Trainline app storing a railcard without the user's knowledge

[Dai Corner]

I would imagine he read the information printed on the ticket. There is, at the very least, a code on the ticket indicating that it has been issued with a railcard discount.

Indeed. I suppose I was really asking whether the OP read the ticket and, if so, understood it.

 

[Haywain]

Indeed. I suppose I was really asking whether the OP read the ticket and, if so, understood it.

And the booking confirmation.

 

[30907]

That icon is meant to be a railcard? It looks like a ticket to me, so "ticket 1" is confirming what I am buying...

It is the icon that appears next to "Add Railcard"

 

[Nottingham59]

It looks like a ticket to me

That icon (a small rectangle with a black stripe across it) looks like a credit card to me. I would interpret that to say I had the details of one credit card stored in the app.

 

[FGW_DID]

I can’t understand how you ’inadvertently’ added a railcard? I have never used Trainline and the last railcard I held was over 10 years ago (HM Forces card).

I‘ve just downloaded the Trainline App, registered an account and when I pressed ‘Railcards’ the very next screen says ‘Buy Railcard’. Clicking on that takes me to the ‘railcard shop’ where I have to choose a railcard. As an example I chose the ”Two Together” Railcard. I know have to input two names, once I’ve done that the next step is to upload photo’s.

I stopped there, it seems there are a lot of steps to go through to add a railcard to the Trainline app. So that brings me neatly round to the start

i can’t understand how you inadvertently added a railcard?

 

[robbeech]

I can’t understand how you ’inadvertently’ added a railcard? I have never used Trainline and the last railcard I held was over 10 years ago (HM Forces card).

I‘ve just downloaded the Trainline App, registered an account and when I pressed ‘Railcards’ the very next screen says ‘Buy Railcard’. Clicking on that takes me to the ‘railcard shop’ where I have to choose a railcard. As an example I chose the ”Two Together” Railcard. I know have to input two names, once I’ve done that the next step is to upload photo’s.

I stopped there, it seems there are a lot of steps to go through to add a railcard to the Trainline app. So that brings me neatly round to the start

i can’t understand how you inadvertently added a railcard?

This is misleading. The buying a railcard process isn’t the same as adding one to apply a discount to the ticket purchase process.

You can click on “add railcard” and select a railcard that you currently have and this is applied to tickets you search for until you remove it.

This process does require a couple of steps to do and I see little way of doing it by mistake but it certainly isn’t the long process you suggest.

 

[FGW_DID]

This is misleading. The buying a railcard process isn’t the same as adding one to apply a discount to the ticket purchase process.

You can click on “add railcard” and select a railcard that you currently have and this is applied to tickets you search for until you remove it.

This process does require a couple of steps to do and I see little way of doing it by mistake but it certainly isn’t the long process you suggest.

I was under the impression that the OP didn’t have a railcard at all, not that they had already added one.

I had no knowledge of how to add a rail card on the Trainline app and indeed don't need to because I have no use of a rail card.

 

[Nottingham59]

I was under the impression that the OP didn’t have a railcard at all, not that they had already added one.

He didn't have a railcard. His issue with the Trainline app is that (a) the app somehow got mistakenly set up as if he did hold a railcard bought somewhere else, and (b) that this incorrect registration of a railcard persisted within the app for months, without warning. When he was unlucky enough to buy a ticket for which that railcard would apply, the app then applied that railcard discount without his realising it, thereby making his ticket invalid.

 

[Deafdoggie]

I can’t understand how you ’inadvertently’ added a railcard? I have never used Trainline and the last railcard I held was over 10 years ago (HM Forces card).

I‘ve just downloaded the Trainline App, registered an account and when I pressed ‘Railcards’ the very next screen says ‘Buy Railcard’. Clicking on that takes me to the ‘railcard shop’ where I have to choose a railcard. As an example I chose the ”Two Together” Railcard. I know have to input two names, once I’ve done that the next step is to upload photo’s.

I stopped there, it seems there are a lot of steps to go through to add a railcard to the Trainline app. So that brings me neatly round to the start

i can’t understand how you inadvertently added a railcard?

The OP didn't accidentally buy a railcard, if they had there would be no problem as they would have had a valid railcard!
They accidentally added a railcard to their account, as if a railcard was already held. This remained stored on their account but unused as the journeys were not valid for the discount. Then, when booking a journey which was valid, it applied the discount unbeknownst to the OP.
The thrust of the argument is weather a small picture that looks like a credit card is sufficient notice a railcard discount is applied, and if "Gold card discount" means anything to non-railway people. If you had a gold credit card stored on the account, I'd say it was a fairly easy mistake to make.

 

[robbeech]

I was under the impression that the OP didn’t have a railcard at all, not that they had already added one.

That’s exactly my point. They don’t have a railcard but they added the discount as if they did.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That’s exactly my point. They don’t have a railcard but they added the discount as if they did.

I'm very intrigued about how that happened by accident, though I suppose the OP might have been flicking through to see what difference it made, e.g. to see if they wanted to get one, and forgot to take it off. That said I do agree it isn't clear enough on most of the apps and should really be a pop-up before you add to basket to confirm you do still want it on there. However as Trainline are a third party I agree with those whose view is that the OP will need to pay the settlement and consider whether they have enough of a case to pursue Trainline for it (though that is doubtful). If it was the same TOC's app, the situation might be subtly different.

 

[30907]

He didn't have a railcard. His issue with the Trainline app is that (a) the app somehow got mistakenly set up as if he did hold a railcard bought somewhere else, and (b) that this incorrect registration of a railcard persisted within the app for months, without warning. When he was unlucky enough to buy a ticket for which that railcard would apply, the app then applied that railcard discount without his realising it, thereby making his ticket invalid.

OP didn't accidentally buy a railcard, if they had there would be no problem as they would have had a valid railcard!
They accidentally added a railcard to their account, as if a railcard was already held. This remained stored on their account but unused as the journeys were not valid for the discount. Then, when booking a journey which was valid, it applied the discount unbeknownst to the OP.

The OP started with the first of these two claims.

The thrust of the argument is weather a small picture that looks like a credit card is sufficient notice a railcard discount is applied,

The OP's screenshots in #14 don't substantiate this as the larger version of the icon first appears with the word "Railcard" adjacent

and if "Gold card discount" means anything to non-railway people. If you had a gold credit card stored on the account, I'd say it was a fairly easy mistake to make.

The discount (see post #3) is labelled "Annual Gold Card (+/-- ...discount)" which even on its own is unlikely to refer to a credit card. The OP hasn't made that claim...

 

[jon0844]

I do think the OP is being rather rude and unfair to GA, which is doing its job to protect revenue. I'd say ignore GA (and pay the necessary settlement) and concentrate on the issue at hand.

The issue is with Trainline, and now it can be easy to accidentally add a Gold Card to your account which is then automatically applied with no warning.

As seen from the screen captures, it seems clear that a railcard discount has been applied throughout the buying process but I suppose a pop-up does no harm, especially if someone might be buying a ticket for someone else (family member), have cancelled their season ticket (gold card) or it has merely expired (if Trainline isn't recording expiry dates).

Nevertheless, the customer has some responsibility to check what they're buying. It was still clearly shown, just as clearly as an adult or child ticket. Do we expect people to say they didn't realise they bought a child ticket on the same basis? Of course not (although there IS an argument to say that we need consistency in the UK as to what age an adult is for public transport, given it varies in Wales, on buses etc).

 

[Nottingham59]

Also I notice that the icons for railcard shown by the app in post #3 and post #14 in this thread are completelly different. Is this an Apple / Android thing? How is anyone supposed to know what that icon means?

 

[FGW_DID]

They accidentally added a railcard to their account

That’s what the impression given is but what is actually meant is a railcard “discount” was applied (and stored by the App).

Words (or lack of them) do make a difference!!

 

[30907]

Also I notice that the icons for railcard shown by the app in post #3 and post #14 in this thread are completelly different. Is this an Apple / Android thing? How is anyone supposed to know what that icon means?

They change within #14 which isn't clever - but the magic word Railcard appears on most of the screens...

 

[35B]

To answer this question specifically, I would say they should support all iOS phone/ipads that can run the latest iOS version (ie not watches!)

Ive had issue with other responsive websites on an first generation iphone SE, e.g. on lego.com the cookies warning page wouldn't let me scroll down enough to click on OK!

Website providers tend to support the most common device/browser combinations (I'm familiar with a "top 10 list" that covers over 90% of transactions made); I would expect an app provider to similarly test the compatibility of their devices. As Apple still market small form iPhones (the SE 2nd generation), the argument of age is a poor one which I would be embarrassed to offer as a supplier/vendor.

If there is an argument against Trainline, I'd suggest it is to do with their compliance with the Equalities Act, and whether their facilities meet reasonable accessibility requirements. That, however, is a complaint against the retailer and is independent of any response that may be made to GA in this matter.

 

[island]

I think the OP needs to wind his neck in, take responsibility for his mistake, pay whatever is being asked to resolve the dispute and prevent a prosecution, and stop quibbling about app version numbers or the standard of written English in a court statement.

Trainline isn’t going to pay his settlement, and he’s committed a criminal offence. Those are the facts.

 

[jumble]

I think the OP needs to wind his neck in, take responsibility for his mistake, pay whatever is being asked to resolve the dispute and prevent a prosecution, and stop quibbling about app version numbers or the standard of written English in a court statement.

Trainline isn’t going to pay his settlement, and he’s committed a criminal offence. Those are the facts.

I agree but suspect he will argue to the bitter end.
Edit I meant they not he

 

[WelshBluebird]

Website providers tend to support the most common device/browser combinations (I'm familiar with a "top 10 list" that covers over 90% of transactions made); I would expect an app provider to similarly test the compatibility of their devices. As Apple still market small form iPhones (the SE 2nd generation), the argument of age is a poor one which I would be embarrassed to offer as a supplier/vendor.

As someone who develops websites, it is pretty normal to pay close attention to usages and try to quickly drop browsers and devices that don't make up a great deal of your userbase. Where your cut off is really is quite a specific question and really depends on your target market. I'd imagine the app market is similar. So maybe you think the small iPhones should be supported as they are still sold, but if they only make up a small percentage of your overall target market, then I wouldn't be surprised at all if there was a decision to just not support them (or more specifically to either not test at all on them, or potentially to just do functional testing rather than worrying about the user experience too).

 

[35B]

As someone who develops websites, it is pretty normal to pay close attention to usages and try to quickly drop browsers and devices that don't make up a great deal of your userbase. Where your cut off is really is quite a specific question and really depends on your target market. I'd imagine the app market is similar. So maybe you think the small iPhones should be supported as they are still sold, but if they only make up a small percentage of your overall target market, then I wouldn't be surprised at all if there was a decision to just not support them (or more specifically to either not test at all on them, or potentially to just do functional testing rather than worrying about the user experience too).

I fully understand that; my surprise is that they are such a small proportion of the market that they fall below that cut-off line given that the 2nd generation SE has not that long been introduced.

 

[ashkeba]

As someone who develops websites, it is pretty normal to pay close attention to usages and try to quickly drop browsers and devices that don't make up a great deal of your userbase. Where your cut off is really is quite a specific question and really depends on your target market.

I hope that the target market being something which has a legal requirement to support visually-impaired users would mean that relatively recent phones with a zoom function would be above any cut.

And just to repeat what I have wrote before: I feel the OP should settle with the train company and then pursue trainline because trainline's error does not make him innocent, as far as I understand the law.

 

[WelshBluebird]

I hope that the target market being something which has a legal requirement to support visually-impaired users would mean that relatively recent phones with a zoom function would be above any cut.

I'm not convinced by the idea that the legal requirements mean you have to support every single device out there.
As you said, any modern phone will support a zoom function, so as long as you support a set of devices that do, I really don't see how anyone could argue you'd have to support everything!

I fully understand that; my surprise is that they are such a small proportion of the market that they fall below that cut-off line given that the 2nd generation SE has not that long been introduced.

I think it has been well documented that it hasn't sold very well though, so I'm not too surprised.
Also, it really depends on the company. Some will want you to support 99% of potential users with the understanding that doing so often requires a significantly more work (and so time and money) than just supporting say 90%, while other companies are happy to compromise and save the time and money. There's the 80/20 rule which really does apply a lot here - 80% of your results / benefits are provided by just 20% of the work and the last 20% of the results are the additional 80% of the work - that really does ring true for supporting different devices / browsers etc!

 

[35B]

I'm not convinced by the idea that the legal requirements mean you have to support every single device out there.
As you said, any modern phone will support a zoom function, so as long as you support a set of devices that do, I really don't see how anyone could argue you'd have to support everything!


I think it has been well documented that it hasn't sold very well though, so I'm not too surprised.
Also, it really depends on the company. Some will want you to support 99% of potential users with the understanding that doing so often requires a significantly more work (and so time and money) than just supporting say 90%, while other companies are happy to compromise and save the time and money. There's the 80/20 rule which really does apply a lot here - 80% of your results / benefits are provided by just 20% of the work and the last 20% of the results are the additional 80% of the work - that really does ring true for supporting different devices / browsers etc!

You're fair in your interpretation of the accessibility requirements - I've lost sleep over the costs potentially involved. But I do also feel that in this Trainline are treading a very fine line - the form factor matters a lot, and ignoring that outlier in terms of size seems suspiciously like the old disease of web developers writing for people like themselves, ignoring minor issues like the real world kit environment.

 

[Haywain]

You're fair in your interpretation of the accessibility requirements - I've lost sleep over the costs potentially involved. But I do also feel that in this Trainline are treading a very fine line - the form factor matters a lot, and ignoring that outlier in terms of size seems suspiciously like the old disease of web developers writing for people like themselves, ignoring minor issues like the real world kit environment.

I think testing would more likely be against operating systems than every possible device, because it should not be unreasonable to expect that devices using the same OS will act consistently.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think testing would more likely be against operating systems than every possible device, because it should not be unreasonable to expect that devices using the same OS will act consistently.

They do, but not in terms of screen resolution/layout. Dealing with that is definitely the app's job, and you tend to find that in iOS developers get lazy as all the recent iPhones are the same. On Android they do it better because there's a massive variety of sizes. This laziness is why there's not an iPad version of most apps - done properly, the iPhone one would properly scale to both as Android apps do.

 

[_toommm_]

I think testing would more likely be against operating systems than every possible device, because it should not be unreasonable to expect that devices using the same OS will act consistently.

Testing is rather easy across iPhones, as youve got a screen resolution that sticks for many generations, and can be easily achieved through emulation.

 

[35B]

I think testing would more likely be against operating systems than every possible device, because it should not be unreasonable to expect that devices using the same OS will act consistently.

The browser list I'm familiar with takes a combination of device, OS, browser and form factor - so distinguishes, for example, between Chrome running on Android phone, Android tablet, or Windows PC. And while devices using the same OS may act consistently, the size may (as here) make a difference to how that consistency actually affects the user journey as there is limited screen space and the effect of a message may be very different on an (say) an SE to (say) an iPhone 12.

 

[ashkeba]

I'm not convinced by the idea that the legal requirements mean you have to support every single device out there.
As you said, any modern phone will support a zoom function, so as long as you support a set of devices that do, I really don't see how anyone could argue you'd have to support everything!

I donot think anyone is arguing to support every device, but if a device is supported, and I bet a recent iPhone is supported, then it seems a reasonable interpretation of the equality law that that app should still work correctly with the built-in accessibility features switched on!

 

[TFN]

Maybe Trainline reads this thread...

I'm surprised this hadn't been done until now.