Rail fares rise above inflation rate.

[Theophany]

As part of the 90% of the population that don't use the trains I wouldn't want to pay more in tax to support something that is mainly there for corporate types who already earn far above the average wage and are trying to have it both ways by living somewhere cheap whilst working somewhere that pays more.

JUST LIVE CLOSER TO WHERE YOU WORK! All these people who "commute to London" for example, why not just go and live in London? You can't take the higher than average salaries available there whilst enjoying the lower living costs of living outside London. Well you can but don't moan when fares go up.

Do you have even the slightest clue how expensive renting in London is these days? That is not a viable option in the least. I'm currently paying £1,500 pcm for a two-bedroom flat in zone 2. My boss is paying £700 for a three bed flat three times the size of mine in Berkamsted.

Whilst I don't take issue with fares going up to cover costs, your argument is daft.

 

[Kainz]

Everyone should avoid rail and use buses! See what happens then!

GTFO mah busses!

I feel for you rail users though. I don't use trains but busses and even bus passes are getting silly on the price front.

 

[Gornall]

As part of the 90% of the population that don't use the trains I wouldn't want to pay more in tax to support something that is mainly there for corporate types who already earn far above the average wage and are trying to have it both ways by living somewhere cheap whilst working somewhere that pays more.

JUST LIVE CLOSER TO WHERE YOU WORK! All these people who "commute to London" for example, why not just go and live in London? You can't take the higher than average salaries available there whilst enjoying the lower living costs of living outside London. Well you can but don't moan when fares go up.

Very naive/narrow view in my opinion.

And I think you entirely missing the point.

 

[rogan]

First are also taking over the virgin routes in the NW and have promised to cut standard anytime fares by 15%

All well and true but when virgin offer the 'virgin trains only' tickets at 50% the cost of standard anytime fares, we're talking a huge increase in price.

****ing *****

 

[FutileBreadMachine]

As part of the 90% of the population that don't use the trains I wouldn't want to pay more in tax to support something that is mainly there for corporate types who already earn far above the average wage and are trying to have it both ways by living somewhere cheap whilst working somewhere that pays more.

JUST LIVE CLOSER TO WHERE YOU WORK! All these people who "commute to London" for example, why not just go and live in London? You can't take the higher than average salaries available there whilst enjoying the lower living costs of living outside London. Well you can but don't moan when fares go up.

I actually agree with this sentiment. This is one of those "have your cake and eat it" scenarios I think. I live in Zone 5, so I pay £50pw for a travel card, which is fair IMO.

 

[Theophany]

I actually agree with this sentiment. This is one of those "have your cake and eat it" scenarios I think. I live in Zone 5, so I pay £50pw for a travel card, which is fair IMO.

Is that NR or TfL though?

 

[Gornall]

I actually agree with this sentiment. This is one of those "have your cake and eat it" scenarios I think. I live in Zone 5, so I pay £50pw for a travel card, which is fair IMO.

But just because someone commutes means they are fair game for drastically increased prices on a shoddy service?

Regardless of the demographic, it's ridiculous to think that is ok? Plenty of people drive, it's still not fun when they hike the taxes on Petrol. But then again they decided to work further than they can walk so it's all good.

 

[FutileBreadMachine]

Is that NR or TfL though?

I travel on Southern Rail, they accept normal tube travel cards, so the same card gets me all around London.

 

[Mr Jones]

I do pity rail users - being a user during my college years - seeing prices go up and up year on year made me sick. Even with a rail card, it's still expensive when I travel on the rail booking in advance.

Since finishing uni, I travel by car because rail is just too expensive. A return ticket (or advance Single/Single) for me to visit my parents down south is around £90 without a rail card. If my missus is to come along, double that. I drive down on my car for 2, return journey cost £70 in petrol.

If I had to travel regularly... it's mad. How much of the profit these train companies earn and return to their shareholders compared to the amount they reinvest into the infrastructure?

 

[krooton]

My current rail cost is £180 a month, plus £70 for a bus and tram pass to get to and from Wimbledon.

When we eventually move further out from London (possibly Kent), it will actually be considerably cheaper for me to get a £2k Smart Car and drive in to work along the M25, as the only way to get to work by train would be to go all the way in the London and then back out again, and it would cost stupid money.

 

[RDM]

If it is the case we are spending more out of taxation now than when it was public *and* the prices are so much higher, then obviously something is not working as it should. The whole point to privatisation is to create a more efficient overall cost effective system, which does not seem to be happening.

Not really comparing like for like though. The British Rail service provision was pretty dire and passenger numbers have massively increased (750m in 1993 to 1350m in 2010). So of course costs are going to go up.

But to answer your question in broad strokes, yes I would be happy to pay more tax to have and provide national services under national control and I dont even use the trains but then again I'm not one of the selfish people that only think of looking after myself and my own wallet...

Considering how poor British Rail were I am not exactly sure having a nationalised service would be any better than the current one. A rubbish system run by the government is still a rubbish system.

That aside I am not sure that not wanting to see tax rises for services you don't use is really all that selfish. Surely it could be said that expecting others to pay for a service for you is even more selfish?

 

[FutileBreadMachine]

But just because someone commutes means they are fair game for drastically increased prices on a shoddy service?

Regardless of the demographic, it's ridiculous to think that is ok? Plenty of people drive, it's still not fun when they hike the taxes on Petrol. But then again they decided to work further than they can walk so it's all good.

They are a private company, so they can do what they like. If the increased cost of travel is not tolerable to some people, then yes they should not be travelling so far. They are trying to live the good life outside the city, but get paid city wages. When I first moved here I lived in a flatshare in Zone 2 for 4 years, I didn't rent a nice pad for myself in Kent and expect cheap travel into London.

 

[Roar87]

This is what happens when private companies are allowed what essentially amounts to a monopoly. The customer has to pay over the odds for a poor service because they have no alternative, simply to line the pockets of share holders and CEO's. And no one these days has the guts to boycott or protest it, people just accept price rises across the board. Britain is a very wealthy country, we should have a much higher standard of living for what we pay in taxes.


I think the best way to operate would be for customers to be able to vote for which company gets the contract on their line every few years. Rail companies would think twice about putting profit above fair pricing and customer service if their contracts were on the line.

 

[Scarecrow]

My yearly travel card was £1150 and as of yesterday its now £1450. For a crappy service it takes the biscuit

 

[[TW]Fox]

The service provision wasn't dire at all, it just needed investment, investment it was getting immediately prior to being sold off. In the 5 years before the Railways Act was passed BR completed a total upgrade and electrification of the East Coast Mainline including an all new fleet of high speed electric trains and had spent an enormous sum on large numbers of replacement trains across the network.

Which private companies then reaped the benefits of.

 

[Ahleckz]

Can I ask where in general you use them? I've been quote honestly amazed at thepoor aattitude of staff in and around glasgow any time I've had to ask for anything or there are problems with services.

When I was using yje train more I had no real issue with there being the occasional cancelled train or delay - more the ineptitude ans poor attitude when it did. She who must be obeyed still reports the same issues

I go through Queen Street daily, Central a couple times a week and earlier this year I went to Waverley daily for weeks.

 

[estebanrey]

Do you have even the slightest clue how expensive renting in London is these days? That is not a viable option in the least. I'm currently paying £1,500 pcm for a two-bedroom flat in zone 2. My boss is paying £700 for a three bed flat three times the size of mine in Berkamsted.

Whilst I don't take issue with fares going up to cover costs, your argument is daft.

It is expensive to live in London because the average salary there is much higher than outside London. That is my point!

If you want to earn London wages but not pay London rents fine, spend half your life on a train travelling to and from where-ever you live but don't moan when fares go up to support a 'having your cake and eating it' set up and certainly don't expect the tax payer to foot the bill.

I live 5 minutes from my work, why should I have to help pay for people who CHOOSE to work miles and miles away from where they live, who often only choose to work there because the pay is higher than where they reside?

Of course not everyone who uses the train is a 'commuter' so my argument doesn't apply to them but the vast majority of them are.

 

[Mr^B]

I don't really care about rail prices, if they suddenly doubled I would, but not a minor increase like this. Which is probably what they are counting on, and fair play to them if they are.

There's always a choice, no matter what arguments are brought forward. You could drive to station further in, you could get a job closer to home, you could move closer to work. All of these have financial penalties, and if you took a job with a commute and a fare and didn't expect that fare to increase over time then that's your own lookout.

I simply would not tolerate the wage drop for me to work somewhere locally, and I wouldn't pay over a million for a 4 bed house with a garden and parking for 4 cars closer to London.

 

[SarGara]

My yearly travel card was £1150 and as of yesterday its now £1450. For a crappy service it takes the biscuit

If you can run a car for a year doing the same journey on £1450 (including fuel, insurance, tax) then by all means complain about it. You get delays on the road too, traffic jams, accidents, roadworks etc.

I doubt the motorists costs have risen with inflation either so welcome to the club.

 

[Freakbro]

That aside I am not sure that not wanting to see tax rises for services you don't use is really all that selfish. Surely it could be said that expecting others to pay for a service for you is even more selfish?

What a ridiculous attitude, we are a society, we all contribute to the benefit of the society - I still maintain provision of our energy, water and transporatation should be public services with a nominal charge for usage....supposedly we're all in this together.....remember?