’t inaccurate. I agree with you, however, in this specific case because of the use on the tube map of the words “internal interchange” which does normally imply a lack of gateline obstructions or OSIs where there are gatelines. (I can’t say that’s an absolute truth but it could be a fair interpretation.)
Of course, none of that is implied or stated in the use of the word ‘interchange’ but it would be clearer to use different terms for different circumstances on the car line diagrams just as they do on the tube map.
To be clear (because I’m paranoid about writing clearly), I’m not suggesting you shouldn’t request this change if you want to but I that’s a different approach to what I think you’re proposing.
What I mean by my comment is that you are interpreting the word ‘Interchange’ on a printed route map as meaning something specific in the context of the TfL fare structure. That’s your interpretation, which is fine, but it isn’t (as far as I know) TfL’s interpretation. The full map illustrates this with its use of words similar to “a less than 10 minute walking distance”.
The fare structure is/should be what’s published in the fare finder database. That isn’t overridden by what’s printed on maps or what route a passenger actually travels. If mobile Bluetooth tracking ever gets off the ground, that may change. We’re not there yet.
I fear you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the meanings and mechanisms behind the TfL map notation and fare setting practices.
Good luck though.
I’d assume that the Direct Debit Guarantee applies in this instance. If TfL info only calls for one payment then the bank should be on the hook for the second, regardless of the actual party at fault.
I’m afraid I’m confused. You say they ‘still’ charge the peak fares which implies nothing has changed. Yet you expect this to be changed so the government promise that nothing has changed isn’t broken.
What am I missing?
As someone who grew up there and recently worked for TfL for a few years, I fully endorse this renaming.
I wasn’t aware they existed. I know TfL don’t use them internally (in the areas I worked in), so I wonder who does.
If you really want to go the long way around, I guess you could make that argument, but it’s fairly weak. The ‘normal’ route of transfer is via the main station concourse.
Using the fare finder on this site will tell you that the Notting Hill Gate fare covers zones 2 to 6 and the Paddington fare covers zones 1 to 6.
I don’t think you’ll ever see an ‘Avoiding zone 1’ caption on a fare that starts in zone 2 (effectively) and travels outwards. For the route via Paddington, my limited understanding of OSIs and the fact that fare finder doesn’t display a different “change at Paddington” fare suggests that the zone 2 to 6 fare might also be charged via that route. The alternative is charging separate fares from NH Gate to Paddington and then Paddington to the airport which is unlikely.
As with all these types of things TfL, as a public body, does what it’s told by government and the mayor/GLA. Sure, they have to divide the overall fare changes between the different zones and ticket types but the amount of money to be raised is imposed on them.
‘Acting against Londoners’ is a cheap shot. Politicians call the shots and public bodies don’t get a choice about implementing them. To make it worse, the “fully funded” NI rise for public bodies isn’t fully funded for TfL meaning their budget for the year is now in deficit. What do you suggest they do? Close the Bakerloo line?
I suspect, but I don’t know, that Oyster payment is the problem in these situations. You paid for the journey that you took and that wasn’t delayed so no refund would be appropriate. Had you bought a paper ticket for the journey you wanted to do, perhaps a delay could have been justified and a refund paid but I don’t know enough to be sure.
I find this to be a failing on any suspension when you get the “Tickets will be accepted by other operators” messages. That’s fine if you have an actual ticket but, with pay as you go, technically you don’t so you always end up paying for the journey you take rather then being able to benefit from any sort of route transfer arrangement.
(I worked for TfL until a week ago but have no inside knowledge in the fares/ticketing area)
To answer you direct question, you’re supposed to use the validators at the W&C exit but the system is supposed to join the journeys up.
I’m surprised the gate line staff let you through the barriers just because you waved a card at them. They’re not supposed to.
The S2 is a TfL service but the E16 is a Surrey service so won’t accept Oyster. The S2 runs to Epsom anyway so I don’t know why you’d want to change.
I suspect it would be because Gatwick Express is a single journey in and of itself. Fares for onward travel aren’t combined with it as they are for other journeys just being charged separately. It’s a GatEx fare and a TfL single as Mike says.
As the TfL site only shows single journey fares, even when made up of lots of legs, the GatEx/LU combination being charged separately don’t meet the ‘single fare’ criteria so aren’t shown. Potentially confusing, as you say.
I’ve never been to Heathrow T4 so I don’t know the layout but I assume you’d need to tap out of the Eliz. line station and into the Picc. Line station?
If not, the question wouldn’t have meaning since the system wouldn’t know you’d been via Heathrow.
If so, I’d be very surprised if there was any sort of out of station interchange functionality that joined your journeys together as Heathrow isn’t an interchange station by any set of criteria. On that basis you’d surely be charged for a journey to Heathrow T4.
The mistake was probably taking 83 minutes for a 2 minute (plus access and waiting time) DLR journey. As above, it looks like the journey time you were relying on isn’t appropriate for this journey.
As far as I’m aware, for TfL to accept someone else’s ticket there needs to be a formal agreement in place between the companies for the duration of the disruption and this is normally explicitly announced as part of the disruption messaging.
Thus, at any other time, NR tickets will simply be refused.
The online and phone access methods share the same list of cards as long as you log into them with the same account details. If you’ve registered a card online, it should be available everywhere.
If you’ve logged into different Oyster accounts online and on the app, however, then you’ll see problems like this because Oyster cards can only be registered to a single account.
