Arriva wants to end national ticketing

[jon0844]

I only see smartcards as a better method of carrying a ticket than a bit of paper, with added benefits such as being able to report a card lost/stolen.

I'd want some PAYG credit for short, local, trips but also to have the ability to load on tickets purchased at a TVM, ticket office or even added to my smartcard by tapping it against a phone that has downloaded the relevant data.

It shouldn't necessarily mean any changes to costs, or a reduction of benefits, although clearly some TOCs will try given half a chance.

But one day there will be a massive overhaul of train pricing, and it will create many winners and losers. However, it will have to happen.

This is then when smartcards can become more intelligent, by offering discounts for regular usage, automatically working out the best discounts depending on the route taken (perhaps even the service you took) and this may require touching in and out at various points/locations. It might take a while to get used to, but that doesn't make it a bad idea.

Future generations are going to expect more innovative ticketing options, but I totally disagree that any TOC should be allowed to limit what tickets it offers to a customer. We might have privatised operators running trains, but we still need to offer customers the network as a whole.

 

[gordonthemoron]

and exactly how many station do Arriva Cross Country run (I know ATW & Chiltern tun stations)?

 

[Bletchleyite]

and exactly how many station do Arriva Cross Country run (I know ATW & Chiltern tun stations)?

Zero, None, Nada

Neil

 

[jkdd77]

Would an end to 'national ticketing' mean that missed connections between different TOCs would then be at the passenger's own risk?

I'm not sure I would travel by train if I had to set off an hour earlier than necessary in order to allow for the risk of a missed connection.

It does seem that TOCs want all the benefits of Government regulation and intervention in the rail industry (eye-watering subsidies, statutory PFs backed by threat of prosecution and the BTP, non-application of UCTTR 1999), but none of the perceived disadvantages (such as through tickets, mandated timetables, and regulated fares).

I don't believe they should be allowed to pick and choose in this manner. If the rail industry was *wholly* private and self-sustaining, then it would be a different matter, but, as it is, it seems reasonable for the Government to regulate for the benefit of the passengers, voters and taxpayers who pay for the subsidies, and who are left to 'pick up the tab' when a TOC hands their franchise back (as with NXEC/ East Coast).

The word "innovation", in this context, is thinly disguised ATOC code for "screwing the passenger over", and I have little sympathy with those who bid for franchises knowing what they were letting themselves in for.

 

[bb21]

It is by no means as easy as it sounds. But that should not be the killer argument.
I worked on the Stock Exchange "Big Bang". The first approach was very much "This will be simple, because all the organisations are doing the same thing". Delusion! Once the first attempt had failed, there followed a period of several years in which all the subtle differences were analysed and addressed. This was not just between working practices of the various institutions (each of which was logically the most suitable for adoption, of course)but also in the language used, which proved the least tractable problem of all. Eventually, it worked.
With rail, we start at a slight advantage, because there already is a universal system. But what we must avoid is allowing TOCs to start going their own way, introducing the differences that would cost a fortune to integrate. It must be done properly, and it must be done now.

It is not a killer argument. It was never intended to be a killer argument.

My point is that the whole proposal needs to be thought through, and pitfalls identified and resolved. This is not to say small scale trials cannot take place. I may have misunderstood him but radamfi's tone sounds like because some continental countries/TfL have been using these systems successfully therefore they must be the solution to all the perceived problems he mentioned in an earlier post with National Rail ticketing. What I am saying is that unless the fares system is completely overhauled, this is simply not true. It will only have limited scope of success, and its full potential will never be realised.

I totally agree that any such system needs to be centrally led. The current situation we have wrt smartcard ticketing where each TOC does its own thing is ridiculous.

 

[Oswyntail]

It is not a killer argument. It was never intended to be a killer argument....

100% agree with what you are saying. A unified system must be put in place, and it must be done properly. I am sorry if I seemed to imply you thought it was a killer argument. There will be some, though, even among the experts here, who think it is simple ("Just copy what they did in Nepal")

 

[Bletchleyite]

I totally agree that any such system needs to be centrally led. The current situation we have wrt smartcard ticketing where each TOC does its own thing is ridiculous.

To be honest I think smartcard ticketing with something stored on the card will be 20 years out of date before we even get near implementing it.

Neil

 

[gordonthemoron]

perhaps the government should take all ticket revenue and pay the TOCs to run the services?

 

[Bletchleyite]

perhaps the government should take all ticket revenue and pay the TOCs to run the services?

That is an option, but it does rather stifle innovation, and does mean you need other incentives for things like revenue protection.

Neil

 

[thedbdiboy]

Would an end to 'national ticketing' mean that missed connections between different TOCs would then be at the passenger's own risk?

I'm not sure I would travel by train if I had to set off an hour earlier than necessary in order to allow for the risk of a missed connection.

It does seem that TOCs want all the benefits of Government regulation and intervention in the rail industry (eye-watering subsidies, statutory PFs backed by threat of prosecution and the BTP, non-application of UCTTR 1999), but none of the perceived disadvantages (such as through tickets, mandated timetables, and regulated fares).

I don't believe they should be allowed to pick and choose in this manner. If the rail industry was *wholly* private and self-sustaining, then it would be a different matter, but, as it is, it seems reasonable for the Government to regulate for the benefit of the passengers, voters and taxpayers who pay for the subsidies, and who are left to 'pick up the tab' when a TOC hands their franchise back (as with NXEC/ East Coast).

The word "innovation", in this context, is thinly disguised ATOC code for "screwing the passenger over", and I have little sympathy with those who bid for franchises knowing what they were letting themselves in for.

No, because EU rules require this. In continental Europe there is a lot of work taking place to ensure provision between operators when things go wrong. Ironically, because of our current through ticketing rules and the NRCoC we already complied with the requirements before they became mandatory across the EU. Of course if the bloke with the fag and the pint has any say then all bets are off (presumably we'll bring back steam trains...)

 

[matt_world2004]

I am surprised that the DFT didn't demand that there was extention of the oyster system nationwide with interavailability on busses and trains.

 

[Gareth Marston]

The 1993 Railway Act only got through parliament due to "concessions" such as national ticketing. That was the caveat that allowed rail privitisation to proceed.

 

[bb21]

I am surprised that the DFT didn't demand that there was extention of the oyster system nationwide with interavailability on busses and trains.

Oyster will not be able to handle the complexity of National Rail ticketing.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Indeed not. AIUI it can only handle concentric zones, for one.

 

[matt_world2004]

Oyster will not be able to handle the complexity of National Rail ticketing.

It could certainly be used for point to point ticketing, Pre purchased first class, standard class and first class season tickets. Advance tickets could be loaded onto the oyster card and modifications to allow break of journeys. Paper tickets could be still used for other ticket combinations.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

. . . . . There will be some, though, even among the experts here, who think it is simple ("Just copy what they did in Nepal")

I'm sure you're right.

What worries me is the same faith 'even among the experts' in 200 Aldersgate (ATOC) or Horseferry Road (DfT).

 

[causton]

It could certainly be used for point to point ticketing, Pre purchased first class, standard class and first class season tickets. Advance tickets could be loaded onto the oyster card and modifications to allow break of journeys. Paper tickets could be still used for other ticket combinations.

Do you know how this will work?

With Oyster, it won't.

Oyster has many limitations, at the moment it is just about at the capacity for what it can currently do. I can't see how you could do any of the things you stated it can do. Oyster is no magic fairy that will solve all problems.

How will you do first class?
Point to point tickets will effectively need one zone for every station in the country.
The fares are calculated in real time, which means you will need to hold your Oyster on the reader for 5 minutes while it looks up the fare for Thurso to Penzance via Birmingham and Bristol where you touched the 'pink readers'...
How long would you want journeys to 'time out' after, for a journey as long as Edinburgh to London? etc etc...
Break of journey... can't see how Oyster could deal with that at all.
I could go on...

 

[radamfi]

The OV-Chipkaart already overcomes most of those issues. First class is set by visiting a ticket machine. It does point-to-point almost exclusively as the Dutch now only use zones for season tickets. There's no issue in calculating the fare for any journey within the country. There is a time out but does allow lengthy breaks of journey, although that will change as barriers are closed.

But as already mentioned earlier, the future is either mobile phone tickets (which is easier for the train companies as it does not require require radical changes to the fare structure) or smartcards where the calculations are done with overnight batch processing. Smartcards may be reserved for local/regional travel where the difficulties are less relevant.

 

[bb21]

Smartcards could (note that I didn't say would) eventually replace paper tickets, in theory, but not with the technology Oyster is built on.

No, nope, no way.

 

[kieron]

Would an end to 'national ticketing' mean that missed connections between different TOCs would then be at the passenger's own risk?

I'm not sure I would travel by train if I had to set off an hour earlier than necessary in order to allow for the risk of a missed connection.

If it matters to me whether I reach my destination at a specific time or not, I'd catch an earlier train anyway. £25 compensation won't cover the cost of a missed flight or a missed job interview.

Going back to the original article, I think the loss of Any Permitted tickets is a very high price to pay, and Arriva need to be a lot clearer about how the public would benefit from this before I'd be happy to sacrifice the ability to buy a Crewe - Manchester ticket and catch whatever turns up next. I can understand why a bus company wouldn't value this flexibility too highly, though.

 

[simple simon]

Going back to the original article, I think the loss of Any Permitted tickets is a very high price to pay, and Arriva need to be a lot clearer about how the public would benefit from this before I'd be happy to sacrifice the ability to buy a Crewe - Manchester ticket and catch whatever turns up next. I can understand why a bus company wouldn't value this flexibility too highly, though.

Hear Hear!

And I do not want to pay through the nose for such flexibility - a problem which already exists in London for people who do not use Oyster or Contactless!

btw, already in London there are routes where you may have to let the first train go because your ticket is not (or might not be) valid.

One example is that rover tickets (such as Brit Rail pass and the UK national Rail Rover) are not accepted on the Underground, so where mainline and Underground trains operate shared services on the same tracks its best to avoid the Underground trains.

Another example related to senior citizens Freedom Passes which have (or did have, perhaps) different hours of validity according to transport provider, so that at certain times of the day passengers using Overground trains in south London (where they share tracks with other mainline trains) can only travel on the Overground trains.

Simon