There, fixed that for you.
-
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!
Fares system is impossible for the average person to understand
- Thread starter suzanneparis
- 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
That's true; fares are valid as per the itinerary under contract law.
All we need is for passengers to never be penalised during disruption, and we're fine for book-ahead passengers. Bit more complex for walk-up passengers though.
There are some simple principles which could be applied to make things easier without ripping up the entire fares structure...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
That's true; fares are valid as per the itinerary under contract law.
All we need is for passengers to never be penalised during disruption, and we're fine for book-ahead passengers.
Bit more complex for walk-up passengers but there are some simple principles which could be applied to make things easier without ripping up the entire fares structure.
But I can get one on the day, at their office.
AlterEgo
Veteran Member
I haven't said they *would* close, rather more likely is that they'd require more subsidy if we went to a zonal system. Alternatively, single fare pricing would solve many of the problems by simply deciding what fare to charge for the Esk Valley branch and adding it to any longer distance ticket.
It's not an esoteric search, it is a real and material one - ordinary punters hate the complexity of fares, the staff can't get it right (and never will), it causes conflict and mistrust and has to change.
Mithering about Looe or Whitby is neither here nor there.
Of course, the debate opens up many questions, not least the possibility that the railway might have to stop appealing to literally all of the people all of the time (buses and airlines don't, so...), and finally decide what its core business is - and whether it would like to be simpler, easier and more intuitive for passengers.
It's over 30 years since I last used a National Express coach so I don't know what they are like now but I remember back then buying a ticket at an office with no check on seat availibility.
Do they overbook assuming no-shows, assume that coaches on all but certain core routes simply won't be full or are you just lucky using a lightly used route.
AlterEgo
Veteran Member
Agreed. It is unlikely that lines would physically close, but the financial constraints might change.
What fares do you propose then?
Ordinary punters will hate closures even more than an opaque fares system. How many fares increases and restructures are remembered about the average Briton ? A few more are aware of route closures I think !
Looe and Whitby are not mithering. They are running trains that people can catch, which is the primary purpose of the railway.
But they still check whether there are seats and if it is full, they won't give you a ticket.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
There's no reason these days why Advance tickets could not be available on the day, assuming quota remained, as a substitute for off-peak walk-ups.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
NatEx and I think Megabus these days are good at adding duplicates, and with compulsory reservation they have a better idea of whether they need to or not. Doesn't apply to the railway in the same way, though I suppose things like the Friday WCML additional services could run only on demand.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I think there is some disconnect on here about exactly what the phrase "single ticket pricing" means.
To me, the key concept is that a return fare just costs the price of two relevant singles. It might still be issued as a single piece, but that is only for convenience; no discount is offered. The advantage of this approach is added flexibility - you are no longer penalised for things like 3-point journeys, nor Y-shaped ones etc.
There are a load of other concepts like per-train pricing, going TOC-specific but not per-train, compulsory reservations, global fares[1] etc - these could possibly be added to single-fare pricing, but could also be added to return-fare pricing (though don't fit it quite as well). These probably merit separate discussion.
[1] Global fares, a rough translation of the German term "Globalpreis", describe a situation where a ticket and reservation are issued together for a given train, with compulsory reservations, and normal tickets are (generally, though not always) not accepted. The term "Globalpreiszug" describes a train on which only those fares are available - Eurostar would be an example - you can neither use UK domestic nor TCV tickets on it. A UK domestic example of a global fare is the inclusive fares on the Caledonian Sleeper.
Last edited:
As I mentioned, XC already do this. I was a bit surprised that no-one commented.
There must be a reason why other TOCs who offer Advances do not do the same, but I do not know what that reason is.
So if there are no seats left unreserved I would only be able to buy an Anytime ticket?
Market-based pricing is here to stay.
But what I would like to see is some basic principles which cannot be over-ridden by any train company, such as:
It would not result in any return fares decreasing (only singles) so any extra subsidy is relatively minimal.
Passenger numbers would rise as customers would feel more confident in knowing they are much less likely to be mistreated and that, while prices may be complex, passenger rights are not.
But what I would like to see is some basic principles which cannot be over-ridden by any train company, such as:
- Singles half the price of returns, but with NO price rises as a result (as I posted earlier, I can't see this happening, but it is highly desirable if - and only if - there are no price rises)
- Common conditions for all Railcards (if they were sensible, ie none of this "not for journeys before 0930 if wholly in the former NSE area" nonsense, e.g. valid any time but perhaps with a reasonable minimum fare, say no more than £10 maximum, none of this £12, £13 or nothing nonsense)
- Common conditions for all Anytime fares (York to Newcastle being Anytime "Short" while York to Leeds presumably being 'long' is ludicrous)
- All walk-up fares permit break of journey (on National Rail element) on either leg. No restrictions!
- Train company specific tickets allowed but must be valid on all the company's trains on permitted routes, compliant with Ticketing Settlement Agreement (no change to current conditions, but the current conditions actually enforced by the rail regulator!) and, in the event of disruption, valid on appropriate alternative trains of the customer's reasonable choice and also enforcement of the "must be printed on the ticket" rule, with hefty fines for train companies who flout this (e.g. XC with GroupSave)
- Common group discounts across all train companies. None of the ludicrous nonsense we have with passengers on the 'wrong type of Groupsave' and some TOCs doing Small Groups, some doing GroupSave (2 types), some doing Duo and some doing nothing.
- Two together Railcards to be like other Railcards in that a named person is the holder and anyone can travel with them, bringing it in line with Disabled, Family, Gold and Network Railcard
- All train companies making it clear that if there are no reservations displayed then no reservations apply.
- All train companies accepting each others tickets without quibble or threat of charging customers, during disruption.
- All train companies honouring the conditions regarding combining tickets for one journey, none of this nonsense of claiming passengers have made multiple journeys
- All train companies to sell the cheapest valid ticket to any customer who was unable to buy their chosen ticket at their origin (none of this Condition 3 nonsense, though the entitlement does need to be documented)
- All train companies & retailers charging an admin fee of no greater than £10 per transaction for changes to Advance fares or refunds of refubdable tickets (currently some charge no admin fee, some charge £10 per ticket, with Trainsplit commendably charging £10 for one entire transaction even if there are many tickets in the transaction)
- All train companies promising that itineraries will be accepted under any circumstances without quibble. Any dispute over websites issuing itineraries is an internal rail industry matter (no change here but TOCs need to adhere to contract law properly)
- All train companies to be forced to only convey 1st class accommodation where superior accommodation exists. Antimacassars only would be re-classified as standard class.
- All train companies to sell 1st class tickets at the traditional 1.5x standard rate if no 1st class fare exists
- All train companies to honour trains advertised as "standard class only"; no attempting to illegally charge 1st class fares or upgrades to customers boarding trains advertised as only conveying standard class
- Train companies who advertise Weekend 1st can only do so if they adhere to the longstanding principles and not make up their own nonsensical anti-customer rules (with hefty fines for train companies who do, e.g. XC)
- Any train company caught making up its own rules which are anti-customer and/or committing any consumer law breach to be issued with an improvement notice and fine, and if the concerns continue, loss of the franchise.
- Reassurances that customers found using a time restricted walk-up ticket at the wrong time will never be charged more than the difference in fares
- Reassurances that customers found using a route or TOC specific walk-up ticket at the wrong time will never be charged more than the difference in fares
- Any train company caught attempting to restrict the validity of, or increase the price of, any fare set by any other company, or to in any way attempt to reduce the rights of customers holding tickets priced by another company, to be severely reprimanded & fined (yes, that would include you, EMT!) and, if such attempts continue, to have their franchise terminated.
It would not result in any return fares decreasing (only singles) so any extra subsidy is relatively minimal.
Passenger numbers would rise as customers would feel more confident in knowing they are much less likely to be mistreated and that, while prices may be complex, passenger rights are not.
That rather defeats the specific purpose of that particular railcard and it would likely be withdrawn.
Here's the problem: define 'disruption'.
OK I will go a step further, and propose its withdrawal, to be replaced with a sensibly priced National Railcard as is the case in other countries then! Happy now?
Train cancelled or delayed by more than a sensible number of minutes to be agreed by the industry and publicised so everyone knows where they stand (with train companies able to give us more rights, by applying it with shorter delays where appropriate, but not less rights)
It is already the case that this should happen, but I'd like to see it more formalised and publicised and with penalties to TOCs who are caught failing to comply.
I accept I wasn't radical enough and yes, there should be such a Railcard!No national railcard Yorkie?
This was just some stuff off the top of my head, with no preparation or drafting. I am sure people can think of many other suggestions to standardise conditions without penalising customers.
Brill, I like to think of it as the ultimate standardisation of the railcard system !
I'd have a standard Railcard, but with pricing varying based on entitlement along the lines of existing railcards (e.g. anyone not currently entitled to a railcard may have to pay £100, while someone currently entitled to an existing railcard would pay less, e.g. DSB £10, Senior/Y-P maybe £30, etc...)
Currently you have:
- Min fare £13 after 10am, not usable before 10am
- Min fare £12 before 10am September-June inclusive
- Not usable before 0930 or whenever the off peak day fare is valid, for travel wholly within the former NSE area
- Not usable before 0930
(and possibly more!)
With regards to arguments about disruption:
I am using the examples of Hockley and Rayleigh Stations. These are two adjacent stations on the Southend Victoria - London Liverpool Street line, about three miles / four minutes apart. Both stations (RLG / HOC) have the same fare to Upminster, the Standard Day Single fare being £10.30.
At this moment in time, at weekends there is Crossrail engineering work causing the bulk of the line to be closed between Billericay and Liverpool Street. During this disruption, a bus service is laid on for passengers from Billericay to Newbury Park, where passengers disembark and use the Tube into London. It takes slightly more than twice as long for a passenger to travel from Billericay to Liverpool Street, 80m as opposed to 36m, IF the bus runs to time (London traffic).
Greater Anglia have ordered c2c not to accept their tickets, and in any event c2c won't accept Greater Anglia tickets (for the past two weekends, c2c were not accepting those that they are obliged to accept under the Ticketing and Settlement Agreement, but I have got that changed over the past couple of days).
It appears that Greater Anglia did this because they would have to pay c2c to accept their passengers as they either did not apply for permission in time or did applied for permission, withdrew the permission then reapplied for permission. It appears that it would have been free of cost to Greater Anglia if they had requested the requisite permission from c2c in time.
Fortunately for passengers from Hockley, the shortest route to Upminster is via Southend and the c2c line, so passengers have the right to use that route. Unfortunatly for passengers from Rayleigh, the shortest route to Upminster via Shenfield so special permission would need to be issued in order for c2c to accept their tickets.
This means that during the engineering works, a passenger from Rayleigh station must use a route that takes 3.5 hours to complete and involves the use of a bus because Greater Anglia withdrew their agreement for c2c to accept their tickets:
This for a journey that takes less than an hour when there is no engineeering work:
It's not just the time the journey takes, but look at the number of changes that is required:
Passengers from Hockley, who have the right to use c2c services by virtue of the shortest route also face a longer journey during the crossrail engineering work, but much, much shorter than that faced by passengers at Rayleigh.
Here is the normal timetable of services:
And here is the timetable of services during the engineering works.
I repeat, the stations each charge the same fare to Upminster. There is a revenue risk created by making passengers pass through London Terminals in order to reach Upminster during the works.
The current situation is absurd and bad for passengers.
I am using the examples of Hockley and Rayleigh Stations. These are two adjacent stations on the Southend Victoria - London Liverpool Street line, about three miles / four minutes apart. Both stations (RLG / HOC) have the same fare to Upminster, the Standard Day Single fare being £10.30.
At this moment in time, at weekends there is Crossrail engineering work causing the bulk of the line to be closed between Billericay and Liverpool Street. During this disruption, a bus service is laid on for passengers from Billericay to Newbury Park, where passengers disembark and use the Tube into London. It takes slightly more than twice as long for a passenger to travel from Billericay to Liverpool Street, 80m as opposed to 36m, IF the bus runs to time (London traffic).
Greater Anglia have ordered c2c not to accept their tickets, and in any event c2c won't accept Greater Anglia tickets (for the past two weekends, c2c were not accepting those that they are obliged to accept under the Ticketing and Settlement Agreement, but I have got that changed over the past couple of days).
It appears that Greater Anglia did this because they would have to pay c2c to accept their passengers as they either did not apply for permission in time or did applied for permission, withdrew the permission then reapplied for permission. It appears that it would have been free of cost to Greater Anglia if they had requested the requisite permission from c2c in time.
Fortunately for passengers from Hockley, the shortest route to Upminster is via Southend and the c2c line, so passengers have the right to use that route. Unfortunatly for passengers from Rayleigh, the shortest route to Upminster via Shenfield so special permission would need to be issued in order for c2c to accept their tickets.
This means that during the engineering works, a passenger from Rayleigh station must use a route that takes 3.5 hours to complete and involves the use of a bus because Greater Anglia withdrew their agreement for c2c to accept their tickets:
This for a journey that takes less than an hour when there is no engineeering work:
It's not just the time the journey takes, but look at the number of changes that is required:
Passengers from Hockley, who have the right to use c2c services by virtue of the shortest route also face a longer journey during the crossrail engineering work, but much, much shorter than that faced by passengers at Rayleigh.
Here is the normal timetable of services:
And here is the timetable of services during the engineering works.
I repeat, the stations each charge the same fare to Upminster. There is a revenue risk created by making passengers pass through London Terminals in order to reach Upminster during the works.
The current situation is absurd and bad for passengers.
Attachments
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Most probably, which would at least put the kibosh on overcrowding while still allowing people to travel (for a high price) in a dire emergency.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I agree. All the Railcards[1], assuming we are having them, should have the same T&Cs, time restrictions, minimum fares if any etc. Only the price should vary based on entitlement.
[1] What to do with the Family Railcard is an interesting question. In the South East, the Network Railcard is almost the same thing but allowing one adult to travel. Perhaps that would be the one variant - a hefty discount for requiring there to be a child in the party - but other T&Cs would be the same as other Railcards.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I would drop the Two Together - a national version of the Network Railcard (at a higher price) would effectively replace it. Actually, it'd also replace the Network Railcard - there isn't an awful lot of sense in a geographically restricted version of something that was available nationally.
Last edited:
So that makes it OK for passengers from Rayleigh to Upminster who pay the same fare from Hockley to have to spend 3.5 hrs making a 1hr journey but for the fact that Rayleigh is three minutes further along the line?
I actually would go as far as to disagree with you. In BR days, it was ANY REASONABLE ROUTE. I fail to see that BR would say it was unreasonable for you to travel via Southend with its 1hr 15m journey rather than its 3hr 30m journey, and when the alternative route via Liverpool Street had a much higher than the fare than the one you paid.
I don't understand what you are saying. Southend Central - Victoria is a valid interchange and I don't understand the reference to doubling back.
It is doubling back in the everyday sense of the word, but not by the Routeing Guide definition (passing through the same station twice)
I'm often accused of being anti-passenger, but this takes the biscuit! Being charged way *more* than the current walk-up price to travel on a weekend train because cheap Advance tickets had sold out - even if those Advance seats are going unused because the passenger decided not to travel.
Edit: Thinking about it some more, it's even worse than that, since they are quota controlled. Let's assume that there are ten seats on a train and eleven people turn up at the station at the same time and queue to buy tickets. The first five people in the queue pay £15, the next five pay £25 and the eleventh pays £50!
Last edited:
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
With such a concept, more Advances would be available - potentially every seat, at variable prices up to the Anytime. You can look at most TOCs' First Class pricing (but reduced) to see how that would work.
You're basically signing away passenger freedoms as there's no longer a cheaper, flexible option. If I want any flexibility I have to pay full whack.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Well, that's how it is on just about every other mode of transport.
I'm not saying I advocate this approach, but it is Off Peak tickets that cause the vast majority of anomalies and therefore confusion. And it would wipe out overcrowding because proper yield management would be able to be used.
- Status