• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Is Pensioner free travel forcing up prices?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Teflon Lettuce

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2013
Messages
1,750
Most landlords don't want tenants who pay housing benefit so you can simply look at the rent paid by such tenants as the "market rent". Housing benefit will rarely pay more than this. Whereas with bus fares there is it openly conceded that single fares have risen in order to maximise the free pass reimbursement. For a while, First in Greater Manchester actually had single fares *higher* than the price of a day ticket in order to profit from the funding formula. Suppose the reimbursement rate was increased. Would single fares get cut? I doubt it!

I suggest you read my previous post (#22)
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

radamfi

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2009
Messages
9,267
Please could you provide examples of where the single ticket price was greater than a day ticket price? Not doubting you, but if true, this is barmy.

After a fare rise they would put up posters giving old and new fares. The highest fares would be higher than a day ticket. That was a few years ago now so I can't give specific details. I'm sure locals will still remember this and may be able to quote the exact numbers.
 

radamfi

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2009
Messages
9,267
I suggest you read my previous post (#22)

Your argument was that it is OK to have silly single fares because of the existence of a day ticket to deter people using competing operators. This is hardly a good thing for passengers! Particularly those who need to use more than one operator, or those just making a single trip in a day, because for example they are getting a lift back.
 

Teflon Lettuce

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2013
Messages
1,750
Your argument was that it is OK to have silly single fares because of the existence of a day ticket to deter people using competing operators. This is hardly a good thing for passengers! Particularly those who need to use more than one operator, or those just making a single trip in a day, because for example they are getting a lift back.

Not at all... my argument is that the rapid increase in single/ day return fares compared to day and period tickets is something that predates nationwide concessionary travel and is a tool that has increasingly been used to lock people into a particular operators services since deregulation... in short a marketing and competitive tool.... and nothing to do with the concessionary travel schemes... as to your argument that having a day ticket cheaper than a day return (or even a single) penalises those who have to use 2 operators... well I should think the percentage of people making a trip that involves HAVING to use 2 operators AND only 2 journeys will be negligently small... after all, to paraphrase a saying... what goes there has to come back!
 
Last edited:

radamfi

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2009
Messages
9,267
Not at all... my argument is that the rapid increase in single/ day return fares compared to day and period tickets is something that predates nationwide concessionary travel and is a tool that has increasingly been used to lock people into a particular operators services since deregulation... in short a marketing and competitive tool.

But before the current nationwide scheme there were local schemes in most areas.
 

Busaholic

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
14,029
The thing that I find most inequitable is free rail travel for ENCTS pass holders in areas where we are constantly told there is not enough revenue (despite much of it walking out of the door because of a lack of ticket issuing facilities) and that prices are too low. Why has free rail travel (as opposed to a generous 50% discount on the normal fare) survided while fares for everyone else have skyrocketed by the imposition of restrictions and :wub:0% rises in off-peak tickets?

Sure I would love for ENCTS pass holders to get as much free travel as they can because it enhances their quality of life. I would also love for the Government not to persist with the crazy notion that public transport must pay for itself entirely. As it seems that's not the way things are going why do we have to make up all of the shortfall? I'm looking at you TfGMC. What's the bill to rail companies for free ENCTS travel, and what could you spend that money on instead?

Geographically, very few pass issuers allow free or even discounted rail travel. It is only a few metropolitan areas, who restrict it to their own populace, in England anyway. I've had a pass for nine years, never had the possibility of a penny off a train fare.
 
Last edited:

Teflon Lettuce

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2013
Messages
1,750
But before the current nationwide scheme there were local schemes in most areas.

and in MOST areas those schemes were not free travel schemes... there was usually a fare for the pass holder to pay... either a flat fare or half fare...

no matter what arguments you put forward NONE alter the fact that the over inflation rate increases in single/ day return fares predates the national concessionary schemes... and the argument put forward at the head of this thread is that it is the concessionary scheme that has caused these increases... this is not so and that is historical fact.
 

radamfi

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2009
Messages
9,267
and in MOST areas those schemes were not free travel schemes... there was usually a fare for the pass holder to pay... either a flat fare or half fare...

But even though the discount was not 100%, there was still a reimbursement system in place.
 

Teflon Lettuce

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2013
Messages
1,750
But even though the discount was not 100%, there was still a reimbursement system in place.

so your argument is that ANY concessionary scheme inflates fares and distorts the market so there should be NO concessionary scheme?

in any case, in previous schemes the usual practice was to make the payments dependant on mileage operated not passenger journeys...

as I said before... the argument is that the NATIONWIDE travel scheme has caused the price hikes in single/ day return fares... nothing you have argued so far has addressed MY contention that the start of price hiking pre-dates the introduction of the NATIONWIDE scheme...

I am going to leave it here as I see it a pointless exercise in debating with someone who willfully ignores the crux of the argument and tries to make the facts fit their opinion rather than the other way round
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,269
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
Sure I would love for ENCTS pass holders to get as much free travel as they can because it enhances their quality of life. I would also love for the Government not to persist with the crazy notion that public transport must pay for itself entirely. As it seems that's not the way things are going why do we have to make up all of the shortfall? I'm looking at you TfGMC. What's the bill to rail companies for free ENCTS travel, and what could you spend that money on instead?

Look at the political ethos of TfGM.

On a personal basis, as one resident exterior to the boundaries of the TfGM empire, we neither have free rail or Metrolink travel within TfGM on our Cheshire East issued ENCTS passes, but we, at our own cost, have purchased three-year Senior Citizen Railcards to help rail travel costs.
 
Last edited:

TheGrandWazoo

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Feb 2013
Messages
19,969
Location
Somerset with international travel (e.g. across th
a strange contention there that housing benefit doesn't distort the rental market... and the inference that the housing market isn't deregulated.

Since the mid 80's social housing stock has been sold to tenants without much replacement... therefore forcing more and more people into private rent... are you telling me that the unaffordable rents charged in some areas would still be as high if landlords didn't have the difference made up by housing benefit? surely if there was more social housing and no housing benefit landlords would have to charge affordable rents otherwise their properties would stay empty... unlike free pensioner travel which is a service paid for by councils and NOT subsidy... arguably housing benefit IS a subsidy to fund the greed of landlords and to hide the failure of housing policy over the last 30 odd years!

Housing Benefit varies according to your situation and is paid to the claimant or direct to the landlord. What it isn't is a blank cheque.

I don't see anyone talking of the government requiring to take on housing stock from the private sector.
 

TheGrandWazoo

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Feb 2013
Messages
19,969
Location
Somerset with international travel (e.g. across th
I am going to leave it here as I see it a pointless exercise in debating with someone who willfully ignores the crux of the argument and tries to make the facts fit their opinion rather than the other way round

Indeed - I appreciate Radamfi's ideological bent and wide eyed view of the world. However, it is, as I intimated before, usually predicated by an ideologically held view and then supporting that answer via a selective interpretation of the facts.

Not quite alternative facts, just selected ones.
 

radamfi

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2009
Messages
9,267
Yep, and that was even the case in the rose tinted uplands of pre-deregulation

Essentially, that was how National Transport Tokens worked.

The pre-deregulation situation was not ideal and so privatisation and competitive tendering would surely have happened by now given that privatisation has become the fashion for most public services. Had deregulation not happened instead, a policy of privatisation and tendering would be considered very right-wing. Nobody calls rail privatisation a form of socialism.
 

RT4038

Established Member
Joined
22 Feb 2014
Messages
4,180
as I said before... the argument is that the NATIONWIDE travel scheme has caused the price hikes in single/ day return fares... nothing you have argued so far has addressed MY contention that the start of price hiking pre-dates the introduction of the NATIONWIDE scheme...

No doubt you are right that the start of 'price hiking' pre-dates the nationwide concessionary fare scheme - it probably started in the 1960s when off-peak traffic started to fall off alarmingly, through the 1970s with massive general inflation and rising expectations of crew wages, reductions of subsidies in the 1980s, and increasing regulation (inter alia H&S, DDA, Drivers CPC, concessionary fares scheme etc etc) since then. I think it true to say that all government financial interventions cause distortions in the market (be it housing benefit, tax policy, concessionary fares schemes) and undoubtedly ordinary adult bus fares are higher now because of the ENCTS scheme. However, this is not the only cause!
 

Marc

Member
Joined
6 Jan 2015
Messages
201
Location
yate
this is wrong.
In fact, there are several models that can be used for this calculation. Yours is one; mine is another.

i refer to the calculator mechanism published by the dft which is the basis for the english scheme. how did you dream yours up?
 

graham11

Member
Joined
21 Oct 2016
Messages
45
I was told by a driver on the Oswestry to Shrewsbury route ( route 70 ) that Arrive in that area received a fixed sum for every free travel .
This was why when I got on the driver didn`t ask the destination but just issued a ticket , the destination not recorded.

He said that the bus company received 60p for each traveller .

If this is the case then surely if the bus has lots of 60p fares this is better than having none .
The maths is simple :
Say 10 passengers at 60p = £6.00
0 passengers at 60p == £ 0
People who claim that if pensioners were not given the subsidy the bus company would be better off !

The problem is most of the customers wouldn`t go at all and the company wouldn`t even get the many 60p s.

Is my logic correct,

Graham
 

Teflon Lettuce

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2013
Messages
1,750
I was told by a driver on the Oswestry to Shrewsbury route ( route 70 ) that Arrive in that area received a fixed sum for every free travel .
This was why when I got on the driver didn't ask the destination but just issued a ticket , the destination not recorded.

He said that the bus company received 60p for each traveller .

If this is the case then surely if the bus has lots of 60p fares this is better than having none .
The maths is simple :
Say 10 passengers at 60p = £6.00
0 passengers at 60p == £ 0
People who claim that if pensioners were not given the subsidy the bus company would be better off !

The problem is most of the customers wouldn't go at all and the company wouldn't even get the many 60p s.

Is my logic correct,

Graham

The problem is, if the figure of 60p per passenger is correct, that even if the bus was full it would be running at a loss.. assuming that it is a single deck that gives a capacity of approx 60 passengers.. 60x £0.60= £36.00 Oswestry- Shrewsbury direct is 19.5 miles so bus will take approx 1hr... that's £9-£10 driver costs... then there is 2 gallons of fuel... another £9... that's before depreciation of vehicle, wear and tear, contribution to fixed costs... it all adds up very quickly... in short the scheme is underfunded...

There was also the clever idea in Wales whereby the WA capped the amount available.... said to the operators that once the money ran out they would lower the percentage paid... as I have asked before... where else in industry are you forced to provide a service (in this case free travel) and then be told how much you are to receive WITHOUT NEGOTIATION for providing that service?
 

radamfi

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2009
Messages
9,267
where else in industry are you forced to provide a service (in this case free travel) and then be told how much you are to receive WITHOUT NEGOTIATION for providing that service?

Regulation and new legislation interferes with private business all the time. If a business doesn't like a new rule they are free to stop offering a particular service or product or close the business down altogether. Bus companies are free to deregister their bus services at any time with 56 days notice.
 

graham11

Member
Joined
21 Oct 2016
Messages
45
Teflon Lettuce.

I can see your argument about the bus losing money if full of 60p fares. But if the pensioners were not on board then the company wouldn`t even get the £36 and the seats wouldn`t be full of full price passengers .
And remember the bus will be taking it`s journey ,with it`s costs whether there are any passengers or not.

Graham
 

Harpers Tate

Established Member
Joined
10 May 2013
Messages
1,680
I don't think 60p can be correct. The figure in this area in the brief period of time when the first "free" travel (which at the time was purely in a local area, not nationally, which dates it to just pre 2008) was introduced was something like 80p. It seems unlikely that it has reduced, and equally unlikely that it's substantially less in one area vs. another. Based on inflation adjusting that 80p, I'd have to estimate £1 or thereabouts.
 

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
^ But to what extent does the subsiding of OAP fares impact on the whole network?

I find a lot of bus routes are geared towards the free pensioner travel market, to a point it makes the service unattractive to other users. At present, I have a bus route from my front door to my place of work, but with low frequencies and restrictive journey times I am unable to use it. For a start, the first journey gets into my work 24 minutes after I'm meant to start, and the last bus back leaves 15 minutes before my shift finishes! And this has been quite common on many bus routes I've tried to use - it's often impossible to work it around many reasonable commutes (certainly outwith big cities).

I would hypothesise that the bus companies are running the routes primarily to serve the OAP market, which is where they make all their money, at the expense of younger passengers, and as a result the services become more centred on this market (which is a natural progression). There's plenty of bus routes that exist purely to ferry old ladies to the supermarket/shops, but they don't run at times to allow the employees to get to work! As such, the OAP market gets bigger, and buses become an increasing irrelevance for those of us outwith major cities. I often post that I really have tried to commute on buses (really, I have) but I am simply unable to do so.

It also leaves bus companies in the position that they rely on the pensioners, to the point that their business would collapse if they couldn't provide subsidised travel (IIRC, a company in Airdrie had their bus pass privileges withdrawn because of abuse, and they shut down pretty much overnight).

Graham's absolutely right. The 60p fares (or whatever indicative number you choose) may not be making the bus companies a lot of money, but we are now in a position that they are usually the main revenue stream for bus companies, and withdrawing them will not see fare paying passengers take up the slack.
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
I would hypothesise that the bus companies are running the routes primarily to serve the OAP market, which is where they make all their money, at the expense of younger passengers, and as a result the services become more centred on this market (which is a natural progression).

In my area some public bus routes only operate with vehicles which are required for school/college runs at the relevant times of the day so it's possibly school routes are more lucrative than running a pre-09:00 service on certain routes. If not why don't the operator give up the school/college services?
 

Robertj21a

On Moderation
Joined
22 Sep 2013
Messages
7,518
I don't think 60p can be correct. The figure in this area in the brief period of time when the first "free" travel (which at the time was purely in a local area, not nationally, which dates it to just pre 2008) was introduced was something like 80p. It seems unlikely that it has reduced, and equally unlikely that it's substantially less in one area vs. another. Based on inflation adjusting that 80p, I'd have to estimate £1 or thereabouts.

Any figure quoted, 60p or anything else, is only relevant to that area/council at best. It varies all over England and is based on a specific formula laid down.

In many areas it has most definitely reduced over recent times.
 

Busaholic

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
14,029
The problem is, if the figure of 60p per passenger is correct, that even if the bus was full it would be running at a loss.. assuming that it is a single deck that gives a capacity of approx 60 passengers.. 60x £0.60= £36.00 Oswestry- Shrewsbury direct is 19.5 miles so bus will take approx 1hr... that's £9-£10 driver costs... then there is 2 gallons of fuel... another £9... that's before depreciation of vehicle, wear and tear, contribution to fixed costs... it all adds up very quickly... in short the scheme is underfunded...

There was also the clever idea in Wales whereby the WA capped the amount available.... said to the operators that once the money ran out they would lower the percentage paid... as I have asked before... where else in industry are you forced to provide a service (in this case free travel) and then be told how much you are to receive WITHOUT NEGOTIATION for providing that service?

Litigation should never be entered into lightly, but I believe Stagecoach South Wales did the bus industry a disfavour by withdrawing their court case against the WA before a ruling could be determined as to the legality of what the WA were doing - Stagecoach were apparently content to be fobbed off with a better percentage that may not have been available to other operators. Like the wheelchair issue, sometimes these things do need robust testing in the courts.
 

carlberry

Established Member
Joined
19 Dec 2014
Messages
3,169
I was told by a driver on the Oswestry to Shrewsbury route ( route 70 ) that Arrive in that area received a fixed sum for every free travel .
This was why when I got on the driver didn't ask the destination but just issued a ticket , the destination not recorded.

He said that the bus company received 60p for each traveller .

If this is the case then surely if the bus has lots of 60p fares this is better than having none .
The maths is simple :
Say 10 passengers at 60p = £6.00
0 passengers at 60p == £ 0
People who claim that if pensioners were not given the subsidy the bus company would be better off !

The problem is most of the customers wouldn't go at all and the company wouldn't even get the many 60p s.

Is my logic correct,

Graham

In most cases the 10 passengers would have been something like 7 anyway (without the free travel) and this is the hit that the companies have taken. A few extra passengers for 60p dosent really cover the loss (especially on a long distance service) and something then has to give. This either means raised fares for everybody else or a reduced service.
 

carlberry

Established Member
Joined
19 Dec 2014
Messages
3,169
I don't think 60p can be correct. The figure in this area in the brief period of time when the first "free" travel (which at the time was purely in a local area, not nationally, which dates it to just pre 2008) was introduced was something like 80p. It seems unlikely that it has reduced, and equally unlikely that it's substantially less in one area vs. another. Based on inflation adjusting that 80p, I'd have to estimate £1 or thereabouts.

Most areas of England have seen a reduction in the payment since it was first introduced so 80p down to 60p is perfectly possible.
 

Teflon Lettuce

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2013
Messages
1,750
Regulation and new legislation interferes with private business all the time. If a business doesn't like a new rule they are free to stop offering a particular service or product or close the business down altogether. Bus companies are free to deregister their bus services at any time with 56 days notice.

yet again you fail to read my post properly...(I'm beginning to think you do so deliberately)

the point is if you wish to run a local bus service you HAVE to accept concessionary passes and you HAVE to accept what you are given for providing free travel... whether you like it or not...

to use your earlier analogy with housing benefit... if you decide to become a private landlord you do not HAVE to accept tenants subsidised through the Housing Benefit system... even then IF you CHOOSE to accept housing benefit tenants you do not HAVE to accept anything lower than the going rate for your property...
 

carlberry

Established Member
Joined
19 Dec 2014
Messages
3,169
^ But to what extent does the subsiding of OAP fares impact on the whole network?

I find a lot of bus routes are geared towards the free pensioner travel market, to a point it makes the service unattractive to other users. At present, I have a bus route from my front door to my place of work, but with low frequencies and restrictive journey times I am unable to use it. For a start, the first journey gets into my work 24 minutes after I'm meant to start, and the last bus back leaves 15 minutes before my shift finishes! And this has been quite common on many bus routes I've tried to use - it's often impossible to work it around many reasonable commutes (certainly outwith big cities).

I would hypothesise that the bus companies are running the routes primarily to serve the OAP market, which is where they make all their money, at the expense of younger passengers, and as a result the services become more centred on this market (which is a natural progression). There's plenty of bus routes that exist purely to ferry old ladies to the supermarket/shops, but they don't run at times to allow the employees to get to work! As such, the OAP market gets bigger, and buses become an increasing irrelevance for those of us outwith major cities. I often post that I really have tried to commute on buses (really, I have) but I am simply unable to do so.

It also leaves bus companies in the position that they rely on the pensioners, to the point that their business would collapse if they couldn't provide subsidised travel (IIRC, a company in Airdrie had their bus pass privileges withdrawn because of abuse, and they shut down pretty much overnight).

Graham's absolutely right. The 60p fares (or whatever indicative number you choose) may not be making the bus companies a lot of money, but we are now in a position that they are usually the main revenue stream for bus companies, and withdrawing them will not see fare paying passengers take up the slack.

OAPs were a big part of the bus market (commuters a much smaller bit) and services were tailored to when prospective passengers want to travel. The free travel issue has increased numbers and reduced revenue however in some circumstances (service length/local authority reimbursement rate) the OAP market can still be worthwhile (In Scotland especially) and wont be ignored aby any company.

As the law stands a bus company dosent have 'bus pass privileges', it has a legal requirement to accept bus passes. It sounds more like it would have shut down because of a fraud investigation which has happened a few times.
 

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
^That is exactly what happened with the company (I'll admit I don't know the intricacies of the concessionary travel schemes). May have been slightly misreported locally.

At the end of the day, I think something's gone wrong when a convenient bus route to a major local employer doesn't run at a time which would suit the employees! But if that's the way the market's going to go, then so be it. But I think that bus companies should be encouraged to provide services throughout the day, in the same way that most rail services have specifications to provide a regular and convenient service. Indeed, commuters should be a good source of revenue for a bus company - with regular income and guaranteed loadings, providing they meet local demand.

Of course, that opens up the can of worms that is bus regulation and I won't go done that path...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top