Petition on Single Train Fares

[SteamPowered]

Even after the latest fare restructuring it seems that single 'off-peak' fares (were 'savers'), are still often nearly as expensive as returns. This means that if you get the train one way and e.g. car share the other way you don't save any money, (unless you book far in advance and commit to a particular train).

I have created a petition to 10 Downing Street, to make single rail fares half the price of returns.

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/singletrainfares/

Thanks for your support!

 

[90019]

I have created a petition to 10 Downing Street, to make single rail fares half the price of returns.

The issue I can see with this is that there is nothing to say that they must be made half price only by reducing the price of singles. So, we could end up with returns being increased as well as singles reduced in price if it happens. :?

 

[SteamPowered]

So, we could end up with returns being increased as well as singles reduced in price if it happens. :?

I know I didn't say it had to be done that way, but I think in practice doubling the price of returns would be extremely politically unacceptable!

 

[90019]

I know I didn't say it had to be done that way, but I think in practice doubling the price of returns would be extremely politically unacceptable!

Not necessarily doubling, but it there could be some increqse in them so that the singles dont have to go down as much.

Also, I don't think 50% of the return fare is quite right. I would've thought it would be slightly more, so that there is some saving to be made by getting a return, rather than it costing the same as two singles. Because if it's the same price for two singles or one return, it kinda defeats the point of the return ticket in the first place.

 

[SteamPowered]

Not necessarily doubling, but it there could be some increqse in them so that the singles dont have to go down as much..

It's possible, but again I think the standard 'off-peak' fare is pretty much as high as it can go without causing major outcry, so I don't think the goverment has much room for manouevre on this option.

Also, I don't think 50% of the return fare is quite right. I would've thought it would be slightly more, so that there is some saving to be made by getting a return, rather than it costing the same as two singles. Because if it's the same price for two singles or one return, it kinda defeats the point of the return ticket in the first place.

Agreed, (and in my detailed comments on the petition site I've actually said it should be roughly half). There is a small saving to be made from the fact that someone only has to sell you the ticket once. So I'd say you ought to save perhaps a couple of quid from buying a return, (less on a very short route), compared with the price of 2 singles, or arguably a little more on a long route for the commitment you've made.

By contrast, if you currently buy a return, then end up getting a lift back, and try to reclaim for the unused half of the ticket, there is a 10 pound 'service charge', which makes it almost never worth doing.

 

[me123]

I know I didn't say it had to be done that way, but I think in practice doubling the price of returns would be extremely politically unacceptable!

They'll find a way of doing it if they choose this option; similar to the recent simplification. I'm a bit cynical, but I just have a feeling that, if they do it, they'll come up with a more restricted "Super-Duper Off-Peak Return" or something.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Also, I don't think 50% of the return fare is quite right. I would've thought it would be slightly more, so that there is some saving to be made by getting a return, rather than it costing the same as two singles. Because if it's the same price for two singles or one return, it kinda defeats the point of the return ticket in the first place.

Glasgow Subway is like this. Benefits? There's still convenience for the traveller, but it does mean that people will probably choose to buy singles just in case they don't go back by train (for example, I sometimes get a lift home if it's late and someone's offering). Before I started buying 20-journey subway tickets, I always bought singles. Didn't waste much time.

I know for a fact that, in some places where restrictions only apply to the morning peak, people will save money buy buying two singles where they don't have a season ticket. This will cause chaos.

I'd say that 60 or 70% of the price of a return is a decent fare for a single. It should also be that splitting tickets doesn't save you money. So, if you buy an Anytime single OUT and off peak single RTN, it should not be less than an Anytime Return.

 

[SteamPowered]

I know for a fact that, in some places where restrictions only apply to the morning peak, people will save money buy buying two singles where they don't have a season ticket. This will cause chaos.

Can you clarify why this will cause chaos?

I'd say that 60 or 70% of the price of a return is a decent fare for a single.

I'd have probably said 60% would be much better than 70%, and many single tickets are currently well above that, or even above 100%! On a long distance journey such as I do fairly regularly from NW England to Glasgow or beyond, you effectively have to guess whether you will be returning by train. If you buy a single, and then end up buying another one to get back you're really paying way too much. But if you buy a return and don't use half of it, that's a huge waste of money too.

It should also be that splitting tickets doesn't save you money. So, if you buy an Anytime single OUT and off peak single RTN, it should not be less than an Anytime Return.

Why? Surely you are only using the precious peak capacity one way? (I can see that this one is perhaps more arguable if that's what many people do anyway - but then I'm not really trying to suggest that just solving the single/return issue will solve all the problems - just that it may be a good place to start).

 

[yorkie]

There's no way I'm singing this because I mostly do return journeys, and we all know that there's no way the TOCs are going to accept a drop in revenue due to making singles cheaper (especially not given other events at the moment!).

So you can forget seeing all returns staying the same and singles at half that.

If forced to simply make singles half the price of returns but no cap on how high unregulated returns can be, you'd see the (unregulated) CDR fares heavily increased in price.

It would make no difference to the long distance peak journeys, where SOSs are already half the price of SORs.

In the case of SVRs where the fare is protected they would just increase restrictions on singles to make them less attractive.

Capping fares has been proven to be a failure because the TOCs just introduce more and more restrictions on them, eventually undermining the whole principle. I have no doubt that forcing them to make singles half the price of returns would result in similarly underhand tactics by TOCs.

You can't just cut TOCs revenue and expect them to put up with it, they won't!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

They'll find a way of doing it if they choose this option; similar to the recent simplification. I'm a bit cynical, but I just have a feeling that, if they do it, they'll come up with a more restricted "Super-Duper Off-Peak Return" or something.

They'll certainly do something.

Take York-London, arriving after 1020 would be fine for most business meetings, and leaving London at around 1700 or 1800 (so evening peak).

The Off Peak Return (SVR) fare is £129.90 valid for this journey.

If forced to make singles half that fare, the fare for a single would be reduced to £64.95 - cheaper than the Super Off Peak single today, and the current cost of a single leaving King's Cross in the evenign peak is £111.50. NXEC won't accept this drop in income so what they would do is make the Off Peak Single fare (which currently does not exist) costing £64.95 very unattractive by making it very heavily restrictive. The Super Off Peak Return (SSR) is £84.00 and the SSS is £83, so they'd have to make the SSS as low as £42! They would make this ticket incredibly restrictive (like valid at, say, 11pm-1pm or after 9pm only or something daft). That's the only way they could protect their revenue if they are forced to have cheap fares, they make them restrictive. Then the vast majority of people who want to travel one way are forced to pay the Anytime Single (SOS) fare which is £111.50 so are no better off!

However even the above will not happen! And here's why....

Over time they abolished the original Super Off Peak fare (then called a Super Saver), and the Saver became the restrictive Super Off Peak which has it's price capped, but the new Saver does not have it's price cap. As the Off Peak return is not a protected fare they would, if forced to make singles half the price of returns, simply increase the price of the return ticket (say to £166 - this is still a lot cheaper than the £223 SOR!), then half of that is £83, the cost of today's SSS. They'd change the restrictions of this newly introduced SVS to match that of the old SSS (you can't stop them doing this!), thus nothing changes. Admittedly they'd be forced to introduce this £42 Super Off Peak Single, but they'd just make that ticket very, very, very restrictive and thus effectively useless.

 

[me123]

Can you clarify why this will cause chaos?

If buying two singles is the same price or even cheaper than buying returns, fewer people will buy returns. Even if it's the same price, some people may buy the two singles, especially if there's a chance of getting a lift home. This causes lots of queues on the return journey where barriers are in place. Of course, a lot of commuters will have season tickets

I'd have probably said 60% would be much better than 70%, and many single tickets are currently well above that, or even above 100%! On a long distance journey such as I do fairly regularly from NW England to Glasgow or beyond, you effectively have to guess whether you will be returning by train. If you buy a single, and then end up buying another one to get back you're really paying way too much. But if you buy a return and don't use half of it, that's a huge waste of money too.

I'm in Glasgow, and I usually buy return fares, even if I don't plan to retrun by train. It's often only 20p more and that way, if I need to go back by train, I save myself time and money. I also know that London-Glasgow tickets are only a few pounds more.

On one hand, you're getting a good deal on return tickets. On the other, one-way passengers are getting ripped off. I like things the way they are because it gives me flexibility for the sake of a few pennies, but I can easily see how it's frustrating for a lot of people.

Why? Surely you are only using the precious peak capacity one way? (I can see that this one is perhaps more arguable if that's what many people do anyway - but then I'm not really trying to suggest that just solving the single/return issue will solve all the problems - just that it may be a good place to start).

Some places have no evening restrictions on off peak tickets, but still have evening peaks. In these areas, if there was pricing to allow cheaper fares, this would cause the "chaos" I've referred to above.

 

[SteamPowered]

This causes lots of queues on the return journey where barriers are in place. Of course, a lot of commuters will have season tickets.

And presumably, most people who know they will return by train could still buy a return, (and get a small discount for doing so), or buy 2 singles at the same time, (shouln't be beyond the bounds of technology(?)), if that were cheaper?

I'm in Glasgow, and I usually buy return fares, even if I don't plan to retrun by train. It's often only 20p more and that way, if I need to go back by train, I save myself time and money. I also know that London-Glasgow tickets are only a few pounds more..

For 20p I'd also be tempted to get the return ticket. However for the typical journey I do, (from NW England to W Coast of Scotland), the off-peak return is about 88 pounds vs 72 for a single.

On one hand, you're getting a good deal on return tickets. On the other, one-way passengers are getting ripped off. I like things the way they are because it gives me flexibility for the sake of a few pennies, but I can easily see how it's frustrating for a lot of people.

I believe the deal for the return is acceptable given that it would probably cost me a similar amount to drive, if I took all the wear and tear into account. However, as you suggest I feel completely ripped off if I just take the train one way and get a lift back. If I'm at all uncertain whether I'm getting the lift back I then have to buy the return, (not wishing to risk having to buy 2 singles), then if I try to reclaim at least the 16 pounds for the unused return, there is a 10 pound service charge, so I end up paying 82 pounds!

Some places have no evening restrictions on off peak tickets, but still have evening peaks. In these areas, if there was pricing to allow cheaper fares, this would cause the "chaos" I've referred to above.

I'd say give a small discount for buying a return, so that only the uncertain will buy singles!

Incidentally, I don't think this all has to be a loss for the train companies. I've ended up driving on quite a few occasions, (including taking 1 way hire cars), because of other people not being willing to accept the above single ticket prices, wheras at 44 pounds I don't think there would have been a problem.

Also, triangular train journeys often end up disproportionately expensive due to the above, (and complicated to work out the best price).

 

[MKB]

It's too simplistic to assume it would reduce revenue to price Off-Peak Singles as half of Off-Peak Returns. I've frequently abandoned the train altogether because I only wanted a one-way ticket and it was too expensive. Result was lost revenue to the TOC on an underused service.

The airline industry embraced one-way pricing on many short-haul routes and shows no sign of abandoning this. Virgin has gone half-way allowing Advance Singles and half Off-Peaks Returns to be mixed and matched.

All but one of my journeys in 2009 has been on a train that was less than half full; often they've been nearly empty. It's only a matter of time before the TOCs wake up to the fact that not everyone can manage the inflexibility of an Advance Single ticket and that there is a market out there for people who want Off-Peak Singles priced more competitively.

 

[Mojo]

It would be beneficial to make it so people don't lose out. I've had countless times where I have lost out because I have decided to make a second journey that day (when buying a single), or just one journey (when buying a return).

This, I see is one of the key advantages of pay-as-you-go Smartcards with price capping, you don't have to predict the journeys you're making that day, therefore you don't lose out.

 

[mumrar]

If you buy a single, and then end up buying another one to get back you're really paying way too much.

Why would you buy another to get back, presuming it fell within the normal period of a flexible return (one calendar month) and you were in Off-Peak restrictions you could just have the Single excessed to a return, paying only the difference between the Single and Return fares to upgrade.

 

[Mojo]

Why would you buy another to get back, presuming it fell within the normal period of a flexible return (one calendar month) and you were in Off-Peak restrictions you could just have the Single excessed to a return, paying only the difference between the Single and Return fares to upgrade.

I've often asked to make an excess but have been told by the ticket office on each occasion that I can't because the ticket has now been used (eg. University to Birmingham Stns). They told me that the only place I could excess was at my original station (ie. University), at a station en-route (ie. Five Ways) or on the train.

 

[gordonthemoron]

how come some TOCS (i'm thinking NT here) have got away without issuing advance fares?

 

[jon0844]

I think it's time we started from scratch on ticket prices. It's going to be chaotic, of course, but that's what they're saying about the Thameslink project - but we know it has to be done.

Some TOCs will lose. Some will gain. In the long run, once it's sorted out then surely some people will be more encouraged to travel and the revenue will increase. The problem there is that if we simplified tickets, making it more appealing for the irregular traveller, we'd probably need more rolling stock and major infrastructure improvements. Thus, forcing people off the railway is actually a good thing - and trying to get more money from fewer people.

A smartcard, ITSO compliant smartcard (or a chip in a mobile), should also be the future for ticketing. It should be nationwide, allowing flexible travel with price capping. Being non transferable and easily tied to a person if required, you can then allow people to travel one way - then decide to come back and pay only the difference on a return or whatever.

Prices could not only be capped, but also allow for easy ticket extensions where people have season tickets pre-loaded, or even loyalty points for usage that could offer additional discounts and/or upgrades.

Oyster has been pretty revolutionary, but we need to crack on with rolling out something elsewhere - and I don't think each TOC or region should be allowed to do their own thing.

If we do it properly, then one day the same card could be used throughout the EU. Imagine how this will revolutionise public transport, and offer a decent alternative to cars (or even taxis, for people who currently get put off using PT - especially when on holiday or business).

 

[SteamPowered]

Also re upgrading single fares to returns, they now often take your single ticket from you when you arrive at your destination, which is fine if you're thinking you're going to get a lift back, but not so great if you later realise you should have got a return!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

In the long run, once it's sorted out then surely some people will be more encouraged to travel and the revenue will increase.

Sorry - only just seen your post - this is what I basically believe!

Thus, forcing people off the railway is actually a good thing - and trying to get more money from fewer people.

Well - I think trying to run trains fairly full would be a good thing. Budget airlines seem to manage this. Perhaps the ability to buy advance tickets at a tapering discount up to time of departure might help?

A smartcard, ITSO compliant smartcard (or a chip in a mobile), should also be the future for ticketing.

Yup - probably right, subject to sensible rules re data collection etc. The current lack of any loyalty bonus for those of us who travel regularly but not on the same routes, so we can't use a season ticket feels unfair. Also, with this kind of system we could be credited points if the train was really late. Our current ticket pricing system seems stuck in the past!

 

[jon0844]

That's a good point, re season tickets; namely, if you travel every day - you could be automatically upgraded to a weekly season. Travel enough days in a calendar month, pay the monthly price (i.e. it would cap the amount charged for a regular journey). Travel further on one particular day, and you'll be charged only for the extra bit at the full rate.

Only a computerised system could properly manage all that so, like London, ordinary tickets could remain without these benefits - but people will almost certainly upgrade very quickly.

I think this could work on buses, coaches and most of the railway network - which will need to be upgraded to have ticket reading facilities and gatelines*. The exception perhaps being the Intercity routes, or a service that usually has seat reservations. You could still use your card to pay, if you had enough credit, but I do think that this would make it too complicated. I also think that for these prices, a prepay card system isn't necessarily a good idea - people simply wouldn't have that sort of money on a card. Of course, the railway industry would benefit a great deal from having a load of money paid in advance.

* Can you imagine the issue with not touching in/out and being made to pay the maximum fare? What would that be?!

I'll admit that there's no perfect solution, but we could look at how they do things abroad. Some work on a system where you can travel virtually anywhere within a certain time. Others work on zones. We have zones in London, but could we simply go for distance for the UK? The number of stations..? Tricky, but it needs to be done sooner or later.

 

[SteamPowered]

Only a computerised system could properly manage all that so.

A (very partial) solution that might help in the meantime, or for those not wishing to go electronic, would be to have a series of railcards available to all. Then if you buy railcard A you get X percent off, but if you buy more expensive railcard B, you get a larger percentage discount.

I also think that for these prices, a prepay card system isn't necessarily a good idea.

Perhaps some kind of a credit card system?

We have zones in London, but could we simply go for distance for the UK?

I certainly think it would help to have the price more closely related to something like distance, (so you don't find you can get from A to C more cheaply by buying tickets from A-B and from B-C etc). The idea with single fares being half the price of returns, was mainly because this is the one that catches me most often, but also because it would be a good start in the direction of greater simplicity/proportionality between pricing and distance.

 

[jon0844]

Perhaps some kind of a credit card system?

Didn't Oyster come unstuck with their plan to allow people to pay for things like newspapers on their Oyster - on account of Oyster needed to register as a bank (or something, my memory on this is rather vague). I think to offer a railcard/smartcard system with a credit facility might be open to all sorts of problems and issues.

Now that's not to say you couldn't buy a ticket at a machine (or ticket office), pay with a credit card and then have the ticket loaded on to the smartcard.

I certainly think it would help to have the price more closely related to something like distance, (so you don't find you can get from A to C more cheaply by buying tickets from A-B and from B-C etc). The idea with single fares being half the price of returns, was mainly because this is the one that catches me most often, but also because it would be a good start in the direction of greater simplicity/proportionality between pricing and distance.

When a return is just 10 or 20p more than a single, I do sometimes wonder if it's worth buying 'just in case' but I usually don't - and a few times I've regretted it (e.g. where I was supposed to get a lift that didn't happen).

When I was young, the local buses all did return tickets so when I first moved to London it seemed crazy that all fares were singles. It's obviously easier and more flexible, but to make it work on the railway we would need to reduce the price of a single considerably - and I bet ATOC would be against that!

 

[yorkie]

* Can you imagine the issue with not touching in/out and being made to pay the maximum fare? What would that be?!

I find the maximum (standard) fare to be £557.00
(Wick/Thurso - Penzance SOR +London)

 

[Mintona]

There's no way I'm singing this

Shame, I could have done with a laugh.

If singles are going to be half, the TOCs will increase return prices.

 

[jon0844]

If we have a total revamp of ticketing and pricing, hopefully they wouldn't just start by doubling the single fare. How would that seem competitive or encourage travel?

As I said, there would be winners and losers - but it would need to be done by a neutral body (like the Government or DfT) and not left up to the TOCs!