Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
The reason would simply be so nobody else could use it. You could choose to have unnamed but would not have this protection.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
E-Tickets on dead phones - a possible solution?
- Thread starter MotCO
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Exactly. Even lost paper tickets can be reprinted if they're named and tied to ID. Culturally the UK is very far away from accepting this, even though most ordinary passengers, if they lost their ticket, would think "oh here is my name and driving licence, check the booking!". Britain really enjoys being some fictional bastion of freedom without ID; I can only describe the entire premise as a hallucination.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
It needn't be mandatory, anyway. I only ever buy tickets for me, so it's not an imposition. People who prefer to take the risk of a failed device but don't wish to give their name for whatever reason (any reason they like) could still have that option.
In many German cities, for season tickets, you can choose if you want a transferrable one or a named one. The tradeoff is that if it's named you can send it in afterwards if issued a penalty and the penalty will be cancelled, but only you can use it. Whereas with the transferrable one anyone can use it but if you forget it the penalty must be paid.
But in terms of acceptance, other than rail and local bus, all transport tickets are named - Megabus are, NatEx are, air tickets are. Hotels are too (unless you pick the "someone else is staying" option, which is comparable to giving an option for unnamed train tickets). So why is the railway different?
"It's always been like this" carries a lot of weight, unfortunately.
Your examples of coach and hotel bookings are nothing like ticketing on fare stage buses or rail tickets, except advances. However, back on topic, I am not averse to Aztec coded tickets, provide all parts of the railway are equipped to use them, as I've said so many times before, there should be no compulsion of using a smartphone to travel on the railway, paper versions of e-tickets are fine. Quite a few posters on RUK are erroneously inferring that mandatory use of phones is coming. Unless somebody here has evidence of that to share here, then another mode of ticketing must be available.
Last edited:
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
I fail to see why they're any different.
But in the end you could choose to have a named booking with the protection that showing ID allows a reprint, or you could choose not to and accept that that means you're 100% responsible for ensuring you can show the ticket on demand and can be prosecuted if you don't, regardless of whether it's an e-ticket and your battery has run out or it's a paper ticket and you've dropped it on the track or left it at home.
I know which I'd choose. They have my name anyway as booker (the only way to obtain a wholly untraceable anonymous ticket is to purchase a paper ticket for cash), simply restricting the ticket to my use so I can show ID instead if I lose it or can't show it is no skin off my nose.
mike57
Established Member
Am I correct in saying that in China tickets are linked to your ID (passport/ID card) and that showing your ID at the barriers gains entry, there is no 'ticket' in the accepted sense.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Yes they are.
Not unless that's changed recently (which it may have done) - you used to have to show both. But that's mainly because if you don't have something with your seat number/coach on it (all Chinese long distance trains are reservation only) you're going to have a bit of a mess of passengers not knowing where to go?
Haywain
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 19,905
All that sort of thing is easier when you have separate long-distance and local services, barriered off from each other. Now, when we have HS2...
Last edited:
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
...it still wouldn't have that, because "Avanti" services are used as local services further north.
I've moved on from this point now but will point out for your benefit: Coaches and hotel bookings (that you cannot tell the difference from) are for a service with a limited capacity, just like planes and most ship jopurneys. With fare stage buses and most rail journeys in the UK, capacity is usually self-limited by the passengers who cannot or will not board a fully loaded vehicle. bear in mind that 2/3 of rail journeys are started, ended or entirely within the south-east and thus walk-up fares represent the norm. In general, passengers expect the freedom to use any train at will within the validity of the fare paid.
You can just scan your ID at the barrier. Your coach and seat number are kept in an app.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
None of which has anything to do with the point I made, which is of being able to reprint tickets against production of ID.
miklcct
On Moderation
This is already done in terms of season tickets. It needs to be extended to advance purchase tickets.
Again, I highlight that if you go to SNCF ticket machines, you can simply quote your PNR (booking reference) and the surname in which the booking was made. It will print your ticket, and/or re-send you the email with a PDF and wallet pass. This isn't a question of whether ID needs to be associated with the ticket, it's about being able to retrieve your booking.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Doubt I would have the PNR if my phone had run out! I'd rather show ID.
Of course both could be offered.
I find it amazing how fast phones can charge up these days. A passenger tells me that their phone is dead, I produce a USB cable and plug it into the train's socket and within seconds their phone has 60% charge. Incredible! Now where's that ticket?...
Yes, there are a small minority of honest passengers who have genuinely run out of charge and aren't carrying so much as a USB cable. You can tell who they are because they're clearly worried and genuinely grateful when the cable is produced. Some are proactive enough to seek me out on the platform. Most "me phone's dieeeeed" passengers though are trying it on.
Yes, there are a small minority of honest passengers who have genuinely run out of charge and aren't carrying so much as a USB cable. You can tell who they are because they're clearly worried and genuinely grateful when the cable is produced. Some are proactive enough to seek me out on the platform. Most "me phone's dieeeeed" passengers though are trying it on.
If only there was a like button.. absolutely spot on
I've just been reading this thread.
www.railforums.co.uk
Isn't the fairest balance to allow a couple of minutes to charge the phone if the passenger (or indeed guard/RPI) has a charging cable, and if the phone can't be recharged to display the ticket then issue a penalty fare but in the same way as the forgotten railcard rule allow 1 appeal each year if the ticket can be shown later? More than once per year would be at the discretion of each railway company to allow appeals or not (or maybe a modest fixed charge instead).
When was the forgotten railcard rule introduced?
Paid for e-ticket - phone died, penalty fare issued, first appeal unsuccessful.
Interesting to note the last sentence. It seems someone at GTR has been reading this forum..... I do recognise that Mr McManus will likely still feel that a “zero tolerance” approach feels harsh, but I also expect that by reading the RailForums he is likely a member of, he will also conclude...
www.railforums.co.uk
Isn't the fairest balance to allow a couple of minutes to charge the phone if the passenger (or indeed guard/RPI) has a charging cable, and if the phone can't be recharged to display the ticket then issue a penalty fare but in the same way as the forgotten railcard rule allow 1 appeal each year if the ticket can be shown later? More than once per year would be at the discretion of each railway company to allow appeals or not (or maybe a modest fixed charge instead).
When was the forgotten railcard rule introduced?
Just how long do you think a guard could safely be delayed on a moderately loaded train?I've just been reading this thread.
Paid for e-ticket - phone died, penalty fare issued, first appeal unsuccessful.
Interesting to note the last sentence. It seems someone at GTR has been reading this forum..... I do recognise that Mr McManus will likely still feel that a “zero tolerance” approach feels harsh, but I also expect that by reading the RailForums he is likely a member of, he will also conclude...
Isn't the fairest balance to allow a couple of minutes to charge the phone if the passenger (or indeed guard/RPI) has a charging cable, and if the phone can't be recharged to display the ticket then issue a penalty fare but in the same way as the forgotten railcard rule allow 1 appeal each year if the ticket can be shown later? More than once per year would be at the discretion of each railway company to allow appeals or not (or maybe a modest fixed charge instead).
When was the forgotten railcard rule introduced?
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
It's very, very common for them to come back to someone who e.g. can't find their ticket. It'd be very unusual to get the MG11 pad out straight away.
Flying Snail
Established Member
- Joined
- 12 Dec 2006
- Messages
- 1,848
As usual the main thing absent from this type of discussion is personal responsibility.
Nobody is forced to use mobile ticketing, if you choose to do so it is your responsibility to manage your device which will have a low battery warning well in advance of complete depletion.
Nobody is forced to use mobile ticketing, if you choose to do so it is your responsibility to manage your device which will have a low battery warning well in advance of complete depletion.
trainophile
Established Member
We soon will be by the seems of things.
Deafdoggie
Established Member
- Joined
- 29 Sep 2016
- Messages
- 3,400
So because people use CCST it is acceptable for the guard to wait whilst the passenger goes through various pockets, then looks in their bag, then gets everything out of their bag before finding it. By which time a phone would have charged enough to show a ticket.
[/QUOTE]
It may suit you, but then the railway will be forced (by the courts if necessary) to make provision for the few cases where the traveller genuinely cannot display a valid ticket. That will actually drive away the chancers who attempt to put the responsibility for neglecting to keep their phone in a suitable state onto the railway.
trainophile
Established Member
It's rather bad luck if you board a train after being out all day and maybe taking photos etc., to find the power sockets aren't working. I think people in this situation, who would normally have been able to recharge their phone on board, but due to the train's fault can't do so, should be given some leeway if they genuinely can't display their ticket. I'm sure some websites (can't think which at the moment) show such information as whether there's wifi and charging sockets, so if you board with an expectation that isn't met then it's hardly your fault.
It doesn't take much charge to open up an app. or a pdf, select a ticket and display it for a few seconds. If you enter a train without checking (or knowing) that your phone has adequate charge for that operation, then you are taking the risk of being unable to present a valid ticket, a rule that you, by purchasing said ticket have accepted.
Powerbanks are stupidly cheap these days and nobody can live without their smartphone these days.
If you can't access your ticket, nor can you phone anyone, check TikTok, watch YouTube or converse on WhatsApp.
I wouldn't allow myself to end up with a dead phone, although any half decent phone has a decent battery these days. Light users can likely get 2 or 3 days between charges.
Heavy users are by definition using the phone a lot, so will have measures in place to reduce the risk of a dead battery.
The industry IMO doesn't really need to do much, like wait for someone to charge on a train. I'd assume if someone had a dead battery, they'd be charging as soon as they could - not when someone asks to see their ticket.
If you can't access your ticket, nor can you phone anyone, check TikTok, watch YouTube or converse on WhatsApp.
I wouldn't allow myself to end up with a dead phone, although any half decent phone has a decent battery these days. Light users can likely get 2 or 3 days between charges.
Heavy users are by definition using the phone a lot, so will have measures in place to reduce the risk of a dead battery.
The industry IMO doesn't really need to do much, like wait for someone to charge on a train. I'd assume if someone had a dead battery, they'd be charging as soon as they could - not when someone asks to see their ticket.
AlbertBeale
Established Member
In my world, I actually know quite a few people without a smartphone...
I've had a fare-dodger do the "me phones dead" routine while waving a burner phone at me. No mate, you never had a ticket on that thing.
- Status