Talk:Permit to travel

message: Hi, this is more to do with Template:British railway ticket machines (computerised) than with Permit to travel.  Can I suggest that an article on Autoslot 88 be created and/or added to that template?  Autoslot 88 was a machine that looked very similar to PERTIS but had a large dial to select local destinations that were then printed on the permit-shaped tickets.  LewPot 17:08, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi LewPot; good suggestion, which I will try to include (and write an article for) soon.  It will be a bit stubby until I get the chance to check with some of my ticket-collecting friends who know a bit more about these machines.  Hassocks5489 20:39, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

message: Where a modern self-service ticket machine is not available, or a manned ticket office is closed or not present, these coin operated Permit machines will be present as an alternative. The draw back for these machines is that they accept coined cash only, and do not accept payment from debit or credit cards which are normally acceptable to onboard ticket inspectors, self-service machines, and ticket offices.
Because of this, if a "Revenue Protection Inspector" holds an individual at their destination and they do not have a ticket or a permit because they boarded a train where only these coin operated permit machines exist, and there was no ticket inspector on the train, and that Protection Inspector attempts to issue a Penalty Fare as a result; the simple fact that the machine does not accept card payments is acceptable. Card payments are accepted everywhere else on the network, so it is unreasonable to expect that a passenger should have the correct coin cash available, when card payments make up the majority payment method used to purchase tickets. The Protection Inspector should not issue a Penalty Fare in this instance, or at the very least, the appeals office will accept "I only had my card and no cash" as an acceptable reason to revoke the penalty fare.
The above section removed by User:Islander for (a) entirely unsourced, b) dubious, and c) not entirely related to the article subject)
Reasons for re-inclusion...
a) The above method worked for me, so I am the primary source, my userpage can be referenced.
b) The law is a grey area, and law must follow common sense. The law says that passengers must be given "sufficient opportunity" to buy a ticket, I believe it is reasonable to assume that coin cash only payment methods is not a sufficient opportunity when card payments are most common.Gilligan, Andrew. "10 ways to avoid penalty fares on trains"
c) The section relates to the machines placement as the last resort for purchasing 'tickets', when in fact they are not fit for purpose.
The National Rail specify that credit/debits cards are an officially acceptable method of payment, they also state that boarding a train without a ticket will still render the passenger liable for a penalty fare. National Rail "Acceptable Payment Types". This still however means that the penalty fare can be voided in these circumstances when the permit machine doesn't accept a card payment, as it is reasonable to say, that 1) National Rail state that card payments are acceptable. 2) The Operator does not provide a means to purchase a ticket with the acceptable payment method. 3) The passenger boarded the train unable to purchase the ticket, and therefor there is no legal basis on which to enforce the penalty fare.
I suggest editing the section to include these new references, or moving the section to the article Penalty fare, and then linking this article to that.
Simbolo.sam (talk) 11:45, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, regarding your first point, primary sources are not acceptable on Wikipedia. See Wikipedia:Original Research - to quote just one bit, " Wikipedia is not the place to publish your own opinions, experiences, arguments, or conclusions.". Please provide reliable (see WP:RELIABLE), secondary sources to back up this section. TalkIslander 12:55, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, just to clarify, primary sources are sometimes acceptable - my mistake. However, in this instance, you count as original research, so cannot be referenced. Regarding the first link your provide, I'm not entirely sure how suitable a reference it is - I'm looking into it. It's clearly biased towards not paying penalty fares, however, it's not exactly encouraging fare evasion. Not sure - the input of others would be appreciated. (As I'm sure you realise, the National Rail link doesn't reference this section, with the exception that cards are acceptable forms of payment). TalkIslander 13:03, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Dispute Removed Section: Electronic Payments