Yellow revenue inspection devices having problems with Android and Google Wallet
Request ID: FOI-3567-2324 Date published: 30 January 2024
You asked
Ever since TfL introduced the new, yellow, revenue inspection devices, they have been unable to read my Android mobile that I use to tap in and out with. It comes up as "invalid card", and I then have to explain that my mobile works to tap in and out at gates, it works to tap in on buses and it works as a payment method in every shop where contactless payment is accepted. Therefore, there is nothing wrong with my mobile as a method of payment.
This leads to my being falsely accused of fare evasion every single time a revenue inspector attempts to read my mobile. Some ticket inspectors are very understanding and say that this happens "often". Some are less understanding and say that I have to "sort it out". Some are downright rude. I have been trying to sort this out for nearly one year now, but every time I contact TfL via the website, I get a different reply. The last reply I got said that this was going to be looked into and the technical team were going to get back to me.
So, please can you let me know 1) when was this issue was first identified? 2) when will a simple software update be released to upgrade the revenue inspection devices? 3) why revenue inspectors say that they are not allowed to accept my showing them my Google Wallet that clearly shows that I have tapped in as proof?
I must reiterate, this has only happened since the new yellow handheld devices were introduced. It was not a problem before. And it is very distressing to be falsely accused of fare evasion.
We answered
Our ref: FOI-3567-2324
Thank you for your request received by Transport for London (TfL) on 07 January 2024 asking for information on revenue inspection devices.
Your request has been considered under the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and our information access policy.
I can confirm that we do hold the information you require. You asked:
1. when was this issue was first identified?
To provide the information you have requested would exceed the ‘appropriate limit’ of £450 set by the Freedom of Information (Appropriate Limit and Fees) Regulations 2004. Under section 12 of the FOI Act, we are not obliged to comply with requests if we estimate that the cost of determining whether we hold the information, locating and retrieving it and extracting it from other information would exceed the appropriate limit. In this instance, we estimate that the time required to gather the information to answer your request would exceed 18 hours which, at £25 per hour (the rate stipulated by the Regulations), exceeds the ‘appropriate limit’. When issues are picked up in the field or during testing and are reported by individual Revenue Inspectors, they are logged by our Service team and investigated. Although your request can take the form of a question, rather than a request for specific documents, TfL does not have to answer your question if it would require the creation of new information or the provision of a judgement, explanation, advice or opinion that was not already recorded at the time of your request. If you have specific questions relating to these topics we may be more easily able to respond to these than to a request for any information held.
2. when will a simple software update be released to upgrade the revenue inspection devices?
To date, this has not been identified as a wider issue affecting all, or a known subset of Android devices. As such, there is no planned update to the Revenue Inspection devices.
3. why revenue inspectors say that they are not allowed to accept my showing them my Google Wallet that clearly shows that I have tapped in as proof?
Customers need to tap their Contactless card or device onto the Revenue Inspection Device in order to have the inspection recorded and processed. Most revenue Inspectors will not accept a Google or Apple Wallet transaction record (recent activity) as proof that a customer has tapped in or out. This information is not always available at the point of inspection and is not consistently displayed across the numerous devices and application versions in circulation.
If you are not satisfied with this response please see the attached information sheet for details of your right to appeal.
Yours sincerely,
Tahsin Prima FOI Case Officer General Counsel Transport for London
