- This topic has 31 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 2 days, 18 hours ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Why is there a need of so many different prices? Other countries can fit an area of a hundred kilometre radius into about a dozen of fare zones or even less! 40 years ago work was done to fit London into 5 (eventually 6) fare zones, why can’t the process be repeated now to the wider commuter area?!
Complexity, basically. Within the zonal (1-6) area fares are relatively cheap so the outcome of rationalising them into standard fares was relatively painless, even though I’m sure there were some losers. If you were to allocate the entire Project Oval area to the next 6 zones there would have to be lots of losers to keep the whole change revenue neutral. The other issue is that there is no desire to expand the zonal system further than zone 9. By that I mean that West Drayton to Upminster is charged as a 6 zone fare the same as West Drayton to Paddington or Fenchurch Street to Upminster. Imagine the revenue loss if Reading to Shoeburyness was also charged the same as Reading to Paddington. It’s not going to happen.
I’ll go through the FOI response later…
Those zonal system of other countries also follow the London rule of “each zone being charged only once as well” for a much larger area.
The fact that West Drayton to Upminster is a zone 1-6 fare means that there are a lot of opportunities to save a massive amount of fares by ending and restarting my journey at boundary stations, when the zonal system isn’t extended further.
Also, why hasn’t daily and weekly capping introduced to journeys where both ends are outside Zone 1-9, like Gatwick to Redhill, or Maidenhead to Reading and along Thames branches?
By the way, I’m now travelling from Croydon to Essex for less than a bus fare with a Railcard. If I have to pay £4.15 I am not going to travel at all for leisure.
1. Any communication between TSGN and TfL (who operates the Oyster system) in regard to the rezoning of these two stations
“TSGN has identified no recorded information relating to discussions with Transport for London (TfL) concerning a decision to rezone Cuffley and Epsom from Zone 9 to Zone 10.
We are advised that TSGN was not involved in discussions regarding the technical implementation of the change referred to in your request.”2. The business case of rezoning these stations from Zone 9 to Zone 10, along with any impact assessment and publicity relating to the change
“TSGN does not hold a business case relating to the change referenced in your
request.
We are advised that no business case or impact assessment was produced by TSGN
in relation to this change.
TSGN also does not hold any specific publicity material concerning the change. We are advised that the only changes made were updates to published PAYG cap
information.”TSGN (aka GTR the Second) and GTR the First are two separate legal entities; furthermore the Epsom / Cuffley rezoning was a GTR I initiative. My take is that at least some GTR I documents / records / etc were not passed on to GTR II and any that did may be exempt from FoI requests as GTR I was never a state-owned entity.
To clarify, GTR I refers to the previous operator whose services were transferred to TSGN / GTR II on 31 May 2026.
Those zonal system of other countries also follow the London rule of “each zone being charged only once as well” for a much larger area.
Those countries are prepared to fund public transport to different levels compared to the UK. It’s a political choice.
Also, why hasn’t daily and weekly capping introduced to journeys where both ends are outside Zone 1-9, like Gatwick to Redhill, or Maidenhead to Reading and along Thames branches?
It has, but it involves a cap including one outboundary station and extension fares for the other outboundary station. Which is which might depend on how many times each extension is used. You certainly can’t put a cap figure on the whole journey and expect it to hold for unlimited trips from end to end.
Re the FOI response. Edvid has articulated one of my thoughts quite well. The other thing is that they are quite right when they say that no fares were changed. All that changed was the caps and how they are implemented. Given that the change also affected caps to Radlett, Potters Bar, Hertford North and Gatwick Airport, it’s quite likely that the terminology in correspondence didn’t necessarily mention stations by name. The business case is simply to ensure that customers pay the fares they were intended to pay now that TfL’s systems can cope.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.