-
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!
Extortionate prices
- Thread starter Nash
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
gordonthemoron
Established Member
yeah, right
BillyBoy
Member
. . . be worth something not to be stuck for hours in a traffic jam on the M5.
If you cost that journey at the HMRC rate of 45p/mile and compare that to the discounted fare with a family and friends railcard, they're not that far apart.
hairyhandedfool
Established Member
- Joined
- 14 Apr 2008
- Messages
- 8,837
If I were to drive a car over that distance it would cost me that same £48, plus the cost of driving lessons and tests, plus the cost of the car, the insurance, etc, etc, £200 sounds like a bargain to me.
Qwerty133
Established Member
1. At 40p per mile (the rate set by government for expenses) that journey would be over £100 by road, excluding parking charges.
2. Get a Family railcard, as that will significantly reduce the train fare to £123.95 according to BR fares.
EDIT: the rate is actually 45p per mile, apparently HMRC thinks it's a good idea to put the current rate below the previous rate in a completely separate table
2. Get a Family railcard, as that will significantly reduce the train fare to £123.95 according to BR fares.
EDIT: the rate is actually 45p per mile, apparently HMRC thinks it's a good idea to put the current rate below the previous rate in a completely separate table
Last edited:
Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
HMRC will give you an allowance of 45p towards fuel, wear and tear, which is about £120 for the return trip. Add £13 for the toll fees and you have a total of about £130.
With a Family and Friends Railcard, the train fare is £123.95.
If you have to buy a railcard it's another £30. But then you have to add HP charges, parking, and insurance costs to the road price, so it works out about the same.
Last edited:
Nash, here is more to t than simply money, even if your calculations are correct, which seems at the very least arguable.
How do you put a monetary value on a more relaxed journey, supposing for example, you find long distance driving to be stressful and something to be avoided if possible?
How do you put a monetary value on time, particularly if you prefer to avoid motorways?
Every time we have a thread like this I say the same thing. Every journey is different, every individuals needs are different. That's why the decision on whether to drive or take the train is up to you. There is no right or wrong answer, just what works best for me or you. The same also applies to plane v coach v car, where such alternatives exist.
How do you put a monetary value on a more relaxed journey, supposing for example, you find long distance driving to be stressful and something to be avoided if possible?
How do you put a monetary value on time, particularly if you prefer to avoid motorways?
Every time we have a thread like this I say the same thing. Every journey is different, every individuals needs are different. That's why the decision on whether to drive or take the train is up to you. There is no right or wrong answer, just what works best for me or you. The same also applies to plane v coach v car, where such alternatives exist.
Won't my insurance and HP cost be the same if I don't go or does Devon have higher taxes I don't know about and bridge toll is £6.40 as you only pay on the way back.
I can only use my car as a guide, it's a 260 mile round trip and when i get there it's staying in a hotel car park until I leave next day, my car will return 60 mpg loaded up which is 4 gallons of diesel about £28.00 total so with the wear and tear my guess of £48 total cost looks way to high.
60mpg makes your car one of the most fuel-efficient around. Unless of course you get stuck in traffic.
Are you going to post a new thread every time you find a fare that's higher than you'd like?
my car is returning a real world 58mpg.
I would still rather catch the train though.
I do love all the 'I did a 4 hour train journey and my train was 90 seconds late, how do I claim compensation'* threads we have bearing in mind the same journey by road could be anything up to an hour or 2 longer that expected but, of course, people will just accept that. If the train gets cancelled they want the world.
* slight exageration for effect!
Last edited:
I don't think anyone is going to argue that £57.10 for a return from Cardiff to Paignton is good value. At least you can travel at any time. Sadly there are loads and loads of fares like this where driving is cheaper. Nash has gone about it in not quite the right way, but as long as we persist with this nonsense attitude to transport where driving so often is cheaper then he'll continue to have a valid point. The low marginal cost of driving is also an issue, despite the very high average cost of driving in most cases. I mean, come on - are we going to keep letting everyone drive everywhere? Nay, encouraging it with fares much worse than this? Hasn't anybody noticed the sea is coming up through the floorboards in Miami?
Last edited:
The AA estimate RUNNING costs of a car (fuel plus servicing, tyres, parking etc) to be at around 17p a mile and the TOTAL costs including road tax, insurance and depreciation to add up to 30p or more, obviously many of these costs are fixed.
If you just take running costs I tend to find the cost of off peak rail travel versus driving to be comparable and the train woud win if the journey was long or difficult but once you add a second person into the car the train loses out. And sadly if you have to use peak services (Cross-Country, I'm thinking of you) it can be cheaper to HIRE a car than to use the train.
If you just take running costs I tend to find the cost of off peak rail travel versus driving to be comparable and the train woud win if the journey was long or difficult but once you add a second person into the car the train loses out. And sadly if you have to use peak services (Cross-Country, I'm thinking of you) it can be cheaper to HIRE a car than to use the train.
my car is returning a real world 58mpg.
I would still rather catch the train though.
I do love all the 'I did a 4 hour train journey and my train was 90 seconds late, how do I claim compensation'* threads we have bearing in mind the same journey by road could be anything up to an hour or 2 longer that expected but, of course, people will just accept that. If the train gets cancelled they want the world.
* slight exageration for effect!
Thanks for bringing some toatlly irellevant nonsense in about how trains are never late and that never inconveniences anyone!
If we're going to pay these outragous fares, why shouldn't we get back what we're entitled to? We don't even get cash!--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
my car is returning a real world 58mpg.
I would still rather catch the train though.
I do love all the 'I did a 4 hour train journey and my train was 90 seconds late, how do I claim compensation'* threads we have bearing in mind the same journey by road could be anything up to an hour or 2 longer that expected but, of course, people will just accept that. If the train gets cancelled they want the world.
* slight exageration for effect!
Thanks for bringing some totally irrelevant nonsense in about how trains are never late and that never inconveniences anyone!
If we're going to pay these outrageous fares, why shouldn't we get back what we're entitled to? We don't even get cash!How do you explain the fact that record numbers of passengers are now using the rail network? I have asked this a few times, and invariably the high cost of motoring features in the answers....
I had a chuckle the other day when looking at a fare to Worcester leaving midweek and coming back a week later. Leaving from Great Malvern......£109! I love using a train and will sometimes spend more to do so than it costs to drive but at that price I'd rather walk it!
Last edited:
bb21
Emeritus Moderator
- Joined
- 4 Feb 2010
- Messages
- 24,151
It is an error. The fare being suggested is a Freedom of South West 8 in 15 Days Rover.
The actual fare is two singles for a total of £10.
The actual fare is two singles for a total of £10.
EM2
Established Member
Yesterday, my wife and I travelled from London to Brighton and back, for a total of £20.30.
Just the fuel for my car (a 2-litre car that woukld return about 30mpg) would have been £28.95, and you can add at least £7 to park for the five hours we were there.
The car does not win every trip.
Ah thanks for that! Wondered what was going on!
bb21
Emeritus Moderator
- Joined
- 4 Feb 2010
- Messages
- 24,151
NRE has a habit of showing Rover fares if a return does not actually exist.
I wish some people would try to understand what the 45p HMRC mileage 'allowance' actually relates to. It is merely a notional maximum rate per mile at which people can either claim allowance from their employers without incurring a tax liability as a benefit in kind, or the rate at which the self employed can offset against their tax liability. There are maximum mileage allowances in both cases before the rate reduces. In many cases, it has little relevance to the real costs of motoring.
The railways problem is that whilst the comfort and facilities of the motor car - even basic models - are improving all the time, the railway is turning itself into RyanRail and making the journey experience far from pleasant. This is probably part of the reason why only around 11% of all journeys in the UK are by rail.
At £200 from Cardiff to Paignton, if the journey was by HST and direct, I might just consider it on a hot summer Saturday. Only the most enthusiastic rail enthusiast would pay that price rather than travel by car.
The railways problem is that whilst the comfort and facilities of the motor car - even basic models - are improving all the time, the railway is turning itself into RyanRail and making the journey experience far from pleasant. This is probably part of the reason why only around 11% of all journeys in the UK are by rail.
At £200 from Cardiff to Paignton, if the journey was by HST and direct, I might just consider it on a hot summer Saturday. Only the most enthusiastic rail enthusiast would pay that price rather than travel by car.
Notional or not, there is a cost per mile for car usage. So how do you explain the fact that rail passenger numbers are at an all time high even if only 11% of all journeys are by rail? Isnt it true that the average fare paid for a single journey is just over £5?
my car is returning a real world 58mpg.
I would still rather catch the train though.
I do love all the 'I did a 4 hour train journey and my train was 90 seconds late, how do I claim compensation'* threads we have bearing in mind the same journey by road could be anything up to an hour or 2 longer that expected but, of course, people will just accept that. If the train gets cancelled they want the world.
* slight exageration for effect!
Surely the chance of getting some money back (or at least a travel voucher) if things go awry is one of the best things going for rail transport !
Work out the difference between total number of passengers journeys, their percentage as a proportion of all UK travel, how growth in population affects those figures and you'll be well on your way to answering your question.
Once you're 26, not only does the cost of rail travel go up, but you could buy a zero depreciation, VED except car and pay under £100 a year insurance.
£48 sounds like an overestimate for a pre-1973 garaged vehicle, though depends on frequency of use. I suspect £200 would pay for the cost of a well-used modern saloon which did require higher insurance, VED and suffered depreciation.
£48 sounds like an overestimate for a pre-1973 garaged vehicle, though depends on frequency of use. I suspect £200 would pay for the cost of a well-used modern saloon which did require higher insurance, VED and suffered depreciation.
Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
I am well aware what the HMRC mileage rules relate to. My point is that 45p is seen as the level at which a taxpayer is not receiving a taxable benefit, i.e. not making a profit.
Some cars will cost less than 45p per mile, some cars will cost more. But at £1.30 for a litre of petrol, I don't think driving is that cheap anymore.
There's definitely an argument to be had about how expensive trains are compared to cars- I have colleagues who are forced to hire cars for travel as it's cheaper than a group ticket on XC- but it's not always as clear cut as it looks. People just add up the petrol price and decide that's the cost of driving, without factoring in any of the on-costs.
Agreed. Even when other factors like the ability to relax, eat and drink on the train unlike when you are behind the wheel, it still isn't as clear cut as some would like to believe.
There is an argument that one should only compare the incremental costs of each journey, on the grounds that one already owns the car, is paying VED and insurance, etc.
I don't normally make it because I think it's tosh, but just saying...
I don't normally make it because I think it's tosh, but just saying...
SS4
Established Member
Once you're 26, not only does the cost of rail travel go up, but you could buy a zero depreciation, VED except car and pay under £100 a year insurance.
Unless you were sneaky and bought your 16-25 railcard days before your 26th birthday
As for the topic some journeys are cheaper by car and some by train. If pounds and pence are that important to you then enjoy the drive but the train has intangible benefits as Greenback has touched upon. Is the expense worth it when you lose your first day (or half of it) due to fatigue?
A car will give you privacy but a train gives you mobility (and the option to go the toilet en route)
- Status