Northern Rail update on revenue

[northwichcat]

The last sentence should please the RMT.

Alex Hynes, Managing Director, Northern Rail provided a presentation which informed Members of Northern Rail’s Revenue Protection Strategy and highlighted the challenges in protecting revenue on the rail network the size of Greater Manchester and explained those strategic measures being introduced to encourage passengers to purchase tickets before they travelled, improvements to enable tickets to be purchased easier and punitive measures.

Members welcomed that Northern’s revenue protection initiatives generated £2.40 income for each £1.00 spent on such initiatives. In addition, Northern explained that alternative measures to enable passengers to purchase tickets with greater ease, such as mobile ticketing, were being introduced. Northern was also to explore the potential for smart ticketing on the rail network. A Member commented that passengers were often unable to purchase tickets due enforced ticket office closures due to staff absence and enquired if Northern had adequate staffing resources. In response, Northern noted that sickness absence was monitored closely and explained that further work was required to advise customers of alternative methods to purchase tickets when ticket offices were temporarily closed.

In response to a comment by a Member regarding the need for greater publicity of Northern’s “buy before you ride campaign”, Northern noted that details of this initiative were publicised at information points in railway stations and onboard trains. A media campaign was also taking place. It was noted there was a need to educate the travelling public in relation to the requirement to buy a ticket before travelling on the rail network.

A Member reiterated concerns regarding the continued fare evasion at Wigan Wallgate station. In response, Northern Rail undertook to ensure that security staff were deployed in the correct areas.

A Member highlighted the level of the current subsidy received by rail operators in Greater Manchester. Clarification was sought as to the implications that any reduction in this subsidy would have to Northern’ Rail’s staffing levels as part of any future franchise agreement and the potential impact on the ability to protect future revenues. In response, it was noted that Northern would maintain a focused approach to the protection of revenues on what is considered an open rail network. Northern also noted that they were not supportive of driver only operations as part of the next franchise.

http://www.transportforgreatermanch...link_and_rail_networks_sub_committee_24_10_14

 

[Starmill]

Northern's "Revenue Protection" varies between a hindrance to collecting their revenue and an entirely ineffectual exercise. They are the shame of the industry.

 

[northernchris]

If Northern are getting £2.40 back for every £1 spent it really does highlight the amount of lost revenue across the network and good on them for targeting those who don't pay for their journeys

 

[Flamingo]

If Northern are getting £2.40 back for every £1 spent it really does highlight the amount of lost revenue across the network and good on them for targeting those who don't pay for their journeys

Yea, for an "entirely ineffectual exercise" (as a previous poster called it) that's not too bad.

 

[Greybeard33]

Does anyone know if, under the terms of the Direct Award, Northern is incentivised to improve revenue protection during the fag end of its franchise? Does it get to keep much of the extra revenue raised, or just hand it over to the DfT? Can some of the cost of new ticket machines at Northern-operated stations be recovered from the next franchisee, who will collect most of the revenue from them?

 

[Haydn1971]

I used Northern daily for a year in 2013, I could count on one hand the times I saw revenue protection in the Yorkshire region, however, in three months of working in Trafford, there wasn't a week where I didn't see northern revenue protection at Piccadilly or on the tram network. Less so on TPE/EMT but that said, to a much greater level than Northern in Yorkshire - I regularly pointed out suspected non payers to the guards in 2013, at least once a week

 

[Mojo]

If the figures are correct they must surely be the only operator to actually make money from Revenue Protection activities (if they really are using the crude calculation which the quote implies). I would be interested to know what costs and "money made" they have actually accounted for.

 

[Flamingo]

If the figures are correct they must surely be the only operator to actually make money from Revenue Protection activities (if they really are using the crude calculation which the quote implies). I would be interested to know what costs and "money made" they have actually accounted for.

It could be a very simple "Lies, damn lies and statistics" response, I suppose. If they only spent £100 a year and got £240 then it would give them this figure.

Mind you, I'd be surprised that any revenue protection unless very badly organized would not be, at least, revenue neutral. Worst case is think of it as a cost of running the business, like providing cleaners and a Customer Services department.

 

[edwin_m]

The obvious measure would be the costs of employing the revenue protection staff against the revenue they bring in. It's reasonable to assume that most of this revenue would be lost if the staff weren't there to collect it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

<Wigan Wallgate>

Wigan Wallgate would to me be an obvious location for barriers to be installed, with only one access to the platforms and the ticket office immediately adjacent to it so it would be able to supervise the barriers as well as sell tickets.

Neil

 

[8J]

There are stm's at wallgate, they just don't seem to do much in the way of stopping people. Barriers are the obvious solution, but like the current situation at Victoria, it will be a union argument as to who staffs them.

 

[Squaddie]

Barriers are the obvious solution, but like the current situation at Victoria, it will be a union argument as to who staffs them.

Barriers are nothing more than a sticking-plaster solution, and turn the rail network into an unwelcoming fortress.

The way to stop fare-dodging is to have a policy of checking tickets on every train, backed up with a firm and unambiguous policy on ticketless travel - on-the-spot fine, no exceptions, and if you can't prove your identity then the police are called. Other countries manage it, and I am at a complete loss to understand why it seems to be beyond the ability of the UK's train operating companies. (Although, it must be said, they're up against one of the least honest and most anti-social populations in Europe).

 

[Bletchleyite]

The way to stop fare-dodging is to have a policy of checking tickets on every train, backed up with a firm and unambiguous policy on ticketless travel - on-the-spot fine, no exceptions, and if you can't prove your identity then the police are called. Other countries manage it, and I am at a complete loss to understand why it seems to be beyond the ability of the UK's train operating companies. (Although, it must be said, they're up against one of the least honest and most anti-social populations in Europe).

And have a problem with serious overcrowding which can make it difficult to perform those checks, particularly in the South East from where barriers have spread outwards.

Neil

 

[Flamingo]

And have a problem with serious overcrowding which can make it difficult to perform those checks, particularly in the South East from where barriers have spread outwards.

Neil

I sometimes wonder quite how overcrowded certain services would be if all the passengers with invalid tickets were not on the train knowing there was a realistic chance they would be charged up or refused boarding (19.15 Pad-Swa, set-down only Reading springs to mind)...

 

[Bletchleyite]

I sometimes wonder quite how overcrowded certain services would be if all the passengers with invalid tickets were not on the train knowing there was a realistic chance they would be charged up or refused boarding (19.15 Pad-Swa, set-down only Reading springs to mind)...

There is always the option of playing games with that one - run a relief from Reading to Swansea, and don't bother stopping the main service. I believe it's been done. Do it often enough, particularly if you then charge them Anytime Singles, plus a single back, when they arrive at Swindon, and they'd soon not bother.

Odd thing though - if you want unenforceable, it's VTs at Watford (because Euston arrivals is not barriered for VTs) - but few bother trying it on there.

Neil

 

[323235]

Yea, for an "entirely ineffectual exercise" (as a previous poster called it) that's not too bad.

To be honest I see it from both sides. In a lot of cases they are very effective and at Manchester Victoria I have my ticket checked thoroughly even if not questioned about the use of an Off Peak Return in the peak (it was an 8A) but they should be questioning it none the less.
On the flipside I have one a couple of occasions where i've run through the barriers at Piccadilly changing from one train to another and they haven't said anything, I've walked through to go look at a train number and often walked through where their have been not enough of them to check tickets, they've been looking at the stars, accepted invalid tickets (wrong date or origin/destination) and I had one who tried to take a Manchester STNS off me when I was going to Deansgate with it.
On one occasion they were checking tickets on one platform side then a cross country train pulled in on the other side, everyone saw them all exiting with no checks and the whole queue waiting to buy on exit (about 20-30 people at least just walked off the platform whilst queuing to buy a ticket. They lost a lot of money that time.
They often just stand their and don't check any tickets at all.

 

[northwichcat]

If Northern are getting £2.40 back for every £1 spent it really does highlight the amount of lost revenue across the network and good on them for targeting those who don't pay for their journeys

Yea, for an "entirely ineffectual exercise" (as a previous poster called it) that's not too bad.

If Northern didn't feel usage of RPIs was cost effective then they would have reviewed their approach rather than award a new contract on 1st April.

However, I'd like to see how the £2.40 figure has been derived. Do they assume, for instance, all revenue collected by RPIs would have gone uncollected otherwise? And do they count extra ticket office revenue at stations where RPIs are present?

 

[Tibbs]

There is always the option of playing games with that one - run a relief from Reading to Swansea, and don't bother stopping the main service. I believe it's been done. Do it often enough, particularly if you then charge them Anytime Singles, plus a single back, when they arrive at Swindon, and they'd soon not bother.

Odd thing though - if you want unenforceable, it's VTs at Watford (because Euston arrivals is not barriered for VTs) - but few bother trying it on there.

Neil

Does the 8:15 Watford to Euston LM train still pull into platform 7 at Euston? No barriers there at all.

You can even travel from Bushey (no barriers) for an easier time. They did have security staff there when I was commuting, but since they both go for their fag break at the same time, you could just walk onto the platform then.

On the way home, the Bushey trains tend to go from barriered platforms, but then you could just get on a Watford Junction train and double back.

When I spoke to a guard who came round to check tickets before Watford apparently it was a 'Union matter' when I asked why they didn't carry oyster readers.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Does the 8:15 Watford to Euston LM train still pull into platform 7 at Euston? No barriers there at all.

LM still heavily use non-barriered platforms at Euston, yes. Problem is that
only 8 and 11 are barriered and can take 12 car sets.

Euston is slated to have all platforms barriered at some point in the future, though, so this issue won't last.

Surprised Bushey isn't barriered - is it unstaffed?

Neil
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

To be honest I see it from both sides. In a lot of cases they are very effective and at Manchester Victoria I have my ticket checked thoroughly even if not questioned about the use of an Off Peak Return in the peak (it was an 8A) but they should be questioning it none the less.

Surely they should, as professional railway staff (I assume), know key flows that get 8A on the off-peak return (or just see the 8A printed on the ticket, as some now do) and know that it is not necessary to embarrass the passenger by questioning them?

Neil

 

[island]

It's worth remembering that Northern Rail's Penalty Fakes bring in four times the amount which the more conventional schemes do and so there is a much better return on RPI spend.

 

[Wolfie]

It's worth remembering that Northern Rail's Penalty Fakes bring in four times the amount which the more conventional schemes do and so there is a much better return on RPI spend.

Sooner or later someone will challenge them in Court. Should Northern lose they potentially could have to refund the whole damn lot.... that would do wonders for their figures!

 

[northwichcat]

Sooner or later someone will challenge them in Court. Should Northern lose they potentially could have to refund the whole damn lot.... that would do wonders for their figures!

Just wait for the day someone working for Nick Freeman solicitors gets handed one. (Nick Freeman is AFAIK as Mr Loophole.)

 

[Flamingo]

The railway has had over a hundred years to close loopholes. The £80 charge from Northern is in lieu of a prosecution. Anybody who is caught with what staff consider to be an invalid or no ticket has the option of not asking for an out-of-court settlement, but proceeding to court and seeing if their defence to the charge offered is strong enough to avoid conviction.

I wonder how many people who decline the offer of an out-of-court settlement do end up in the dock and of them, how many are subsequently convicted. On anecdotal evidence on here (not that I have analysed the posts), the vast majority of people coming with tales of sorrow and woe do seem grateful to be offered the option of an out-of-court settlement.

 

[Clip]

Sooner or later someone will challenge them in Court. Should Northern lose they potentially could have to refund the whole damn lot.... that would do wonders for their figures!

Challenge what in court? If they refused to pay the amount requested in these letters in a form of an out of court settlement which these are then they wouldnt get to test their legality in court as they would be in tehre on a prosecution instead surely?

 

[northwichcat]

Challenge what in court? If they refused to pay the amount requested in these letters in a form of an out of court settlement which these are then they wouldnt get to test their legality in court as they would be in tehre on a prosecution instead surely?

One thing that could be tested in court is Northern have been known to hand out 'proof of boarding' passes. This is so when someone arrives at a major station with a ticket from the closest station to the terminus with a 'proof of boarding' pass Northern claim they have caught someone not paying the full fare for their journey. However, there's no requirement for a passenger to take and retain a 'proof of boarding' pass and if someone did board at the last station with a ticket but didn't retain a 'proof of boarding' pass then they could wrongly be accused of fare evasion and threatened with a £80 charge.

 

[Starmill]

I thought proof of boarding passes were distributed to passengers who didn't have tickets?

 

[Clip]

I thought proof of boarding passes were distributed to passengers who didn't have tickets?

I dont know which way it is but if they gave them to those who didnt have tickets then that would be them giving authority to travel therefore perfectly acceptable.

If someone didnt have one and said they got on at such a station then they would be accused of fare evasion 'Short faring' as we have seen many times on this very forum.

Makes no sense to give them to someone who already has a ticket though.

 

[northwichcat]

I thought proof of boarding passes were distributed to passengers who didn't have tickets?

I recall one thread on here where someone said they presented a season ticket to the G4S team at Piccadilly (before they changed to STM) having not boarded at their usual station and the G4S staff demanded to see his 'proof of boarding pass' and then threatened him with fare evasion when he said he didn't have one.

 

[Tibbs]

LM still heavily use non-barriered platforms at Euston, yes. Problem is that
only 8 and 11 are barriered and can take 12 car sets.

Euston is slated to have all platforms barriered at some point in the future, though, so this issue won't last.

Surprised Bushey isn't barriered - is it unstaffed?

Neil
/snip

The 8:15 from Watford is an 8 car as well!

Bushey is unbarriered I think because it has 2 exits, so would cost too much in terms of staffing. The station is run by London Overground, and I would imagine the vast majority of evasion there is on the LM trains. It is staffed - it has 2 windows and there is usually someone there.

LM had (when I was commuting from there earlier this year) started putting staff at the bottom of the steps to the London-bound platform armed with Oyster Readers. However, you only need to wait for them to go on fag break (they seemed to go just before a train came in, go figure...) and you could enter with no problem.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Sooner or later someone will challenge them in Court. Should Northern lose they potentially could have to refund the whole damn lot . . .

How do you reach that conclusion?

Just wait for the day someone working for Nick Freeman solicitors gets handed one. (Nick Freeman is AFAIK as Mr Loophole.)

And what possible outcomes do you think there are ? (and how does any of them even approach the cost of instructing a solicitor ?)

. . . . . if someone did board at the last station with a ticket but didn't retain a 'proof of boarding' pass then they could wrongly be accused of fare evasion and threatened with a £80 charge.

Is there any record of any passenger anywhere ever being threatened with a £80 charge?