Update on Railcards and Covid

[CyrusWuff]

I was 50/50 on whether to post this in the Covid-19 subforum or here. Mods: Feel free to move if you disagree with my decision!

Rail Delivery Group have announced today that Railcards WILL NOT be extended, nor refunded, as a result of people not using them due to Covid.

We’d like to thank everyone for their patience. After careful consideration, the government has confirmed to us that Railcards will remain non-refundable and will not be extended, as in doing so would come at a significant cost to the taxpayer.

An FAQ page has been set up at https://www.railcard.co.uk/faq/

 

[AM9]

I was 50/50 on whether to post this in the Covid-19 subforum or here. Mods: Feel free to move if you disagree with my decision!

Rail Delivery Group have announced today that Railcards WILL NOT be extended, nor refunded, as a result of people not using them due to Covid.



An FAQ page has been set up at https://www.railcard.co.uk/faq/

That was a good stroke, wait until the railways were re-nationalised.

 

[Ianno87]

That still doesn't necessarily rule out a future promotion of 15 months for the price of 12 for new/renewed railcards or something.

 

[RJ]

Interesting.

I thought everything was being done to undo the damage to demand that COVID-19 has caused and encourage people to return to using the railways. It's depressing seeing colossal 12 carriage trains leaving London Bridge at 6pm empty. Using the cost to the taxpayer as a reason for not extending grace to cardholders suggests this is not the case.

Reading between the lines, maybe the railway industry does want to achieve this, but central government is not sympathetic to the cause and isn't prepared to support it.

Over in the travel industry, I've had various graces from airlines and hotel groups who have been proactive in extending the expiry dates of vouchers and points.

 

[Starmill]

I think it is just a part of the reality that no serious attempt has yet been made to get people to return on commercial terms. Why bother with doing it for railcards if you can't even deliver flexible season tickets within a reasonable time?

 

[typefish]

That's fine then, I'll just use the car ‍

 

[Haywain]

Reading between the lines, maybe the railway industry does want to achieve this, but central government is not sympathetic to the cause and isn't prepared to support it.

That’s my reading of the situation. DfT have the final say on every financial decision so it’s no real surprise.

 

[James H]

I think in any case now would not be the time, with so much uncertainty about how the winter will pan out.

With a bit of luck things will improve in time for next summer and suitable promotions / incentives for leisure travel can be introduced.

 

[Starmill]

I think in any case now would not be the time, with so much uncertainty about how the winter will pan out.

With a bit of luck things will improve in time for next summer and suitable promotions / incentives for leisure travel can be introduced.

Indeed they could be, although not practically ones thay reward the loyalty of March 2020 railcard holders specifically.

 

[Cardiff123]

So UK government and the DfT, run by the Conservatives, decide not to extend national UK railcards.

Meanwhile Transport for Wales, answerable to Welsh Government, which is run by Welsh Labour, made the decision a few months ago that all TfW railcards purchased before 17th March 2020 are eligible for a 6 month validity extension. (There are 7 different TfW Rail railcards)

Be in no doubt, the decision not to extend UK wide railcards or offer compensation for railcards purchased just before lockdown came in in March, is a political one.

 

[185143]

I'm very disappointed by this, but sadly not surprised in the slightest. Whilst I certainly got my £30 worth out of my railcard, it's not the point.

The product is sold as 12 months of discounted rail travel. Given you could not leave your home without "reasonable excuse" for a significant period of the last 12 months, it is fair to say a railcard holder has not recieved the 12 months discounted travel they have purchased the right for.

Extending railcards would have been an easy PR victory and I'd have been happy enough with that. The costs of doing so would have been minimal. The government were perfectly happy to use taxpayer money to pay for £10 off each person's meal for half of August, so what's the difference here?

 

[Cardiff123]

I'm very disappointed by this, but sadly not surprised in the slightest. Whilst I certainly got my £30 worth out of my railcard, it's not the point.

The product is sold as 12 months of discounted rail travel. Given you could not leave your home without "reasonable excuse" for a significant period of the last 12 months, it is fair to say a railcard holder has not recieved the 12 months discounted travel they have purchased the right for.

Extending railcards would have been an easy PR victory and I'd have been happy enough with that. The costs of doing so would have been minimal. The government were perfectly happy to use taxpayer money to pay for £10 off each person's meal for half of August, so what's the difference here?

Extending railcards isn't populist. Giving everyone £10 off meals was.

 

[Ianno87]

I think in any case now would not be the time, with so much uncertainty about how the winter will pan out.

With a bit of luck things will improve in time for next summer and suitable promotions / incentives for leisure travel can be introduced.

I agree, I suspect there may be some logic in not wanting to stimulate demand prematurely whilst restrictions are still coming and going. Although explaining this to the public would at least help people understand, and perhaps some reassurance that other things might be in the pipeline.

 

[AM9]

I agree, I suspect there may be some logic in not wanting to stimulate demand prematurely whilst restrictions are still coming and going. Although explaining this to the public would at least help people understand, and perhaps some reassurance that other things might be in the pipeline.

But that would just fuel a debate similar to many threads here about TOCs simultaneously putting off travellers whilst trying to promote leisure travel.

 

[Haywain]

Extending railcards isn't populist. Giving everyone £10 off meals was.

Plus the railways had been bailed out by the government while the restaurant trade hadn’t.

 

[Ianno87]

Plus the railways had been bailed out by the government while the restaurant trade hadn’t.

Restaurants did however benefit from putting employees on the furlough scheme too.

 

[Haywain]

Restaurants did however benefit from putting employees on the furlough scheme too.

I think most restaurants would argue that the furlough scheme was a benefit for their employees, rather than for the businesses. In any event, a closed business will still be making a loss and those losses were not underwritten by the government.

 

[yorkie]

That's fine then, I'll just use the car ‍

That's what most former rail users appear to be doing (except for short journeys where they may be walking / cycling) ; traffic levels appear to be up to normal at most times (a bit reduced at some times but busier than ever at others) while most trains cart a lot of fresh air (see dedicated thread for that)

I believe many companies want to put people off; see the deviated threads about XC, for example (but probably best to discuss further on one of those threads than here)

There is a lot of stuff in both the Covid section as well as the Trip Planning & Reports section relating to this.

 

[peters]

I think most restaurants would argue that the furlough scheme was a benefit for their employees, rather than for the businesses.

The real reason behind furlough was to keep the workers on payroll, as if they were made redundant or laid off short term they would have been forced to look for new work to qualify for out-of-work benefits, that would have meant employers were left with recruitment and training issues when they reopened instead of being able to recall their existing staff. Apart from some employees who were shielding or who had child care issues due to schools being closed, I don't think many employees wanted to be in the position where they would only get part of their normal pay but in exchange for that they wouldn't need to work for a few weeks/months. Also don't forget employers had the final say as to who did and didn't go on furlough, not employees or the government. Some employers chose to make people redundant even before the government started making employers contribute to the furlough payments.

 

[Llandudno]

With increasing parts of the UK in lockdown, now is not the time to be ACTIVELY promoting leisure travel, however, I would be surprised at some time in the new year if the government/rail industry don’t come up with some incentives and marketing campaigns to get us back on the rails?

 

[fairlie]

At one level, I've got much less use out of my railcard over the last year than I would have done. At another level, an extension probably wouldn't help me much as it's still likely to be a while before I'm back on the train with any degree of regularity.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I can't say I overly mind either, but the arrogant way in which the message on that website is written (no apology at all, for instance) wants to get someone sent on a Customer Services course.

 

[All Line Rover]

Why would extending railcards cost "the taxpayer" money? I thought railcards were the commercial arrangement of a privatised industry? An industry which normally goes to great lengths to stress that government control and interference in its affairs is unnecessary and unwelcome.

Ad-hoc government funding to support the continued running of services with low patronage doesn't grant private companies the right to renege on contracts previously concluded with customers. These private companies must adhere to those contracts pursuant to the commercial risk they undertook an the time. They can not and should not expect part of government funding used to help support the continued functioning of the economy to be siphoned off and spent to cover the cost of this commercial risk.

And that FAQ, explaining why it takes until October to receive an answer to a question raised in March. "Conversations take time, especially when they happen at the highest level." Is Appleby still around?

 

[Ianno87]

I can't say I overly mind either, but the arrogant way in which the message on that website is written (no apology at all, for instance) wants to get someone sent on a Customer Services course.

Yes, it was a bit blunt and not very sensitively written given the number of people who, rightly or wrongly, feel short changed (I'd at least have expected a "check back in future for some great offers!" or something), *but* likely a decision made outside of RDG's hands so they shouldn't be the ones apologising.

 

[221129]

Ad-hoc government funding to support the continued running of services with low patronage doesn't grant private companies the right to renege on contracts previously concluded with customers.

What contract has been reneged on?

 

[35B]

Why would extending railcards cost "the taxpayer" money? I thought railcards were the commercial arrangement of a privatised industry? An industry which normally goes to great lengths to stress that government control and interference in its affairs is unnecessary and unwelcome.

Ad-hoc government funding to support the continued running of services with low patronage doesn't grant private companies the right to renege on contracts previously concluded with customers. These private companies must adhere to those contracts pursuant to the commercial risk they undertook an the time. They can not and should not expect part of government funding used to help support the continued functioning of the economy to be siphoned off and spent to cover the cost of this commercial risk.

And that FAQ, explaining why it takes until October to receive an answer to a question raised in March. "Conversations take time, especially when they happen at the highest level." Is Appleby still around?

New rules, and probably a response based on what they’d been told by government, pointing the finger at the new boss.

As for the logic of the decision, I agree completely; it is an unpleasant insight into what a railway run by HM Treasury will be like.

 

[Ianno87]

Why would extending railcards cost "the taxpayer" money? I thought railcards were the commercial arrangement of a privatised industry? An industry which normally goes to great lengths to stress that government control and interference in its affairs is unnecessary and unwelcome.

Presumably the DfT/Treasury view is that in this case it'll be more likely giving a free discount on fares to people who would travel anyway (either on a full fare or a fresh Railcard) rather than generating more travel (thus revenue) overall. Therefore placing more revenue risk on DfT.

Seems a world away from when I got a free 1 month extension to my 26-30 Railcard as a Thank You...

 

[All Line Rover]

Yes, it was a bit blunt and not very sensitively written given the number of people who, rightly or wrongly, feel short changed (I'd at least have expected a "check back in future for some great offers!" or something), *but* likely a decision made outside of RDG's hands so they shouldn't be the ones apologising.

What decision was out of RDG's hands? The decision not to refund/extend, or the decision not to use taxpayer money to cover the losses to train operators (and, in turn, their shareholders) resulting from the issue of refunds and the temporary fall in railcard revenue caused by extensions to expiry dates?

 

[Ianno87]

What contract has been reneged on?

None of course. Fairly sure the Railcard Ts and S include a clause to effect of no extension/refund for non-use.

Whether it would be a good promotional gesture of goodwill on the other hand....

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 1 Oct 2020 ==

What decision was out of RDG's hands? The decision not to refund/extend, or the decision not to use taxpayer money to cover the losses to train operators (and, in turn, their shareholders) resulting from the issue of refunds and the temporary fall in railcard revenue caused by extensions to expiry dates?

The RDG could not make a decision that would place yet more risk on DfT to make up the current revenue shortfall.

 

[Starmill]

Yes, it was a bit blunt and not very sensitively written given the number of people who, rightly or wrongly, feel short changed (I'd at least have expected a "check back in future for some great offers!" or something), *but* likely a decision made outside of RDG's hands so they shouldn't be the ones apologising.

I get the feeling that putting out a very blunt, unflattering statement was deliberately done.

After all, if your position were that compensation is neither necessary nor desirable why bother to put out a statement and FAQ? Just tell the person who asked the question that the matter is closed and leave it at that.

I think it’s more likely to be written as an attack.