£10 Admin Fees: Bogus or not?

[Bletchleyite]

Advance Saver/Super Advance were not heavily quota controlled nor heavily discounted, so this isn't all that surprising.

I think changeable Advances was a "Virgin Value" innovation. Indeed, the entire concept of Advances as they are now was basically VT's doing.

 

[gray1404]

Oh really, so Apex would basically be there as long as you booked 7 days in advance and Super Advance as long as you booked by 1800 the night before? Not many limits on quotas. I remember being told though that those 2 ticket types were only offered in limited numbers and I seem to recall they could not be changed once booked - although I might be wrong on that point. You are saying it was when Virgin Value came in that true yield management (and thus limits on amounts offered per train) came in - with the ability to make changes.

 

[tony_mac]

just for a little history - the NRCoC used to specify a 'reasonable' administration charge, but as far as I remember, a charge wasn't widely applied.

As part of a review of (many) terms and conditions, the OfT pointed out that 'reasonable' was not defined, which effectively gave the rail companies the ability to charge what they like. And it isn't reasonable in a consumer contract for the customer to buy something but have no idea what the future charges might be.

Hence, the NRCoC was amended to specify that this 'reasonable' charge would never be more than £10.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, this was soon seen as a green light to charge exactly £10...

 

[Paul Duck]

Where does the £10 go. Straight to the Ticket office owners TOC. Like we are independent at Eaglescliffe, what commission if any do we get from Change Of Journey fees?

 

[richw]

In genuine circumstances I have found gwr to waive the admin fee, send a copy of a sick note or death certificate etc

 

[DarloRich]

Do you not acknowledge that there is a cost, maybe not £10 but a cost nonetheless, to processing your refund which is for no fault of the TOC's? (If it is their fault the £10 is not charged).

There is a cost. If it is £10 then the TOC's need to look at their processes and make some efficiencies. I suspect it is a rip off.

 

[Gareth Marston]

I occasionally get some "customers" who try it on for a refund when they have managed to travel for whatever reason without having the ticket marked or when the barriers at Shrewsbury aren't manned and managed to retain the tickets. The £10 fee is nice shock for them especially on a £8.70 SDR to Shrewsbury!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Oh really, so Apex would basically be there as long as you booked 7 days in advance and Super Advance as long as you booked by 1800 the night before? Not many limits on quotas. I remember being told though that those 2 ticket types were only offered in limited numbers and I seem to recall they could not be changed once booked - although I might be wrong on that point. You are saying it was when Virgin Value came in that true yield management (and thus limits on amounts offered per train) came in - with the ability to make changes.

Apex was tightly quota controlled *and* you needed to have quota available in both directions. The quotas for Advance Saver and Super Advance existed (I think) but were much larger so you had a very good chance of getting one.

The concepts "Virgin Value" introduced (that APEX/SuperAPEX didn't have) were:
- A large number of price levels on the same ticket - same advance booking requirement, changeability etc
- Single leg pricing
- Changeable for a fee on all price levels

...though the concepts really came from the orange and blue airlines.

 

[Nick66]

I travel regularly and buy advance tickets as soon as they become available as I know when I will be travelling. At £20 or £28 when a flexible ticket would be at least £65, I am happy to accept the exchange fee as part of the T&Cs. On the rare occasions I have not being going to use a ticket I have just exchanged it for the next trip months in advance so still gained. These are the rules you have to decide for yourself if it is worthwhile. If there’s no risk, people will just buy up the whole advance quota on the off chance, making tickets more expensive for the rest of us.

As an aside, I had to exchange one ticket on the new VTEC site, you now need to book a new ticket and quote the reference number to refund the original one and they forgot to deduct the fee!

 

[AlterEgo]

I personally think that the cost of a refund should be £5.00 so it is still enough to pull people off buying tickets then refunding them, yet still covers retailers costs.

Can you let us know how you’ve calculated that it covers the retailer’s costs?

 

[AlterEgo]

Advising the TOCs that you will raise a chargeback with your card provider in order to get a full refund usually changes their tune and they send the refund back including the £10 the would have taken.

Never been charged a £10 'admin' charge yet...

Are you sure that’s not an abuse of the chargeback process? That’s supposed to be for when the retailer or provider fails to deliver, not for upholding their terms and conditions you agreed to.

 

[LAX54]

I agree totally with there being a fee for changes made in person. However, for changes made entirely electronically, for example of tickets not even picked up yet, I see no reason why these should be charged at more than the raw cost to the retailer of selling and subsequently refunding the ticket.

As an example, I was recently unable to travel on a ~£15 ticket booked months in advance (a refundable one though), as I was ill on the day of travel. I hadn't picked up the tickets yet as I was going to do this at the station just before boarding the train. So why is it fair to charge a £10 fee and only return £5?

I appreciate that the fare I was paying was significantly below the highest possible 'walkup' fare, but I nevertheless fail to see how it can possibly have costed the TOC I bought it from £10 to receive a £15 debit card payment and subsequently refund this again. Probably no more than 20p in reality, as no human contact was involved anywhere in the process.

Which is 'cheap'........ book a short haul (or long haul) flight with B.A and if for any reason you cannot go, you will get no refund at all except for taxes, so a cancelled £100 fare, you will see about £15, there is no valid reason for such a draconian policy, but that's B.A for you, in fact they will not even let you postpone the dates if you are ill ! so getting 1/3 back from a £15 ticket you are quids in !

 

[bb21]

Nah only when they try and charge it. Had an argument with Scotrail not so long ago about them only refunding me £7.45 of a £17.45 fare after I couldn't travel due to ill health.

I believe the £10 Is definitely bogus and there is no real reason for TOCs to charge it.

So you are not only wasting the TOC's time, you are wasting your bank's time as well, which all customers will have to pay for eventually?

I think a particular word in the title of this thread applies more suitably to your claims than the £10 admin fee, reasonable or not.

 

[theblackwatch]

I think some people have forgotten this is a fee, not a cost. Heaven help us, a business is charging something and making something out of it! Why shouldn't it?

 

[GaryMcEwan]

Are you sure that’s not an abuse of the chargeback process? That’s supposed to be for when the retailer or provider fails to deliver, not for upholding their terms and conditions you agreed to.

As a consumer I'm protected and will use all the tools at my disposal to ensure that companies play by the book. Clearly you've never had the unbridled joy of having to deal with Scotrail Customer Relations.

Like I said previously, only had to do it on a handful of occasions and the mere mention of it usually changes their tune.

 

[WelshBluebird]

My favourites were always those who’d want to buy a ticket costing about £11 (SDR/CDR) about two months in advance. You’d advise them it would be the same price on the day of travel and that they’d lose £10 should they change their mind. Some would, but most were definitely going and wouldn’t change their mind so you’d sell them the ticket. They’d be back in a couple of days saying they now couldn’t go so they needed a refund. Then you’d get the grumbling, even though you’d told them.

To be fair, I buy flexible tickets in advance fairly often for one of three reasons:

• I often travel from unmanned stations and would end up having to buy a ticket at an interchange station. I don't like the fuss this adds to my journey (and the fact that ticket will be on the crappy receipt roll type tickets stock) so I'll buy the ticket a few days before if I am in town at the manned station nearby.
• If I am planning a trip somewhere (I often travel around the place for gigs or football), I like to have all of what I need booked, sorted and organised so I know I don't have to fuss with anything else for the trip. This could be a fair few weeks in advance, and advance tickets often are not available for the journeys I make (or are no cheaper than a flexible return).
• If I am travelling for work, the tickets are usually bought in advance via my works trainline account. Again, if advance tickets are not available (or are no cheaper than a flexible return) then those tickets will be flexible tickets.

Do you not acknowledge that there is a cost, maybe not £10 but a cost nonetheless, to processing your refund which is for no fault of the TOC's? (If it is their fault the £10 is not charged).

A cost yes. But that cost is in the pennies for the vast majority of transactions.
Look, I agree with what a few people have said that some kind of fee is needed to stop people taking the mick etc, but can we just be honest and stop trying to say the charge is because of the cost of refunds?

I think some people have forgotten this is a fee, not a cost. Heaven help us, a business is charging something and making something out of it! Why shouldn't it?

Pretty much what I just said - I don't agree with the charge, however I accept it is there. But some people here have tried to claim that the £10 charge is because if costs ToC's to do refunds. While technically true, the actual costs to the ToC will be tiny, so you surely cannot use that to justify the charge.

 

[bb21]

A cost yes. But that cost is in the pennies for the vast majority of transactions.
Look, I agree with what a few people have said that some kind of fee is needed to stop people taking the mick etc, but can we just be honest and stop trying to say the charge is because of the cost of refunds?

Have you factored in the cost of system maintenance, etc?

£10 doesn't really go very far these days.

 

[gray1404]

As a consumer I'm protected and will use all the tools at my disposal to ensure that companies play by the book. Clearly you've never had the unbridled joy of having to deal with Scotrail Customer Relations.

Like I said previously, only had to do it on a handful of occasions and the mere mention of it usually changes their tune.

Interesting that mention of it gets them to back down. I wonder why that is.

Sounds like you have threatened the use of it rather than actually used it via the bank? If so though, what reasons have you given to the bank? I assume that the bank has to accept such reasons.

 

[WelshBluebird]

Have you factored in the cost of system maintenance, etc?

£10 doesn't really go very far these days.

What system maintenance? Surely the refund procedure is part of the general ticketing / sales system and so doesn't actually cost the ToC anymore than what they would already be paying for that system. The card transaction fees (or an equivalent amount for handling cash) and the staff members time are the only real costs here.

As I said, while I don't agree with the fee, I accept it is there. But lets be honest about why it is there. It isn't there because processing a refund costs the ToC £10. It is there in part to prevent people taking the mick, and in part because it is an easy way to make money.

 

[bb21]

Why should the cost of maintaining the system, part of which covers refunds, not be covered by those who use the facility?

I don't disagree about your opinion on why the £10 fee is there, just that the cost isn't as minimalist as some might think.

 

[GaryMcEwan]

Interesting that mention of it gets them to back down. I wonder why that is.

Sounds like you have threatened the use of it rather than actually used it via the bank? If so though, what reasons have you given to the bank? I assume that the bank has to accept such reasons.

I've used it twice against Scotrail and the bank returned the full amount and Scotrail haven't disputed it. Once a dispute has been raised with my bank, they ask the retailer why they won't refund the full amount.

My reason is a simple one, I've paid XYZ amount and I expect to get XYZ amount back.

 

[bb21]

Interesting that mention of it gets them to back down. I wonder why that is.

Why? It is quite simple really. It isn't really worth the company's time disputing it for the sake of £10, and some people are obviously exploiting that loophole.

I probably would have done the same thing, albeit begrudgingly, in these circumstances, as the cost to the business would far outweigh the sums disputed if I were to prepare the response together with suitable evidence, plus all the admin and processing time. Much easier and quicker to just say "have your £10 on the house".

 

[Tetchytyke]

Have you factored in the cost of system maintenance, etc?

£10 doesn't really go very far these days.

For online transactions, the cost is pence. You're looking at the cost of the card interchange fee and that's about it. Everything else is automated. The credit card interchange fee is 0.3%, so for a £300 ticket it is a massive 91p. Let's be charitable and assume that the bank fees and assorted costs take that to an overall 1%. So for a £300 ticket bought online you're looking at £3. For the most expensive walk-up ticket available (Wick-Penzance 1st Anytime return) it would be £8.04.

A manual refund done at a ticket office would cost a bit more. Let's be generous and say a refund will take 12 minutes to process and a clerk earns £15 per hour. That's an extra £3 to factor in there.

Let's not be coy here. TOCs charge this £10 fee simply because they can. Let's not insult our intelligence by claiming that the cost of refunds is anywhere near £10, unless you're in the subset of people who routinely buy Wick-Penzance 1st Anytime returns in cash at a ticket office and then want a refund a few days later.

 

[bb21]

I will just refer you back to Post 50.

The cost of developing and maintaining the system should all be shared between users of the system imo.

I know some of you wish to simply look at refund functions as an add-on rather than an integral part of the system. I can only suggest that we agree to disagree.

 

[WelshBluebird]

The cost of developing and maintaining the system should all be shared between users of the system imo.

Which would be fine - except you don't charge a £10 fee to people buying a ticket. So it isn't being shared between users of the system. Of course, the counter to that will be that it is built into the cost of the ticket, well I wonder how much of a £7.90 Bath Spa to Bristol off peak day return goes to the cost of developing and maintaining the system?

 

[Tetchytyke]

I know some of you wish to simply look at refund functions as an add-on rather than an integral part of the system.

My understanding (which may be wrong) is that inbound and outbound card transactions are done as part of the same system. So if you have the functionality to do one, you have the functionality to do the other. It's certainly been the case on other retail EPOS systems I've used.

The cost of doing business is paid for by the commission paid to a retailer by ATOC. That's 5% for "normal" ticket sales. Now if a full refund is paid obviously that commission isn't paid either, so yes, there is a cost to the business of processing a refund. But you'd have to be looking at a refund value of £200 before £10 starts to look reasonable in that context.

 

[gray1404]

Even if the refund fee for flexible tickets was reduced (or got rid of), Advance tickets would remain non refundable (only changeable - which is only worthwhile if the ticket is £10 or more) unless the Advance t&c's changed too.

 

[AlterEgo]

As a consumer I'm protected and will use all the tools at my disposal to ensure that companies play by the book. Clearly you've never had the unbridled joy of having to deal with Scotrail Customer Relations.

Like I said previously, only had to do it on a handful of occasions and the mere mention of it usually changes their tune.

That doesn’t answer the question. You’re not protected from terms and conditions you simply don’t like, no matter how unethical you think they are.

 

[gray1404]

On the subject of refunds, Interesting how a company may try and fob a customer off if the customer complains and wants their money back... However raise a chargeback dispute and they back down much quicker.

I am not saying they will not make representations to the bank, but it seems like a more fair playing field.

Who makes the final decision with chargeback? Is it ultimately the customers bank who can take money back from the retailer (if so there's a lot of risk involved in accepting card payments).

 

[GaryMcEwan]

That doesn’t answer the question. You’re not protected from terms and conditions you simply don’t like, no matter how unethical you think they are.

Let's put it this way then, a customer wants to withdraw £300 cash from the counter at the bank, and the teller takes £10 as an admin fee for the customer taking it out via the teller rather than an ATM, could you imagine the uproar? I'd love to know how much the TOCs make a year on the back of their £10 'admin' fees...