Extortionate season tickets £££

[JGurney]

But when I decide to travel by car or train, my choice is about the direct cost - fuel and parking. Whole life costs simply aren't part of that calculation.

But when I consider whether to buy a car, whole life costs certainly are part of my calculations.

I'd like to see the workings of 22p a mile to run a Land Rover.

In about 2015 I did a full costing for a vehicle I owned for 5 years and about 50,000 miles. I bought it used at a year old and traded it. The whole life cost for a 1.6 petrol was 50p a mile.

Quite. I did much the same in about 2008, and was astonished at the result. I can't now recall the figure but it was a lot higher than had thought, something like 42p/mile back then. I recall working out that it was a lot higher per mile than the rail alternatives.
On no more than a whim, I had put all of the car running costs onto a single card used for nothing else, so I had a clear trail of most of it's costs (but a few paid in cash were still left out). I decided against replacing it, and have not seen any good financial case for getting another since.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Quite. I did much the same in about 2008, and was astonished at the result. I can't now recall the figure but it was a lot higher than had thought, something like 42p/mile back then. I recall working out that it was a lot higher per mile than the rail alternatives.
On no more than a whim, I had put all of the car running costs onto a single card used for nothing else, so I had a clear trail of most of it's costs (but a few paid in cash were still left out). I decided against replacing it, and have not seen any good financial case for getting another since.

It is certainly unusual to do that kind of working-out when deciding whether to own a car. It is mostly a lifestyle choice - you own one because you're OK paying about what it costs per month to own, and you benefit from its flexibility and convenience.

 

[JGurney]

It is certainly unusual to do that kind of working-out when deciding whether to own a car. It is mostly a lifestyle choice - you own one because you're OK paying about what it costs per month to own, and you benefit from its flexibility and convenience.

Yes, I suspect many motorists don't realise how much they are paying for their cars - I had certainly not realised how much I was paying for mine until then, and it was purely a whim that had led to to put it all on one card which made it more visible.

I wonder how many are

OK paying about what it costs per month to own

and how many don't know quite what that is.

 

[AlterEgo]

Is that 22p a mile in fuel, or are you adding in depreciation, maintenance, insurance, tyres etc etc?

I already have the car, am insured, pay the costs of ownership. So the cost to me driving that distance is just fuel (about 20-21p a mile) plus a penny or two.

Most longer distance commuters are also car drivers. They already have a car, are insured, and own or lease the car regardless.

Nobody is talking about car free households here. The vast majority of adults have access to a car.

 

[35B]

But when I consider whether to buy a car, whole life costs certainly are part of my calculations.

Whereas they weren't part of my calculation - because the choice is which car, not car/no car.

 

[TUC]

I was devastated about the last season ticket fare increase as I had to let the second under footman go. Coupled with VAT on little Freddie's school fees and increases in minimum wages for staff, I'm seriously thinking about having to convert one of the staff cottages to an AirBnB although how I'll live that down at the Club I'll never know.

Life is hard in the upper echelons these days it's not all caviar and champagne you know.

How to show how out of touch you are with working people.

 

[AlterEgo]

If that money was spent on imported goods and foreign holidays, it would make us an even less prosperous nation.

We should be thankful then for extraordinary transport, energy and housing costs, because people might waste their incomes otherwise and not do sensible things like invest or save. Really do not understand this thread which has become uniquely poisoned because of who the OP is. Will happily refer to it in future when people moan ahout high fares, so we can see lots of people justify them.

 

[Bletchleyite]

How to show how out of touch you are with working people.

I think that was a joke

 

[TUC]

I do think some of the discussion about the cost of running cars above needs a reality check in how most people really do the equation. The cost of the car itself, together with annual insurance etc. are regarded by most people as sunk costs. They don't sit there and think 'this car will hopefully last for eight years so I can divide that cost by 96 months and add a proportion each month into what take into account as the cost of it.'

Most people just look at the day to day costs, together with the softer elements of not being reliant upon whether a train turns up, and with the self-control of, even if they get stuck in a traffic jam, they can turn at the next junction and weave their way around it, not wait for three trains in front to move.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Nov 2025 ==

I think that was a joke

I know, but it does suggest a certain assumption about longer distance commuters.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I know, but it does suggest a certain assumption about longer distance commuters.

Most long distance commuters are at least middle class, because it's not economically viable to commute long distances to do lower paid jobs. There are exceptions but if you look around a typical commuter train they aren't full of people who are likely to be on minimum wage. Even the tradespeople who you see on the earlier trains are likely well paid - being good at a trade is very much a middle class occupation these days.

People doing jobs like cleaning in London are by and large living in social housing in London.

 

[JGurney]

Nobody is talking about car free households here.

Really? Am I banned from the thread?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Really? Am I banned from the thread?

Carfree households are so rare among typical middle to long distance London commuters that they probably aren't relevant to the debate. It doesn't mean you can't contribute to the thread - of course you can - but your situation is a minority one. Indeed a very large proportion of London commuters drive to the station.

 

[Snow1964]

Looked as Paris as a comparison.

The Navigo Decouverte contactless smart card (effectively French equivalent of a travelcard) is €88.80 per month (£78.24). Looks like 12th month is free too.

There are cheaper versions if don't want all 5 zones (zone 5 will get you to CDG airport or Disney etc.

https://www.ratp.fr/en/titres-et-tarifs

 

[cactustwirly]

Carfree households are so rare among typical middle to long distance London commuters that they probably aren't relevant to the debate. It doesn't mean you can't contribute to the thread - of course you can - but your situation is a minority one. Indeed a very large proportion of London commuters drive to the station.

Most likely to be younger people, university graduates etc

 

[Mark J]

I will absolutely be looking at this given Labour has only been in power since May last year.

Sorry, Labour are not off the hook.

For a party that endlessly bangs on about 'green', 'net zero', and a PM who loves to jet off around the world discussing the subject.

Their approach to rail, and public transport, flies in the face of this.

Any Government that is serious and committed to the above would be ensuring public transport is reliable and affordable.

In the UK we have neither.

Welcome @benedictjsmith

Seeing as there is a national newspaper journalist here looking to tell a rail story about rising fares, is it worthwhile to also brief this new member on the forum’s widespread (although possibly not universal) concerns over the LNER fares project?

And the fear that this might be rolled out across the entire long-distance network.

Essentially the DfT:

- has removed all flexible off peak fares from some LNER journeys as part of a trial.
- by doing so it has also removed the price cap on the price of off peak journeys, thereby allowing fares to be significantly increased.
- has introduced additional route restrictions on the routes passengers can take
- has - at the same time - pushed more passengers to more restrictive Advance / Advance flex tickets, which themselves have increased in cost because of the removal of the price cap.
As the price of advance fares change based on demand or the market, these fare rises don’t really feature in the annual March fares increase news cycle.

I’ve seen posters wanting this story to be told more widely, perhaps this is the opportunity you’ve been waiting for.

On top of this, there is a new national rail conditions of travel about to come into force.
This significantly reduces passenger rights and could increase the numbers of passengers being presented with penalty fares.

Agree.

Would also add the sneaky price rises that occur throughout the year, in addition to the well publicised annual increase in March. All thanks to certain tickets not being regulated.

Last year many SWR and GWR services had the annual increase in March, followed by another in September. Taking the yearly increase in prices to 10%+.

 

[bleeder4]

Most long distance commuters are at least middle class, because it's not economically viable to commute long distances to do lower paid jobs. There are exceptions but if you look around a typical commuter train they aren't full of people who are likely to be on minimum wage. Even the tradespeople who you see on the earlier trains are likely well paid - being good at a trade is very much a middle class occupation these days.

True, but I think that is a consequence of the high cost of rail travel. If it was cheaper to travel by train, minimum wage workers would be able to afford to travel longer distance by train, therefore widening the pool of jobs available to them.

 

[35B]

True, but I think that is a consequence of the high cost of rail travel. If it was cheaper to travel by train, minimum wage workers would be able to afford to travel longer distance by train, therefore widening the pool of jobs available to them.

Would they? Travel has costs over and above time, so travelling for work is frequently not a preferred option.

For a middle class professional like me, it’s a trade off between cost and convenience. I can afford to live somewhere nicer if I’m willing to travel a bit, and my choice is then about how I draw the line between my season ticket cost and my mortgage.

When I moved 20 years ago the choice was influenced by paying a LOT more to stay in area, quite a bit more on both mortgage and travel to move a bit further out, or hold the mortgage flat and whack up the season ticket cost. That then played into other factors like where family lived to help make the final choice.

 

[akm]

That is such a ridiculous objection. Rail tickets are often extortionate, and season tickets still so. People don't have to name a price to be able to object to its cost or its impact on or society.

The way tickets are priced and the way capacity is used in and out of the capital has real world implications which shape our country; tons of people's incomes vanishing into housing, transport costs, energy etc makes us a much less prosperous nation with lower levels of satisfaction and human flourishing than we deserve.

I'm not sure I was objecting to anything.

What should season ticket prices be then, if they are not to end up being 'extortionate'? 10% less? 50% less? 90% less? And what would you say to someone who says that your proposed price is itself 'extortionate' ?

Or should we go full Luxembourg?

 

[AlterEgo]

I'm not sure I was objecting to anything.

What should season ticket prices be then, if they are not to end up being 'extortionate'? 10% less? 50% less? 90% less? And what would you say to someone who says that your proposed price is itself 'extortionate' ?

Or should we go full Luxembourg?

That is just a circular argument to prevent anyone from objecting to high rail fares.

Prices are too high - you suggest a price - I find someone who says it is also too high - deal with that then

It isn't a good faith line of inquiry, particularly as you yourself aren't willing to engage in debating what the price should be, nor seem interested in it, having mocked people's "Righteous Prices" when they have suggested - quite reasonably! - that season tickets are very expensive. There are plenty of other places I have discussed how ticket prices ought to - or ought not to - be structured, and I would bore myself by repeating myself here.

 

[Tetchytyke]

But when I consider whether to buy a car, whole life costs certainly are part of my calculations.

There is a cost to owning a car. But, in general, these are fixed costs. A service is done annually. Tyres wear out if you use them but they also degrade even if you don’t. Same with brake pads. Depreciation is mostly based on the age of the car.

I don’t think anyone breaks that cost down per mile. But if you own a car and you do break it down per mile then the more you use the car the less it costs per mile anyway.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Nov 2025 ==

Looked as Paris as a comparison.

€978 for something that costs £3,200 in London.

 

[35B]

That is just a circular argument to prevent anyone from objecting to high rail fares.

Prices are too high - you suggest a price - I find someone who says it is also too high - deal with that then

It isn't a good faith line of inquiry, particularly as you yourself aren't willing to engage in debating what the price should be, nor seem interested in it, having mocked people's "Righteous Prices" when they have suggested - quite reasonably! - that season tickets are very expensive. There are plenty of other places I have discussed how ticket prices ought to - or ought not to - be structured, and I would bore myself by repeating myself here.

On the contrary, it's a question that cuts to the heart of "what should fares be". There's a tendency to say "they're too expensive" but not to then follow that through into serious consideration of whether that points to the costs being too high, or the share of government subsidy, or whatever else.

If a "fair price" is 50p/mile, and the average cost of running the railway is £1/mile, you have to consider both whether that £1/mile is too high, and why, and whether the right level of subsidy is 50p/mile, or some other value.

 

[AlterEgo]

On the contrary, it's a question that cuts to the heart of "what should fares be".

Not if the natural progression for whoever is starting the argument is that they will just find someone else who finds those prices too high and not even bother to debate themselves. It isn't a serious request for debate and I'm not going to entertain it off-topic here, particularly as this topic has been done to death recently in Speculative Discussion.

 

[35B]

Not if the natural progression for whoever is starting the argument is that they will just find someone else who finds those prices too high and not even bother to debate themselves. It isn't a serious request for debate and I'm not going to entertain it off-topic here, particularly as this topic has been done to death recently in Speculative Discussion.

That is about the spirit in which a question is asked, not the question itself.

 

[A S Leib]

I would swap out most of my driving for rail travel if such a ticket were offered. I'd make my money back on a 58 EUR regional trains pass in no time.

Last month, I travelled 3453 km with mine, which works out at around seven-eighths of a cent per kilometre (it would have been ~1.5¢ per km had I been getting the normal one rather than a youth one. That's with a commute which is around two kilometres each way; the rest is from leisure travel.

The only rail season ticket I've bought in the UK, from Hemel Hempstead to University (Birmingham) (Watford not London) for a week, is 173 km each way via Northampton and currently £154 for the LNR/WMR fare. Using it seven days per week, that's 6.4p per km, or almost 9p/km if only using it for five days, and with far less flexibility (not being able to go to Bedworth or via Tamworth, let alone across the country).

 

[deltic]

Commuting long distances daily is I suggest not sustainable from a health,economic or environmental perspective and should not be encouraged. Average time of commutes outside London are around 30 minutes each way. Those by rail are longer but the distances travelled are also longer. If we want to support lower income groups get into work we need to be radically improving the reliability of bus services and investing in light rail schemes. Tom Forth's seminal work on Birmingham https://www.tomforth.co.uk/birminghamisasmallcity/ highlights how increased bus journey times and variability of journey times radically reduces the number of jobs people can access within a given time budget.

Those who commute long distances by rail and pay 5 figure season ticket prices are in well paid jobs not minimum-paying ones. Do we really want 16 HS2 train loads of passengers an hour commuting daily from Birmingham to London due to offering dirt cheap season tickets on the route? The issue as many have already pointed out is that those who are now only working in the office two days a week are paying almost as much for their commute as when they came in 5 days a week due to the heavy discount season tickets give compared to peak anytime fares and we presently have the worst of all worlds with having to provide resources for peak demand on only 3 days a week with half empty trains on Mondays and Fridays.

 

[Falcon1200]

You don’t think 50p per mile is extortionate? Really?

For unlimited travel on 363 days a year, not just on National Rail but has been pointed out, on multiple TfL services also; And which, today for example, provides multiple trains in the Up direction from Hemel from 0403 to 2340, and in the Down direction from Euston from 0535 to 0139 tomorrow; No, I do not regard that as extortionate. No doubt people would like cheaper train fares (and cheaper many other things too) but if the fares were to be reduced to a level no longer considered 'extortionate', how would the cost of providing the service then be covered? The 'high' fares cannot all be down to rapacious privateers, surely?

BTW I pay £2.50 for a 3-mile bus trip into Oxford from a suburb, so more than 80p per mile - Is that also extortionate, or simply what has to be charged to maintain the service?

 

[Starmill]

Not this again. Depreciation and maintenance are by and large fixed costs with modern long service intervals (particularly of EVs which don't require servicing in the same way), and insurance is not highly influenced by mileage unless you do absolutely loads. Fixed costs are analogous to a Railcard (or indeed a season ticket) - you pay them once and you get effectively unlimited use. It is not sensible to work out car use in this way.

The OP should probably include a small contribution to tyre wear and brake linings, but compared to fuel it is small.

Indeed. Motor fuel and parking are the relevant comparison price. The effect of variable maintenance and insurance costs can be estimated by rounding up to the next 10p...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Nov 2025 ==

BTW I pay £2.50 for a 3-mile bus trip into Oxford from a suburb, so more than 80p per mile - Is that also extortionate, or simply what has to be charged to maintain the service?

No. That's completely crazy as well and is exactly why I refuse to use buses for journeys which charge like that. There are loads of examples of 2-3 mile journeys that cost about £3, or round trips that cost £5-6, and they are all shocking value. Any other questions?

 

[styles]

BTW I pay £2.50 for a 3-mile bus trip into Oxford from a suburb, so more than 80p per mile - Is that also extortionate, or simply what has to be charged to maintain the service?

I think at that point, assuming I was able to, I'd just walk, cycle, or rollerblade it.

 

[Falcon1200]

I think at that point, assuming I was able to, I'd just walk, cycle, or rollerblade it.

I have walked and cycled it, but I no longer have a bike in Oxford and am too old to walk now, especially on the way back with shopping!

 

[johncrossley]

but if the fares were to be reduced to a level no longer considered 'extortionate', how would the cost of providing the service then be covered? The 'high' fares cannot all be down to rapacious privateers, surely?

Evidence from abroad clearly shows that lower fares are possible. Is it possible that the UK may even have the most expensive season tickets in the world, even though it doesn't have the highest salaries in the world? I could understand if you got Swiss levels of reliability and punctuality, but you don't even get that.