|
|
|
grahame
|
 |
« Reply #1 on: February 18, 2019, 05:09:15 » |
|
"Conculsions and next steps" - from page 68. This document sets out proposals for an easier fares system as a rst part of the industry’s submission to the Williams review in to the future structure of rail. We know our customers want change quickly however, so we want to work with government to begin the journey of improvement where possible now, starting with a review of the TSA▸ and running a series of real-world trials over the next year. Commercial contracts would then need to be revised and agreed, starting a programme of reform which, with all parties working together, has the potential to be rolled out operator any operator across the network over the next 3-5 years.
The current system risks failing to protect customers. Rather, it distorts the market and undermines trust, to the extent that up to 35% of people are being put off travelling by train because they find it difficult to find the right fare.
No change is not an option. To do nothing is to fall behind, not stand still.
Unless we bring the system up to date with how people work and travel today, the railway is likely to become increasingly outmoded. An overly rigid fares system will inhibit the exibility of travel required in today’s economy.
For an industry which has been at the cutting edge of technology, and in earlier eras drove huge changes in behaviours, this would be a great tragedy; and yet, as we have demonstrated here, there is also a tantalising opportunity.
The incremental improvements to the system we have delivered within current constraints (as set out on page 28) are valuable, but with changes in regulation we can deliver far more. Working with government, passenger groups, retailers and others, we can create an up to date, easier to use system where customers have more control over when they travel and how much they pay, easing crowding at the busiest times of day and boosting the funding available for investment in the future railway.
We also believe that current ticketing reform projects in the pipeline could, with the aid of our fares proposals and the agreement of government and devolved authorities, quickly o er real bene t to customers and communities. This is particularly so with many of the planned smart ticketing schemes that could make a real diffrence to people’s lives, but only with the right fares structure in place.
These proposals show how this can be delivered, starting with the rst stage, which is to work with the government to create a new set of regulations for the fares system as a whole, replacing the TSA. This does not require statutory change so could be done very quickly.
With these new regulations in place, the second stage would see commercial changes agreed with operators as part of changing the price regulation. This can ensure that the right products are developed for the right markets incrementally, with new pricing structures better able to re ect what people want to see from fares including fairness, flexibility and a pay-for-what-you-need approach - allowing operators to be flexible in the face of shifting patterns of consumer behaviour.
The changes would need to be made on a contract-by-contract basis, with government weighing up the implications for each individual operator. The rail industry is committed to working with government to kick start this process. In addition, a series of real-world trials need to be set up in parallel with the Williams review process over the coming year that can showcase new types of fares and how they are sold, and this will require regulatory approval. These trials would demonstrate the bene ts to customers of reform while enabling further commercial modelling on a train operator by train operator basis, as a fundamental part of delivering a sustainable and successful new fares system.
Half of the industry’s revenue either ows directly through to government or is within the scope of franchise renewals taking place in the next 12 months. With joint working, meaningful improvements can therefore be achieved quickly, supporting full reform rolling out across the network through the contracting process over the next 3-5 years. Other changes could be implemented through existing change processes in contracts. These reforms are capable of taking place under the current system, and under any new structures adopted by government and transport authorities as an output of the Williams review and are therefore complimentary to the on-going review.
The Rail Delivery Group, as the unified voice of the train operators and Network Rail, is arguing for reform not for the sake of change but for the pressing urgency of change. Reforming the system of fares is part of that journey, making fares simpler to understand, easier to buy, and always the best value-for- money. This document sets out our ideas for reform, backed by evidence, analysis, and popular opinion. With government, industry and others working together, we can move to a system which meets the needs of our customers and equips the railway for success now, and the generation to come. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Coffee Shop Admin, Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, TravelWatch SouthWest Board Member
|
|
|
|
grahame
|
|
« Reply #2 on: February 18, 2019, 05:16:16 » |
|
From the BBC» report: Tap-in, tap-out rail fares could be expanded beyond London if a group of train operators gets its way.
The Rail Delivery Group has set out a wish-list of reforms for the industry and it wants the UK▸ and devolved governments to support them.
Another suggestion is removing the sudden change between peak and off-peak fares, to reduce overcrowding.
The lobby group said almost 20,000 people made submissions on how they would like the UK railways improved.
Transport Focus, the independent passenger watchdog which also worked on the consultation, said UK train operators currently offered an "outdated and outmoded fares and ticketing system".
Fair fares
Feedback from commuters found eight out of 10 want the fares system overhauled and nine out of 10 want smart or electronic tickets, with the potential for price capping.
The Rail Delivery Group said reforms would support tap-in, tap-out fares, a pay-as-you-go method used in London, and more integration with other modes of transport.
In London, tube and rail commuters can use contactless bank cards to automatically pay fares which are calculated based on where a passenger enters and exits the network.
Reform would mean updating regulations around peak and off-peak travel, Rail Delivery Group said, and ticket prices could be set more flexibly. This would reduce overcrowding, it said.
Paul Plummer, chief executive of the Rail Delivery Group, said customers have different needs and want changes that offer value and better reflect changing work habits.
"Rail companies are already working together on plans for real world trials so people can see what our proposals could mean for them".
All change
Mr Plummer said rail companies needed the government to change rules on how train fares are charged.
"Current regulation needs to be updated and we want to work with government, which is key to making improvements a reality, to deliver the better fares system the public wants to see."
The government is currently undertaking the Rail Review which is covering everything from commercial contracts to rail fare structures. Its consultation closes at the end of May.
The Rail Delivery Group said its ideas could be rolled out, train operator by train operator, in as little as three years.
Darren Shirley, chief executive of the Campaign for Better Transport, said the existing system is "broken and desperately needs fixing".
"We're particularly pleased to see proposals for more flexible commuter tickets to reflect modern work patterns, something we've long called for, and for nationwide smart ticketing.
"What's not clear however, is if these proposals will also lead to an end to the annual fares rise, which fails to reflect the level of service passengers receive the previous year.
"It is now up to the Government to take forward these proposals to ensure we have a fares system that is fairer and easier to use."
Another proposal is to stop passengers having to buy split tickets to get the cheapest fares for some journeys.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Coffee Shop Admin, Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, TravelWatch SouthWest Board Member
|
|
|
|
grahame
|
|
« Reply #3 on: February 18, 2019, 05:19:11 » |
|
And (my final quote in 'seeding' this story - an analysis from the end of the BBC» link (trying to see the wood for the trees?) Analysis
Tom Burridge, BBC transport correspondent
How to reform the railways is a contentious, some might say politically toxic subject right now. A broad Government-commissioned review into almost every aspect of the system is ongoing.
Our out-dated and mind-bogglingly complicated ticketing system is a prime candidate for change. The system is, in the eyes of many, inherently flawed.
How can an off-peak single sometimes cost a fraction less than a return? And how can it be that you get different prices for exactly the same journey and fare?
Technology is clearly a big part of the solution. But a tap-in, tap-out system which automatically ensures you the best fare for your journey is also partly about restoring trust. The t-word has become a precious commodity on the tracks of late, after a whole host of problems.
The underlying message from train companies today is that they are on the side of passengers. They want to shunt the government towards positive change.
More types of flexible fares is one thing, but cost and who pays will, as always, be almost every passenger's central concern.
To make the proposals 'revenue neutral', as the operators plan, cheaper fares would have to be off-set by more expensive ones. That is, unless the changes drive more people to travel by train, especially on more empty off-peak services.
The initial mood music from those representing passengers is broadly positive. But some fear there could be winners and losers.
Even with the support of Government, one industry source said real change might not arrive for another three to five years. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Coffee Shop Admin, Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, TravelWatch SouthWest Board Member
|
|
|
|
grahame
|
|
« Reply #4 on: February 18, 2019, 05:23:04 » |
|
Reaction - the Daily Mail's take - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6715555/Peak-peak-rail-tickets-replaced-sliding-scale-prices-day.htmlWhy rail fares could become even more confusing! Critics hit out at plans to replace 'peak' and 'off-peak' tickets with sliding scale prices that change throughout the day
* Cheaper tickets at quiet times are hoped to end the crush during rush hours
* Consumer group Fairer Finance said new system may be 'even more confusing'
* The flexible commuter tickets were introduced to reflect modern work patterns
* Rail Delivery Group said reconfiguring the decades old system won't be easy The Guardian - https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/feb/18/rail-industry-proposes-best-fare-guarantee-in-pricing-overhaulRail companies are offering part-time season tickets, a guarantee that passengers will get the cheapest prices and smartphone-based ticketing across the UK▸ as part of a radical overhaul of British fares.
The rail industry proposals include a weekly fare cap that allows commuters to avoid paying for their season ticket on the days when they don’t use it – something long demanded by campaigners as a benefit for part-time workers.
[snip]
The need for an overhaul of rail fares is almost universally recognised, with passengers often paying more than they need to because of complex options. The RDG‡ estimates that there are 55m separate fares available in Great Britain.
However, the solution to Britain’s railway problems remains deeply contentious.
The train companies argue that regulations prevent them from being able to introduce technologies that would simplify buying tickets for passengers, allowing for airline-style ticketing systems for longer journeys and more “tap in, tap out” pay-as-you-go systems in urban areas, similar to Transport for London’s Oyster▸ system. From Which? https://press.which.co.uk/whichstatements/which-responds-to-rdg-fares-reform-proposals/Which? responds to RDG fares reform proposals
18 February 2019
Alex Hayman, Which? Managing Director of Public Markets, said:
“Too often rail passengers have had to struggle with a confusing ticketing system so any steps to make the system simpler and easier for them to navigate are a step in the right direction.
“Now that the industry has acknowledged the need for automatic compensation, train companies must roll it out across the network without further delay, so all passengers can benefit and get the money that they are owed.” Also East Anglian Daily Times - https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/what-is-split-ticketing-and-how-is-it-changing-1-5895935Rail user groups in Suffolk and Essex are welcoming proposed changes to ticket prices which could see split ticketing become a thing of the past in favour of less complicated fares. The Telegraph and Argus - https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/17437207.hope-for-changes-to-rail-fares-as-shake-up-is-launched/JOURNEYS for rail travellers in Yorkshire could get much easier under proposals from the rail industry to overhaul the country’s fares system.
The radical proposals published by the rail industry have been informed by the biggest ever public consultation with nearly 20,000 people across Britain, including over 1,800 in the region.
Britain’s rail companies are publishing the ‘Easier Fares for All’ proposals to explain how updates to outdated regulation would enable the transparent, simpler to understand fares system people want. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: February 18, 2019, 05:35:54 by grahame »
|
Logged
|
Coffee Shop Admin, Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, TravelWatch SouthWest Board Member
|
|
|
|
ellendune
|
|
« Reply #5 on: February 18, 2019, 07:53:33 » |
|
Immediate response
The proposal to move to single leg pricing is welcome as indeed the idea of paying based on trains used.
I don't see anything to address the disparity between per mile walk-on fares for so called "commuter services" and long distance services.
80% of respondents wanted fares based on distance travelled. I don't immediately see anything to suggest this is incorporated in the solution.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Surrey 455
|
|
« Reply #6 on: February 18, 2019, 08:23:55 » |
|
Using your bank card beyond London to tap in and out sounds hassle free to me although many people won't know how much their journey costs until they tap out or look at their bank statement later. What if I sat in first class? How would I be charged for that?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
grahame
|
|
« Reply #7 on: February 18, 2019, 08:28:45 » |
|
The BBC» has edited its earlier post (just after midnight) to change the headline and add the following at the top Peak rail fares could go under rail price shake-up
Traditional peak and off-peak rail fares face the axe under sweeping changes being proposed for the UK▸ 's train ticketing system.
The Rail Delivery Group (RDG‡), which represents train operators, wants to eliminate the "cliff edge" between when peak and off-peak tickets kick in. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47258909 |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Coffee Shop Admin, Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, TravelWatch SouthWest Board Member
|
|
|
|
grahame
|
|
« Reply #8 on: February 18, 2019, 08:33:25 » |
|
Using your bank card beyond London to tap in and out sounds hassle free to me although many people won't know how much their journey costs until they tap out or look at their bank statement later. What if I sat in first class? How would I be charged for that?
How would "tap in, tap out" know if I should be charged via Warminster and Salisbury, via Newbury or via Swindon? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Coffee Shop Admin, Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, TravelWatch SouthWest Board Member
|
|
|
|
Clan Line
|
|
« Reply #9 on: February 18, 2019, 08:45:43 » |
|
Could I offer a German word for what I fear the outcome will be ? Shame there isn't an English word like it.
"Verschlimmbesserung"
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
johnneyw
|
|
« Reply #10 on: February 18, 2019, 09:20:52 » |
|
Could I offer a German word for what I fear the outcome will be ? Shame there isn't an English word like it.
"Verschlimmbesserung"
I have distant recollections of the German side of my family using that term in conversations usually about "improvements" to local amenities or services. I've discovered that the term is also applicable to some of the outcomes decorating my house. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Bmblbzzz
|
|
« Reply #11 on: February 18, 2019, 10:08:54 » |
|
It sounds as if (gross generalisation alert) the general trend is towards an airline-style system with fluid fares but with the added factor, if tap-in tap-out payment is used, that the final price paid might not be known till after the journey has finished.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Waiting at Pilning for the midnight sleeper to Prague.
|
|
|
|
ChrisB
|
|
« Reply #12 on: February 18, 2019, 10:40:10 » |
|
I can't see many travellers being happy with that....
RailUK Forums seem to think that the cliff-edge peak/non-peak fares will be resolved by reducing peak fares & raising off-peak.....
But yes, the recommendation seems to be to abolish return fares & price singles accordingly such as to remove the return being £1 more than a single - which I am all for......on the proviso that the return fare doesn't ordinarily increase to double the single - more that the single drops such that it becomes half the return.
Combined with the increases over peak/off-peak adjustm,ents above, that ought to leave the farebox pretty close to neutral.
I note that the RDG‡ say nothing about Advance fares - suspect they're biting the dust.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
IndustryInsider
|
|
« Reply #13 on: February 18, 2019, 11:09:33 » |
|
Isn’t GWR▸ one of the operators where off-peak singles are usually much cheaper than returns, not just 10p cheaper?
I’m not sure about advance fares biting the dust. After all, as well as a cheaper fare for the passenger, they guarantee the operator most if not all of the revenue rather than ‘normal’ tickets where it is often divided amongst many.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
To view my GWML▸ Electrification cab video 'before and after' video comparison, as well as other videos of the new layout at Reading and 'before and after' comparisons of the Cotswold Line Redoubling scheme, see: http://www.dailymotion.com/user/IndustryInsider/ |
|
|
|
grahame
|
|
« Reply #14 on: February 18, 2019, 11:26:34 » |
|
Isn’t GWR▸ one of the operators where off-peak singles are usually much cheaper than returns, not just 10p cheaper?
For many journeys, yes (I guess that's why you said "Usually"). I did a whole comparison table (for Melksham, of course) as to whether it's cheaper to buy two singles or a return for a trip to London, depending on whether you're travelling peak, off peak or super off peak in each direction - http://www.mrug.org.uk/londonfares.htmlHowever, for Melksham to BRISTOL TEMPLE MEADS, a single is just £1 less than a day return - not quite your 10p, but still very much worth buying the return ticket. http://www.mrug.org.uk/bristolfares.html . That page is a classic illustration of some of the oddities in the current system ... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Coffee Shop Admin, Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, TravelWatch SouthWest Board Member
|
|
|
|
Click on the map to explore geographics
