When does an apparent fare error become permanent, and is there no £/km audit?

[BlueLeanie]

A friend here in Haddenham was looking to make a journey to work at Culham in Oxfordshire. Their usual 50 minute drive has extended to almost two hours with multiple roadworks on the route, particularly at Thame and Golden Balls.

The return rail fare from Haddenham to Culham is a rather toppy £35.40, not far off three times the cost of taking the train to Oxford (£13.50). Obviously split ticketing is the workaround here, but I don't believe we should be normalising split ticketing to mitigate against fare errors.

So fiddling around with the fares, there's no extra charge for travelling home at night via Banbury, so this suggests to me that the fare mappings weren't corrected when the Bicester chord opened.

Playing with the fares a little more, Radley, Appleford & Didcot are similarily affected by the pricing jump.

Then I thought I found the biggest of them all.

A peak day return fare from Haddenham & Thame Parkway to Long Hanborough (HND) (via Bicester Village), a journey that can take as little as 49 minutes with a 7 minute cross-platform interchange comes in at an outrageous £70.70.

Until I reversed the direction and found that.

A peak day return fare from Long Hanborough (HND) to Haddenham & Thame Parkway (via Bicester Village) comes in at an obscene £122.20.

Surely there should be some kind of background audit operating to cross match fares with distances travelled, as well as a check of "handed" journeys to mitigate against this?

 

[JonathanH]

This all stems from the absence of fares priced specifically for the route via Oxford Parkway which has never been resolved.

Unfortunately, there are various fares for stations where the logical route is via Oxford Parkway, but the structure remains based on travel via Banbury or London and has never been fixed since the chord at Bicester opened.

A peak day return fare from Long Hanborough (HND) to Haddenham & Thame Parkway (via Bicester Village) comes in at an obscene £122.20.

This particular journey is effectively priced for travel via London (and is routed via +Any Permitted).

All of this needs sorting out but presumably GWR and Chiltern have never worked together to do so.

Surely there should be some kind of background audit operating to cross match fares with distances travelled, as well as a check of "handed" journeys to mitigate against this?

Handed journeys are all about pricing for the peak flow, and are something that has existed for a long time.

 

[BlueLeanie]

This doesn't bode well for the reopening of East-West in early course. We're 8 years on from opening the Bicester chord and the pricing structures for cross-operator journeys haven't been successfully managed.

Surely the regulator should now step in and set the fares at a more realistic level?

 

[swt_passenger]

This doesn't bode well for the reopening of East-West in early course. We're 8 years on from opening the Bicester chord and the pricing structures for cross-operator journeys haven't been successfully managed.

Surely the regulator should now step in and set the fares at a more realistic level?

That’s only 8 years of inaction, I don’t believe fares have ever been properly adjusted for the opening of Chandlers Ford in 2003…

 

[Nottingham59]

All of this needs sorting out but presumably GWR and Chiltern have never worked together to do so.

Which of these august bodies sets the fares in these cases? And could you explain why GWR and Chiltern need to work together to do so? Why can't whichever one is responsible set the fares accordingly?

 

[Watershed]

Surely the regulator should now step in and set the fares at a more realistic level?

Which regulator?

 

[CyrusWuff]

Which regulator?

Presumably the DfT. Though I strongly suspect that "via Oxford Parkway" fares are unregulated, on the grounds that they don't exist!

Though even if they were, all fares regulation does is set the maximum increase that can be applied (i.e. 4.6% for this year's main fare increase), it doesn't determine what the fare should be for every ticket type.

 

[Haywain]

presumably GWR and Chiltern have never worked together to do so.

They are not permitted to work together on pricing, it would be a breach of competition law (whether it should be is another matter entirely). The current status of the TOCs just confuses theissue.

 

[JonathanH]

They are not permitted to work together on pricing, it would be a breach of competition law (whether it should be is another matter entirely). The current status of the TOCs just confuses theissue.

Right, so do we assume that Chiltern haven't legitimately been able to set through fares which involve travel off their route onto the other parts of the network?

 

[Haywain]

Right, so do we assume that Chiltern haven't legitimately been able to set through fares which involve travel off their route onto the other parts of the network?

No, you should not assume that. Every flow has a designated fare setting TOC, and where that is Chiltern they will set the fares.

 

[BlueLeanie]

No, you should not assume that. Every flow has a designated fare setting TOC, and where that is Chiltern they will set the fares.

So which TOC is to blame for setting a fare of £122.20 between Hanborough and Haddenham?

 

[Mcr Warrior]

So which TOC is to blame for setting a fare of £122.20 between Hanborough and Haddenham?

GWR would appear to be the fare setter for this flow, I believe.

 

[Tetchytyke]

So which TOC is to blame for setting a fare of £122.20 between Hanborough and Haddenham?

GWR. Who have set it as they always have, with the Maltese Cross for travel via London. Hence the price.

Who should create a separate, more sensibly priced, ROUTE OXFORD PARKWAY ticket? Answers on a postcard.

 

[Kite159]

That’s only 8 years of inaction, I don’t believe fares have ever been properly adjusted for the opening of Chandlers Ford in 2003…

Considering a Romsey - Eastleigh ticket is more expensive than Romsey - Southampton I suspect not.

Those in the know will buy to Southampton for a cheaper fare if wanting to travel between Romsey & Eastleigh

 

[didcotdean]

Look at these two off peak day returns:

Reading to High Wycombe: £34.30 (route via Oxford)
Didcot to High Wycombe: £44.70 (route not via London)

The first is set by Crosscountry, the second by GWR. There is also available an any permitted fare for Didcot to High Wycombe ... which is £44.70.

 

[JonathanH]

Reading to High Wycombe: £34.30 (route via Oxford)

Even that fare is more expensive than splitting in Oxford.

 

[didcotdean]

Indeed (Bicester has been better at times).

I pointed this all out to senior management at GWR a few years ago but I wasn't really surprised it wasn't acted on.

 

[BlueLeanie]

Who should create a separate, more sensibly priced, ROUTE OXFORD PARKWAY ticket? Answers on a postcard.

An elected Mayor, with responsibilities for transport, as part of future reform to local Government?

 

[thedbdiboy]

This doesn't bode well for the reopening of East-West in early course. We're 8 years on from opening the Bicester chord and the pricing structures for cross-operator journeys haven't been successfully managed.

Surely the regulator should now step in and set the fares at a more realistic level?

Which of these august bodies sets the fares in these cases? And could you explain why GWR and Chiltern need to work together to do so? Why can't whichever one is responsible set the fares accordingly?

Which regulator?

Presumably the DfT. Though I strongly suspect that "via Oxford Parkway" fares are unregulated, on the grounds that they don't exist!

Though even if they were, all fares regulation does is set the maximum increase that can be applied (i.e. 4.6% for this year's main fare increase), it doesn't determine what the fare should be for every ticket type.

There is no 'regulator' for fares. All these issues stem from the privatisation structure which mandated the maintenance of national through fares but provided no mechanism to manage this, instead parcelling out fare responsibility to different TOCs and then making it illegal through competition law for them to talk to each other.

Although the DfT lets the contracts it has no pricing capability itself and can barely cope with a handful of 'fare trials' plus Oval, let alone specifying fares across the network.

They are not permitted to work together on pricing, it would be a breach of competition law (whether it should be is another matter entirely). The current status of the TOCs just confuses theissue.

Although that was the case, it is highly questionable whether a group of TOCs all under contract to DfT with revenue risk taken by Government and who are now legally excluded from bidding for future franchises (as there won't be any) can in practice be in breach of competition law just for working together in advance of GBR to try and sort things out at a network level. But as with these things it takes a while for anyone to have the courage to say 'this is ridiculous'.

Anyhow, at least there is an organisational structure coming that will actually be accountable for the national fare and product structure rather than simply being a cog in a giant machine with no pilot. Hopefully before EWR gets to Cambridge...

 

[Taunton]

Anomalous fares have long existed. Back in BR days there were singles that were more expensive than returns. Of course then almost all tickets were sold by clerks, who knew this and always sold the cheaper one.

 

[CyrusWuff]

GWR also technically set fares between Bicester North and Bicester Village, as seen here. (Got to love clustering!)

For those who don't know the area, the two stations are about a mile apart and also linked by a shuttle bus that also serves the shopping centre. Now the £2 cap has increased to £3, the shuttle bus fares have reverted to £2.30 Single and £4.50 Return.

 

[4COR]

£23.10 Anytime single for 1.2km as the crow flies for Bicester Town - Bicester Village is an impressive fare (I know you have to go as far as Haddenham and Thame to come back, but still...) - of course, virtually noone will do it!