LNER to pilot removal of Off-Peak tickets

[ThameslinkUser]

I was very aware of the near-identical numbers, but thought this isn't the place to start a war over Brexit...

 

[AdamWW]

Then why is the staff brief advising that more flows are to join?

Page 2 of https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/fares_utopia_simpler_fares_pilot/response/2552002/attach/4/Staff Brief Simpler Fares Pilot.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1 states:

Interesting that they mention that a majority (just) said that 1 hour either way was all the flexibility they'd ever need.

Surely there's also the question of how far in advance you're prepared to fix that window in order to get an affordable ticket? There's a difference between buying a ticket on the day and having to fix the return time and having to choose it a month in advance.

I also don't quite understand the argument that people don't need to worry about unaffordable "surge" pricing because anytimes set a cap. Aside from it being a rather high cap, aren't they unregulated?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Surely there's also the question of how far in advance you're prepared to fix that window in order to get an affordable ticket? There's a difference between buying a ticket on the day and having to fix the return time and having to choose it a month in advance.

Very much so. I can cope with compulsory reservations provided the fares on the day aren't unreasonable and the change fee is either nonexistent or reasonable, because I do it by either buying on the day (if it isn't likely to fill up) or buying the most likely train and changing it when I know which I want.

The fare increase is by far the worst part of this.

I also don't quite understand the argument that people don't need to worry about unaffordable "surge" pricing because anytimes set a cap. Aside from it being a rather high cap, aren't they unregulated?

Quite. (FWIW I wouldn't mind this as much if the Anytime was reduced to about £120 - which looking at the fares they've deployed would appear not to cap below what they want to charge - perhaps they could try that as well?).

 

[AdamWW]

The fare increase is by far the worst part of this.

And yet the document goes out of the way to give the impression that it's all about making life better for passengers and they won't really, much, well perhaps just a little bit, use it as a way of increasing fares overall.

As said above, they could so easily have introduced an easy way to change the reservation of an off peak ticket, avoiding unused reservations and giving people confidence they're on the right train. What could be more simple for the passenger than that?

 

[Watershed]

I'm glad that LNER's disingenuous claims are finally being aired in public. See for example this on page 7:

Guidance for retail staff
For the length of the pilot, where only selected markets see the withdrawal of off-peak fares, there may be opportunities to split tickets (to gain access to off-peak fares) and also opportunities for 'long buying' where it is cheaper to buy a longer distance off-peak fare for the shorter journey being undertaken.
This sort of booking behaviour distorts passenger demand and revenue figures - figures which are crucial to business planning. We do not support any retailer or retail agent actively offering customers alternative tickets in this way. Again, this distorts vital management information and may hinder further reforms if this leads to any material impact to the evaluation of LNER's pilot. We therefore encourage retail outlets during this time not to extend any 'tricks of the trade'.
It is fundamental to the success of fares reform that during this time staff only sell a ticket for the journey the customer is actually making unless a request is made for alternative tickets.
Any fares anomalies should be reported to LNER's pricing team for review. Please be mindful that if customers are actively swayed to make alternative ticket purchases which favour any particular operator, this could be seen as acting unfairly and not adhering to impartial retailing principles.

How can the use of an existing, unchanged fare constitute an 'anomaly'?

LNER must be on a different planet when they claim that suggesting a Haymarket ticket to avoid the usury of an Edinburgh ticket 'could be seen as acting unfairly'. I think they'd struggle to show many (if any) examples where it's more expensive! Unless of course they are suggesting it's unfair to LNER - which essentially admits that the trial is a foregone conclusion...

As for 'not adhering to impartial retailing principles', it's funny how these principles only ever seems to be wheeled out when it suits the argument being made. Perhaps I'm mistaken, but are these not the same principles that the industry has previously described as outdated and unnecessary?

 

[miklcct]

I'm glad that LNER's disingenuous claims are finally being aired in public. See for example this on page 7:


How can the use of an existing, unchanged fare constitute an 'anomaly'?

LNER must be on a different planet when they claim that suggesting a Haymarket ticket to avoid the usury of an Edinburgh ticket 'could be seen as acting unfairly'. I think they'd struggle to show many (if any) examples where it's more expensive! Unless of course they are suggesting it's unfair to LNER - which essentially admits that the trial is a foregone conclusion...

As for 'not adhering to impartial retailing principles', it's funny how these principles only ever seems to be wheeled out when it suits the argument being made. Perhaps I'm mistaken, but are these not the same principles that the industry has previously described as outdated and unnecessary?

A lot of retailers show a number of "popular" routes on the front page with a price. Maybe London - Haymarket can be one of them.

 

[Watershed]

A lot of retailers show a number of "popular" routes on the front page with a price. Maybe London - Haymarket can be one of them.

I don't think that most people are necessarily aware of where Haymarket is. On the other hand, if you used the name Edinburgh (Haymarket)* then I imagine it might be a little more popular. Either way, I don't think most people make their purchasing decisions based on these sorts of factors. Edinburgh would likely show as cheaper anyway, because of Lumo's cheap fares.

A more popular (and entirely legitimate) option might be if on a London-Edinburgh search a retailer suggested something along the lines of "you can also buy a ticket to Haymarket (0.9 mi away) for £x less. This ticket allows you to finish your journey at Edinburgh". But whilst legitimate, it would be sure to get LNER's backs up - a position most retailers wouldn't want to put themselves in.

*Ryanair-style - hardly out of keeping with the direction the rail industry seems to be headed in

 

[NorthOxonian]

I'm glad that LNER's disingenuous claims are finally being aired in public. See for example this on page 7:


How can the use of an existing, unchanged fare constitute an 'anomaly'?

LNER must be on a different planet when they claim that suggesting a Haymarket ticket to avoid the usury of an Edinburgh ticket 'could be seen as acting unfairly'. I think they'd struggle to show many (if any) examples where it's more expensive! Unless of course they are suggesting it's unfair to LNER - which essentially admits that the trial is a foregone conclusion...

As for 'not adhering to impartial retailing principles', it's funny how these principles only ever seems to be wheeled out when it suits the argument being made. Perhaps I'm mistaken, but are these not the same principles that the industry has previously described as outdated and unnecessary?

The line about "the journey the customer is actually making" is also an interesting one as surely that goes both ways? Generally, when travelling to London I have bought a ticket to King's Cross (typically an advance but not always).

But in practice I'm very rarely going there - for instance on several recent trips to London I stayed in Putney. In the past there would be no reason to book a through ticket: perhaps it might have been very slightly cheaper, but the simplicity of just a ticket to London and contactless from there was worth the (very theoretical) difference in price, particularly as it included the flexibility to get the tube to East Putney or take main line services. Now that there's no cap on advances from Newcastle to London other than the exorbitant Anytime, the difference in price can be quite substantial - all of a sudden I have a very strong incentive to book for my actual journey rather than in parts (and the latter was probably better financially for LNER)...

 

[Haywain]

A more popular (and entirely legitimate) option might be if on a London-Edinburgh search a retailer suggested something along the lines of "you can also buy a ticket to Haymarket (0.9 mi away) for £x less. This ticket allows you to finish your journey at Edinburgh". But whilst legitimate, it would be sure to get LNER's backs up - a position most retailers wouldn't want to put themselves in.

That might get LNER's backs up, but I would expect that it would also be an accreditation failure. It would also open an extremely large can of worms about why this was only being done for one flow when there are many others where tickets for longer journeys might be cheaper and/or more flexible. I believe that there was a query about offering this sort of functionality on Trainsplit recently and @Adam Williams wasn't enthusiastic about it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Haymarket isn't really a Ryanair version of Edinburgh, the two stations are just at opposite ends of the city centre, a bit like Manchester Pic and Vic. I've long advocated an Edinburgh Stations covering both - but this dodge is a useful side effect of not doing that

 

[fandroid]

A lot of the criticism would be dispersed if Anytime fares became affordable and a fee-free refund* were available for the 70 minute flex tickets.

*even if was only in the form of a credit with the retailer

 

[Bletchleyite]

A lot of the criticism would be dispersed if Anytime fares became affordable and a fee-free refund* were available for the 70 minute flex tickets.

*even if was only in the form of a credit with the retailer

I'd be as happy as I'm going to be with it if:

Anytime reduced to £120 and to become a regulated fare
70 minute tickets refundable to an e-voucher
£10 admin fee removed for all Advance changes and all refunds, except paper tickets where there is admin to do.

 

[Krokodil]

What an interesting document (my bolding):

Don't help the person who already subsidises the railways through their taxes. Make them pay more.

(Why do train operating companies even still have their own retail channels in this post-franchising age, think of all the money being wasted)

Heaven forbid anyone puts the passenger first.

Definition of "Impartial Retailing" :

Impartiality simply means providing the customer with information or a ticket that is the most suitable for their needs.

My need is to get from London to Edinburgh without it costing an arm and a leg. Haymarket is in Edinburgh, just as Euston is in London. So if I turned up and asked for a ticket to Edinburgh, shouldn't I be told "it's this price to Waverley but this price to Haymarket", just as on a journey in the other direction I should be told "it's slower but cheaper to Euston than to Kings Cross".

Or indeed someone going to Manchester should be told "it's this price if you go to Victoria at xx:25, this price to Piccadilly at xx55, or this price for the flexible ticket to return from either"

Haymarket isn't really a Ryanair version of Edinburgh, the two stations are just at opposite ends of the city centre, a bit like Manchester Pic and Vic. I've long advocated an Edinburgh Stations covering both - but this dodge is a useful side effect of not doing that

Yes, Ryanair would have Edinburgh (Berwick).

 

[Gerald Fiennes]

Really, this is a revenue raising measure and staff briefing neatly obfuscates this. Removing the off-peak return creates more option for ADV fares to be increased up to Anytime levels on busy days, something LNER's many predecessors have wanted to do more or less ever since the new fares regime was created. Even if ticket office staff are 'forbidden' from pointing out better value options to passengers using the stations in the trial, those in the know will be altering their travel behaviour -- quickly followed by those non-rail officianadoes who get stung with Anytime fares! (They won't be doing that again... )

The line about 'Impartial Retailing' shows how seriously muddled things have got in our hybrid nationalised/privatised railway. It would be good to get a test case under consumer law brought should someone be offered a cheaper option which LNER deem to be a breach of this curious concept...! One would hope that ORR would be on the case here ... but that is, of course, unlikely.

 

[sheff1]

A lot of the criticism would be dispersed if Anytime fares became affordable and a fee-free refund* were available for the 70 minute flex tickets.

*even if was only in the form of a credit with the retailer

Almost all the criticism would not have arisen at all had the Super Off Peak Fare been retained. That, as already pointed out, would also have made for a much more informed assessment of what passengers really preferred during the 'trial' period - but, despite the claims from the usual LNER apologists, it is clear that the aim is not to assess people's preferences or make fares simpler, rather it is to increase fares under a smoke screen of simplification.

Definition of "Impartial Retailing" :

My need is to get from London to Edinburgh without it costing an arm and a leg. Haymarket is in Edinburgh, just as Euston is in London. So if I turned up and asked for a ticket to Edinburgh, shouldn't I be told "it's this price to Waverley but this price to Haymarket", just as on a journey in the other direction I should be told "it's slower but cheaper to Euston than to Kings Cross".

Exactly this. Not as if Haymarket is a minor suburban station either. It is a well served station at the opposite end of one of the major thoroughfares in the city to Waverley

If someone asks for the walk up fare options from Birmingham to London is it against Impartial Retailing to give the prices for "via High Wycombe" as well as "Any Permitted" because doing so might cause the price conscious customer to favour Chiltern. Marylebone is almost the exact same distance from Euston as Haymarket is from Waverley.

 

[thedbdiboy]

Then why is the staff brief advising that more flows are to join?

Page 2 of https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/fares_utopia_simpler_fares_pilot/response/2552002/attach/4/Staff Brief Simpler Fares Pilot.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1 states:

That's irrelevant to the point that evaluation is against comparable markets. The DfT and its analysts have dozens of comparable flows across the TOCs, even if DfT agrees to further journeys being added on LNER.

 

[LittleRedTrain]

I note that a number of Freedom of Information requests were made on WhatDoTheyKnow for data relating to this trial. LNER has the obligation to respond in 20 working days, which is next week for most of the requests - but so far there is nothing.

Responses usually come from one lady (who seems usually very helpful) but I am surprised that LNER has seemingly left her to answer all these queries. Unless, of course, LNER thinks that it is immune to its obligations under the Freedom of Information Act?

LNER have now responded to an FOI request for the Equality Impact Assessment for the fare changes:

Equality Impact Assessments for Fare Simplification trial announced on 16/1/24 - a Freedom of Information request to London North Eastern Railway Limited

Please can you provide all 'Equality Impact Assessments' (or equivalent documents) related to the fares simplification trial announced on 16/1/24 at https://www.lner.co.uk/news/lner-launches-pioneering-pilot-to-further-simplify-fares/ Particularly, any documents that evaluate the impact of...

www.whatdotheyknow.com

The Dft hold responsibility for making any relevant assessments under the Public Sector Equality Duty and so the Equality Impact Assessment (EQIA) for this project is with the DfT. In determining whether LNER holds the information requested, I carried out a comprehensive search of LNER's servers and electronic records. After carefully reviewing the results of this search, I have determined that LNER did not carry out its own EQIA nor do we hold a copy of the DfT’s completed EQIA. Therefore, unfortunately I must inform you that LNER does not hold the information you have requested

Basically, up to the DfT to carry out any Equality Impact Assessment (despite LNER trying to pretend that the DfT aren't pulling the strings), and they can't find any copy of the DfT's assessment either.
I wouldn't be surprised to find out that no assessment was actually carried out, despite any fare changes potentially having a greater impact on those that cannot drive due to disability!

 

[Mainline421]

That might get LNER's backs up, but I would expect that it would also be an accreditation failure. It would also open an extremely large can of worms about why this was only being done for one flow when there are many others where tickets for longer journeys might be cheaper and/or more flexible. I believe that there was a query about offering this sort of functionality on Trainsplit recently and @Adam Williams wasn't enthusiastic about it.

I don't know the rules personally but offering one valid ticket for a journey really shouldn't fail accreditation! If it does somehow there's a simple solution, when a customer starts typing Edinburgh have the drop down in this order:
Edinburgh (all stations)
Edinburgh (Waverley station) EDB
Haymarket (Edinburgh) HYM
Then if a customer actually does select Waverley for whatever reason add a link below the fares "London Kings Cross to Haymarket (central Edinburgh) from £57.40"

If I was Trainsplit I'd definitely look to start offering appropriate Off-Peak fares on normal searches though.

 

[akm]

(my emphasis)

It is fundamental to the success of fares reform that during this time staff only sell a ticket for the journey the customer is actually making unless a request is made for alternative tickets.

What disingenuous nonsense. A London-Haymarket ticket is a ticket for the journey London-Edinburgh! Otherwise you wouldn't be able to use it for that journey!

This whole document has a really nasty tone - I'd be embarrassed to have written it.

We kindly ask all rail staff to be alert to, and to discourage the use of, this terminology ['surge pricing']

Yeah, and £3.59 and a "kindly ask" gets you a Happy Meal.

 

[ainsworth74]

Yeah, and £3.59 and a "kindly ask" gets you a Happy Meal.

I quite like the "all rail staff" bit. If you work for Northern LNER would like you to "discourage" passengers using the accurate phrase "surge pricing" even though it's nothing to do with your operator.

 

[lnerazuma]

Long before from the start of single leg pricing, King's Cross staff would kindly sell a Leeds ticket if someone asked for a York one, are they all gonna get prosecuted soon?

 

[AdamWW]

I quite like the "all rail staff" bit. If you work for Northern LNER would like you to "discourage" passengers using the accurate phrase "surge pricing" even though it's nothing to do with your operator.

Well good luck to ticket office staff explaining to someone that replacing the off peak ticket they used to buy with something less flexible that might or might not be more expensive depending on when they travel and how far in advance they could plan their trip is actually an exciting opportunity to make their life simpler.

 

[BRX]

At the moment what channels are there for people to register their objection to this?

It would be good if there were some independent effort to poll opinion amongst people, given clear and honest information about what's actually being changed. The problem is that it takes a little time/effort to understand it, especially for infrequent rail users.

It seems obvious that whatever "customer feedback" LNER presents at the end of the pilot is going to be rather selective.

 

[Krokodil]

This whole document has a really nasty tone - I'd be embarrassed to have written it.

Let's face it, the document comes from the government. Not directly of course, but it's implementing a government policy. Are you really suprised by the tone?

I quite like the "all rail staff" bit. If you work for Northern LNER would like you to "discourage" passengers using the accurate phrase "surge pricing" even though it's nothing to do with your operator.

It wouldn't have occured to me to use "surge pricing". Am I discouraged from using "fleecing", "price hike", "profiteering" or "rip-off"?

 

[Watershed]

It wouldn't have occured to me to use "surge pricing".

I suspect this particular wording comes from the media, who have previously referred to the proposals under those kinds of terms.

 

[Tester]

If I ask at King's Cross LNER ticket office for, 'The cheapest available flexible ticket valid for [insert train on which super off peak tickets are valid] to Newcastle',.....

[Clarifying for tidiness that more than +/-70 minutes flexibility is required]

A) What should I be sold?
B) What am I likely to be sold?

 

[Wallsendmag]

If I ask at King's Cross LNER ticket office for, 'The cheapest available flexible ticket valid for [insert train on which super off peak tickets are valid] to Newcastle',.....

[Clarifying for tidiness that more than +/-70 minutes flexibility is required]

A) What should I be sold?
B) What am I likely to be sold?

Something with Lumo same as it's been for a while.

 

[Tester]

Something with Lumo same as it's been for a while.

Good point!

And if I add that I prefer not to restrict myself to Lumo as the flexibility is important to me?

 

[Hadders]

If I ask at King's Cross LNER ticket office for, 'The cheapest available flexible ticket valid for [insert train on which super off peak tickets are valid] to Newcastle',.....

[Clarifying for tidiness that more than +/-70 minutes flexibility is required]

A) What should I be sold?
B) What am I likely to be sold?

Good point!

And if I add that I prefer not to restrict myself to Lumo as the flexibility is important to me?

An Anytime Single from London Terminals to Newcastle.

 

[MrJeeves]

I'm glad that LNER's disingenuous claims are finally being aired in public. See for example this on page 7:

My FOI here was certainly worthwhile... A shame they couldn't find the presentation which I've personally laid eyes on though (doubt that's done on purpose -- FOI is a very arduous role and LNER's FOI staff are very kind and always do their best in my experience).

What is also interesting is the DfT's FOI response to me, too (well, one of the three duplicates they sent): https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/regulated_fares_on_lner#incoming-2553800

Following the introduction of single leg pricing across LNER in June 2023, the majority of regulated fares on the ECML are super off-peak singles. These will remain the regulated fares for all routes apart from the three “Simpler Fares” trial routes listed above. On these routes the super Off-peak singles have been removed and alternative to the old regulatory model are being tested to ensure a wide range of affordable tickets remain available for passengers. LNER have committed to a set of assurances which are publicly available and can be found on their website at the following link https://www.lner.co.uk/tickets-savings/. I have reproduced them below for your convenience.

1. There is a maximum price: the “Fully Flexible” (Anytime) ticket.
2. A large selection of cheap seats: at least 2/3 of all “Fixed” (Advance) tickets sold will be priced at 50% or less than the price of the Fully Flexible (Anytime) ticket.
3. A maximum of 10% of all “Fixed” (Advance) tickets will be sold at 80% or more of the Fully Flexible (Anytime) price

These replace the previous regulation and form part of the contractual agreement between the operator and the Department which is being updated to reflect the new assurances above in relation to the trial flows.

So essentially confirming the fear of removing regulated fares, and replacing the concept with a promise that two-thirds of advances will be priced at no more than half the anytime fare.

Wonderful.