Print at Home Ticket / 'e-ticket' - Refused travel

[jon0844]

I think it is valid to question WHY there's a rule to have a code printed when it's accepted these days that the aim for 'paperless offices' should encourage the use of displays to convey information that we once printed.

Yes, there's a problem with some scanners and that's likely the real issue but that's for the industry to solve - like big retailers have (well, not Sainsbury's in most stores) as there's no logical reason to stop someone showing a fixed code on a phone screen.

 

[sarahj]

What you have to keep in mind is the railways ability in this fragmented age, is to keep up. As on board staff we are working with what can be classed as 'ancient' equipment. So, we have no way of reading QI codes and bar codes and such like. We carry extra stuff just to read oysters and keys.

There are some print at home tickets that are used for Gatwick Express and I do see them on my Southern trains. (if they want to waste their money, so be it). There are QI readers at Gatwick for them.

Perhaps soon, perhaps, we will get equipment to read them, but until then a ticket for an advanced trip must be printed before travel. *

*sometimes during ticket machine issues, this may not be possible, but we do get told. Does not help when someone goes, I've got a copy on my phone, ooohh, it's dead.:roll:

 

[najaB]

I think it is valid to question WHY there's a rule to have a code printed when it's accepted these days that the aim for 'paperless offices' should encourage the use of displays to convey information that we once printed.

Agreed, it's a good question. And it may well turn out that the answer is "because" rather than any technical limitation. What we should avoid though is castigating staff for following the rule.

 

[Clip]

I think it is valid to question WHY there's a rule to have a code printed when it's accepted these days that the aim for 'paperless offices' should encourage the use of displays to convey information that we once printed.

.

Yesw that is a valid question but its still irrelevant even if you have used your phone at concert venues,dentists and airplanes. The simple fact is that some times you are required to print your ticket to be valid for travel and if thats what is asked then thats what you must do. There is no ambiguity about it.

As sarahj has said the railway is slow at implementing new things and until they abolish print at home then print at home is what you must do.

 

[jon0844]

Agreed, it's a good question. And it may well turn out that the answer is "because" rather than any technical limitation. What we should avoid though is castigating staff for following the rule.

Of course. Staff are just following orders and can't be blamed if they're given silly orders.

And, no, I don't think can invoke Godwin's Law here!

 

[londonbridge]

You are supposed to have the card you used to pay for the ticket, so nobody else can use the ticket. I had a problem with this a few years ago when the card I had used for the ticket was cancelled because somebody had tried to hack an online account. The new card had a different expiry date and last 4 digits.

I have used print-at-home tickets on four occasions so far and have not been asked to show my card or any other form of ID, the guard has just looked at the ticket, said 'thank you' and moved on.

 

[sauropod99]

I have used print-at-home tickets on four occasions so far and have not been asked to show my card or any other form of ID, the guard has just looked at the ticket, said 'thank you' and moved on.

This was several years ago, boarding at Euston. They accepted another form of ID on that occasion, but they did used to check. It makes sense - how are they going to prevent people using multiple copies of the same ticket if they don't check ID as well?

 

[sparks2000]

Perhaps when these tickets were introduced there was concern about how easy they are to alter with intent to commit fraud. Printing the ticket makes it easier for the ticket staff to retain the ticket as evidence of fraud. Virgin at about the same time were using m-tickets that had to be activated before the journey started.

It doesn't explain why the rules are simpler now - perhaps the barcode contains more information now and there are more online ticket readers available that can be used to check tickets quickly. Airlines e-tickets are only issued where the journeys are made through airports that are online.

 

[AlterEgo]

Perhaps when these tickets were introduced there was concern about how easy they are to alter with intent to commit fraud. Printing the ticket makes it easier for the ticket staff to retain the ticket as evidence of fraud. Virgin at about the same time were using m-tickets that had to be activated before the journey started.

It doesn't explain why the rules are simpler now - perhaps the barcode contains more information now and there are more online ticket readers available that can be used to check tickets quickly. Airlines e-tickets are only issued where the journeys are made through airports that are online.

An e-ticket means something totally different in the airline world.

Do you mean a print at home boarding pass?

 

[ManchesterTim]

I have travelled in Europe, in particular Switzerland, Germany and Austria using electronic tickets with QR codes. They used a handheld scanner to read the ticket and then swiped the credit card that I purchased them with. The codes where shown on phone screens by myself and other passengers showed them on paper as well.

I returned to the UK on Monday and using a Virgin mobile ticket to travel from Euston to Stockport. This was provided as an image with a QR code and also a time and date for the advance ticket details. When I showed the ticket at the barriers at Euston on a phone the only thing that was checked was the date and time (very easy to change). The QR code was never scanned either by platform staff or by train crew which was somewhat unexpected.

I'm aware this doesn't help the OP, but I was very impressed with the Swiss / German / Austrian ticket process. I could buy via an App that showed me the full travel details as well as my tickets, it all "just worked".

 

[yorkie]

...When I showed the ticket at the barriers at Euston on a phone the only thing that was checked was the date and time (very easy to change). The QR code was never scanned either by platform staff or by train crew which was somewhat unexpected...

Yes, easy to change, and yes thorough checks are rare, but do sometimes happen (as snowghty found out; see I got caught with a fake ticket )

 

[Master29]

It is irrelevant arguing whether the ticket should have been printed or not after the event. The terms and conditions are as such and that`s what counts, even if there may be valid points as to why this shouldn't be the case. All you can do is count on Virgins good will (it does occasionally happen) to reverse the decision. I think there was a recent case on here about a similar thing where they did indeed reverse the decision.

 

[hounddog]

It is irrelevant arguing whether the ticket should have been printed or not after the event. The terms and conditions are as such and that`s what counts, .

Of course now that consumer law applies fully to the railway that may no longer be the case.

 

[Clip]

Of course now that consumer law applies fully to the railway that may no longer be the case.

Thats surely if you think that having to print it is an unfair T&C - Im guessing thats what you are alluding too?

 

[mattr2102]

mattr2102, I think the crucial question in all this is right in the middle of one of your initial comments on this situation:I won't dissagree with you (though that's not the conclusion I came to when buying a 'Print at Home' ticket).

But whatever sense you draw from the contract you entered into, the crucial question is exactly that - what is the contract that you entered into?
Was it one in which :-
1) a Railway Company agreed to convey you from one place to another, and
2) you agreed to print and present a ticket which would authorise that travel?

It was, wasn't it?

If the question of 'sense', or your curiosity in understanding 'why' such an option for the contract is offered, is paramount, then surely that would be an excellently appropriate question for a widely publicised debate among informed people in the various communities involved, such as passenger groups, railway companies, the government's Transport Department, IT contractors, local authorities and others. But NOT as an after-the-event attempt to undermine an entirely correct attempt to recover the fare due from a passenger who didn't print their print at home ticket?

1 - In my initial post I could not have been more clear in acknowledging that I was in breach of the conditions, this was again repeated in subsequent posts.

2 - The question is clearly an attempt to understand the WHY of this restriction. Again, I thought this was fairly clear.

3 - “But NOT as an after-the-event attempt to undermine an entirely correct attempt to recover the fare due from a passenger who didn't print their print at home ticket?”

I’m simply questioning why this condition exists which nobody has so far been able to answer (including yourself or anyone at Virgin).

If this is before or after the event is of absolutely no relevance at all, the question is still entirely valid.

“attempt to recover a fare” also seems like an odd phrase to use, I hadn’t travelled, they weren’t recovering anything, they were simply refusing travel.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Thats surely if you think that having to print it is an unfair T&C - Im guessing thats what you are alluding too?

I can't imagine why it would be considered unreasonable by a Court that a product called a "print at home ticket" might have to, err, be printed at home.

 

[najaB]

...might have to, err, be printed at home.

Or, at the very least, that it needs to be printed even if not at home.

 

[Clip]

1 - In my initial post I could not have been more clear in acknowledging that I was in breach of the conditions, this was again repeated in subsequent posts.

2 - The question is clearly an attempt to understand the WHY of this restriction. Again, I thought this was fairly clear.


I’m simply questioning why this condition exists which nobody has so far been able to answer (including yourself or anyone at Virgin).

#
It doesnt matter 'why' it exists - the simple fact is that it 'does' exist. Thast all you need to know

I can't imagine why it would be considered unreasonable by a Court that a product called a "print at home ticket" might have to, err, be printed at home.

Me neither but as I havent had an answer off the person I quoted then I guess we'll never know what they meant

 

[rs101]

1 - In my initial post I could not have been more clear in acknowledging that I was in breach of the conditions, this was again repeated in subsequent posts.

2 - The question is clearly an attempt to understand the WHY of this restriction. Again, I thought this was fairly clear.

If you were to try and work out why many of the rules in place around railway ticketing exist, I'd think you'd have a breakdown within a week or so..

 

[PeterC]

I can't imagine why it would be considered unreasonable by a Court that a product called a "print at home ticket" might have to, err, be printed at home.

No problem with that, on the other hand if something was described as an e-ticket then I would expect a copy on my phone to be valid.

If I wasn't told that an "e-ticket" was actually a "print at home" ticket until after purchase then I would be talking to my local Trading Standards Department.