• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Ripped off by the railway - Nottingham to Crewe return

Status
Not open for further replies.

Deerfold

Veteran Member
Joined
26 Nov 2009
Messages
12,569
Location
Yorkshire
Why would that be necessary? Leeds to Huddersfield to Sheffield would by any normal pricing method exceed £10.

Leeds - Sheffield is currently £9.80 Anytime Single.

This is valid by various routes including on the 1743 Leeds - Sheffield via Huddersfield.

If this is priced higher by your pricing method should we start to disallow direct trains that take a longer route?

Or should we allow this anomaly?


I'm not sure where you are going here. I think you are using the current complicated pricing mechanisms to justify the current complicated pricing mechanisms.

I'm arguing that as soon as you start going any distance I don't think your system is simpler - unless you have fewer options with a given ticket than you do now.
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

RJ

Established Member
Joined
25 Jun 2005
Messages
8,383
Location
Back office
How far do we go to really define the cheapest available ticket if the simplest one isn't good enough? Just splits? Exploiting loopholes? Routeing Guide anomalies?

I feel that it's something best left to those doing their homework and confident enough to explain themselves if questioned. I say that because I worked as a ticket office clerk. I only ever offered to sell splits twice. One time, the passenger got stressed and angry because she just wanted one through ticket, even though what I was offering was a simple split along the line of route where every train stopped. The first already held a ticket which wasn't valid at the location I was at and offered her a ticket to the point of convergence. She exploded and demanded I gave her a ticket through to her destination, despite it being much more expensive. Ever since then, I vowed never to voluntarily offer them ever again and consequently never had any more bad experiences with customers.

What if the clerk offers a split to a trusting lay passenger and they have trouble on the train? Then what? It's best left to those who know what they're doing. It's good customer service to give the customer what they ask for without the risks associated with being creative.
 

Stewart

Member
Joined
31 Aug 2011
Messages
127
Leeds - Sheffield is currently £9.80 Anytime Single.

This is valid by various routes including on the 1743 Leeds - Sheffield via Huddersfield.

Seriously? I think you are now justifying the complicated pricing mechanisms by complicated routing. Would anyone who wanted to go from Leeds to Sheffield seriously consider going via Huddersfield?

Again consider if you are making current pricing policy overwhelm your consideration of rational pricing policy.

If this is priced higher by your pricing method should we start to disallow direct trains that take a longer route?

Or should we allow this anomaly?

This route would be priced more expensive as it would expected to be a commuter route. No standard individual would want to spend 90 minutes on a journey that could otherwise take 40 minutes.
I'm arguing that as soon as you start going any distance I don't think your system is simpler - unless you have fewer options with a given ticket than you do now.

The problem as I see it is that you see the current pricing policy and think it applies to a rational pricing policy. The problems you identify are a result of the current policy and are not a natural result of a considered pricing policy.
 

snail

Established Member
Joined
16 Jun 2011
Messages
1,848
Location
t'North
They may not, but Tesco & Morrison certainly will and the till operator will even get another member of staff to fetch you the second item whilst you continue packing.
They will with BOGOF and similar offers because their system flags it. They almost certainly won't where two smaller items are cheaper than a large item, as has been pointed out by several posters already. One of the main reasons this happens in supermarkets is manufacturer promotions: Coke and Pepsi are the most obvious examples, there is almost always an offer on one or the other, and it's not necessarily the supermarket that is funding it. If the manufacturer wants to push a particular pack size they will discount it, while keeping the standard pack the same because they know people buy them anyway.

This does have a corollary on the railway, where certain long distance flows are virtually guaranteed a basic custom but offers exist to fill in the gaps - Manchester to London is the most obvious one I can think of in this category.
 

Deerfold

Veteran Member
Joined
26 Nov 2009
Messages
12,569
Location
Yorkshire
The problem as I see it is that you see the current pricing policy and think it applies to a rational pricing policy. The problems you identify are a result of the current policy and are not a natural result of a considered pricing policy.

The problems I identify are because the rail network is a complicated system. I'd agree that we have far too many different fares and certainly far too many different restriction codes. However you seem to have decided that your system is simpler and refuse to acknowledge anyone's attempts to show you it isn't *unless* (and you've made no comment on this the last couple of times I've mentioned it) you restrict the routing a lot more than is currently done.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
This route would be priced more expensive as it would expected to be a commuter route. No standard individual would want to spend 90 minutes on a journey that could otherwise take 40 minutes.

Perhaps they travel partway home with a friend who lives in Penistone they like to chat to?
There could be more chance of a seat on this service?
I used to deliberately take 10 minutes longer on my journey to work, leaving my starting point earlier than a service which would get to my destination sooner as I had a choice between a seat or crush loading.
This is a deliberately extreme example - but shows if you want really simple fares you'll also have to restrict where they're valid as that's where so many anomalies come from.
 
Last edited:

hairyhandedfool

Established Member
Joined
14 Apr 2008
Messages
8,837
I think that says it all. The extent of the ripping off could amount to hundreds of pounds a year to a regular commuter.

I fail to see how it could inconvenience rail staff if a few prices were adjusted to eliminate glaring anomalies such as I've highlighted. Bear in mind that until the last price changes this anomaly did not exist, at which point prices from the Warrington area to the Wirral and stations on other Merseysrail lines were raised by 40%.

I think you cut off the important bit. Basically, as long as his job is made easy then sod the lot of you.

The inconvenience of staff? or passengers? True enough I don't want to spend half an hour trying to explain the options, but imagine you are Joe Bloggs in the queue behind missing trains because you can't buy a ticket until someone understands what is going on, and getting on the train without one would leave you with a penalty fare to pay.

....I think you missed the point he wanted to sell tickets in a reasonable timescale.

Well at least someone understands.

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

That would be unnecessary if individual station to station stops have fixed prices.

If you plan to have fixed prices, how do you deal with alternate routes without pumping up the price or losing money on the small journeys? How do you account for PTEs discounting fares?

....I spent 20 minutes this morning wasting time booking Leeds to Sheffield, Sheffield to Derby, Derby to Birmingham, Birmingham to Cheltenham, Cheltenham to Swindon. That is not an efficient use of anyone's time or resources.

Some people seem to want everyone to go through that, added to all the explanations that most people won't understand or be able to follow.

Leeds to Sheffield is priced at x. Intermediate routes are priced at x/a where a over the combined route equals 1.

How would that work for London-Glasgow? Or Lancaster-Carlisle?

How would Lancaster-Carlisle compare to Lancaster-Dalston? Or Lancaster-Wigton?

....I'm arguing that as soon as you start going any distance I don't think your system is simpler - unless you have fewer options with a given ticket than you do now.

In any case, it won't be cheaper.
 

MikeWh

Established Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
15 Jun 2010
Messages
7,865
Location
Crayford
OK, lets look at some examples down where I live - South East London. First of all we have a different pricing method anyway because everything within the travelcard zones is zonally priced and that produces quite interesting anomalies in itself. For example, Bexley to Albany Park is one stop taking about 2 minutes and is charged as 2 zones because one is in 6 and the other is in 5. Conversely Caterham to Tattenham Corner via Purley requires two trains, takes over half an hour, but is all in one zone (6). However, let's just assume that we want to go back to mileage based pricing...

First question: Are we still allowed to treat all South London terminals as the same price? This has historically always been the case, even before zonal pricing came along. If so, how do you price London to Lewisham? From London Bridge it is 4.25m, and from Victoria it is 7.5m.

Or how about London Bridge to Dartford. There are four routes and all trains take similar lengths of time (35 minutes for a half hourly fast, 40-45 minutes for all shacks at 6/hour).

14.50m via Greenwich and Woolwich
17.00m via Lewisham and Woolwich
15.25m via Lewisham and Bexleyheath
15.50m via Lewisham and Sidcup (ignoring the unquoted avoiding Lewisham route)

Trust me, anyone commuting between London Bridge and Dartford will generally want to take whatever comes first - would they be allowed?
 

Stewart

Member
Joined
31 Aug 2011
Messages
127
The problems I identify are because the rail network is a complicated system. I'd agree that we have far too many different fares and certainly far too many different restriction codes. However you seem to have decided that your system is simpler and refuse to acknowledge anyone's attempts to show you it isn't *unless* (and you've made no comment on this the last couple of times I've mentioned it) you restrict the routing a lot more than is currently done.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Perhaps they travel partway home with a friend who lives in Penistone they like to chat to?
There could be more chance of a seat on this service?
I used to deliberately take 10 minutes longer on my journey to work, leaving my starting point earlier than a service which would get to my destination sooner as I had a choice between a seat or crush loading.
This is a deliberately extreme example - but shows if you want really simple fares you'll also have to restrict where they're valid as that's where so many anomalies come from.

I think you are baiting and switching here.

I asked you why any standard individual would want to go from Leeds to Sheffield via Huddersfield and you created some long, but admittedly interesting, story. I'm still a bit undecided why this is relevant to the railways however.
 

island

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
15,982
Location
0036
I think you are baiting and switching here.

I asked you why any standard individual would want to go from Leeds to Sheffield via Huddersfield and you created some long, but admittedly interesting, story. I'm still a bit undecided why this is relevant to the railways however.

So you don't mind charging some individuals more for their tickets because they engage in behaviour you arbitrarily consider non-standard?
 

Stewart

Member
Joined
31 Aug 2011
Messages
127
So you don't mind charging some individuals more for their tickets because they engage in behaviour you arbitrarily consider non-standard?

Well if you consider going from Sheffield to Leeds via Hudds non-standard I agree because anyone who wanted to find the quickest route would not go via Huddersfield. It is very strange behaviour to take 80 mins over a journey that can take 40 minutes.
 

MikeWh

Established Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
15 Jun 2010
Messages
7,865
Location
Crayford
But what about my London Bridge to Dartford examples?
 

hairyhandedfool

Established Member
Joined
14 Apr 2008
Messages
8,837
I spent over three hours going from Lancaster to Carlisle last month, by choice, I'm sure I could have done it in half the time on the mainline, but I didn't. It is of no concern to the railway why I choose this route and to be honest I don't expect them to care so long as the correct fare is paid.

So does it really matter why someone wants to go by that route? Is it not simply a case of knowing that they want to take that route and charge accordingly?
 

SS4

Established Member
Joined
30 Jan 2011
Messages
8,589
Location
Birmingham
Perhaps they should sort out ORCATS first. Our railway is too complex/dense for a mileage system to work properly without compromising passenger rights/cost of tickets.

It's not even like split ticketing is verboten. It's only fair that cheaper, but more complicated, tickets are available for those willing to put in the effort. I can only imagine trying to calculate splits when there was no internet to check fares
 

johnnychips

Established Member
Joined
19 Nov 2011
Messages
3,675
Location
Sheffield
It's not even like split ticketing is verboten. It's only fair that cheaper, but more complicated, tickets are available for those willing to put in the effort. I can only imagine trying to calculate splits when there was no internet to check fares

This is a good point. I know I can save a couple of quid splitting Doncaster-Nottingham at Sheff, and I do notice supermarket rip-offs masquerading as special offers, yet I've just realised I haven't looked to see if my energy supplier is the cheapest for about three years now, and that would probably save loads more. Thanks for reminding me!
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,035
Location
No longer here
It seems I have been branded a troll because I have dared to disagree with your lordship. Please forgive me.

Perhaps a little unfair to call you a troll, but you've deliberately avoided perfectly valid questions to which I suspect you don't have an answer. I point you to MikeWh's questions. Could you answer them? You seem very confident you can simplify railway fares overnight. I'd like to see you elaborate and deal with some of the barriers and complications others have pointed out.
 

Deerfold

Veteran Member
Joined
26 Nov 2009
Messages
12,569
Location
Yorkshire
Troll? I don't remember calling anyone that - I'm just trying to get you to answer some questions as to why you think it's simpler. I'll admit I chose an extreme example - you've disparaged that but don't seem to want to answer questions about more real life situations.


Lordship? I thought we were having a debate here?
 

MidnightFlyer

Veteran Member
Joined
16 May 2010
Messages
12,857
I asked you why any standard individual would want to go from Leeds to Sheffield via Huddersfield and you created some long, but admittedly interesting, story. I'm still a bit undecided why this is relevant to the railways however.
On the contrary. Deerfold gave some good reasons. One of the reasons was:
There could be more chance of a seat on this service?.
Is this not the same as your own (completely justified) reasoning for taking an indirect route?
Does anyone know why a ticket from Birmingham to Leeds is valid via Manchester? I often take advantage of this if travelling north on a Sunday in order to avoid the cramped and slow but direct Cross Country.
 

kieron

Established Member
Joined
22 Mar 2012
Messages
3,047
Location
Connah's Quay
I think mileage-based pricing would only work if walk-on fares were charged at the point of travel rather than paid for in advance (using some appropriate technology). Then you can simply charge people for whatever trains they actually use.

That said, it doesn't take anything like that to sort out fares like Sankey-Birkenhead Hamilton Square; just an operator which believes in treating customers fairly. The only valid SNK-BKQ routes involve going from SNK-LVJ and then going through the Mersey Tunnel. It costs £2.30 (£2.80 return) to go through the Mersey Tunnel, so the difference between SNK-LVJ and SNK-BKQ should be no more than that.

If a company is in a position where a typical customer doesn't understand its price structure and is scared of getting something wrong, then doing whatever it can get away with really isn't good enough.
 

hairyhandedfool

Established Member
Joined
14 Apr 2008
Messages
8,837
I think mileage-based pricing would only work if walk-on fares were charged at the point of travel rather than paid for in advance (using some appropriate technology). Then you can simply charge people for whatever trains they actually use....

Not sure that would be popular, no Advance fares, no return fares, no simple ticketing from TVMs and queues at ticket offices. Oh, and probably no season tickets either.
 

kieron

Established Member
Joined
22 Mar 2012
Messages
3,047
Location
Connah's Quay
Not sure that would be popular, no Advance fares, no return fares, no simple ticketing from TVMs and queues at ticket offices. Oh, and probably no season tickets either.
I think you misunderstand me. By "at the point of travel", I don't mean that you have to go to a ticket office/machine and buy a ticket for that train. Rather, I was thinking of having something on the platform or train which deducted credit from an account you have as you travel.

As to your claims:
It would not be popular at first. Some people would be charged more (and I'm not just talking about those who expect to be able to clog up trains for hours at a time to take a 60 mile journey), and they won't like it. Some people will have difficulty with the technology, and they won't like it. People would get used to it, though.

Advance tickets would be unaffected. You commit to using specific trains at point of sale, so the price is known and the company can sell you tickets.

Return fares would go, as I don't envisage the traveller ever telling anyone that he or she wants to go back that way.

TVMs and ticket offices won't sell walk-on tickets, although they may still provide a way to credit your card account.

Season tickets would probably be replaced by something more like the zone-based tickets various PTEs promote; you buy a ticket which allows any journey between a particular set of stations, and use it like that. Season ticket users are more likely to complain than other groups of rail users simply because they pay so much at a time, so I'm sure the industry would work something out.

I'm sure there have been previous threads on this subject, though.
 

Deerfold

Veteran Member
Joined
26 Nov 2009
Messages
12,569
Location
Yorkshire
I'm sure there have been previous threads on this subject, though.

There have. Might I suggest that anyone in favour of mileage-based priving answers Yorkie's questions which have appeared in most of them and are in this thread here: http://www.railforums.co.uk/showpost.php?p=1061681&postcount=77
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
As to your claims:
It would not be popular at first. Some people would be charged more (and I'm not just talking about those who expect to be able to clog up trains for hours at a time to take a 60 mile journey), and they won't like it. Some people will have difficulty with the technology, and they won't like it. People would get used to it, though.

Season tickets would probably be replaced by something more like the zone-based tickets various PTEs promote; you buy a ticket which allows any journey between a particular set of stations, and use it like that. Season ticket users are more likely to complain than other groups of rail users simply because they pay so much at a time, so I'm sure the industry would work something out.

And the advantages would be?
 

island

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
15,982
Location
0036
Return fares would go, as I don't envisage the traveller ever telling anyone that he or she wants to go back that way.

To pick one point of the several suggestions you have in your post: would you set the single fare at (1) the current amount which is typically £1 or 10p cheaper than the return fare, (2) half of the return fare, or (3) somewhere in between?

If (1), how will you justify and explain this to passengers who currently buy return tickets and see their journeys almost double in price? If (2), how will the TOCs be compensated for the loss in revenue? If (3), both of the foregoing.
 

MikeWh

Established Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
15 Jun 2010
Messages
7,865
Location
Crayford
To pick one point of the several suggestions you have in your post: would you set the single fare at (1) the current amount which is typically £1 or 10p cheaper than the return fare, (2) half of the return fare, or (3) somewhere in between?

If (1), how will you justify and explain this to passengers who currently buy return tickets and see their journeys almost double in price? If (2), how will the TOCs be compensated for the loss in revenue? If (3), both of the foregoing.

To a certain extent that has already been answered by TfL and ATOC. When Oyster was introduced to the remaining TOCs in 2010 the fares were set at (2) or even slightly less. I guess the rationale is that most people do make return journeys so there is little loss of income.
 

hairyhandedfool

Established Member
Joined
14 Apr 2008
Messages
8,837
I think you misunderstand me. By "at the point of travel", I don't mean that you have to go to a ticket office/machine and buy a ticket for that train. Rather, I was thinking of having something on the platform or on the train which deducted credit from an account you have as you travel....

Something like Oyster? So how would you deal with "Break of Journey"? And who would foot the bill for all the equipment?

....As to your claims:
It would not be popular at first. Some people would be charged more (and I'm not just talking about those who expect to be able to clog up trains for hours at a time to take a 60 mile journey), and they won't like it. Some people will have difficulty with the technology, and they won't like it. People would get used to it, though....

But never like it.

....Advance tickets would be unaffected. You commit to using specific trains at point of sale, so the price is known and the company can sell you tickets....

Ah, this is different to you statement of "charged at the point of travel rather than paid for in advance". I can see the logic of Advances continuing under such a system, but this was not the impression I got from you post.

....Return fares would go, as I don't envisage the traveller ever telling anyone that he or she wants to go back that way....

I really don't see a place for returns with a mileage system, even if passengers could say what route they would take.

....TVMs and ticket offices won't sell walk-on tickets, although they may still provide a way to credit your card account....

Sounds like the start of the end of ticket offices to me. They are unlikely to keep offices open (at least at medium and small stations) just to add credit when a machine could easily do that.

....Season tickets would probably be replaced by something more like the zone-based tickets various PTEs promote; you buy a ticket which allows any journey between a particular set of stations, and use it like that. Season ticket users are more likely to complain than other groups of rail users simply because they pay so much at a time, so I'm sure the industry would work something out....

I'm not sure how that could realistically work.

....I'm sure there have been previous threads on this subject, though.

Probably.
 

Clip

Established Member
Joined
28 Jun 2010
Messages
10,822
I suggested a zone based or mileage based system.

Could I just ask how you would propose a zonal system to work and how you would place the zones and then correctly price them so that no anomolies(whish this thread appears to be about) would arise all over the country please.
 

sheff1

Established Member
Joined
24 Dec 2009
Messages
5,459
Location
Sheffield
Sorry; I've not been following this thread, however someone brought to my attention that mileage based pricing has been suggested.

Therefore, is it possible to get the answers to these 3 questions please ;)

Interesting that some of your 'standard' questions are now different to the ones you asked last time. I answered your earlier questions, but my response was seemingly ignored. I do not therefore intend to waste my time answering supplementaries ;).


Could I just ask how you would propose a zonal system to work and how you would place the zones and then correctly price them so that no anomolies(whish this thread appears to be about) would arise all over the country please.

Similar to the one in Denmark where, to my knowledge, cost of travel to location B via location A is never cheaper than the cost just to A (I do not claim to have analysed every fare combination :))

My preference, though, is for a mileage based system - the Netherlands example was described earlier. Germany uses such as system as well. Both have a maximium fare cap which is also important.


Not sure that would be popular, no Advance fares, no return fares, no simple ticketing from TVMs and queues at ticket offices. Oh, and probably no season tickets either.

Well, In Germany all of these are available. Season tickets, in particular, are far cheaper than in the UK.
 
Last edited:

hairyhandedfool

Established Member
Joined
14 Apr 2008
Messages
8,837
....Well, In Germany all of these are available. Season tickets, in particular, are far cheaper than in the UK.

I don't know about you, but I don't live in Germany and I have never used the German railway system. I suppose you will claim the German railway system has as many routeing possibilities as the comparatively cramped UK rail network? And therefore any possible problems that could be encountered have already been answered? Such as, I don't know, does a guard/RPI have to carry a set of mileage tables and a calculator around with them to check tickets?
 

island

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
15,982
Location
0036
Germany has those and also three different grades of train as well as two classes of travel. ICE and IC trains require a supplement over other train types.

I don't think anyone has said that a mileage-based system is unachievable in the UK, merely that it would be liable to cause inequity and disadvantage to some existing passengers and some existing TOCs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top