Great Western Coffee Shop

What's Super Off Peak?  AFAIK, there are three types of tickets, ADVANCED, OFF-PEAK and ANYTIME (four if you count season tickets)?
Then again, I only check / sell them as part of my job (when I'm bored, have nothing better to do, and the boiler is broken! ;D )

Ah the super saver that was abandoned to make things more simple.

And unlike FGW, they don't have "no Friday" restrictions.

I wasn't aware that this has actually happened yet? Nor am I convinced that it will. There will be riots.

I thought the Off Peak Return was a regulated fare and so limited to an increase of inflation plus 1 percent.

100% correct. However the TOCs can change time restrictions on regulated fares as they wish. This allows fares increases by stealth. CrossCountry did it with a blanket 'not before 0930' on their SVRs, although they soon backtracked after the furore this created. They also introduced an afternoon 'Peak' for their CDRs in places where they set the fare.

Both correct, but from what I was shown yesterday, the off peak restrictions are not changing but the price most certainly is from ^83 to ^100, Being 5 weeks away something still might change, so I might go back and ask a few more questions tomorrow.

I have just done a fare enquiry across numerous TOCs online and NRES. All show the Off-Peak Return RED-PAD as ^83.00 travelling out Monday 14th Sept, any train except 0526, returning Friday 18th Sept, any train except 1703. So no change in the fare, no Friday restriction, and only the removal of the 1703 return which is currently vaild on an Off-Peak ticket to Redruth. Super Off Peak singles have been added at ^41.50, available from 1029 up to PAD, and down from PAD on the 1206, 1406 and after 1903. Now either these systems have not been updated (unlikely as the new new Super Off Peak singles are available) or the information old original was given is wrong. OR the new Off-Peak price is not finalised. But in this final scenario FGW can only increase the price by RPI + 1% so it cannot possibly increase from ^83.00 to ^100.00

FGW have already made Off Peak Day Travelcards (which should be valid on trains arriving in the capital after 1000) not valid on the first such train, meaning you can't arrive until 1130!

The what was a Saver fare is definately going up apx 20%, so ^83 to ^100 from Cornwall to Paddington is DEFINATELY correct.

Super Off Peak will be current Off Peak price. Off Peak will rise by apx 20p for every pound it is now. Super Off Peak fares are not regulated, apart from changing the name and validity times Off Peak remains unchanged. Thats how they get round it and this is what will happen.

Super Off Peak will be current Off Peak price. Off Peak will rise by apx 20p for every pound it is now. Super Off Peak fares are not regulated, apart from changing the name and validity times Off Peak remains unchanged. Thats how they get round it and this is what will happen.

So, the current Off Peak fare (^83.00 RED-PAD) will be applied to a new Super Off Peak product. And this leaves FGW free to increase the Off Peak by 20%? That can't be allowed under the regulated fares rules surely? If it is, then it appears that FGW are returning to some of the sharp practices that got them slapped with a remedial notice in 2007. I'll wait until 7th September before I email Lord Adonis.....

I would like to know how they are getting away with pushing up a regulated fare by 20% though.

didnt think SVR's were regulated??

didnt think SVR's were regulated??

did someone say on here that the first "super off-peak" was the 1029 from Redruth? (1000 from Pnz), which is the busiest train of the day!!!

Yep, that's the one and only valid on the 12.06,  14.06 & 23.45 coming back (direct services)
and the 19.03 changing at Plymouth

Thats another load of crap because the 1206 is about the busiest London-Cornwall train! I could understand all this if it meant easing turn-up-and-go's on the busiest trains but it's not! It's allowing you to go on the busiest trains!

didnt think SVR's were regulated??

So the equivalent of the old Super Saver will now cost the same as a Saver would have done.  Can we be sure they won't try the same trick in a few years time?  First simplify the fares by scrapping the Super Off Peak and forcing everyone to pay the higher Off Peak fare and then reintroduce the Super Off Peak at the same rate as Off Peak and push the fares up by 20 percent.

did someone say on here that the first "super off-peak" was the 1029 from Redruth? (1000 from Pnz), which is the busiest train of the day!!!

Not in the middle of winter. But yeh, I can see summer being hell. But then again, nobody will travel if its going to cost ^100. How bloody cheeky of FGW!

NEW INFO....

FGW super off peak will not have a day restriction i.e. they will be valid on Fridays but the time restrictions as previously posted, will apply

...although I'm still not sure how increases to Off Peaks can go beyond RPI+1%.

Apparently, as long as they have an off peak type fare, that counts. All seems a bit sneaky to me.

Most of them sit in G or H now...  ;)

That train won't cost ^100 though.  The issue is that it will be the first train of the day that won't cost that.

I've done some checking on Advance fares as well. BRI-PAD currently has 5 standard class Advance fares under ^25. These are ^10, ^13.50, ^17.50, ^21.00, ^24.50.
After the introduction of Super Off Peaks the ^24.50 Advance is removed and the others all increase except the ^10. The middle three Advance fares are  ^15, ^19.45, ^23.35.

So with the introduction of Super Off Peaks we also see an increase in Advance fares. There are other Advance fares beyond the prices of the new Super and Off Peak single fares, and it appears these have increased as well. I can't do a direct comparison as I do not have NFM 04.

More info......I've seen the staff brief and it appears the FGW are apparently going give 10% discount on the advance fares if booked on the web, negating the increase.

More info......I've seen the staff brief and it appears the FGW are apparently going give 10% discount on the advance fares if booked on the web, negating the increase.

Great!! One suspects that'll only be through firstgreatwestern.co.uk. Not much use for us Solo Debit card holders who have to use 'Mixing Desk' ticket sites (NXEC, Southern, London Midland) or purchase Advance tickets at a station.

They probably have first class passes - at least the ones high enough up to mess things up do!  ;)

One very, very small benefit though. As well as Super Off Peak Singles, Off Peak Singles at half the return fare (SVH,  ^50) are being offered.

I apologise if this has already mentioned, but there's five pages worth of cpmments now and my eyes hurt! The SVH Off Peak Single price is a Saver Half and is only available for one half of a return journey when the other half is with an advance ticket. Any longer distance Off Peak Singles should have the code SVS (for the old Saver Single).

This I believe was introduced so that passengers buying an advance ticket for one leg of their journey weren't penalised if there were no advance tickets available for the return leg (which in most cases would make it cheaper to buy an Off Peak return) thus restricting them to one particular train.

Ok, this is getting complicated now! :o

Can someone summarise what the hell is going on? One post says the Off Peak fares are "regulated", another says Anytime tickets are not.

Is this affecting all routes (i.e. for me, Cotswold line)?

As for the online discount - that's just a ploy to reduce ticket office usage so they can sack more staff and line their pockets even more. :'(

This doesn't sound good - esp if Super Off Peak is scrapped during a "simplification" programme.

the code is SVS in the Avantix for the half price off-peak singles.

Almost half of UK rail fares, including most commuter journeys, are set to fall by 0.4% next year after a key inflation measure remained near a record low.
Regulated rail fares, which also include long-distance off-peak journeys, are based on July's Retail Prices Index (RPI) figure, plus 1%.
It was -1.4% in July, after hitting a record low of -1.6% in June.
"For the first time in a generation passengers will see their fares fall," Transport Secretary Lord Adonis said.
Last year, the July figure for RPI was 5%, meaning that rail prices this year rose by 6%.
Regulated fares make up 60% of rail journeys and up to 45% of rail fare income.
'Welcomed'
In 2010, the rules on regulated fares change, with most rail companies having the limit of RPI plus 1% imposed on them. Previously, train operators have been allowed to increase individual regulated fares by as much as 6% over the RPI rate.
   
TYPES OF FARES
Regulated fares Commuter fares (weekly, monthly and season tickets), anytime day singles and returns, short-distance walk-up fares in commuter areas, and long-distance off-peak fares
Unregulated fares Advance and anytime fares on long-distance routes

UK inflation rate stays at 1.8%
"This means most regulated fares will fall in line with the national fare change, which will be welcomed by passengers," Lord Adonis said.
Regulated fares refer to weekly and monthly season tickets in commuter areas, where the Department For Transport (DFT) keeps prices in check by means of fares 'baskets' .
Two train companies, Southeastern and West Yorkshire PTE, are exempt from the change in rules.
Both will allowed to raise fares by 3% on top of the RPI rate from January to fund additional investment in services in those areas, the DFT said.
Rail fares have risen by 5% in real terms since 1997.
"While this will provide welcome respite from the normally unrelenting rise of annual fares, it is just a pause, not the end of higher train fares," Liberal Democrat shadow transport secretary Norman Baker said.
"Passengers shouldn't be fooled by today's announcement - we already have the highest rail fares in Europe and the government's franchise policy will force up unregulated fares even further."
Unregulated fares
There are concerns that unregulated rail fares will surge as train companies seek to recoup the money lost from falling season ticket prices.
Some rail firms have raised fares by as much as 11% recently on advance ticket purchases. First Great Western announced increases of up to 20% on some off-peak services last week.
"We expect a wave of companies now to try and make the passengers pay for January's fares cut by jacking up the unregulated off-peak fares in September," said Gerry Doherty, head of the TSSA rail union.
"They will also hike first class and advance fares as well because these are not controlled by the RPI formula."
Mr Doherty also expects rail companies to raise prices at train station car parks.
Hassard Stacpoole, spokesman for the Association of Train Operating Companies, said that train companies set the prices for unregulated fares in the autumn and suggestions of any price increases were "sheer speculation" at this point.
The BBC learned in February that the government had rejected a request from train companies to make sure fares stay rising, even in the event of deflation.
There have been fears that several train companies will not be able to afford cutting the price of fares and may run into financial difficulties.

Commuter rail fares to drop in January
 
London commuters will see peak-time rail fares fall in January for the first time since privatisation in the Nineties.

Negative inflation means train operators will be forced to reduce the cost of tickets for about 400,000 passengers.

The fares are regulated by laws restricting train companies to increases of no more than 1% above the July inflation figure.

Appears the Super Off Peak restrictions will be subject to some last minute change........

Does anyone know if the Advance fares are being withdrawn as well?  Tried several times to book some single restricted advance fares but only ones listed are the new supersaver returns, which are basically half the value of a return ticket.  For example, cheapest weekend single from Swansea to Paddington if booked well in advance was ^13.50 each way, now ^33.00!  Website not giving 10% discount either.  Is there a problem at the moment with the site?

Rail commuters reacted with fury today after train companies announced record increases in the price of fares with some rising by as much as 143 per cent. The inflation-busting price hikes are being allowed after the rail firms sidestepped Government regulations aimed at keeping prices down.

It is the off-peak fares which are not regulated by Government which are seeing the big rises as opposed to the peak fares which are bound to the rate of inflation which has been been falling. The increases make a mockery of the Labour Government's bid to get more people out of their cars and using public transport in a bid to save the environment.

Now it is feared that thousands of train users already crippled by the recession will be forced to seek other means of transport because of the costly new ticket prices.

Examples of the price hike, which will come into force from Sunday, have been revealed.

First Great Western, which runs trains into Paddington, said: 'It is a challenge to balance the need to encourage customers to use our services while ensuring we generate enough income.'

I'm probably going to make myself unpopular here by saying that the new structure is very sensible.

Seems to me our Travelwatch and rail user groups are a total waste of time. FGW it seems can do just what they like.

The new structure is perhaps sensible, but FGW should have introduced LOWER Super Off Peak fares like other TOCs have done. (Chiltern, for example)

As well as this, apparently certain already busy trains from the West Country will be in the Super Off Peak period, and will only get busier.

But as demonstrated, people are still paying it.

What sensible business model would include loss of revenue?

New Year heralds lower fares for many rail passengers

The majority of commuters will benefit from cheaper tickets from Saturday as most regulated rail fares drop in price.

The majority of rail journey fares are regulated by the Government. Increases to most fares are capped at 1% above inflation with the changes implemented in January, based on the previous July's RPI figure. Last July's RPI figure was  -1.4%, so most regulated fares will now fall.

In August the Government also announced it had taken away the flexibility for operators to raise individual regulated fares by up to 5% above the national fare change, protecting passengers from unduly steep rises in future regulated fares.

Transport Secretary Andrew Adonis said:

"The majority of rail journeys in this country are made on regulated fares and most of those rail fares will fall from Saturday. Passengers will welcome these reductions - regulated fares include the weekly, monthly and annual season tickets used by commuters as well as many day singles and returns and long distance off-peak fares.

"This is good news for many passengers, for the first time in a generation they will see the cost of their tickets fall. I hope that this will encourage more people to travel by train, which is also good news for the economy and the environment."

Also from Saturday 2 January travellers will be able to use their Oyster 'Pay As You Go' cards on London's rail network. The change means the majority of underground and overground services will be fully integrated for commuters travelling from railway stations in London.

Notes to editors

1.      Two train operators are currently excepted from the RPI+1% rule:

*  Southeastern has a higher cap of RPI +3% for five years from 2007. This is in recognition of historically low fares on Southeastern and to allow for the investment recently made in the Kent services.

*  In the Northern franchise, West Yorkshire PTE fares also have a higher cap of RPI +3% from 2007 until the end of the franchise to enable investment in additional trains in and around Leeds.

2.      Previously, train operators have been allowed to increase individual regulated fares by as much as 5% above the average cap on regulated fares so long as the average increase across their 'basket' of fares was no more than RPI+1%. Andrew Adonis announced in, February 2009, his intention to remove this flexibility for 2010.

3.      The regulation of rail fares in Scotland, Wales and Liverpool and London Overground are matters for the Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembly Government, MerseyTravel and Transport for London respectively.

4.      Since 1997 regulated fares have risen by about 5% in real terms while disposable income has increased by over 20%.

5.      The RPI+1% formula does not apply to unregulated fares which are set on a commercial basis by train operators.

Rail firms 'hiding' 15% fare increases

Rail passengers are facing inflation-busting fare rises of up to 15% in the New Year, sparking accusations that 'rip-off' increases are being disguised.

Tomorrow annual fare increases come into force which train company chiefs say will see passengers paying an average of 1.1% more for their tickets.

This is largely thanks to a 0.4% fall in the cost of regulated fares - including season tickets, savers and standard day returns - which are capped by the Government.

But passenger groups and rail unions say the average figure masks the full extent of the New Year rises. Some passengers will see rises of up to 15% in unregulated fares, which include most cheap day returns, long distance open, leisure and advance fare tickets.

These prices are set by the train companies themselves, with the average rise being around 5%.

However the TSSA rail union said some advance purchase tickets would rise much more. It highlighted a supersaver fare from London to Swindon rising from ^20 to ^23, an increase of 15%.

TSSA general secretary Gerry Doherty said: 'These people have no shame.

'If there is a chance of legally ripping off the passenger they will take it. This is modern highway robbery.'

The RMT union has described the rises as a 'taxpayer-sponsored ripoff' and said that train companies were guilty of 'spin and gloss' to disguise 'massive fare hikes' on some lines.

There is particular anger that the Association of Train Operating Companies (ATOC) has chosen not to announce how much unregulated fares are rising. ATOC normally gives separate figures for the regulated and unregulated increases.

Regulated fares, which make up around 40% of all fares, will be going down from tomorrow as they are capped according to the formula of Retail Price Index measure plus 1%, based on the July inflation rate.

The recession and deflation meant RPI was minus 1.4 per cent in July, meaning prices must go down by 0.4 per cent.

But details from individual train companies paint a very different picture.

For example Virgin Trains, which operates Glasgow to London services on the West Coast main line, said its unregulated fares were rising by an average of 2.8%.

But some tickets are going up by as much as 6%, including London to Manchester anytime standard returns, from ^247 to ^262.

Anthony Smith, chief executive of rail customer watchdog Passenger Focus said: 'This is a sting in the tail.

'Many unregulated fares will continue to soar above inflation as the average figures will mask steep rises on individual routes.

'We are also concerned that some train operators will tinker with off-peak ticket restrictions, forcing passengers into buying more expensive tickets.'

Liberal Democrat transport spokesman Norman Baker said: 'We all recognise that times are tough but putting rail fares up will not get people back on to the railways.'

ATOC chief executive Michael Roberts defended the presentation of fare changes by saying: 'Not only is the average rise the lowest since privatisation, but it will come in well below the rate of inflation, meaning a real-terms cut in prices for many passengers.'

He said rail travel 'continues to be good value for money'.

The majority of rail journey fares are regulated by the Government. Increases to most fares are capped at 1% above inflation with the changes implemented in January, based on the previous July's RPI figure. Last July's RPI figure was  -1.4%, so most regulated fares will now fall.

Anger as train fares rise by 15%

Rail passenger watchdog Passenger Focus has criticised First Great Western for increasing fares, only three months after reducing them.

First Great Western cut some of its single fares by half in September to attract more customers, but now it has put some back up by as much as 15%.

A Plymouth to London off peak single ticket goes up from ^43 to ^49.50.

First Great Western, which operates in Devon and Cornwall, said the cuts had not had the effect it was looking for.

Train operators in the South West are also introducing new limits on when cheaper off-peak tickets can be used.

Anthony Smith, Passenger Focus chief executive, said: "Train companies are effectively forcing passengers into buying more expensive tickets."

The sting in the tail could be the 'new limits on when cheaper off-peak tickets can be used'.

First Great Western, which operates in Devon and Cornwall, said the cuts had not had the effect it was looking for.

First class fares always go up - I dread to think what I'll pay Monday

Its only my (ahem) student rail card that keeps it viable since my travel patterns are too sporadic to use a season.

That was the comment I had from management. Seems the new structure was resulting in too much loss of income. Which is not surprising given that it gave lots of opportunity to travel cheaper than an anytime return on HSS. 

Do you always manage to find First Advance fares available then? 

Paul

Rail travellers in UK pay 20% more than the rest of Europe

Cuts in rail fares do not go far enough and British passengers are still paying 20 per cent more than the European average, transport campaigners have warned.

The Campaign for Better Transport said a reduction in some fares introduced today would be "too little, too late". Ministers have been urged to review the way rail fares are regulated and cut ticket prices to the EU average ^ by around one-fifth.

Some commuters will benefit from cheaper tickets from today, when many regulated rail fares drop marginally in price.

Most rail prices are regulated by the government, with increases to most fares capped at 1 per cent above inflation. The change in the price of regulated fares from 2 January is based on July's Retail Price Index (RPI), which was ^1.4 per cent. As fares are pegged to rise 1 per cent above inflation, it will mean a one-off reduction in regulated fares of 0.4 per cent.

Cat Hobbs, of the Campaign for Better Transport, said: "Regulated fares will fall by 4p for every ^10 paid. This is too little, too late for passengers who are already paying hundreds of pounds more because of the government's policy of increasing fares. UK train fares are already 20 per cent higher than the European average, so the government needs to make serious cuts to make taking the train affordable."

Transport Secretary Lord Adonis said: "The majority of rail journeys in this country are made on regulated fares and most of those rail fares will fall from Saturday. Passengers will welcome these reductions ^ regulated fares include the weekly, monthly and annual season tickets used by commuters as well as many day singles and returns and long-distance off-peak fares. This is good news for many passengers; for the first time in a generation, they will see the cost of their tickets fall. I hope that this will encourage more people to travel by train, which is also good news for the economy and the environment."

But there were fears that some rail companies would still raise fare prices.

Some ScotRail fares will rise by 3 per cent, while passengers on Virgin Trains will face an increase of 2.8 per cent.

Rail passenger watchdog Passenger Focus has also criticised First Great Western for increasing fares only three months after reducing them. The company cut some of its single fares by half in September to attract more customers, but now it has put some back up by 15 per cent.

Car parking charges for commuters will also go up. Passengers on the East Coast Main Line from Edinburgh to London will see car park charges rise by 4.3 per cent at most stations.

While train fares will fall in the short term, passengers will pay a greater proportion of the cost of their journeys as the subsidy for rail will remain static.

The contribution of passenger revenue is expected to increase from ^6.7 billion to ^9bn per annum by 2013/14.

Meanwhile, rail subsidy levels will remain at around ^3bn throughout.

There's a worrying item in the Notes to Editors in that DfT release....

"Previously, train operators have been allowed to increase individual regulated fares by as much as 5% above the average cap on regulated fares so long as the average increase across their 'basket' of fares was no more than RPI+1%. Andrew Adonis announced in, February 2009, his intention to remove this flexibility for 2010.   (My emphasis)

I thought he'd done this for all future rises, not just this one.....very disappointing. I'm sure they'd have said "remove this flexibility from 2010 if this was indeed the case. I'll make enquiries....

There's a worrying item in the Notes to Editors in that DfT release....

"Previously, train operators have been allowed to increase individual regulated fares by as much as 5% above the average cap on regulated fares so long as the average increase across their 'basket' of fares was no more than RPI+1%. Andrew Adonis announced in, February 2009, his intention to remove this flexibility for 2010.   (My emphasis)

I thought he'd done this for all future rises, not just this one.....very disappointing. I'm sure they'd have said "remove this flexibility from 2010 if this was indeed the case. I'll make enquiries....

Before Thames Trains unfortunatley became part of the fgw (greater) franchise they would allow travel from London with an off peak travelcard between 4pm and 7:15pm where as fgw wouldn't. I'm not sure if that restriction disappeared when they were absorbed. (fgw used to put a train at 7:15 which you couldn't get on with an off peak ticket).

Can be read two ways.  I believe it means for 2010 and thereafter. You think it means 2010 only.  Either of us could be right but 99% sure I am  :)

RAIL fares in Swindon could rise by up to 10 per cent, Transport Secretary Philip Hammond hinted this week despite the town having the highest single fare in Europe.  Mr Hammond, challenged by the Advertiser to squash speculation of huge fare hikes on the horizon, said: ^I don^t want to rule anything out.^  The minister insisted the coalition Government was committed to ^fair fares^ and said no decision would be taken until after the national spending review concluded in the autumn.  But he added it would be wrong not to consider whether the current pricing structure should be changed against a backdrop of public spending ^constraints^.

The cost of a standard-class Anytime Single on a First Great Western (FGW) train for the 77-mile journey from Swindon to Paddington is ^54.50, which rises to ^89.50 in first class. At more than 70p a mile, this is the most expensive fare in the EU.

Mr Hammond has already indicated that the existing annual fare rise formula ^ whereby regulated rail fares including season tickets go up each January by one per cent above RPI inflation ^ may have to be reformed. Yesterday, during Commons question time, shadow transport minister Willie Bain expressed fears that the fare formula could be replaced with an RPI plus five per cent arrangement ^ meaning a likely rise of up to 10 per cent.  Mr Hammond replied: ^The coalition agreement commits us to a policy of fair fares and we are committed to ensuring that fares are fair for rail users, and no decisions have been made as yet about future fare increases.^

Offered the chance to rule out 10 per cent rises in Swindon, the minister told the Advertiser afterwards: ^If we rule out fare increases we are essentially shrinking the pot of money that would be available for investment in the railways and it is very clear that there are some investment that passengers urgently need, including additional rolling stock capacity. Until I^ve seen what my spending assessment from the Treasury is, I don^t want to rule anything out.^

Gerry Doherty, leader of the TSSA rail union, said: ^The Transport Secretary will be betraying millions of passengers if he scraps the present fares formula and allows a 10 per cent increase in fares in January^

Mr Hammond refused to offer any hope for supporters of the redoubling of the Swindon to Kemble railway line, saying that scheme would also be ^reviewed^ following the spending review.

The cost of a standard-class Anytime Single on a First Great Western (FGW) train for the 77-mile journey from Swindon to Paddington is ^54.50, which rises to ^89.50 in first class. At more than 70p a mile, this is the most expensive fare in the EU.

Rail commuters face major fare increases next year, transport sources warned today.

Typical prices will rise by six per cent, but passengers at Southeastern, the busiest commuter company, face increases of eight per cent. The rises will hit up to 500,000 passengers in the South.

It comes before an official announcement on the Retail Price index for July, on which the January increases are based.

RPI is understood to be five per cent. Rail companies are allowed to increase peak-time fares by one per cent above inflation ^ meaning average rises of six per cent. An annual season between Brighton and Victoria would rise by ^213.

A senior industry source said: ^While the Government may order higher fares than planned it now looks unlikely. Ten per cent fare increases are now thought excessive.

^The industry view is the usual rise will now take place in January and any extra could follow in the spring.^

If that happens, the TOCs won't be best pleased, as the majority of annual renewals that place at / around January fares round - hence they will get a further year without an increase imposed....and TOC income would be less than expected / budgeted for.

Not sure I understand.  Surely the rises that are being talking about are to help the GOVERNMENT balance their books rather than help the TOCs balance sheets. 

How many peoples pay packets will be going up by RPI +1 I wonder  ::)

The Transport Minister has said that the formula may have to be higher this year, anything over RPI+1 will effectively go to the Government via lower funding to the TOCs (as they charge even higher fares)

Spending cuts spark fears of 8% rise in rail fares

Rail fares may rise by up to 8% next year if the Department for Transport (DfT) is hit hard in the government's spending review, sources have said.

While many rail fare rises are currently capped at inflation plus 1%, the department could change that to inflation plus 2% or 3% in the autumn.

Increases are based on July's RPI measure, expected to be 5%, which could mean increases of up to 8%.

Consumer watchdog Passenger Focus urged train operators to show restraint.

Transport Secretary Philip Hammond said: "It would normally be the case that next year's regulated train fares are calculated using July's inflation figure, plus 1%. But this is not a normal year. The scale of the financial crisis that we have inherited means that we will have to make some tough decisions in the spending review which concludes this autumn. I am therefore not yet in a position to determine next year's fare increase. It would be irresponsible, at a time when investment in the railway is under pressure, to rule anything out until the spending review is concluded."

A spokesman for the Association of Train Operating Companies said predictions of rail fare rises were "just speculation".

Gerry Doherty, leader of the TSSA transport union, said the Liberal Democrats must stick to a manifesto commitment to change the annual fare price rise formula to RPI minus 1%. Mr Doherty said that "to do anything else would be to betray rail users" who voted for the party.

Bob Crow, general secretary of the RMT, said the government was protecting rail companies from the cuts by allowing fares to "shoot through the roof".

"Private rail profits will be ring-fenced while the travelling public are forced to pay through the nose to travel on overcrowded cattle trucks on dangerously under-maintained tracks," he said.

Alexandra Woodsworth of the Campaign for Better Transport said: "Particularly now, with high fuel prices, we need to make sure the train gives people a real alternative to driving".

From the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10982871):

Chris, you just know it'll press my buttons, but it's that man again: Bob Crow.

I see that 'cattle trucks' seems to be a stock quote of his at the moment.   ::)

RMT General Secretary Bob Crow said today:

^Just a few weeks into this ConDem administration we can now see their transport policy taking shape ^ ring-fencing the profits, subsidies and fare increases of the private train operators while passengers are forced to travel in slow-moving, over-crowded cattle trucks on dangerously under-maintained tracks."

Westcountry rail passengers could be the most badly hit by a double price hike in train fares, an industry commentator has warned.

From January, the cost of tickets will go up by one per cent more than the level of inflation for July, which is to be announced today and expected to be about five per cent.

Transport Secretary Philip Hammond has also refused to rule out changing the "inflation plus one per cent" formula used to set regulated fares, which includes season tickets and most off-peak long-distance journeys.

Some commentators are predicting increases of ten per cent from January, which could be particularly punishing for passengers making frequent long-distance journeys from Devon and Cornwall.

Chris Irwin, chairman of the TravelWatch South West pressure group, added that any across-the-board price rise would be felt more keenly in low wage areas such as the Westcountry.

A ten-per-cent rise on an open return ticket from Plymouth to London would see the fare go up by about ^23 to almost ^252.

Mr Irwin said: "The Great Western line has already got the most expensive mainline fares in Europe, and we rely much more on long-distance rail travel than other regions. We are also a part of the world where wages are much lower than other parts of the country, so we will really feel an increase in fares of eight or nine per cent. Even in the South West, the incomes of those in Cornwall are half those in Swindon."

He said the hike would discriminate against those on low wages, undermine the Government's green agenda by driving rail passengers on to the road and put economic growth at risk.

He said: "Will it overcome over-crowding? Almost certainly not. Rather than buy more carriages, British Rail would push up fares."

Commentators fear the fares formula will be changed as part of the spending review in the autumn.

Transport Secretary Philip Hammond has said: "It would normally be the case that next year's regulated train fares are calculated using July's inflation figure, plus one per cent. But this is not a normal year. The scale of the financial crisis that we have inherited means that we will have to make some tough decisions. I am therefore not yet in a position to determine next year's fare increase. It would be irresponsible, at a time when investment in the railway is under pressure, to rule anything out until the spending review is concluded."

A spokesman for the Association of Train Operating Companies said predictions of rail fare rises were "just speculation".

He said: "The average price paid for a single journey comes in at under five pounds and we will have to wait and see how this changes."

Commuters face fare rises of nearly 11% on some routes next year under government changes to the rail ticketing regime.

Transport secretary Philip Hammond is reinstating a provision that allows rail companies to average out fare hikes across a basket of tickets instead of applying uniform price increases. The result is that some regulated fares on commuter routes are likely to rise by as much as 10.8% in January.

Anthony Smith, chief executive of Passenger Focus, the rail user watchdog, said some commuters would be "shocked" by the cost of renewing their season ticket in January. "It is very disappointing. We could be back to double-digit fare rises on particular routes. Some passengers will be in for a real shock in January."

The basket system means that a further 5% can be added to the planned rise on certain fares, provided the net increase across the batch of tickets is in line with the official limit. As a consequence, next year's scheduled increase of the rate of inflation plus one percentage point, which comes in at 5.8%, will in fact be 10.8% on some tickets. The government announced a wave of fare increases in last week's comprehensive spending review, including the headline increase of 5.8% for 2011, as part of plans to reduce the state's ^5bn annual rail budget.

The fares basket was scrapped last year by the previous transport secretary, Lord Adonis, who ordered rail operators to apply the pricing regime to each fare individually. The move angered some train operators at the time, particularly those exposed to the London commuter market who feared they would lose tens of millions of pounds in revenues. Fare hikes are capped for regulated tickets, which include commuter season tickets and off-peak long-distance fares.

A DfT spokesperson said the government could not afford to limit the fares cap to each individual ticket: "The decision to remove the 5% flexibility for 2010 was made by the previous government. It was only removed for the fares year starting January 2010 to address the particular circumstances at the time. This loss of flexibility is unsustainable in both operational and affordability terms."

A government source said the decision by the previous transport secretary, Lord Adonis, to apply the cap to individual fares was a "one-off" change in an election year. "That was only ever a temporary measure and this is one of those tough decisions that we are having to make. It is not affordable to continue with a one-off move instigated by the previous government." Some passengers will benefit from the changes as the corollary of higher increases on some fares will be decreases of a similar proportion on others.

A spokesperson for the Association of Train Operating Companies said: "It means that some fares will go up by less than 1%. Importantly, the average is weighted so that operators cannot increase fares on routes with lots of passengers, and likewise reduce them on routes with fewer passengers."

However, the effect of reintroducing the basket system is likely to be more marked from 2012 onwards, when the fare caps rises from inflation plus one percentage point to inflation plus three percentage points until 2015. If that increase was introduced in January, including the basket regime, it would mean fares on some routes rising by nearly 13%. Farepayers already put ^6bn per year into the railways and they will account for three-quarters of the industry's funding by 2014.

When I heard of this plan I was devestated that the goverment's new policy is to encourage modal shift away from public transport (I've heard they also cut funding for rual bus services), a move which can only cause rises in greenhouse gas emmisions.

Exactly how much additional farebox revenue per year are these planned rises (including the 3% above inflation coming up) expected to generate?

When I heard of this plan I was devestated that the goverment's new policy is to encourage modal shift away from public transport (I've heard they also cut funding for rual bus services)

There's an obvious contradiction. The government says it is unaffordable to continue with the restriction, so by definition they expect it to raise more money. Therefore, if you believe that statement, (and why else would they be lifting the rule) then  ATOC's statement must be false, as if it were weighted the net effect would be nil.

You misunderstand. It is unaffordable as they have to pay TOCs additional money to stick to the fixed increases in each fare. They wish to save that, so back to baskets they want to go.

Errrr......an extra 2%. (RPI+1% -> RPI+3%)

Exactly. Abolishing the restriction raises more money from the farebox, which it wouldn't do if the ATOC statement was true. So for franchises currently on a cap and collar arrangement, the government will need to give less support.

Maybe you misunderstood, I'm wondering how much extra revenue (ie. ^s) would be generated, not the percentage.

My own calculations were rather un-informed and I came up with either ^43,200,000 or ^115,200,000, BIG difference there! I ask this because I'm wondering if there's a way that amount can be saved without pricing passengers off Britain's railway, I have an idea but I expect the goverment won't listen unless it generates at least as much as the fare hike would. We can NOT afford to wait a few years to get modal shift to rail, according to what I've read global greenhouse emmisions MUST START TO FALL BY 2015.

The stated aim is for the passdengers to pay more of the running costs, so unless your idea is related to that, I agree, they won't listen.

My idea is to massively reduce the running costs, by completly eliminating at least one unecessary element of said costs (the ROSCOs, and later perhaps total nationalisation).

Therefore passengers would pay the same amount as they do now but the government wouldn't have to fork out so much money, ie. raising the percentage which is covered by passengers without increasing the fares they pay.

However without knowing how much money the fare rise would bring in I can't say if the massive reduction in running costs

Hmmm - did you know that the ROSCOEs actually run on a commercial basis and cost the Government nothing to run? If you abolished them, who looks after the stock? And orders more? And who pays for that? Currently TOCs pay a hire fee to the ROSCOEs for their stock.

Nationalisation costs more than what we've got currently....

but there still is no benifit to be had by having ROSCOs

Someone has to finance the purchase of rolling stock. Currently, the ROSCOEs do this (using Government guarantees but no cash), hence the lease payments from the TOCs repaying the loans that the ROSCOEs take out.

Nationalising the ROSCOEs means that the DfT has to finance the rolling stock - how, currently, do you suggest that they do this?

Lastly, all recent Governments have accepted that franchising is a cheaper all-round way of running the railways, otherwise they would nationalise, surely - especially Labour. I think they probably have a better handle on national finances than you, possibly?

The idea that the whole system should be renationalized and that will solve all problems is fantastically naive - do you remember British Rail and the utopian world of low fares, tidy stations, new stock, polite staff and fast, frequent trains? No, neither do I. It was, bluntly, a national joke. The European countries that are often quoted as good examples of nationalized rail services (e.g. France, Switzerland, Germany even though DB is engaged in all sorts of political and structural machinations that are leading to creeping part-privatization) aren't good because they're nationalized, they're good because government policy in those countries is to pour in large sums of subsidy and accept that railways are a public service rather the a profit-making enterprise. Many of the tickets you can buy on those systems simply don't cover the cost of your journey, and the government picks up the tab. End of.

Don't you think that the rest of Europe might possibly be correct in thinking that transport infrastructure is vital to the long-term economic situation of a nation?

Now that is purely a political decision - at the moment, HMG wants the user to pay 75% of the running costs, hence the increase in fares etc.
I'm not sure political debate is for this forum? We could argue fors & against until the train arrives....

Why can't the TOC's buy the rolling stock? They are all substantial enterprises with plenty of capital behind them, surely the only reason they don't buy trains is because the franchises are too short. I think Rhydgaled's proposal is pretty sound in principle -- if you could take out the substantial profit element enjoyed by the ROSCO's, the savings could be used for the benefit of the railways.

And so it came to pass, that about 4 or 5 years ago the Labour government set the competition commission onto the big bad profiteering Roscos, and after much detailed analysis (available online if I could be bothered to look for it) they reported back that the Roscos didn't actually make a substantial profit after all, and the main problem with the rolling stock market was that it was too tightly controlled by the DfT...

Paul

Lloyds exited from the consortium owning Porterbrook on 15th October 2010.

http://www.porterbrook.com/pages/shareholders.html

Angel Trains sold by RBS in 2008 to a consortium advised by Babcock & Brown.

http://www.angeltrains.co.uk/corporate/shareholder.aspx

Alpha Trains has nothing to do with UK rolling stock.

On top of that the TOCs would have an interest in maintaining the value of their assets, not to mention trying to procure durable trains in the first place that will retain their value better.

For the *entire* length of their franchise? I don't think so....they'd maintain them up until there were a few years left & then cut costs drastically & probably leave them in areally crap state for whoever took over....

Don't you think that the rest of Europe might possibly be correct in thinking that transport infrastructure is vital to the long-term economic situation of a nation?

However it was better in British Rail days.... trains were faster, more punctual, more comfortable, didn't break down so often, and fares were much lower in real terms.

Hmm. From what little I remember of BR (I was fairly young when the railways were privatized) it wasn't very good. Can you actually back up those assertions with anything concrete or are they just observations made through the rose-tinted nostalgic spectacles. Oh, and before you point out that a few trains a day were faster than now because they made fewer station calls then yes, that's true.

There has also been a large decrease under privatisation of major train crashes.

As first delivered the HST's had around 288 second class seats, and now have over 400 standard, so it's not surprising that they need to make additional stops to avoid the accusation of being half empty.

to redoubling, which has been driven by effectively public sector Network Rail, not dynamic thrusting private FGW

And BR managed to reopen a number of passenger lines in England, something that the private sector seems unable to do.

It's probably thanks to NSE that there is still a route between Oxford and Bicester for Chiltern to improve.

And when they were delivered, the populations of places like Reading, Swindon, Didcot and North Bristol were far smaller and people's travel habits were different.

Sorry, Will, I'll call you on that. If it wasn't for FGW's apalling performance for which it got rightly fined, this was NRs 'penance' for their part in the TOCs guilty verdict. If FGW performance had been over 90%, there is NO way that NR would have even considered the work.

And BR managed to reopen a number of passenger lines in England, something that the private sector seems unable to do.

But the private sector *has* re-doubled an awful lot of miles that BR failed to do in the 80s / early 90s.

I presume you mean "originally delivered"?.....

More likely the MOD depot at Bicester kept that open!

Very expensive way to do penance. And by the time the funding was authorised, Cotswold Line and overall FGW performance was a lot more adjacent to 90 per cent than the lows of early 2007 or 2008, so why bother spending ^60-odd million?

2. It was discussed with the councils and CLPG representatives at a Cotswolds & Malverns Transport Partnership meeting on November 17, 2006 and at a further meeting on January 8, 2007.

Name me one other instance in England that has not been led by Network Rail? And Chiltern is borrowing the money for its latest schemes on what is effectively a mortgage from... Network Rail.

Don't doubt that played a part but the presence of the existing passenger service and the potential for growth on that section (as seen in the past year with the enhanced service) will have made the maths look an awful lot better for Chiltern, who, even so, have had to cut back from the intended full redoubling to keep control of the costs of Oxford-Bicester.

I was referring to regulatory approval for spending the money, not whether it was FGW that first had the idea. It was however, FGW's apalling performance that triggered the business case improvement for redoubling.

Sorry, Will, I'll call you on that. If it wasn't for FGW's apalling performance for which it got rightly fined, this was NRs 'penance' for their part in the TOCs guilty verdict. If FGW performance had been over 90%, there is NO way that NR would have even considered the work.

Could be worse - try getting a first class ticket from Leeds to West Kirby:
http://www.pyromancer.net/railways/cce-tip/a-million-pounds-to-liverpool-2010.jpg (http://www.pyromancer.net/railways/cce-tip/a-million-pounds-to-liverpool-2010.jpg)

SVB line only fares appear unchanged - which is very good news.

First Capital Connect 46% rail fare hike criticised

A union is urging the government to intervene after it emerged rail fares on some First Capital Connect services will rise by up to 46% next month.

Rail travellers are facing an average rail fare rise of 6.2% in the new year, according to industry figures.

Gerry Doherty, leader of the TSSA rail union, said the rise was "simply outrageous".

First Capital Connect said the majority of its fares were rising by less than the national average.

Regulated fares, which include season tickets, will go up by an average of 5.8% from January. Some of these fares could rise by as much as 10.8%.

Some unregulated fares, typically short distance off-peak ones, will rise by more than the 6.2% overall average, but the industry is not giving a figure. There is no price cap on these so rail firms could raise them by much more.

BBC transport correspondent Richard Scott said: "Train companies are bound by competition. If they think they can increase it by 10% then they will but they don't want to drive people off the railways."

The Campaign for Better Transport warned the rises would price people off trains

Passenger groups expressed disappointment that the Association of Train Operating Companies (Atoc) had not provided figures for individual train companies.

But Atoc, which supplied the figures, said the above-inflation rises were a response to recent government policy changes, which meant passengers having to pay more towards railway investment.

Michael Roberts, chief executive of Atoc, said: "We know times are tough for many people but next year's fare increases will ensure that Britain can continue investing in its railways. Even with these fare increases, the money passengers spend on fares covers only half the cost of running the railways - taxpayers make up the difference."

Campaign for Better Transport campaigner Alexandra Woodsworth said the rises made a mockery of the government's commitment to fair pricing for rail travel. "Increasing rail fares is not smart, not fair and not green. It's high time that the government started keeping some of its promises," she said.

Mr Doherty said: "It is simply outrageous that hard-pressed commuters are being forced to pay fare hikes of up to 10% when they are themselves facing pay freezes and job cuts. Passengers will regard that as a sick joke seeing as we have the most expensive and overcrowded railway in Europe."

Regulated fares are tied to an annual price cap formula meaning fares can increase each January only by the previous July's RPI inflation rate plus 1%. This means a 5.8% average rise for 2011.

However, companies are able to put up some fares by more than 5% as long as other fares decrease at the same rate.

In January 2012, passengers will have to dig even deeper into their pockets when the annual price rise formula changes to RPI plus 3% across the network.

Our correspondent said rail travel dipped during the recession but, as the economy recovered, passenger journeys rose 10% over the past year. Demand, he said, was expected to double over the coming decade.

On Thursday, the government is expected to make an announcement about long-term rail projects.

A First Capital Connect spokesman said: "The tickets quoted are used by less than 0.3% of our customers. The overwhelming vast majority of customers will see fares rise by an average of 5.5% which is less than the national average of 6.2%. All of our fares are set at levels to encourage growth and it is not in our interest to price people off the railway."

Commuters face an increase in rail fares of more than 46 per cent in the new year.

First Capital Connect is to scrap ^flexi^ off-peak monthly tickets, with the result that the Hornsey to Stevenage fare will rise by 46.2 per cent from ^194.40 to ^284.20, while a Hornsey to Welwyn Garden City monthly ticket will go up 39.2 per cent. The rises are the UK's biggest.

A First Capital Connect spokesman said: "The tickets quoted are used by less than 0.3% of our customers

But they are used by someone otherwise you wouldn't be putting them up!

Campaign against rail fares hike underway

A campaign against rail fare rises which are "holding travellers to ransom" has been unveiled ahead of planned increases to train ticket prices on Sunday.

The Campaign for Better Transport (CBT) will launch its Fair Fares Now petition next week as millions of commuters return to work after the festive break.

The campaign, which is backed by Monty Python star Michael Palin, was formed in protest at New Year fare rises, which mean some passengers will have to pay more than ^5,000 for season tickets, according to the CBT.

From Sunday, annual season tickets for main line rail travellers will rise by an average of 5.8 per cent, with Tube and bus fares in London rising by an average of 6.8 per cent.

The CBT said some commuters would see their season tickets increase in price by 13 per cent.

It said the new cost of season tickets would equate to around 20 per cent of the average UK salary and was the equivalent of Transport Secretary Philip Hammond paying more than ^27,000 for a season ticket.

CBT chief executive Stephen Joseph said: "Commuters feel like they are being pick-pocketed by the Government, expected to pay more year on year for the same poor quality service.

"Even with the promised extra investment, many passengers will see no actual improvement to their daily commute.

"Politicians need to start living in the real world and understand that people simply cannot afford to pay a fifth of their income just to do a day's work. The Government pledged to create fair fares and we all expect them to keep that promise."

The Association of Train Operating Companies said any fare rising by more than 5.8 per cent would have to be balanced by another going up by less and that some fares would be going up by less than 1 per cent.

...but I don't know why Liskeard to Plymouth has been singled out for these reductions when the rest of Cornwall is facing increases nearer to 6%

The cost of commuting to work in the South East is to pass ^5,000 a year for the first time from Sunday, as sharp season ticket hikes come into force.

Rail passengers across the country ^ including those using popular Home Counties routes ^ are facing the highest increases in a generation, at a time when many people's salaries are failing to keep pace with inflation.

The biggest season ticket hikes are being imposed by Southeastern, which carries 120,000 commuters a day into central London from East Sussex and Kent. Commuters travelling to St Pancras from Hastings, Rye and Tonbridge will have to find ^5,192 a year ^ equivalent to a fifth of the national average salary.

This is the first time that any standard class season tickets in the South East have broken through the ^5,000 milestone. The Government allowed Southeastern to push up fares by an average of 7.8 per cent ^ three per cent above July^s Retail Price Index. But this masked higher increases approaching 13 per cent on some routes.

A 7.82% Bristol-Bath season ticket price increase features in this BBC article - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12104087

A 7.82% Bristol-Bath season ticket price increase.....

Train boss defends above-inflation rise in fares

The chief executive of the Association of Train Operating Companies has defended fare increases which average 6.2% and in some cases are much higher. Michael Roberts said the rises were part of a government policy to make rail passengers pay a greater share of the cost than taxpayers. The hikes will also result in "more trains and better services", he said.

But Anthony Smith, chief executive of customer watchdog Passenger Focus, said many passengers would be "baffled".

Regulated fares, which include season tickets, have gone up by an average of 5.8%, but some mainline season tickets have increased by almost 13%. Some unregulated fares, typically short distance off-peak ones, have also risen by more than the 6.2% average but the industry has not given a figure. Tube and bus fares in London have risen by an average of 6.8%.

Speaking to BBC - Radio 5 live's Weekend Breakfast, Mr Roberts said the above-inflation fare rises were the result of a broader policy decided by the government, rather than train companies.

"At the moment, (the cost of travel) is paid for half-and-half between the taxpayer and passenger. The government policy is that the taxpayer ought to pay a smaller share of that in the future, which is why fares are going up. The money raised will pay for more trains to address overcrowding, better stations and quicker journeys," he said.

He admitted that "in the current economic climate, any talk of increase is clearly something people are not going to be particularly pleased with" but said rail journeys were at an "all time high since 1940s - which is a sign people are able to buy the right ticket for the right journey".

The government and London Mayor Boris Johnson say the increases are necessary to support vital transport projects.

But shadow transport minister Maria Eagle said the changes were unfair and would be a "nasty New Year shock" for commuters. "The government have given the train operating companies freedom to fiddle the fare rises by reintroducing something which the Labour government put a stop to - flexibility. Which means that they can charge commuters who have to get on particular trains even higher than the already high average while charging less on little-used routes," she said.

Anthony Smith, chief executive of rail customer watchdog Passenger Focus, said: "Many passengers returning to work in the new year will be baffled about why they are paying much higher figures than the 'averages' published by the train companies. With the train companies again free to raise fares on individual routes, some passengers will be facing rises way above inflation and in some cases it will be back to the bad old days of double-digit fare increases."

The Campaign for Better Transport said the cost of some annual season tickets exceeded ^5,000 for the first time and warned the rises would price people off trains. It says an annual season ticket for commuters travelling on services between London and Tonbridge, in Kent, has risen by 12.7% to ^5,192. A season ticket on the First Capital Connect stopping service between Peterborough and London, which was ^5,000, is now ^5,320.

Regulated fares are tied to an annual price cap formula meaning fares can increase each January only by the previous July's RPI inflation rate plus 1%. This means a 5.8% average rise for 2011.

However, companies are able to put up some fares by more than 5% as long as other fares decrease at the same rate. There is no price cap on unregulated fares.

In January 2012, passengers will have to dig even deeper into their pockets when the annual price rise formula changes to RPI plus 3% across the network.

Rail fares could kill the growth

I have done a couple of TV interviews on the steep rale fare rises today and it is striking that the mood out there is very angry. The fares regulation rules were designed to protect people who had no choice other than to use the railways, notably south east commuters, and it is they who are hardest hit.

Having 12 per cent slapped on the price of your ticket, as has been the case some commuters on Southeastern as the price of having the high speed line, is really excessive and completely against the spirit of the legislation. Train operators I have talked to are confident that the growth in usage is not going to be affected, but I am not so sure. Of course petrol prices are rising, too, but that is always a much more hidden cost which motorists tend to just put up with. Season tickets are upfront money coming out in one lump sum. So they hurt more.

This is, of course, just the start of things to come. For reasons that are unclear ^ though probably out of fear that rises of near double digits across the board would be unapalatable ^ Hammond has postponed the RPI plus three per cent rise until next year, but by the end of this run of rises, many people may well have fled from the railway. That in turn will diminish the case for investment and, indeed, for HS2.

There is, of course, no logic to any of this. A government that was really interested in boosting rail use permanently would have a coherent strategy to do so, not have a policy that is supportive of rail investment on the one hand, but then deterring people from using the railway on the other.

Swindon to London season ticket hits ^7,000

Commuters face travel misery when they return to work tomorrow with a double whammy of rising rail fares and petrol pump prices.

Swindon rail passengers heading for London will feel the pinch more than most, faced with the prospect of coughing up more than ^7,000 for a season ticket to the capital.

And those wanting to escape the price hike by switching to the road, are still going to be hit. Motorists, already paying record prices for petrol at the pumps, will see further hikes from tomorrow due to VAT increases.

The train fare increase which came into force yesterday means thousands of commuters will have to pay ^7,024 for an annual season ticket from Swindon to London Paddington, an increase of ^384 on last year^s ticket which cost ^6,640.

At a Swindon Borough Council scrutiny committee meeting held in November, 2010, managing director of First Great Western, Mark Hopwood, defended rail fares at the time saying that Swindon commuters were getting value for money.

Mr Hopwood said: ^Swindon to London has probably one of the best train services in terms of distance from London, with 71 trains a day most taking about an hour through the key parts of the day with a minimum of four trains an hour.

^There are very few places with trains that frequent, usually only one an hour. The success of rail in this area has been quite phenomenal.^

Councillor Peter Greenhalgh told the committee then: ^The cost of travelling by train from Swindon to anywhere is having a massive impact on the economy of Swindon. It deters businesses and deters commuters living in Swindon. It is having a detrimental effect.^

Swindon commuters face some of the highest prices in the region, even though rail passengers travelling to London from Didcot in Oxfordshire, which is only 30 miles away, will pay almost ^3,000 less for a season ticket for a Swindon ticket, which will cost ^4104. Robert Buckland, MP for Swindon South, said: ^I would hope the train operators would make the fares fairer from Swindon because they have been consistently more expensive than surrounding areas such as Didcot.

^I share the commuters^ concerns with regards to the increases. While I accept that there must be increases, I would like to see an increased capacity in the service.

^I think season ticket holders should have their own space where they know they have a seat given they have paid ^7,000 each for their tickets. These are people who have no choice but to travel to work and there^s a case for giving them special treatment.^

It was announced last year that rail fares between Swindon and London have risen to the highest in Europe, according to a Parliamentary report. The report by the South West regional committee said the cost of a standard-class Anytime Single on a First Great Western train was the highest per mile in Europe.

Rail fares are set to continue rising with the cost of season ticket from Swindon to Paddington expected to cost ^8,783.29 by 2015.

Buy a Swindon - Didcot and Didcot - Paddington season then. Valid on any trains, saves a little bit of money...

If both tickets are seasons then you have to use services that call at Didcot.

Only a combination of season and non-season permits travel on non-stopping services.

Not all bad news.

Liskeard to Plymouth

Standard Day Return was ^8 now ^7.90
Seven Day Season was ^23.90 now ^19 - a 20% reduction!

See my message earlier below - but I don't know why Liskeard to Plymouth has been singled out for these reductions when the rest of Cornwall is facing increases nearer to 6%

Interesting data and map at http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/03/rail-fares-increase

Changes to restrictions
To FGW main line services
Off Peak used to allow travel between 08.10 - 16.40 and after 18.25 ; this has now changed to 08.10 - 16.40 and after 18.31.
This 6min extension to the evening peak effectively removes 1 departure to Bristol.

Ministers urge Osborne to reduce steep rail fare rises

George Osborne is being urged by fellow ministers to scale back steep rail-fare rises due in the new year amid fears that the planned increases will force passengers back on to the roads.

Ticket prices are due to go up by an average of 8 per cent in January under a formula approved by ministers for above-inflation rises for the next three years to raise cash for investment on the railways. But Justine Greening, the new Transport Secretary, has urged the Chancellor to announce a rethink in his Autumn Statement on Tuesday.

Ms Greening is suggesting that fares should go up by about 6 per cent ^ 1 per cent above inflation ^ in a move to reduce the impact on hard-pressed commuters and long-distance travellers. The move would cost the Treasury an estimated ^26m.

The Independent understands talks on the issue are still "live", but the Department for Transport is privately optimistic of success in its negotiations with the Treasury. A DfT source said: "We've been fighting very hard and we're very hopeful we have won something. There is money around for things when we think they are worth it, such as [weekly] bin collections."

The department is arguing that the potential benefits from higher fares have to be offset by the danger of a drop in revenues as travellers swap trains for other forms of transport.

Ms Greening's move signals a change of approach at the DfT. Insiders last night said she places far more emphasis than her predecessor, Philip Hammond, on passengers' needs.

But Justine Greening, the new Transport Secretary, has urged the Chancellor to announce a rethink in his Autumn Statement on Tuesday.

Chancellor George Osborne will unveil a new government scheme to underwrite at least ^10bn of loans to small businesses when he delivers his autumn statement on the economy on Tuesday.
...
Mr Osborne is also due to announce a cap on rises for regulated rail fares, such as peak fares and season tickets.

A planned rise of 8.2% - RPI inflation of 5.2% +3% - will be restricted to 6.2% (RPI +1%), with the cap also covering bus and tube fares in London.

The Association of Train Operating Companies described the plan as a "positive move" for passengers.

"Train companies are ready to work hard to ensure that a Government decision on fares is able to be implemented in time for the New Year," said a spokesman.

FARE RISE RELIEF FOR RAIL COMMUTERS

RAIL fares will be capped next year saving season ticket holders up to ^140.

Commuters had been braced for eye- watering eight per cent increases after Chancellor George Osborne last year said regulated fares would rise by inflation, (which hit 5.2 per cent in August), plus three per cent.

After fears that outraged travellers would be driven off the railways to clog crowded roads, he will now rein back the rise on season tickets and peak fares to inflation plus one per cent.

It will knock ^90 off the feared ^369 rise on the average annual ^4,500 season ticket.

It means commuters from Swindon to London, who faced paying an extra ^562, will save ^140.

Mr Osborne is expected to announce the decision, which will help up to 500,000 rail users, in an otherwise bleak Autumn Statement on Tuesday.

It follows strong hints from David Cameron that the planned three pence petrol tax rise in January is also to be scrapped.

Transport for London will also have to limit its ticket rises from planned inflation plus two per cent down to inflation plus one per cent.

A Treasury source said the Chancellor recognised the pressure commuters were under and wanted to ease the burden on workers.

However, passengers will still face bigger rail rises in 2013 and 2014 with plans to return to inflation plus three per cent, though economic forecasts suggest that inflation will begin to fall again next year.

The new fares are already there eg. Super off peak single Truro - London up from^51 to ^55, CDR Truro - Falmouth ^3.70 - ^3.90

I don't feel sorry for the TOCS having to make these last minute changes after all they've been making the fare system so incrediably complicated over the years they've only got themselves to blame.

Maybe they'll see sense and start rationalising their fares and an asociated restrictions etc so that you don't need a Phd in the fare manual, route map etc to get a resonable fare from A to Z without splitting your journey at every stop and travelling on the one train a day without restrictions. 

Plenty of the weird anomalies that apply today date back directly to British Rail

NFM 11 (effective from 2 January to 19 May 2012)

Due to the recent announcement by the Secretary of State that requires a major last minute revision to rail fares, NFM 11 will now not publish until Monday 19 December (and not Monday 5 December 2011 as originally planned).

No surprise to see Commie Bob wading in again.

Passenger Focus found 46% of rail users were satisfied their ticket was value for money compared with 49% a year ago.

No surprise to see Commie Bob wading in again.

Protests may herald U-turn on coalition's rail fare rises

Government hints it may back down over planned increases in the face of mounting opposition

Passenger groups and unions are stepping up pressure over train fares with a day of action, as the government hinted it may back down over planned rises that would result in some season tickets costing ^1,000 more in 2015 than in 2011.

Fares will rise in January by three percentage points above the July RPI figure, which will be announced on Tuesday. That is expected to leave fares between 5% and 6% higher. Passenger groups said train fares were going up three times faster than salaries. With train operators allowed to raise some fares by an additional 5%, some commuters could see double-digit price rises on their tickets next year.

The transport secretary, Justine Greening, said she would ask for government money to keep fares down.

The Campaign for Better Transport's chief executive, Stephen Joseph, said: "The government knows they can't continue to hit [car] commuters ^ that's why they've postponed the fuel duty increase. Now they need to give the same help to rail users." He said commuters in the south-east routinely spent up to 15% of their salary getting to work in London, and warned that the price of an annual season ticket from many towns ^ including Brighton, Oxford, Luton and Reading ^ would rise by more than ^1,000 between 2011 and 2015.

Demonstrations are expected on Tuesday at London's Waterloo and dozens of other stations around the country, organised by the TUC-backed Action for Rail campaign. Elsewhere, a season ticket for rail travel between Liverpool and Manchester would see an annual increase of over ^160, and between Leicester and Derby would go up nearly ^120, at current rates.

Frances O'Grady, the TUC's deputy general secretary, said: "These fare rises will add even more pressure to passengers feeling a massive squeeze on their incomes. At the same time the government is asking the train operators to make cuts to staff on trains and stations and in ticket offices. Passengers are being asked to pay more to get less. We want cuts to rail fares, not rail staff."

A similar rise planned for January 2012 was modified to one percentage point above inflation in George Osborne's autumn statement, but at the time he restated increases scheduled for 2013.

But Greening said there could be a similar U-turn by the Treasury this autumn if there was "spare money". She added: "I am keen to see what we can do to keep fares down to something affordable." While reducing the deficit by cutting subsidy was important, the government needed to "strike a balance" with continued investment in the network and affordable fares. She said she was hopeful money would be made available. "If you don't ask, you don't get, so I'll make sure I'll ask."

Greening pledged in March to "end the era of inflation-busting fare rises". However, the government has also called for the taxpayer subsidy to be cut, which means more funding has to come from ticket revenue. The McNulty report on value for money in the rail industry concluded that substantial efficiency savings could be made, and Greening has demanded spending cuts of ^3.5bn a year by 2019. The current subsidy is around ^4bn a year.

Train operating companies maintain that they do not benefit directly from the additional rise in regulated fares, as payments they make or receive under the terms of their franchises are adjusted. Michael Roberts, the chief executive of the Association of Train Operating Companies, said: "The government decides the average increase of commuter ticket prices and other regulated fares which train companies will be required to introduce. Any flexibility train companies have within the rules is to maximise revenue for the government."

Unions say the proposals in the McNulty report mean train operators are likely to shed thousands of station staff, guards, catering staff and ticket offices to cut costs ^ putting up to 20,000 jobs at risk.

The Department for Transport is expected to announce on Tuesday morning which firm will run services on the West Coast mainline between London and Glasgow for the next 15 years, which could see the end of Richard Branson's Virgin Trains. First Group, which runs Thameslink and the Great Western route, is tipped to take the franchise, as first reported in the Guardian. Both Branson and the RMT union claim that First Group's bid for the service can only be profitable if staff and onboard services are drastically cut.

First Group did not take up the option to run its Great Western franchise to term, saving an estimated ^800m in payments to the government, although it is now bidding to win the contract again.

The shadow transport secretary, Maria Eagle, said: "Passengers are set to lose out no matter which companies win these new longer franchises because ministers have promised successful bidders they can hike fares, cut services and close ticket offices. Instead of the strict 1%- above inflation cap proposed by Labour, the government has told train companies they can levy fare rises of 8% above inflation in 2013 and 2014 and 6% above inflation for the rest of the franchise." Eagle said ministers should consider how bidders have "treated the spirit of previous contracts, for example not gaming the system to evade payments to the taxpayer", before awarding new franchises.

The RMT said it was considering a ballot for industrial action adding that First Group's bid was "based on the same kind of over-geared financial projections that led to the collapse of the GNER and National Express contracts on the East Coast ^ forcing the government to renationalise the service". The union said the winning West Coast bidder was likely to remove onboard shops and catering with a potential loss of 800 train crew jobs.

Rail fares rises set to be revealed

---

The amount by which rail fares could rise from January is to be revealed, with some commuters set to see rises of more than double the rate of inflation.

The latest Retail Price Index inflation figure - expected to remain at 2.8% - will be used to calculate the increase.

In England fares will rise by inflation plus 3%, while in Scotland they will go up by inflation plus 1%. Wales has yet to set a figure for its increase.

The extra money is helping to fund huge investment across the network.

BBC transport correspondent Richard Westcott says passengers and taxpayers used to split the cost of running the railways, with both sides paying about half each, but successive ministers have cut the amount of government funding and that has resulted in regular fare rises.

The latest rise will mean fares in England will have gone up by more than inflation for 10 successive years, resulting in some of the most expensive train journeys in Europe, our correspondent adds.

The planned rise for fares in England is only an average. Train companies are allowed to raise some fares by as much as 11%, as long as they cut ticket prices elsewhere.

Stephen Joseph, from passengers' group the Campaign for Better Transport, said rail fares could rise three times faster than salaries if the government sticks to its policy.

"With the economy flatlining, this is untenable. The government knows they can't continue to hit commuters - that's why they've postponed the fuel duty increase," he said.

"Now they need to give the same help to rail users."

The group said commuters across the country routinely spend between 5% and 10% of their salary getting to work. In some towns in south-east England, it said they spent up to 15%.

Olympics bounce?
Forecasts for July's Retail Price Index (RPI) inflation measure suggest it will remain unchanged from 2.8%, or dip slightly.

The rate of inflation has fallen sharply from September last year, when the RPI stood at 5.6%.

This is partly due to falling petrol prices, but also a slowdown in the increase in the price of clothes and food.

The slowing of inflation means it is heading back towards the Bank of England's target rate of 2%. This means the Bank has more leeway when considering further stimulus measures to boost economic growth.

Last month, the Bank said it would pump a further ^50bn into the economy over the next four months through quantitative easing (QE), taking the total size of the programme to ^375bn.

But earlier this month, the Bank decided not to pump more money into the economy, despite figures released at the end of July showing that the UK economy contracted by 0.7% between April and June.

Some economists expect the economy to bounce back in the current quarter, helped in part by a short-term boost from the Olympic Games.

This, they say, could come from a small uplift in consumer spending and from ticket sales, which will be recorded in the third quarter.

Rail fare rises: Commuters face ^100-a-week prices as tickets rise by up to 11%
Tens of thousands of Home Counties commuters will find themselves paying at least ^100 a week to get to work thanks to the latest round of fare rises.

Tens of thousands of Home Counties commuters will find themselves paying at least ^100 a week to get to work thanks to the latest round of fare rises announced this morning, which will see the cost of season tickets rising by up to 11.2 per cent in January
The cost of commuting will go up by an average of 6.2 per cent, rather more than expected, with some commuters facing increase up to five per cent above that figure.
The increase, which will come into effect in January, is pegged to July's retail price index, which saw inflation unexpectly rise to 3.2 per cent from 2.8 per cent.
Even with the smallest increase commuters from towns such as King^s Lynn, Battle and Biggleswade will become reluctant new members of the ^100 a week club.
^Justine Greening seems determined to prove her predecessor Philip Hammond right and turn the railways into a rich man's toy," said union general secretary Manuel Cortes, general secretary of the Transport and Salaried Staffs Association.

But why is this legal but little advertised scheme not made more public?

An article on ticket splitting on the BBC website:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-19217111

And apparently there's a new Apple 'app' to help people do it. Will be interesting to see what the TOCs do to try to stop it...

DfT has announced that the general regulated fares increase in Jan will be RPI + 3%...

Rail fare rise capped by government

A passenger group has welcomed news that the average rail fares rise will be capped at just over 4% next year.

The government had intended to allow train firms to raise the average price of regulated fares by the Retail Prices Index (RPI) inflation plus 3%.

But Prime Minister David Cameron said that the rise for the next two years will be RPI plus 1%.

This means that in January 2013 commuters will have to pay for average rises of 4.2% rather than 6.2%.

The RPI plus 1% formula will also apply for London's buses and the Tube for the next two Januarys.

London Mayor Boris Johnson's spokesman said the government's announcement was "very helpful and represents good news for hard-pressed commuters in difficult economic times".

A spokesman for passenger group Association of Train Operating Companies (ATOC) said: "The government's change in policy is a positive move for passengers."

TSSA rail union leader Manuel Cortes said: "He is still punishing commuters with an inflation-plus increase of 4% which he repeats in both 2014 and 2015."

Reduced cap on rail fare rises

Passengers will benefit from a cut of up to 2% to the planned rises in the cost of nationwide train travel and travel on London buses and tubes following today^s announcement by Prime Minister David Cameron.

The average increase in regulated rail fares and the cost of travel on London^s buses and tube network will be limited to one per cent above inflation for 2013 and 2014. Rail fares had been due to increase by RPI+3%, while fares on London buses and tubes had been due to rise by RPI+2% in 2013.

This is expected to benefit more than a quarter of a million annual season ticket holders who can expect to have an extra ^45 back in their pockets as a result of today^s decision. Many more holders of weekly and monthly season tickets could also see lower fares and some commuters will be over ^200 better off over the two years.

The Department for Transport (DfT) is planning that from January 2015 onwards the regulated fares cap for franchised train operators will increase by RPI+1%.

The decision to reduce the planned increases, funded from savings identified in the DfT^s budget, will benefit hard-pressed commuters and passengers. In future years the DfT will look to absorb the costs by reprioritising within existing budgets.

The fares national rail passengers pay will continue to support our major programme of rail improvements, the largest in scale since the Victorian era. It will deliver crucial benefits for passengers, including relief from crowding on some of the nation^s busiest routes.

The Government still believes it is vital that efficiencies are found in the cost of running the railways so that we can deliver better value for money for both taxpayers and farepayers and end the era of above-inflation rises.

I'm somewhat cynical about these u-turns. I get the impression the government gets us all prepared for eye-watering rises and then shows us how nice they really are by lowering the increase. ....

Another u-turn by HMG over the fares rise formula.

For the next two years regulated rail fare rises will be RPI+1%. I think I predicted this elsewhere on the forum some time ago. At least this time the DfT (or more likely the Treasury) have given the industry a bit more notice. Last year's u-turn was announced in mid November.

From the Department for Transport (http://www.dft.gov.uk/news/press-releases/press-dft-20121007a/):

I'm somewhat cynical about these u-turns. I get the impression the government gets us all prepared for eye-watering rises and then shows us how nice they really are by lowering the increase. It is a welcome announcement but I fear it has little to do with railway finances and more to do with political expediency.

At least with a 2 year announcement, there won't be all the usual RPI+3% headlines late next summer, with all the negative messages about rail fares that sends out, before the (far less dramatic) actually it'll only be RPI+1% stories hit the press later in the year.  An announcement to be applauded I say.

The independent McNulty Rail Value for Money study published in 2011 highlighted that while our railways are performing well operationally, they cost too much to run. If we can make substantial reductions to the cost of running the railways and the improvement in the wider economic situation permits, we can bring to an end the era of above inflation fare rises in average regulated fares, while continuing to expand capacity on our rail network.

Rail campaigners urge Bristol MPs to fight fare rises

Train campaigners met at Bristol Temple Meads this morning to urge Bristol MPs to use their position to campaign on fare rises.

Members of Friends of Suburban Railways (Fosbr) have produced 10 'De-Railed' cards which will be sent to the 10 Bristol MPs.

(http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/images/localpeople/ugc-images/275775/Article/images/17125568/4234996.jpg)

Each card carries a message stating their disappointment that no Bristol MP contributed to a major parlimentary debate about public transport last month.

The message also points out that MPs that only one of the four MPs who pledged in the Post to help improve public transport voted for the motion, proposed by Maria Eagle, Shadow Secretary for Transport, which called on the Government to restore the one per cent above inflation cap on annual fare rises from 2013 and 2014.

Teresa McGill, of Fosbr, said: "Passengers have been bearing the brunt of massive fare increases for years ^ what are our MPs doing about this? We feel very let down by the MPs and I think we represent the views of many hundreds of thousands of rail users. We will send out these cards to the MPs and very much look forward to hearing their responses."

Councillor Gus Hoyt (Green, Ashley) said: "We were told this would be the greenest government ever and here they are penalising those who wish to use public transport. They are clearly going in the wrong direction."

So first they say the lower increase in regulated rail fares is down to savings already made and then they say, 'If we can make substantial reductions' and (if) 'the wider economic situation permits'.

Just seems totally confused to me. Whatever happened to politicians making a policy decision and sticking with it? Dave and Co would do well to remember the words uttered by Mrs T, "You turn if you want to...."