[ST Forum] Review practice of retaining ez-link cards
-
In that particular instance, I suppose you've got to question what happens to the interest of the consumer if the card were actually fault-free and the problem was one of the card-reader's.Originally posted by LazerLordz:What's the use of retaining the card if it's spoilt. The person may not use (i.e Tap) it in any bus either.
On a sidenote, I suppose as with so many daft policies on offer in this regime, there's only so much you can do to counter their measures - and most of their measures hardly make much sense to begin with.
-
I never understood whatsoever the rationale for the EZ-Link card. Fancy technology as it is, there was no impetus for it, and there was never even a need for it. Someone high up there thought it would look good to his political masters or tried to justify the extra funding for his dept and then set to work on making such a card.
Unfortunately they obviously overlooked ease of use in a less than ideal environment. Typical of poor beta and alpha testing. What's worse was that later, despite the extra costs of the cards, they obviously underestimated the costs, and made us OWN the cards. Then coupled with the multiple problems that besieged the project, there was an uproar. I have no idea whether they even fixed that bug with people getting charged more when they leave the front door.
It is just symptomatic of a lot of stupid policies forced down our throats. Looks great on paper, but implementation terrible to the extreme. Otherwise, it was terrible, and it was forced down our throats regardless. Well done. -
Why is the EZ-link card being used as a student pass in the first place?
It's like turning an IC into a cash card, which makes it even more enticing to 'steal'. -
'Money face' of transport companies rears its head.
-
We have more than 1 card each in our house, and the only problem I have with my ez link card is when my wife borrows it without telling me. Good to learn about faulty ez link cards but still not sure what to do, can the bus driver chase me off the bus if my card is faulty and I don't have cash to pay?
I applaud everybody who is contributing to the discussion in this thread. I am learning something new here. In other threads, I see continuing personal bashing and names calling, from both sides, the anti pap and the pro- government, on practically every issue, dead wood, scumbag....
-
There's an NS card too, in case you don't know of it.Originally posted by BillyBong:Why is the EZ-link card being used as a student pass in the first place?
It's like turning an IC into a cash card, which makes it even more enticing to 'steal'.
However, back in my time, they only issued it to clerks and stay outs. -
As if they care about Singaporeans... Ministers needs come first... Big companies' needs come second... the rest of us are treated like dirt nia....
-
Actually, if one is to think of it, it helps to save costs (well, for a consumer).Originally posted by Fingolfin_Noldor:I never understood whatsoever the rationale for the EZ-Link card. Fancy technology as it is, there was no impetus for it, and there was never even a need for it. Someone high up there thought it would look good to his political masters or tried to justify the extra funding for his dept and then set to work on making such a card.
In the past, when adults were still using fare cards, it's a static price. There's no rebates when you transfer. Now that ez-link cards replaced it, it makes calculation of rebates simpler.
One could also say using the fare cards are cheaper, because nobody knew what price you pressed. But if caught, the penalty is heavy. You end up paying double of what you need. Automatic systems reduces the chances of it, but for those who tries to beat it, is just asking for trouble. -
You mean 11B? That was issued to everyone, not just 'clerks and stay outs'.Originally posted by Fingolfin_Noldor:There's an NS card too, in case you don't know of it.
However, back in my time, they only issued it to clerks and stay outs.
And usually, that was because your IC was 'impounded' by MINDEF for the duration of NS - hence 11B = IC.
The question remains: why is EZ-link used as a student pass?????? -
No, there is a separate EZ-Link card. It was issued from 2002. I have mine at home. You are probably too old to have seen it.Originally posted by BillyBong:You mean 11B? That was issued to everyone, not just 'clerks and stay outs'.
And usually, that was because your IC was 'impounded' by MINDEF for the duration of NS - hence 11B = IC.
The question remains: why is EZ-link used as a student pass??????
The 11B only has a smart card chip used for log in access to SAF terminals and for smart card and cash card uses.
As for why students use it as a student pass, the EZ-link card is now the container for the bus passes. Same goes for the NS bus passes. -
11B and NSF EZ-Link card different.
-
Exciting...so many cards flying around, we must really 'believe' in multiple redundancy...Originally posted by Fingolfin_Noldor:No, there is a separate EZ-Link card. It was issued from 2002. I have mine at home. You are probably too old to have seen it.
The 11B only has a smart card chip used for log in access to SAF terminals and for smart card and cash card uses.
As for why students use it as a student pass, the EZ-link card is now the container for the bus passes. Same goes for the NS bus passes.
The europeans who use a validator system must be laughing their socks off....their payment system remains cheap cardboard tickets while they invest heavily in GPS tracking to time their schedules acccurately, a move which has reaped handsome dividends.
With our grand plan to push for paper-less electronic transactions on our transport system and we can't even get that right...how to claim 'WORLD CLASS'? -
Because the people who decided to do the implementation assumed that it would adopted widely and obviously underestimated the costs. You then have NETS, Ez-Link and other things around.Originally posted by BillyBong:Exciting...so many cards flying around, we must really 'believe' in multiple redundancy...
The europeans who use a validator system must be laughing their socks off....their payment system remains cheap cardboard tickets while they invest heavily in GPS tracking to time their schedules acccurately, a move which has reaped handsome dividends.
With our grand plan to push for paper-less electronic transactions on our transport system and we can't even get that right...how to claim 'WORLD CLASS'?
This is why the Govt should stay out of business. Civil servants simply do not have the aptitude to make business decisions. Yet.... -
There is no logic into confiscating ez-link cards at all. In the first place, when the student ez link card expire, the card will automaticaly change & turn into adult fare. It's not like the card fare remains students price forever & we can get away with it.
Next, there's a pic of the person on it, WITH your name & IC no.. What makes the SBS to have a right to take the card away? Hello, im not gonna give away my IC no. freely away to some random uncles who drive the bus.
Anyway even if the card is a stolen 1, who is that stupid to tap it without hiding it from the drivers? -
---
-
We have a Govt who thinks it is above the law, and if the law gets in the way, it has the power to rewrite the constitution at its whim.Originally posted by LazerLordz:The last point is moot. When you tap it, it's going to have a loud error sound.
So you can't even cheat with it.
Thus, we can conclude that if the student ID is part of the EZ-Link card, it is a legitimate form of identification, and more importantly, if the child is under the age of 12, and has no NRIC, it is the sole "official" form of ID that he or she has.
The bus driver is not a legal entity for law enforcement, and how can one monpolistic transport company's regulations regarding retention of ID supersede the Constitution of Singapore?
It's mind boggling, and to put it simply, typically tao tiah. -
Originally posted by Boy Stratus:
The last point is moot. When you tap it, it's going to have a loud error sound.
There is no logic into confiscating ez-link cards at all. In the first place, when the student ez link card expire, the card will automaticaly change & turn into adult fare. It's not like the card fare remains students price forever & we can get away with it.
Next, there's a pic of the person on it, [b]WITH your name & IC no.. What makes the SBS to have a right to take the card away? Hello, im not gonna give away my IC no. freely away to some random uncles who drive the bus.
Anyway even if the card is a stolen 1, who is that stupid to tap it without hiding it from the drivers? [/b]
So you can't even cheat with it.
Thus, we can conclude that if the student ID is part of the EZ-Link card, it is a legitimate form of identification, and more importantly, if the child is under the age of 12, and has no NRIC, it is the sole "official" form of ID that he or she has.
The bus driver is not a legal entity for law enforcement, and how can one monpolistic transport company's regulations regarding retention of ID supersede the Constitution of Singapore?
Let's see, under the NATIONAL REGISTRATION ACT
(CHAPTER 201), 13 (1E) 1) Any person who unlawfully deprives any person of an identity card, is committing an offence under this act.
With regards to a case below
----
Excerpt of a letter by LEE Boon Hwee, Deputy Head (Public Relations) for Director Singapore Immigration & Registration, to The Forum, The Straits Times of 2 Mar 2002
NOT ILLEGAL FOR SECURITY GUARDS TO HOLD NRIC
"...The National Registration Act authorises certain officials, for instance the police and immigration officers, to retain a person's identity card (NRIC) for the purpose of investigation.
"Security guards at buildings, condominiums and other premises are not authorised by the Act to retain a visitor's NRIC.
"However, it is not illegal for them to do so if the visitor authorises them - by the act of surrendering the NRIC - to hold his NRIC as a condition for entry, or in exchange for a visitor's pass. This is a private arrangement between the two parties concerned.
----
Now we are back to the issue of a child below the age of 15, who legally does not need a NRIC, and those below 12, who generally DO NOT have an NRIC by practise.
The above case mentions that private parties may engage in NRIC-exchange for an entry pass to a premise. However, the case of public transport is different, because there is no such exchange between the commuters and the company.
Therefore, how legal is it for a representative of a commercial entity to RETAIN a legitimate form of ID for children below the age of 15 based on the fact that there is no reciprocated pass of travel or entry in return for this "private" transaction, given that the Student ID issued by MOE on the EZ-Link system is the only form of national ID for these individuals.
I rest my case. -
Exactly! But most of those drivers argue & said they are just working according to their boss/HQ, which really pisses me off.Originally posted by LazerLordz:The last point is moot. When you tap it, it's going to have a loud error sound.
So you can't even cheat with it.
Thus, we can conclude that if the student ID is part of the EZ-Link card, it is a legitimate form of identification, and more importantly, if the child is under the age of 12, and has no NRIC, it is the sole "official" form of ID that he or she has.
The bus driver is not a legal entity for law enforcement, and how can one monpolistic transport company's regulations regarding retention of ID supersede the Constitution of Singapore?
Let's see, under the NATIONAL REGISTRATION ACT
(CHAPTER 201), 13 (1E) 1) Any person who unlawfully deprives any person of an identity card, is committing an offence under this act.
With regards to a case below
----
Excerpt of a letter by LEE Boon Hwee, Deputy Head (Public Relations) for Director Singapore Immigration & Registration, to The Forum, The Straits Times of 2 Mar 2002
NOT ILLEGAL FOR SECURITY GUARDS TO HOLD NRIC
"...The National Registration Act authorises certain officials, for instance the police and immigration officers, to retain a person's identity card (NRIC) for the purpose of investigation.
"Security guards at buildings, condominiums and other premises are not authorised by the Act to retain a visitor's NRIC.
"However, it is not illegal for them to do so if the visitor authorises them - by the act of surrendering the NRIC - to hold his NRIC as a condition for entry, or in exchange for a visitor's pass. This is a private arrangement between the two parties concerned.
----
Now we are back to the issue of a child below the age of 15, who legally does not need a NRIC, and those below 12, who generally DO NOT have an NRIC by practise.
The above case mentions that private parties may engage in NRIC-exchange for an entry pass to a premise. However, the case of public transport is different, because there is no such exchange between the commuters and the company.
Therefore, how legal is it for a representative of a commercial entity to RETAIN a legitimate form of ID for children below the age of 15 based on the fact that there is no reciprocated pass of travel or entry in return for this "private" transaction, given that the Student ID issued by MOE on the EZ-Link system is the only form of national ID for these individuals.
I rest my case.
-
What do you mean you don't understand the rationale? It's a poor and faulty imitation by this regime as a sequel to the Octopus Card used in Hong Kong.Originally posted by Fingolfin_Noldor:I never understood whatsoever the rationale for the EZ-Link card. No prizes for guessing where the idea of EZ-link cards being used as cashless smartcards (ie.at McDonalds) originated from...
Back to the point about bus drivers wanting to retain the EZ-link cards. As far as I know, should you refuse to handover the EZ-link card as requested, all the driver can do is get in touch with the operations control centre who will, in turn, deploy a staff/inspector to attend to you (although that's their "official" policy, I've yet to see an incident going to that extreme). That said, even that extreme would beat the idea of having your concession card retained, especially for those who are eligible and have purchased the concessions. -
Someone needs to call for consultation and a meeting with these people to tell them that this is unacceptable corporate behavior.Originally posted by Boy Stratus:Exactly! But most of those drivers argue & said they are just working according to their boss/HQ, which really pisses me off. -
Show your bus pass or pay the full fare
Letter from Tammy Tan
Director, Corporate Communications SBS Transit
I REFER to the letter, "Student made to pay adult fare" by Ms Ang Su Sze Carolyn (Aug 7). Concessionary travel is a privilege accorded only to holders of concessionary cards.
TransitLink, which issues these privilege cards, has clearly-defined terms and conditions governing the use of these cards. One of these conditions states that a student must produce a valid concession card to enjoy concessionary travel.
Children who are of school-going age and donning a school uniform may not necessarily be attending school. These children are not entitled to concessionary fares. The student concession card is therefore the only identification that allows the bus captain to recognise holders who are entitled to a concessionary fare. Without this, the commuter has to pay adult fare.
SBS Transit bus captains are right to enforce this rule. We do not speak for other operators. With regards to Ms Ang's allegation that we were slow in replying to her feedback, I would like to point out that she sent in her comments on July 29, which was a Sunday, and she got her reply on Aug 2.
http://www.todayonline.com/articles/204887.asp in response to.............
She forgot to bring her pass but was in school uniform
Letter from Ang Su Sze Carolyn
I AM a junior college student. On July 27 at about 4.40pm, I boarded SBS service 86 (licence plate SBS 204E) with a fellow schoolmate. We were both wearing our school uniforms at the time.
I had forgotten to bring my wallet that day and hence did not have my student pass with me, leaving me with no choice but to pay the fare by coins.
To my indignation and surprise, the bus captain insisted that I pay the adult fare, even when it was quite evident I was a student.
He mumbled something about having to account to the company over a certain policy, but did not make himself clear about the details.
Prior to boarding his bus, I had alighted from an SMRT bus without encountering such a rule.
I can only guess that such a rule had been put in place to deter members of the public from taking advantage of the student concession.
But, it is preposterous to suspect that I would put on a school uniform just to avoid paying a few extra cents.
I was also travelling with a fellow schoolmate who was in her uniform as well. This should have made it even more obvious that I was not masquerading as a student.
In the end, I reluctantly paid the adult fare but did not receive a satisfactory explanation as to why I was denied the concession rate.
I gave feedback to SBS Transit via their website on July 29 and have not received any response to date. I would like them to clarify their stand on this issue.
If the person is clearly a student, why should he or she not be accorded the concession rate?
Shouldn't the bus captains use their discretion when a student has a valid reason for not carrying a student pass? She forgot to bring her pass but was in school uniform.
http://www.todayonline.com/articles/204337.asp -
i once tap my card and i think neber deh, someone else tapped his and i tot dats mine so i went ahead. wah lao, the bus driver shouted at me like i intentionally wanted to cheat his money lidat. "OY! YOU COME OVER HERE!" and gib me his guai lan face and stared at me. den everyone looked at me.
den i deh the card and it said "PASS USAGE". why the fark i wanna cheat his money when im on concession pass!? siao eh.
den at the back i said loud loud "WHY I WANNA CHEAT BUS FARE!? I'M ON CONCESSION!" -
Show your bus pass or pay the full fare
Oh for goodness sake, show some common sense.
Letter from Tammy Tan
Director, Corporate Communications SBS Transit
I REFER to the letter, "Student made to pay adult fare" by Ms Ang Su Sze Carolyn (Aug 7). Concessionary travel is a privilege accorded only to holders of concessionary cards.
TransitLink, which issues these privilege cards, has clearly-defined terms and conditions governing the use of these cards. One of these conditions states that a student must produce a valid concession card to enjoy concessionary travel.
Children who are of school-going age and donning a school uniform may not necessarily be attending school. These children are not entitled to concessionary fares. The student concession card is therefore the only identification that allows the bus captain to recognise holders who are entitled to a concessionary fare. Without this, the commuter has to pay adult fare.
SBS Transit bus captains are right to enforce this rule. We do not speak for other operators. With regards to Ms Ang's allegation that we were slow in replying to her feedback, I would like to point out that she sent in her comments on July 29, which was a Sunday, and she got her reply on Aug 2.
http://www.todayonline.com/articles/204887.asp
Not to mention that her grammar has holes.