Rail ticket 'revolution' could cut journey prices by up to a third

[amcluesent]

Britain is on the verge of a “rail fares revolution” that could enable passengers to save millions of pounds on published ticket prices for the first time.

Rail ticket 'revolution' could cut journey prices by up to a third

Britain is on the verge of a “rail fares revolution” that could enable passengers to save millions of pounds on published ticket prices for the first time.

Under an agreement reached between ministers and train operating companies, comprehensive ticket price data from across the UK’s railway network is to be made available for free within the next few months.

The new information will allow customers travelling on some routes to make savings of more than 30 per cent on current ticket prices – without passengers needing to change the train they were intending to take. A journey from Birmingham to Edinburgh taken yesterday, for example, would be almost £40 cheaper.

(read full article)
.

Will passengers soon be carrying a sheaf of split-tickets to test the RPI's knowledge of permitted routes? "The iPhone app says I can do this!" :roll:

 

[SS4]

I may come across as horribly elitist but I don't think this is a good idea. Currently split tickets are your reward for putting in the time and effort into finding them. Make them available to everyone and the TOCs will put pressure on the DfT to either raise prices on shorter journeys (thus punishing everyone making that shorter journey) or to impose more restrictions on split ticketing.

Then again people are still using thesheepline to buy tickets so perhaps I'm overestimating the intelligence and knowledge of the general travelling public. I can only really foresee this being a major issue if some of the bigger ticket websites/NRES get in on the act and offer splits by default.

 

[Simon11]

Looking at the MSE app a in early summer, we've yet to see an improved verison which properly shows the best price available. I wonder if they bit off more than they could chew!

 

[Be3G]

I'm very, very pleased to read about this. I've always thought it particularly immoral that we customers (after all, that's what the rail industry calls us, not passengers) are expected to pay just to see what amounts to a price list. I recall that even back in the days when the NRE site published PDFs of the manual, they left out the fares section. So this is very pleasing indeed.

(I'm very aware of and grateful for the existence of brfares.com, but I know that's completely unofficial – I've always been half-expecting it to get shut down.)

 

[SS4]

^ It does raise a question of computing power and it may be that a computer doesn't recognise certain combinations of futile especially on short commuter services - eg if I want to go to Birmingham New Street to Sutton Coldfield it takes only a second for a human to realise the direct fare is cheapest but how long would it take a computer?

For longer journeys various permitted routes and TOC/Route restricted tickets come into play increasing the options. It can be done I'm sure but will it be economical?

 

[All Line Rover]

I have my doubts about this. Split-ticketing reduces flexibility and is not suitable for all passengers. If split-ticketing becomes widespread, I imagine the TOCs will simply penalize passengers who make 'simple' mistakes very harshly. For example, board a train which does not stop at the split station (easy to do) = no valid ticket = byelaw 18 prosecution.

If passengers wish to save money on their train fares the tools to do so already exist. 'Do it yourself' apps and websites will not help, as passengers will continue to be just as uninformed as they are currently. All that will happen is that passengers will make more mistakes!

Also...

Under current rules, train companies are not obliged to publicise the cheapest way of getting from one destination to another – only the most direct.

...is incorrect. Ticket offices offer passengers the cheapest through ticket. This will not change.

Also...

While the fares data will be too complicated for individuals to process, it will be used by internet developers to create computer and smartphone apps. This will allow passengers to input journey details and automatically find the cheapest fare.

...is laughable. It is impossible to 'find the cheapest fare' automatically.

Also...

Jonathan Raper, who runs the transport data company Placr, said: “At the moment the only information that rail companies provide passengers with is for the most direct route – which is often their most profitable – so they don’t want people to be made aware of cheaper, slower alternatives,” he said.

...is nonsense. Passengers are already offered tickets via slower or indirect routes, and it is in the interest of a number of train companies, such as LM or EMT, for this to happen.

Finally...

Transport Secretary Patrick McLoughlin said: “People shouldn't need to have a degree to get hold of the cheapest ticket for their journey. That’s why the publication of open fares data will mark a big step forward.”

...is he really this naive?

 

[yorkie]

Anyone can find the cheapest ticket for the journey - just ask at the ticket office or look online!

Perhaps he meant cheapest combination of tickets? In which case, a degree isn't necessary but a lot of time & effort is, but then what does he define as cheapest? For example, when Newcastle to Carlisle was valid via Manchester, would that have meant the "cheapest" for, say, Hadfield to Carlisle was a combination of a Hadfield to Manchester and Newcastle to Carlisle tickets?

I think that releasing the data is a good thing, providing its not used in a way that puts passengers in difficult situations regarding routeing anomalies.

I think that software should not recommend starting/finishing "short" - due to the problems that involves, and the fact that using a ticket in that way in certain circumstances exposes the anomaly and means it gets closed down fast. There is no point publishing anomalies that can be closed down almost immediately.

Linear splits at major calling points are much easier to recommend, and there is far less that can go wrong. For example, in contrast to my example in a previous paragraph, take York - Derby. Split at Sheffield. Easy. All trains call, there is no routeing complications, nothing to worry about, and no reason why that should not be published. Potential savings of £50 on a day return departing in the morning peak easily achieved.

 

[All Line Rover]

Linear splits at major calling points are much easier to recommend, and there is far less that can go wrong. For example, in contrast to my example in a previous paragraph, take York - Derby. Split at Sheffield. Easy. All trains call, there is no routeing complications, nothing to worry about, and no reason why that should not be published. Potential savings of £50 on a day return departing in the morning peak easily achieved.

Indeed. Splits like that are common sense and impossible for the TOCs to close. The only solution in your example would be to reduce the price of the extortionate XC fare!

However, what I worry about is automated DIY 'splitting machines' recommending splits such as Birmingham to London, splitting at Rugby and Milton Keynes. The uninformed traveller at Birmingham New Street might think "Hmm... That Virgin train goes to London. I think I'll get on that one!", when in fact that combination of tickets restricts one to travelling on London Midland except in the very early morning or very late evening when VT stops at both Rugby and Milton Keynes.

Another thing which worries me is 'pick-up only' and 'set-down only' stations. They appear as stops in the printed timetables, on NRE and on TOC and third party booking engines, but splits are not valid at those stations. Uninformed people are sure to get caught out by this and I doubt they want to face the possibility of a byelaw 18 prosecution.

 

[dvboy]

Surely, given trainscanbecheaper exists, it's already possible to search all possible splits for walk-up tickets, all that needs to be added are the advance tickets, and the ability to search their availability, and present the user with the cheapest combinations.

 

[amcluesent]

No doubt many forum members will be familiar with the complexity of optimal routing using computers, the so-called travelling salesman problem. Have the cost of each journey segment published should make split-ticket optimisation far quicker as it does away with hammering the on-line TOC web-sites with queries.

 

[telstarbox]

In my experience, unusual permitted routes are more useful than splits when looking to save money on tickets. However, these are harder for the public to find and use than splits, as an understanding of the Routeing Guide is required.

 

[dvboy]

some split ticketing solutions are only good if you know of potential places to split, and I mean the less obvious ones that you wouldn't even pass through if you bought just the one ticket, for example recently I asked for advice on a Glasgow-Wolverhampton return, and for the return journey someone suggested a split at Manchester, which I would never have thought of because I was only looking at splitting at places the direct trains call at (on the west coast and east coast) - the split at Manchester not only saved money but shaved about 2 hours off the journey time too.

 

[wintonian]

I wonder if this will save the TOC's some amount of time and effort, in that if all these developers create apps that will find splits then all the pricing managers have to do is go to the apple store (yes I expect all these managers do wield iphones poor sods), punch in a few start and end points from the latest LENNON feed on their way to work, and sit back in their first class seats whilst sipping the dishwater complimentary coffee.

 

[34D]

Another thing which worries me is 'pick-up only' and 'set-down only' stations. They appear as stops in the printed timetables, on NRE and on TOC and third party booking engines, but splits are not valid at those stations. Uninformed people are sure to get caught out by this and I doubt they want to face the possibility of a byelaw 18 prosecution.

This is incorrect. As long as you don't actually board a set down only train, you are perfectly at liberty to use a Manchester-Watford and a Watford-Euston ticket on a train which is set down only at Watford.

 

[SS4]

I wonder if this will save the TOC's some amount of time and effort, in that if all these developers create apps that will find splits then all the pricing managers have to do is go to the apple store (yes I expect all these managers do wield iphones poor sods), punch in a few start and end points from the latest LENNON feed on their way to work, and sit back in their first class seats whilst sipping the dishwater complimentary coffee.

Unless they're holding it wrong of course

 

[amcluesent]

I'd think most pax would go for easy splits if they stayed on the train and split at stopping stations. But changing trains, with maybe only a few minutes between arrive and depart, not so sure about with the risk of being stranded.

 

[paulypaul]

I welcome a website or app that delivers valid value for money tickets for my rail journeys. Technology and websites like this one are helping the public get better value by advising them on split ticketing, the use of various parts of NCoC, easements, excesses, starting short and terminating early, the routing guide, TOC only tickets, regional travelcards, ticket validity to name but a few.

It isn't beyond the wit of man to develop a system that when a passenger enters that they wish to travel from A to B, it offers up a valid cheaper ticket between x and Y via Z and maybe even a more flexible alternative if you arrive at station A wishing to catch the faster train sitting on the platform or you miss your scheduled train for whatever reason, together with smartphone onscreen display showing why your ticket combination is valid on that train. It will be a programming challenge, but it's on it's way. The only driver to it will be a commercial one. ie who can bring it to market and make money out of it by selling those sort of tickets.

 

[amcluesent]

It will be a programming challenge,

The procedure is laid out step-by-step in the National Routeing Guide, so should be possible to discover routes which abide by the 'rules', then search for the cheapest when the TOCs publish the £ cost of every route segment.

 

[All Line Rover]

This is incorrect. As long as you don't actually board a set down only train, you are perfectly at liberty to use a Manchester-Watford and a Watford-Euston ticket on a train which is set down only at Watford.

As it is not possible to travel on a Manchester to Euston train using a Watford to Euston ticket, that is not my experience. Both tickets need to be valid. There is just no requirement to get off and back on the train at the split station.

 

[maniacmartin]

The procedure is laid out step-by-step in the National Routeing Guide, so should be possible to discover routes which abide by the 'rules', then search for the cheapest when the TOCs publish the £ cost of every route segment.

The Routeing Guide describes how to check if a given set of tickets is valid for a certain route. or for a given set of tickets, which routes can be taken.

It's much more computationally intensive to do the inverse - i.e., for a given route, to find the cheapest combination of tickets. Such tickets may include starting or stopping short, overlapping sections, rovers and rangers, changing between peak and off-peak, using 19(c) with season tickets, the shortest route and 3 mile rule, mapped routes, through trains etc.

Also, if the cheapest splits involve Advance tickets, there is a limit to how many queries of the current quota usages one can do on the National Reservation System one can do, before ATOC get very unhappy with you. (And you have to be a ticket vendor to get direct access in the first place = ££££)

 

[amcluesent]

It's much more computationally intensive

True, but not explosively so and the algorithm may be the type you can run on a graphics card GPU which are now hitting teraflops speed.

how many queries of the current quota usages

AFAIK that's what would be avoided by the publication of every segment fare

 

[yorkie]

Another thing which worries me is 'pick-up only' and 'set-down only' stations. They appear as stops in the printed timetables, on NRE and on TOC and third party booking engines, but splits are not valid at those stations. Uninformed people are sure to get caught out by this and I doubt they want to face the possibility of a byelaw 18 prosecution.

This is incorrect. As long as you don't actually board a set down only train, you are perfectly at liberty to use a Manchester-Watford and a Watford-Euston ticket on a train which is set down only at Watford.

I wouldn't say ALR is 'incorrect' but I would say it's a debatable/contentious issue.

Also, if the cheapest splits involve Advance tickets, there is a limit to how many queries of the current quota usages one can do on the National Reservation System one can do, before ATOC get very unhappy with you. (And you have to be a ticket vendor to get direct access in the first place = ££££)

AFAIK that's what would be avoided by the publication of every segment fare

No, it won't avoid that. The levels of Advance fare will be published (currently available on brfares.com) but you won't know what is actually available without querying the National Reservation System.

It isn't beyond the wit of man to develop a system that when a passenger enters that they wish to travel from A to B, it offers up a valid cheaper ticket between x and Y via Z and maybe even a more flexible alternative if you arrive at station A wishing to catch the faster train sitting on the platform or you miss your scheduled train for whatever reason, together with smartphone onscreen display showing why your ticket combination is valid on that train. It will be a programming challenge, but it's on it's way. The only driver to it will be a commercial one. ie who can bring it to market and make money out of it by selling those sort of tickets.

It sounds like you are saying you do want a system that would have suggested a Newcastle-Carlisle ticket for someone making a Manchester-Carlisle journey, before the routeing was removed?

If so, the technical challenge is immense, and would anyone get a license to sell tickets on that basis? I doubt it. Would you want people with no understanding of the Routeing Guide, or their rights (and responsibilities) walking up to the ticket office at Manchester Piccadilly and demanding to be sold a Newcastle to Carlisle for immediate travel, 'starting short'? The loophole lasted for many years, until someone was found to be doing a Leeds to Appleby journey on this ticket, and the guard refused to acknowledge the Routeing Guide and requested payment of a new ticket. The passenger did this and submitted a refund request. The refund was granted along with a promise that the loophole would be withdrawn. And it was! So, why spend so much time & effort developing a system that results in confrontations between passengers and staff, potential breaches of contract by the TOC in asking passengers to buy new tickets, refund requests, and then the TOC immediately requests that the loophole is withdrawn? It doesn't make much sense to me.

Linear splits are fine, and a logical step forward, many people do this already. But starting/finishing short? Not a good idea, at least not released to the general public!

 

[kieron]

Surely, given trainscanbecheaper exists, it's already possible to search all possible splits for walk-up tickets

No, as trainscanbecheaper doesn't check ticket validity. It's all very well knowing what the cheapest set of flexible tickets is, but it may not be too useful if one of the tickets isn't valid on Fridays.

The cheapest route finder isn't integrated with the split fares check, so it's not that easy to find out whether the fare is available on convenient trains, and there's not much you can do if it isn't.

It's a good site, but it's not quite that good.

The procedure is laid out step-by-step in the National Routeing Guide, so should be possible to discover routes which abide by the 'rules', then search for the cheapest when the TOCs publish the £ cost of every route segment.

Unfortunately, easements are not described in a straightforward way, even where they are written in proper English. For instance, journeys from Bicester Town must go via Oxford (which must be a bit awkward if you're just going down the shops. But I digress). There is no suggestion as to where they can go from there in the NRCoC.

Computationally, finding the cheapest fare is a version of the shortest path problem. For a web site, I'd be tempted to work out a lot of stuff in advance and cache it.

 

[paulypaul]

I wouldn't say ALR is 'incorrect' but I would say it's a debatable/contentious issue.

No, it won't avoid that. The levels of Advance fare will be published (currently available on brfares.com) but you won't know what is actually available without querying the National Reservation System.


It sounds like you are saying you do want a system that would have suggested a Newcastle-Carlisle ticket for someone making a Manchester-Carlisle journey, before the routeing was removed?

If so, the technical challenge is immense, and would anyone get a license to sell tickets on that basis? I doubt it. Would you want people with no understanding of the Routeing Guide, or their rights (and responsibilities) walking up to the ticket office at Manchester Piccadilly and demanding to be sold a Newcastle to Carlisle for immediate travel, 'starting short'? The loophole lasted for many years, until someone was found to be doing a Leeds to Appleby journey on this ticket, and the guard refused to acknowledge the Routeing Guide and requested payment of a new ticket. The passenger did this and submitted a refund request. The refund was granted along with a promise that the loophole would be withdrawn. And it was! So, why spend so much time & effort developing a system that results in confrontations between passengers and staff, potential breaches of contract by the TOC in asking passengers to buy new tickets, refund requests, and then the TOC immediately requests that the loophole is withdrawn? It doesn't make much sense to me.

Linear splits are fine, and a logical step forward, many people do this already. But starting/finishing short? Not a good idea, at least not released to the general public!

A ticket is either valid or invalid. If I board a train holding a valid ticket, starting and finishing short as described and it is valid, and I can demonstrate that on my smartphone with an app to the guard, then so what? TOCs need to catch up with technology. If that loophole is then closed, the software can be upgraded closing it. More power to consumer's elbows I say.

 

[All Line Rover]

A ticket is either valid or invalid. If I board a train holding a valid ticket, starting and finishing short as described and it is valid, and I can demonstrate that on my smartphone with an app to the guard, then so what? TOCs need to catch up with technology. If that loophole is then closed, the software can be upgraded closing it. More power to consumer's elbows I say.

It is already possible to exploit the Routeing Guide using digital means. Difficult, but possible. It isn't being commercially exploited because it isn't viable. There is no point suggesting to the average Joe that they use a Stockport to Stafford ticket to travel via London. (This is a fake example but similar real examples do exist). Any such software would be made redundant within weeks as the TOCs would use it to their own advantage by finding and 'fixing' anomalies.

In any case, saying to the guard 'this app told me so' is not sufficient evidence! Software is not infallible. Either the Routeing Guide, NRE or one of the licensed booking engines must show the ticket and route as being valid, otherwise you are unquestionably travelling without a valid ticket.

 

[Flamingo]

In any case, saying to the guard 'this app told me so' is not sufficient evidence! Software is not infallible. Either the Routeing Guide, NRE or one of the licensed booking engines must show the ticket and route as being valid, otherwise you are unquestionably travelling without a valid ticket.

I could see it becoming the new "the man on the platform told me..."

 

[wintonian]

I could see it becoming the new "the man on the platform told me..."

Conversely I worry that if an app was given to on-board and ticket office staff in lieu of a through grounding in the RG it might become the new "the journey planner says no". After all you gotta have something to do with all these expensive smart phones some of the TOC's seem to give out these days.

 

[yorkie]

Either the Routeing Guide, NRE or one of the licensed booking engines must show the ticket and route as being valid, otherwise you are unquestionably travelling without a valid ticket.

Not quite. It could be valid on the shortest route rule or the direct trains rule.

Certain Scotrail guards on the Fife Circle have been known to deny that the direct trains rule exists and have not read the NRCoC.

And as for the shortest route, a member of this forum caught another member of this forum on a ticket that he did not believe was valid... but it turned out to be the shortest route!

 

[All Line Rover]

Quite correct. My mistake. (Although having checked, Section A of the Routeing Guide does mention the shortest route and direct train rules, so if the RG is followed correctly these rules would be taken into account anyway).

 

[michael769]

I doubt that this will have a large impact. It will garner a little more publicity and a few more will be "in the know" and make good use of it, but for most I suspect they will continue to pay the full whack - and the most popular anamolies will be closed within a couple of years.

In any case I suspect most commuters and leasure travellers will, like me, be making simple journeys with no splits or the like available to them.

This kind of smack of the same type of pandering we see with energy bills. Where the government tries to look like it is doing something about the pricing issue by making it appear easier to find the cheaper deals, but without actually doing anything about the real source of the public disconent - ie current price increases.