Tag Archives | NRA

Save money on calls to eFlow

It took us multiple unanswered e-mails and eventually the submission of a Freedom of Information request to the NRA, but our SayNoTo1890.com website finally got a geographical alternative for the eFlow customer service number 1890 50 10 50.

  • eFlow Customer Service 1890 50 10 50 – Call 01 6602511 and select the eFlow call centre option
If you have a contract with any of the mobile or landline providers that provides you with bundles of minutes each month, you can now call this number instead of the 1890 number. These calls will then come from your minutes bundle rather than you being charged upwards of 35c per minute on your mobile.

 

Click here for the SayNoTo1890.com Website.

Click here for the SayNoTo1890.com Website.

0

NRA using their technology to force drivers use their toll service?

Since the advent of the barrier free tolling, one or two readers of the Value Ireland Blog have voiced their suspicions that the NRA sensors at the M50 toll plaza are selectively not identifying cars using non-eflow tags in order to snuff out competition to the eflow tags themselves.

Take one reader, for example, who has an eazypass tag. For 6 times out of 10 trips through the M50 toll area, their eazypass tag wasn’t recognised by the eflow equipment, and 6 non-payment lettera were sent out. The other 4 times, the eazypass tag was recognised successfully and money was deducted from the eazypass account. On some days, the tag was recognised in the morning, but not in the evening. On other occasions, it was recognised going southbound on one day, but not the next day. So, the tag works – and the tag position is correct within the car, yet more than half the time, they’re getting the non-payment letters.

As some of you may know, I like a conspiracy theory as much as the next person, maybe more than most, but I think this deserves to be looked at. Basically the NRA are working both sides of this M50 tolling fiasco. I can imagine that the temptation to playing both sides of the game and gaining an unfair advantage might be hard to ignore.

The NRA, through their company eflow, are providing the hardware and software required to manage the scanning and billing of cars and lorrys that pass through their toll area. Therefore, all toll tag and service providers must interact with eflow to ensure that their tags are suitable to be used, that their customers are identified going through the toll area, and that the correct companies are notified of charges incurred by their customers for such trips across the M50.

Yet eflow also provides a service in competition to all of those 3rd party toll tag service providers. eflow provides it’s own tag service, as well as providing the number recognition and pay as you go service.

Hypothetically then, consider if the part of eflow responsible for identifying tags and number plates of cars sets their systems up to only sometimes identify all of the 3rd party tags of the eflow tag competitors. By doing this, many more non-eflow tag holders would get the toll overdue paper work and notification of non-payment of toll letters than really should do.

And hypothetically, every time a driver who has a non-eflow tag gets such an unwarranted letter, they’re then forced to ring the part of eflow responsible for billing to get the mess sorted out. And, hypothetically, no matter what the user says to eflow about their competitor tag being set up correctly, and working some of the time but not all of the time, the eflow customer service people maintain that the problem isn’t on their side, but on the side of the competitor tag provider.

And then, hypothetically, the 3rd party tag provider such as eazypass is now so overrun with calls from irate customers who are getting non-payment notifications through no fault of their own that they don’t even answer calls to their own customer service number.

How long then, hypothetically, before the user of the competitor tag decides that it’s not actually worth their while suffering all the grief they’re getting from having to deal with both their own tag service provider and with eflow customer service all the time and can’t be bothered with all the hassle – especially having to follow up regularly to ensure they’re not stung for the extra non-payment of toll fines?

How long, hypothetically then, before the user of the M50 who originally signed up with an eflow tag competitor decides to make their lives easier and just signs up for the eflow tag itself and cut their losses and save themselves the hassle?

0

Do you know the proposed new speed limit on the widened M50?

We received this forwarded e-mail yesterday – a building campaign which we in Value Ireland strongly support.

—— Forwarded Message
From: Barbara Casserly
Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 11:32:41 +0100
To:
Subject:
RE: Speed limit on the M50

Dear friends and colleagues

As you may or may not know, the M50 motorway has now been designated with a 100km speed limit. I phoned the NRA this morning to confirm if this was going to be the speed limit while the works are completed, or if this was going to be the speed limit moving forward. They have confirmed to me this morning that moving forward the M50 will have a limit of 100km per hour.

I have included below the email I have sent this morning to the NRA’s CEO (Fred Barry – fbarry@nra.ie <mailto:fbarry@nra.ie> ) and the safety officer Harry Cullen (hcullen@nra.ie <mailto:hcullen@nra.ie> ) registering my complaint. This mail contains the reasons I was given by them for their decision, and my answers to those reasons.

The only logical reason I can think of for this decision is
because it will be a great place for the police to sit with their gatso guns to earn lots of extra money on speeding fines.

Sorry, I mean “saving lives”. Saving lives on statistically the safest roads.

So I have decided to start an email campaign. I can’t make them change their minds, but maybe lots of us can. Please please forward this on to everyone you know, and get them to mail the NRA today also. Join my campaign to have the 120km speed limit reinstated on the M50. Or if they won’t, then they shouldn’t be allowed charge a toll (personally I don’t think they should be allowed to charge this anyway!).

We now live in the nanniest of nanny states.

Barbara
http://www.PetitionOnline.com/M50120km


From: Barbara Casserly
To: fbarry@nra.ie; hcullen@nra.ie
Subject: Speed limit on the M50
Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 11:46:47 +0100

Dear Mr Barry and Mr Cullen



I am mailing you today to register my complaint at the new speed limit on the M50. It was with total astonishment at the weekend that I have discovered that after years of torment using the M50 – a motor way with a limit of 120km – you have now reduced the speed limit to 100km. This is the national speed limit, the speed limit of carriageways and all primary roads. I get to use these for free!



I have been provided the reasons for your decision and I address each of them below.


  1. To increase capacity – you are building an extra lane for this very reason – and in most cases between junctions, 2 additional lanes.
  2. To increase safety – statistically motorways are the safest roads anyway – so why reduce the speed down on a 3 lane motorway, yet maintain 100km speed limits on all the twisty narrow back roads of this country where the carnage is actually taking place.
  3. Because there are lots of junctions on it – eh hello, isn’t that the reason that from junction to junction there is a specific additional lane?
  4. Because of “weaving traffic” – traffic will weave whether there are 1, 2, 3 or 4 lanes involved. Ridiculous nonsense to name this as a reason, and it is my belief that reducing the speed to 100km will only result in increasing road rage, frustration, and people needing to spend more time looking at their speed dials then keeping an eye on the road.



You also wish to increase the cost of the toll for using the motorway, which in my opinion is now no better than a carriageway with the silly speed you have reduced it to. So I have only one conclusion on this issue.



Either you see sense and maintain the speed limit of 120km as is fitting for a 4 lane motorway, OR, you realize that charging people the use of a 4 lane carriageway is not acceptable and therefore stop charging the toll.



Yours,

Barbara Casserly

1

Lack of Motorway service stations

There’s a thread going on www.askaboutmoney.com at the moment here about the NRA and their use of rope wire barriers, and more particularly the lack of service stations on Irish motorways.

Last weekend this was clearly illustrated to me on my way back from Mayo. Not noticing when we left Mayo that we’d need petrol somewhere on the way. I only noticed this coming close to Enfield on the N4.

Realising that I couldn’t get all the way home to Dublin, and knowing there was nowhere on the way, I left the motorway to get petrol – and promptly got stung for the €2.60 toll going in to Enfield.

And then, rejoining the motorway to go the rest of the way to Dublin, got stung again for the €2.60 toll on the motorway proper.

And add to that, the more expensive petrol (relatively speaking) in Enfield, it was a costly mistake to make.

0

Powered by WordPress. Designed by WooThemes

hit counter