Is it time to completely overhaul the ticketing system?

[ChilliSauce]

Isn't it time for a complete overhaul of the ticketing system ?

There has to be something fundamentally wrong with a system that when a traveller buys a consecative bundle of tickets (split tickets) rather than 1 ticket for the complete journey that the overall fare is less.

And removal of Delay Repay on cheaper tickets may very well be appropriate .. i.e. you have chosen to purchase a cheap ticket so as a consequence delay repay does not apply.. Simply the punter pays the low price and takes their chances.

If however you were to purchase a full price anytime ticket then Delay Relay does apply. And improve that delay repay to 50% after 15 minutes of delay..

 

[yorksrob]

Isn't it time for a complete overhaul of the ticketing system ?

There has to be something fundamentally wrong with a system that when a traveller buys a consecative bundle of tickets (split tickets) rather than 1 ticket for the complete journey that the overall fare is less.

And removal of Delay Repay on cheaper tickets may very well be appropriate .. i.e. you have chosen to purchase a cheap ticket so as a consequence delay repay does not apply.. Simply the punter pays the low price and takes their chances.

If however you were to purchase a full price anytime ticket then Delay Relay does apply. And improve that delay repay to 50% after 15 minutes of delay..

I don't think we should go down the route that "full price anytime" tickets are the threshold for delay repay as these are often poor value for money to begin with - given that TOC's have often justified their existence on the basis that "hardly anyone buys them anyway".

Also, there's a consumer issue that on a cheaper ticket, any delay repay will be proportionally less, on account that the initial cost was less anyway, therefore it's unjustifiable and regressive to impose a further penalty on purchasers of lower cost tickets by preventing them from claiming delay repay in the first place.

 

[HSTEd]

I'd prefer that the National Rail booking system (and if TOC ticket fronts continue exist, them to), simply offered a split ticketing engine themselves.

The money that would be "lost" is increasingly lost anyway, and we'd get better ticketing statistics that aren't distorted by splits.
We'd also be able to see what fares are entirely useless and then remove them from the system.

 

[MatthewHutton]

I'd prefer that the National Rail booking system (and if TOC ticket fronts continue exist, them to), simply offered a split ticketing engine themselves.

The money that would be "lost" is increasingly lost anyway, and we'd get better ticketing statistics that aren't distorted by splits.
We'd also be able to see what fares are entirely useless and then remove them from the system.

I think the routes where split ticketing happens the general price should probably just be lowered accordingly.

 

[ChilliSauce]

I'd prefer that the National Rail booking system (and if TOC ticket fronts continue exist, them to), simply offered a split ticketing engine themselves.

I believe if the fare calculation worked correctly then a single ticket from A -> C should always be cheaper than a couple of tickets going from A-> B & B -> C.

As example if the criteria between Peak and Off Peak was 09.30am you would expect a ticket from London to Glasgow on the 07.30am to cost more than on the 08.30 and more than travelling on the 09.30 for the simple reason more of the complete end-to-end journey would of been undertaken at Peak rate given the earlier departure froma London.

The DB fare model might also have some merit in the UK in that in Germany you pay more to travel on IC/ICE services (faster, greater comfort) compared to Regional services.

I.e. if the customer is happy to travel in 2+3 seating on basically an "All Stations" Euston to Liverpool (via Northampton) service for a cheaper fare compared to a faster more expensive IC then that is the travellers choice.

 

[stevieinselby]

I think the routes where split ticketing happens the general price should probably just be lowered accordingly.

From what I have seen, there are three principal reasons for split ticketing to give a cheaper option than through tickets:

• Stringing together 2 or more day return tickets for a journey that only has period returns
• Where the quota for cheap advance fares on the full journey has been sold but there are still cheap advances available for some sections
• Where there is no advance fare for the full journey, but there are advances for some sections

The first is a definite anomaly that could do with being tidied up – it has always struck me as a bit anachronistic that the railways think people won't make a journey of more than 50 miles and return the same day. Sure, if you want the flexibility to return any time within a month then you can pay more for that privilege, but if I'm travelling out and back the same day then I don't see why I should be made to pay for a benefit that I don't want or need.

The second is more a consequence of everyone being bullied into buying advance tickets for most of the time. I don't know how much scope there is or could be within the system to have flexibility in the way that quotas are allocated, so that you wouldn't get this kind of situation, but I suspect it would be very complicated to make it work.

The DB fare model might also have some merit in the UK in that in Germany you pay more to travel on IC/ICE services (faster, greater comfort) compared to Regional services.

I.e. if the customer is happy to travel in 2+3 seating on basically an "All Stations" Euston to Liverpool (via Northampton) service for a cheaper fare compared to a faster more expensive IC then that is the travellers choice.

That already happens on a lot of routes where there are competing operators, eg Euston to Birmingham has open fares for Any Permitted and LNR/WMR only, so people who are happy to travel on the slower and more basic trains can save on average about 40% of the fare. Similar situations occur on a number of other routes. Where it gets tricky is where the same operator provides both the intercity and local services (eg GWR and GA services out of London), where the current ticketing rules allow flexible tickets to be restricted to particular routes or particular operators only, but I don't know of any way that they could be restricted to certain services within an operator only, eg London to Ipswich Route: Stopping Shenfield – but then would that preclude someone getting a stopping train to Chelmsford and changing to an intercity?

With the disappearance of TOCs as we know them likely to come in the next few years, there would definitely be merit in GBR having a way to designate premium trains and cheap trains and have some tickets only valid on the cheap trains.

 

[JonathanH]

From what I have seen, there are three principal reasons for split ticketing to give a cheaper option than through tickets:

• Stringing together 2 or more day return tickets for a journey that only has period returns
• Where the quota for cheap advance fares on the full journey has been sold but there are still cheap advances available for some sections
• Where there is no advance fare for the full journey, but there are advances for some sections

A fourth reason is the way off-peak / peak times are organised, which is something it would be complex to do something about without easements. For example, for example, with a blanket 0930 restriction, splitting at the point the journey reaches that time may be cheaper.

The fifth is passing into an area with cheaper fares, for example a former PTE area.

 

[Lewisham2221]

Isn't it time for a complete overhaul of the ticketing system ?

There has to be something fundamentally wrong with a system that when a traveller buys a consecative bundle of tickets (split tickets) rather than 1 ticket for the complete journey that the overall fare is less.

And removal of Delay Repay on cheaper tickets may very well be appropriate .. i.e. you have chosen to purchase a cheap ticket so as a consequence delay repay does not apply.. Simply the punter pays the low price and takes their chances.

If however you were to purchase a full price anytime ticket then Delay Relay does apply. And improve that delay repay to 50% after 15 minutes of delay..

Any major overhaul would almost certainly involve either a huge increase in subsidy, significant fare increases, or removal/restriction of flexibility. Essentially, any overhaul/reform will see significant opposition, and thus the status quo will be maintained until somebody has the balls to be extremely unpopular.

 

[yorkie]

Isn't it time for a complete overhaul of the ticketing system ?

The DfT is in the process of doing this, by removing Off Peak and replacing them with "Flex" tickets, which enables surge pricing at busy times e.g. when sporting fixtures and other events are taking place.

There has to be something fundamentally wrong with a system that when a traveller buys a consecative bundle of tickets (split tickets) rather than 1 ticket for the complete journey that the overall fare is less.

The lower priced tickets are likely to increase in price in any shake-up which results in any sort of normalisation of fares.

And removal of Delay Repay on cheaper tickets may very well be appropriate .. i.e. you have chosen to purchase a cheap ticket so as a consequence delay repay does not apply.. Simply the punter pays the low price and takes their chances.

If however you were to purchase a full price anytime ticket then Delay Relay does apply. And improve that delay repay to 50% after 15 minutes of delay..

I can't see that happening.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Feb 2026 ==

I think the routes where split ticketing happens the general price should probably just be lowered accordingly.

The DfT are keen to increase the revenue paid per passenger, not decrease it, so any change in this area will see the lower priced fares increase.

A fourth reason is the way off-peak / peak times are organised, which is something it would be complex to do something about without easements. For example, for example, with a blanket 0930 restriction, splitting at the point the journey reaches that time may be cheaper.

The fifth is passing into an area with cheaper fares, for example a former PTE area.

And this is why you can't have both "simple" restrictions and also remove splitting opportunities.

The fundamental problem is that there is no palatable solution, without an acceptance that some fares should reduce and this may require increased subsidy, which won't be forthcoming.

 

[JonathanH]

Essentially, any overhaul/reform will see significant opposition

The overhaul / reform happening right now is seeing some opposition, but the reality is that there is not enough groundswell to push it back.

For example, the Project Oval move to single leg pricing and Contactless with some different peak times has caused some letters to MPs and a bit of complaint, but it is very unlikely to be rolled back.

the status quo will be maintained until somebody has the balls to be extremely unpopular

Change is happening, but the idea that it will remove all anomalies is not happening. With split ticket websites, such as the forum's booking engine, and Trainline, some of those can be addressed. Removing the sources of complexity mentioned in this thread is not really possible on a complex network.

 

[Lewisham2221]

The overhaul / reform happening right now is seeing some opposition, but the reality is that there is not enough groundswell to push it back.

For example, the Project Oval move to single leg pricing and Contactless with some different peak times has caused some letters to MPs and a bit of complaint, but it is very unlikely to be rolled back.

Change is happening, but the idea that it will remove all anomalies is not happening. With split ticket websites, such as the forum's booking engine, and Trainline, some of those can be addressed. Removing the sources of complexity mentioned in this thread is not really possible on a complex network.

I'd say what's happening now is closer to tweaking the existing system rather than a complete overhaul. Of course, over a long enough time period, with enough tweaks, you eventually end up with an overhauled system, but you'll never please everyone.

 

[cf111]

I'd prefer that the National Rail booking system (and if TOC ticket fronts continue exist, them to), simply offered a split ticketing engine themselves.

The money that would be "lost" is increasingly lost anyway, and we'd get better ticketing statistics that aren't distorted by splits.
We'd also be able to see what fares are entirely useless and then remove them from the system.

The platform Scotrail use offers split ticketing as a default for every flow. For example an open return between Fort William and Glasgow Queen Street with a Highland railcard is about 30p more expensive than a Fort William-Dalmuir open return with singles for the Dalmur-GLQ leg added on to each journey, and that's what the app shows you as the cheapest fare.

 

[Bevan Price]

Dft and Treasury need to learn the lessons of history. From the early 1960s onwards, there were several large fare increases. But, these lost enough traffic to make the deficit increase rather than decrease......

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'd prefer that the National Rail booking system (and if TOC ticket fronts continue exist, them to), simply offered a split ticketing engine themselves.

The money that would be "lost" is increasingly lost anyway, and we'd get better ticketing statistics that aren't distorted by splits.
We'd also be able to see what fares are entirely useless and then remove them from the system.

To be honest I think Advance fares should be sold split by default, i.e. only priced per vehicle journey. This would keep things much simpler. The booking engine would just issue multiple tickets, one for each leg. This looks silly when you have a pile of orange cardboard, but if it's e-tickets your phone (or the PDF) formats them nicely together and each has its own barcode (so you can go out and back in the gateline at an interchange station without having to beg staff for it and without silly staff telling you it's break of journey as sometimes happens) and each shows your departure time, coach and seat clearly rather than having to go into an itinerary to find it.

On the rare occasions I use Advances 99% of the time doing this seems to produce a cheaper fare anyway because across multiple TOCs the quotas don't line up.

With regard to splits within a vehicle journey, the railway was going to fix this by changing how quotas work and issue the "split" on one ticket, and it needs to go ahead and do that.

Otherwise I'd go for single fare pricing but also offer day returns at twice the relevant single for those who prefer. For a period return buy two singles, reducing re-use fraud risk. As per the Project Oval area. It's a bit less convenient but unless the railway can get on top of scanning it probably saves a fortune in fraud - see also the refunds issue.

You'd never get rid of all anomalies, but that would be genuinely simpler and avoid people being overcharged when they buy from TOC sites that don't do splitting in the way Trainsplit etc do.

Also a bit of renaming. Anytime becomes Flex. Advance becomes Value (Non Flex and the likes are misleading as in airline terms they are a semi-flexible product, while Advance is itself misleading because people think any ticket bought in advance is an Advance, plus often they're sold not very much in advance). (Super) Off Peak goes back to (Super) Saver. The new names were meant to be simple but they actually imply things they aren't. The old names were brands people largely knew.