ScotRail to introduce £10 minimum fare for those not buying before boarding

[kkong]

Announced today, in an effort to reduce revenue loss.

It seems like a measured first step to address the problem of the many passengers seen every day who "pay when challenged".

https://www.scotrail.co.uk/about-scotrail/news/scotrail-tackle-ticketless-travel-new-minimum-fare

There are exclusions:

• For customers who hold a national entitlement card.
• If a ticket office in a station is closed.
• If a station doesn’t have a ticket office or ticket vending machine (TVM).
• If a customer has a registered disability that prevents them from using TVMs.
• Staff will have the discretion to issue the minimum fare depending on the customer’s circumstances.
• Customers who can only pay with cash would obtain a ‘promise to pay’ ticket from a TVM and then purchase a ticket from on train staff.

 

[GLC]

Given that Scotrail intentionally only allow some fares to be sold from a member of staff (Kids for a Quid etc), if the first member of staff is onboard staff, will they allow for exceptions such as that too? Or will they permit more ticket types other than be sold via TVMs?

 

[kkong]

Given that Scotrail intentionally only allow some fares to be sold from a member of staff (Kids for a Quid etc), if the first member of staff is onboard staff, will they allow for exceptions such as that too? Or will they permit more ticket types other than be sold via TVMs?

Isn't is already the case that if you're unable to buy your required ticket type from a ticket office or TVM, then you can purchase on board without penalty?

We will need to see the full policy (rather than a press release) to be sure of the details.

 

[island]

Curious to see the legal basis for this.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Curious to see the legal basis for this.

It seems to be the same as the policy operated by Edinburgh Trams, so presumably it's similar to that? I don't know what basis sits behind that though, isn't it just the same as bus companies in that the standard fare is a minimum of £10 and a discount is offered for purchase before boarding?

 

[najaB]

Curious to see the legal basis for this.

There doesn't need to be a specific legal basis as it's not a penalty fare, just a minimum fare.

 

[Kite159]

Sounds like it's something where the minimum fare tickets will be sold by revenue protection but most guards/ticket examiners will ignore and sell a regular priced ticket (including Railcards if applicable)

 

[kkong]

Curious to see the legal basis for this.

The Scottish Ministers have the power to introduce penalty fares regulations (Railways Act 2005 s.47).

If that is how it is to be implemented, we would expect a Scottish Statutory Instrument (SSI) to be in force by August 2026.

As of today, I can't see any SSI (even a draft) listed on the Scottish Statutory Instrument Tracker Report.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Feb 2026 ==

There doesn't need to be a specific legal basis as it's not a penalty fare, just a minimum fare.

Curious how that would work.

What "fare" would be sold for the quoted example of Bishopbriggs to Glasgow which is priced at £3.00 for an Anytime Day Single?

 

[najaB]

Curious how that would work.

What "fare" would be sold for the quoted example of Bishopbriggs to Glasgow which is priced at £3.00 for an Anytime Day Single?

Pretty much the same way as works today for buses. For example. with Ember if I buy Dundee-Edinburgh before boarding it's £11.20, if I buy it from the driver it is something like £20.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Pretty much the same way as works today for buses. For example. with Ember if I buy Dundee-Edinburgh before boarding it's £11.20, if I buy it from the driver it is something like £20.

Though isn't that more like the ticket bought online is an Advance and that bought on board an Anytime Day Single, in effect? The railway can do that now (and LNER does) but it isn't quite what ScotRail are doing, it's differentially priced walk up fares.

 

[kkong]

Pretty much the same way as works today for buses. For example. with Ember if I buy Dundee-Edinburgh before boarding it's £11.20, if I buy it from the driver it is something like £20.

Yes, but the bus industry operates on a rather different legal basis to the railways.

Perhaps new "on board" fares will be created for all flows which have existing fares less than £10.

 

[najaB]

Though isn't that more like the ticket bought online is an Advance and that bought on board an Anytime Day Single, in effect? The railway can do that now (and LNER does) but it isn't quite what ScotRail are doing, it's differentially priced walk up fares.

Almost, except that there's no advance purchase requirement for Ember if you're travelling from a booked stop. I've paid for mine while standing in the line to board.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Perhaps new "on board" fares will be created for all flows which have existing fares less than £10.

The fares do need sorting out generally, so perhaps as part of that. There are still Off Peaks in there at the same price (but different conditions e.g. overnight break of journey) to the Anytimes.

 

[najaB]

Perhaps new "on board" fares will be created for all flows which have existing fares less than £10.

That's probably how it will be done.

 

[kkong]

The fares do need sorting out generally, so perhaps as part of that. There are still Off Peaks in there at the same price (but different conditions e.g. overnight break of journey) to the Anytimes.

I think the Off-Peak fares are still there (for now) for "reasons", e.g. the Club 50 discount only applies to Off-Peak fares.

ScotRail did say they would be sorting this out, but unsure how they intend doing so:

... for now, please make sure to select journeys labelled Off-Peak to use your discount. There are a small number of journeys labelled Anytime where your discount won’t currently apply, but we’re working on a system change to address this and will update you soon.

 

[Clydeflyer]

"It is anticipated that this change will also help to reduce anti-social behaviour on the railway, which is often caused by a small minority travelling without a ticket."

If they are not being asked/challenged presently on the train to pay the existing fares... and they know that hence they know they will get away with it... what difference does a minimum fare make? Is the problem there not a lack of visible on-train staff?

 

[najaB]

"It is anticipated that this change will also help to reduce anti-social behaviour on the railway, which is often caused by a small minority travelling without a ticket."

If they are not being asked/challenged presently on the train to pay the existing fares... and they know that hence they know they will get away with it... what difference does a minimum fare make? Is the problem there not a lack of visible on-train staff?

I suspect it's a variation on the Broken Windows theory. The fact that there's no reason to pay your fare before boarding (since the worst that will happen is you have to pay what you should have paid in the first place) makes the railway an easier/more attractive place to those who would also be more likely to engage in anti-social behaviour.

 

[island]

There doesn't need to be a specific legal basis as it's not a penalty fare, just a minimum fare.

Yes there does. Otherwise it will risk falling foul of (for example) unfair contract terms rules.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes there does. Otherwise it will risk falling foul of (for example) unfair contract terms rules.

That's probably why it's £10 rather than £50, and a minimum fare rather than a penalty.

It's the same as the tram (where it's entirely legit to board and pay £10 if you're in a rush and that's therefore good value for you) - what legal basis is that under? I suspect the sum being the same is no coincidence.

 

[AlterEgo]

Yes there does. Otherwise it will risk falling foul of (for example) unfair contract terms rules.

Indeed, it should really be an amendment to the NRCoT along the lines of "an operator may, if you do not buy your ticket before you board, be entitled to charge you an additional surcharge to the appropriate fare onboard. This will not exceed £10."

 

[Haywain]

Yes there does. Otherwise it will risk falling foul of (for example) unfair contract terms rules.

They could just make the Anytime (Day) Single fares for such journeys £10, and then they would be acting in accordance with the NRCoT.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Indeed, it should really be an amendment to the NRCoT along the lines of "an operator may, if you do not buy your ticket before you board, be entitled to charge you an additional surcharge to the appropriate fare onboard. This will not exceed £10."

Given that Monday-Friday 6am-9am was never the prime time for neds (as they have in Scotland) to be hanging around causing trouble, we did have something like it before in the sense that the fare charged on board would be the Anytime rather than the Off Peak. I guess in a way it's just returning to that, so there is already precedent. I guess that was lost by the abolition of peak fares.

It isn't a surcharge by the way, it's a minimum. Though I do wonder if what you mention there wouldn't be a bad idea!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Feb 2026 ==

They could just make the Anytime (Day) Single fares for such journeys £10, and then they would be acting in accordance with the NRCoT.

That's a better way to explain

 

[kkong]

That's probably why it's £10 rather than £50, and a minimum fare rather than a penalty.

It's the same as the tram (where it's entirely legit to board and pay £10 if you're in a rush and that's therefore good value for you) - what legal basis is that under? I suspect the sum being the same is no coincidence.

The provision for paying the £10 on-board fare on Edinburgh Trams is made in their Conditions of Carriage:

Any passenger who boards a tram without a valid ticket must pay a Company official the on-board fare as shown in the Company’s fare tables.

First Aberdeen have a £50 "Standard Fare" for those without a valid ticket (I doubt anyone has been charged this, ever) in their Conditions of Travel:

4.1.1 Every customer must ensure they are in possession of a valid ticket, pass, validated payment or smartcard or other authority to travel for their entire journey. Our Revenue Protection Officers will charge a Standard Fare to any passenger not complying with this requirement.

4.11. The Standard Fare is £50.

 

[Flying_Turtle]

Well, a minimum fare is far more easy to deal with than a penalty fare, which may carry lasting criminal repercussions, thus needing a far greater financial expenditure because of the need to provide evidence in court. Basically it is a win win...
For me, it will add up a bit more "fun" to the process of boarding unstaffed stations in some Scotrail lines, where FIPs are something never before seen, believe it or not!

 

[redreni]

There doesn't need to be a specific legal basis as it's not a penalty fare, just a minimum fare.

In which case, in the rest of Britain, why weren't penalty fares called 'minimum fares' to dispense with all the pesky requirements to pass regulations, then?

You're still charging people more than the published fare. That's a penalty.

 

[najaB]

In which case, in the rest of Britain, why weren't penalty fares called 'minimum fares' to dispense with all the pesky requirements to pass regulations, then?

Because penalty fares are exactly that - penalties - whereas what Scotrail proposes is simply that tickets paid for on-board will cost at least £10.

You're still charging people more than the published fare. That's a penalty.

As above, what will almost certainly be done is create a new fare for on-board purchases.

 

[island]

They could just make the Anytime (Day) Single fares for such journeys £10, and then they would be acting in accordance with the NRCoT.

That would do it.

 

[kkong]

That would do it.

They would have to prevent Anytime Single fares from being sold by TVMs and other online sales channels to avoid customers overpaying.

Also, some flows don't have any Off-Peak fares and have Anytime Single fares priced at less than £10, e.g. Inverness to Beauly.

 

[redreni]

Because penalty fares are exactly that - penalties - whereas what Scotrail proposes is simply that tickets paid for on-board will cost at least £10.

As above, what will almost certainly be done is create a new fare for on-board purchases.

I'm not the only one unconvinced by this, it seems... https://x.com/seatsixtyone


[Description of image: The Man in Seat 61 replies to Rail Magazine's article on the ScotRail £10 minimum fare as follows: "That's a financial penalty, so is by definition a Penalty Fare 1993 Railways Act). So this needs to be fully compliant with the Penalty Fare Rules"]

 

[Bletchleyite]

OK, so you get on an Avanti at Preston (ungated) and go to Euston and are sold an Anytime at £198 rather than an Off Peak at £70 because you didn't pay before you boarded. An extra £128, not under a tenner.

Why does that not have to be fully compliant with the Penalty Fares Rules? It isn't. And it's been how it's worked for years including back into BR days.