Rationalising Railcards

[JohnofWessex]

There are 9 different railcards ..........

While the basic reduction they offer is the same I understand that there are some differences in when the reductions apply

And the price for a year is the same

Now why cant they be rationalised?

So you have a 'railcard' ticket

And some of the benefits could be standardised eg my senior railcard costs as much as a two together BUT is only valid for me

 

[JonathanH]

Now why cant they be rationalised?

If they were rationalised, they would need to level out at the worst features of each railcard. Fairly simple really, and an obvious reason to be careful what you wish for.

 

[Manutd1999]

I've advocated for this before - simplify the system and replace all railcards with one national card which gives a standard 33% discount.

You could then make it available to different groups at different prices (eg, maybe free for under 18s and similar to current £35/yr prices for under 30s and pensioners). You could even make it available to people outside those select groups at a higher price (maybe £50-100 per month?), with the aim of replacing flexi season tickets altogether.

Some groups would lose out, notably Two Together and Family railcard users, but I fail to see much justification for these anyway - why should a family or two people travelling together pay less than a solo traveller?

Mayoral and city regions could then have the own regional discounts and cards if they wanted, integrated with the local transport systems.

 

[JonathanH]

Some groups would lose out, notably Two Together and Family railcard users, but I fail to see much justification for these anyway - why should a family or two people travelling together pay less than a solo traveller?

The cost of road travel is the same for one passenger as for a family. The idea is to bring the family or two person cost down to a level which competes with that.

Each railcard has targeted discounts to achieve a particular outcome. Those discounts have always seemed reasonably focused to me, although I think that it could be reasonably justified for the Senior Railcard to have the South East 'not before off peak fares are valid' restriction applied nationwide.

 

[Russel]

The cost of road travel is the same for one passenger as for a family. The idea is to bring the family or two person cost down to a level which competes with that.

I agree in principal, but the reality, outside of subsidised PTE areas is very different, even with an F&F railcard the car generally works out a cheaper option.

For example, me, my partner and child are visiting Stratford Upon Avon tomorrow from Lichfield, by train it's around £25, by car it'll be around £15 max in petrol, not factoring in parking as I'd have pay to park at the station if I got the train anyway.

 

[brad465]

I doubt you could rationalise all of them into one, but some of them I think could be merged and become something like "Concessions Railcard", which could merge, 16-25, 26-30, Senior, Network and Veterans into one, where applicants would have to provide details of which applies to them (similar to now), but all on the same form and resultant railcard, while streamlining restrictions where there are minor differences. 16-17 saver, F&F, Disabled and TT would be too complex to rationalise, given their eligibility criteria and different benefits from each, but I think merging the other six would still achieve a lot.

 

[stadler]

There are 9 different railcards ..........

While the basic reduction they offer is the same I understand that there are some differences in when the reductions apply

And the price for a year is the same

Now why cant they be rationalised?

So you have a 'railcard' ticket

And some of the benefits could be standardised eg my senior railcard costs as much as a two together BUT is only valid for me

There are a lot more than 9 railcard types available. I count at least 24 railcards that are currently available. There may well be even more that i have missed.

• 16-17 Saver (50%) (£35.00 1year)
• 16-25 Railcard (33%) (£35.00 1year OR £80.00 3year)
• 26-30 Railcard (33%) (£35.00 1year)
• Annual Gold Card (33%) (£0.00 with annual season)
• Cambrian Railcard (33%) (£20.00 1year)
• Cotswold Railcard (33%) (£12.50 1year)
• Dales Railcard (33%) (£15.00 1year)
• Devon & Cornwall Gold Card (33%) (£0.00 with annual season)
• Devon & Cornwall Railcard (33%) (£13.00 1year)
• Disabled Persons Railcard (33%) (£20.00 1year OR £54.00 3year)
• Esk Valley Railcard (33%) (£15.00 1year)
• Family & Friends Railcard (33%) (£35.00 1year OR £80.00 3year)
• Heart of Wales Railcard (33%) (£20.00 1year)
• Highland Railcard (50%) (£15.00 1year)
• HM Forces Railcard (33%) (£21.00 1year)
• Island Line Resident Card (40%) (£5.00 1year)
• Job Centre Plus Travel Discount Card (50%) (£0.00 3months)
• Network Railcard (33%) (£35.00 1year)
• Pembrokeshire Railcard (33%) (£20.00 1year)
• Senior Railcard (33%) (£35.00 1year OR £80.00 3year)
• Two Together Railcard (33%) (£35.00 1year)
• Valleys Senior Railcard (50%) (£20.00 1year)
• Valleys Student Railcard (50%) (£20.00 1year)
• Veterans Railcard (33%) (£35.00 1year OR £80.00 3year)

Personally i would prefer that we just simply scrapped all railcards and reduced all of our train fares by 33% at the same time. That would be the simplest option and would make cheaper fares available to everyone. The current railcard system is a mess and i would like to see it replaced by a fare reduction.

 

[flitwickbeds]

by train it's around £25, by car it'll be around £15 max in petrol,

But there are also things you can attempt to quantify - insurance, road tax, wear and tear on the vehicle and lease costs if you have that - as well as things which cannot necessarily be easily quantified - the cost of buying the car in the first place, cost of learning, cost of storage, your time lost while driving...

 

[AlterEgo]

The likely reason there probably isn’t one national railcard (or that fares are all reduced by a third) is because the railway would lose money, unlike the situation where the railway can currently segment and target discounts.

 

[xotGD]

But there are also things you can attempt to quantify - insurance, road tax, wear and tear on the vehicle and lease costs if you have that - as well as things which cannot necessarily be easily quantified - the cost of buying the car in the first place, cost of learning, cost of storage, your time lost while driving...

The majority of these are subject costs that you've paid irrespective of whether you drive to your destination or leave the car at home and take the train.

It is only the marginal cost that should be considered, which is predominantly fuel and parking.

 

[deltic]

I wonder if there is a case for abolishing all the regional railcards and having a national network railcard that is valid for discounts on off-peak tickets but with evening peak restrictions leaving major cities. Problem now is that regional and Intercity services are busier on a Saturday than at weekday peak periods and offering more people discounts will just exacerbate that situation.

 

[flitwickbeds]

The majority of these are subject costs that you've paid irrespective of whether you drive to your destination or leave the car at home and take the train.

It is only the marginal cost that should be considered, which is predominantly fuel and parking.

I understand that argument but I still think they need to be considered when doing a true comparison. If the journeys you make can always be done by public transport, then you could argue it would always be cheaper to take the £25 train over the £15 petrol, because you wouldn't have had those additional costs.

 

[The Ham]

The majority of these are subject costs that you've paid irrespective of whether you drive to your destination or leave the car at home and take the train.

It is only the marginal cost that should be considered, which is predominantly fuel and parking.

It depends on if you own a car or own enough cars.

For example, if you need to own a second car to make a journey twice or even three times a week which you could otherwise do by train and owning one car it makes the cost of those other factors come into play.

I've previously said that in theory an increase in WFH (even if people have to go to the office 3 times a week) cos reduce the need for a couple of family to own a second car.

Person 1 works in the office Monday to Wednesday
Person 2 works in the office Wednesday to Friday

Therefore the need to have a second car for the one day of overlap of working in the office and maybe some leisure activities is very much reduced from needing a car 5 days a week.

Given that the average cost of car ownership is over £3,600 per year, even someone paying half that average (£1,800) is still going to be sacked to do a decent amount of travel before they get close to that value.

With a Railcard that amount of travel increases.

I think that there's potentially an option where you reduce all rail tickets and at the same time reduce the number of Railcards but also the amount of discount.

For instance, reduce all off peak travel by 15% and then have a single card which gives you a further 20% off.

That single card would cost £100 for the year for an individual and £150 for two people (both named and identified on their card)
if it applies the discount at any time. Up to 4 children can travel with each adult with a card with a 50% discount on their travel (removes the need for family Railcards).

Then you apply discounts to the above price:
- off peak only discounts 50% discount
- under 18 50% discount
- 18-26 30% discount
- 27-30 15% discount
- over 66 30% discount
- buying for 3 years 25% discount
- with a session ticket half the cost off the single person version - applied before any other discounts, basically makes the single off peak version free, but allows a second adult to be added for £50

Disabled Railcard you can make 70% off but has to be the +1 version to help with the cost of a career travelling with them (however unlike others this doesn't have to be a named person, just that they have to travel with them) and then apply any of the above discounts which would apply (making the off-peak version £22.5 but the anytime version £45).

The regional Railcards are likely to cost more to operate than they generate in income from sales of the cards, it's potential better just to offer further discounts for residents of those areas to the above. Whist that would give then a wider benefit than they currently have (it being national rather than local) it would likely reduce the need for people to drive as much and so actually provide wider benefits to the local area.

Jobcentre cards would still be required, but could just be a 3 month version of the above anytime card and issued for free (would enable them with their costs in starting work not just in finding work).

HM forces could be issued for free by the MOD (it's hardly going to be a significant change in rail use and saves a level of effort on the part of the railway) to all personal giving them off-peak travel discounts, but offer an upgrade to extend to anytime and to cover another adult.

For example, HM forces card:
- £0 for the personal and up to 4 children, off peak only - issued annually by email (probably an MOD email) for use on a smartphone
- £20 for the personal and 1 other adult and up to 4 children each, off peak only
- £25 for the personal and up to 4 children, at anytime
- £45 for the personal and 1 other adult and up to 4 children each, at anytime

The application for the above could be online using a login linked to the email which issues them the Railcard and they just put in the other person's email for them to get their card on their smartphone if they opt for adding a second person (even if that's a parent).

Yes overall it may cost the railways a bit compared with what it currently does, but with a streamlined application process and the likely increase in rail use the overall costs are likely to be limited.

I'm sure I've overlooked something, but am happy to review if others want to highlight the thing(s) I've overlooked.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Some groups would lose out, notably Two Together and Family railcard users, but I fail to see much justification for these anyway - why should a family or two people travelling together pay less than a solo traveller?

Because driving costs the same (roughly) regardless of how many people travel. However I'd remove these Railcards and improve GroupSave in its place, basically giving 33% discount and kids for 2 quid (or similar, or maybe just 33% off child fares too) for any group travelling together of any number bar 1. Those wishing to have that travelling alone would purchase a Railcard of the relevant type.

 

[Highlander1]

My opinion is they should be scrapped altogether and amount of money saved be used to reduce fares across the board, perhaps in the region of 15%. I think it's discriminatory to favour certain age groups or family dynamics. Why does a multi-millionaire pensioner get a discount when a struggling middle aged single person on minimum wage pay full price?

Failing that all rail cards should have the same restrictions in terms validity periods? Again the student is discriminated against if they want to travel at peak times but no such restrictions apply to some other cards.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

There's certainly room for some rationalisation. My particular bugbear is that for the 16-25 Railcard we're told at https://www.16-25railcard.co.uk/

£12 minimum fare applies Monday to Friday between 04:30 and 09:59

while the 26-30 Railcard tells us in the equivalent place on https://www.26-30railcard.co.uk/

£12 minimum fare applies on morning peak

These impose very nearly the same restriction: to my mind, the benefit to enforcement of RPIs only having to remember one set of rules for (loose term) young people's Railcards would outweigh any loss from customers whose journeys changed price.

 

[AlterEgo]

I understand that argument but I still think they need to be considered when doing a true comparison. If the journeys you make can always be done by public transport

True of basically no car owner. People have cars for essential use cases which cannot be delivered by public transport. Therefore the proper comparison is marginal costs which are relatively small. Even with diesel at 170p a litre and driving a Range Rover most of my trips are cheaper and more convenient than using public transport. Our car exists to get my wife to work and my daughter to nursery and swimming lessons. It’s on the drive.

 

[Haywain]

The cost of road travel is the same for one passenger as for a family. The idea is to bring the family or two person cost down to a level which competes with that.

I think it's about bringing fares to a level that *better* competes with the cost of going by car.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There's certainly room for some rationalisation. My particular bugbear is that for the 16-25 Railcard we're told at https://www.16-25railcard.co.uk/ while the 26-30 Railcard tells us in the equivalent place on https://www.26-30railcard.co.uk/

These impose very nearly the same restriction: to my mind, the benefit to enforcement of RPIs only having to remember one set of rules for (loose term) young people's Railcards would outweigh any loss from customers whose journeys changed price.

It still astonishes me that they kept those separate rather than just creating a 16-30.

 

[JonathanH]

It still astonishes me that they kept those separate rather than just creating a 16-30.

Should they have removed the July-August concession for the 16-25 group? There really isn't any grounds for it to be available to the 26-30 group.

 

[William3000]

There are 9 different railcards ..........

While the basic reduction they offer is the same I understand that there are some differences in when the reductions apply

And the price for a year is the same

Now why cant they be rationalised?

So you have a 'railcard' ticket

And some of the benefits could be standardised eg my senior railcard costs as much as a two together BUT is only valid for me

Yes but a TwoTogether is ONLY valid for me if I’m travelling with one specific person. So it’d not the same as having two cards.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Mar 2026 ==

The biggest issue I have is the geographical element. The Network Card area (and the Gold Card area) only cover part of the country. Why for example is it possible with a gold card to get 1/3 discount travelling off peak between Stafford and Worcester but not between Doncaster and Grimsby. A national 1/3 off would be good and would body rail travel outside the South East.

 

[flitwickbeds]

True of basically no car owner. People have cars for essential use cases which cannot be delivered by public transport. Therefore the proper comparison is marginal costs which are relatively small. Even with diesel at 170p a litre and driving a Range Rover most of my trips are cheaper and more convenient than using public transport. Our car exists to get my wife to work and my daughter to nursery and swimming lessons. It’s on the drive.

Right, which is why I said if ALL the journeys you make can be done using public transport, then it's probably cheaper overall to never drive even though the ticket price would be more expensive than the fuel price.

Clearly if you need a car for some regular journeys anyway which can't be done on buses and/or trains, then it does makes sense to only compare fuel price to ticket price.

But in the bigger picture comparison I believe you do need to take into account all the costs of car ownership - including difficult to quantify costs such as the price of a driveway/garage as part of mortgage/rent payments - vs just jumping on a train with zero other costs beyond the ticket fare.

And this is of course before we even begin thinking about the wider societal and global costs and benefits.

 

[RailWonderer]

My opinion is they should be scrapped altogether and amount of money saved be used to reduce fares across the board, perhaps in the region of 15%. I think it's discriminatory to favour certain age groups or family dynamics. Why does a multi-millionaire pensioner get a discount when a struggling middle aged single person on minimum wage pay full price?

Failing that all rail cards should have the same restrictions in terms validity periods? Again the student is discriminated against if they want to travel at peak times but no such restrictions apply to some other cards.

I agree but at least young people still get discounts on peak travel even with the minimum fare, the network railcard doesn't allow any discounts on peak travel. They want to keep the system complicated unless it means more groups will have to pay more in the name of simplification.

The biggest issue I have is the geographical element. The Network Card area (and the Gold Card area) only cover part of the country. Why for example is it possible with a gold card to get 1/3 discount travelling off peak between Stafford and Worcester but not between Doncaster and Grimsby. A national 1/3 off would be good and would body rail travel outside the South East.

They should merge all the regional railcards into a national. Gradual simplification is the right way to go.

 

[AlterEgo]

Right, which is why I said if ALL the journeys you make can be done using public transport, then it's probably cheaper overall to never drive even though the ticket price would be more expensive than the fuel price.

That would be true of basically no car owner. So it’s not a relevant consideration. I cannot think of anyone who retains a car when they don’t actually need one. They’re expensive and a responsibility.

 

[Haywain]

It still astonishes me that they kept those separate rather than just creating a 16-30.

Or an 18-30 Railcard. The 16-17 part is barely needed.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

. The 16-17 part is barely needed.

Now there's the 16-17 saver.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Now there's the 16-17 saver.

Which is extremely useful for students because uniquely ( I think ) amongst all the multitude of publicly available railcards it allows a discount on season tickets.

 

[flitwickbeds]

That would be true of basically no car owner. So it’s not a relevant consideration. I cannot think of anyone who retains a car when they don’t actually need one. They’re expensive and a responsibility.

Of course. But people might learn to drive and buy a car because they see headlines about the high price of rail fares, then only compare the ticket cost to the petrol price alone. If they could relatively easily make all their journeys by public transport alone, BUT only compare ticket to petrol, that is not a good comparison as they're not taking into account all the other costs of car ownership (including the cost of lessons in the first place)

 

[AlterEgo]

Of course. But people might learn to drive and buy a car because they see headlines about the high price of rail fares, then only compare the ticket cost to the petrol price alone.

That assumes they only want to replicate the journeys that they don’t already make by public transport (because the information they get about fares is from the news and not actually using it) by car, and then being stupid enough not to factor in the cost of buying the car as if it’s an irrelevance.

If they could relatively easily make all their journeys by public transport alone, BUT only compare ticket to petrol, that is not a good comparison as they're not taking into account all the other costs of car ownership (including the cost of lessons in the first place)

But nobody is doing this!

Do you drive?

 

[JonathanH]

The biggest issue I have is the geographical element. The Network Card area (and the Gold Card area) only cover part of the country. Why for example is it possible with a gold card to get 1/3 discount travelling off peak between Stafford and Worcester but not between Doncaster and Grimsby. A national 1/3 off would be good and would body rail travel outside the South East.

The justification for the Network Railcard is becoming increasingly thin with the extension on Contactless PAYG around London. The argument you present above could just as easily be seen as one for its abolishment rather than its extension.

I think we really do need to be careful what we wish for when it comes to seeking rationalisation of railcard offers.