Spending Review: steeper train fare hikes from 2012

chattychappy

Stigy wrote: »

If your friend had found that there was nobdy at the ticket barriers, would he have paid the £2? I've reported people for a £1.80 fare before.

No you missed the point. The barrier was open - he could have just walked through. But he had a query about his return journey so asked the guy standing nearby.

He had no idea he had the wrong ticket, so of course would not have paid the £2. He intended and thought he had bought the right ticket in the first place.

In the end, don't want to get drawn into a debate about penalty fares. My point is it's an example of the way the railways get away with treating people in a way that normal private businesses couldn't.

(One more example: my elderly mother left a bag on a train. Had to pay a fee to get it back! Then left the same bag on a domestic flight - no charge for getting it back from the airport. I wonder how many other businesses can charge for returning property left behind.)

Butterfly_Brain

I could understand it if it was still a nationalised company but they are privately owned - so why should the commuter pay for new trains? Surely that should be down to the shareholders and profits.

Sadly this is happening in all the previously nationalised companies, water, gas, electricity all expect the consumer to pay for upkeep of services whilst making obscene profits :mad: :mad:

Jeff_Bridges_hair

Butterfly_Brain wrote: »

I could understand it if it was still a nationalised company but they are privately owned - so why should the commuter pay for new trains? Surely that should be down to the shareholders and profits.

Sadly this is happening in all the previously nationalised companies, water, gas, electricity all expect the consumer to pay for upkeep of services whilst making obscene profits :mad: :mad:

Because in case you really didnt know it is the taxpayer who subsidises the lower fares. It has been costing billions to keep the railways going and its all a f-in shambles but in real terms you are still paying lower commuter fares then if BR still existed

chattychappy

Jeff_Bridges_hair wrote: »

Because in case you really didnt know it is the taxpayer who subsidises the lower fares. It has been costing billions to keep the railways going and its all a f-in shambles but in real terms you are still paying lower commuter fares then if BR still existed

Didn't help Stephen Byers pushing Railtrack into receivership to make a political point when really it wasn't bust. Ended up with the taxpayer having to pay off the shareholders at pretty much market value - money that could have been put to better use.

I think the endless restructuing has been costly, but agree with the sentiment - it is probably better value now than it would have been under BR.

Sarahtnt83

Hi all.... bit of a long rant here... but please read on

I am a hard working civil servant living in Colwyn Bay and have to get to Caernarfon and back 5 days a week for work, I spend 15 hours a week on public transport, and am on £16830 a year Gross a year. I pay £7 a day to get to and from work (bus and train, get a 'taith rover ticket). And my partner is on similar pay and works closer to home.

The reason I travel by public transport is that it is by far alot cheaper than buying and running a car and there are few jobs in this wage scale close to home! But could somebody please explain with all the cuts and tax hikes etc, i'm just wondering how long I will have a job for (oh and did I neglect to mention that Local Government is the majority employer in North Wales), and I don't even want to think about how I will afford to keep a roof over my head!!!

Couple all of this with the fact I have not had a pay rise for a year (doubt i'll be getting one for a few years either, and last years was a poxy 1%), the cost of train fares going up in the future i'll probably better off in a local shop on minimum wage, or my worst nightmare... on the dole!

Oh and with these price hikes... where are they (Arriva trains Wales) going to spend the money??? Doubt they will spend much of it on their one train an hour service to Holyhead (I personally dream of Virgin taking over and there being 2 trains an hour)!!!

This route is already grossly overcrowded, unreliable and to be frank... disgusting, and so why should I pay more??? I nearly passed out a few times travelling home when the flights were all cancelled earlier in the year, because of the Volcano in Iceland. Any the airconditioning not working duriung the summer!!!

...Oh and let you in on a little secret here, ATW have received £7.5 million from the WAG to improve things, yet the new seating (on only two carriages I have seen) doesn't fit the existing seat moulding, and I would definately say the trains were not thoroughly cleaned before the fit either!!!

So please... for you too see how bad rail transport in North Wales is, please go to the Daily Post website and search for 'arriva trains'... some of the stories are shocking!!!

wealdroam

Sarahtnt83 wrote: »

Oh and with these price hikes... where are they (Arriva trains Wales) going to spend the money???

Haven't read all the detail, but I don't think that Arriva will be better off because the train fare increases.

I imagine that the government will reduce subsidies to match (or beat) the increased fare income... thus saving the government money.

FATBALLZ

wealdroam wrote: »

Haven't read all the detail, but I don't think that Arriva will be better off because the train fare increases.

I imagine that the government will reduce subsidies to match (or beat) the increased fare income... thus saving the government money.

As I understand it it had already been in plan for a number of years (since the previous Labour government) to significantly reduce the subsidy - I think the actual figure is 50%. This equates to many billions of lost income to the companies, which I agree this hike in fares is designed to compensate for.