Press releases - Rail, bus, coach and tram

Watchdog publishes research into value for money and European fares comparisons

19.02.2009

Passenger Focus has today published the results of its major study into rail fares and ticketing. The study, carried out at the request of Government, focuses on passenger satisfaction with value for money and compares fares and service levels in Great Britain with those in continental Europe.

Colin Foxall, Passenger Focus chairman, said: “This major new study lays bare why Britain’ s passengers are broadly happy with the quality of rail services but not happy with the value for money they are getting. Price of tickets is a key factor behind this but so is performance, overcrowding and managing delays. By comparison with some other European countries Britain’s railways are generally more expensive, especially in London and the South East. However, most of Britain’s passengers seem better served than other European passengers by the number and times of trains available.”

Anthony Smith, Passenger Focus chief executive, said: “Alongside these findings we are publishing recommendations about the measures that could be taken to improve passenger satisfaction with value for money. Tackling overcrowding and continuing to improve punctuality are key. In the short-term we believe removing train companies’ ability to increase some prices by more than the headline inflation plus 1% can help.”

Mr Smith said: “Passenger Focus also recommends that Government reviews its intention to shift the cost of funding the railway from taxpayers to passengers. This policy was born in very different economic times. Passengers cannot be expected to continue paying above-inflation fare increases year on year during a recession."

Passenger Focus also examined fares, ticketing and value for money satisfaction for passengers making long-distance journeys. The study found that the underlying fares structure is too complex; that it must be seen to be fairer to passengers; and that the price of flexibility in your travel plans is too high. The research found that if you can get a ticket at the cheapest possible ‘buy in advance, one train only’ price, long-distance travel to London can be cheaper than travel to Paris, Hamburg, Milan, Amsterdam, Madrid, Stockholm and Zurich. However, travelling at short notice or needing flexibility about the train you catch can be more expensive travelling to London than to the other cities.

Mr Foxall said: “Ultimately, a fundamental review of the long distance fare structure is needed to improve understanding and address the issues of fairness and the high price of flexibility. However, there are things that the rail industry can do in the short-term, including making the cheapest ‘buy on the day’ return price more transparent and taking into account what passengers have paid already if they miss the train on which they were booked.”

Ends
Notes to editors
1. Passenger Focus’ latest Fares and Ticketing study can be downloaded from:
Fares and Ticketing Study Final Report
Appendix A – Research report Understanding drivers of passenger satisfaction with value for money
Appendix B – Research report Comparisons between fares and ticketing in Great Britain with Continental Europe *see note below
Appendix C – Research report Regional commuter fares and ticketing comparisons in Great Britain

* Appendix B updated 20 February, Figures 3.37, 3.38 and 3.39 amended

2. The Fares and Ticketing Study was commissioned in 2008 from Passenger Focus at the request of the then Secretary of State for Transport, Rt. Hon. Ruth Kelly MP, in response to her concerns about continuing low passenger satisfaction with the value for money offered by Britain’s railways. In the Autumn 2008 National Passengers Survey (NPS) 46% of passengers were satisfied or very satisfied with value for money against an overall satisfaction rating of 83%. Passenger Focus presented its conclusions and recommendations to the Rt. Hon. Geoff Hoon MP, Secretary of State for Transport, on 11 February 2009.

3. Passenger Focus’s Fares and Ticketing Study conclusions and recommendations

i. Passenger satisfaction with value for money
Key findings:
• Commuters in London, South East England and the East of England rate value for money lower than in other parts of England, Wales and Scotland
• Value for money satisfaction is inextricably linked with ticket price, but quality matters too. The key issues for both commuters and long distance passengers are:
• Punctuality and reliability
• Being able to get a seat
• Passenger information during service disruption

Recommendations:
• Short term: much greater focus on passenger information during service disruption. For example, feeding station information systems direct from the National Rail real time database would be a huge step forward, enabling information to passengers during major disruptions to be dramatically improved.
• Long term: the industry must continue to work on punctuality/reliability and delivering sufficient capacity – clearly core elements of a train service.

ii. The price of commuter tickets
Key findings:
• The price of commuting to London is high in comparison with other European countries.
• The price of commuting to other major cities in Great Britain is lower than to London, but in most cases is still more expensive than commuting to the principal city in other European countries.
• Current funding policies were set in different economic times and, because of their impact on passengers through upward pressure on fares, need to be reviewed in the light of the economic downturn.
• Flexibility within the overall basket does not prevent individual passengers having substantial fare increases, year on year, on theoretically regulated tickets.

Recommendations:
• Short term:
• Developing discounted travel for frequent commuters for whom a traditional season ticket is not cost-effective (e.g. 10 single journeys for the price of eight carnet books)
• Develop and promote a facility to spread the cost of an annual season ticket – allowing more people to take advantage of 52 weeks for the price of 40.
• Long term:
• That Government reviews the intention to move to 75%/25% split between passenger and taxpayer, and the impact on fare levels of high premium franchises.
• That restrictions are placed on the fares basket flexibility that allows individual tickets to rise by 5% higher than the overall cap.
• That train companies are prevented from passing on all of the permitted increase in regulated fares on routes where peak performance is poor.

iii. Simplify the long distance fares structure
Key findings:
• The long distance fares structure must be simpler. Existing simplification was about presentation only – the underlying structure is still seen as complicated and not logical (e.g. two singles may or may not be cheaper than a return, return £1 more than a single).
• The price of flexibility is too high – passengers are baffled by the huge gap between the cheapest and the most expensive fares on the same train (the fact of which is confirmed in our European research).

Recommendations:
• Short term:
• Lift the lid on the mystery by displaying at stations the cheapest ‘buy on the day’ return price for a through ticket to key destinations. It will remove doubt about whether you have got the best price. It will prompt thought about how to pay that price another day. Where else is a retailer not required to display prices to intending customers?
• Building on the previous point, consider the merits of describing prices above that level in terms of the extra you pay and the extra you get – a ‘menu’ approach. ‘Bundling’, a term that could apply to an Anytime return, generally favours the supplier and not the customer – it makes it difficult to see if you actually need what you are paying for.
• Long term: a fundamental review of the long distance fares structure to deal with myriad anomalies/complexities and tackle the current high price of flexibility.

iv. Fairness
Key findings:
• The long distance fares structure needs to be (and needs to be seen to be) fairer to passengers. It requires greater transparency.

Recommendations:
• Short term:
• Allow Advance purchase fares to be purchased much closer to departure (e.g. move the cut off time from 1800 to midnight the day before travel?).
• Increase flexibility by allowing passengers to pay the difference between what they have paid already for an Advance ticket and the appropriate new ticket if they miss their train or need to change their plans. Flexibility at an affordable price was highlighted in our employers research.
• Transparency regarding Advance purchase tickets: the industry must address the perception that ‘cheap tickets’ are never available.

4. Passenger Focus is the official, independent consumer organisation representing the interests of rail users nationally. Created by the Railways Act 2005, Passenger Focus is the operating name of the Rail Passengers Council. It is a non-departmental public body sponsored by the Department for Transport. We want to make a difference for rail passengers. We do this by:
- providing authoritative advice for the industry based on sound research
- securing improvements to rail services – both big and small-scale improvements
- helping passengers with advice and information
- campaigning for change and acting on passenger complaints

4. Media enquiries regarding this release should be addressed to:
Krista Hamblin
Press officer
0300 123 0821/07918 626 045
mailto:krista.hamblin@passengerfocus.org.uk