Which Magazine: rail "second least-trusted consumer industry"

[squizzler]

Silly season upon us, and the BBC is duly reporting the latest survey from "Which" magazine which claims "only 23% of people told us that they trust train travel"

It makes good headlines, but what the heck is "trust" in a train operator meant to mean? Get you to your destination? Keep a secret? Not to take advantage of your partner? The good news for rail is that consumers have even more trepidation about the main alternative form of transport: car dealers are the least trusted of all.

Note also the chart in the linked webpage (click quote title for link). The score for "journey overall" - probably the key metric - is not referred to in the main copy. Perhaps this is because it does not support the narrative of decline, having not changed on balance (c80%) over the ten years of the survey.

I personally am not convinced by the Which readership. When I moved into a house I got the magazine delivered free for a year because the previous owners had not bothered to change their address or cancelled the subscription. Slightly ironic situation for a magazine whose readers probably like to think they are smart with their money. I did however find it a good read!

Has train travel actually improved for passengers in the last decade?

Read more: https://www.which.co.uk/news/2018/08/have-trains-actually-improved-in-the-last-decade/ - Which?

We’ve scrutinised official train passenger stats from the past 10 years and ask: has rail travel improved at all in that time?

The rail industry has had plenty of bad press in recent weeks, after timetable chaos led to mass frustration across the UK. It may come as no surprise, then, that new Which? analysis has found passenger satisfaction has stagnated over the past 10 years. We analysed official Transport Focus data, which revealed that satisfaction with punctuality and reliability of train services has dropped from 79% to 73% over the past decade. These findings, alongside plummeting trust and soaring fares, paint a bleak picture. We dig into more of the detail of our broad analysis of Transport Focus data, below.

Read more: https://www.which.co.uk/news/2018/08/have-trains-actually-improved-in-the-last-decade/ - Which?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I find that all a bit odd. I wouldn't say rail wasn't trustworthy - it's not like they take your money then screw you over like say Ryanair do. It might be *expensive* at times, but that's different - they say they will charge you a fortune and then do, and then if they fail to do so give you a fair chunk (or all) of that fortune back without an awful lot of faff or argument in most cases.

 

[Esker-pades]

How does one calculate the frequency of trains as a percentage?
What does trust actually mean in this context?
What are the other commuter industries?

Commuting in any city is going to be a bad experience. Simply too many people need to travel to one place at one time. I think the railways do their best in that area.

 

[Bantamzen]

Is it me, or is that photo in the Which article not a UK train? If so, not a great start....

Seriously though I would be highly surprised if this is really the case amongst the general public. I'd wager the financial sector, energy providers, the legal industry, and many, many more would come much higher up on people's "Don't trust" list. There is a world of difference between passengers being unhappy with and not trusting a company.

 

[broadgage]

I find that all a bit odd. I wouldn't say rail wasn't trustworthy - it's not like they take your money then screw you over like say Ryanair do. It might be *expensive* at times, but that's different - they say they will charge you a fortune and then do, and then if they fail to do so give you a fair chunk (or all) of that fortune back without an awful lot of faff or argument in most cases.

IME, a lot of passengers DO consider that the railway DO "take your money and then screw you over" A lot of people expect a seat on an expensive and long distance journey and consider that paying hundreds of pounds for standing is a rip off. The fact that the railway is not required to provide a seat does not help those who feel ripped off.
Likewise many passengers feel "screwed over" when they have paid an expensive rail fare in order to travel on a rail replacement bus, that is much slower and involves long waits at each end.

 

[3141]

I'm a member of Which. I think that increasingly it reflects the preconceptions of its staff. It is no longer impartial but intemperate - as an example, consider "plummeting trust and soaring fares" in the passage quoted by the OP. They recently sent me a questionnaire about possible topics for future reports which included subjects like "the great grocery pricing trick and "how energy companies catch you out". They'd already formed their opinion. Some of the railway's recent timetable problems are serious and should not have happened, but Which wants to stir up dissatisfaction and resentment rather than find solutions.

Which likes the term "trust". As other posters have said, they don't define it. If you asked me whether I trusted SWR to be on time, my answer would be NO. But mostly, when I take a train (which isn't a daily peak-time commute), I get the one I need to reach my destination and not the one an hour earlier, which suggests that in practice I do trust them.

Still, the unfortunate reality is that many people are dissatisfied with the railways, even though they may not be affected by the highly publicised problems at GTR or Northern, and steps should be taken to improve performance.

 

[theironroad]

I think a !of of people no longer trust the train to get them to their destination at the time published in the timetable and to be fair, there's plenty of evidence to support that lack of trust.

 

[jon0844]

I'm a member of Which. I think that increasingly it reflects the preconceptions of its staff. It is no longer impartial but intemperate - as an example, consider "plummeting trust and soaring fares" in the passage quoted by the OP. They recently sent me a questionnaire about possible topics for future reports which included subjects like "the great grocery pricing trick and "how energy companies catch you out". They'd already formed their opinion. Some of the railway's recent timetable problems are serious and should not have happened, but Which wants to stir up dissatisfaction and resentment rather than find solutions.

So consumer websites are also not trustworthy then!

 

[Bertie the bus]

I think a !of of people no longer trust the train to get them to their destination at the time published in the timetable and to be fair, there's plenty of evidence to support that lack of trust.

I agree. They also don’t trust they will be sold the cheapest ticket, trust they will be dealt with competently in times of disruption, trust they will be dealt with fairly in terms of compensation, etc. All of these are well founded.

Wasn’t it Which? who forced a change in the NRCoT that incorrectly and illegally stated the railway wasn’t responsible for consequential losses when passengers are delayed?

 

[underbank]

The lack of trust isn't about being ripped off in the same way as buying a used car. It's about the train being cancelled, not being able to get a seat, train being late, etc. The "trust" element is not trusting the railways to get you to where you want to go on time nor in comfort, and usually at a high cost for the privilege.

Given Northern's woeful services recently (another 80 services cancelled yesterday I saw reported in local press), and long established overcrowding etc., it's no surprise people in the Northern area don't trust their services.

 

[mallard]

I'm amazed that the rail industry only came second. Which industry has worse customer relations? Is there another industry that creates a bizantine web of incomprehensible (to the average "customer") rules and restrictions and then actively employs people to issue substantial penalties to those who make minor and easily understandable mistakes?

 

[Clip]

I'm amazed that the rail industry only came second. Which industry has worse customer relations? Is there another industry that creates a bizantine web of incomprehensible (to the average "customer") rules and restrictions and then actively employs people to issue substantial penalties to those who make minor and easily understandable mistakes?

Local councils and car parking are ones that come to mind

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The Which? stuff does not mention the part the government and Network Rail play in "trust" and "value for money" on the railway.
It is just a superficial brand assessment, much like washing machines or mobile phones.
Note that the "best" operator, Grand Central, is under the same ownership (Arriva) as Northern, near the bottom.

 

[Esker-pades]

Is it me, or is that photo in the Which article not a UK train? If so, not a great start....

You are right. It's of RER rolling stock, so it's Parisian.

 

[Bantamzen]

I'm amazed that the rail industry only came second. Which industry has worse customer relations? Is there another industry that creates a bizantine web of incomprehensible (to the average "customer") rules and restrictions and then actively employs people to issue substantial penalties to those who make minor and easily understandable mistakes?

I take it you've never had to deal with nPower's random outstanding bill generating system then, where you get a bill that look nothing like your usage, you query it then get a different amount each time you speak to an agent, none of whom can quite explain or understand why its thrown up the current figure in question? Trust me, compared to what goes on with the railways, nPower alone are far more worthy of the top three positions, let alone just the top one.

In all honesty there are probably lots of companies that could earn the same, depending of course on who you speak to. I'm afraid as another poster has said up thread, Which are not really the same consumer championing group they once were. Its very easy to weight a series of survey questions to get the answer you're looking for. And as Which continue to try and plug their membership scheme, and railways are high up in the public attention span, well you figure it out....

You are right. It's of RER rolling stock, so it's Parisian.

That explains the look on the lady's face, "Why are Which contacting me about British Railways?"...

 

[DarloRich]

The usual defensive stance taken by posters here missing the point entirely or complaining about the picture of a train used! I suspect this quote is closer to the truth:

IME, a lot of passengers DO consider that the railway DO "take your money and then screw you over" A lot of people expect a seat on an expensive and long distance journey and consider that paying hundreds of pounds for standing is a rip off. The fact that the railway is not required to provide a seat does not help those who feel ripped off.
Likewise many passengers feel "screwed over" when they have paid an expensive rail fare in order to travel on a rail replacement bus, that is much slower and involves long waits at each end.

 

[sprunt]

I find that all a bit odd. I wouldn't say rail wasn't trustworthy - it's not like they take your money then screw you over like say Ryanair do.

If I were to buy a ticket for today for both a Ryanair service in October, and a rail service in October I would have far greater confidence that the Ryanair service would proceed as planned.

 

[squizzler]

I'm amazed that the rail industry only came second. Which industry has worse customer relations?

I presume "social media" was not one of the multiple choice answers in the survey!

Which industry has worse customer relations? Is there another industry that creates a bizantine web of incomprehensible (to the average "customer") rules and restrictions and then actively employs people to issue substantial penalties to those who make minor and easily understandable mistakes?

I presume you read the terms and condition of every outfit you get into bed with. Phone operators are the worst IMO. I have some sympathy with firms that require a fixed term agreement where they issue you with a top-of-the-range handset or other expensive hardware that must be amortised, but try switching landline provider for an agreement that isn't something like two years.

If I were to buy a ticket for today for both a Ryanair service in October, and a rail service in October I would have far greater confidence that the Ryanair service would proceed as planned.

In view of the escalating industrial action facing that particular carrier I suspect yours would be a minority view!

 

[WelshBluebird]

it's not like they take your money then screw you over like say Ryanair do

When the answer to some ticketing issues is "buy a new ticket, at your own expense, much more expensive than the ticket you bought in advance, and we'll refund you afterwards", then the industry certainly does "take your money then screw you over". Look at the recent thread here with Grand Central where they were saying you'd have to buy a brand new walkup ticket because they cancelled their trains. The same answer is sometimes given for TOD issues. And that is before we even talk about "one off" issues like staff telling people their valid ticket is not valid etc. I doubt there are many stories of passengers being told their Ryanair ticket isn't valid when they have followed everything they needed to do to have the ticket etc.

 

[Stew998]

The article is written to support a Which? campaign to demand better train services, for which there is an online petition:

Our railways are plagued by delays, cancellations, constant overcrowding and hideous train conditions. Passengers are paying more than ever but still arriving at their destination late and frustrated. To make matters worse, recent timetable changes have caused even more disruption. It’s unacceptable. We deserve trains that run for passengers, not just the rail industry. Sign our petition to demand better rail services.

Being objective, whatever the measure it is clear there has been little or no improvement. In particular value for money and how train companies dealt with delays both hover around the 35-45% mark. These results are based on a survey of 50,000 passengers carried out by Transport Focus twice a year, hardly an insignificant sample - presumably this sample size is felt sufficient to yield a result one can place some confidence in (although perhaps a statistician could comment on that?)

NB Transport Focus is the independent transport user watchdog and has a Board of non-executive members appointed by the Secretary of State for Transport - hmm!

 

[LeeLivery]

I think some on this platform a quite out of touch with the general public, I've thought this more than once. Especially on fare discussions.

Anyone who trusts GTR down here probably needs their head testing. Do their staff even trust them?

This is how the general public see it: We've been paying over the odds for late, cancelled or fast run trains for years. I had a LO train fast run 6 stops because it was 5 minutes late two weeks ago. Network Rail bosses are some of the highest paid in the public sector, many times more than the PM for what? Failure after failure? The industry can't manage to write a timetable or electrify a line without astronomical sums of money and massive delays. Then we get Southern managers (who haven't even paid for a ticket) having the nerve to complain that people are standing in that pathetic section labeled first class. Honest mistakes with tickets can cost you small fortunes, SE RPIs fining you for going into minus on Oyster Cards, LO RPIs fining for not having your railcard when your not even using your railcard, then there are the successive failures of the East Coast franchise and the list goes on.

Yes Ryanair are crap and telecom and utility companies are a pain but the vast majority of people don't fly with Ryanair (at least regularly) - I never have and how often do we really talk to the telecom and utility companies?

Note that the "best" operator, Grand Central, is under the same ownership (Arriva) as Northern, near the bottom.

Why is that relevant? National Express ran c2c and MML great, Central was shocking. People were asked what they thought of their journeys and service not who owned what, and to risk being pedantic, nationalised NIR came top for leisure. GC being top isn't a surprise when it's a tiny operation that must keep its passengers happy.

 

[ianBR]

I'm amazed people on here are surprised that rail companies came out second. Most people I know that commute every day would have Govia at the top of their list.

For a start - trains cancelled frequently, incorrect information given out, delay repay made as difficult as possible to claim and then rejected for spurious reasons (knowing that people can't be bothered to argue or resubmit a claim). Abandoning people with no assistance when last trains are cancelled. Twitter teams giving stock answers and not resolving issues. Fares going up annually as services go down.

There are so many reasons for Govia to not be trusted and I'd consider nPower, ryanair and others quoted above far more trustworthy.

 

[AndrewE]

Just think about the TPE problems: you buy a ticket with a reserved seat on a timetabled through train to Scarborough (or to Manchester airport), then when almost there you get told the train isn't going any further and tipped off. Your journey forward to Scarborough is not without stress. If you were looking to check in at MIA with just 2 hours before your flight then you are definitely going to be stressed, given their appalling check-in queues and security check delays.
Of course people are losing trust in "the railway." Another reason why Franchising (for which read fragmentation/Balkanisation) is and always will be a disaster. People either take the train, or they don't: Forget stupid franchises and pretend names.

 

[js1000]

I'm amazed people on here are surprised that rail companies came out second. Most people I know that commute every day would have Govia at the top of their list.

For a start - trains cancelled frequently, incorrect information given out, delay repay made as difficult as possible to claim and then rejected for spurious reasons (knowing that people can't be bothered to argue or resubmit a claim). Abandoning people with no assistance when last trains are cancelled. Twitter teams giving stock answers and not resolving issues. Fares going up annually as services go down.

There are so many reasons for Govia to not be trusted and I'd consider nPower, ryanair and others quoted above far more trustworthy.

I agree. I know people love trains on here - maybe even an 'echo chamber' as they say - but ask Joe Public and you'll find a very different response to how the railways are being run at the moment.

Northern Rail have introduced penalty fares in recent months - a move I agree with. However, to my disgust, they have been guilty on a couple of occasions of not providing a means to purchase a ticket before boarding, either via a ticket office or a ticket machine. On a few occasions at Levenshulme in recent months, the ticket booth has been closed as the member of staff is on a lunch break and the ticket machine is out of order. Yet, went you arrive at Piccadilly you are immediately treated like a criminal even though they have not proved they enabled the opportunity for a ticket purchase before boarding. Then you consider many of them are outsourced and normally clueless to how Northern operate - how are they supposed to give excellent customer service if they doesn't understand their TOC's network and operations? It's a nonsense.

I've been on commuter trains to Manchester Airport and inexplicably the train has been cancelled or terminated at Piccadilly in recent months on multiple occasions. For those looking to catch a flight, it is a frustrating and stressful thing to happen and the punishment of compensation doesn't really fit the crime I feel. To think one of the original posts was: "I find that all a bit odd. I wouldn't say rail wasn't trustworthy - it's not like they take your money then screw you over like say Ryanair do." Somewhat ironic! Wouldn't trust the railways to even get you as far as getting you on a Ryanair flight the way recent months have gone!

It does feel like the railways are increasingly becoming a law unto themselves sadly and not surprisingly passenger confidence is taking a battering. I rest my case and completely concur with the published survey above.

 

[sbt]

I asked myself "do I trust 'The Railways'"? And the answer is 'generally yes' but I distrust the fares system, some of the ticketing machinery, a specific small minority of staff whose attitude and behaviour I have encountered and the people at the top of franchises.

Thinking generally. part of the problem is that that for commuters, even on a good day, with everything working as intended, you tend to be stressed anyway. Then there are legitimate delays and disruptions that, regardless of who is responsible or if they are avoidable, raise your stress levels even further. In this stressed environment small things erode trust, like feeling that you yourself are distrusted - hearing that 'You need a ticket...' announcement several times a day will do that, without the behaviour of some RPIs (necessary but sometimes, depending on your appearance etc. sometimes quite hostile, suspicious, and when larger than you and blocking you into a quite restricted seat, downright intimidating). The whole thing creates an atmosphere and situations where whilst distrust may not be created trust is certainly not.

In this atmosphere where no 'trust credit' has been built quite small things can tip things over into distrust - there is not body of prior positive thoughts to make you think 'it's just a small mistake or issue'. So, for example, the way that the new ticket machine at my usual station moves ticket selections around in a way that makes it easy to select a First Return rather than a Standard Return creates distrust rather than eroding the assumption of trustworthiness you have built up. And then you get things like the Gatwick Express situation and GTRs promises and pronouncements and their lack of correspondence with reality (and the apparent 'I don't care' attitude) and you become downright distrustful.

Anticipating some peoples response - this has nothing to do with who is to blame or which part of the system, DTI, NR or which Franchise is responsible. To the commuter it is all 'The Railway'.

 

[Hadders]

With the largest train operator, GTR, in total meltdown it's hardly surprising that a survey finds that people don't trust the railway. That before we get on to fares, Cross Country overcrowding, strikes etc etc.

 

[theironroad]

With the largest train operator, GTR, in total meltdown it's hardly surprising that a survey finds that people don't trust the railway. That before we get on to fares, Cross Country overcrowding, strikes etc etc.

I'd suggest 'total meltdown' is a bit over-dramatic.

 

[yorksrob]

And there's the crumbling edge of value for money. Another three percent price hike on the way.

 

[etr221]

In terms of dis-trust, Which? had the railways second to car dealers.

As an indication as to why the railway is distrusted, the proportion of this forum devoted to fare queries and disputes, and similar issues, might be a good pointer...

And a piece here: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/13/the-guardian-view-on-britains-railways-a-system-where-nobody-listens

 

[squizzler]

In terms of dis-trust, Which? had the railways second to car dealers.

Again, what other industries where readers invited to select. I can think of two others which purposely misled the public and caused harm: surely a more real definition of "breach of trust" than running late occasionally.

• Never mind car dealers, the manufacturers were in hot water over diesel emissions. A deliberate conspiracy which has had real public health consequences.
• Facebook and other social media operators sold user data to shady deep-state actors and foreign powers who manipulated elections to their own ends.
• The newspaper industry still has not got over the phone hacking scandal, another example of those at the top of these businesses ordering morally indefensible practices. Leveson enquiry was stopped after the first part following lobbying by newspaper industry.

As an indication as to why the railway is distrusted, the proportion of this forum devoted to fare queries and disputes, and similar issues, might be a good pointer...

I wholeheartedly agree that the entire fare system needs to be systematically reimagined. But a holistic recast of the fare system will cause some fares to go down and others to go up. Worse for Which readers who probably think of themselves smarter than the average bear, the loopholes that allow those in the know to get cheaper fares such as split ticketing will close. When a clean sheet fares system comes up for consultation, I imaging that it will be Which and its ilk that campaign "Save split ticketing"!

Perhaps the delay repay scheme should be given up as a bad job, many people who take the train will not even know about it, let alone bother to claim. But the cost of every ticket contains a hidden surcharge for delay repay, whether the customer is aware of what it means or is likely to claim on it or not. Far better IMO to allow customer discretion as to whether they are prepared to pay for delay repay on their ticket. I used Austrian Railways online ticket purchase and "travel insurance" was offered as a small surcharge. If the stakes are high for a given journey being disrupted, customers can just stump up for the insurance.