Revenue Protection at Brighton

[Minstral25]

It is part of a major project to build flats on the car park at the front of the station which changes the rear access arrangements.

Hopefully won't happen, in terms of the flats that is (19 stories high), but if they do the plan is to convert the station managers office into a ticket office, which could probably happen anyway.

 

[Jan Mayen]

Why does building flats at the front of Redhill station change access provision at the rear? And what's wrong with the current ticket office? (I don't know where the station managers office is, can anyone enlighten me, please?)

 

[JonathanH]

Why does building flats at the front of Redhill station change access provision at the rear?

It pays for the work.

 

[Minstral25]

Why does building flats at the front of Redhill station change access provision at the rear? And what's wrong with the current ticket office? (I don't know where the station managers office is, can anyone enlighten me, please?)

Because new flats are on the drop off area and part of car park at the front on the stations. So the back of the station will become the new drop off zone and taxi area, meaning need for more passengers through the rear entrance. Hence new protection.

 

[Jan Mayen]

Because new flats are on the drop off area and part of car park at the front on the stations. So the back of the station will become the new drop off zone and taxi area, meaning need for more passengers through the rear entrance. Hence new protection.

Now I understand. Thank you.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Jul 2024 ==

It pays for the work.

I see. Thank you.

 

[LCRTrainfan979]

I have just been reading through this forum, and I can give some notes about some points.

Closing stations just because they are close to other stations, for revenue protection purposes, is a bit harsh. Maybe I'm an old fashioned leftie, but I've always felt that the railways should put the customer first. Silly old me!

I agree with that. However, on top of that, closing Aldrington and/or Fishersgate would be an absolute nightmare. Unlike in the days of Dr Beeching, to close down a station (or a route for that matter) thesedays, a consultation is required, and from there it would have to be determined whether there is a business case for closing the station. Then it would have to finally be approved by high up government officials. In general, its a complicated process. There's a reason it took a whopping 14 years for Newhaven Marine station on the Seaford line to finally close, during which time, it only had a parliamentary service that passengers couldn't access, and as far as I know, that still runs as a Newhaven Harbour terminator (perhaps to keep up some route knowledge???). Because Aldrington and Fishersgate are both through services, this would be hard to enforce, so I suspect if fare evasion did become more of an issue, and it was determined that Aldrington and/or Fishersgate were the main cause, the likely solution would be to reduce them down to parliamentary services, perhaps with only a very tiny number of trains calling there, maybe just at peak times or early mornings and late evenings). That wouldn't eliminate the issue outright, but if you are de facto getting rid of 2 stations which cause the issue, that would do a lot for the issue.

Wouldn't delay repay apply in this case if you missed your connection because of the ticket checks and then them losing that revenue make them aware of the problem.

There weren't any checks between connecting passengers when I passed both ways on Saturday.

Something I have been worried about would be how the delay repay system would be able to identify the exact cause of a missed connection. Say if you had a 10 minute connection, and the West or East Coastway train was 5 minutes late, you spend 3 minutes in the queue going out, 3 minutes in the queue going in, and you missed the connection by 2 minutes as a result, would the system actually detect that was the issue if on their system, it showed that a connection was indeed possible if they can't include the queue in their system. Unless this becomes a permanent thing and systems are updated in due course, I could imagine this being a problem, and having the potential to lead to at least some people getting their claims rejected, unless you appeal it, which I have no idea how likely it is to actually work.

I was amazed a month ago to be checked twice on a Victoria to Bognor . Once by the OBS between London and Horsham and again by the OBs who took over at Horsham. The gates at Bognor, Barnham and Horsham were working after 21:00 but I did not see the OBS between trips on the return

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Jun 2024 ==

Chichester the gates were working on the main side but the 2 x agency staff obviously couldn’t be arsed so left the platform 2 exits wide gate open rendering the entire operation pointless

I have spoken to staff at some stations, and I suspect the policy may be at some stations, if there are no staff available for a ticket barrier, it is left open, and because one of those members of staff clearly couldn't be asked to walk over the footbridge or down the lift and through the subway, by that criteria, the gate had to be left open.

It only matters if you actually timetable trains with that 4 min connection with the new west coastway timetable in June Im not sure thats the case.
Of course what we really need is a low level Brighton Coastway station deconflicting the service with mainline services and allowing a through Southampton to Hastings service.

I have very recently been to Glasgow, where they have the two underground rail lines (obviously not to be confused with the subway), one under Glasgow Central and one under Glasgown Queen Street. Unfortunately for Brighton, those lines were built by design to have cross-Glasgow services, and were built in an era where that was more possible. However, connecting up the two lines would be possible, but extremely expensive, given on the East Coastway, you would need to have the tunnel mouth avoiding the London Road viaduct, and the line would need to quite deep level, in order to minimise disruption for Brighton during construction, given cut and cover lines are impossible today. You would also need to work out exactly where the line would then join up with the West Coastway line, based on where there is space for a tunnel mouth joining up with the existing line. Then you would need to likely rebuild Brighton to have two low level plaforms, which would likely require connections to the high level platforms, at least for London services. I'm not sure whether you would need to retain the high level platforms for Coastway services, given you could theretically divert them all through the tunnel, but then have a terminus shortly afterwards, e.g. using the loop platform 1 at Worthing for East Coastway services, and/or using some platforms at Lewes for terminating some trains from the West Coastway line. Ultimately, all of this stuff would cost an outrageous amount of money, which could be better spent elsewhere. Perhaps some money could be spent on improving Brighton station to perhaps have more ticket barriers available, and reduce the disadvantages of splitting the station as it seems they have done.

Overall, I just think that while the problem they are trying to solve at Brighton is genuine, it just creates more issues, and if there is disruption on one, but not all lines, it just makes it more inevitable that sooner or later more people will miss trains, and maybe that will lead to angry passengers hurling fowl language at those officers if they can see what should have been their train leaving the station just as they are in the queue to have their ticket thoroughly checked. Ultimately, there are many better solutions, such as perhaps more ticket checks which would ensure that people have the right tickets when leaving the station, and make detailed checked unneccessary. I personally haven't been to Brighton station myself since april (before these new checks), and there, I managed to easily cross over and make my connection from East to West Coastway. Having to go through a potentially long queue and in and out a ticket barrier just increases the risk that a connection ends up missed. Just looking at how smoothly SWR run their busy stations like Southampton Ctl by not trying to be insanely awkward around their tickets, this just makes southern a classic case of being a laughingstock among all operators, particularly if this ends up being introduced at more stations.

 

[paul1609]

I have very recently been to Glasgow, where they have the two underground rail lines (obviously not to be confused with the subway), one under Glasgow Central and one under Glasgown Queen Street. Unfortunately for Brighton, those lines were built by design to have cross-Glasgow services, and were built in an era where that was more possible. However, connecting up the two lines would be possible, but extremely expensive, given on the East Coastway, you would need to have the tunnel mouth avoiding the London Road viaduct, and the line would need to quite deep level, in order to minimise disruption for Brighton during construction, given cut and cover lines are impossible today. You would also need to work out exactly where the line would then join up with the West Coastway line, based on where there is space for a tunnel mouth joining up with the existing line. Then you would need to likely rebuild Brighton to have two low level plaforms, which would likely require connections to the high level platforms, at least for London services. I'm not sure whether you would need to retain the high level platforms for Coastway services, given you could theretically divert them all through the tunnel, but then have a terminus shortly afterwards, e.g. using the loop platform 1 at Worthing for East Coastway services, and/or using some platforms at Lewes for terminating some trains from the West Coastway line. Ultimately, all of this stuff would cost an outrageous amount of money, which could be better spent elsewhere. Perhaps some money could be spent on improving Brighton station to perhaps have more ticket barriers available, and reduce the disadvantages of splitting the station as it seems they have done.

Overall, I just think that while the problem they are trying to solve at Brighton is genuine, it just creates more issues, and if there is disruption on one, but not all lines, it just makes it more inevitable that sooner or later more people will miss trains, and maybe that will lead to angry passengers hurling fowl language at those officers if they can see what should have been their train leaving the station just as they are in the queue to have their ticket thoroughly checked. Ultimately, there are many better solutions, such as perhaps more ticket checks which would ensure that people have the right tickets when leaving the station, and make detailed checked unneccessary. I personally haven't been to Brighton station myself since april (before these new checks), and there, I managed to easily cross over and make my connection from East to West Coastway. Having to go through a potentially long queue and in and out a ticket barrier just increases the risk that a connection ends up missed. Just looking at how smoothly SWR run their busy stations like Southampton Ctl by not trying to be insanely awkward around their tickets, this just makes southern a classic case of being a laughingstock among all operators, particularly if this ends up being introduced at more stations.

The low level coastway suggestion was a bit tongue in cheek as I know we'd never get the same level of investment on the south coast thats continually made in the north and on the intercity routes from London to the North.
However engineering wise id suggest that Brighton Low level isnt quite as difficult as is made out. On leaving the London Rd Viaduct the east coastway line currently climbs up to get over the formation of the ex goods yard. If it instead dropped down I reckon it would be able to get under the Main Lines without too much difficulty. youd loose the Amec depot the other side of Montpellier Sidings and might need to slightly adjust the portal of the tunnel. otherwise you could easily fit in 8 car low level Coastlink Platforms accessed via a travelator alongside platform 7.
Id do away with the access from the coastlink line to the high level station instead relying on an expanded Hove station with a fourth platform
built on the ex carriage sidings.
Ive only done the cross Brighton trip once recently because of the closed football season but the new arrangements did have a coastway bypass manual ticket check on that occasion with no queuing.
I suspect that there will shortly be a "Trainsplit retail Advisor (fka as a moderator)" along shortly to move the posts to the Speculative Ideas forum.

 

[Sonic1234]

Something I have been worried about would be how the delay repay system would be able to identify the exact cause of a missed connection.

The automated Delay Repay system is unlikely to know about the revenue check and will deny the claim saying the connection was possible, meaning an appeal via customer relations.

Things will only change if the cost of Delay Repay and goodwill gestures due to missed connections becomes a significant cost (and gets picked up by management as being above the normal customer service costs).

Ironically, some more militant customers may end up taking GTR to court to get their (probably auto-denied) delay repay!

 

[LCRTrainfan979]

The automated Delay Repay system is unlikely to know about the revenue check and will deny the claim saying the connection was possible, meaning an appeal via customer relations.

Things will only change if the cost of Delay Repay and goodwill gestures due to missed connections becomes a significant cost (and gets picked up by management as being above the normal customer service costs).

Ironically, some more militant customers may end up taking GTR to court to get their (probably auto-denied) delay repay!

I would consider that slightly ironic under the current private operator. If you think about it, for southern, that "cost" would be them gaining more money from money that is not given out due to the claim being rejected. Obviously to goodwill, it is a cost, but financially, not really to GTR. To be fair though, that is a prospect though if people are having their claims rejected in high numbers, and people end up taking video footage of exactly what happens to take to court.

Overall though, although this isnt related to Southern, I would say delay repay isn't the best system, because I put in a delay repay with ScotRail after 2 trains in a row at Edinburgh bound for Helensburgh were cancelled, but although I put in the legs correctly, and claimed for ScotRail trains, my claim ultimately got turned down because those trains were appararently operated by LNER, which for that part of the journey, they were absolutely not. I have got an appeal going through after writing a statement, but its just a weakness of the whole system, and doing it automated isn't going to work out perfectlty in the long term, given more is likely to go wrong.

 

[OrangeJuice]

Just looking at how smoothly SWR run their busy stations like Southampton Ctl by not trying to be insanely awkward around their tickets, this just makes southern a classic case of being a laughingstock among all operators, particularly if this ends up being introduced at more stations.

Although recently in the last month or two I have been held up at Southampton exiting and entering the station to load up my Railcard or seen multiple child tickets rejected and long, long queues at the barriers particularly on platform 4 side. So it can be similarly frustrating waiting to change. However they haven't yet started forcing changing passengers to leave and re-enter the station so that's a positive!

 

[LCRTrainfan979]

Although recently in the last month or two I have been held up at Southampton exiting and entering the station to load up my Railcard or seen multiple child tickets rejected and long, long queues at the barriers particularly on platform 4 side. So it can be similarly frustrating waiting to change. However they haven't yet started forcing changing passengers to leave and re-enter the station so that's a positive!

To be fair, I can see why they want to check people's railcards, because that is in all honesty a genuine way of dodging some fares (if you are lucky enough to not get caught on the train and either given a penalty fare or have to pay the difference (depending on how nice the guard is)). Then again, thats a nationwide issue, not just for SWR or Southern, and I suspect the only way to resolve that issue would be to include a requirement to enter railcard details before you can get the discount, such as a full code or a qr code to scan at a ticket machine.

Ultimately though, now thinking about it, they fortuantely can't really segregate Southampton Ctl (thank god) because multiple operators use it, and there is the possiblity you can end up with a Southern and SWR sharing a platform. However, Brighton has different platforms for different services under normal circumstances, and although they are all owned by GTR, they are different sub brands, and they are allowed tickets like those "Southern only" or "Thameslink only" tickets, so different ticketing I suppose gives them the excuse to segregate the platforms, including the east and west platforms, given the London platforms are sandwiched between them. I do wonder however when the contracts gradually expire and the contracts are renationalised, whether some more ticket unity and the end to exclusive tickets with an eventually unified body could be introduced, and take away incentives. Oft chance in all likelihood, but I do wonder how labour could change railways.

 

[swt_passenger]

[…] I do wonder however when the contracts gradually expire and the contracts are renationalised, whether some more ticket unity and the end to exclusive tickets with an eventually unified body could be introduced, and take away incentives. Oft chance in all likelihood, but I do wonder how labour could change railways.

Dft definitely wanted the Thameslink tickets removed, (but not Gatwick Express), when the franchises were combined into “TSGN” - it was in the franchise specification. Never happened because of the outcry from passengers.

 

[JonathanH]

Never happened because of the outcry from passengers.

I think it was effectively the overrun of the London Bridge works in 2015 and the Southern dispute which followed shortly after that made it untenable. Project Oval is now the natural point to remove then, implementation of which is itself delayed.

 

[LCRTrainfan979]

I think it was effectively the overrun of the London Bridge works in 2015 and the Southern dispute which followed shortly after that made it untenable. Project Oval is now the natural point to remove then, implementation of which is itself delayed.

Perhaps if it was ever implemented, other than maybe some more staff around the ticket barrier and ensuring they are nearly always shut, perhaps this whole effort wouldn't be needed so much. Depends where the boundary is for that though, and how you may need some staff to check that people dont use project oval beyond a certain boundary.

 

[Benjwri]

Project Oval is now the natural point to remove then, implementation of which is itself delayed.

That or them losing the court case over GTR brands all being the same and so these restrictions being not legal. Perfect excuse to say 'Oh look, we can't do these anymore, blame the courts'

 

[paul1609]

Dft definitely wanted the Thameslink tickets removed, (but not Gatwick Express), when the franchises were combined into “TSGN” - it was in the franchise specification. Never happened because of the outcry from passengers.

TSGN has been a management contract since it was formed in 2008 with all revenue (and risk) going to the DFT. It was done this way because no private organisation would have accepted the revenue risk of the Thameslink Core enhancement and London Bridge station redevelopment. The management contract actually specified that the management company (Govia) should present options to the DFT for the reform of the whole Brighton main line fares regime which included the Gatwick Express. Govia have done this three times and have not received a decision from the DFT.
Went to Brighton yesterday to see the Kooks on the beach. no sign of the revenue protection scheme.

 

[Jan Mayen]

Went to Brighton yesterday to see the Kooks on the beach. no sign of the revenue protection scheme.

Not sure that's an appropriate way to refer to the nudists...

 

[MrJeeves]

Went to Brighton yesterday to see the Kooks on the beach. no sign of the revenue protection scheme.

I went through this morning. The scheme wasn't in operation but it was very clear that it existed from the number of and layout of barriers.

 

[paul1609]

I went through this morning. The scheme wasn't in operation but it was very clear that it existed from the number of and layout of barriers.

Thats been put up since last night I left on the 23.20 to Eastbourne from PLatform 7 and there was no sign of any barriers at all. Unusually I arrived on Platform 6 from Polegate yesterday as well.

 

[MrJeeves]

Looks like the revenue protection scheme is in full swing today with customers not holding tickets being forced into an interview with Claudia Winkelman!

 

[ThameslinkUser]

Thats been put up since last night I left on the 23.20 to Eastbourne from PLatform 7 and there was no sign of any barriers at all. Unusually I arrived on Platform 6 from Polegate yesterday as well.

It operates from 0630 until roughly 1900 from my observation. Funnily enough, there's not a business case at 2320.

 

[paul1609]

It operates from 0630 until roughly 1900 from my observation. Funnily enough, there's not a business case at 2320.

it wasnt there when i arrived at 14.30ish either, presumably theres not a business case all weekend?

 

[MrJeeves]

For what it's worth, there was noone there when I arrived at Brighton at around 1045, but there was staff at 1800 standing around (not actively doing checks, but I suppose available for any issues) plus OnTrak staff at each of the faux-separated gateline sections.

Many different members and ranks of staff overall. Standard gateline crew, plus OnTrak support staff with TTK at the ready, plus "Revenue Support", and also "Revenue Protection".

My Thameslink out of Brighton (1814) also had RPIs on board making their way through the train from the front.

 

[AlbertBeale]

it wasnt there when i arrived at 14.30ish either, presumably theres not a business case all weekend?

I was using Brighton station twice the other day (including via the Coastway service, not just up and down the London line) - no sign of this revenue protection either time. Is it only in place on weekdays? I've yet to ever see it.

I again noted that P7 was consistently being used by London arrivals and departures, with all East Coastways seeming to manage with just P8 (though at one time with 2 of them in the platform end-to-end) - hence making a revenue block for interchange passengers between East and London rather difficult....

 

[ThameslinkUser]

it wasnt there when i arrived at 14.30ish either, presumably theres not a business case all weekend?

To be fair I haven't seen it in operation on any weekend. Perhaps they think there's too high a chance of being stabbed by Croydon punters travelling to the coast

 

[paul1609]

To be fair I haven't seen it in operation on any weekend. Perhaps they think there's too high a chance of being stabbed by Croydon punters travelling to the coast

I've already made my case for coastway trains to be fast from Victoria to Gatwick ensuring only the cheaper Thameslink passengers get stabbed.

 

[LCRTrainfan979]

I've already made my case for coastway trains to be fast from Victoria to Gatwick ensuring only the cheaper Thameslink passengers get stabbed.

To be absolutely honest, that would be a good idea, because Southern trains are so ridiculously slow to their major destinations compared to Southeastern which have high speed alternatives, and South Western Railway with faster line speeds and not having to call at both Clapham Junction and East Croydon on every single service (minus the overpriced Gatwick Express).

 

[ThameslinkUser]

I've already made my case for coastway trains to be fast from Victoria to Gatwick ensuring only the cheaper Thameslink passengers get stabbed.

Non-stop Burgess Hill too please.

 

[LCRTrainfan979]

Non-stop Burgess Hill too please.

Good point, i suppose that could maybe lose a small number of services, but the main reason that all trains except Gatwick Express have to call there is because of the removal of the Southern Victoria to Brighton services, supposedly for the upgrade of Gatwick Airport station, but bringing it back and reintroducing train divisions at Haywards Heath would just crowd both of the Coastway lines, which collectively could benefit more from increased capacity than 2 more trains from Brighton station.

Overall, using Littlehampton as an example, the journey times are completely unimpressive. For example, Bognor is further on, and has roughly identical journey times thanks to the Arun Valley line. Then Chichester has 10 minutes better journey times because it runs fast from Horsham, and then both Portsmouth and Southampton have faster South Western Trains because their lines have higher speeds.

Overall, a big question I have been wondering is whether this system has the potential to be made permanent.
Technically speaking in the long term, they could introduce new segregated gatelines at Brighton, and permament segregation barriers, probably with some gates in for whenever there is a platform alteration at the last minute and going through the gateline would simply lead to everyone missing a train. Given some of their barriers seem old, its inevitable theyll replace them at some point, and they could hypothetically implement the new system with the arrangement.

 

[MrJeeves]

Non-stop Burgess Hill too please.

Oi! No thanks!