Great Western Coffee Shop

Easier fares for all The Rail Delivery Group’s proposal for a more transparent, simpler to use, modern system of tickets and fares

This document sets out proposals for an easier fares system as a  rst part of the industry’s submission to the Williams review in to the future structure of rail. We know our customers want change quickly however, so we want to work with government to begin the journey of improvement where possible now, starting with a review of the TSA and running a series of real-world trials over the next year. Commercial contracts would then need to be revised and agreed, starting a programme of reform which, with all parties working together, has the potential to be rolled out operator any operator across the network over the next 3-5 years.

The current system risks failing to protect customers. Rather, it distorts the market and undermines trust, to the extent that up to 35% of people are being put off travelling by train because they find it difficult to find the right fare.

No change is not an option. To do nothing is to fall behind, not stand still.

Unless we bring the system up to date with how people work and travel today, the railway is likely to become increasingly outmoded.  An overly rigid fares system will inhibit the  exibility of travel required in today’s economy.

For an industry which has been at the cutting edge of technology, and in earlier eras drove huge changes in behaviours, this would be a great tragedy; and yet, as we have demonstrated here, there is also a tantalising opportunity.
 
The incremental improvements to the system we have delivered within current constraints (as set out on page 28) are valuable, but with changes in regulation we can deliver far more. Working with government, passenger groups, retailers and others, we can create an up to date, easier to use system where customers have more control over when they travel and how much they pay, easing crowding at the busiest times of day and boosting the funding available for investment in the future railway.

We also believe that current ticketing reform projects in the pipeline could, with the aid of our fares proposals and the agreement of government and devolved authorities, quickly o er real bene t to customers and communities. This is particularly so with many of the planned smart ticketing schemes that could make a real diffrence to people’s lives, but only with the right fares structure in place.

These proposals show how this can be delivered, starting with the  rst stage, which is to work with the government to create a new set of regulations for the fares system as a whole, replacing the TSA. This does not require statutory change so could be done very quickly.

With these new regulations in place, the second stage would see commercial changes agreed with operators as part of changing the price regulation. This can ensure that the right products are developed for the right markets incrementally, with new pricing structures better able to re ect what people want to see from fares including fairness,  flexibility and a pay-for-what-you-need approach - allowing operators to be flexible in the face of shifting patterns of consumer behaviour.

The changes would need to be made on a contract-by-contract basis, with government weighing up the implications for each individual operator. The rail industry is committed to working with government to kick start this process. In addition, a series of real-world trials need to be set up in parallel with the Williams review process over the coming year that can showcase new types of fares and how they are sold, and this will require regulatory approval. These trials would demonstrate the bene ts to customers of reform while enabling further commercial modelling on a train operator by train operator basis, as a fundamental part of delivering a sustainable and successful new fares system.

Half of the industry’s revenue either  ows directly through to government or is within the scope of franchise renewals taking place in the next 12 months. With joint working, meaningful improvements can therefore be achieved quickly, supporting full reform rolling out across the network through the contracting process over the next 3-5 years. Other changes could be implemented through existing change processes in contracts. These reforms are capable of taking place under the current system, and under any new structures adopted by government and transport authorities as an output of the Williams review and are therefore complimentary to the on-going review.

The Rail Delivery Group, as the unified voice of the train operators and Network Rail, is arguing for reform not for the sake of change but for the pressing urgency of change. Reforming the system of fares is part of that journey, making fares simpler to understand, easier to buy, and always the best value-for- money. This document sets out our ideas for reform, backed by evidence, analysis, and popular opinion. With government, industry and others working together, we can move to a system which meets the needs of our customers and equips the railway for success now, and the generation to come.

Tap-in, tap-out rail fares could be expanded beyond London if a group of train operators gets its way.

The Rail Delivery Group has set out a wish-list of reforms for the industry and it wants the UK and devolved governments to support them.

Another suggestion is removing the sudden change between peak and off-peak fares, to reduce overcrowding.

The lobby group said almost 20,000 people made submissions on how they would like the UK railways improved.

Transport Focus, the independent passenger watchdog which also worked on the consultation, said UK train operators currently offered an "outdated and outmoded fares and ticketing system".

Fair fares

Feedback from commuters found eight out of 10 want the fares system overhauled and nine out of 10 want smart or electronic tickets, with the potential for price capping.

The Rail Delivery Group said reforms would support tap-in, tap-out fares, a pay-as-you-go method used in London, and more integration with other modes of transport.

In London, tube and rail commuters can use contactless bank cards to automatically pay fares which are calculated based on where a passenger enters and exits the network.

Reform would mean updating regulations around peak and off-peak travel, Rail Delivery Group said, and ticket prices could be set more flexibly. This would reduce overcrowding, it said.

Paul Plummer, chief executive of the Rail Delivery Group, said customers have different needs and want changes that offer value and better reflect changing work habits.

"Rail companies are already working together on plans for real world trials so people can see what our proposals could mean for them".

All change

Mr Plummer said rail companies needed the government to change rules on how train fares are charged.

"Current regulation needs to be updated and we want to work with government, which is key to making improvements a reality, to deliver the better fares system the public wants to see."

The government is currently undertaking the Rail Review which is covering everything from commercial contracts to rail fare structures. Its consultation closes at the end of May.

The Rail Delivery Group said its ideas could be rolled out, train operator by train operator, in as little as three years.
Darren Shirley, chief executive of the Campaign for Better Transport, said the existing system is "broken and desperately needs fixing".

"We're particularly pleased to see proposals for more flexible commuter tickets to reflect modern work patterns, something we've long called for, and for nationwide smart ticketing.

"What's not clear however, is if these proposals will also lead to an end to the annual fares rise, which fails to reflect the level of service passengers receive the previous year.

"It is now up to the Government to take forward these proposals to ensure we have a fares system that is fairer and easier to use."

Another proposal is to stop passengers having to buy split tickets to get the cheapest fares for some journeys.

Analysis

Tom Burridge, BBC transport correspondent

How to reform the railways is a contentious, some might say politically toxic subject right now. A broad Government-commissioned review into almost every aspect of the system is ongoing.

Our out-dated and mind-bogglingly complicated ticketing system is a prime candidate for change. The system is, in the eyes of many, inherently flawed.

How can an off-peak single sometimes cost a fraction less than a return? And how can it be that you get different prices for exactly the same journey and fare?

Technology is clearly a big part of the solution. But a tap-in, tap-out system which automatically ensures you the best fare for your journey is also partly about restoring trust. The t-word has become a precious commodity on the tracks of late, after a whole host of problems.

The underlying message from train companies today is that they are on the side of passengers. They want to shunt the government towards positive change.

More types of flexible fares is one thing, but cost and who pays will, as always, be almost every passenger's central concern.

To make the proposals 'revenue neutral', as the operators plan, cheaper fares would have to be off-set by more expensive ones. That is, unless the changes drive more people to travel by train, especially on more empty off-peak services.

The initial mood music from those representing passengers is broadly positive. But some fear there could be winners and losers.

Even with the support of Government, one industry source said real change might not arrive for another three to five years.

Why rail fares could become even more confusing! Critics hit out at plans to replace 'peak' and 'off-peak' tickets with sliding scale prices that change throughout the day
* Cheaper tickets at quiet times are hoped to end the crush during rush hours 
* Consumer group Fairer Finance said new system may be 'even more confusing'
* The flexible commuter tickets were introduced to reflect modern work patterns
* Rail Delivery Group said reconfiguring the decades old system won't be easy

Rail companies are offering part-time season tickets, a guarantee that passengers will get the cheapest prices and smartphone-based ticketing across the UK as part of a radical overhaul of British fares.

The rail industry proposals include a weekly fare cap that allows commuters to avoid paying for their season ticket on the days when they don’t use it – something long demanded by campaigners as a benefit for part-time workers.

[snip]
The need for an overhaul of rail fares is almost universally recognised, with passengers often paying more than they need to because of complex options. The RDG estimates that there are 55m separate fares available in Great Britain.

However, the solution to Britain’s railway problems remains deeply contentious.

The train companies argue that regulations prevent them from being able to introduce technologies that would simplify buying tickets for passengers, allowing for airline-style ticketing systems for longer journeys and more “tap in, tap out” pay-as-you-go systems in urban areas, similar to Transport for London’s Oyster system.

Which? responds to RDG fares reform proposals
18 February 2019
Alex Hayman, Which? Managing Director of Public Markets, said:

“Too often rail passengers have had to struggle with a confusing ticketing system so any steps to make the system simpler and easier for them to navigate are a step in the right direction.

“Now that the industry has acknowledged the need for automatic compensation, train companies must roll it out across the network without further delay, so all passengers can benefit and get the money that they are owed.”

Rail user groups in Suffolk and Essex are welcoming proposed changes to ticket prices which could see split ticketing become a thing of the past in favour of less complicated fares.

JOURNEYS for rail travellers in Yorkshire could get much easier under proposals from the rail industry to overhaul the country’s fares system.

The radical proposals published by the rail industry have been informed by the biggest ever public consultation with nearly 20,000 people across Britain, including over 1,800 in the region.

Britain’s rail companies are publishing the ‘Easier Fares for All’ proposals to explain how updates to outdated regulation would enable the transparent, simpler to understand fares system people want.

Peak rail fares could go under rail price shake-up

Traditional peak and off-peak rail fares face the axe under sweeping changes being proposed for the UK's train ticketing system.

The Rail Delivery Group (RDG), which represents train operators, wants to eliminate the "cliff edge" between when peak and off-peak tickets kick in.

Using your bank card beyond London to tap in and out sounds hassle free to me although many people won't know how much their journey costs until they tap out or look at their bank statement later. What if I sat in first class? How would I be charged for that?

Could I offer a German word for what I fear the outcome will be  ?    Shame there isn't an English word like it.

   "Verschlimmbesserung"

Isn’t GWR one of the operators where off-peak singles are usually much cheaper than returns, not just 10p cheaper?

you missed out the peak DID-SWI fares.

OXF-DID, the shorter the distance, yes, it looks as though the return probably has to rise as the single is probably priced about right.

BUT this is going to be the best chance to sort out the DID-SWI prices - which I think is the most expensive 12 mins on GWR. About the same time as OF from DID, it's nearly twice the price!

In relation to 1, my understanding is that the fare income will be neutral *at the point of change*....ie with the same fares sold on day -1 as day +1, the income would be the same.

Of course, sales of fares will difer over time & therefore the farebox over any period will be different.

There is such sense in having a uniform relationship between single and return fares, of having fares based on mileage, of having an "n" tier fare system where "n" is a big enough number to avoid the current frightening price steps between two successive trains.

Yes... but that also increases the likelihood of having the *wrong* ticket type for any journey, where wrong means either more expensive than necessary or invalid. Going the other way and having only one fare type (by time of travel, so erasing completely the peak v off-peak distinction) would remove these two problems entirely – but probably at the cost of even more overcrowding in peak times and empty trains at some other times.

Could I offer a German word for what I fear the outcome will be  ?    Shame there isn't an English word like it.

   "Verschlimmbesserung"

The latest attempt to simplify our crazily complex rail ticketing system, hailed as a “once in a generation reform” is nothing of the sort. It is tinkering at the margins, which will result in some passengers being a little better off, a few a little worse off and Britain’s railway system still egregiously expensive and unfit for purpose.

The Rail Delivery Group’s (RDG’s) new deal largely consists of part-time season tickets, a guarantee that passengers will get the cheapest prices and smartphone-based ticketing across the UK.

Will the system become less complex? The RDG repeats an oft-quoted figure for how labyrinthine our ticketing system is, saying: “There are around 55m fares in the current system.”

Yet it then suggests that the train companies should be allowed to “create discounted, premium, train specific and personalised variations of these fares, for example, charging less at quieter periods, more for first class, less for reduced flexibility, and so on”. This is about creating more fare types, more complexity and potentially much more opaque pricing. It is the opposite of fare simplification. It is more like Ryanair on steroids.

The RDG says it came to its conclusions after conducting months of “intensive” consumer research which found that passengers want “a fairer, more transparent and easier to use experience”.

They could have saved some time by reaching back to a House of Commons transport committee report from 2006 which concluded that a decade after privatisation : “Passengers are consistently dissatisfied with what they perceive to be the value for money of their fares.”

The privatised rail companies have had 13 years to digest that report’s findings. Yet during that time, they have made the ticketing system ever more complex, and ever more costly for walk-up passengers.

The problem with the RDG proposals is that they come within tight, revenue-neutral, terms of reference. To be fair to the RDG it is operating within a Balkanised network with a frustrating amount of legal restrictions in place.

Once upon a time fares really were pretty simple. In 1961, for example, each second class mile was charged at about 2.5 old pence by British Railways.

If you knew that London Paddington to Reading was 36 miles, you could work out with reasonable certainty that a second-class single would be about 90 old pence, or seven shillings and sixpence. (That’s 37.5p, but the change in money values since 1961 makes the conversion all but meaningless.)

£100 in 1961 -> £2,207.52 in 2019

When I passed my driving test and was able to persuade my father to let me use the family car PROVIDED I put something into the tank petrol was 2/6 (12 1/2p) per gallon. Two years on when I was the owner of my own vehicular transport and post the 1973 Middle East crisis petrol prices had risen somewhat, JET petrol had arrived on the scene and theirs was 4/- (20p) a gallon. Anybody reading this remember National Benzole, a fuel mix of petrol and benzene.

Yes! The garage near us sold it - and my father had an account there. Buying petrol on account...now that seems odd today!

When I passed my driving test and was able to persuade my father to let me use the family car PROVIDED I put something into the tank petrol was 2/6 (12 1/2p) per gallon. Two years on when I was the owner of my own vehicular transport and post the 1973 Middle East crisis petrol prices had risen somewhat, JET petrol had arrived on the scene and theirs was 4/- (20p) a gallon. Anybody reading this remember National Benzole, a fuel mix of petrol and benzene.

Confused here. I wasn't quite old enough to use money in 1973 but didn't shillings get replaced in 1971? Were things really still priced in shillings post 1973?

http://www.ukrestoration.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/IMG_2273-400x400.jpg
For those who are wondering what we are talking about.

This is what a 1965 BR WR timetable says about fares:

(https://i.gyazo.com/3fc71d0e0b6dd629302b1d4a49eb866c.png)
A single from London Paddington to Reading General was then 9/-

... all of our ultra-complicated fares structure has been built up over time to encourage off peak demand and, if it is changed unwisely to be “fairer” it may well stifle demand.

That is probably why the TOCs don’t really want to do anything about it, and the RDG need to be very wary indeed with their recommendations, for there will be winners and losers. And the winners won’t be grateful enough to spend any more money, whilst the losers might stop using the trains.

In truth this whole issue ought to have been left in the “too difficult to do” file. We’ll see what happens in the end.

Fares must be prioritised… say passengers

A year on since the UKs biggest ever rail fares consultation opened, train passengers are still using an outdated fares system.

Passengers are now saying that the government shouls prioritise a fares reform and enable it to change as soon as possible.

81% of passengers think updates to the fares system should be prioritised by the independently chaired Williams Review looking at the whole rail system. This is according to an independent survey by Populus commissioned by the Rail Delivery Group.

The latest poll shows that passengers want to see change delivered quickly, with almost eight in 10 (77%) saying it is important that the government works with the rail industry to enable change within the next three to five years. This timeframe is especially important among commuters (79%) and people who take the train for business (80%).

The poll also found that among rail users:

* Only one in 10 (11%) feel the range of rail fares on offer always fits with their lifestyle and the way they want to travel, falling to just 5% of people who use the train for business.

* Six in 10 (60%) say rail fares always, often or sometimes feel too rigid so they have to fit their plans around them, rather than the other way around, which rises to two-thirds (67%) of part-time commuters and eight in 10 (80%) people who use the train for business.

* More than eight in 10 (85%) think it’s important that the fares system is updated to enable flexible workers to save money.

That was the resultys of a Transport Focus poll of just 2,000 passengers, extrapolated to fit the travelling public.

You are probably right in suggesting that a fairer system would cause significant problems ... however, time and again it's what the majority of people say they want.

From Rail Advent (https://www.railadvent.co.uk/2019/06/fares-must-be-prioritised-say-passengers.html) - headlines from a longer article

I have long felt that a greatly simplified fares system would be preferable, with only 3 different fares payable in each class of travel, for each journey.
I see no merit in punitively high fares for last minute travel on a lightly loaded service.
Neither do I see any merit in offering discounted advance tickets for services that are known to be overcrowded.

If these proposals are considered too radical, then perhaps a start could be made by reducing the number of "booked train only" tickets, and offering instead discounted tickets valid on ANY off peak train.

* “More than eight in 10 (85%) think it’s important that the fares system is updated to enable flexible workers to save money.”

Or in other words (as I read it) “we don’t want to pay peak rate fares and we want cheaper railway tickets.” Or, in some cases, “its not fair that I have to pay £100 for my peak return to Paddington when other people only pay £20 with an advance ticket, so we should both pay the same.

Discounted advance tickets were sold, and AFAIK are still sold for the 18-03 and 19-03 departures from Paddington, services that are routinely overcrowded.
I recall a previous thread about gross overcrowding on Westbound GWR services on Maunday Thursday, but discounted tickets were still sold for these trains.

Mid day trains from Taunton to Paddington are often lightly loaded, but a very high fare is payable for last minute travel.

It's not just about peak rate fares.  There are also a lot of commuters who use the train 3 or 4 days a week and therefore can't take advantage of season ticket discounts.  And there are others who work night shift and so day returns don't suit them very well.

This is not particularly detailed research but I have raised National Rail Enquiries and put some options in to get some prices, to test what you have to say:

Taunton to Paddington return on 19/06/2019, leaving 0945 returns an off-peak price of £81.30, with return travel permissable on the 1803 and 1903 departure. No advance tickets were available for that journey.

A single Taunton to Paddington leaving at 1145 on the same day gives an advance price of £43.50, which actually gives very little discount on the off peak fare of £47.30. Its clearly a bad idea to have an off peak single with LT Travelcard because that whacks the price up to  £86.00  ;D An anytime single is £128.50 but you are of course under no obligation to buy one as an off peak single would be valid.

So, in summary, it appears that you are wrong in saying that advance tickets are available on the 1803 and 1903 departures from Paddington to Taunton.

Clearly your definition of "a very high fare" may differ from mine, but National Rail Enquiries give a fare of £47.30 for an off peak single from Taunton to Paddington which, as an off peak rather than advance ticket, you could buy in the last couple of minutes before your chosen train departs. I see no evidence of a premium being applied (as I expected I wouldn't, because that#s not how the fares system works)

As regards part time workers, this would depend on what the season discount actually was. For example a weekly season Chippenham to Paddington is £250.70 whilst an anytime return is £178.00. Therefore buying a season and only going twice in a week would still be cheaper than buying two anytime returns.

Looking at Friday 2nd August (the second weekend of the school holidays)..... Advance tickets are available on the 1803 PAD-TAU for £35.

Actually more complicated if you take into account railcards. CHP to PAD with card is about £116 anytime return, whereas AFAIK there is no railcard discount on a season.

Actually more complicated if you take into account railcards. CHP to PAD with card is about £116 anytime return, whereas AFAIK there is no railcard discount on a season.

Where are you getting those Bournemouth to London fares from grahame? They don't tally with BRFares or SWR's booking engine.

Anytime Return £118.00
Anytime Day Return £115.20
Off Peak Return £62.40
Off Peak Day Return £61.30
Super Off Peak Day Return £55.30
Weekend Super Off Peak Day Return £54.30

You have.

Your post was comparing fares TO London, but for Bournemouth you used fares FROM London, which are considerably cheaper in that direction. A not uncommon thing with fares in the former Network SouthEast area.

One matter intrigued me, however. Graham quoted a 7 day season CPM PAD to be £282.30. I used a figure of £250.70 which also appears on BR fares as an option ( http://www.brfares.com/#!fares?orig=CPM&dest=PAD )

Can someone explain why these two figures appear, because on the face of it they seem to be offering the same thing?

It's not just about peak rate fares.  There are also a lot of commuters who use the train 3 or 4 days a week and therefore can't take advantage of season ticket discounts.  And there are others who work night shift and so day returns don't suit them very well.

That's a very good point - the world of work is changing, fewer and fewer people work 9-5 and the railways should reflect this - a lot of people work flexibly and/or from home 1 or 2 days a week, a "loadable" season ticket which is on an Oyster card type system and is valid for 30 days worth of trips rather than a calendar month would be a good step forward.

Enjoy your rover ... if you head for Retford after Barnetby - hope you get a seat!   I was on that train in the other direction last Saturday and - well - it was packed.  Conductor muttering that they should have given him something with more capacity than a 153 as he foresaw the problems getting everyone on along the way!

I've found my first fares anomaly from my new home village station, Templecombe.

Should I wish to make a day trip to Exeter, leaving on the 0925, the fare I'm expected to pay is the Off Peak Day Return at £27.70.

However, I can get an Off Peak Return to Tiverton Parkway (route: Via Exeter) for £25.30.

If were going to Exeter for an overnight stay and leaving Templecombe before 0900 (and/or returning before 0900) then the fare I'm expected to pay is the Anytime Return at £48.00.

An Anytime Return to Tiverton Parkway (route: Via Exeter) is £30.60. In fact that fare beats the Templecombe to Exeter Off Peak Return which is £31.50.

I know these anomalies have arisen due to who price the flows. For Templecombe to Exeter it's South Western Railway. For Templecombe to Tiverton Parkway its Great Western Railway.

And of course, the only 'fix' I'd like to see is one where the fares to Exeter become cheaper than those to Tiverton Parkway. Such a fix has revenue implications though, so best leave it be please, and I'll stick to buying tickets to Tiverton for trips to Exeter. ;)

I've found a second (there will no doubt be more) anomaly in fares from Templecombe.

Templecombe <-> Melksham fares have two routeing options. Any Permitted or Via Salisbury. The only valid routeing point for such journeys, according to the National Routeing Guide, is Salisbury, so all journeys have to go that way.

The prices make little sense, with the Any Permitted being cheaper than Via Salisbury across the board.

TMC - MKM Off Peak Return (Any Permitted) £21.50
TMC - MKM Off Peak Return (Via Salisbury) £30.50

Both those Off Peak Returns have the same restriction code, Q8 (https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/ticket_types/64154.aspx).

That's a very good point - the world of work is changing, fewer and fewer people work 9-5 and the railways should reflect this - a lot of people work flexibly and/or from home 1 or 2 days a week, a "loadable" season ticket which is on an Oyster card type system and is valid for 30 days worth of trips rather than a calendar month would be a good step forward.

TMC - MKM Off Peak Return (Any Permitted) £21.50
TMC - MKM Off Peak Return (Via Salisbury) £30.50

Exasperatingly GWR have known about a low-tech solution to this for a few years but haven't rolled it out.

In Cornwall and Devon, on selected routes, you can buy part-time season tickets: valid for three selected weekdays, plus weekends. The route section of the ticket says "MO TU WE &WKND" or whatever combination you buy it for. Here's a typical BRFares link (http://www.brfares.com/#!fares?orig=PLY&dest=PNZ).

But it's only available there, not across the whole GWR network. So part-timers (at least the ones I know) watch like a hawk for advances to become available on their working days, and then spend the evening in front of a computer booking as many as possible. This isn't a sensible solution for anyone.

Exasperatingly GWR have known about a low-tech solution to this for a few years but haven't rolled it out.

In Cornwall and Devon, on selected routes, you can buy part-time season tickets: valid for three selected weekdays, plus weekends. The route section of the ticket says "MO TU WE &WKND" or whatever combination you buy it for. Here's a typical BRFares link (http://www.brfares.com/#!fares?orig=PLY&dest=PNZ).

But it's only available there, not across the whole GWR network. So part-timers (at least the ones I know) watch like a hawk for advances to become available on their working days, and then spend the evening in front of a computer booking as many as possible. This isn't a sensible solution for anyone.

@CarolineLucas
·

When are ministers going to require train companies to offer part-time season tickets?

“We continue to challenge the industry to come up with proposals” the govt says

Pathetic.  It’s not rocket science. Just regulate to make them do it

Part-time workers deserve better