This person should have got advice here...

[yorkie]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7742531.stm

£327 for a SOR Bath Spa to Northallerton!!!

He says, "I just can't believe where they get this figure from," well quite. Where do they get the figure from?!

Splitting tickets gives a huge discount:-

Bath Spa - Reading SOR £87-00 (valid any train)
Reading - Peterborough SVR £71-00 (valid on the 0830 from KGX or later)
Peterborough-Northallerton SVR £61-00 (valid any train)
TOTAL = £219 saving £108!


If he got the 0543 from Bath Spa he could have got the 0804 GC from KGX and done the following:-

Bath Spa to Finsbury Park SOR £136-00
London to Northallerton SVR (GC only) £63-00
TOTAL = £199 even bigger saving but he'd need to get GC back to London (there is a solid connection to the sleeper leaving at the end of the business day so a good one to get).

I see from the headcode stamped on the ticket, 1A02, he did get the 0543 from Bath Spa so he'd have got to King's Cross in time to get the 0804 Grand Central to Northallerton. So he spent £128 more than if he split tickets. Looking at the time on the ticket (0527) he had plenty of time to specify a combination of tickets, but it probably didn't occur to him. People who just turn up and buy a ticket to somewhere without doing research are the ones who are penalised by the TOCs, and they are taken advantage of. Those people may be put off using rail again. The TOCs don't care though - they are quite happy to take the £128 extra that he has unfairly had to pay and pocket it, even if it means he won't travel with them again. No other organisation treats its customers like that.

 

[mrcheek]

A one week ALR would have only been an extra £40! then he could have gone wherever he wanted!

 

[devon_metro]

He was not a rail expert and made the trip at the last minute. Ticket office issues what you ask for. Not his fault :?

 

[JoshW1992]

Prices are getting absolutely ridiculous nowadays. People are going to start finding alternative forms of transport, and when the railways start to lose revenue, they will wonder what they have done wrong.

 

[paul1609]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7742531.stm

£327 for a SOR Bath Spa to Northallerton!!!

He says, "I just can't believe where they get this figure from," well quite. Where do they get the figure from?!

Splitting tickets gives a huge discount:-

Bath Spa - Reading SOR £87-00 (valid any train)
Reading - Peterborough SVR £71-00 (valid on the 0830 from KGX or later)
Peterborough-Northallerton SVR £61-00 (valid any train)
TOTAL = £219 saving £108!


If he got the 0543 from Bath Spa he could have got the 0804 GC from KGX and done the following:-

Bath Spa to Finsbury Park SOR £136-00
London to Northallerton SVR (GC only) £63-00
TOTAL = £199 even bigger saving but he'd need to get GC back to London (there is a solid connection to the sleeper leaving at the end of the business day so a good one to get).

I see from the headcode stamped on the ticket, 1A02, he did get the 0543 from Bath Spa so he'd have got to King's Cross in time to get the 0804 Grand Central to Northallerton. So he spent £128 more than if he split tickets. Looking at the time on the ticket (0527) he had plenty of time to specify a combination of tickets, but it probably didn't occur to him. People who just turn up and buy a ticket to somewhere without doing research are the ones who are penalised by the TOCs, and they are taken advantage of. Those people may be put off using rail again. The TOCs don't care though - they are quite happy to take the £128 extra that he has unfairly had to pay and pocket it, even if it means he won't travel with them again. No other organisation treats its customers like that.

Why didnt he travel via Birmingham then the anytime Not London ticket is £170? first arrival about 40 mins later than via London.
I'm a bit confused as to which sleeper service to Bath Spa offers a sound connection to the GC service?

 

[Mintona]

He got what he asked for. He should have researched more thoroughly if he wanted cheaper fare. Not the industry's fault. Yes it's far too fooking expensive. But it is what he asked for.

 

[yorkie]

Why didnt he travel via Birmingham then the anytime Not London ticket is £170? first arrival about 40 mins later than via London.

It seems that 40 minutes was crucial. I found a combination of tickets avoiding London for £85 - half the cost of the through fare!

I'm a bit confused as to which sleeper service to Bath Spa offers a sound connection to the GC service?

No, in the southbound direction you can get the GC to KGX arriving just after 9pm leaving plenty of time to get to Paddington for the sleeper, although unfortunately I've now realised the sleeper doesn't call at Bath, but there is a 2145 which should be doable, but the next official connection is 2215 so he could get back that night. Anyway, the point is there is a GC back at a good time so it would have been a viable option.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

He was not a rail expert and made the trip at the last minute. Ticket office issues what you ask for. Not his fault :?

That's basically what I am saying, yes. And the TOCs are fleecing people in his situation.

Only the rail industry has a "customer is always wrong" attitude (Basil Fawlty doesn't count).

 

[glynn80]

That's basically what I am saying, yes. And the TOCs are fleecing people in his situation.

Only the rail industry has a "customer is always wrong" attitude (Basil Fawlty doesn't count).

Whilst I'm not trying to detract from the fact that some TOCs have raised unregulated fares higher than others, thus causing an inbalance in fares whereby buying a combination of tickets (set by TOCs who have increased their fares at a lower rates than the TOC setting the through fare) is cheaper than buying a through fare.

I cannot believe people are suggesting the TOC in question is trying to "fleece" this customer by not offering him the combination in fares? Are we to expect all ticket office staff to start searching through hundreds of combinations on each flow they start selling to check if passengers can purchase their tickets cheaper. Then cross reference these combinations with the timetables to check if the trains stop at the relevant destinations to change tickets?

If we are we would have ticket office queues ridiculously long and in a worse situation than we are in now. The only way to solve this would be to equal out fares, this would be done by EITHER lowering the through fares in line with the combinations OR rising the different cominbations inline with the through fare. I think we know which the TOCs will choose to do if forced to on their unregulated fares

 

[yorkie]

No, I don't think anyone is moaning that he was not offered a combination of fares.

The crime is not in not offering a combo, it's the fact that the through fare is hideously expensive compared to the shorter fares combined. We're not talking a few quid more, we're talking three figure sums - that's obscene! In the case of avoiding London, it's down to two figures but proportionately it's higher - twice the fare!

The worst I know of is York to Derby departing at 0827, the through fare is £64-50 the combination is £25-90, the through fare is 2.5 times the price!

Imagine a restaurant doing that!

 

[Mintona]

It's the same though isn't it. If someone went into a very expensive resturant without having a look at prices or to see if they could get the same meal cheaper elsewhere, then surely they would expect to pay the higher price?

 

[yorkie]

It's the same though isn't it. If someone went into a very expensive resturant without having a look at prices or to see if they could get the same meal cheaper elsewhere, then surely they would expect to pay the higher price?

That's not the comparison.

The equivalent would be consuming an identical meal but paying far less if you pay for each individual dish seperately.

I know of a Fish & Chip shop that sold meals for 10p more than a combination of chips and fish. Someone queried it and was told "that's because a meal is more on the system" but was then given their money back, as if they'd bought the seperate items. This was last Summer I don't know if it's still the case.

It happens elsewhere but nowhere near on the scale it happens in the rail industry. A few pennies is nothing. £100+ extra or twice the price is ludicrous.

 

[Mintona]

That's not the comparison.

The equivalent would be consuming an identical meal but paying far less if you pay for each individual dish seperately.

I know of a Fish & Chip shop that sold meals for 10p more than a combination of chips and fish. Someone queried it and was told "that's because a meal is more on the system" but was then given their money back, as if they'd bought the seperate items. This was last Summer I don't know if it's still the case.

It happens elsewhere but nowhere near on the scale it happens in the rail industry. A few pennies is nothing. £100+ extra or twice the price is ludicrous.

I see what you're saying. So before he ate the meal, he should have researched to see the cheapest way of eating it. And presuming (as it is possible on the railway, drawing parallels) he was allowed to pay for each dish separately, then he would have done that if he had bothered to do his research. But as he didn't, then he had to pay the full whack price. So basically he got what he asked for, even though he could have got it cheaper, but the restaurant wasn't obliged to tell him that. That sort of what you're saying?

As I said earlier, I don't know how anyone can possibly consider £327 a reasonable price for a ticket that, let's face it, only gets you about 250ish miles (each way). But obviously someone "up there" thinks so :roll:

 

[Metroland]

Imagine a restaurant doing that!

Yep but, with all due respect, running a restaurant is a tad simpler than running a 10,000 mile railway network with 25,000 trains a day on it and literally millions of ticket combinations, serving 3 million odd customers.

That said, £300 odd quid does seem rather excessive. Going a similar distance from Dorset to York shortly, for 1/3 of that price on a good old fashioned saver. I could have gone 1st class for the same money, but the trains didn't quite suit, and for about £70 booked on certain trains that also didn't suit. I suppose the trick is to know when not to travel and which route to take. I doubt the customer would know this and probably insist on a certain time/journey. No booking office staff/call centre staff is going to have the training for every sort of trick.

Sorry, some of you armchair railway operators need to actually apply for some of these jobs.

Would you also say hotels, airlines etc are fleecing customers, some of whom are travelling/staying for very little, other people are pay much higher prices? Or perhaps you have a better idea for managing demand?

Think we all agree £327 is madness, no standard fare in this country should exceed £200, and the railways do themselves no favours with that sort of pricing. I expect very, very few people pay it the average fare on the network is about £4.35.

 

[glynn80]

Yep but, with all due respect, running a restaurant is a tad simpler than running a 10,000 mile railway network with 25,000 trains a day on it and literally millions of ticket combinations, serving 3 million odd customers.

That said, £300 odd quid does seem rather excessive. Going a similar distance from Dorset to York shortly, for 1/3 of that price on a good old fashioned saver. I could have gone 1st class for the same money, but the trains didn't quite suit, and for about £70 booked on certain trains that also didn't suit. I suppose the trick is to know when not to travel and which route to take. I doubt the customer would know this and probably insist on a certain time/journey. No booking office staff/call centre staff is going to have the training for every sort of trick.

Sorry, some of you armchair railway operators need to actually apply for some of these jobs.

Would you also say hotels, airlines etc are fleecing customers, some of whom are travelling/staying for very little, other people are pay much higher prices? Or perhaps you have a better idea for managing demand?

Think we all agree £327 is madness, no standard fare in this country should exceed £200, and the railways do themselves no favours with that sort of pricing. I expect very, very few people pay it the average fare on the network is about £4.35.

The price of £327.00 is for a 325 mile journey- via London (650 mile round trip). That is £0.50 (rounded) per mile.

The price of £170.00 is for a 288 mile journey- Not London (576 mile round trip). That is £0.30 (rounded) per mile.

 

[t0ffeeman]

The reporter didn't do his homework here. FGW gets the bad press whereas the ticket was priced by NXEC!

 

[Metroland]

Hmn, 50p per mile. Expensive for rail, about the same price to go with one person in a Ford Mondeo Hatchback 2.0 TDCi 140 Zetec 5dr. I suppose travelling on a railcard, if poss, you could get 1/3 off, that's over £100. I definitely think they should replace all railcards with one national one for everyone.

http://www.whatcar.co.uk/car-review-costs.aspx?RT=2732&ED=51621&U=0

I suppose they want more and more people to advance book like London - Glasgow @ £14 each way, about 3.5p per mile aprox.

http://www.nationalexpresseastcoast.com/Special-offers/

 

[yorkie]

The reporter didn't do his homework here. FGW gets the bad press whereas the ticket was priced by NXEC!

Although the customer didn't step foot on an NXEC train! (at least not on the outward journey).

I'd blame the system - the industry as a whole should take responsibility. There are many overpriced fares set by many TOCs.

 

[glynn80]

Although the customer didn't step foot on an NXEC train! (at least not on the outward journey).

I'd blame the system - the industry as a whole should take responsibility. There are many overpriced fares set by many TOCs.

I don't think anyone is to "blame", its just capitalism. If NXEC (or GNER) think they can get away with charging £327.00 return, why should they charge a lower fare? If we are to have lower fares for everybody, a higher government subsidy will be needed to pay for the railway, so then everybody pays (even if they aren't benefiting) rather than just the people using the service paying. Customers have lots of choice on the route. He could of purchased "Advance" fares or gone direct all considerably cheaper. If this person feels he needs to get to Northallerton, 40 minutes earlier and have a ticket with the greatest flexibility, this is the price he needs to pay.

Virgin do exactly the same:
London to Manchester- 183 mile journey (366 mile round trip), £230.00
£0.63 per mile (rounded)

 

[devon_metro]

Although the customer didn't step foot on an NXEC train! (at least not on the outward journey).

I'd blame the system - the industry as a whole should take responsibility. There are many overpriced fares set by many TOCs.

How did he get to Northallerton then?

 

[Metroland]

Well said Gynn80. but yes that's really what it is, market forces. As nobody has found a better way of organising human needs and wants and resources, we can expect more of the same. I totally dispute 'the railway only do this', all commercial outfits charge what they can get away with based on supply and demand. Some things have an elastic price response, other things doesn't. In places there is demand, other times there is none. In the railways cases its all based on flow statistics, LENNON data, and market research. All of which we don't have access to.

The other alternative is subsidy and a planned economy, where the government allocates resources.

I take the point in there seems to be a dispute whether the railway is a public service or commercial operation, but the fact remains off-peak and rural services are not profitable (without cross subsidisation from intercity and freight), because of low flow and intense competition, which differs from say airlines, which run on a mostly commercial basis because they run city-city often with little competition - apart from other airlines in some cases. Unfortunately, this is the difference some of my plane chums cannot seem to grasp.

We all wanted this ultra safe railway system, where there is never any accidents, that costs money too. In some cases a lot of money for reducing very little risk. Then there is staff costs, and it always amuses me that unions complain about high fares, yet are constantly demanding better conditions. The money has to come from somewhere, else the operation has to become more efficient (which usually means cutting staff or better productivity)

Where the railways do operate commercially, you cannot expect them to do any less than maximise revenues, which any other company does, thus in order to attract investment and create jobs. As I said, the alternatives is the taxpayer pays the bill, then we get all these arguments about line closures.

Okay there's a case for including external costs into other forms of transport (such as road pricing) for more perfect competition, but this doesn't seem politically popular.

Perhaps there is a better way or organising ticketing, I'm certainly no expert, but I'd be interested to read views.

 

[yorkie]

How did he get to Northallerton then?

0543 Bath - PAD
0804 KGX-NTR

 

[devon_metro]

0543 Bath - PAD
0804 KGX-NTR

Does it say that in the article?

 

[paul1609]

Hmn, 50p per mile. Expensive for rail, about the same price to go with one person in a Ford Mondeo Hatchback 2.0 TDCi 140 Zetec 5dr. I suppose travelling on a railcard, if poss, you could get 1/3 off, that's over £100. I definitely think they should replace all railcards with one national one for everyone.

http://www.whatcar.co.uk/car-review-costs.aspx?RT=2732&ED=51621&U=0

I suppose they want more and more people to advance book like London - Glasgow @ £14 each way, about 3.5p per mile aprox.

http://www.nationalexpresseastcoast.com/Special-offers/

I think you are confusing the cost of ownership of the vehicle with using it for this journey.
Hertz Bath will hire me a Mondeo for £130 mid week picking up the night before and returning the morning after. Fuel would cost £77 at £1 per litre/ 30 mpg.
Thats at total cost of £207 or 40p per mile based on the mileage supplied by the aa route planner. £180 or 35p per mile assuming our businessman can reclaim the VAT.

 

[The_Rail_WAy]

Better reserach could have saved alot more money here, for example using long-distance bus companies like national express and mega bus - ok its a bit longer but a helluva lot cheaper.

 

[paul1609]

The hire car should be comfortably quicker than the train for this journey as well according to the aa route planner

 

[Metroland]

I think you are confusing the cost of ownership of the vehicle with using it for this journey.

Hertz Bath will hire me a Mondeo for £130 mid week picking up the night before and returning the morning after. Fuel would cost £77 at £1 per litre/ 30 mpg.

Thats at total cost of £207 or 40p per mile based on the mileage supplied by the aa route planner. £180 or 35p per mile assuming our businessman can reclaim the VAT.

I'm not confusing anything, the whole point of the post was comparing vehicle ownership costs with the ticket. You could equally get the ticket in advance which would be a fraction of the £327, cheaper than the car, and probably as much as the bus. You could equally buy a more expensive or cheaper car. But that wasn't the point. The point was 50p a mile is expensive, but most people don't realise that's actually the cost of running a family car.

PS you can claim train tickets back on expenses as well.

 

[yorkie]

Does it say that in the article?

No, but as I said earlier the clue is on the ticket he bought! (which can be seen in the video).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Better reserach could have saved alot more money here, for example using long-distance bus companies like national express and mega bus - ok its a bit longer but a helluva lot cheaper.

But he needed speed, anyway that misses the point!

 

[Metroland]

Well yep, and the whole point about the piece was to moan about the high cost of walk on train fares, rather than compare different forms of transport..

 

[yorkie]

Well yep, and the whole point about the piece was to moan about the high cost of walk on train fares, rather than compare different forms of transport..

Quite true.

Although I have been thinking about what you said earlier that it's just an example of capitalism and a case of charging what they can get away with. I'm not so sure. Capitalism appears to be about giving discounts for items bought in bulk, or if you buy several products from the same shop. It's almost unheard of for someone to be charged more for buying in bulk - surely this goes against all the rules of logic and business?

Another issue was that if these silly money fares were reduced to the level of the combination of fares it would result in a higher level of subsidy being required. I'm not so sure, as I reckon not many journeys are made on such tickets and I think the high price will mostly result in one of two things: 1) the customer trying to get round it by consulting friends/family/money saving websites, etc - which may result in them splitting fares or 2) simply giving up on rail altogether (which is what this guy has done from now on). A few people may opt to pay the fare as a one-off as they need immediate travel then either opt for option 1) or 2) for future journeys. People are unlikely to repeatedly pay silly money for journeys. They will either find a way round it for future reference or find another travel mode, surely?!

 

[The_Rail_WAy]

Rocket fuelled jet-pack anyone?