The government has backtracked on plans to close railway ticket offices following a consultation that saw widespread opposition to the plans from the public.

The plans, announced earlier this year would have seen the majority of ticket offices in stations in England closed, and the staff redirected to other tasks in the station. The argument was that just 12 percent of train tickets were bought in a ticket office, so it’s not a huge leap for those people to switch to ticket machines or online.

However, it became clear that the 12 percent average hid substantial variations between stations, particularly outside London, where in-person ticket sales in the station are much higher. The London area has a far lower demand for ticket sales over the counter thanks to the much simpler ticket pricing system in use. There was a strong feeling in the consultation that as ticket prices are complicated, mandating a switch to ticket machines or online sales would lead to confusion and likely fewer ticket sales.

There’s long been a call to simplify the ticket pricing, but closing the ticket offices before the simplification process was even started felt more like a case of putting the horse before the cart.

Although presented publically as a proposal from the train companies, and the Department for Transport (DfT) would respond to the consultation, make no doubt this was led by the DfT, who instructed the train companies to put forward proposals to cut costs in light of post-pandemic changes.

Of the 20 train operating companies in England, the DfT directly controls five, representing about a quarter of passenger journies in the UK. They would have only been able to propose closing the ticket offices if the DfT had said that was acceptable.

Each of the train companies had to submit their proposals to the two statutory bodies running the consultation, Transport Focus and London Travelwatch.

Transport Focus said in its report today that it’s objecting to all of the current proposals to close ticket offices. While many of the revised station proposals failed to meet the criteria set by Transport Focus, there were some, such as those proposed by GWR and TransPennine Express, which met the majority of their criteria. However, across all proposals, they said that there are key issues that are critical to maintaining accessibility for all to the national network that remain unresolved.

Transport Focus was particularly concerned that the details around some of the proposals, particularly new customer support arrangements, still lack detail. A lack of an overall delivery plan also raises concerns that closures may occur before new arrangements are in place.

Anthony Smith, chief executive of the independent watchdog Transport Focus, said: “Transport Focus is supportive of the principle of redeploying staff from ticket offices to improve the overall offer to the passenger. We also recognise the extreme financial pressure facing the railways and the need to find new, cost-effective ways of working. We will continue to work with the train companies to help them resolve the issues raised by passengers during this process.”

This is the crux of the issue.

Having staff sitting behind a glass wall when they could be standing in the ticket office performing the same function with a handheld tablet seems archaic — why is the glass wall important.

However, the proposals felt rushed and half planned, and unsurprisingly, sparked a considerable amount of opposition.

In a statement, the Transport Secretary, Mark Harper said “The consultation on ticket offices has now ended, with the Government making clear to the rail industry throughout the process that any resulting proposals must meet a high threshold of serving passengers”

“The proposal that have resulted from this process to not meet the high thresholds set by Ministers, and so the Government has asked train operators to withdraw their proposals”

For the Government to lay the blame for the failure of the plans at the door of the train operating companies when it was the government that, in effect, told them to close the ticket offices is disingenuous.

It has also angered people inside the train companies who feel they’ve taken the blame for a government decision.

The proposal for a wholesale closure of ticket offices is now dead.

The consultation process has had a positive aspect to it. That it triggered so much feedback — over 750,000 responses in total — will be a valuable body of information that can highlight areas where the trains are weakest in providing services, particularly to those less able to use the services.

The consultation has also shown how much people want to travel by train and were worried about the potential loss of access to public transport, especially outside London where public transport services are weaker.

What the DfT — which ultimately controls the train companies — can do is to take this as an opportunity to push ahead with the simplification of ticketing prices, speed up the rollout of contactless payments and improve the functionality of ticket machines and online ticket sales.

Then you might very well see ticket offices closing over the years to come because they will have genuinely become redundant. But they’re not redundant yet.

NEWSLETTER

Be the first to know what's on in London, and the latest news published on ianVisits.

You can unsubscribe at any time from my weekly emails.

Tagged with:
SUPPORT THIS WEBSITE

This website has been running now for over a decade, and while advertising revenue contributes to funding the website, it doesn't cover the costs. That is why I have set up a facility with DonorBox where you can contribute to the costs of the website and time invested in writing and research for the news articles.

It's very similar to the way The Guardian and many smaller websites are now seeking to generate an income in the face of rising costs and declining advertising.

Whether it's a one-off donation or a regular giver, every additional support goes a long way to covering the running costs of this website, and keeping you regularly topped up doses of Londony news and facts.

If you like what you read on here, then please support the website here.

Thank you

5 comments
  1. Keith says:

    Glad to see a U-turn occurred, be that due to common sense finally being seen or for political (election) reasons.

    The government and train operators need to realise that the reason TFL was able to close ticket offices on the underground was because they had a useable alternative in place. Simple ticket pricing (with daily & weekly caps), contactless payments and oyster being supported at ticket barriers, and generally less complicated journeys within London.

    The same cannot not be said of the current situation on the UK’s railways.

    For a start ticket prices need simplifying. At the moment you have Anytime, Off-peak, Super Off-peak, and Advanced just to name a few (not including the 1st class variations). Also, due to pricing quirks it can sometimes be cheaper to buy split tickets, even when the entire journey is off-peak and you’re not changing trains.

    Personally I’d rather see the tickets simplified to just Off-peak and Peak for shorter/commuter journeys, with a daily & weekly caps introduced based around distance travelled. Advanced tickets could still be retained for long distance / high-speed trains (e.g. LNER).

    With that sort of simplified ticket pricing in place it would then be far easier to introduce contactless tap in/out payment using the ticket barriers, for standard class travel. Admittedly 1st class tickets would probably still require a paper or digital ticket, but they’re a relative minority.

    At that point the case for closuring ticket offices may be a more justifiable option. In the meantime there may be a case at some stations to reduce the number of manned ticket office windows, preferably re-using that space to improve the station for the public.

  2. Andrew Jones says:

    Great and balanced summary, thanks Ian.

  3. Jon Jones says:

    When this was first announced I looked at responding to the consultation. Unfortunately I found the default response options were too simplistic. As your excellent post tells: “It’s complicated”.

    Removing both the physical and metaphorical barrier between staff & customer only leads to better interactions. But that can only be done once the means to purchase tickets can be efficiently handled by machines or apps.

    At my local station, there are pieces of paper sellotaped on and around the ticket machines by staff explaining which trains different tickets can be used on. This shows that ticket machines & the fares are not designed with the average user in mind. (In the IT modern world you’d talk about “the user journey” or “the user experience”)

    Having more of an interest in trains than the average person, I still struggle to understand all the nuances of fares – especially around the peak/off-peak boundary. If I’m struggling, what does chance does the average user have?

  4. NG says:

    Even with “simplified” ticket prices, there are many thousands (over a million?) people in London, who might easily need a ticket office, if they go outside London …
    “Boundary Zone 6 to $_Destination please?” you simply can’t do that on a machine, even without a railcard ….

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

Home >> News >> Transport News