Ripped off by the railway - Nottingham to Crewe return

[Darandio]

If the Rail Industry was to offer the service you have in mind, always offering the cheapest method of travelling from A to B, then certainly revenue would be diminished. Meanwhile, costs will remain unchanged.

I imagine it is possible that costs may even increase to provide this service. Presumably it would require some sort of IT investment?

Alternatively, if they had to provide the service using the current system of searching, then surely more manpower would be needed to keep the queues down after Joe Bloggs has requested possible splits at 19 stations.

 

[Yew]

I imagine it is possible that costs may even increase to provide this service. Presumably it would require some sort of IT investment?

Would probably need some decent PC's at every station to compute splits, or to have a database of the best splits for each route?

I imagine an optimisation program could be derived in matlab (im currently doing soem optimisation, maybe if someone wants to give me a grant of a few million to make a program ?

 

[exile]

The general tenor of the responses reveals an attitude to customers which is sadly typical of the industry.

Apparently

1. The OP was offered the cheapest ticket from A to B - when of course he wasn't.

2. It's claimed that supermarkets and the like will never offer you the cheapest deal when in my experience they do - as, unsurprisingly, they wouldn't want you to go to the supermarket down the road if you found later on that such a deal was available and you weren't told about it

3. It's simultaneously claimed that working out split ticketing options is (a) too difficult for the TOCs do themselves (b) something the OP should have done before buying the ticket.

And of course if the OP have bought split tickets but made an error and one of the tickets he bought was invalid..... he'd get it in the neck - whilst overcharging by the TOC has no adverse consequences for the TOC whatsoever.

 

[SS4]

The general tenor of the responses reveals an attitude to customers which is sadly typical of the industry.

I disagree, the replies have pointed out the technical difficulty in working out split tickets for a nationwide network. A lot of customers see customer service as getting their own way all the time instead of abiding by the rules.

Apparently

1. The OP was offered the cheapest ticket from A to B - when of course he wasn't.

Yes he was. But we need to make this clearer - he was sold a ticket for A-C which happened to be valid via B. He did not ask for A-B and B-C which happened to be cheaper.

2. It's claimed that supermarkets and the like will never offer you the cheapest deal when in my experience they do - as, unsurprisingly, they wouldn't want you to go to the supermarket down the road if you found later on that such a deal was available and you weren't told about it

That point has been debunked many times in this thread. The two cannot be compared

3. It's simultaneously claimed that working out split ticketing options is (a) too difficult for the TOCs do themselves (b) something the OP should have done before buying the ticket.

I like how you're trying to imply an equivalency between (a) and (b). Tickets are sold as point to point journeys. What the OP is doing is searching for end to end journeys which happen to form a longer journey. What TOCs would need to do to give the cheapest ticket (as the OP suggests) is to work out all the possible splits and display the cheapest

And of course if the OP have bought split tickets but made an error and one of the tickets he bought was invalid..... he'd get it in the neck - whilst overcharging by the TOC has no adverse consequences for the TOC whatsoever.

The OP got a ticket he requested and paid the appropriate price. See point 1.

 

[SussexMan]

2. It's claimed that supermarkets and the like will never offer you the cheapest deal when in my experience they do - as, unsurprisingly, they wouldn't want you to go to the supermarket down the road if you found later on that such a deal was available and you weren't told about it

No they don't, not on a vaguely equivalent comparison. They may with the likes of BOGOF etc but regularly you will find that two smaller packets of something are cheaper than the larger one. e.g. Buy a four pack of baked beans for £2 but buy four individual ones at 45p each. You would be amazed how often it is cheaper to buy individual ones. The same happens with two 250g packets compared to one 500g packet. No supermarket I have ever been to has ever pointed that out. You won't find a sign saying "if you're buying a four-pack, don't as it's cheaper to buy four individual ones", or "don't buy this 500g packet, buy 2 x 250g packets". That's the nearest comparison to split tickets - but a fairly loose one really!

 

[Greenback]

No they don't, not on a vaguely equivalent comparison. They may with the likes of BOGOF etc but regularly you will find that two smaller packets of something are cheaper than the larger one. e.g. Buy a four pack of baked beans for £2 but buy four individual ones at 45p each. You would be amazed how often it is cheaper to buy individual ones. The same happens with two 250g packets compared to one 500g packet. No supermarket I have ever been to has ever pointed that out. You won't find a sign saying "if you're buying a four-pack, don't as it's cheaper to buy four individual ones", or "don't buy this 500g packet, buy 2 x 250g packets". That's the nearest comparison to split tickets - but a fairly loose one really!

I was just about to post something similar. Customers should be careful in supermarkets!

 

[MarkyMarkD]

Quite agree. It is exceptional in other (non-rail) circumstances for cheaper options to be pointed out.

If you go straight to an insurer's website, they won't say "Why not clear your cookies, log into Quidco, and come back to us that way and you'll get paid £100." Of course they won't - because they want to make a profit, not because it's a scam.

Obviously this isn't MoneySavingExpert.com but my experience there is that any thread with "scam" or "rip-off" in the title inevitably doesn't involve either. This one doesn't appear to be any different.

 

[All Line Rover]

No they don't, not on a vaguely equivalent comparison. They may with the likes of BOGOF etc but regularly you will find that two smaller packets of something are cheaper than the larger one. e.g. Buy a four pack of baked beans for £2 but buy four individual ones at 45p each. You would be amazed how often it is cheaper to buy individual ones. The same happens with two 250g packets compared to one 500g packet. No supermarket I have ever been to has ever pointed that out. You won't find a sign saying "if you're buying a four-pack, don't as it's cheaper to buy four individual ones", or "don't buy this 500g packet, buy 2 x 250g packets". That's the nearest comparison to split tickets - but a fairly loose one really!

Yes, and they rely on those busy mums who don't have the time (can't be bothered) to check prices to fall for those tricks (aka "businessmen" on the railways), and don't appreciate those savvy people who check everything online and plan their shopping list to the penny (aka "people like myself" on the railways).

 

[exile]

I disagree, the replies have pointed out the technical difficulty in working out split tickets for a nationwide network. A lot of customers see customer service as getting their own way all the time instead of abiding by the rules.

It shouldn't be that hard. I have examples from my local station where the shortest and indeed only practical route from A to C is via B yet it's far cheaper to buy separate tickets. This is clearly a nonsense. If there was a rational pricing structure there'd be no need for a complex algorithm for working out split ticket prices.

That point has been debunked many times in this thread. The two cannot be compared

I didn't realise that making an assertion meant the end of the argument! As far as I'm concerned both supermarkets and TOCs are involved in competing for customers by offering a good service for a competitive price. The difference is, I fear, that the train customer is faced with the simple take-it-or-leave-it choice whilst the supermarket customer can go next door if not satisfied.

 

[All Line Rover]

The difference is, I fear, that the train customer is faced with the simple take-it-or-leave-it choice whilst the supermarket customer can go next door if not satisfied.

That is a fair point. But I don't think it justifies the TOC's telling people about split ticketing.

 

[Greenback]

It shouldn't be that hard. I have examples from my local station where the shortest and indeed only practical route from A to C is via B yet it's far cheaper to buy separate tickets. This is clearly a nonsense. If there was a rational pricing structure there'd be no need for a complex algorithm for working out split ticket prices.

I'm afraid that it is that hard. Quite a few people have tried, and failed. However, you are correct to say that the pricing structure is too complicated.

I didn't realise that making an assertion meant the end of the argument! As far as I'm concerned both supermarkets and TOCs are involved in competing for customers by offering a good service for a competitive price. The difference is, I fear, that the train customer is faced with the simple take-it-or-leave-it choice whilst the supermarket customer can go next door if not satisfied.

All of the supermarkets do it. So if you go next door, the chances are exactly the same thing will happen.

Sorry, but regardless of whatever industry we are talking about, it is down to the customer/consumer to look for ways to save money. All we can expect is for companies to shout very loudly about their latest special offers, and insist they are the best value compared to their competitors.

 

[island]

While I don't think that the railways should have to give out details of splits incase they are cheaper, I do want to bring up one point.

The people arguing that the ticket combinations and the system makes it too difficult to do are forgetting one thing. The system in use is the fault of the railways. The reason why fares are so complicated is because of the railways. So surely the onus should be on them to make it easy and fair for the general person to understand the cheapest choice for their journey?
After all, if the railways hadn't made such a complicated fare system, then having a way to give the cheapest fares including splits would be a piece of cake.

OK. Can you please propose an alternative system that would be fairer?

And have the people who proposed establishing a database of all possible splits (if that's even viable) checked how large the resultant database would be and whether current technology in use (including Avantix Traveller) would have sufficient storage? If not, have they budgeted for its replacement?

 

[WelshBluebird]

OK. Can you please propose an alternative system that would be fairer?

And have the people who proposed establishing a database of all possible splits (if that's even viable) checked how large the resultant database would be and whether current technology in use (including Avantix Traveller) would have sufficient storage? If not, have they budgeted for its replacement?

Well the fairer system would be for longer distance journeys not to be priced as much so split ticketing is no longer needed to get the best price for a journey.
But of course, that is not going to happen. Any change to the pricing would see longer distance prices staying as they are, and the shorter journey tickets (which make split ticketing cheaper) going up in price so splits are no longer cheaper.

 

[Pumbaa]

Cutting through the rhetoric here, and for a moment ignoring the sensationalist thread title, exile and skymonster have a very valid point.

It is not the responsibility of the passengers who use the system, or interested observers, to either tell the railway how to do it's job properly, or indeed invent a whole new system to allow it to do so. The railway, as a whole and (ahem) integrated organisation has a responsibility as a quasi-public service to convenience passengers, with time, service and money. The railway as a whole has failed here.

I know the ticketing system is stupid, but exile raises a good point, a point I often raise. The railway is trapped in a "won't do, can't do" mentality, the passenger is nearly always at fault, and it will do nothing to modernise or improve itself. Sure skymonster was offered the cheapest ticket, but he wasn't offered the cheapest way. Demanding an instant fix I agree is pointless, but asking for at least some movement towards improvement from the railway surely isn't too much to ask?

 

[exile]

I guess my complaint is really about the pricing structure - which to be fair is not strictly speaking the responsibility of the TOCs (though maybe they could at least look at the prices they set themselves). I suspect eventually a computer programmer will come up with a solution that generates more or less the cheapest option for a particular journey within limits (eg no more than 3 splits, etc). It shouldn't be down to the individual staff member or passenger to have to do all the work involved.

 

[Greenback]

Cutting through the rhetoric here, and for a moment ignoring the sensationalist thread title, exile and skymonster have a very valid point.

It is not the responsibility of the passengers who use the system, or interested observers, to either tell the railway how to do it's job properly, or indeed invent a whole new system to allow it to do so. The railway, as a whole and (ahem) integrated organisation has a responsibility as a quasi-public service to convenience passengers, with time, service and money. The railway as a whole has failed here.

I know the ticketing system is stupid, but exile raises a good point, a point I often raise. The railway is trapped in a "won't do, can't do" mentality, the passenger is nearly always at fault, and it will do nothing to modernise or improve itself. Sure skymonster was offered the cheapest ticket, but he wasn't offered the cheapest way. Demanding an instant fix I agree is pointless, but asking for at least some movement towards improvement from the railway surely isn't too much to ask?

My first question would be who is 'The Railway'? The industry is trapped within a structure that, in my view is not fit for use and this contributes hugely to the sort of complaints that we see here.

Yet, basically, what is being asked for is for private companies with short franchises to commit themselves to reducing their income from the farebox. I'm not sure how this loss could be recovered. And this is quite apart form the technical difficulty of ensuring that the cheapest possible fare is always known, and offered, even if it the fare is only available on a couple of traisn a day if the splitting point has an infrequent service.

There is also a huge tension in the franchise system between public service na dthe requirement of a private company not only to make money to stay in business, but also to maximise revenue for its shareholders. Until this tension is resolved, then I think there will always be difficulties in balancing consumer wishes with the interests of the government and the companies themselves.

Before anyone thinks I am a fanboy, let me make it quite clear that I think that there are many, many areas of the railway that need improvement. I just think that none of them can be improved within the constraints of the fragmented franchised system.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I guess my complaint is really about the pricing structure - which to be fair is not strictly speaking the responsibility of the TOCs (though maybe they could at least look at the prices they set themselves). I suspect eventually a computer programmer will come up with a solution that generates more or less the cheapest option for a particular journey within limits (eg no more than 3 splits, etc). It shouldn't be down to the individual staff member or passenger to have to do all the work involved.

The pricing structure has a lot to answer for. The way that the flows were split up during the privatisation process causes a lot of anomalies as far as I cna see. We must remember that the system of the pricing of flows was originally set up purely for administartive ease within BR, it was never intended to form the basis of the pricing mechanism in the privatised system.

That said, it is probably the best we can ever get. If the pricing structure is simplified, we may end up wishing we were back with what we have now.

 

[SS4]

That said, it is probably the best we can ever get. If the pricing structure is simplified, we may end up wishing we were back with what we have now.

Couldn't agree more. One need only look at what happened with "Simplification" to understand what 'progress' means when passengers don't get a voice

 

[Captain Chaos]

Thing is though is that we are asking a company to invest a large amount of money and resources to develop something that will reduce their income.

No company worth their salt would agree to such a thing. Can you imagine telling Tesco's that they should develop a new style of till with super-amazing software that will inform their customers to take items back and pick up smaller versions as they are better value and tell them all the ways they can save money, thus reducing their potential income from said shopper? You'd be laughed out the store! (Though to be fair, if self-service checkouts are anything to go by it probably wouldn't work anyway).

Anyone who thinks that a company is going to invest heavily in a system that will reduce their income from their customers is living a fantasy.

 

[Greenback]

Thing is though is that we are asking a company to invest a large amount of money and resources to develop something that will reduce their income.

The head of the nail has been well and truly hit there! The only way it could happen would be the government prescribing it, and writing it into the franchise of every single TOC. The government, which means us, will probably end up paying for it one way or another anyway.

 

[Skymonster]

As I've already mentioned, Tesco and the likes already automatically discount appropriate combinations of items at checkout without the customer for a combination discount. They would never get away with NOT doing this - the media wold be quickly all over them, and in a competitive world it's too risky to upset customers by not applying appropriate pricing.

Imagine if Tesco sold bananas, five to a bunch for £1.00, in the fruit area. Then, hidden in amongst electronics, they routinely offered single bananas at £0.10 each. The press would be all over them, they'd be on Watchdog... This is the equivalent of what the railway is doing by hiding splits and combinations and not offering them as ticketing options as a routine where it would save the customer money. But of course the railway isn't really competitive and can thus abuse it's dominant position.

The head of the nail has been well and truly hit there! The only way it could happen would be the government prescribing it, and writing it into the franchise of every single TOC. The government, which means us, will probably end up paying for it one way or another anyway.

Yes, I agree... And the government also won't do it without a good hard shove from public opinion, because anything that cuts rail revenue risks increasing the rail subsidy.

Andy

 

[starrymarkb]

They do it regularly. As an example the local supermarkets have Pepsi on offer at 2 for £2 - a pack of 4 is £4.50. Hobgoblin bottles are 3 for £4 or £6.70 for a pack of 4. Recently in Tesco 2 packs of 80 PG Tips were cheaper then a pack of 160.

One of the airline comparison sites offers a Split finding service. You have to specifically click it and confirm that if things go wrong you may not receive assistance to your final destination to view the fares.

Someone did build a split finding system. It took an hour to search (the server was busy which didn't help) and eventually got nuked by the webhost for overloading their servers

 

[Wath Yard]

Imagine if Tesco sold bananas, five to a bunch for £1.00, in the fruit area. Then, hidden in amongst electronics, they routinely offered single bananas at £0.10 each. The press would be all over them, they'd be on Watchdog... This is the equivalent of what the railway is doing by hiding splits and combinations and not offering them as ticketing options as a routine where it would save the customer money. But of course the railway isn't really competitive and can thus abuse it's dominant position.

You really have no intention of trying to understand anything anybody else says have you? :roll:

How many times do you need to be told railway ticketing, and making a journey, is slightly more complex than buying a bunch of bananas?

 

[Greenback]

Comparisons between supermarkets and the raiwlay system are pretty much pointless. The railway is pretty unique in the way that it is orgnaised. The government (started by the last one) wants passengers to pay more to reduce the burden on the taxpayer. They also want the railway to cost less. I don't think that this is in any way compatible with the supermarket retail giants, who are constrained only be market forces.

Of course, we could have that on the railway too. But no subsidy would mean a drastically curtailed network, and absolutely no services would run that do not show a profit somewhere. For what might happen, take a look at First's buses!

 

[hairyhandedfool]

....Imagine if Tesco sold bananas, five to a bunch for £1.00, in the fruit area. Then, hidden in amongst electronics, they routinely offered single bananas at £0.10 each. The press would be all over them, they'd be on Watchdog....

Strange, because Morrisons and Sainsburys (and I wouldn't be surprised about Tesco either) do that sort of thing all the time, not specifically bananas, but all sorts of food, even with offers on them (and they have been on 'consumer affairs programmes' for it and they still do it because people fall for it).

....This is the equivalent of what the railway is doing by hiding splits and combinations and not offering them as ticketing options as a routine where it would save the customer money....

The railways don't hide splits, people expect everything to be done for them (see comparison websites), but sometimes you have to do your homework.

Explain how 'the cheapest split' could be offered for London to Glasgow, in a way that any person could easily understand it.

Explain how that same system could make it clear what the restrictions and limitations are.

Explain how the system could cope with people who do not want to be tied to specific trains, dates or routes.

 

[SS4]

You really have no intention of trying to understand anything anybody else says have you? :roll:

How many times do you need to be told railway ticketing, and making a journey, is slightly more complex than buying a bunch of bananas?

Probably someone who thinks good customer service is a company giving in to all of the customer's demands without regard to practicality or sanity. We used to get them all the time in my last job.

 

[MikeWh]

As I've already mentioned, Tesco and the likes already automatically discount appropriate combinations of items at checkout without the customer for a combination discount. They would never get away with NOT doing this - the media wold be quickly all over them, and in a competitive world it's too risky to upset customers by not applying appropriate pricing.

Imagine if Tesco sold bananas, five to a bunch for £1.00, in the fruit area. Then, hidden in amongst electronics, they routinely offered single bananas at £0.10 each. The press would be all over them, they'd be on Watchdog...

I've got news for you. Supermarkets routinely do just that. Not on bananas, but things like cereal boxes. I often buy 500g boxes of Frosties reduced from say £1.79 to £1.50 when 1kg boxes are unchanged at £3.19.

This is the equivalent of what the railway is doing by hiding splits and combinations and not offering them as ticketing options as a routine where it would save the customer money. But of course the railway isn't really competitive and can thus abuse it's dominant position.

It's not the same thing at all. Fares for shorter journeys often have a different target market in mind, sometimes with competition from buses etc. The nearest equivalent might be selling a shepherd's pie for £3 while selling the exact required amount of potatoes, mince, carrots, gravy for a total of £2.20. Of course you have to do the actual preparation in the cheaper case. With train tickets the more expensive single ticket saves you a lot of time in research and also often allows much more flexibility of route and trains.

 

[starrymarkb]

The railways don't hide splits, people expect everything to be done for them (see comparison websites), but sometimes you have to do your homework.

Explain how 'the cheapest split' could be offered for London to Glasgow, in a way that any person could easily understand it.

Explain how that same system could make it clear what the restrictions and limitations are.

Explain how the system could cope with people who do not want to be tied to specific trains, dates or routes.

Easiest way I can think of is to offer splits at stations where the customer has to change trains. OK that still leaves them to research splits for direct services and non interchange stations on there own. But it would be a clear and relatively idiot proof method of displaying it to the average customer.

 

[Medicy]

Wish we could adopt the Dutch system, which seems straightforward enough and covers the entire system (and covers a semi-centralised, semi-franchised system). Would it not be possible to adopt something similar? Everyone has a smartcard and you check-in and out at your stations. You could have validators similar to LU for multiple legs if necessary. If you were travelling say between Ashford International to Cardiff it would be calculated:

Fare for any end-to-end journey = (base fare for entering the transport system) + ((direct distance between stations in kilometres travelled in first leg x fare per kilometre) x transport type factor) + ((DDBS/km in second leg x transport type factor)) x transport type factor) + ... + [any special TOC-specific fare between 2 stations)]

where the transport type factor could be, for example:

1.50 for high-speed rail
1.00 for suburban
0.80 for intercity
0.50 for metro
0.40 for bus/tram

with a maximum cap (here of 25 euros single. Obviously it would have to be higher in the UK. Maybe a cap zoning system with zones of England/Scotland/Wales/(Northern Ireland/Rep. of Ireland) so there's a 40 pound cap within England, 25 pound cap in Scotland...

So:

Fare = (base fare) + ((km between Ashford Int - St Pancras x fare/km) x 1.50) + ((km between St Pancras - Paddington x fare/km) x 0.50) + ((km between Paddington - Cardiff x fare/km)) * 0.80)

If you want to travel a more indirect route you can, though if you leave the station you'll have to check-out though and re-check-in, paying the base fare once more once you come back. If you want to use a cheaper or an indirect route than the most direct one (i.e. not via HS1) you can use validators and of course are subject to on-board checks to determine you are validating correctly (so no going on HS1 then sneakily using the Underground to get to Victoria and claiming you used the low-speed route). If a TOC wants to have a promotion they can sell products which are loaded onto the smartcard and deducted on use (i.e. day-rangers for a specific day and area/route). First-class tickets bought either at the station or in advance for a specific day are loaded on the smartcard in an identical way (if you travel between the 2 stations on the day requested it will assume you have used the first-class ticket; if you travel to another station on that day it will charge you the normal 2nd class PAYG rate).

50 quid per annum gets you an off-peak discount of 40% all year
Students get free travel on either weekends or weekdays (their choice) and 40% off-peak travel on the other.
Elderly get 40% off off-peak travel and a limited number of free trips
For a couple of grand you can get unlimited off-peak/anytime travel for a year.
Every month or so for a few weeks they sell print-at-home daycards valid anywhere on the network off-peak for around 10-20 pounds (more often just on weekend days).

Ok having written it out it took longer than expected but at least there's no messing around; longer distance = more expensive :P

 

[Skymonster]

You really have no intention of trying to understand anything anybody else says have you? :roll:

To the contrary, I understand everything that's been said. I also understand that there's no incentive ormwill within the industry to fix things.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Probably someone who thinks good customer service is a company giving in to all of the customer's demands without regard to practicality or sanity. We used to get them all the time in my last job.

Again to the contrary, I do not believe that the consumer is always right... But I do believe in fairness and clarity in pricing and failure to provide that is justification for a customer to complain.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Easiest way I can think of is to offer splits at stations where the customer has to change trains. OK that still leaves them to research splits for direct services and non interchange stations on there own. But it would be a clear and relatively idiot proof method of displaying it to the average customer.

But according to the ops argument, that isn't good enough. Not to mention that the splits may not be the same for each direction of travel.