Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I never said losing, I meant that cash is more likely to be stolen.


Also you say it would have been pointless to buy another Oyster, but I suspect it would have worked out cheaper than paying cash for a couple of weeks.


Actually perhaps not because it's school holidays, but if she'd been travelling to and from school every day...

Also, kids can't buy "a peice, 2 wings, and chips" with an oyster card. They may be tempted to use their ?2 emergency bus money for just that.


(I'm basing this on the crowds of kids iutside the chicken shops in Newham every day).


Not that I have anything against dirty chicken, I love it!

We need the options though Otta. I work full time, organising a new Oyster for my daughter for a week is not at all practical for one or yeo journeys.


Aldo what about when you've not topped up your Oyster and have something urgent to get to. Getting off the bus becsuse you've reslised theres not enough money, hunting got a Newsagents that is open (could be after 6pm) and getting back to the bus stop to catcj s bus, is likely to make you late. Cash as a back up in that situation is vital. Not everyone of as organised as you cashless people clearly are.


If there were paper ticket machines and Oyster top up places at bus stops, then maybe you could argue that there is no need for cash, but being stuck in the middle of no-where at night, unable to top up your Oyster or use/have cash is every woman's nightmare.

Also the arsehole who suggested cash should be done away with so he doesn't have to subsidise a more expensive admin process, (despite concerns for safety) I guess would be the kind of person who objects to paying for education or NHS services if he doesn't personally use them.


Transport is subsidised by taxes despite being privately run, because it is recognised as being an important public service. Something we all pay for, not just commuters.

I do think it's much better now that you can use a wireless debit card on the bus. On the couple of occasions where I've needed to hop on a bus and realised my Oyster is at home, that's been a better option than cash for me - not least since it charges you Oyster rates...

I get the bus every day & always use my contactless card.


On a couple of occasions it hasn't worked - and not because I didn't have ?? in my account before you ask, because of some unknown error.


That's why I think it's really important people can still pay by cash

I assume you mean "The focus should be getting as many people SAFELY as possible on the buses" KK? We wouldn't want a repeat of those bendy bus thingamys now would we?!


The empathsis is too much on speeding up the service to make it "quicker"? why? does 30 seconds (over generalising based on no statistical fact of course) saved each stop from potential cash fares really make much of a difference? What about the time taken when passengers ask for directions, take time when boarding either through disability, lots of shopping/luggage, pushchairs, wheelchair users with the ramp having to be used, over boarding of passengers? If anything these examples slow up the service yet are a necessary part of travel. To say banning cash fares would improve time by suggesting it's time consuming is unrealistic. To say also that it would be saving on admin is unrealistic. Surely more time and resources would be required to administer oyster card refunds and payment queries/issues.

FFS - I wasn't suggesting it is done "as dangerously as possible" !!


How do you extract the safety element from such an innocent statement ?

The thread is about cash v cashless isn't it ?


I think it's obvious that my only point is we should not restrict access to buses by stopping cash transactions when boarding.

If they get rid of cash, it will inconvenience people for a bit, and some people will be caught out. Then people will get used to it and plan appropriately.


They shouldn't not do something because a few people can't remember to take their Oyster cards with them to work.

This thread is hilarious. The fact is, once you need to have your Oyster topped up, you will more likely remember to top it up. Central London has been cashless for YEARS. I don't think extending this is going to lead to the rape and pillage feared by those against the policy being brought to the suburbs.


First, if a child loses their Oyster it is certainly cheaper to get them a pay as you go Oyster than pay cash. As has previously been mentioned, any unused credit and the initial cost of the Oyster are REFUNDED when you turn the card in.


You can top up your Oyster Card online in addition to being able to do so at News Agents and stations. If you forget, then you'll be late for what you are doing. Just like if you forget your keys or your phone and need to turn back. Sometimes, forgetfulness has consequences. That's life.


If you lose your Oyster, have cash but no way to acquire a new Oyster because its the middle of the night and you need to get home and you are unsafe then I can see how this could be problematic, particularly in the suburbs. In central London there are more New Agents open late so it might not have posed the same issue it could pose in Greater London. Bus drivers on the night bus should be allowed to use their discretion (and in my experience already do) in these circumstances to let those they perceive to be vulnerable ride for free if they get picked up outside of Central London.

Central London may have been cashless for years but yesterday two sets of tourists boarded a #12 on Regent St (just north of Oxford Cirus) and paid in cash to get to Westminster - one family group asked for "Two adults and one child please" for which they were charged just under a fiver.


Interesting to note that (ime) general enquiries to bus drivers from visitors (particularly where there are language difficulties) hold up journeys in town far more than payments.

LondonMix Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> > You can top up your Oyster Card online in addition

> to being able to do so at News Agents and

> stations. >

>


Whilst it's great to be able to top up your Oyster card online, it's not much help if you don't use trains or the underground and only use buses because you have to activate the top up at a machine before it's credited to your account.

I don't use buses on a daily basis, and never use trains or the underground. It would be a long way out of my way to go to a station just to activate an online purchase, and would actually be much easier to top up at a newsagent. My point was that topping up online isn't necessarily a solution to people who may otherwise need to make an occasional cash payment for a bus fare when they've not been in a position to top up an Oyster card.

Get an oyster


Register it


Set it to top up automatically online (you choose amount)


No more faffing Around with newsagents, cash, machines.


If it gets lost or stolen you can immediately block it and all money on it gets transferred to new card


It is so immeasurably better and more convenient, anyone saying "it's a faff" is a fool to themselves.

Well said



The truth is, if you know you'll need to travel top it up at a news agent. If you don't live near a station and are concerned about emergency travel when the news agent is closed, just always keep a few quid on your oyster in the same way you keep a few quid in your wallet in case of emergency given your circumstances. As SJ mentions this can be done automatically online without you ever having to remember to do it once you've set it up if remembering to keep an emergency balance seems too much effort.

Growlybear Wrote:


> Whilst it's great to be able to top up your Oyster

> card online, it's not much help if you don't use

> trains or the underground and only use buses

> because you have to activate the top up at a

> machine before it's credited to your account.


Whenever I've purchased new cards online (and I have a fair number of them for the family) I've never gone to a train/tube station to activate it... just board the bus and touch in.

Don't think that works for auto-top up, see https://oyster.tfl.gov.uk/oyster/link/0002.do. It's why I never use it, much as I'd like to, I almost never make tube journeys. It's a pain.


Also, last time I tried to top up my oyster past tube closing time, the shops that do it that were open said they couldn't top it up past a certain time, which seems bizarre. Was in the centre of town, thankfully, so could buy a paper ticket from the machine. So I hope they change that if they are going to ban cash payments. Would also have been stuck last week when in a hurry and the newsagents was myseriously shut. Can't see it makes much of a difference to bus speeds allowing the odd cash payment, really, and can think of many instances when it would make life difficult.

If TFL want to do this, they need to change the minimum amount people can put on their cards. Some people can't afford to have ?3.80 on their oyster just so they could top up and use the bus.


What's the total value they reckon just sits on Oyster card and is unused? Disgraceful really.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Granted Shoreditch is still London, but given that the council & organisers main argument for the festival is that it is a local event, for local people (to use your metaphor), there's surprisingly little to back this up. As Blah Blah informatively points out, this is now just a commercial venture with no local connection. Our park is regarded by them as an asset that they've paid to use & abuse. There's never been any details provided of where the attendees are from, but it's still trotted out as a benefit to the local community.  There's never been any details provided of any increase in sales for local businesses, but it's still trotted out as a benefit to the local community.  There's promises of "opportunities" for local people & traders to work at the festival, but, again, no figures to back this up. And lastly, the fee for the whole thing goes 100% to running the Events dept, and the dozens of free events that no-one seems able to identify, and, yes, you guessed it - no details provided for by the council. So again, no tangible benefit for the residents of the area.
    • I mean I hold no portfolio to defend Gala,  but I suspect that is their office.  I am a company director,  my home address is also not registered with Companies House. Also guys this is Peckham not Royston Vasey.  Shoreditch is a mere 20 mins away by train, it's not an offshore bolt hole in Luxembourg.
    • While it is good that GALA have withdrawn their application for a second weekend, local people and councillors will likely have the same fight on their hands for next year's event. In reading the consultation report, I noted the Council were putting the GALA event in the same light as all the other events that use the park, like the Circus, the Fair and even the FOPR fete. ALL of those events use the common, not the park, and cause nothing like the level of noise and/or disruption of the GALA event. Even the two day Irish Festival (for those that remember that one) was never as noisy as GALA. So there is some disingenuity and hypocrisy from the Council on this, something I wll point out in my response to the report. The other point to note was that in past years branches were cut back for the fencing. Last year the council promised no trees would be cut after pushback, but they seem to now be reverting to a position of 'only in agreement with the council's arbourist'. Is this more hypocrisy from 'green' Southwark who seem to once again be ok with defacing trees for a fence that is up for just days? The people who now own GALA don't live in this area. GALA as an event began in Brockwell Park. It then lost its place there to bigger events (that pesumably could pay Lambeth Council more). One of the then company directors lived on the Rye Hill Estate next to the park and that is likely how Peckham Rye came to be the new choice for the event. That person is no longer involved. Today's GALA company is not the same as the 'We Are the Fair' company that held that first event, not the same in scope, aim or culture. And therein lies the problem. It's not a local community led enterprise, but a commercial one, underwritten by a venture capital company. The same company co-run the Rally Event each year in Southwark Park, which btw is licensed as a one day event only. That does seem to be truer to the original 'We Are the Fair' vision, but how much of that is down to GALA as opoosed to 'Bird on the Wire' (the other group organising it) is hard to say.  For local people, it's three days of not being able to open windows, As someone said above, if a resident set up a PA in their back garden and subjected the neighbours to 10 hours of hard dance music every day for three days, the Council would take action. Do not underestimate how distressing that is for many local residents, many of whom are elderly, frail, young, vulnerable. They deserve more respect than is being shown by those who think it's no big deal. And just to be clear, GALA and the council do not consider there to be a breach of db level if the level is corrected within 15 minutes of the breach. In other words, while db levels are set as part of the noise management plan, there is an acknowledgement that a breach is ok if corrected within 15 minutes. That is just not good enough. Local councillors objected to the proposed extension. 75% of those that responded to the consultation locally did not want GALA 26 to take place at all. For me personally, any goodwill that had been built up through the various consultations over recent years was erased with that application for a second weekend, and especially given that when asked if there were plans for that in post 2025 event feedback meetings (following rumours), GALA lied and said there were no plans to expand. I have come to the conclusion that all the effort to appease on some things is merely an exercise in show, to get past the council's threshold for the events licence. They couldn't give a hoot in reality for local people, and people that genuinely care about parkland, don't litter it with noisy festivals either.   
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...