Christian Wolmar - Trend Back To Barriers Is Damaging The Customer Experience

[whole diary]

[oooooo]

Plymouth's gates would be more useful at Coombe Junction!!

One morning last week the 08:15 ex Gunnislake arrived same time as the unit that comes down from Bristol and as the queue at the gates started building up they decided to open them.. Thats intelligent, especially as both these trains are busy and the mainline one was last stop Ivybridge and you can guarantee some (if not all) tickets from there wouldnt have been done. Defeating the object somewhat.

[Tim]

Gates can of course be justified, but CW^▸ (Christian Wolmar (rail journalist))'s point still stands I think - their proliferation has every so slightly erroded the passenger experience.  This might not neccessarily be a problem but because it happend at the same time that trains get more croweded, that a few minutes slack is added here and there to the timetable and that fares continue to rise above inflation, that ticket machines fail to work it only contributes to passenger disgruntlement. 

I fairly often travel between Bath and London.  I started doing this 7 years ago when you could turn up at Bath at the last minute and buy our ticket (open return) on the train).  Now I have to arrive at the station 5 minutes earlier to buy a tciket/  Using the barriers adds another 1 minute at Paddington and Bath in Both directions.  The Up train (0743) takes 9 minutes longer than it used to and the Down train takes 2 minutes longer.  The door to door return journy now takes 5+1+1+1+1+9+2 = 20 minutes longer than it used to.  Plus the fact that my fare is now ^133 rather than ~^88 and that I can no longer get a table to work at and that I can no longer buy a cup of tea and a breakfast baguette from the buffet and I would say that my experience as a passsenger has deteriourated.  Ticket barriers are only part of the story but they are a contributory factor.

FGW^▸ (First Great Western) have every right to install barriers and check tickets but they need to realise that they are in danger of damaging teh customer experience to such an extent that people will stop travelling if they are able.  I have certainly changed my travel patterns and only travel to london about 20 to 30% as often as I used to.

Call me cynical but I would argue that ticket barriers are being installed for one or more of the follwoing reasons:

1) To meet arbitary DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) targets
2) Because staff Morale is so low that FGW do not trust their on-train staff to do propper checks.
3) Because trains are too crowded for proper on-train checks. 

[zebedee]

No way to gates at Newton Abbot!  It's bad enough, as a passenger, trying to get through the gates at St. David's in the morning - people just get confused and then the staff have to get involved, which just blocks the (narrow) entrance way up.  It's not the staff, it's the dummies who don't have their tickets ready or who just don't understand what they have to do or (and this really annoys me), decide that now THEY have got through the barriers they are going to just stop to put their ticket away or sort their bags out.

From a regular commuters perspective, I think they are nothing but a pain.  If fares were reduced in cost because they had cut down on the amount of people riding the trains without paying, then I would welcome them.

[FarWestJohn]

It is sadly not only barriers that are damaging the Customer experience.

After being very pro rail all my life I regretfully now fly from Cornwall to London for my regular trips. I chose rail travel because I enjoyed it.

The wonderful Mk 3 carriages that we previously had are now no longer suitable for long distances, they are commuter shuttle stock. Air line seating, virtually no tables, claustrophobic layout, appalling high back seats [RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch) insistence] that totally restrict the view and wreck the travel experience.
If I have to sit in an airline seat it is better for one hour on a plane rather than 4.5 hours on the train. Interestingly the seating on a Dash aircraft is not so high back.

If the RAIB consider the risk of flying objects in rail travel to be so high as to require these appalling seats then I do not understand how passengers and staff are allowed to stand on a moving train. Surely the risk of them flying around and injuring themselves and others must be greater. The accident record of the previous layout in the Mk 3s was exemplary and a pleasure to travel in.

Installing new power car new engines is a good reliability improvement but the rest of the ^200 million investment that First keeps going on about does not seem much an improvement to me.

Sorry First but you are losing me. I originally thought that the long distance stock upgrades were going to be different and suitable for long journeys.

[zebedee]

I agree with your comments Farwest - I am not a fan of the new style carriages - I am lucky that my journey is only 20 mins and they are okay for that, but I wouldn't fancy anything longer.  They are very restricting in terms of view and agree they are claustrophobic.  I don't always choose seats with tables, but it's nice to have the choice and I find I am more likely to strike up a conversation with someone across a table than next to me (which helps the journeys go a bit quicker....).

[vacman]

No way to gates at Newton Abbot!  It's bad enough, as a passenger, trying to get through the gates at St. David's in the morning - people just get confused and then the staff have to get involved, which just blocks the (narrow) entrance way up.  It's not the staff, it's the dummies who don't have their tickets ready or who just don't understand what they have to do or (and this really annoys me), decide that now THEY have got through the barriers they are going to just stop to put their ticket away or sort their bags out.

From a regular commuters perspective, I think they are nothing but a pain.  If fares were reduced in cost because they had cut down on the amount of people riding the trains without paying, then I would welcome them.

There is always the matter of principal though, I think that FGW^▸ (First Great Western) has a duty to ensure that decent fare paying passengers such as yourself aren't subsidising the people who have no intention of paying, which is why barriers are such a good idea, yes they are a bit of a pain in the backside when you've got the kids with you and lots of luggage but they have reduced the amount of freeloaders travelling on the network that you were paying for!!

[Timmer]

There is always the matter of principal though, I think that FGW^▸ (First Great Western) has a duty to ensure that decent fare paying passengers such as yourself aren't subsidising the people who have no intention of paying, which is why barriers are such a good idea, yes they are a bit of a pain in the backside when you've got the kids with you and lots of luggage but they have reduced the amount of freeloaders travelling on the network that you were paying for!!

Totally agree with everything you said there Vacman especially about fare paying passengers paying for those who don't. The question is though will we ever see either a reduction in fares or when fares increase not such a large increase because of the extra revenue gained through the use of barriers? Or will it just go to the DaFT^» (Department for Transport - critical sounding abbreviation I discourage - about) and shareholders?

[zebedee]

I agree that anything that prevents people riding for free can only do the whole service good - but to the daily user it just appears as something designed to frustrate - if there was some feedback on what the extra money was used for (better station facilities? extra staff to assist with customer enquiries?) or if the fares were capped or reduced (as we are no longer subsiding as many free loaders) then the benefits of barriers might be more obvious to joe public.

[vacman]

I think we all know where the extra money's going, paying the DFT^▸ (Department for Transport)!

[zebedee]

Yeah - into the big black hole....you know, I'd even prefer to see the extra money go to the dudes on the barriers as a bonus as it must be a thankless task (and I work in IT so I know what a thankless job is like).

[gaf71]

No way to gates at Newton Abbot!  It's bad enough, as a passenger, trying to get through the gates at St. David's in the morning - people just get confused and then the staff have to get involved, which just blocks the (narrow) entrance way up.  It's not the staff, it's the dummies who don't have their tickets ready or who just don't understand what they have to do or (and this really annoys me), decide that now THEY have got through the barriers they are going to just stop to put their ticket away or sort their bags out.

From a regular commuters perspective, I think they are nothing but a pain.  If fares were reduced in cost because they had cut down on the amount of people riding the trains without paying, then I would welcome them.

There is always the matter of principal though, I think that FGW^▸ (First Great Western) has a duty to ensure that decent fare paying passengers such as yourself aren't subsidising the people who have no intention of paying, which is why barriers are such a good idea, yes they are a bit of a pain in the backside when you've got the kids with you and lots of luggage but they have reduced the amount of freeloaders travelling on the network that you were paying for!!

barriers at NA would be a great idea, as this is one of the worsrt areas for fare evasion on my patch, i.e. Newton Abbot to Teignmouth/Torre. " It's only one f****ng stop mate! Anyway, what you gonna do about it, me and me 8 cans of special brew will be off in 5 minutes!" Not to mention the 200 odd school children who travel between Torre and Newton Abbot every day, the vast majority of which, without paying.

P.S. It's funny how the always have money for booze, but never have ^2.50 for a ticket!(not the kids!)

[vacman]

No way to gates at Newton Abbot!  It's bad enough, as a passenger, trying to get through the gates at St. David's in the morning - people just get confused and then the staff have to get involved, which just blocks the (narrow) entrance way up.  It's not the staff, it's the dummies who don't have their tickets ready or who just don't understand what they have to do or (and this really annoys me), decide that now THEY have got through the barriers they are going to just stop to put their ticket away or sort their bags out.

From a regular commuters perspective, I think they are nothing but a pain.  If fares were reduced in cost because they had cut down on the amount of people riding the trains without paying, then I would welcome them.

There is always the matter of principal though, I think that FGW^▸ (First Great Western) has a duty to ensure that decent fare paying passengers such as yourself aren't subsidising the people who have no intention of paying, which is why barriers are such a good idea, yes they are a bit of a pain in the backside when you've got the kids with you and lots of luggage but they have reduced the amount of freeloaders travelling on the network that you were paying for!!

barriers at NA would be a great idea, as this is one of the worsrt areas for fare evasion on my patch, i.e. Newton Abbot to Teignmouth/Torre. " It's only one f****ng stop mate! Anyway, what you gonna do about it, me and me 8 cans of special brew will be off in 5 minutes!" Not to mention the 200 odd school children who travel between Torre and Newton Abbot every day, the vast majority of which, without paying.

P.S. It's funny how the always have money for booze, but never have ^2.50 for a ticket!(not the kids!)

Oh yes! And whenever you get a scouser it's always "well what it was mate, errrr I had a ticket but I just ate it", no offence to any honets scousers on this forum!

[willc]

On the Cotswold Line I have often found my customer experience damaged of a Friday evening, when, having paid a hefty sum for a peak day return to Oxford (I especially enjoyed the 13 per cent increase three years ago) I was surrounded by people heading from London for a weekend in Charlbury and Kingham, in particular, who were travelling without tickets. Anyone who knows the area will appreciate that these are, in general, not among the poorest communities hereabouts.

They usually took a chance that it would take the guard so long to get through a ticket check on a full 125, as well as station work at Reading and Oxford, that they would be off before he reached them and would only have to pay for a cheap day single on Sunday to get back to the smoke, rather than shelling out for a peak return fare. If a check was carried out west of Oxford, it was always noticeable just how many Savers from London would be sold in each standard class coach, and we're not talking ones and twos.

As soon as the barriers were introduced at Paddington, this phenomenon declined markedly, though you can always tell if a train has left from ones of the non-gated platforms, as the numbers go up again straight away.

I appreciate there are places where squeezing in barriers must be pretty difficult - Exeter St Davids being a case in point - but if all the revenue owed is actually collected, then maybe future fare increases for the honest among us won't be quite as high as in recent times.

[zebedee]

I don't mind the extra wait to get through the barriers IF I can see that the extra money is put to good use into the rail service (and it doesn't even have to be my local rail service - just the railways in general).  If the extra money attained from barriers just goes into the black hole and gets spent on more roads instead and all I get is pushed, squeezed and delayed then I really don't care who is paying and who isn't, I am just more inclined to see it as a backward step and get fed up and buy a second car.

[vacman]

I don't mind the extra wait to get through the barriers IF I can see that the extra money is put to good use into the rail service (and it doesn't even have to be my local rail service - just the railways in general).  If the extra money attained from barriers just goes into the black hole and gets spent on more roads instead and all I get is pushed, squeezed and delayed then I really don't care who is paying and who isn't, I am just more inclined to see it as a backward step and get fed up and buy a second car.

The extra money does get spent on the service though, don't forget the initial outlay in putting barriers in in the first place which is altogether about ^1m per station after staff recruitment and everything else! if barriers hadn't been put in then we may not have seen refurbed units etc, it's easy to forget just how expensive running a railway is!