Single Fares Hikes

[whole diary]

[grahame]

Chippenham to London fares - December '09 and January '10 - a complete example

Fare Type	December '09	January '10	change
Super off peak single	22.50	26.00	+16%
Off peak single	27.00	31.00	+15%
Standard single	64.00	66.50	+4%
Super off peak return	45.00	44.80	-0.4%
Off peak return	54.00	54.00	unchanged
Standard return	128.00	133.00	+4%

For a typical use I would make - one direction peak, the other direction off peak, that's an increase from 91 pounds to 97.50, which is an increase of over 7%.   I am rarely sure enough of y timings to use advanced fares.  Let's remember that 2 x off peak singles used to be the most scandalous ripoff (and THANK YOU to FGW^▸ (First Great Western) for correcting that last September - you don't know how many times I had to explain it to irate overseas customers).  But this rise, at a time when regulated fares are goiong down, takes the icing off the cake.

I WOULD happily add 5 pounds to each of the current fares if there was a connection off alternate trains that they're valid on to Melksham ... and I and many others would use the line - and the London connection -  much more than it's used at present with such a service level, which is that suggested ashaving an excellent BCR^▸ (Benefit Cost Ratio) in the GWRUS^▸ (Great Western Route Utilisation Strategy).

[Timmer]

Well I have to say that I'm disappointed in FGW^▸ (First Great Western) for these single fare hikes. After praising them back in September for doing the right thing and making saver singles half the price of a saver return they go and put them up not by 50p or a ^1 but by around ^4.

Okay so they made a mistake by introducing cheaper single tickets that were for a walk up ticket actually good value but to take it out on those who use them by putting them up by around 15% is a bit unfair when they could have done it in stages throughout the year when fares always seem to go up in Jan/May/September. But as has been said they are not regulated fares so FGW can do what they jolly well like with them and they have. Not good PR^▸ (Public Relations) but why should they care.

[devon_metro]

Okay so they made a mistake by introducing cheaper single tickets that were for a walk up ticket actually good value but to take it out on those who use them by putting them up by around 15% is a bit unfair when they could have done it in stages throughout the year when fares always seem to go up in Jan/May/September. But as has been said they are not regulated fares so FGW^▸ (First Great Western) can do what they jolly well like with them and they have. Not good PR^▸ (Public Relations) but why should they care.

You seem to forget that these fares are still much lower than in January 2009?

[Timmer]

You seem to forget that these fares are still much lower than in January 2009?

Not at all DM. I see what FGW^▸ (First Great Western) did in September as putting something that was inheritantly wrong in the fares system right but now they are a back peddling and I wonder how long it will be before they are raised so much that there won't be much difference between a saver single/return that most will just end up buying the return ticket and we are back to where it was before.

Hope I'm wrong and we will find out come next May and September if FGW put them up again even further.

[ChrisB]

A couple of comments.....

Have you ever driven from London to Swindon?.....you wouldn't get there on 20 quids worth of fuel.....!

Re Melksham - FGW^▸ (First Great Western) state that an increase in the level of service to that station isn't commercially viable - they have approached Wiltshire County Council for assistance but they just aren't interested, unlike Devon, Cornwall, Bristol, etc etc.

The local voters will know what they need to do.....

[grahame]

Re Melksham - FGW^▸ (First Great Western) state that an increase in the level of service to that station isn't commercially viable - they have approached Wiltshire County Council for assistance but they just aren't interested, unlike Devon, Cornwall, Bristol, etc etc.

That's a simplification (and to be a sound bite, it has to be) which is misleading and rather out of date - things have moved on since I first got involved ... it was SRA^» (Strategic Rail Authority - about), Wessex Trains, railtrack and Wiltshire County Council with the First group in the wings, about to be awarded the next franchise but without their own experience of running the regional and local services in the South West.   You'll find that with time and people moving on, with rail travel having grown much more than was assumed in the figures under which the franchise was awarded, with major growth plans along the TransWilts corridor, that the case has changed rather, and with it the people involved and their views.

Can you let me know - by PM or email if you can't publish it here - "who [at FGW] told you THAT" and - importantly - when.  Thanks

[JayMac]

Have you ever driven from London to Swindon?.....you wouldn't get there on 20 quids worth of fuel.....!

Bit of a sweeping statement....

At approx ^5 a gallon at the moment for unleaded you only need a vehicle capable of averaging 20mpg to do the 80 miles from central London to Swindon for ^20.

20mpg is not beyong the realms of the average car.....

[ChrisB]

Plus the congestion charge, and the traffic congestion....your engine will burn a lot more than 80 miles of fuel...

[Zoe]

Have you ever driven from London to Swindon?.....you wouldn't get there on 20 quids worth of fuel.....!

You car must have quite poor fuel economy then.  London to Swindon is about 80 miles.  If you can get 30 mpg then you'd use about 2.7 gallons of fuel.  Petrol is currently around ^5 per gallon, so London to Swindon would cost you about ^13.50.

Plus the congestion charge, and the traffic congestion....your engine will burn a lot more than 80 miles of fuel...

The congestion charge only applies to Central London.  Many people doing the journey don't actually live in Central London and so wouldn't have to pay.  The car also allows you to do the journey any time you want at a reasonable price without having to book in advance, this is something the TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) do not seem very keen on.

[ChrisB]

See above....congestion charge plus traffic congestion means you'd burn at lot more than 80 miles of fuel.

[Zoe]

See above....congestion charge plus traffic congestion means you'd burn at lot more than 80 miles of fuel.

See above also, many people doing the journey wouldn't have to pay the congestion charge.

[ChrisB]

The journey discusdsed upthread is a peak journey. Like-for-like, journeys to / from Paddington at that time, congestion charge applies.

[Zoe]

The journey discusdsed upthread is a peak journey. Like-for-like, journeys to / from Paddington at that time, congestion charge applies.

You'd only end up paying if you actually left Marylebone Road/Park Lane and went onto the local roads around the station itself.  If you were going to drive to Swindon you'd stay on the main roads.

[JayMac]

I'm still off the opinion that ^20 worth is more than enough fuel to get you to Swindon. You made no mention of the congestion charge in your original statement, so why should I factor that in? As equally no mention is made of TfL^» (Transport for London - about) fares in addition to the train ticket prices quoted upthread.

Take the UK^▸ (United Kingdom)'s most popular car, the Ford Focus. Even the thirtiest model in the range has a combined urban/extra urban mpg of 28, with the average being around 39mpg.

Of course if we factor in all the ancillary costs - insurance, vehicle excise duty, congestion charge (when it applies), wear and tear, depreciation etc, then we may get close to paying more than ^20 for one trip from London to Swindon.

[ChrisB]

Which to be fair, if you're running your own car, would be a fairer comparison, wouldn't it?