Suggestion to have a PAYG scheme throughout the South East of England

[cle]

Shouldn't contactless just be offered for all services in the old NSE area - we're almost "post-Oyster" already, in a physical sense. All that is needed is capping and intelligent, integrated ticketing so that people can make journeys which include NR, tube, bus, whatever - which inspectors on trains can verify - and then at the end of the day, it hits their account. Railcards would be applied to their profile.

The only downside is the lack of visibility in advance in terms of spend.

 

[jon0844]

Shouldn't contactless just be offered for all services in the old NSE area - we're almost "post-Oyster" already, in a physical sense. All that is needed is capping and intelligent, integrated ticketing so that people can make journeys which include NR, tube, bus, whatever - which inspectors on trains can verify - and then at the end of the day, it hits their account. Railcards would be applied to their profile.

The only downside is the lack of visibility in advance in terms of spend.

While TfL drags its heels, I think the future might be advancements to ITSO cards like The Key, where you can load season tickets, individual tickets (of any value) and PAYG credit. There's also no reason, in theory, you couldn't load a first class ticket/season on, or have a railcard attached etc.

More flexible than just using contactless, given the £30 limit that might be restrictive as you venture further out of London and £30 may not cover a single fare (and let's consider the issue of off-peak day tickets where the return is currently 5 or 10p more).

If The Key and other cards had the PAYG credit usable in and around London, that might be the best of everything. CPCs usable by irregular travellers who would get a fairly basic service.

(I think this comment and the original post probably needs moving by moderators to a more appropriate thread).

 

[yorkie]

Shouldn't contactless just be offered for all services in the old NSE area...

How high could the maximum fare go?

https://tfl.gov.uk/fares/how-to-pay...-and-oyster/pay-as-you-go/touching-in-and-out

Charges if you don't touch in and out
If you don't touch in and out, we can't tell where you've travelled from or to, so your journey will be incomplete.

As we can't work out the right fare for your journey, we'll charge you the maximum fare

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

The largest issue in my mind would be how you'd deal with people not tapping in or out, and then potentially being able to make long journeys without paying the correct fare. I suspect the answer to that is, as TfL have done, maximum fares. But what happens if the maximum fare is returned unpaid for whatever reason?

I think the only ultimate solution without making the whole thing fall down on this issue would be to require payments to be made via a proxy smartcard, which, a bit like Apple or Google Pay (or Curve, for those who have heard of it), separates the actual payment medium (i.e. the smartcard) from the funds (i.e. the funding credit or debit card). You'd then need to set it up so each person could only have one smartcard, tied to a trusted form of ID such as a driving licence or passport.

Obviously that would exclude certain people from being able to access a smartcard, but workarounds can and must be found for such people, such as accepting National Insurance Number letters together with a utility bill or birth certificate, and so on. Or perhaps tying it to some biometric identifier.

The key thing would be that it would be pointless linking your smartcard to a debit or credit card that couldn't cover the cost of your fare, because you'd not be able to use your smartcard to travel again until you paid off the debt, and you wouldn't be able to throw your smartcard away and get a new one. Of course that could lead to a trade in unused smartcards from those who don't use trains, but the "one per person" rule would prevent it from being of a meaningful scale.

Obviously people would have probably justified concerns about tracking and privacy!

 

[MikeWh]

More flexible than just using contactless, given the £30 limit that might be restrictive as you venture further out of London and £30 may not cover a single fare

The £30 limit does not apply to transit mode contactless transactions. Indeed a return journey on either Heathrow Express or Gatwick Express will result in a charge over £30. The first touch of the day causes an authorisation to be sought in the background. If this fails then the card will be temporarily blacklisted (apart from the next exit so you are not stranded inside the gateline). If it passes then all your daily touches are combined to produce one charge. If you really travel excessively the system may request a further authorisation, whilst if you travel regularly the initial authorisation can last a few days.

 

[Alfonso]

Shouldn't contactless just be offered for all services in the old NSE area - we're almost "post-Oyster" already, in a physical sense. All that is needed is capping and intelligent, integrated ticketing so that people can make journeys which include NR, tube, bus, whatever - which inspectors on trains can verify - and then at the end of the day, it hits their account. Railcards would be applied to their profile.

The only downside is the lack of visibility in advance in terms of spend.

This would mean getting rid of the choice between cheap/slow and pricey/fast routes: HS1 to East Kent, Southampton via Barnham etc. Expanding PAYG to a degree makes sense, but to the whole of the NSE area is a step too far I think. It would also spoil the fun for us fare nerds.

 

[Hadders]

In theory all of this is a good idea.

In practice it will mean fares increases via the back door:

- will railcards be able to be used with PAYG?
- many routes have super off peak tickets (e.g GTR at weekends). Will these continue or will they be abolished?
- if we move to single leg pricing then I strongly suspect all routes will gain evening restrictions, despite most not having them at the moment. It is also worth noting that many south-east operators have recently re-named their Off Peak Day tickets to/from London which had evening restrictions as Super Off Peak Day tickets and introduced a new slightly more expensive Off Peak Day ticket without evening restrictions.

 

[Aictos]

I agree to a point as it should be possible to link a railcard to a ITSO smartcard so for GTR to say you can’t use the Keygo on a PAYG basis with a railcard isn’t that helpful.

 

[alistairlees]

As this thread seems to have been split from another, here is the link to the DfT's proposals:
https://assets.publishing.service.g...ta/file/776998/payg-rail-consultation-doc.pdf

For the initial area as proposed by DfT, the highest fares are probably between Reading and Stansted Airport, where an SDS is £44.20.

For the potentially expanded area, the highest fares are probably between Brighton and Oxford (Any Permitted) where the SDS is £64.30.

To avoid customers doing these journeys and not being charged if they did not tap out (or in) then the capped fare would need to be set at at least these amounts in each phase. DfT would need to be confident that a person making (say) a journey from Windsor to London in the 'peak' was comfortable that they might be charged at least £44.20 (rising to £64.30 when the scheme is expanded) if they failed to tap in / out correctly. I doubt that the public (or MPs) would be comfortable with this, or understands that this is what they are buying in to.

Alternatively single fares could be dramatically decreased. I doubt that this will happen sufficiently for it to change the balance of consideration here.

It's also worth noting that some routes have alternate fare routes. E.g. from Brighton to Oxford the "via Gomshall" SDS fare is less than half the "Any Permitted" fare. There will need to be a means of getting this reduced fare (perhaps by tapping in the GWR service) and not being charged the "Any Permitted" fare.

There are many other difficulties around peak and off-peak, break of journey etc. All these will need to go or be harmonised to make such a scheme workable.

 

[PeterC]

I suspect that many of those who advocate expanded PAYG assume that it will result in TfL levels of low fares.

Apart from that fares would have to be harmonised which would mean winners and losers. The winners will keep quiet and the losers will scream!

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's also worth noting that some routes have alternate fare routes. E.g. from Brighton to Oxford the "via Gomshall" SDS fare is less than half the "Any Permitted" fare. There will need to be a means of getting this reduced fare (perhaps by tapping in the GWR service) and not being charged the "Any Permitted" fare.

There are many other difficulties around peak and off-peak, break of journey etc. All these will need to go or be harmonised to make such a scheme workable.

Could they not simply follow the Dutch model and just introduce a totally different pricing model for PAYG? The UK seems obsessed with replicating ticketing schemes intended for paper tickets onto PAYG systems, and it results, like TfL, in all sorts of anomalies. Even if it sometimes results in paying a little more, and sometimes a little less, people would still use a simplified PAYG system as it is so convenient.

Peak and off peak can simply be based on time of touch-in (no model is perfect anyway). Break of journey does not need to be considered, if you exit you simply make two journeys. Route differentials can either be abolished, basing things on just entering a "transport cloud" and leaving it at your chosen destination, or by having touch-in on the vehicle so you can follow a Dutch style model of everything being based on vehicle miles with a starting fee, and so on.

If you start with a ticketing system designed for paper, you will never properly succeed.

 

[JonathanH]

Could they not simply follow the Dutch model and just introduce a totally different pricing model for PAYG?

Yes, but it won't be a case of everyone paying a 'little' more or less. Some fares would be materially different from now. The further you expand PAYG on a new pricing model the worse this could be - e.g. look at different fares from Gatwick to Reading.

 

[SS4]

It sounds like a good idea on paper (or should that be on smartcard?) but I have doubts as to whether implementation will either benefit - or be neutral to - passengers. I remember Simplification a few years back now which caused a rise in prices either directly or via restrictions.

My first question is how Break of Journey will be implemented - on a paper ticket that allows it there is nothing stopping a traveller from stopping en route for any reason they like. I fear a smartcard will treat them as two separate journeys.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

My first question is how Break of Journey will be implemented - on a paper ticket that allows it there is nothing stopping a traveller from stopping en route for any reason they like. I fear a smartcard will treat them as two separate journeys.

That needn't be an issue, so long as all journeys along a given route are priced at the same cost in pence per mile. Of course, I can't imagine that happening (otherwise you'd have ludicrous fares of 20p for a one-station hop) so break of journey will definitely be an issue in the same way it is (to a lesser extent) on Oyster/contactless.

 

[PeterC]

My first question is how Break of Journey will be implemented - on a paper ticket that allows it there is nothing stopping a traveller from stopping en route for any reason they like. I fear a smartcard will treat them as two separate journeys.

A short break to use "landside" facilities at an interchange is easy enough, there are plenty of complaints about Oyster combining two journeys when people make a short stop. The ability to take a seven or eight hour stopover would probably have to be lost.

 

[Bletchleyite]

A short break to use "landside" facilities at an interchange is easy enough, there are plenty of complaints about Oyster combining two journeys when people make a short stop. The ability to take a seven or eight hour stopover would probably have to be lost.

Again, keep it simple. X pence per vehicle kilometre (different X for peak/off peak etc) with a fixed entry fee of £Y per journey, defined as any touch in within say an hour of a touch out.

Different X per TOC if they like.

 

[JonathanH]

Again, keep it simple. X pence per vehicle kilometre (different X for peak/off peak etc) with a fixed entry fee of £Y per journey, defined as any touch in within say an hour of a touch out.

Different X per TOC if they like.

Do you think it should be more expensive to travel from Reading to Redhill than it is to travel from Reading to Paddington?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Do you think it should be more expensive to travel from Reading to Redhill than it is to travel from Reading to Paddington?

I don't have a strong view on the matter (I'm assuming here it's the same distance), but if it was felt that it was sensible for that to be the case it could be done by use of "tariff kilometres", where you define on a market basis how many tariff units are charged between each pair of stations along a given line for a given TOC and sum those up to calculate the price.

FWIW, isn't this sort of approach what RDG were looking at for their proposed "single leg pricing" idea?

But anyway, my point is that it is not sensible to try to apply to "touch in, touch out" type payment methods a fares structure designed for pre-purchased paper ticketing. It just doesn't work properly, evidenced by the amount of manual correction and workarounds the London system has.

 

[JonathanH]

I don't have a strong view on the matter (I'm assuming here it's the same distance), but if it was felt that it was sensible for that to be the case it could be done by use of "tariff kilometres", where you define on a market basis how many tariff units are charged between each pair of stations along a given line for a given TOC and sum those up to calculate the price.

FWIW, isn't this sort of approach what RDG were looking at for their proposed "single leg pricing" idea?

But anyway, my point is that it is not sensible to try to apply to "touch in, touch out" type payment methods a fares structure designed for pre-purchased paper ticketing. It just doesn't work properly, evidenced by the amount of manual correction and workarounds the London system has.

No, about 10 miles shorter - Reading to Paddington is 36 miles, Reading to Redhill is 46 miles. Current prices:
Reading to Paddington £49.20 anytime day return (£20.70 off peak day return)
Reading to Redhill £25.80 anytime day return (£16.80 off peak day return)

As you say, you could build up this concept of a tariff per station but it is just as complicated because at some point it will be possible to travel one change from Reading to Redhill via a single change at Farringdon.

All I am saying is that the proposals / extension of PAYG lead to some very big losers where prices go up materially, not just small changes but maybe RDG are totally comfortable with that.

 

[Bletchleyite]

All I am saying is that the proposals / extension of PAYG lead to some very big losers where prices go up materially, not just small changes but maybe RDG are totally comfortable with that.

Just as there are anomalies in the TfL system. Anyone travelling on a weekend with a Network Railcard should buy a paper ticket for Euston-Watford Jn, for instance (assuming that is still cheaper, I think it is). But I bet a load of people still use contactless PAYG as it's just easier.

That to me is better than a messy and partially-functional PAYG system that requires a lot of human intervention and "workaround" back-end processes.

 

[JonathanH]

Just as there are anomalies in the TfL system. Anyone travelling on a weekend with a Network Railcard should buy a paper ticket for Euston-Watford Jn, for instance (assuming that is still cheaper, I think it is). But I bet a load of people still use contactless PAYG as it's just easier.

That to me is better than a messy and partially-functional PAYG system that requires a lot of human intervention and "workaround" back-end processes.

Yes, I agree. It costs £6.05 to get a return from Redhill to London with a Network Railcard at the weekend and £6.30 to get a single using Contactless PAYG. There will be loads of people who pay the latter. However, I appreciate that I currently have the opportunity to pay £6.05 for this journey and not £12.60. That is a material cost to have PAYG. It increases the price by more than 100%.

PAYG was widely accepted in London because people paid a few pence more than they did before. PAYG outside central London means people are paying a few pounds more in some cases.

I think it will happen and will be widely welcomed because it makes peak time travel more flexible. However, it has to be associated with the complete withdrawal of the current fare structure. Some people will lose out materially. RDG / DfT just have to grab the mettle and impose it and people who travel at the weekend can complain about it afterwards for a while before accepting it.

PAYG is not the panacea that people think it is as 'Hadders' points out up thread but it is a great opportunity for fare increases for off-peak travel.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think it will happen and will be widely welcomed because it makes peak time travel more flexible. However, it has to be associated with the complete withdrawal of the current fare structure. Some people will lose out materially. RDG / DfT just have to grab the mettle and impose it and people who travel at the weekend can complain about it afterwards for a while before accepting it.

There is no reason weekend users should be penalised as such. Because it's all calculated for you, you can have far more peak/off-peak jumps, and the idea of a cheaper rate on weekends (or even further differentials - LNR after all have a "peak" on Saturdays) is by no means something that would be out of the question.

The absolute key, though, is that you design it so the rules fit the infrastructure you are going to deliver and are designed to work with it, which is what the Dutch system does and the TfL system absolutely does not.

Unresolved journeys are the best example of this, and having to work out how to solve them. The "simple" approach is that if you don't touch both in and out you are charged the maximum fare - end of. Mitigating circumstances to that are just a discretionary customer services matter.

But there are others too. For instance, if you go for touch in/out at barriers only, you need a system based on a "cloud" of travel, i.e. no different routes, just charges based on entering and leaving the system and having made a "crow flies" journey. If you put it on the vehicle, you do it based on vehicle journeys, possibly with a "flagfall" added on top. What you don't do is take an overcomplicated paper ticket based pricing system and try to make it work with a totally different usage model.

 

[JonathanH]

There is no reason weekend users should be penalised as such. Because it's all calculated for you, you can have far more peak/off-peak jumps, and the idea of a cheaper rate on weekends (or even further differentials - LNR after all have a "peak" on Saturdays) is by no means something that would be out of the question.

Isn't what you are suggesting rather complicated? Having loads of different fares for a particular journey - I thought the aim was simplicity.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Isn't what you are suggesting rather complicated? Having loads of different fares for a particular journey - I thought the aim was simplicity.

The simplicity isn't whether there are banded fares by touch in time/day i.e. peak/off-peak. The simplicity is in having a model which fits with the infrastructure on which it is to be implemented, so there are no TfL style anomalies to resolve manually.

Really, it's not hard to get your head around the idea that you might have different rates for touch-ins from 0400-0600 (early bird), 0600-1000 (peak), 1000-1600 (off peak), 1600-1900 (peak again) and 1900-0400 (off peak), and a similar arrangement on weekends, is not that complex. It might create the odd anomaly (where you've got a train A-B-C which departs A at 0959 and B at 1010, say), but so does a paper ticket with similar restrictions.

 

[MikeWh]

Unresolved journeys are the best example of this, and having to work out how to solve them. The "simple" approach is that if you don't touch both in and out you are charged the maximum fare - end of. Mitigating circumstances to that are just a discretionary customer services matter.

There will have to be exceptions to this. The most notable example is around events (eg Wembley Park, North Greenwich etc). Either the gates may be open to prevent passengers exiting clogging up the platforms as the next train gets there, or the police request relaxation to prevent disorder after the event. Then you've got what happens if an evacuation becomes necessary. And we haven't even got onto power cuts rendering a stations equipment unusable. And yes, I've experienced all of those scenarios over the last few years.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There will have to be exceptions to this. The most notable example is around events (eg Wembley Park, North Greenwich etc). Either the gates may be open to prevent passengers exiting clogging up the platforms as the next train gets there, or the police request relaxation to prevent disorder after the event. Then you've got what happens if an evacuation becomes necessary. And we haven't even got onto power cuts rendering a stations equipment unusable. And yes, I've experienced all of those scenarios over the last few years.

Of course the proper way of dealing with events in a city with a centrally managed transport system is that your event ticket is your ticket for the city rail system for the day, and a levy is placed on large events to fund it, and similarly your hotel stay includes a tourist tax paying for travel during your whole stay, with your booking confirmation acting as a ticket while you're on the way there. In Germany this even goes as far as theatre and gig tickets. It completely removes this kind of issue, certainly where you're looking at a system like TfL's.

My point about TfL's unresolved journey setup is that the default is that it's something requiring investigation and correction. In my eyes the default should be maximum fare. Obviously it might be worth automatically refunding in the case of a known thing like station evacuation, of course, just as you might allow PF appeals if there is a broken TVM.

 

[JonathanH]

Are you suggesting that only people going to an event will be using Wembley Park station on a day when an event occurs. There is the 'designer outlet' and new flats there too. You can't simply say that the station is only available to people going to the event with an event ticket.

The maximum fare is going to approach £50 if TfL Contactless PAYG is extended.

The fact that the Contactless peak doesn't apply before 0630 on NR services outside Zone 1-6 suggests that there is only one definition of peak in the current system, noble as the idea of loads of different fare time splits might be. Afternoon peak outside London will be a killer, just as the weekend might be - not all leisure journeys are into Central London and can take advantage of the 'into Zone 1' relaxation.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Are you suggesting that only people going to an event will be using Wembley Park station on a day when an event occurs. There is the 'designer outlet' and new flats there too. You can't simply say that the station is only available to people going to the event with an event ticket.

No, but if 90% do have event tickets, you just feed into two queueing systems, one for ticket holders straight onto the platforms and one where you use the gates.

The maximum fare is going to approach £50 if TfL Contactless PAYG is extended.

As to me that's about the right level for a PF, that makes sense.

The fact that the Contactless peak doesn't apply before 0630 on NR services outside Zone 1-6 suggests that there is only one definition of peak in the current system, noble as the idea of loads of different fare time splits might be. Afternoon peak outside London will be a killer, just as the weekend might be - not all leisure journeys are into Central London and can take advantage of the 'into Zone 1' relaxation.

I'm not proposing extending the inflexible and nearly-20-years-old Oyster system here (I'd oppose that), I'm proposing a proper design from scratch as the Dutch did. Maybe we need a seperate thread in Speculative Ideas to explore that further, but is there enough material for two threads or should this one maybe be moved there as it is quite speculative?

 

[etr221]

The two things which let Oyster PAYG be the success that it was were, firstly, that an appropriate fare structure - with fares being based solely on start and end points, together with a start time differentiator for peak/off-peak scales (so start at time T from A, go to B (which would only be identified when you got there), fare is X) - could readily be introduced (this was perhaps the cleverest bit of the project), and, secondly, - as Oyster & PAYG was seen as the way forward for TfL - a decision (political as much as anything) was made that PAYG fares would always be the cheapest option, lower then the cash + conventional ticket alternative (with revenue impact being accepted). And as it was originally designed for the Underground, which could be seen as a central core (Zone 1!) with lines radiating from it, London's simple system of zones provided an easy - and easily understandable - way of setting fares.

What has complicated matters, and to a large extent destroyed the initial simplicity of the system, has been its extension from the tube to Overground and other National Rail lines - which has meant that alternative journeys not via Zone 1/Central Core are now common, extensions beyond the initial Travelcard Zones 1-6 - which has made the simple system of zones inadequate, and, most importantly, a decision that the fares for all these extensions should essentially be 'revenue neutral' from the previous complex (relative to Oyster simplicity) system.

So for a successful 'wide ranging' (NSE or National) PAYG - whether using Contactless or new generation Oyster to be a success, either there needs to be radical reorganisation of fares so that for a journey between any two stations there is a standard base fare (which can be modified based on time of journey, or 'privilege' of passenger (old, young, staff, etc)) - which, if there's an insistence on revenue neutrality, is going to mean massive losers and gainers; or alternatively a major rethink of how PAYG would work.

 

[Meerkat]

Will people really go for touch in touch out without knowing how much they are getting charged?
If it is contactless how does a guard know you have touched in?