Case Studies

Pradeep attempted to top up his myki at a Card Vending Machine (CVM) at a tram stop. His myki was not credited, but $126 was debited from his bank account.

He contacted the PTV Call Centre on 23 October and was advised to send them a copy of his bank statement showing the debit of $126 to support his claim for a refund. After he resent his bank account information twice, PTV initiated an investigation and confirmed with the system contractor that it was a case of inadvertent myki purchase. This means that instead of topping up his myki, Pradeep inadvertently purchased a new myki for $6 which was then topped up with $120 and in all likelihood taken from the CVM by another consumer.

On 10 November Pradeep was advised that matter would need to be escalated within PTV for further response. The customer contacted the PTO on 1 December to make a complaint as he had not received a further response from PTV. Because Pradeep had had a number of contacts with PTV, the complaint was allocated for investigation.

PTV responded to the PTO and apologised for not providing a timely response. PTV looked at the travel history report for the inadvertently purchased myki and advised that the travel history was distinctly different to Pradeep’s travel history. PTV was confident that Pradeep was unaware of the inadvertent purchase, and someone else found the myki in the CVM and used it. PTV arranged to have $126 myki money credited to Pradeep’s myki and the complaint was resolved.

Joanne attended Winchelsea train station to catch a train to Melbourne. On arrival at the station, she found a notice advising that due to track works, a coach replacement service was operating.

The notice didn’t indicate timetable or route details other than to advise passengers to expect delays of up to 40 minutes. It also didn’t specify the departure location for the replacement service. As V/Line’s regular coach service normally operates from a bus stop in town Joanne thought she should wait there.

When the coach replacement service arrived, it drove straight past her.

Joanne said the incident caused her a great deal of confusion and stress. She contacted V/Line through PTV a number of times seeking an explanation and then contacted us because she was dissatisfied with their response.

Following investigation by our office, we established that the replacement coach service operates as both express and stopping all stations. The coach seen by Joanne was an express service. We confirmed that the notice did not contain advice about which services were express or where to wait for the replacement coach.

V/Line acknowledged the issues highlighted by the complaint and advised that future communications about replacement coach services would include information about where consumers should wait for these services.

V/Line also acknowledged that information provided to Joanne by their customer feedback team was not clear and likely to cause confusion.

In recognition of the inconvenience and distress to Joanne, V/Line offered Joanne a complimentary travel voucher as a goodwill gesture. Joanne accepted V/Line’s offer and the case was closed.

Michael complained to us about a penalty fare.

He believed he successfully touched on his myki at a suburban train station before boarding a train; however he was unable to exit the myki barriers at Southern Cross station and approached customer service officers for help. He was directed to AOs who issued him with the penalty fare of $75 for travelling without a valid ticket. He complained to the PTO on the basis that the myki reader at the local station must be faulty. Michael claimed that he touched on his myki and the myki reader displayed the message that his touch on was successful. PTV declined his request for a refund so the PTO investigated the matter.

The PTO reviewed CCTV footage from Michael’s local station which showed Michael holding his myki to the reader for a few seconds and looking at the screen. The footage does not capture what is on the screen or the audio. PTV reported that device reports showed that there were no faults, downtime or errors with the myki reader and PTV was unable to determine why a successful touch on was not recorded. PTV maintained its position that Michael made an informed decision to pay a penalty fare after travelling without a valid ticket, and as such Michael was not entitled to a refund.

However the PTO accepted in good faith Michael’s statement that the myki reader displayed a ‘touch on successful’ message after he touched on. The CCTV footage supported his claim that he had taken reasonable steps to touch on his myki and travel with a valid ticket and he had a positive balance on his myki. After looking at all the circumstances, the PTO concluded that Michael did not knowingly travel without a valid ticket and that he took reasonable steps to ensure his ticket was valid.

After further discussions with the PTO, PTV agreed to make a goodwill payment of $75 to Michael and the complaint was resolved.