High fares - The issue that won't go away

[Starmill]

I don’t know. They do emphasise how some fares appear to have become or are particularly ‘expensive’. There is then the debate about whether price per mile should be even - which I think is a bit of a vexed one?

The classic where I grew up was Marsden to Greenfield. I have just checked it now and it is £3.90. That seems reasonable to me so I wonder if they have sorted it out. I think they must have because Huddersfield to Marsden (within the PTE boundary) is now more expensive at £4.20!

Marsden to Greenfield Off Peak Day Single is £7.80.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

The classic where I grew up was Marsden to Greenfield. I have just checked it now and it is £3.90. That seems reasonable to me so I wonder if they have sorted it out. I think they must have because Huddersfield to Marsden (within the PTE boundary) is now more expensive at £4.20!

Marsden to Greenfield Off Peak Day Single is £7.80.

Indeed. It's a booked train only Advance single (Marsden -> Greenfield) that can be had for £3.90. The £4.20 Huddersfield-> Marsden fare quoted is, however, for an Anytime Day Single.

 

[yorksrob]

For me the debate goes something like this:
1. What are loadings on trains now that post-Covid routines have largely settled down.

I have a sense that there are some big points to be sorted - most on my mind is quiet peak intercity and quiet outer-suburban in the south.

2. How can quiet trains be filled. Intercity - feels like we need a major change on anytime fares (unless I my anecdotal but regular recent experience of very light loadings is wrong). Outer suburban london - I don’t have enough experience of recent peak/off peak loadings to say if there is a big problem there.

3. Off peak intercity - feels very busy - can some of that load be shifted into the peak to create more capacity.

4. Fair fares - all taxpayers pay for the railway. Where rail is an option (it obviously isn’t where there is no railway - that is such a non-point), prices should be affordable.

5. Are high fares a talking point for people who don’t use the train and don’t live near a train line - of course not. Why would they be.

6. Where trains are full but also short, it is a real shame our answer seems to be price people off, not increase capacity.

I spent the first 30 years of my life seeing the ridiculous under-provision on transpennine. It was just silly to run 2 carriage trains on a route connecting most of the countries biggest cities outside London, competing with the M62 car park.

It is crazy that we have allowed cross country trains to be half the length they should be.

Funnily enough neither of these intercity routes calls at London.

The railway wastes vast amount of money every year at every level. There are plenty of open secrets on where. If GBR does its job properly, it will deal with the overspending/paying on infrastructure provision and contractual game playing and get that money into increasing capacity where there is clearly demand/suppressed demand.

It would be lovely if the sums add up to also allow fares to come down across the board. I would be partially happy if we just dealt with the current absolutely ridiculous examples, such as peak anytime.

Perhaps controversially, I would also reduce the availability of advance fares to no more than 1/2 of a service and with no railcard discounts so the rest is available at standard off-peak fares. They tend to be just about okay and with plenty of railcard reductions even better for lots of people.

You make a good point - all taxpayers contribute to the railway. Politicians are quick to call for value for taxpayers - they conveniently forget that that means said taxpayers not being priced off all the time.

Fares may not be much of a talking point, however I believe a perception of poor value for money is keeping a lot of people away

 

[modernrail]

Indeed. It's a booked train only Advance single (Marsden -> Greenfield) that can be had for £3.90. The £4.20 Huddersfield-> Marsden fare quoted is, however, for an Anytime Day Single.

Ah yes,

I stupidly thought there is no way an advance would be offered for 1 stop!

So, the high base fare remains but then with advances for 1 stop between two local stations not that far apart. Are we the only country doing it like that???

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Jun 2025 ==

You make a good point - all taxpayers contribute to the railway. Politicians are quick to call for value for taxpayers - they conveniently forget that that means said taxpayers not being priced off all the time.

Fares may not be much of a talking point, however I believe a perception of poor value for money is keeping a lot of people away

Exactly, and the ease with which some in the railway seem to be see pricing people off who are stakeholders in the system and have contributed to it financially troubles me greatly.

 

[AlterEgo]

Exactly, and the ease with which some in the railway seem to be see pricing people off who are stakeholders in the system and have contributed to it financially troubles me greatly.

What’s the solution? It’s obviously to make people who don’t use the railway pay more for it as a social good. That increases the burden on taxpayers. Which would be good - but it isn’t going to happen!

 

[yorksrob]

What’s the solution? It’s obviously to make people who don’t use the railway pay more for it as a social good. That increases the burden on taxpayers. Which would be good - but it isn’t going to happen!

This is why you need some sort of a nationwide benchmark such as a cap per mile. Otherwise its a postcode lottery as to whether ones local railway has affordable fares.

The alternative would be a national railcard or discount scheme that anyone could buy into.

There are various options for a government who was serious about ensuring value for money for passengers.

 

[modernrail]

What’s the solution? It’s obviously to make people who don’t use the railway pay more for it as a social good. That increases the burden on taxpayers. Which would be good - but it isn’t going to happen!

Before we get to that we have a right at taxpayers to ask, is the railway and are the DfT finding the right balance within the current envelope.

The answer is highly unlikely to be yes, unless the railway has somehow managed to find the perfection that no other organisation in the world has achieved.

The railway is already heavily taxpayer funded as a social good and so should be open to a fair bit more scrutiny that it is at the moment.

The subsidy is running at what level now…. more than half of all income, compared to maybe a quarter before Covid. That is I think before accounting for additional capital funding. I am not an expert but I think those are the broad numbers?

 

[redreni]

The trouble is, nobody in authority is prepared to make and win the argument that the travelling public is rightly subsidised. We are subsidised if we drive and we are subsidised if we take the train. People who don't drive still have to pay for the roads and people who don't take the train still have to pay for the railways. A lot of drivers don't like that and appear oblivious to the subsidies they receive, but It needs a bit of political leadership rather than pandering to ignorance.

I quite agree with @modernrail 's point that the argument loses a lot of it's legitimacy if you compel people to subsidise something through their taxes then price them off it. Particularly when we're not only failing to invest significantly in new infrastructure to lay on adequate capacity, but we're even running short-formed trains that are either seriously overcrowded, or would be seriously overcrowded but for price rationing.

 

[yorkie]

This is why you need some sort of a nationwide benchmark such as a cap per mile....

No-one has yet come up with a viable figure per mile, nor come up with a solution that takes into account the permutations of routes, potential for doubling-back, etc...

Usually when someone initially tries it, they then say that different sections of track would have different pricing (which gets very complicated) and then either fails to come up with example pricing, or it turns out that the results would cause huge overcrowding on 'popular routes' (e.g. between London & Reading), while putting people off using trains in places where fares have been kept reasonable, e.g. Devon & Cornwall.

 

[yorksrob]

No-one has yet come up with a viable figure per mile, nor come up with a solution that takes into account the permutations of routes, potential for doubling-back, etc...

Usually when someone initially tries it, they then say that different sections of track would have different pricing (which gets very complicated) and then either fails to come up with example pricing, or it turns out that the results would cause huge overcrowding on e.g. London to Reading, while putting people off using trains in Devon & Cornwall.

But a cap is different from a price per mile.

It would probably be nearer to something that would stop massive overcrowding on Paddington to Reading, but it's only a cap, so the railway could always offer cheaper fares (say in Cornwall) if it made commercial sense.

 

[yorkie]

But a cap is different from a price per mile.

It would probably be nearer to something that would stop massive overcrowding on Paddington to Reading, but it's only a cap, so the railway could always offer cheaper fares (say in Cornwall) if it made commercial sense.

True, but what would it be? If it was a reasonable rate, I'd be all for the idea, but in practical terms, how would it be calculated, detected and enforced?

 

[AlterEgo]

But a cap is different from a price per mile.

It would probably be nearer to something that would stop massive overcrowding on Paddington to Reading, but it's only a cap, so the railway could always offer cheaper fares (say in Cornwall) if it made commercial sense.

Is there lots of overcrowding on Paddington to Reading at the moment?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Is there lots of overcrowding on Paddington to Reading at the moment?

With the 80x being considerably more capacious than the HSTs used to be plus 12 car EMU services and the Lizzie (and more working from home) it's by no means what it was.

 

[yorksrob]

True, but what would it be? If it was a reasonable rate, I'd be all for the idea, but in practical terms, how would it be calculated, detected and enforced?

Something less than the average off peak fare per mile between London and Canterbury maybe. But I'm only a passenger, it would be a decision between politics and the industry really.

As for how to enforce it - it would just be reflected in fares regulation.

Is there lots of overcrowding on Paddington to Reading at the moment?

Some seem to think that would be the consequence of meaningful fares reform.

 

[Starmill]

Would you use set a cap based on straight line distance between stations, miles by car, miles by rail or something else?

 

[Hadders]

As I said upthread...

What would the cap be?

If you used something like Reading to Paddington it would be so high as to be relatively meaningless across the rest of the country.

On the other hand, if the cap was based on the excellent value fares in the West Country then they’d be ‘too cheap’ on a route like Reading to London and there’d be too much revenue loss.

There isn’t an easy solution…

 

[Krokodil]

All of the IETs I've had into Paddington over the last year have been wedged. These have been on Sundays though, so peak fares don't apply. I'd be interested to know what loadings are like during the peak (when the contactless fare is an eye-watering 84p/mile) and off peak (when it is still pricey at 34p/mile but better value than the 50p/mile fares for similar length single journeys in North Wales). I suspect that there is some spare capacity and that peak fares can come down without causing overcrowding - it may even be a profitable move.

If we're purely looking at what is a reasonable price (without considering how to extract funding from the Treasury), I'm going to set the bar at 30p/mile for single journeys, 25p/mile for period returns and 20p/mile for day returns (for the return tickets don't forget to count the miles in both directions).

Would you use set a cap based on straight line distance between stations, miles by car, miles by rail or something else?

Miles by rail. Just as would have been the case until 1967 (or whichever year it was).

Alternatively, there's always the system used in the Netherlands where each section of route is allocated a number which roughly correlates with real distance but not exactly, you count the numbers on the map and look up the fare for that distance. This would allow you to allocate smaller numbers to "community" routes. This would eliminate the need to split in many of the cases where branchline tickets are cheap but the through tickets from mainline stations are expensive.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Wednesday at 23:47 ==

On the other hand, if the cap was based on the excellent value fares in the West Country then they’d be ‘too cheap’ on a route like Reading to London and there’d be too much revenue loss.

Only if you assume that extortionate peak fares aren't pricing off demand.

 

[Starmill]

Miles by rail. Just as would have been the case until 1967 (or whichever year it was).

So York - Whitby would cost... roughly double what York - Eaglescliffe does? Is that sensible? Is York - Whitby going to double in price or is York - Eaglescliffe going to half? Also, what's the mileage for Manchester - Derby, York - Sheffield or Leeds - Headbolt Lane?

 

[AlterEgo]

If we're purely looking at what is a reasonable price (without considering how to extract funding from the Treasury), I'm going to set the bar at 30p/mile for single journeys, 25p/mile for period returns and 20p/mile for day returns (for the return tickets don't forget to count the miles in both directions).


Miles by rail. Just as would have been the case until 1967 (or whichever year it was).

Sorry, why are we basing pricing on mileage travelled? The number of miles travelled is one of the least important factors about a customer's journey. What's more important is where they're going and how fast.

 

[yorksrob]

Would you use set a cap based on straight line distance between stations, miles by car, miles by rail or something else?

Personally I'd be inclined towards something like straight line distance if possible - then it would avoid overpricing journeys like Leeds to Whitby which take a long way round. Of course, this might not be possible if it created too many anomalies, so it may need to be based on route milage.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Rail miles are the only way to avoid massive anomalies and is *very roughly* what the system approximates to now when it comes to Anytime fares.

That does make York to Whitby or (even more extreme) Hull to Barton rather pricey, but in reality those journeys are rather indirect and best done by bus anyway.

 

[yorksrob]

As I said upthread...

What would the cap be?

If you used something like Reading to Paddington it would be so high as to be relatively meaningless across the rest of the country.

On the other hand, if the cap was based on the excellent value fares in the West Country then they’d be ‘too cheap’ on a route like Reading to London and there’d be too much revenue loss.

There isn’t an easy solution…

I think that one has to recognise that many off-peak fares in the South East are eye-wateringly high (hence my example of London to Canterbury, (which is over 40 quid in some cases) and probably ought to come down.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Thursday at 07:39 ==

All of the IETs I've had into Paddington over the last year have been wedged. These have been on Sundays though, so peak fares don't apply. I'd be interested to know what loadings are like during the peak (when the contactless fare is an eye-watering 84p/mile) and off peak (when it is still pricey at 34p/mile but better value than the 50p/mile fares for similar length single journeys in North Wales). I suspect that there is some spare capacity and that peak fares can come down without causing overcrowding - it may even be a profitable move.

If we're purely looking at what is a reasonable price (without considering how to extract funding from the Treasury), I'm going to set the bar at 30p/mile for single journeys, 25p/mile for period returns and 20p/mile for day returns (for the return tickets don't forget to count the miles in both directions).


Miles by rail. Just as would have been the case until 1967 (or whichever year it was).

Alternatively, there's always the system used in the Netherlands where each section of route is allocated a number which roughly correlates with real distance but not exactly, you count the numbers on the map and look up the fare for that distance. This would allow you to allocate smaller numbers to "community" routes. This would eliminate the need to split in many of the cases where branchline tickets are cheap but the through tickets from mainline stations are expensive.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Wednesday at 23:47 ==


Only if you assume that extortionate peak fares aren't pricing off demand.

That's similar to the pence per mile I came up with a few pages back.

I like the Netherlands idea - it still allows for routes to be treated separately on a commercial basis, however by itself, it wouldn't stop the numbers on the ECML (as an example) being too high.

 

[Hadders]

I think that one has to recognise that many off-peak fares in the South East are eye-wateringly high (hence my example of London to Canterbury, (which is over 40 quid in some cases) and probably ought to come down.

I'd love fares in the south-east to reduce in price but it simply isn't going to happen. In fact, in many cases, the opposite is happening with significant fares increases.

 

[yorksrob]

I'd love fares in the south-east to reduce in price but it simply isn't going to happen. In fact, in many cases, the opposite is happening with significant fares increases.

Perhaps the easiest route to affordable transport would be to make the Network railcard National - which would bake in the existing disparities between London radial routes and the rest of the country. I know that all the arguments will be dusted off against even that modest proposal by those defending the status quo at all costs.

It's all depressingly and familiarly unambitious. If only we could look to some of our neighbouring countries and their determination to have affordable rail transport, but we'll still be stuck with what the Establishment in Westminster and Whitehall say we should have.

 

[35B]

Perhaps the easiest route to affordable transport would be to make the Network railcard National - which would bake in the existing disparities between London radial routes and the rest of the country. I know that all the arguments will be dusted off against even that modest proposal by those defending the status quo at all costs.

It's all depressingly and familiarly unambitious. If only we could look to some of our neighbouring countries and their determination to have affordable rail transport, but we'll still be stuck with what the Establishment in Westminster and Whitehall say we should have.

You are assuming that the resolution requires outlying expensive fares to come down. As fares have a significant history, including of some PTE areas (S Yorks comes to mind) holding fares very low, presumably you would also accept that these would rise?

 

[Richardr]

Personally I'd be inclined towards something like straight line distance if possible - then it would avoid overpricing journeys like Leeds to Whitby which take a long way round. Of course, this might not be possible if it created too many anomalies, so it may need to be based on route milage.

I live in St Albans and as far as I am aware the only realistic way to say Hatfield station on rail is via St Pancras / Kings Cross. The straight line distance between stations is about 9km. Charging me on a straight line will use that 9km. Presumably that will also enable me to break my journey at St Pancras for the same cost as the straight line to Hatfield?

 

[35B]

Personally I'd be inclined towards something like straight line distance if possible - then it would avoid overpricing journeys like Leeds to Whitby which take a long way round. Of course, this might not be possible if it created too many anomalies, so it may need to be based on route milage.

If there were identified demand for that journey, isn't that precisely why operators have moved away from mileage based fares?

 

[Mawkie]

I live in St Albans and as far as I am aware the only realistic way to say Hatfield station on rail is via St Pancras / Kings Cross.

"On rail" being the operative words. There are numerous frequent buses that take you from St Albans to Hatfield in circa 30 mins. Nobody is really going to make that journey by train unless they absolutely had to - longer, more expensive, more hassle.

We have to take the best method of public transport available to us.

 

[Haywain]

We have to take the best method of public transport available to us.

Do we? Is this written somewhere?

 

[Mawkie]

Do we? Is this written somewhere?

I find pendantry to be important in legal documents, but a bit silly on an internet forum.

Hopefully you understood the meaning behind my sentence - that being: railway journeys are fantastic, buses are great, cars are good too, taxis are fine, cycling is useful, walking is lovely - but each method should be chosen according to cost, distance, availability, suitability, and many other personal variables.