Hopper fare on longer bus journeys?

[GodAtum]

I recently took the X26 from Heathrow to Croydon. This takes more then an hour, so when I change onto another bus at Croydon, I do not get the Hopper fare. Should I contact TFL to raise a complaint?

 

[higthomas]

No. They advertise the hopper by saying: "Make a journey using pay as you go (contactless or Oyster) on a bus or tram, and you can make a second bus or tram journey for free within one hour of touching in on the first bus or tram." (Source)
You have not done that, taking over an hour for your first journey, so you can't get a second journey free.

If you think the system should be organised differently, talk to your AM or something, don't raise a complaint.

 

[matt_world2004]

I recently took the X26 from Heathrow to Croydon. This takes more then an hour, so when I change onto another bus at Croydon, I do not get the Hopper fare. Should I contact TFL to raise a complaint?

No as its boardinn two buses within an hour.

 

[quarella]

As others have said, the Hopper fare would not apply as it is not within and hour as stated in the terms of use. I would also point out that in most of the UK for a journey of that distance and duration you would be paying around £10.00 not £1.50.

 

[Busaholic]

I recently took the X26 from Heathrow to Croydon. This takes more then an hour, so when I change onto another bus at Croydon, I do not get the Hopper fare. Should I contact TFL to raise a complaint?

The irony is that that journey in reverse would probably be doable on a Hopper fare e.g. if you were travelling from Coulsdon, say, to Heathrow with a change at Croydon, you would be paying a fare on boarding the bus in Coulsdon and, so long as you were able to get on an X26 in Croydon within an hour of that (or 70 minutes in fact, but don't let on!) the Hopper fare would apply. It is one reason why I'm against the Hopper fare in principle: it can make the same journey by the same buses twice as expensive in one direction as opposed to the other, which I find inequitable (obviously) and irrational. Far better to have capped the number of bus fares payable in a day at two imo instead of three, but to have increased the price of each fare to, say, £1.80, still below the minimum fare in many places in the U.K., which would have saved some passengers 90p per day while costing others, like for instance a Croydon to Heathrow passenger, an extra 30p for a single journey or 60p for a return journey, an increase I find entirely justifiable.

 

[Jordeh]

The irony is that that journey in reverse would probably be doable on a Hopper fare e.g. if you were travelling from Coulsdon, say, to Heathrow with a change at Croydon, you would be paying a fare on boarding the bus in Coulsdon and, so long as you were able to get on an X26 in Croydon within an hour of that (or 70 minutes in fact, but don't let on!) the Hopper fare would apply. It is one reason why I'm against the Hopper fare in principle: it can make the same journey by the same buses twice as expensive in one direction as opposed to the other, which I find inequitable (obviously) and irrational. Far better to have capped the number of bus fares payable in a day at two imo instead of three, but to have increased the price of each fare to, say, £1.80, still below the minimum fare in many places in the U.K., which would have saved some passengers 90p per day while costing others, like for instance a Croydon to Heathrow passenger, an extra 30p for a single journey or 60p for a return journey, an increase I find entirely justifiable.

The hopper fare saves people money who either live in poorly served areas and are reliant on the bus or are genuinely poor and use it as an cheap way of getting around. I don't see a good reason to be against it.

 

[Busaholic]

The hopper fare saves people money who either live in poorly served areas and are reliant on the bus or are genuinely poor and use it as an cheap way of getting around. I don't see a good reason to be against it.

I think if you read and took in my alternative proposal you would see that, with a cap of fare on two bus journeys per day, those most reliant on bus travel including poorer members of society would not lose out. The Hopper was a 'quick fix' rather than a carefully thought-out policy.

 

[radamfi]

it can make the same journey by the same buses twice as expensive in one direction as opposed to the other, which I find inequitable (obviously) and irrational.

In a typical integrated fare system, single tickets expire when the time limit is reached. So you have to revalidate before the time period is up, even if you are already on the bus. That avoids this anomaly. But that increases the scope for fare evasion, so that is probably why London is allowing you to go over the hour limit.

Far better to have capped the number of bus fares payable in a day at two imo instead of three, but to have increased the price of each fare to, say, £1.80

This will not cure the anomaly you are complaining about, unless you are planning to charge people for changing buses again, which is highly undesirable. A short trip involving a change of buses would cost more than twice what it costs now. The whole point of hopper fare is to make short journeys reasonably affordable.

 

[Busaholic]

In a typical integrated fare system, single tickets expire when the time limit is reached. So you have to revalidate before the time period is up, even if you are already on the bus. That avoids this anomaly. But that increases the scope for fare evasion, so that is probably why London is allowing you to go over the hour limit.



This will not cure the anomaly you are complaining about, unless you are planning to charge people for changing buses again, which is highly undesirable. A short trip involving a change of buses would cost more than twice what it costs now. The whole point of hopper fare is to make short journeys reasonably affordable.

I understood the point of the Hopper fare was for the passenger requiring more than one bus in each direction on a given day for work, study or shopping purposes. The passenger wanting to make two journeys in one direction only would, I agree, be the one to lose out. If I was Mayor, I'd be happy to defend that policy.

 

[radamfi]

The passenger wanting to make two journeys in one direction only would, I agree, be the one to lose out.

A "journey" can include one or more changes of vehicle. We don't charge different fares on other modes of transport just because you are changing vehicle.

 

[Feathers44]

I was about to say that we do for trams...but apparently the hopper fare applies to them too. I didn't know that.

Do you have to touch in before boarding the second tram I wonder?

 

[radamfi]

I was about to say that we do for trams...but apparently the hopper fare applies to them too. I didn't know that.

Do you have to touch in before boarding the second tram I wonder?

Bizarrely, even before the Hopper fare, changing onto another tram was free, even though trams and buses were supposed to be the same fare. So trams were effectively cheaper than buses before the Hopper fare.

 

[Busaholic]

A "journey" can include one or more changes of vehicle. We don't charge different fares on other modes of transport just because you are changing vehicle.

But we almost always have with buses. I consider a universal flat fare and a basic fare cap the most that should be done: the last thing on earth the London bus system needs is a complex set of fares so you could see how much it would cost from Stratford to Richmond, say, depending on how many buses you use or whether you travel via Clapham Junction or Tottenham Court Road and whether there's an 'r' in the month or whatever i.e. nothing akin to Underground/NR or anything requiring an expert to understand. I know from your many previous posts you won't agree with this but, hey, when was life ever 'fair'?

 

[radamfi]

But we almost always have with buses.

Does that mean it is right, or desirable?

when was life ever 'fair'?

The goal is to maximise patronage and minimise use of the private car. It makes no sense to deter short trips because the fare is unnecessarily and unintentionally high, simply because a change of bus is required.

 

[Busaholic]

Does that mean it is right, or desirable?



The goal is to maximise patronage and minimise use of the private car. It makes no sense to deter short trips because the fare is unnecessarily and unintentionally high, simply because a change of bus is required.

Short of getting rid of fares on London buses altogether (a policy that briefly found favour amongst Labour politicians on the GLC in the 1970s, when they were in opposition) or re-introducing scaled fares on buses depending on length of journey I can't see how you can achieve what you want. Actually, I see scant evidence that the London Assembly share the goal you state, in practical terms. Anyway, my last words on this subject on this thread.

 

[radamfi]

Short of getting rid of fares on London buses altogether (a policy that briefly found favour amongst Labour politicians on the GLC in the 1970s, when they were in opposition) or re-introducing scaled fares on buses depending on length of journey I can't see how you can achieve what you want. Actually, I see scant evidence that the London Assembly share the goal you state, in practical terms. Anyway, my last words on this subject on this thread.

I mean maximizing patronage within a given budget. Regardless of the level of subsidy, it makes no sense to charge extra to change buses. Even in the high fare regime outside London it makes no sense to charge extra to change buses.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I mean maximizing patronage within a given budget. Regardless of the level of subsidy, it makes no sense to charge extra to change buses. Even in the high fare regime outside London it makes no sense to charge extra to change buses.

Completely agree, and I think TfL in principle do now as well, though it's taken them long enough.

 

[Busaholic]

I mean maximizing patronage within a given budget. Regardless of the level of subsidy, it makes no sense to charge extra to change buses. Even in the high fare regime outside London it makes no sense to charge extra to change buses.

I said I wouldn't add anything else to this thread, but I'm genuinely bemused as to what type of journey you feel should be possible for the payment of one fare of £1.50. Is your criterion that any two bus routes that intersect at some point should be available for such a fare? If so, then it would be theoretically (and actually, if you didn't value your nether regions) possible to get on an X68 in the evening peak at Russell Square and when it eventually reaches West Croydon Bus Station transfer to an X26 and go all the way to Heathrow Central Bus Station. Now I don't see why that would be 'fair', 'desirable' or anything else, beyond what I've already said about capping fares after any two bus journeys in a day. The person travelling from Chigwell Row to Heathrow might, after all, have to take four or five buses to get to Heathrow, probably more if they wanted a more direct route that didn't take half a day. So, please, do enlighten me as to your criteria, because I'm not getting them at present.

 

[CatfordCat]

A few disconnected thoughts -

if you travel on the Underground, many journeys involve changing trains. The idea of expecting people to pay twice for this went out in the 1920s if not before. Why should bus passengers have to put up with it? The practical difficulty has been that underground passengers change trains inside the ticket barriers, bus passengers don't.

From memory, Nottingham made their bus tickets 'transfer' as a matter of course some years back, but there was a problem with passengers getting off buses being bothered for unwanted tickets as they got off.

The London County Council Tramways system had a fairly comprehensive range of transfer fares - and a policy where you could 'board the first car' from your local area, and (if it wasn't one going to the central London terminus you wanted) change where there were other routes, for the same fare. Even if there was a direct tram route between the two points. And this with bell punch technology. Of course it's debatable how much this was driven by social responsibility and how much by competing with the buses for passengers. This was killed off in the 1950s by LT.

There were a handful of London bus routes that had transfer facilities in to the early 50s, but tended to be for specific journeys, in some cases replacing previously available direct journeys.

The lack of transfer fares on London buses also has been one factor in TFL having a lot of overlapping routes, arguably leading to some corridors (Oxford Street springs to mind) having too many buses carrying not enough people - the hopper fare means that while there is a potential minor inconvenience in changing, you're not financially penalised for it in most cases.

 

[Bletchleyite]

From memory, Nottingham made their bus tickets 'transfer' as a matter of course some years back, but there was a problem with passengers getting off buses being bothered for unwanted tickets as they got off.

This can be an issue for paper tickets, but because you've paid your Oyster deposit this issue is removed.

 

[Feathers44]

Bizarrely, even before the Hopper fare, changing onto another tram was free, even though trams and buses were supposed to be the same fare. So trams were effectively cheaper than buses before the Hopper fare.

I don't believe that's always been true. I think that tickets once worked that way (with a time limit) but Oyster was a touch required each time you changed trams.

Proving that now may be next to impossible of course.

Edit: Page 10 of this document covers it http://www.southernrailway.com/download/3194.1/tramlink-user-guide/

Oyster

Valid for one single journey on tram boarded within 70 minutes. You must touch your Oyster card at on the yellow reader on the tram stop platform.

Cash

Valid for 90 minutes from time bought, including change of tram to reach destination.

 

[radamfi]

I said I wouldn't add anything else to this thread, but I'm genuinely bemused as to what type of journey you feel should be possible for the payment of one fare of £1.50. Is your criterion that any two bus routes that intersect at some point should be available for such a fare? If so, then it would be theoretically (and actually, if you didn't value your nether regions) possible to get on an X68 in the evening peak at Russell Square and when it eventually reaches West Croydon Bus Station transfer to an X26 and go all the way to Heathrow Central Bus Station. Now I don't see why that would be 'fair', 'desirable' or anything else, beyond what I've already said about capping fares after any two bus journeys in a day. The person travelling from Chigwell Row to Heathrow might, after all, have to take four or five buses to get to Heathrow, probably more if they wanted a more direct route that didn't take half a day. So, please, do enlighten me as to your criteria, because I'm not getting them at present.

The fare should depend on where you are coming from and where you are going to. In London's case we have a flat fare (for buses) so the two locations, Russell Square and Heathrow, are in the same zone. As explained earlier, most places have time limits for single journeys. So, depending on what time limit is imposed, a trip like the X26/X68 may or may not be possible on one ticket. The time limit solves the anomaly you are worried about.

Your irk seems to be focused on artifacts caused by the small number of cases where people get cheap fares for long distances. It is more reasonable to think about the vastly more numerous people who want to make short journeys.

 

[radamfi]

I don't believe that's always been true. I think that tickets once worked that way (with a time limit) but Oyster was a touch required each time you changed trams.

Yes you had to touch in each time but you didn't pay extra for the second tram ride as long as you were within the time limit.

 

[Busaholic]

.

Your irk seems to be focused on artifacts caused by the small number of cases where people get cheap fares for long distances. It is more reasonable to think about the vastly more numerous people who want to make short journeys.

I don't think you understand my irk at all. I have more than one, but I'll reiterate one of them for one last time: it is that a journey from A to B using two (or more) buses can cost twice as much as the journey in reverse, B to A, even though exactly the same routes are involved and the total time of the completed journey in each direction can be EXACTLY the same, to the minute or even second, because the Hopper fare is purely based on the time you got on the second bus. This is perverse and inequitable and cannot be defended LOGICALLY imo, and I'm afraid neither you nor other contributors to this thread have attempted to answer my objection, perhaps because there is no answer to it.

Please don't think I am against people being able to make long journeys on one fare, by the way. I have gone on record all over this forum attacking TfL's plans to curtail the westernmost end of the long 25 route, for instance, and I'm in principle opposed to making routes even shorter rather than addressing the causes of traffic congestion and/or pollution concerns.

 

[radamfi]

I don't think you understand my irk at all. I have more than one, but I'll reiterate one of them for one last time: it is that a journey from A to B using two (or more) buses can cost twice as much as the journey in reverse, B to A, even though exactly the same routes are involved and the total time of the completed journey in each direction can be EXACTLY the same, to the minute or even second, because the Hopper fare is purely based on the time you got on the second bus. This is perverse and inequitable and cannot be defended LOGICALLY imo, and I'm afraid neither you nor other contributors to this thread have attempted to answer my objection, perhaps because there is no answer to it.

I explained the solution earlier:

In a typical integrated fare system, single tickets expire when the time limit is reached. So you have to revalidate before the time period is up, even if you are already on the bus. That avoids this anomaly

London has decided not to insist on revalidation after the hour but I don't think it is a big deal as it affects only a few people. One of the three main bus/tram companies in Belgium, De Lijn, has recently changed from tickets expiring after one hour to allowing validity until you alight from the last bus.