I'm not quite following the leap of logic between "I can't check my online account when I'm using contactless" and "due to this inconvenience TfL should let everyone get on for free".
People who don't like the inconvenience of not being able to check their online account are, of course, free to use an alternative payment method of their choosing.
There's no such leap of logic since I have not arrived at that conclusion. Nobody to my knowledge is saying that's what TfL should do. Just that it's something they could do if they are not able to think of anything else acceptable. I don't regard the status quo as remotely acceptable and I am shocked that anybody does.
If you think it's a mere inconvenience, perhaps you're not aware of the range of services currently unavailable or haven't thought through enough different use cases to realise that a substantial number of people are going to be out of pocket, and/or it will be much more difficult for them to detect errors in TfL's favour and still more difficult to get refunds within any kind of reasonable timescale?
We've had an informed opinion expressed on here that nobody will be out of pocket 'long term' (whatever that means), but to my mind this misses the point that people shouldn't even be out of pocket short-term. And more to the point, why isn't TfL giving that assurance? Rather than it being left to members of this forum to speculate?
I can’t see it going to paper tickets (plus Oyster) only. There isn’t the infrastructure available to sell the volume of paper tickets required.
Similar if it went Oyster only, I doubt there’d be enough Oyster cards to satisfy demand (unless TfL has a stash somewhere).
Maybe the temporary solution, if it is required (which it isn’t as this point) is something like a bus - fixed price, touch in only required.
No, the system can't operate if these IT systems break.
I'm not even
that old, and I've lived in major cities where they had a highly efficient, flat fare system that had absolutely no reliance on anything that could be hacked. Toronto, for example, had flat fares across bus, tram and subway, collected by way of mechanical turnstiles operated by tokens on the subway, and cash, tokens or prepaid tickets on buses and trams. There were in-station interchanges (including between modes, where possible) and paper transfers otherwise. The main technology underpinning paper transfers was the bulldog clips needed to allow bus and tram drivers to tear off the paper transfer at the right point to indicate the time of issue. The technology didn't change from the 60s to the early 2010s. All designed to be far more efficient than the system that preceded London's PAYG system. All invulnerable to hacking.
TfL chooses not to have a system like that, so it's up to them to suggest an acceptable way of collecting fares when the means of accounting and redress are unavailable to passengers.
I'm raising the possibility that TfL can no longer collect the fares in London without a functioning contactless PAYG system because it appears to be the case.
If they wanted to switch to Oyster they'd need to drop the charge for the cards, I would suggest, and after a few hours I can't imagine people would be able to get hold of one for love or money. TfL put itself in this position; my view is I'm not obliged to accept that the current unsatisfactory situation should be allowed to go on, just because TfL hasn't got a contingency plan.
.