CNash
Member
- Joined
- 30 Dec 2010
- Messages
- 336
My understanding was that TFL requires name, address etc. for Oyster deposit refunds in order to stop people handing in lost or stolen cards and getting £5 for them.
Regarding the refund of the£3.00 card deposit, I can advise that as from 19 March 2006, these deposits can be refunded at a tube station ticket office. The deposits were previously processed via the central refunds department because they were classified as 'anonymous funds'.
Consequently, refunds had to meet anti money-laundering regulations which required that deposits be refunded in this way, rather than through individual tube station ticket offices. However, as the deposit is no longer defined as anonymous funds, we can now process deposit refunds at ticket windows.
TfL can say what it likes. Nothing in any regulation requires it to seek or take proof of name or address for refunds. Department stores don't require it if you take something back, for example. I remain to be convinced that TfL's policy is anything other than attempting to obstruct people from getting money that's rightly theirs. And really - with a £95 maximum refund, nobody's going to launder money through an Oyster card anyway.island - I think you are taking it rather too literally.
Everyone is subject one way or another - it is a crime to launder money or to assist/not report money laundering. Organisations that move money - such as the times you listed- have a greater level of regulation where they are expect to vet their customers and transactions.
A site quoted a TfL letter that said:
Likewise."anyone else been unable to add an AMEX card to their online account"
Strange. Worked seamlessly for me.
Why is TfL going for contactless and not just sticking with Oyster?
I was on the DLR yesterday and noticed the PSA (Passenger Service Agent) using a new device to check Oyster/ITSO/contactless cards. It looked more like a PDA with a (what looked like) much larger colour screen. Also looked as though there was a stylus, so there are presumably multiple options/menus.
Everyone's cards were checked very quickly, so I'm assuming there were no contactless cards on my train.
Why is TfL going for contactless and not just sticking with Oyster?
it also has a slot in the top to read contactless payment cards but I forget what else they do.
By contrast LO are still using the older readers for ticket checks.
Given the relatively small values involved, it wouldn't really be a very effective way of laundering money. It could be in case the card is subsequently reported as stolen though - otherwise anyone finding a card could take it into the station and claim £5 + any credit. A bit like we used to do with pop bottles when I was a kid
Why would you need a "slot" for contactless cards?
London Buses have prosecuted for unvalidated CPC the same as for unvalidated Oyster or no ticket or pass produced.
Whilst that will work on buses, it will not be possible on trains or trams.CPC hand held checking devices cannot capture the whole CPC number (data protection) but they can check that you have correctly validated for the journey you are taking.
For instance on London Buses, the new device is put onto the Oyster reader and captures the Oyster and CPC data for that trip and is transferred to the device so when the inspection is done your CPC can be matched if correctly validated on boarding.
London Buses have prosecuted for unvalidated CPC the same as for unvalidated Oyster or no ticket or pass produced.
I'm yet to have a play with one of the devices, but my understanding is that the slot is not strictly necessary for reading contactless cards, but rather that the readers have them built it. No doubt somebody will correct me if I'm wrong (or I'll come back here and post again later!).
As for London Overground, some contractor RPIs are using the newer-style readers to which we refer.
They must be able to capture the validated data remotely or the devices themselves can pick up a mark left there through validation?
Again, I'll have to enquire further with that.
The way I've seen it explained is that the device will record every card that it checks, but not in "real time". It's only at the end of the day when, in the back office, they apply a maximum fare to any cards which were checked by the device and had not been properly touched in.
I hope none of the prosecutions were for someone who, expecting to be able to pay cash, had a kind stranger pay for them via CPC but the good samaritan left the bus before the cash-less passenger finished their journey
It's an interesting point and one that would never have occurred to me. I'm not in the habit of paying other people's bus fares but I've never looked at Oyster in terms of being able to 'show' a valid ticket.From previous discussion I understood the readers were set to reject multiple touches from the same card. Therefore if the "good samaritan" had already touched in for their own fare with a CPC and then, several stops down the line, offered to pay another person's fare, wouldn't the card be rejected? Or are they only programmed to reject multiple touches made within a certain time limit? If, however, the good samaritan had a CPC AND an Oyster, they could use whichever one they had not used for their own fare to pay the fare of the other passenger, but again if they then left the bus first and an RPI then boarded, that would still leave the second passenger in the position of being unable to show a valid ticket or other travel authority.
I guess the reality is that I'd only ever double pay for someone else who was actually traveling with me but it's still worth noting.
If, however, the good samaritan had a CPC AND an Oyster, they could use whichever one they had not used for their own fare to pay the fare of the other passenger, but again if they then left the bus first and an RPI then boarded, that would still leave the second passenger in the position of being unable to show a valid ticket or other travel authority.
Yep, this is the scenario I'm thinking of (and have seen played out) habitual Oyster user boards the bus, later on someone wanting to pay cash boards, Oyster user twigs they have a CPC which can be used to pay for the newly boarding passenger, the grateful passenger gives the CPC owner the cash for the bus fare, everyone's happy. Until a ticket inspector boards, which is the only aspect of this that I haven't yet seen play out.
I would add though that this only works if an Oyster traveller lends someone their CPC; in the opposite arrangement, it could be against the rules as Oysters are strictly bound to be used by the named cardholder only unless they're PAYG with no discount entitlement.
Every passenger has to have a ticket (or have paid for their travel) and to have it ready for inspection at any point in their journey, so if a Good Samaritan pays for your journey it is also worth getting a contact number or email address of that Good Samaritan because if he/she gets off before you, the inspector will report you for 'failing to produce' a valid ticket.
However, you contact the Good Samaritan later and get confirmation from him/her that you both had a valid ticket. No further action required.
If however, you cannot prove someone paid your fare and got off, you risk a Penalty Fare or worse, a prosecution!
Therefore before you board, always make sure you have or can pay your own fare.
With CPC, only the owner should be using their own CPC, inspectors can withdraw any ticket, pass or Oyster as that is written within the Conditions of Carriage, however, they cannot withdraw CPC's
If you use someone else's CPC you risk Police being called!
A conspiracy theorist might say they want people not to understand it so they can make additional revenue out of them.While that makes sense, it is never publicised and once again puts the passenger at risk of prosecution for something that simply isn't understood. It's frightening really, at least in the sense that there are so many rules 'out there' that we risk falling foul of that simply aren't advertised.
(I'm not somplaining that the rules are 'wrong' or 'unfair', simply that if we are supposed to abide by them then we need to be aware of them.)
If however, you cannot prove someone paid your fare and got off, you risk a Penalty Fare or worse, a prosecution!