25-05-2025
Over €20m lost in revenue on public transport services due to fare dodgers
Over €20 million was lost in revenue on public transport services last year due to fare dodgers, according to estimates by transport regulatory bodies.
Figures released under freedom of information legislation by the National Transport Authority show the highest fare evasion rates in 2024 were on DART and commuter rail services with 6.9 per cent of passengers not having a valid ticket for their journey.
Advertisement
The results of regular surveys conducted on bus, rail and tram services during 2024 show varying fare evasion rates between different public transport operators
They found an average rate for fare evasion of 6.9 per cent on DART trains and commuter rail services for the greater Dublin region and Cork with an estimated loss in revenue of €4.6 million.
Fare evasion rates as high as 15 per cenr were recorded on Dublin-Drogheda, Dublin-Longford and Dublin-M3 Parkway services.
The level of fare evasion on DART services ranged from 4 per cent to 6 per cent, while the lowest rate was on Cork-Mallow services at 1.3 per cent.
Advertisement
However, Iarnród Éireann did not suffer any deductions for the high overall fare evasion rates as the permitted threshold operated by the NTA before financial penalties are imposed is an evasion rate of 6.9 per cent for DART and commuter rail services.
In contrast, the lowest fare evasion rate on any public transport service last year was on Iarnrod Éireann's intercity routes where just 1.4 per cent of passengers were found travelling without a valid ticket which resulted in an estimated loss in revenue of €2.2 million in 2024.
Iarnród Éireann was the only public transport operator last year to receive an incentive payment for meeting a key performance indicator on having a fare evasion rate below target levels.
The company received incentives totalling almost €37,000 for its high compliance rate on its intercity trains.
Advertisement
Fare evasion levels on all intercity services were below the 2.5 per cent target rate with the exception of Waterford-Limerick Junction (12.8 per cent); Dublin-Rosslare (8.0 per cent) and Tralee-Dublin (2.8 per cent).
As the country's largest public transport operator in terms of passenger numbers, Dublin Bus unsurprisingly had the largest estimated shortfall in revenue due to fare dodgers at €6.0 million last year.
However, the fare evasion rate on Dublin Bus services was one of the lowest of any operator at 3.4 per cent.
It was also the only one of the large bus companies to record a fare evasion level below the target rate of 3.9 per cent for bus services.
Advertisement
Full compliance was found with passengers on 26 of 84 Dublin Bus routes surveyed including the 15B, 26, 38A, 65B, 68 84 and L53 services.
The highest evasion rate on a Dublin Bus service was 20.6 per cent recorded on the 43 (Talbot Street-Swords Business Park) route.
Overall, Bus Éireann which operates a range of subsidised routes including commuter and city bus services in Cork, Limerick, Galway and Waterford and several large towns as well as commuter services in the greater Dublin region had evasion rates of approximately 5.0 per cent.
However, the company suffered deductions totalling over €118,000 over its failure to meet the 3.9 per cent target rate last year, while the loss of revenue from fare dodgers was calculated to be at least €4.5 million.
Advertisement
The highest evasion rates were on two services in Cork – the 220X Ovens-Crosshaven route (35.3 per cent) and 206 Grange-South Mall (34.3 per cent) followed by 190 Drogheda-Trim (23.9 per cent) and 419 Galway-Clifden (20.4 per cent).
The other large bus operator – Go-Ahead Ireland – recorded some of the highest non-compliance rates with fares across its network of 34 routes within the greater Dublin area last year.
The company had an average fare evasion rate of 6.2 per cent on its 'outer metropolitan' services in Dublin and a 5.4 per cent rate on its commuter route in the greater Dublin including services to Tullamore, Newbridge, Kildare, Naas and Athy.
The rate on its W4 (The Square- Blanchardstown) and W6 (The Square-Maynooth) routes was 6.9 per cent.
Besides Bus Éireann, Go-Ahead Ireland was the only other public transport operator to be hit with deductions last year – over €121,000 over its failure to meet targets with fare evasion calculated as resulting in a €1.3 million loss in revenue.
Commenting on the findings of the surveys, a NTA spokesperson said the transport authority believed progress was being made on tackling the problem of fare evaders.
'The NTA will continue to work closely with transport operators to further address this issue,' the spokesperson added.
Separate surveys carried out on Luas passengers by Transport Infrastructure Ireland revealed the average fare evasion rate on tram services last year was 4.2 per cent.
However, the fare evasion rate on the Red line was considerably higher at 4.9 per cent compared to the Green line where the rate was 3.4 per cent in 2024.
It is estimated fare evasion on Luas services last year resulted in a loss of revenue of around €1.7million.
The surveys show the overwhelming majority of Luas passengers without a ticket (88 per cent) provided no reason for their failure to have one, while 6 per cent claim they boarded a tram in a rush with 1 per cent losing their ticket and another 1 per cent in 'confusion.'
A spokesperson for Luas operator, Transdev said the fare compliance data was an important tool for managing and improving compliance.
'It helps us inform the planning and targeted deployment of our Revenue Protection and Security Teams on what is known as an open system where there are no physical barriers to entry,' the spokesperson added.
Transdev said compliance levels fluctuate and certain Luas stops can experience lower compliance rates at specific times.
'This is not unusual and is a challenge faced by transport operators globally,' the spokesperson said.
Since the start of 2023, the NTA receives all revenue collected from bus, train and light rail services operated under 'public service obligation contract' routes, which are deemed commercially unviable without a form of subsidy or where their provision is considered socially desirable.
