Oh I fully understand the reasons, you don't have to explain that.
But at the end of the day, the railway still accepts cash. That means if someone wants to pay cash (not needs to, wants to) then they should be able to.
It is the railway industry who is going down this automated TvM route for unstaffed stations, so it should be the industry who provides a solution to those who want to pay cash.
Simple signage and easy to use machines are the answer really. It isn't difficult. The idea that someone has to dig through menus on a difficult to use machine without any signage to say what they have to do is just nuts. We have talked about this before, and assuming the flow is as it was back then (where you have to select the ticket, select pay, and then select to get a P2P) then that is just not customer friendly at all.
We are going around in circles here, the reasons for not having these options are the reasons why most TVMs do not offer one-touch P2Ps, or cash facilities. The former would risk the TVMs being out of order for even longer at many stations if certain individuals continued to empty the ticket stocks. As for the latter, cash payment via P2P is available, but frankly consumer choice as well as security is leading not only TVMs, but many other companies to opt for card-only transactions (including as previously stated my work's canteen).
I believe that most of the posts I have made I have mentioned specific things I have an issue with. The lack of signage, the lack of TVM's, the positioning of some of the TVM's that do exist, the fact that the only real way to protect yourself if the TVM is not working is to take a photo or video of it, the fact that getting a P2P is not obvious etc. As I said above, I do not use Northern rail to travel. So my issues with them are specific about this subject, rather than general complaints about them.
And I've already stated that I concede some of these points, as it appears do Northern as they slowly seem to be addressing these with more TVMs, signage etc.
As for constructive feedback, surely that feedback should have been sort first? Certainly before threatening people with fines (to most people a PF is a fine, regardless of what you want to actually call it) or prosecution etc. The idea that a TOC can roll out a project to punish people without sufficiently doing the upfront work to make sure facilities are good enough is bonkers.
Getting feedback before actually trialling a system is going to be very hard, this is why it was trialled on just two lines. However Northern do respond to feedback, I know the RUG in my area have been very proactive and got results, and individual issues I had early on were addressed. Of course some people have fallen foul, but they might have been just as likely to fall foul after a long period of consultation. But Northern do have an appeals process, and those that have can use this if they feel they are justified.
Ok let us use that logic and approach here. Prior to a journey you do some research. You look on the official website of the railways in the country (NRE) and that says there is not a ticket machine at the station in question. You look a bit more and see that the train operators website (Northern) say there is not a ticket machine at the station either. So a solid assumption would be that there is not a ticket machine at the station. But in reality, we know that those sites are very misleading and out of date. So research doesn't always help! You say about offering specific feedback - how about updating the damn websites so they are actually correct?
Its a good and valid point and National Rail do need to update their website, and this is a much wider problem than Northern's PF scheme sadly. However in relation to my recent journeys on Spain's Renfe services, the information was not gleamed from their website. Indeed their website is almost totally free of details on buying at stations. No my research came from various traveller sites and even YouTube videos, which were very useful as my Spanish isn't great and the language change option on their ticket machines is a small icon on the bottom left of the display and not instantly obvious.
I guess the point of my posts apart from the specific issues I have mentioned is that the attitude that I seem to get from your posts and Northern's actions (PF people and wait for them to appeal) is the wrong way around. The systems, methods and attitudes to correctly deal with these issues should be in place first before any actual PF's are allowed to be issued. There shouldn't be "an audit train of certain areas having more problems than others" because all of that should be thought about and resolved beforehand. It doesn't take much to think that actually having one TVM hidden away in the corner of one platform on a two platform station, where you can't see it from the other platform, will give some issues. It also doesn't take much to realise that not having obvious signage can cause problems. Why are these things not thought about before the PF scheme is in place? Again, why are the travelling public essentially treated as beta testers here?
I get your point, but you are creating a paradox. You want the systems designed with extensive public consultation, but tested without public exposure to ensure that 100% of the public can use it first time without issue? Would that be a fair assumption? If so, I can only say this isn't how things work. It wish it was, but it simply isn't.
To clarify my position on this, I am a daily user of the lines that were first used as the beta test. And there were some issues, but by and large most passengers quickly got used to the new TVMs, knew to ask the guard to sell them a ticket when they were not working, and have from casual observation adapted to the simple requirement of buying before boarding. I remember well the initial discussions on here about the proposed scheme as it was then, and that some members gleefully predicted chaos & mass malcontent from passengers on these lines. But none of this has come to pass 11 months later, without any attempt from those initial dissenters to offer an explanation why. Instead the same issues are raised each time a new set of lines go-live on the scheme, with the usual bluster about how its disgusting, typical of evil TOCs etc etc.
**Warning - Controversial Opinion Alert**
In short, I see it as no more than moaning for the sake of moaning, with seemingly little or no desire to engage with the TOC to resolve any of the issues they raise. I don't think the system is perfect, there are issues and I have conceded these. But this subject has been going around in a perfect echo-chamber circle for a year now, yet out there in commuter land the vast majority of people have just got on with it. I'm sorry if this irks any member of these forums, but it is how it is. Northern, and other TOCs have been required to introduce these schemes under the terms of the franchises. Northern opted to roll-out in small areas to test the systems, and make adjustments where needed, and as s it rolls out further they appear to be do the same, albeit with various amounts of success. And I do agree with this approach, they could have waited a couple of years and just gone "Big Bang" style and really upset the apple cart. I'm sure that would have attracted even more criticism and complaint from members here. Quite honestly I don't think any method would have appeases all, remember a while back when some members lamented the introduction of TVMs at low usage stations? Because I do!
Further upthread
@Clip wondered about why members were so opposed to the scheme. Being blunt I think it's biggest problem here is change, which is often badly received by those interested and enthusiastic about our railways.
