-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Regulated Fares
- Thread starter AlterEgo
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
323235
Established Member
This may not be correct as its from the BBC (hardly the experts on rail) but this is what they say.
BBC News said:
That's highly simplified.
In the case of "long-distance Off-Peak fares" it's really that the fares (as in the price!) that the former Savers (SVR) fares is protected. But the conditions are not, they can make them so restricted that they are basically unusable.
In most cases, the SVR became the Off Peak, and indeed they even retain the same 3-letter code.
However it is not uncommon for SVRs to become SSRs or SORs, depending on the policy of the TOC at the time of so-called "Simplification".
For example, from York, the SVR fare was protected, this is now SSR. The SSR fare was abolished, and the SVR given the restrictions of the SSR, then re-named SSR. The old BVR then became the SVR. By doing it this way they were, technically, not breaking the law. But they certainly broke the spirit of the law with this 'workaround'. Bizarrely some TOCs/guards are unhappy when passengers do workarounds to by-pass restrictions. Funny that!
Some TOCs were far more sensible and recognised that the SVR was actually valid at any time (all non-London* SVRs were valid at any time under BR!) and re-named them SOR.
At the time of privatisation, the public were led to believe that fares that were, for non-London* journeys valid at any time would be protected, the reality has been quite different, sadly.
(* London plus surrounding locations including Stevenage, Milton Keynes, Reading, etc)
In the case of "long-distance Off-Peak fares" it's really that the fares (as in the price!) that the former Savers (SVR) fares is protected. But the conditions are not, they can make them so restricted that they are basically unusable.
In most cases, the SVR became the Off Peak, and indeed they even retain the same 3-letter code.
However it is not uncommon for SVRs to become SSRs or SORs, depending on the policy of the TOC at the time of so-called "Simplification".
For example, from York, the SVR fare was protected, this is now SSR. The SSR fare was abolished, and the SVR given the restrictions of the SSR, then re-named SSR. The old BVR then became the SVR. By doing it this way they were, technically, not breaking the law. But they certainly broke the spirit of the law with this 'workaround'. Bizarrely some TOCs/guards are unhappy when passengers do workarounds to by-pass restrictions. Funny that!
Some TOCs were far more sensible and recognised that the SVR was actually valid at any time (all non-London* SVRs were valid at any time under BR!) and re-named them SOR.
At the time of privatisation, the public were led to believe that fares that were, for non-London* journeys valid at any time would be protected, the reality has been quite different, sadly.
(* London plus surrounding locations including Stevenage, Milton Keynes, Reading, etc)
Details of how fares are regulated can be found in appendix C (from page 35 & onwards) of this document:
http://webarchive.nationalarchives....espolicyreview/faresreviewconclusions2003.pdf
http://webarchive.nationalarchives....espolicyreview/faresreviewconclusions2003.pdf
Paul Kelly
Verified Rep - BR Fares
RJ
Established Member
Including, but not limited to;
Regulated:
7DS/7TS - Seven Day Seasons including Travelcards
SVS/SVR - Off Peak single/returns
SDS/SDR - but only when no SVS/SVR exists for the same flow
Unregulated:
SOS/SOR - Anytime Single/Return
CDS/CDR - Off Peak Day Single/Return
SDS/SDR - when SVS/SVR exists for the same flow
Advance
Super Off Peak
First Class fares including seasons
*Codes may vary between TOCs, the ticket types are what's significant.
What was the SVS/SVR at privatisation, yes. Of course these fares may now be SSS/SSR and SOS/SVS in some cases, depending on the policy of the relevant TOC at the time fares were made more complicated at so-called "Simplification" (ATOC style) in September 2008.
But those 'minimum standards' set by the SRA are considerably worse than the situation under BR. For example, Savers did not have peak restrictions unless you passed London, Reading, Watford, Luton or Stevenage. Return portions of Savers were always unrestricted.
Paul Kelly
Verified Rep - BR Fares
Is it even possible that perhaps the SRA did not realise that most Savers were historically unrestricted when they were defining these regulations? Could they have been blinded by a London-centric viewpoint? Or perhaps had the wool pulled over their eyes by the TOCs?
LexyBoy
Established Member
Ah, so that's why SOS/SOR are so expensive compared to Seasons...
Can someone explain the history of the Saver? I remember reading that it was first introduced for a small number of flows on the WCML in the mid-80s and was extended across the country due to the success of this trial. IIRC the first examples were very much more restricted than the later Savers (either quota controlled or only certain services allowed, cant recall). Is this roughly right? What happened next seems quite a big jump from being a trialled to being a nationwide regulated fare within a decade or so.
So until simplification the Saver fare was actually regulated but after simplication the only requirment was that the cheapest walk-on fare be limited to RPI plus one percent? This has resulted indrectly in that what was the Saver is now not a regulated fare in all cases. The TOCs though justify these increases by introducing a range of even cheaper advance fares.
LexyBoy
Established Member
The protections described by Indigo2 would still apply to these fares though, so they are still effectively Savers. edit: sorry, didn't digest your post properly. I see what you mean, it's pretty confusing (and no doubt allows the regulated fare to be rather more restricted than the SVR)
What FGW and others have done is to transfer the SVR to a SSR, making the restrictions as tight as they're allowed to get away with, whilst keeping the older, more permissive restrictions on the SVR (but bumping up the price as much as they want, since it's now the SSR which is the regulated fare). The SSR can then be marketed as an exciting, new, money saving option.
It's all marketing, and probably works pretty well on those who don't use trains too often (and thus don't spot what's going on). After all, it's super off peak, and therefore must be better value.
But as far as I know before simplification they would not have been able to hike the price of the Saver. Super Saver fares were available but these were cheaper than the Saver. What's interesting is that back in 2006 when FGW scrapped the Super Saver it was claiemd that it was done to make things simpler as there were too many different ticket types on offer. They introduced a new range of rock bottom advance fares at the same time. Just a few years later though, simplification allows them to hike the price of the Saver by introducing a new Super Saver. I don't think they would have been allowed to do that before simplification.
It is worse now because Super Off Peaks from fGW have worse restrictions than Savers did when they were the cheapest fare. However, they could have done this before simplification but chose not too. fGW didn't impose the maximum amount of restrictions (as in SRA rules above) on Savers that they could have done.
On East Coast it is slightly more easier to understand as the Saver (regulated) was renamed Super Off Peak and the Business Saver (unregulated) was renamed Off Peak. The Business Saver always had more relaxed restrictions.
Virgin is the main long distance company from London not to have transferred the regulated fare to a Super Off Peak Return. For some reason, they haven't got a middle tier walk on fare. So on a comparison of Off Peak fares, Virgin looks much cheaper than, say East Coast, but you should really be comparing it to EC's Super Off Peak.
Paul Kelly
Verified Rep - BR Fares
Even though the restrictions on the new FGW super off-peak returns can be tight, they're not as tight as the old supersaver, because they are now governed by the regulations for savers. E.g. they have to be available on Fridays, and afternoon restrictions out of London cannot be applied from stations west of Reading.
I would describe the situation in general by saying that the former saver fare is still regulated, but since simplification it is now called by a variety of different names now depending on the operator and flow. I do wonder how the Department for Transport keep track of this though in their computerised system for monitoring that the regulations are kept to. And even if it actually checks the restrictions at all, or just monitors the percentage increase in the price.
I would describe the situation in general by saying that the former saver fare is still regulated, but since simplification it is now called by a variety of different names now depending on the operator and flow. I do wonder how the Department for Transport keep track of this though in their computerised system for monitoring that the regulations are kept to. And even if it actually checks the restrictions at all, or just monitors the percentage increase in the price.
They couldn't have hiked the cost of the Saver though could they? If they had imposed the maximum restrictions on the Savers then anyone travelling after 3 PM would have been forced to buy an Anytime fare and that may well have pushed things too fare and resulted in people not using the train. What I still find strange though is the way in 2006 FGW claimed that they were scrapping the Super Saver to make things simpler. As they have now reintroduced this fare I'm not convinced.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
But they are more restricted in time than the old Super Saver was. They were almost certainly not banned between 3 PM and 7 PM.
It isn't though. The TOCs first removed Super Savers and then later reintroduced them at the same price the Saver was and hiked the Saver fare. The only regulation is that the cheapest walk-on fare be regulated. Back in the days of the Super Saver the Saver was still regulated but the Super Saver was even cheaper.
Last edited:
LexyBoy
Established Member
My point was that, as I understand it, the current Super Saver (SSR) is the old Saver, but with more restrictions and a super added to make it more fabulous. The regulation is not based on the name of the ticket but rather the restrictions, and there are maximum permitted levels of restriction. In most cases, the old Savers were more generous than mandated, so the TOCs were free to tighten up the restrictions on these fares (i.e. to what are now the Super Off Peaks) however if they had just done this, it would make them look very bad, so they introduced a new ticket, the Off-Peak, with the same restrictions as the old Saver, but a higher price.
The point being that its the Super Off Peak which is the regulated fare, and the Off-Peak merely shares the (more generous than necessary) restrictions of the old Saver. If FGW wished they would be free to scrap the SVR and give you the choice of SSR or SOR.
Does that make sense? Even I'm confused now :-?
PS: I may have got the timing of the Saver/Off-Peak renaming mixed up with the SVR>SSR shuffle, but hopefully it makes some sense.
So you think Savers were too cheap? The Super Off Peak is unaffordable on some routes never mind the Off Peak.
LexyBoy
Established Member
BTW, I wasn't trying to suggest that FGW aren't/weren't trying all the tricks to get ticket prices pushed up! 
Think of the "Off-Peak" as being a "Semi-Saver", "Near-peak" or perhaps "Mosttime" ticket. Doesn't sound quite as good though.
Think of the "Off-Peak" as being a "Semi-Saver", "Near-peak" or perhaps "Mosttime" ticket. Doesn't sound quite as good though.
LexyBoy
Established Member
Certainly not! I was referring to them being more generous with the time restrictions than they had to be, which is why FGW could play three cups with the fares.
WillPS
Established Member
At least most people the WCML serve have direct competition from London Midland (or East Coast further North).
fGW screwed up a few years ago by trying to impose afternoon restrictions on Savers west of Newbury and Didcot. I noticed this was illegal according to SRA rules and complained to fGW and Barry S Doe. This change was removed a few months later. Would that have happened if no one noticed?
LexyBoy
Established Member
Worked well as in:
a) Simple to understand and allowing passengers to get good value travel; or
b) Raked in loadsamoney for a small number of people in a private company?
Not true. There are many off peak tickets valid out of Euston between those times. What you say is likely to be true for only (a) specific flow(s).
shinkansen1966
Member
How did we end up with both regulated and unregulated ?
Either have all or nothing. Partly explains the dog's dinner of our current fares structure.
Either have all or nothing. Partly explains the dog's dinner of our current fares structure.
Yes, I should have been more specific. For example, London to Lancaster and further is valid throughout the evening peak.
RJ
Established Member
If you go fully unregulated then I expect certain TOCs would completely abolish off peak fares and say that if you want to travel without paying the full anytime fare then you should book in advance.
- Status