Rail fare dodger – or simply bamboozled by the train ticketing ‘system'?
Some people inadvertently find that they are travelling without a valid ticket simply because the fare system is so darn complicated.
Take the journey from Bristol to London. Forget for a moment about complications such as advance tickets and railcard conditions. All you want is a standard ticket for immediate departure, whether you buy it from a ticket office (which only two out of five passengers do), online or through a ticket machine.
A so-called 'walk-up ticket' comes in five different financial flavours (rounded here to the nearest pound). There's an anytime ticket, price £139, which it is difficult to imagine anyone buying. Rational passengers who need to travel in the rush hour would go for the 'Didcot dodge'. You travel on the same train, in the same seat – just making sure it is one of the majority of services that stop at Didcot Parkway in leafy Oxfordshire. That will save you (or whoever is paying for your ticket) £52.
Anyone with a bit of flexibility can halve the number Great Western Railway first thought of by buying an off-peak ticket, price £67, for journeys between the peaks leaving London, and in the morning rush-hour only when heading from Bristol to the capital.
A bit more flex? The fare can fall a further one-third to £45, with a slightly more restrictive super-off-peak. But perhaps you're in no great hurry to reach the capital? If you are happy to go the exceptionally pretty way through Bradford-on-Avon and Westbury, changing trains in Salisbury – that's another 33 per cent discount, down to £33.
By now you may be reaching for the car keys – or perhaps the FlixBus or National Express apps, to secure a straightforward and low-cost option on the motorway. And that's before the complexity of advance tickets and complicated railcard rules, which include some discounts that are available only in July and August.
Before you exclaim indignantly about the laughable complexity of it all, perhaps I can persuade you that there are good reasons for this range of options?
While the 'system' baked in at the time of privatisation remains in place, the clunky inevitability of a 'cliff-face' drop or rise in fares at the prescribed rush-hour boundaries will continue, and it will be in the commercial interests of the rail firms – and the taxpayer – to offer progressively lower prices if you are prepared to travel on the quietest trains or via a roundabout route.
Inevitably, though, some people find themselves travelling without the appropriate ticket. Or they may make a mistake online and select '16-25 Railcard' rather than '26-30' – and, even though the ticket price is exactly the same, face possible prosecution.
For me, that was the most shocking aspect of the ORR report – that railway people would conclude that an error which made no difference to fare revenue was worthy of pursuit. The staff I have encountered would have had a quiet word to just recommend more care next time.
The best policy for any passenger uncertain of the validity of their ticket/railcard combo is simply to ask staff on the station gateline or the train guard whether they can travel.
But some will remain blissfully unaware that they have the wrong sort of ticket.
I contend that most of the people who inadvertently breach fare rules are making occasional journeys and are bamboozled by the range of fares and railcard rules.
Conversely, most of the 'professional' fare dodgers know exactly what they are doing and are making regular journeys for which they don't fancy paying the right price.
It is down to rail staff to judge which side each errant traveller is on. And, from my observation, most of the time they get it right.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
10 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Better design could make new homes cooler
There are two main issues driving the problem of overheating in modern housing (Overheated homes: why UK housing is dangerously unprepared for impact of climate crisis, 10 August). First, in order to maximise profit, developers often do the bare minimum required by legislation, without any consideration of the building's performance in use over its lifespan. This desire for economy also often leads to the reduction of natural elements (such as tree planting in urban areas), which may otherwise assist in tempering heat buildup. Second, too often we seek to solve fundamental flaws in the building design with bolt-on solutions, when instead we should design for climate resilience from the outset. The move towards air conditioning as a response to overheating problems illustrates this. Even the new Part O building regulations – which cover ensuring that homes do not overheat – allow the use of machinery rather than requiring an adequately responsive building fabric. Design expertise from environmentally minded professionals such as chartered architectural technologists can help to overcome these problems without using energy-hungry machinery. Considering the orientation of the building, incorporating a natural ventilation strategy and utilising materials in the building's fabric that mitigate heat gain can greatly reduce the risk of overheating. But such principles are often disregarded in order to cut costs. The climatic situation we find ourselves in requires a shift in the very basics of building design. The knowledge is available. It just needs to be HalliganChartered Institute of Architectural Technologists
The Sun
10 minutes ago
- The Sun
Kellogg's brings new cereal to the UK that shoppers say is just like discontinued favourite
KELLOGG's has brought a new cereal to the UK that shoppers have said is just like a discontinued favourite. Shoppers have spotted packs of Kellogg's Smacks on shelves at Morrisons for £2.50. 1 The sweetened puff wheat cereal is already popular in the US but it's now made it across the pond. It's described as a classic crunchy breakfast cereal with a honey-sweet taste. But shoppers have also pointed out that it looks very similar to a popular discontinued cereal. A picture of the new cereal was shared on the Facebook group Snack Reviews and hundreds of people were commenting on it. Lots of commenters said how similar the new product looked to Sugar Puffs, which were discontinued in 2014. "Basically sugar puffs then lol," one person said. Another wrote: "Definitely sugar puffs!!" A third added: "They'll always be sugar puffs to me. They're puffed wheat and sugar." Sugar Puffs, which were made by Quaker Oats, were rebranded as Honey Monster Puffs with a new reformulated recipe. The new recipe had less sugar and more honey than the original Sugar Puffs. Rice Krispies brings back 'most requested' flavor for first time in 20 years – but fans will notice a big switch It came as the Government aimed to crack down on sugar content in foods marketed at children. Sugar Puffs had been around for 60 years before they were rebranded. Discontinued items that have made a comeback Brands have started a trend of bringing back popular discontinued items recently. One that got shoppers buzzing was the comeback of White Malteasers, which had been off shelves for 11 years. Customers can now buy a 30g pack for £1.05, 74g pack for £2.50 or a larger 126g sharing bag for £2.95. Meanwhile snack fans have spotted another chocolatey treat on supermarket shelves that's similar to a discontinued Cadbury product. The new Cadbury Dairy Milk Balls are said to resemble Cadbury Tasters, which first launched in 1996. Plus, the nostalgic alcopop Bacardi Breezer has also made a return to stores after being axed in 2015. The fruity alcopops were once a rite of passage for teenagers having their first alcoholic drinks or going clubbing for the first time. Why are products axed or recipes changed? ANALYSIS by chief consumer reporter James Flanders. Food and drinks makers have been known to tweak their recipes or axe items altogether. They often say that this is down to the changing tastes of customers. There are several reasons why this could be done. For example, government regulation, like the "sugar tax," forces firms to change their recipes. Some manufacturers might choose to tweak ingredients to cut costs. They may opt for a cheaper alternative, especially when costs are rising to keep prices stable. For example, Tango Cherry disappeared from shelves in 2018. It has recently returned after six years away but as a sugar-free version. Fanta removed sweetener from its sugar-free alternative earlier this year. Suntory tweaked the flavour of its flagship Lucozade Original and Orange energy drinks. While the amount of sugar in every bottle remains unchanged, the supplier swapped out the sweetener aspartame for sucralose.
The Guardian
10 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Construction should be a career that you can build a life on
Re your editorial (The Guardian view on construction workers: the country needs more of them, fast, 13 August), as a bricklayer with decades of experience, I see the skills shortage in the construction industry as the result of years of neglect. The problem is not only attracting new people, but keeping them in the trade once they see the reality of working conditions. Most site bricklayers are self-employed subcontractors. We don't get pensions, holiday pay, or sick pay. If you're ill or injured, you simply don't earn. That insecurity pushes many skilled people out of construction entirely. On top of that, wages have barely moved in years – in fact, the rates many bricklayers receive today are lower than four years ago. Large housebuilders often pay good rates to main contractors, but by the time it filters down to the bricklayer, they can end up with far less. If the UK is serious about meeting its housing targets, we need more than training schemes. We need to make construction a job you can build a life on – fair pay directly to the tradespeople, proper benefits, and conditions that match the skill and physical demands of the work. Until that changes, we'll keep losing good people faster than we can train them, no matter how much money is thrown at OrdPeterlee, County Durham Large construction firms routinely depend on multiple levels of subcontracting, involving an ecosystem of small and medium-sized enterprises that source labour through a myriad of different routes. Those who do the work are often unsure of their own employment status. People working alongside each other frequently have very different terms and conditions, or indeed, no written terms and conditions at all. Career paths do exist, but only in sheltered pockets. The fractured nature of the employment model brings obvious advantages to 'employers' in terms of low overheads. But training is invariably seen as someone else's problem. Many small firms would much prefer to invest in direct employment and apprenticeships, but such investment isn't feasible given the competitive dynamics of the marketplace. This is the end point of the industry's 40-year quest for modernisation. Simple solutions are few and far between. But the first step for policymakers is to recognise the highly fissured nature of the construction employment GreenProfessor of construction management, University of Reading There are plenty of decent tradespeople out there and, of course, some not so good. Yes, we need to bring in more for the future, and I've no problem with them having formal qualifications. But that doesn't make a tradesperson. I got my City & Guilds in carpentry in 1997. As I understand it, once my Construction Skills Certificate Scheme card runs out, it won't be renewed unless I make a significant spend to get an NVQ. I've been in the trade for over 30 years, and I've diverged my skill base significantly past carpentry alone, all learned on the job. Currently, I have no problem getting work, as I'm fairly adept at most building trades. A rush to have only the formally qualified working on site will be counterproductive. As a self-employed tradesperson, if my work isn't to standard, I cannot work. I'm 51, still fit. If Labour is going to achieve its goals, people like me are StringerKing's Lynn, Norfolk Have an opinion on anything you've read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
