On July 1st, several thousand Los Angeles Community College District (LACCD) students may have been affected in what may well be the TAP Pass program's greatest failure to date, owing to a software update that was not uploaded in time for the student TAP cards issued by the nine campuses that comprise LACCD. Numerous inquiries to Metro and Metro TAP management personnel went unanswered.
Sources close to the problem have stated that they "are still trying to monitor the situation. . . regarding the "fix" that MTA applied to the software yesterday around 1:00 p.m. It was supposed to be downloaded to all train stations within about 4 hours, or by 5:00 p.m., but that didn't actually happen."
For those who were affected, I was also informed that "if you paid for a ticket, the MTA will reimburse you, at least at the Customer Resources office at Union Station, and possibly other locations."
Our source, who will for obvious reasons remain anonymous, also stated that he was "distressed that many MTA employees gave the students answers to the problem which they were obviously fabricating! People can't seem to say, 'I don't know, but I'll try to find out'."
For those students who have been misinformed by TAP, and continue to be vexed by the problem with the card (not to mention the ridiculously long lines at Union Station's Metro ticket window), here are some possibly helpful e-mail contacts to find out about any unresolved TAP pass problems:
David Sutton: SuttonD@metro.net
Hines, Kelly Hines: HINESK@metro.net
CustomerService@taptogo.net
and
Nelson Prudencio: Nelson.Prudencio@acs-inc.com
(This last e-mail is to the agency that is contracted to execute the TAP program; it is also the same agency that oversees the Los Angeles parking violations processing program with LADOT as well as the photo enforcement program—the traffic cameras that take photos of vehicles that run red lights. I have yet to hear of either of the two revenue streams being interrupted, so one wonders what happened with ACS and TAP.)
Along with all the other problems regarding TAP and what appears to be yet another installment of FareGate, one wonders what is in store for straphangers and bus riders now that the City of Los Angeles is issuing IOUs. Perhaps this was an intentional hacking from within TAP's IT or executive offices, as a warning to City Hall? Or was it just gross incompetence?
-BusTard











So...what are the pros of the TAP pass? I've only ever heard horrid tales of malfunction. Thank heavens for my trusty paper monthly pass!
Posted by: Rosemary | 07/03/2009 at 09:52 PM
The benefits of TAP are reaped by the firms that own the system. TAP is not a value-added card; one purchases only a monthly, et al, type of pass. As such, the card should read as valid even if a straphanger/bus rider fails to "tap" the machine, which means that TAPping it serves only those who wish to count people and, most importantly, TRACK people. That would be Cubic and ACS, both of which are deeply involved with national defence industries and government monitoring of private citizens.
Posted by: Randall BusTard | 07/04/2009 at 10:59 AM
It's technology. It has glitches. Granted, there have been a lot of missteps in implementing TAP, but this is also the largest region of the country to ever attempt to do so.
Think of this as a variation on upgrading from Windows XP to Windows Vista only to find your computer won't work right under Vista. At least Metro and Cubic moved faster to solve this problem than Microsoft did to solve theirs.
Posted by: Kymberleigh Richards | 07/07/2009 at 11:44 AM
Well intentioned. Poorly implemented, despite millions spent and over a decade of preparation. I've heard even folks whose opinion matters (and I mean that in the heavyweight political sense) are pissed about how messed up this is.
Posted by: dgabbard | 07/08/2009 at 09:42 AM
I am a disabled metro passenger wich has suffered the problems of the tap I have paid my 2:00 processing fee and sumitted a pllication with mydoctors stement now I can not even get a temporary tap pass as of 8/30/2009 i was told I would have to start the whole process over again
Posted by: Nathaniel Austin | 07/22/2009 at 07:25 PM