LNER to pilot removal of Off-Peak tickets

[modernrail]

Never mind FOI requests, the focus should be on whether they are legally allowed to do this in the first

So far I have found this which interestingly says that not that long ago off peak fares made up the majority of all fares, to those who seem to think it is a niche sport!!!!!

https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-8552/CBP-8552.pdf

The report then goes on to say the coalition said there was no case for change in terms of regulated fares, which includes off peak savers. So… what has changed to make this move legal?

 

[mad_rich]

14, as of my request last night!

As I said there, my sympathies to the LNER FOI person team (person?), who are/is lovely.

Excellent!

Do you think asking for the following would elicit a meaningful FoI response from LNER, and would that response be helpful?

1 The total number of individual train departures currently on sale for a direct journey on LNER between London King's Cross and Newcastle on all dates between 5 February and 4 May 2024.

2 The total number within (1) above on which an Advance fare is currently available in Standard Class.

3 The total number within (2) above for which a semi-flexible fare is currently available for a supplement of £20 or less.

4 The total number within (2) above for which a semi-flexible fare is currently available for a supplement of greater than £20.

5 The total number within (2) above for which a semi-flexible fare is not currently available.

 

[wilbers]

1 The total number of individual train departures currently on sale for a direct journey on LNER between London King's Cross and Newcastle on all dates between 5 February and 4 May 2024.

2 The total number within (1) above on which an Advance fare is currently available in Standard Class.

3 The total number within (2) above for which a semi-flexible fare is currently available for a supplement of £20 or less.

4 The total number within (2) above for which a semi-flexible fare is currently available for a supplement of greater than £20.

5 The total number within (2) above for which a semi-flexible fare is not currently available.

I suspect they would give an answer to 1 and say the answers to the others are commercially sensitive and refuse because of that.

 

[Starmill]

You can see the fares on BR Fares they tie in to the relevant Advance + £20

So I'm sure someone in your position will be giving us an explanation for why it's on sale for more than that then?

Advance tickets increase in price for sooner dates, but I've never seen them higher (or even the same) as a super off-peak.

It's very common with Avanti West Coast. I'd suggest you've probably not been looking very closely or only travel on routes where it doesn't happen.

I'm curious, how many people here have had to make a long distance journey with no notice? I can only conceive of having to do it if a distant friend or family was taken dangerously ill (and I have made such a journey). It's unreasonable to design a public transport system around that scenario.

Is notice really the deciding factor? Surely flexibility is. I don't book non-refundable hotels since the pandemic (unless it's the day and I'm about to leave or already on my way, which is just as good) for this specific reason. What if you want to be sure your connecting transport will be at the station in time for your preferred departure? LNER aren't going to let you off if you miss your train because London Underground had a serious problem or your local bus didn't show up.

The 70 Min Advance really doesn't cover the basics either. If you're travelling from Heathrow Airport to Retford (a very likely thing for someone who lives in Retford to want to be doing...) you can't use them because it's 120 minutes until the next service. I would suggest 125 minutes either way should have been the absolute bare minimum.

 

[Krokodil]

The silly Manchester-London Anytime fares exist because you make more money by selling one £350 ticket than three £100 ones.

Assuming of course that you can find 200 passengers willing to pay £350 to travel on the same Pendo. These days I wouldn't be too sure. I suspect that knocking the peak fare back down to £200 might yield more in the present climate.

* - Completely off thread but do compliments ever get passed on? I ask because I witnessed a staff member do the right thing fairly recently, I was aware that a passenger might complain so wrote to the TOC, they have never responded. I spoke to another staff member who said that all they hear were complaints.

It varies, often depending upon the local manager. I've seen plenty of tweets with the reply "thanks, we'll pass on the praise" where it never filtered down. Also had passengers send in written praise (and I know it was sent) but never heard anything. Sometimes there is some recognition though.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Assuming of course that you can find 200 passengers willing to pay £350 to travel on the same Pendo. These days I wouldn't be too sure. I suspect that knocking the peak fare back down to £200 might yield more in the present climate.

And (back on topic) while £400 return is slightly less poor value from London to Edinburgh (twice as far, yet the fare isn't twice as much), this whole thing might be a little less unpalatable if LNER also cut the Anytime down a fair way.

But like the "rack rate" at a hotel, which is set high to allow dynamic pricing (rather than it typically not being paid by very many people), that's not the point of all this. Notably, though, I've bought plenty of hotel rooms on the day for non-extortionate prices, whereas on the railway...

 

[robbob700]

Bad luck for you.

I'm curious, how many people here have had to make a long distance journey with no notice? I can only conceive of having to do it if a distant friend or family was taken dangerously ill (and I have made such a journey). It's unreasonable to design a public transport system around that scenario.

I've stayed at a hotel and planned to catch a train home late morning, but on waking to glorious sunshine stayed the whole day and got a train late afternoon instead. That doesn't seem unreasonable to me.
Car drivers aren't expected to book their journey times in advance - we have designed our road system around the scenario that people should be able to make journeys at any time and at short notice. Why should public transport users not have that freedom?

 

[MrJeeves]

Does anybody have a view on whether this might be a removal of a regulated fare that is not actually permitted?

It's permitted if the DfT say they can, and DfT control LNER through operator of last resort, so...

Either way, I did explicitly ask DfT:

Regulated fares on LNER - a Freedom of Information request to Department for Transport

I understand that some fares on the Great British Railway Network are classified as "regulated fares", meaning that their prices are dictated by government. With the upcoming scrappage of super off-peak tickets on some ECML routes, and the previous scrapping of off-peak tickets on the same...

www.whatdotheyknow.com

 

[Starmill]

And (back on topic) while £400 return is slightly less poor value from London to Edinburgh (twice as far, yet the fare isn't twice as much), this whole thing might be a little less unpalatable if LNER also cut the Anytime down a fair way.

But like the "rack rate" at a hotel, which is set high to allow dynamic pricing (rather than it typically not being paid by very many people), that's not the point of all this. Notably, though, I've bought plenty of hotel rooms on the day for non-extortionate prices, whereas on the railway...

For reference - if the 4.9% increase goes through from 3 March for London to Newcastle, the Anytime Single would be likely to be £202.30.

With hotels, anyone with a couple million quid can get planning permission and build a large one. With railways if you want to get in on the market for London to Newcastle you'll be told where to go. Even if you have a couple of million quid. There's room for one small challenger and the state monopoly and that's pretty much it.

 

[mad_rich]

For reference - if the 4.9% increase goes through from 3 March for London to Newcastle, the Anytime Single would be likely to be £202.30.

Wow.

When I came to university in 1996, the cheapest walk-up fare for Newcastle-London was around £56 return (at that time Saver, or Super-saver I think?). That was full-price. I would have paid ~£37 with a YP railcard. [If anyone knows how to look it up, I'd be interested to know if my memory is correct!]

Bank of England inflation calculator suggests that would be £107 today, a bit less than double.

£404 would represent a 720% increase.

 

[island]

Excellent!

Do you think asking for the following would elicit a meaningful FoI response from LNER, and would that response be helpful?

Such a request would fall to be refused under section 21 of the FOI Act (information already publicly accessible) as it can be found from the booking engines.

 

[Wallsendmag]

So I'm sure someone in your position will be giving us an explanation for why it's on sale for more than that then?

I’m not currently working for LNER

 

[sheff1]

Apparently LNER are very keen that this is not referred to by the original title of "Demand Based Pricing" and instead want everyone to use the new title of "Simpler Fares".

How anyone can claim with a straight face something like the situation in post #13 (where the 0900 train is priced higher than the 0930 but the cheaper ticket booked for the 0930 is valid on the 0900 under the 70 min rule) is 'simpler' is hard to see.

On first sight it might seem they actually want people to pay the demand based price on the 0900 and hope most will be so confused that they don't realise the cheaper fare is also valid*. However I am minded to agree with those who think the real plan is to make 'simpler' fares so confusing that a case can be made for just having Advances and Anytimes because of said confusion.

* Exactly the same applies later in the day when a Flex ticket for the 1530 will be valid on both the 1600 & 1630 for which the quoted Flex fare is £53 more.

 

[thedbdiboy]

Does anybody have a view on whether this might be a removal of a regulated fare that is not actually permitted?

Also on whether this is a removal of a National Rail fare that also might not actually permitted from a statutory position?

I just don’t see how we have jumped from TOCs being legally obliged to offer these regulated fares (presumably with supporting legislation to put that obligation in place) to a position where they can just pull it without amending legislation.

Fares regulation has never been a statutory provision. Any legal obligation on TOCs regarding fares stems from the terms of their contract (previously their Franchise Agreement). If the contract is varied by the contracting authority (in this case between DfT and LNER) then the change is permitted.

 

[Joe Paxton]

So that means they lied when they said it was £20 before. Not looking squeaky clean, this, is it?

I don't think they ever said Semi-Flex 70 tickets would always be made available for every train.

 

[island]

Fares regulation has never been a statutory provision. Any legal obligation on TOCs regarding fares stems from the terms of their contract (previously their Franchise Agreement). If the contract is varied by the contracting authority (in this case between DfT and LNER) then the change is permitted.

And conversely, any breach of regulated fares rules* does not give random passengers any legal remedies. It is at most a breach of a contract between the DFT and the relevant remedy is civil action by the DFT, if it wishes to take it.

*For the avoidance of doubt I express no opinion on whether LNER's changes constitute such a breach

 

[trainstrainstr]

I suppose the best way to put it is, it’s not LNERs change - it’s the DfTs. This IS the DfT trialling the removal of regulated fares more than anything. It’s not really a trial of flex fares.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I suppose the best way to put it is, it’s not LNERs change - it’s the DfTs. This IS the DfT trialling the removal of regulated fares more than anything. It’s not really a trial of flex fares.

Bingo.

It's not about flexibility, it's about removing the off peak cap that the Super Off Peak provides.

If they were replacing the Super Off Peak ticket with a cap at the same fare which would be regulated and had the same set times, I'd care a lot less as I could just buy an Advance once I'd decided which train and know it couldn't cost more. It would be inconvenient but not disastrous. It's the potential fare doubling at times like Friday PM and Sunday PM that is a problem.

If it was about simplicity they'd just go Anytime or Advance, and maybe bin the £10 admin fee (the latter would certainly be a good thing; it's outdated as nobody is doing any admin - it should be noted that for instance Premier Inn's equivalent rate charges no admin fee for an amendment, you just pay the increase in room rate - and unlike the railway they even refund the difference if it's cheaper!). It clearly isn't, it's about fare increases. They'll just sneak them in later now the framework has been set up for them to do so quietly.

 

[OscarH]

You can see the fares on BR Fares they tie in to the relevant Advance + £20

While I agree that the case where it was >£20 was probably a mistake not entirely LNER's fault given the system they're working with, this restriction code that prevents it being offered at all on certain services is completely unacceptable when it leaves just the two tier fare system, and to make matters worse is not made clear in the messaging either

 

[Bletchleyite]

While I agree that the case where it was >£20 was probably a mistake not entirely LNER's fault given the system they're working with, this restriction code that prevents it being offered at all on certain services is completely unacceptable when it leaves just the two tier fare system, and to make matters worse is not made clear in the messaging either

But note that it's been stated (though I forget where) that the £20 thing is just to start with - there is definitely the intention to vary it as part of the trial to see what the market will stand.

 

[OscarH]

But note that it's been stated (though I forget where) that the £20 thing is just to start with - there is definitely the intention to vary it as part of the trial to see what the market will stand.

The impression I got was that the variation would be if they started adding more stations, different length journeys might be different. That might be wrong though

 

[Travelmonkey]

It's broadly similar to the ticket office debarkale last year and given they've [TO staff] been given strict instructions to only sell the point to point I can invisigin enough blue language to make a sailor even blush, the only thing simpler is its a rince to those who have little choice, yes you can use the likes of national express, flixbus ect but at what time penalty, or you have flights and if it rolls our across the IC market not everyone can easily get to a airport unlike the cities. My local airport is EMA and that's a 90 min bus trip on a good day,

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's broadly similar to the ticket office debarkale last year and given they've [TO staff] been given strict instructions to only sell the point to point I can invisigin enough blue language to make a sailor even blush, the only thing simpler is its a rince to those who have little choice, yes you can use the likes of national express, flixbus ect but at what time penalty, or you have flights and if it rolls our across the IC market not everyone can easily get to a airport unlike the cities. My local airport is EMA and that's a 90 min bus trip on a good day,

Though for the other way round airports aren't bad. Far more people live near Heathrow or Luton than do to Kings Cross, and Edinburgh airport is very close to the city as it's all so compact, just a half hour's bus or tram ride at very low cost, and again easier if you don't live in the centre. Don't know about Newcastle though.

(The railway trumpets city centre to city centre, but often forgets that suburb to city centre is the most common journey requirement - this is one reason Stockport is so busy)

 

[Joe Paxton]

Though for the other way round airports aren't bad. Far more people live near Heathrow or Luton than do to Kings Cross, [...]

I think that's just straight factually incorrect.

King's Cross is in the centre of a metropolis of nearly 9 million people.

 

[Bletchleyite]

King's Cross is in the centre of a metropolis of nearly 9 million people.

But a bit of a pain to get to if you're not on the Tube or going for an early morning departure/late evening arrival.

For vast swathes of north and east London as well as the Home Counties, driving or taxi-ing to either Heathrow or Luton will be considerably easier than getting to Kings Cross. And if there's a Gatwick-Edinburgh, which there probably is, add huge chunks of south and east London and the countryside around there too.

I suppose, to be fair, driving to Peterborough or Stevenage might also suit such people, but then they get the slower trains.

I should perhaps have worded it as "far more people would find it convenient to get to..." to be fair.

 

[HurdyGurdy]

For vast swathes of north and east London as well as the Home Counties, driving or taxi-ing to either Heathrow or Luton will be considerably easier than getting to Kings Cross. And if there's a Gatwick-Edinburgh, which there probably is, add huge chunks of south and east London and the countryside around there too.

It's reasonable to point to the alternatives available to potential customers of LNER services between Kings Cross and Edinburgh. That this particular market is highly competitive is presumably the main reason its been chosen for the pilot study.

But once it's been deemed an unqualified success by those who proposed it, there's little doubt the same treatment will be applied to many other flows priced by LNER. Including flows where there are few practical alternatives other than to travel by private car if you have access to one, or not to travel at all, if you don't.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But once it's been deemed an unqualified success by those who proposed it, there's little doubt the same treatment will be applied to many other flows priced by LNER. Including flows where there are are few practical alternatives other than to travel by private car if you have access to one, or not to travel at all, if you don't.

It would be laughable to apply it to London-Birmingham, say, but it does seem that's the DfT's wont - IC=airline style, regional=contactless.

 

[Travelmonkey]

It's the same logic why on the Newcastle/Berwick/Edinburgh flows and not the Leeds/Lincoln/Newark flows the perceived long distance. Although if a full nation contactless is rolled out and your gonna be screwed regardless why not tap in at KGX and out at Waverly, for now there is competition and fare fudging but I recon the coach market may see a boom out of this. I'm already debating a flixbus instead of XC for a upcoming trip due to cost I'm sure many others if possible will too.

 

[HurdyGurdy]

It would be laughable to apply it to London-Birmingham

It may seem laughable, but the approach is not far from what the explainers of privatisation were hoping to achieve. It was left to individual MPs to make the point that not all flows were of the competitive 'Inter City' kind, and that where rail had an effective monopoly on public transport, their constituents faced being squeezed in terms of fares. The result was that for the Bill to pass Parliament the government had to give assurances that fares on those other kinds of flows would be regulated.

What we are seeing now is how worthless such assurances are in comparison to the relevant clauses being written into the Railways Act.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's the same logic why on the Newcastle/Berwick/Edinburgh flows and not the Leeds/Lincoln/Newark flows the perceived long distance. Although if a full nation contactless is rolled out and your gonna be screwed regardless why not tap in at KGX and out at Waverly, for now there is competition and fare fudging but I recon the coach market may see a boom out of this. I'm already debating a flixbus instead of XC for a upcoming trip due to cost I'm sure many others if possible will too.

Certainly if the railway goes this way the coach industry is likely to benefit massively, both in terms of increased custom and the ability to stick their prices up a bit. And with a shift to EVs can wave the environmental flag too. Sure, coaches are (by law) compulsory reservation/no standing, but NatEx fares right up to departure aren't typically swingeing* if there are seats left and coach interiors (unlike train interiors) are improving all the time.

It takes only a quick glance at Spain to see what a self-serving railway network does to the coach market - Spain has probably the biggest such market in western Europe (and much of it owned by our very own NatEx!).

* About 20 quid seems to be the going rate for both NatEx and Megabus for the next Edinburgh departure, admittedly that's overnight but tomorrow's morning daytime NatEx is also going for around that price. That's even cheaper than I expected!

It may seem laughable, but the approach is not far from what the explainers of privatisation were hoping to achieve. It was left to individual MPs to make the point that not all flows were of the competitive 'Inter City' kind, and that where rail had an effective monopoly on public transport, their constituents faced being squeezed in terms of fares. The result was that for the Bill to pass Parliament the government had to give assurances that fares on those other kinds of flows would be regulated.

Competition is an interesting point - already Chiltern/LNR seem to be winning spectacularly over Avanti, to the point that one could argue the Euston-Brum Avanti services as being entirely unnecessary once the "Aston-Acton shuttle" opens. If they price themselves further out of the market then that can only become more pronounced.