Possible end to paper tickets in South East?

[talltim]

.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not everyone traveling from Inverness will be going to London. I know there are fewer local journey options than in the London areas, but they still exist.

In the end I think a national rollout will happen, but people will just choose not to use it for long journeys because it doesn't make sense, either because Advances or routed fares are cheaper, or because popping out to the chippy between trains might cause an undesired split.

You could just offer it in a load of separate zones (e.g. TOC areas) but then that doesn't provide for people making short journeys across a boundary, which isn't really that niche. For instance journeys involving both Northern and Merseyrail are extremely common.

 

[MikeWh]

Is she unable to make a contactless payment?

Not "doesn't trust that new fangled junk", as that is a choice, and we do not have to accommodate unreasonable choices. Is she unable?

Yes, she is able to make contactless payments. My post was in response to your assertion that elderly people are rapidly getting to grips with smart phones and other tech. My mum was quite adept at all that until a year or so ago. She can still use a phone for simple things like making calls or video calling, but anything that involves typing or complex sequences of touches is getting beyond her.

The bottom line is that your fantasy of requiring all rail users to have smartphones is not going to happen any time soon.

 

[Wallsendmag]

Every TOC is working towards the end of paper tickets . Some quicker than others

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes, she is able to make contactless payments. My post was in response to your assertion that elderly people are rapidly getting to grips with smart phones and other tech. My mum was quite adept at all that until a year or so ago. She can still use a phone for simple things like making calls or video calling, but anything that involves typing or complex sequences of touches is getting beyond her.

The bottom line is that your fantasy of requiring all rail users to have smartphones is not going to happen any time soon.

Nowhere in this thread is it being suggested that smartphones will become mandatory. What I can see happening is cash payments being abolished, probably within 10 years or so, but that's one for another thread.

 

[hwl]

Contactless limit has just increased to £100, so this would only work for fares of £100 or less.

Transport limit remains £10 (the original retail limit when launched)

 

[Bletchleyite]

Transport limit remains £10 (the original retail limit when launched)

Clearly not the case as the TfL daily cap is above that and billing is daily.

In fact a peak single from Reading using contactless is £25.10, rather in excess of £10.

 

[MikeWh]

Transport limit remains £10 (the original retail limit when launched)

Transit mode of contactless payments has no limit. The card is authorised on first touch and further travel after exiting the system is barred if that authorisation fails. It's a completely different scenario to retail mode, although many shops now authorise while you wait anyway.

 

[hwl]

Given the tender is to find a partner to implement one solution that is an upscaled version of TfL's system, the principles around the helpline could be entirely consistent.

DfT are looking at three options:
1) get TfL to do this
2) get someone else into work with TfL to do this
3) get TfL to do this but with multiple subcontractors (i.e. more than one gateline equipment supplier)

The expansion is ~230 stations beyond the current TFL Contactless/Oyster area once GWR do their branches off Crossrail (WIP)

That isn't what this is about. You would imagine that the DfT will want revenue neutrality at best. However, the implementation of a single fare structure like that in London should achieve closer alignment of single fares.

There are already examples - eg Reading, Gatwick which suggest how fares might be structured.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Transit mode of contactless payments has no limit. The card is authorised on first touch and further travel after exiting the system is barred if that authorisation fails. It's a completely different scenario to retail mode, although many shops now authorise while you wait anyway.

In retail mode, authorisation is now mandatory. This is I believe an anti-fraud measure (so blocked cards are identified more quickly) rather than relating to whether you have the funds.

 

[hwl]

Clearly not the case as the TfL daily cap is above that and billing is daily.

In fact a peak single from Reading using contactless is £25.10, rather in excess of £10.

The fraud risk splits above / below £10 between transit payment taker and payment card less specific agreement is reached.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The fraud risk splits above / below £10 between transit payment taker and payment card less specific agreement is reached.

Which is not the same as the limit being £10.

The railway can of course choose to take that risk if they wish. The significant saving in the number of TVMs and ticket offices this will bring will almost certainly make that risk pay. Just like they choose not to bother with regular revenue protection at certain times of day, such as out of Euston in the late evening - it would cost more than it collects.

 

[Mainline421]

No, because the validity of Contactless and e-tickets for a given journey even with the same fare would differ.

For example, Contactless requires the journey to be made in one go. Continued availability of e-tickets might continue to permit stopping short, break of journey etc. Having different conditions for the same fare is a source of confusion.

Equally, Contactless allows a certain degree of doubling back which isn't possible on e-tickets.

Break of journey is already supported by Tap2Go, so no reason for the that to be abolished.

Proper pay as you go would realistically need LNER-style single leg pricing to work though, otherwise there would likely be issues when returning from a different station etc. But with that should need no loss of rights compared to paper tickets

 

[Bletchleyite]

Break of journey is already supported by Tap2Go, so no reason for the that to be abolished.

Interesting. I wonder how that is worked out? If you tap out then back in, does it perhaps work out the split and the through fare (if applicable) and charge the cheaper of the two?

 

[hwl]

Which is not the same as the limit being £10.

The railway can of course choose to take that risk if they wish.

The point is that the railway takes more and more of the risk as the ticket prices go up beyond £10 - which requires a high degree of competence and deep pockets from the payment system operator (which points to TfL)

The extent of the proposed expansion* will see maximum contractless fares of ~£30.

* there may well be further rounds later.

The significant saving in the number of TVMs and ticket offices this will bring will almost certainly make that risk pay. Just like they choose not to bother with regular revenue protection at certain times of day, such as out of Euston in the late evening - it would cost more than it collects.

The policy may well be roll out and see what happens before TVM and booking office reductions.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The policy may well be roll out and see what happens before TVM and booking office reductions.

I'm sure that will be the case, yes - i.e. roll it out, see the almost certain reduction in ticket sales at stations and then ramp back provision for those sales.

 

[JonathanH]

Proper pay as you go would realistically need LNER-style single leg pricing to work though, otherwise there would likely be issues when returning from a different station etc.

Or the existing TfL / London framework which is already implemented in London and a number of corridors into it. Given what 'hwl' has written about the potential for TfL involvement it would look like expansion of that rather than something close to SWR tap2go is more likely.

 

[hwl]

I'm sure that will be the case, yes - i.e. roll it out, see the almost certain reduction in ticket sales at stations and then ramp back provision for those sales.

Later additional expansion(s) of the PAYG area would probably use the lessons learned on reduction in use of ticket offices /TVMs for comparable locations from the initial phase so the reductions would probably happen more quickly in comparison.

ITSO etc. is being retained (for the medium term at least) for the areas beyond and seasons as the initial scope is much smaller than the NSE map.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Later additional expansion(s) of the PAYG area would probably use the lessons learned on reduction in use of ticket offices /TVMs for comparable locations from the initial phase so the reductions would probably happen more quickly in comparison.

ITSO etc. is being retained (for the medium term at least) for the areas beyond and seasons as the initial scope is much smaller than the NSE map.

Do you know where the initial scope is? Or more specifically, is Bletchley included so I can give it a go?

 

[JonathanH]

Do you know where the initial scope is? Or more specifically, is Bletchley included so I can give it a go?

The original consultation documents might be helpful as to what the scope is. They indicated the boundary stations on each route.

Tring was the limit in the main option, Milton Keynes for the alternative. Which fits with 230 stations?

 

[hwl]

Do you know where the initial scope is? Or more specifically, is Bletchley included so I can give it a go?

MK Central is the WCML limit, Bedford the MML limit and it includes Marston Vale stations

 

[Bletchleyite]

MK Central is the WCML limit.

Useful, cheers.

 

[hwl]

Useful, cheers.

Slightly updated...

 

[Horizon22]

MK Central is the WCML limit, Bedford the MML limit and it includes Marston Vale stations

I would imagine the limits would be at operationally sensible places (i.e places with terminating trains on each route).

 

[Bletchleyite]

I would imagine the limits would be at operationally sensible places (i.e places with terminating trains on each route).

Slightly surprised they've not gone out to Northampton rather than MKC, as it would make sense to include Wolverton at least.

Mind you, I did half expect it just to be Tring.

 

[Paul Kelly]

I agree with others who say this is unlikely to cover the whole Network SouthEast area. I can't see how that could be cleanly integrated with the London system without causing issues with passenger confidence due to the large amounts that could potentially be charged. It looks more likely to be the contactless system that has been put in place as far as Reading, but expanded a vaguely similar distance out of London in other directions. The discrepancies between the contactless and paper fares to Reading (and intermediate stations) are already quite confusing and I would be slightly concerned that they've underestimated the confusion that could result here, potentially undermining confidence that contactless will always give you the best price.

Also I notice the article doesn't actually say that they're going to be abolishing paper tickets. It simply says (a) paper tickets will be shredded [meaningless], (b) contactless payments will be rolled out across south-east England and (c) ticket offices might be closed. London Underground has closed all its ticket offices and still has paper tickets. I think there is just some artistic licence being used by the author there to make it seem more dramatic than it is. Which is a pity, as the Daily Telegraph often has quite good, well informed articles on rail fares.

 

[Starmill]

The extent of the proposed expansion* will see maximum contractless fares of ~£30.

What does that mean? There are already common contactless fares of around £30 and have been for some time e.g. Reading to Euston Underground at £27.50.

 

[Bletchleyite]

What does that mean? There are already common contactless fares of around £30 and have been for some time e.g. Reading to Euston Underground at £27.50.

The maximum doesn't really matter. You don't need to use a maximum fare to enforce people touching in/out correctly, there are other options.

 

[JonathanH]

The discrepancies between the contactless and paper fares to Reading (and intermediate stations) are already quite confusing and I would be slightly concerned that they've underestimated the confusion that could result here, potentially undermining confidence that contactless will always give you the best price.

Yes, so you get rid of the existing fare structure on these routes such that there isn't any confusion. Contactless gives the best price if it is the only price or the existing fares are made more expensive or consistent. The Contactless fares to Reading are roughly what would be expected if you take the existing paper fares and apply TfL's single fares model to it. There are obviously differences in peak times and the odd situation where you can touch in at, say, Dartford at 1845 and be charged the peak fare even though you pass through Paddington well after 8pm.

It looks more likely to be the contactless system that has been put in place as far as Reading, but expanded a vaguely similar distance out of London in other directions.

The map in the 2019 consultation consistent with extension to Bedford and Milton Keynes had the following extensions. Map shows Bedford, Milton Keynes, Aylesbury Vale Parkway, Bicester North, Oxford, Didcot Parkway, Aldershot, Guildford, Dorking, Brighton, East Grinstead, Tunbridge Wells, Maidstone, Rainham, Shoeburyness, Southend Victoria, Witham and Cambridge as the extremeties.

What does that mean? There are already common contactless fares of around £30 and have been for some time e.g. Reading to Euston Underground at £27.50.

Reading to Gatwick Airport is £38.20 peak single.

 

[Starmill]

Reading to Gatwick Airport is £38.20 peak single.

It is, and there are lots of fares for more than £30, but given most of the time the fare is £20.80 on paper between Gatwick Airport and Reading using through trains which are quicker than using PAYG I didn't consider that one enormously relevant.