Misleading train prices?

[noddy997]

Ok, I need to go to to London from Nottingham this Thurs/Fri. On East Midlands Trains website it says this: "Return tickets to London for £38 or less" http://www.eastmidlandstrains.co.uk/travelling-with-us/our-network/trains-to-london/

 

Ok, now I have been quoted from Nottm to London £17 one way, return journey I am getting stupid figures around £48-90 one way!

 

The return tickets are coming in at over £120. The above prices are from 2 singles (even with their "best fare finder") - as you can see these figures are way out with their "£38 or less"....

 

 

What is going on here?

 

I drove to London twice before and back to Nottm on £40 worth of diesel. Moreover, I get my own personal space in the car, and dont have to stand around cramped at peak hours, or listen to some drunk rage at off peak times.

 

I thought public transport was supposed to be cheap?

Edited November 24, 2013 by noddy997

[dx100uk]

http://www.farefinder.eastmidlandstrains.co.uk/bestfares.aspx?orig=NOT&out=20131128&dest=STP&rtn=20131129

[Sparks_]

Easy book single tickets each way! Sometimes it is cheaper that way

[BazzaS]

Ok, I need to go to to London from Nottingham this Thurs/Fri. On East Midlands Trains website it says this: "Return tickets to London for £38 or less" http://www.eastmidlandstrains.co.uk/travelling-with-us/our-network/trains-to-london/

 

Ok, now I have been quoted from Nottm to London £17 one way, return journey I am getting stupid figures around £48-90 one way!

 

The return tickets are coming in at over £120. The above prices are from 2 singles (even with their "best fare finder") - as you can see these figures are way out with their "£38 or less"....

 

 

What is going on here?

 

I drove to London twice before and back to Nottm on £40 worth of diesel. Moreover, I get my own personal space in the car, and dont have to stand around cramped at peak hours, or listen to some drunk rage at off peak times.

 

I thought public transport was supposed to be cheap?

 

Overall, I agree rail fares are too high (based on comparing them with equivalent industrialised nations)

 

However, your "£40 for diesel" doesn't include the other costs of car ownership, including insurance / depreciation, nor the cost of parking (dependant where in London you are parking this can be significant!).

 

As for "fares from £38 or less", all they need to do is have a fare for £38 and one for £37.95, both actually available in reasonable number, (as opposed to selling one ticket for each and then "sold out"), to avoid being accused of "misleading advertising". By all means complain to the ASA, but if they can demonstrate this, they will be in the clear.

Nothing says they have to be available at those rates for the times you want to travel, though.

[sequenci]

I've just booked a return from Newark to London for New Years eve (coming back new years day) for £20 all in. You might want to check if it's cheaper to go via the East Coast Mainline if it's convenient for you.

[Conniff]

It must have taken some considerable time and money to work out a way to fool the public into paying higher than they need to but still stay on the right side of the law.

 

 

It's deliberate.

[sequenci]

It must have taken some considerable time and money to work out a way to fool the public into paying higher than they need to but still stay on the right side of the law.

 

 

It's deliberate.

 

it's probably more to do with the fact that some fares are based upon statute, and some are not.

[noddy997]

http://www.farefinder.eastmidlandstrains.co.uk/bestfares.aspx?orig=NOT&out=20131128&dest=STP&rtn=20131129

 

I seen that too. Problem is, the £25 ticket is at 12:15 - too early for me, later afternoon is £48...

 

It drops to £22 at 2315 which is too late. I need something after 2pm really!

 

 

It was about £3ish for parking (not far off from Nottingham prices 80p for 30mins anyone?) lol

 

Miss my student rail card courtesy of Natwest

[andydd]

 

I thought public transport was supposed to be cheap?

 

EErr..who told you that ?

 

Public transport has never been cheap, especially when compared to other countries and especially trains and even more so where they have a captive market/desperate travelers such as the express routes from the capital to Gatwick and Stansted, etc./

[noddy997]

EErr..who told you that ?

 

Public transport has never been cheap, especially when compared to other countries and especially trains and even more so where they have a captive market/desperate travelers such as the express routes from the capital to Gatwick and Stansted, etc./

 

Well, if we rewind back when cars were a "luxury" - public transport was aimed at those that could not afford the "luxury" - I might be entirely wrong!

 

However, your "£40 for diesel" doesn't include the other costs of car ownership, including insurance / depreciation, nor the cost of parking (dependant where in London you are parking this can be significant!).

 

 

 

I dont want to start a pointless debate, but one thing, in my opinion, cars are probably safer than trains as you got no forms of restraint and safety features in trains such as seatbelts and airbags. The likelihood of an injury increases for passengers standing up "toe to heal" lol.

 

As car users we have to ensure all safety aspects via an MOT and you would expect with the ever increasing rail prices safety would be considered as a major role. Even public buses dont have seatbelts yet they are on the road, I really dont understand these loopholes/grey areas!

 

 

Back on topic: a trip to the rail station, the prices are stil the same as the website. However, I can still get a rail card lol (I thought you had to be a student for that).

[andydd]

I think statistics would show trains are far safer, there are all sorts of railcards but check limitations and minimum fares.

[BazzaS]

I dont want to start a pointless debate, but one thing, in my opinion, cars are probably safer than trains as you got no forms of restraint and safety features in trains such as seatbelts and airbags. The likelihood of an injury increases for passengers standing up "toe to heal" lol.

 

If you don't want to start a debate, let alone one you say is "pointless", don't post unjustified tosh.

The carnage on the roads largely goes unreported, as it is commonplace whereas rail incidents are rarer and more newsworthy.

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/tsgb-2011-transport-accidents-and-casualties

 

Excluding suicides, in 2010/11 there were 40 fatalities on the National Rail network, a 43 per cent fall from 2009/10 when there were 70. This reduction is mainly due to a large fall in the number of trespassers killed, 27 of whom were killed in 2010/11 compared to 50 the year before. There were also 8 passenger fatalities,1 member of the workforce and 4 members of the public (excluding trespassers).

 

Excluding attempted suicides, there were 395 major injuries in 2010/11 compared to 396 the previous year. This number has fallen by 21 per cent since 2001/02. Overall casualties rose by 2 per cent from 12,585 in 2009/10 to 12,841 in 2010/11, although this follows six consecutive years of falls.

 

Road:

In 2010 there were a total of 208,648 reported road casualties of all severities, 39 per cent lower than in 1990. A total of 1,850 people were killed, 65 per cent lower than in 1990, 22,660 were seriously injured (down 63 per cent) and 184,138 were slightly injured (down 33 per cent).

 

So, 2010/11.

13 rail fatalities in non-trespassers/non-suicides, against 1,850 killed on the roads.

395 rail major injuries against 22,660 on the roads,

12,841 rail casualties, against 184,138 on the roads.

 

Adjusted for distance covered:

The passenger casualty rate in train accidents and movement accidents has fallen from 36.7 casualties per billion passenger kilometres in 2001/02 to 26.4 in 2010/11. The fatality and major injury rate has fallen from 1.2 to 0.9 over the same period.

The (albeit 2012) figure for road fatalities per 1 billion vehicle-km covered : 3.6 (from 1754 fatalities), from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate#cite_note-54

 

Rates of 0.9 for both fatalities and major injury, (40+395, so 435 cases).

So the rate for the 40 fatalities alone is 0.9 * 40 / 435, or 0.083 per billion passenger km

Excluding the trespassers, this is 0.9 * 13 /435, or 0.027 per billion passenger km.

 

0.027 per billion passenger km vs. 3.6 per billion vehicle-km

 

Admittedly, one vehicle might have more than one passenger ; but not the 133 (on average) that would be needed to make the fatality rates equivalent.

Edited November 26, 2013 by BazzaS

[timbo58]

I'm surprised the OP is even considering travelling by rail when their perception of train travel is so poor.

The only 'advantage' in complaining to the ASA will be to make the TOC spend money defending your complaint, period.

 

The ASA are either a welcome regulatory body who watch out for genuine interests or an unelected PITA who act as judge, jury and executioner on spurious or downright false claims depending on your experience.

[BazzaS]

I'm surprised the OP is even considering travelling by rail when their perception of train travel is so poor.

The only 'advantage' in complaining to the ASA will be to make the TOC spend money defending your complaint, period.

 

The ASA are either a welcome regulatory body who watch out for genuine interests or an unelected PITA who act as judge, jury and executioner on spurious or downright false claims depending on your experience.

 

I doubt it would cost the TOC that much, if anything.

The "complaint" might not even get past the ASA's initial screening process, if they did a few fare searches for the less popular times, and found fares as advertised.

 

If so, the first the TOC might know of it is when the ASA find no further investigation needed and case closed.

[timbo58]

Unfortunately Bazza, the asa doesn't do much checking IME, they take it as read the complainant is correct and force the respondent company to defend themselves by actually stating the facts.

Or so they told me anyway: you couldn't make it up! If someone wanted to drive a one man band or small business into bankruptcy they could reply on the ASA to help thats for sure!

[noddy997]

I'm surprised the OP is even considering travelling by rail when their perception of train travel is so poor.

The only 'advantage' in complaining to the ASA will be to make the TOC spend money defending your complaint, period.

 

The ASA are either a welcome regulatory body who watch out for genuine interests or an unelected PITA who act as judge, jury and executioner on spurious or downright false claims depending on your experience.

 

To me "£38 or less" means a maximum of £38 or LESS, not MORE! How do you justify that? And for those that said "all you have to do is find a fare at £38 and one at £37.95" - but that still does not cover "£38 or LESS".

 

@ Bazza - having a bit of common sense is not "tosh" compared to stats. I came back today (on the train) it was packed, many people were forced to stand up, if the train derailed, or the emergency break was applied because one idiot decided to play "chicken" on the tracks (a recent increase, which is a fact for you since your a person of facts) - how many of those standing would be shunted forward? Plus those that would be jolted in their seats, multiply that by 8 carriages.

 

Then I got on the bus from the train station, overly packed, many people standing, some were standing on the upper deck - the sign that says "no standing on upper deck" is very small and in the corner - buses operate on the road, yet they're exempt from seatbelts and poor health and safety signs?

 

And please quit ranting about ASA or any other regulatory body as they're are few corrupt ones here and there that dont do much for consumers. "The big get bigger, the small get smaller".

[BazzaS]

To me "£38 or less" means a maximum of £38 or LESS, not MORE! How do you justify that? And for those that said "all you have to do is find a fare at £38 and one at £37.95" - but that still does not cover "£38 or LESS".

 

@ Bazza - having a bit of common sense is not "tosh" compared to stats. I came back today (on the train) it was packed, many people were forced to stand up, if the train derailed, or the emergency break was applied because one idiot decided to play "chicken" on the tracks (a recent increase, which is a fact for you since your a person of facts) - how many of those standing would be shunted forward? Plus those that would be jolted in their seats, multiply that by 8 carriages.

 

Then I got on the bus from the train station, overly packed, many people standing, some were standing on the upper deck - the sign that says "no standing on upper deck" is very small and in the corner - buses operate on the road, yet they're exempt from seatbelts and poor health and safety signs?

 

And please quit ranting about ASA or any other regulatory body as they're are few corrupt ones here and there that dont do much for consumers. "The big get bigger, the small get smaller".

 

"Return fares to London £38 or less" means just that : one fare at £38, and one less!, so the £38 and £37.95 example I gave does cover it.

If they ALL had to be £38 or less, it would be "ALL return fares to London £38 or less".

 

The website you cited also notes "we have thousands of return journeys .... at £38 or less", NOT "ALL our return journeys ..... are £38 or less"

 

If you can't comprehend English, its no wonder you can't comprehend the statistics either!

 

The train may be "packed", but the frequency of accidents is far lower compared with the carnage on the roads, leading to the statistics I've quoted.

I recently traveled 100 miles up the M6 : passing 3 separate accidents causing delays, 2 of which still had the ambulances present.

Admittedly, this is anecdote rather than evidence, just for 1 trip, but having worked with the emergency services I've seen many more "road" casualties than "rail" casualties.

 

When it "goes wrong" on the Railways it can go "very wrong" (Greyrigg, Potters Bar, Clapham Junction), but this is overshadowed by the road's low-level (of "death per incident ") but constant level (incidents per day) of death & serious injury.

Edited November 30, 2013 by BazzaS

[timbo58]

No ranting involved - I gave both a complainants and respondents POV and can't be a rant by definition.

Complain to them by all means though.

 

Frankly when I see a fare price at £38 or less I would tend to think that in certain circumstances (such as railcard discounts) the fare will be less than this lowest price special offer.

It doesn't make me think a 1st class peak ticket from x to y will be £38 and everything else less.

 

Opinion noted however.

 

As for standing on buses - if every single seat was taken on both floors and people were standing then I'd complain as this us obviously a h&s breach.

If people choose to stand when seats are there however that's their choice.

 

Jam packed trains were subject to a safety report a few years back which ironically found that standing passengers were LESS at risk in the event of a collision - I'm surer someone with the correct references to its report will show a link if you're interested?