Using Visa Debit Cards On Train

[island]

Diners cards should all be cobranded MasterCard these days so should work fine.

Don't know if PTA has a high population of dodgy passengers...

 

[sheff1]

As far as I'm aware, the only thing we are obliged to accept is cash money.

I don't know about 'obliged' but FGW states the following regarding purchases at ticket offices:

You will be able to purchase a ticket with cash, cheque and most credit and debit cards. A list of accepted cards will be displayed clearly at each ticket office window.

The position with On Board purchase is less clear:

Where journeys start at stations where there are no ticketing facility available, it is your responsibility to pay your fare to the on-board staff who are able to issue the normal range of tickets..

It could be implied that the same methods of payment are possible but, of course, no list of accepted cards is displayed on board.

 

[Flamingo]

I don't know about 'obliged' but FGW states the following regarding purchases at ticket offices:


The position with On Board purchase is less clear:


It could be implied that the same methods of payment are possible but, of course, no list of accepted cards is displayed on board.

Ticket offices are a different kettle of fish from on-board, as the terminal will automatically dial for authorization if required. On-board, we don't have the luxury of a phone connection.

IMHO it is no different from a bank refusing to authorise a transaction because a cheque has not cleared in an account. Again, the money is "in" the account, the bank is blocking it. It is annoying and frustrating for the customer, but it is down to the bank, not the retailer.

 

[Terrafire]

Ticket offices are a different kettle of fish from on-board, as the terminal will automatically dial for authorization if required. On-board, we don't have the luxury of a phone connection.

IMHO it is no different from a bank refusing to authorise a transaction because a cheque has not cleared in an account. Again, the money is "in" the account, the bank is blocking it. It is annoying and frustrating for the customer, but it is down to the bank, not the retailer.

A company can choose to accept whatever method of payment it likes, normally. The issue really is that there are no posters at stations or notices on websites telling customers that the on-board payment methods don't include certain types of card. Even that would be OK in a normal transaction, but given that once on a train the customer must pay, as the contract has already been formed, or face penalties ranging from journey disruption to fines, the whole thing seems a little unfair.

 

[Flamingo]

A company can choose to accept whatever method of payment it likes, normally. The issue really is that there are no posters at stations or notices on websites telling customers that the on-board payment methods don't include certain types of card. Even that would be OK in a normal transaction, but given that once on a train the customer must pay, as the contract has already been formed, or face penalties ranging from journey disruption to fines, the whole thing seems a little unfair.

It is not the rail companies who are refusing to accept these cards, but the banks refusing to authorise them. TOC's are losing millions over this, I can guarantee for every tale of someone having to get off the train there are ten who are getting a free journey.

At least with SOLO cards there were posters up about their non-acceptance. The banks have introduced a product that is restricted usage, but indistinguishable from cards that are accepted.

And there are a hard-core who know their card will be declined, I have the same faces producing a card that was declined the day before, with a bug grin on their face, ring for authorisation and the bank says "declined" as well.

The bottom line is also, passengers are not supposed to board without a valid ticket. A significant number of these declined cards are from stations where a ticket could have been bought before boarding. The question I ask is "Why was a ticket not bought before boarding?". Could it be because the passenger knew the card would not be accepted on-board?

 

[WelshBluebird]

The bottom line is also, passengers are not supposed to board without a valid ticket.

And in a significant number of cases, there is no way to buy before you board.
I think it is a tad unfair to assume that just because someone has not been able to buy a ticket before they board, they are specifically trying to avoid paying.
Of course in many cases that is exactly what is happening. But in many other cases, it is not what is happening.

 

[Flamingo]

And if they have not, then they will be given the benefit of the doubt over someone who has got on at a manned station.

 

[Ferret]

Flamingo, if the bank authorisation line says declined as well, you're perfectly within your rights to TIR them - no money, no means of payment, no intent to pay the fare. I must've done umpteen of those recently.

 

[WelshBluebird]

And if they have not, then they will be given the benefit of the doubt over someone who has got on at a manned station.

And if the person who got on at the manned station has a valid reason?
(such as starting off at an unmanned station with no ticket machine, being delayed on the train, thus not having any time to buy a ticket at the interchange station before getting on your service).

I have been in this situation a couple of times, and it is amazing the difference in attitude you can see from staff.

 

[WillPS]

VISA reasonably expect all merchants to have the ability to perform online authorisation in any setting, and have expressed this by removing the differentiation between Electron and Debit/Delta. Customers are now told that they can use their VISA card at any location which shows the VISA logo.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again - the technology is there to support online transactions on-the-go, and if the train companies have no intention have forking out for it then that's their problem. I sympathise with those on the front line who have to put up with this but as long as ATOC and their members bury their heads in the sand the problem will persist.

 

[Oswyntail]

Flamingo, if the bank authorisation line says declined as well, you're perfectly within your rights to TIR them - no money, no means of payment, no intent to pay the fare. I must've done umpteen of those recently.

Yet again we have this spurious assumption that the default attitude of customers is attempting to defraud the company.

 

[clagmonster]

Yet again we have this spurious assumption that the default attitude of customers is attempting to defraud the company.

In the case of a passenger only having their card rejected by the offline machine I agree with you, it is unfair on the passenger but I see no reason why a valid card with sufficient funds would be declined by the authorisation line, therefore when a card is rejected by the authorisation line it is probably dodgy.

One question I do have is: What are the opening hours for the authorisation line?

 

[Jeremy B]

Yet again we have this spurious assumption that the default attitude of customers is attempting to defraud the company.

......and again we have your spurious assumption that all passengers are innocent as per your frequent previous postings on various topics.

 

[WillPS]

In the case of a passenger only having their card rejected by the offline machine I agree with you, it is unfair on the passenger but I see no reason why a valid card with sufficient funds would be declined by the authorisation line, therefore when a card is rejected by the authorisation line it is probably dodgy.

One question I do have is: What are the opening hours for the authorisation line?

It's 24 hours, including the call centres at the cardholder's bank you sometimes have to get to run security checks with the customer in order to manually authorise.

I've said it before - but the problem with the card being rejected is down to VISA and their banks' reasonable expectation that online authorisation should always be possible. Every other industry has in the last 20 years built their systems with this expectation in mind, but despite a relatively modern overhaul of their ticket sales equipment - the railway failed to do this presumably on the grounds of cost.

Not the customer's fault.

I should add that the authorisation line does not authorise in every situation when online authorisation would.

 

[michael769]

the technology is there to support online transactions on-the-go,

Only in theory. In practice mobile coverage is not 100% especially away from built up areas, and in areas of borderline coverage fast moving units will have some difficulty with data especially. With many trains spending substantial parts of their journeys in rural and sometimes remote locations, while GPRS/3G terminals would greatly increase the ability to accept these cards it would still not be anywhere close to 100% reliable.

Indeed I would argue that the railways have a almost unique difficulty in this regard.

 

[reb0118]

Are these declined transactions logged anywhere?

My company's policy once declined is to TI the passenger if they have no further means to pay. There will be no administative costs involved the first time as this could be put down to a genuine believe that their card was acceptable.

The problem with this is the time factor involved would result in serious delays to train services up & down the country incovieniencing genuine fare paying passengers.

Not a good system. I think a floor limit of say £10 or £20 could be re-introduced to get some money off them before hoying them of at the next stop.

 

[WillPS]

How many services are there where between 2 stations there would not be adequate coverage? Would it not be the case that in these circumstances the guard would probably struggle to perform an offline card transaction?

 

[sheff1]

It is not the rail companies who are refusing to accept these cards, but the banks refusing to authorise them.

I find it dificult to get my head round this line of reasoning. The passenger is attempting to pay the rail companies but they are not accepting payment because of their own failure to move with the times, as per:

VISA reasonably expect all merchants to have the ability to perform online authorisation in any setting, and have expressed this by removing the differentiation between Electron and Debit/Delta. Customers are now told that they can use their VISA card at any location which shows the VISA logo.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again - the technology is there to support online transactions on-the-go, and if the train companies have no intention have forking out for it then that's their problem. I sympathise with those on the front line who have to put up with this but as long as ATOC and their members bury their heads in the sand the problem will persist.

If TOCs really are only prepared to accept a restricted range of methods of payment On Board, they should make that absolutely clear in their 'Notices'.

 

[WillPS]

If TOCs really are only prepared to accept a restricted range of methods of payment On Board, they should make that absolutely clear in their 'Notices'.

What would they possibly say? "Your card must be able to authorise offline"? How would the customer know for sure?

 

[WestCoast]

Yes, it's a problem, but if there are card accepting ticket outlets (TVM/offices) at the passenger's origin, then they should be used as per the NRCoC.

Trains are still much more flexible with payment than most provincial buses for example, where you can get huffed at for handing over a £5 note for a £3.40 fare (in my experience)! And of course, cards are not an option.

 

[Flamingo]

If TOCs really are only prepared to accept a restricted range of methods of payment On Board, they should make that absolutely clear in their 'Notices'.

We will happily accept them if authorised. The banks are refusing to authorise them. If banks did hot have "online only" cards, or had them marked accordingly, that both the customer and retailer knew this, then there would be no problem.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

What would they possibly say? "Your card must be able to authorise offline"? How would the customer know for sure?

The bank would have to tell them, but the bank is not prepared to do so as this looks bad for them. It is easier for the bank to blame the retailer.

 

[sheff1]

What would they possibly say? "Your card must be able to authorise offline"? How would the customer know for sure?

That is the problem. The customer does not know and can be ejected from the train as a result.

How many services are there where between 2 stations there would not be adequate coverage? Would it not be the case that in these circumstances the guard would probably struggle to perform an offline card transaction?

When travelling by Macbraynes ferries in remote parts of Scotland, where presumably the coverage is poor/non existent, my card was just swiped and I was not asked for a PIN or to sign anything. I have never been refused access to such a ferry because 'your card doesn't work'.

 

[WestCoast]

When travelling by Macbraynes ferries in remote parts of Scotland, where presumably the coverage is poor/non existent, my card was just swiped and I was not asked for a PIN or to sign anything. I have never been refused access to such a ferry because 'your card doesn't work'.

However, where do you think 'abuse' of this procedure is more likely to take place?

I have this problem, especially as my local station doesn't have ticket purchasing facilities. I either have my season ticket or make sure I have sufficient cash.

I understand everyone loves their cards, but personally for smaller transactions I like dealing with tangible coins and notes. That's merely a personal preference though.

 

[WillPS]

Yes, it's a problem, but if there are card accepting ticket outlets (TVM/offices) at the passenger's origin, then they should be used as per the NRCoC.

Trains are still much more flexible with payment than most provincial buses for example, where you can get huffed at for handing over a £5 note for a £3.40 fare (in my experience)! And of course, cards are not an option.

In fact, some Stagecoach buses now accept contactless payment. But with regards to your point - at least they're consistent; they don't advertise that you are able to pay by Visa but then only accept it under certain circumstances.

We will happily accept them if authorised. The banks are refusing to authorise them. If banks did hot have "online only" cards, or had them marked accordingly, that both the customer and retailer knew this, then there would be no problem.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


The bank would have to tell them, but the bank is not prepared to do so as this looks bad for them. It is easier for the bank to blame the retailer.

The banks DID make the differentiation (Solo/Electron). Now that a pretty generous amount of time has passed to allow retailers to update their systems to authorise online, they are removing the differentiation and in fact are applying and removing the online-only restriction on an ad-hoc basis.

 

[Flamingo]

I did have a guy a few weeks ago on a late train with a card that was declined, I rang up for authorisation (which was given), and told him next time, bring cash.

Following night, same chap, and he had a £5 on him! Nice

 

[sheff1]

Yes, it's a problem, but if there are card accepting ticket outlets (TVM/offices) at the passenger's origin, then they should be used as per the NRCoC.

Trains are still much more flexible with payment than most provincial buses for example, where you can get huffed at for handing over a £5 note for a £3.40 fare (in my experience)! And of course, cards are not an option.

I don't think anyone is disputing the first point.

On the second, a bus fare of a few pounds is a different scale to a train fare of 10's of pounds. Saying that, again the issue is with companies not being prepared to install the required equipment. When travelling by local/regional bus in Sweden it is perfectly acceptable to pay by credit or debit card - indeed in many areas it is cash which is not accepted.

 

[Flamingo]

In fact, some Stagecoach buses now accept contactless payment. But with regards to your point - at least they're consistent; they don't advertise that you are able to pay by Visa but then only accept it under certain circumstances.



The banks DID make the differentiation (Solo/Electron). Now that a pretty generous amount of time has passed to allow retailers to update their systems to authorise online, they are removing the differentiation and in fact are applying and removing the online-only restriction on an ad-hoc basis.

The retailers are the BANKS customers. Why have the banks introduced a system that their CUSTOMERS are not able to use, for the banks own convenience?

Surely the banks have some responsibility in all of this?

 

[WillPS]

The retailers are the BANKS customers. Why have the banks introduced a system that their CUSTOMERS are not able to use, for the banks own convenience?

Surely the banks have some responsibility in all of this?

Not at all. The banks offered forward online authorisation as a way to reduce risk (for them) and allow custom with a broader range of customers (children and those with credit issues). Most retailers (who like the idea of making things easier for their customers and significantly reducing the risk involved in card acceptance) welcomed this with open arms.

Now the banks simply want something in return - the flexibility to apply and remove online-only restrictions on an ad-hoc basis to prevent unfavourable transactions from occurring.

There has been adequate opportunity to sort this out - and it hasn't just been sprung on the industry I assure you.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Surely the banks have some responsibility in all of this?

Exactly!

There really is no point in the polarised Passengers vs TOCs argument when the agent in the middle is secretive* about their policies and practice.

Now the banks simply want something in return - the flexibility to apply and remove online-only restrictions on an ad-hoc basis to prevent unfavourable transactions from occurring.

Flexibility? Fine if its consistent and transparent. Not if its ad hoc and unclear.

*Secretive in the sense that they are not transparent in the approvals and restrictions they impose on their clients, whether these are Retaillers, Businesses, consumers or institutions nor in when they change those approvals and restrictions.

 

[WestCoast]

On the second, a bus fare of a few pounds is a different scale to a train fare of 10's of pounds. Saying that, again the issue is with companies not being prepared to install the required equipment.

I wonder how many on-board transactions are for tickets over £10, I'd imagine that many 'paytrains' take fares mainly on local journeys. However, I recognise that the guard is the ticket office when other facilties are unavailable, so potentially fares could be anything up to £100+ a ticket. Then there is excesses, Anytimes paid onboard e.t.c.

When travelling by local/regional bus in Sweden it is perfectly acceptable to pay by credit or debit card - indeed in many areas it is cash which is not accepted.

I can't say that's the case in other parts of continental Europe. From my experience, Trains and Buses in Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Austria, Italy and Spain tend to take cash only when paying onboard (where this is acceptable, often it isn't). TVMs in Belgium and the Netherlands will generally not take credit cards or even debit cards that aren't Maestro.