Appendix 1

London TravelWatch Performance Report to 30.9.12

1. Introduction

1.1. This report sets out details of TravelWatch’s performance for the first six months of 2012/13 and shows the financial position as at 30 September 2012. It provides a high-level summary of performance against the suite of performance indicators agreed previously with the Transport Committee.

1.2. Over the past six months, London TravelWatch’s principle focus has been on playing its part to help ensure the successful operation of the transport network during the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games. In addition, the organisation has continued to lobby for improved accessibility and safety and has put forward the specific London passenger perspective in a number of important rail consultations. It moved to new premises in July.

1.3. Performance against turnaround targets for casework continues to be excellent as the table of performance indicators later in this report confirms. Our casework team continued to receive a lot of appeals from passengers who felt that penalty fares had been unfairly administered and we have changed our approach in response to this.

1.4. In the next six months, two of our main priorities will be carrying out further research to see how passenger experience and understanding of Oyster Pay As You Go (PAYG) has changed since our research into unfinished Oyster journeys in 2011, and establishing what passenger priorities are for improvement on (LUL). In addition, we will do more to directly engage with transport users in different ways in order to increase our evidence base.

1.5. Major works will be taking place on the transport network, notably at London Bridge station but also at Victoria, Bank and stations associated with Crossrail, so we will keep a close eye on progress and decisions that are relevant to passengers.

1.6. We will also be working closely with the Chair to provide a comprehensive induction programme for the new Board.

Page 1 of 8 Financial Outturn

1.7. The financial position as at the end of September 2012 is summarised below:

Original Revised Actual Year end Forecast Budget Budget to date Forecast Variance £ £ £ £ £ REVENUE EXPENDITURE Chairman, Members & Staff Costs 811,393 811,393 406,299 800,302 (11,091) Accommodation costs 209,350 209,350 123,524 187,117 (22,233) Supplies & Services 160,809 160,809 57,531 153,894 (6,915) Depreciation 21,448 21,448 18,700 29,424 7,976

Total Revenue Expenditure 1,203,000 1,203,000 606,054 1,170,737 (32,263)

Total Capital & Revenue Expenditure 1,203,000 1,203,000 606,054 1,170,737 (32,263)

INCOME Funding 1,203,000 1,203,000 601,500 1,203,000 0 Passenger Focus 0 0 4,243 8,500 (8,500) Bank Interest Receivable 0 0 40 75 (75) Other income 0 0 0 0 0

Total Income 1,203,000 1,203,000 605,783 1,211,575 (8,575)

Surplus / (Deficit) funded from transfer to / (from) reserves – excluding capital expenditure 0 0 (271) 40,838 (40,838)

Capital Expenditure 0 0 0 0 0

Surplus / (Deficit) funded from transfer to / (from) reserves – including capital expenditure 0 0 (271) 40,838 (40,838)

Main Variances

1.8. The forecast underspend of £11,000 for Chair, Members and staff costs is due to reduced member costs.

1.9. Despite the need to meet all of the removal costs from this year’s budget there is a forecast underspend of £22,000 for accommodation costs. This arises both from the savings in office costs following the move from Middle Street and because some savings were made against the provisions made for the actual cost of moving.

1.10. The income from Passenger Focus is a cost recovery for the time our safety adviser spends on consultancy work for them.

Page 2 of 8 Risk Areas

2. Due to the need to meet the significant costs of last year’s staff restructure from savings made and reserves, the organisation started the year with very low cash reserves. It has had to exercise extremely tight control to manage its cash flow, particularly during the office move where not all of the costs could be accurately predicted, and to rebuild a small reserve to cushion against unexpected costs.

3. Headline achievements and progress against the Business Plan

3.1. This section of the report highlights achievements made between April 2012 and September 2012. It also reports progress against London TravelWatch’s key performance indicators.

The 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games

3.2. We have held regular discussions with transport operators and providers since the Games were awarded to London, advocating the use of travel demand management from an early stage. We made sure that the needs, views and experiences of non- Games transport users were taken account of by transport operators and providers during their planning for the Games.

3.3. As the Games drew closer, having had concerns expressed to us about the vulnerability of the rail network in the vicinity of Stratford, we intervened to encourage Network Rail to change the way it was planning major improvement works to the overhead power lines. We were particularly pleased that they responded by reworking their plans for this in advance of the Games. They rectified more than 3,000 faults that had been outstanding for up to two years along a twenty mile section of track between London and Shenfield. This resulted in a very reliable service throughout the Games period, and improved performance since, that has been a real benefit to passengers. The success of this programme in improving performance has led Network Rail to institute a similar rectification programme on the routes between London and Stansted Airport.

3.4. One of the undoubted successes of the 2012 Games was the way that operators worked together to provide a seamless service under the ‘One Team Transport’ banner. Our multi-modal remit means that we are particularly aware of how often customer service fails when different operators do not liaise properly so this is something we called for repeatedly prior to the Games. TfL subsequently acknowledged how London TravelWatch’s advocacy in this area helped them make the case for greater integration.

3.5. To assist people in planning their travel during the summer, and to supplement the other information available, we developed a set of answers to ‘frequently asked questions’ about travelling to and during the Games on our website. Clearly people found these useful because we received a large number of ‘hits’ from the public; visitors to this section of the website peaked in August at around 2,000 hits with the most popular page registering 3,361 hits. Questions were compiled from casework enquiries, staff queries and other popular questions and were updated to reflect observed or emerging issues.

Page 3 of 8 3.6. We received very few enquiries relating to transport during the Games and, so far, have not received any appeals. This shows that all the preparatory work carried out paid off and helped pre-empt significant problems.

Accessibility and safety

3.7. Several months in advance of the Games and in partnership with Transport for All, we carried out mystery shopping of the Olympic and Paralympic venue stations with visits to 13 of the 14 venues. Our conclusions were positive, finding that, overall, stations which serviced the London venues were well prepared for the arrival of spectators with disabilities. However, we argued that minor works before the Games could have further improved access, such as tactile paving at the top of staircases which is very useful for visually impaired travellers.

3.8. Many innovations worked well this summer such as the ramps which allow wheelchair access onto the Underground and improved signage and information at stations, and we would like to see these continue now the Games are over. We will, along with many others, continue to lobby to retain as many of these benefits as possible.

3.9. The London Assembly’s report ‘Making walking easier and safer in London’ (October 2010) and our own ‘Walking and Interchange in London’ report (June 2011), identified pavement obstructions as a serious problem for people with visual and mobility impairments. In September our Transport Services Committee heard from representatives of blind and disabled travellers who described the difficulties they face as pedestrians from street obstructions such as A-boards, barriers and items for sale on the pavement. London TravelWatch has now called for TfL and borough councils in London to do more to get obstructions removed from pavements which make it difficult for pedestrians to get around the capital. In particular, we have asked TfL to begin making use of its power to impose penalty fare notices for pavement contraventions.

3.10. We continued to take opportunities to lobby transport providers to ensure that station enhancement works included improvements to accessibility. Where we thought that operators had missed opportunities to improve accessibility we flagged this to the regulator. We have continued to discuss these issues with operators and providers to see how we could take them forward.

3.11. We responded to the Office of Rail Regulation’s (ORR) periodic consultation report and welcomed their decision to introduce new rules which will force train operators to minimise disruption for passengers. We suggested that Network Rail should be given an incentive to deal with environmental quality on the rail network. Litter on the rails can affect performance, lead to delays and ultimately may impact on safety. Clean stations and trains improve passengers’ perceptions of safety on the network. In a separate consultation on the proposed output framework for the period 2014-19 for Network Rail, we recommended that the proposed Station Stewardship Measure should have a measure of accessibility to incentivise Network Rail and train operators to improve station access, particularly whilst carrying out other work to stations.

Page 4 of 8 3.12. London TravelWatch assisted the Law Commission in developing its consultation on taxi and private hire vehicle regulation. We advised the Commission that it should focus on reforms that improved safety, increased consumer choice and reduced costs to consumers. In our consultation response we pressed for better safety standards for passengers. Given the work we have done previously to promote this, we were especially pleased to see the Commission recommend national minimum safety standards for both taxis and private hire vehicles and an increase in enforcement powers for licensing officers against out-of-borough vehicles and drivers.

Issues in the London railway area

3.13. The South London line is due to be withdrawn service on 8 December 2012. Following the DfT’s decision that Southeastern trains should not make any additional stops at Peckham Rye and Denmark Hill during peak hours, the East London line extension to Clapham Junction is being offered as the only alternative service provision. We successfully called for TfL to launch an information and advice programme in co- operation with Southern and Southeastern to inform existing South London Line users about the alternative journey options that they will have after December.

3.14. London TravelWatch has a statutory obligation to ensure that the public are properly consulted in respect of railway closures. Accordingly, following LUL’s proposal to discontinue services to and from Watford Metropolitan Underground station, we set up a member panel to hear the views of members of the public. The level of interest in the proposals was so significant that we organised a public hearing and over 80 people, including the MP and local councillors, took part in the debate. We then reported our views on the closure to the Mayor of London, who has to make the final decision. We also responded to the DfT’s closure consultation regarding sections of railway in West and South London between Ealing Broadway, Kensington Olympia and Wandsworth Road stations. Feedback from local user groups, and from the public in response to posters at stations, helped to inform our reply.

3.15. We responded to a number of important rail related consultations. Our responses varied in detail depending on the likely impact of the proposals and we focused on those with the greatest impact on passengers in London, particularly the consultations regarding the three important franchise specifications, and used evidence from our casework and research to underpin our responses.

3.16. In responding to the DfT’s consultation on rail decentralisation we welcomed the prospect of responsibility for rail services in the UK being devolved, recommending that the Mayor of London and TfL’s proposal for taking responsibility for Southeastern and Greater Anglia suburban services should be accepted by the DfT.

3.17. In respect of the DfT consultation on fares and ticketing, we supported the general objectives of the review but made a series of additional proposals which included suggesting radical changes to the ticketing structure to make it easier for passengers and to provide a more flexible approach to peak time pricing. We called for the Mayor of London to be given greater influence over the setting of fares.

Page 5 of 8 Communications and Public Engagement

3.18. We continued working to raise awareness of London TravelWatch among transport users so that they know there is an organisation putting the case on their behalf with the industry. In addition, getting feedback from the travelling public increases our understanding of their concerns, which informs our work and helps us achieve better outcomes.

3.19. We continued to promote localised stories arising from our general work to local newspapers. We also produced targeted articles in specialist press for excluded groups after the Paralympics, including, among others, to Age UK, Arthritis Research UK, Disability Magazine, Scope and the Shaw Trust. The articles aimed to make readers aware of what we had done during the Games and that we were addressing disability issues and acting on behalf of disabled users.

3.20. We continued to develop our website as a source of advice on both passenger rights and relevant consumer issues. We developed our use of social media to provide passengers with new ways of getting into contact with us. The London TravelWatch website drew together useful information and links relating to travel during the Olympic and Paralympic Games.

3.21. We attended this year’s London Pensions Fund Authority (LPFA) information fair at the Southbank Centre, giving information and advice to a large number of the 450 people who attended the annual event, most of whom were of pension age, and it was useful to hear their thoughts about transport issues in the capital.

4. Casework and progress against London TravelWatch’s suite of key performance indicators

4.1. The performance indicators in the following table relate to the organisation’s performance in its handling of casework during the six months April to September 2012.

4.2. We continue to maintain excellent performance against turnaround time targets but were disappointed to see a drop in satisfaction rates over the past six months. However a detailed analysis of individual responses showed that the drop was because we are now appealing penalty fares and prosecutions where it is possible that sufficient discretion was not applied by the operator. As there are very few grounds relating to discretions which might result in an appeal being overturned, these complaints are much less likely to result in a successful outcome than is the case in other appeals.

4.3. It should be noted that over the past six months, since implementing our new policy to pursue penalty fare cases relating to discretions, we have achieved a success rate of 41%. Nevertheless, the new policy has impacted on our customer satisfaction scores. We are now investigating whether we should make it clearer to passengers how difficult it is to have a penalty fare overturned so that their expectations of success are not raised unduly.

Page 6 of 8 PI Indicator Performance Perform- no. Jan/Mar Apr/Jun Jul/Sep Oct/Dec Jan/Mar Apr/Jun Jul/Sep Oct/Dec Jan/Mar Apr/Jun Jul/Sep Target ance 10 10 10 10 11 11 11 11 12 12 12 2012 against /13 target at Sep 12 1a % of newly received cases recorded and 95% 99% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 0 acknowledged by LTW within 5 days 1b % of newly received referred to relevant 75% 89% 98% 96% 98% 99% 98% 98% 98% 100% 99% 75% +24 operator within 5 days 2 % of replies from operators considered, decision taken on further action within three days of receipt 2a Reply within 10 working days of receipt 77% 89% 94% 94% 98% 98% 98% 100% 98% 100% 99% 90% +9 if no further action required 2b Reply within 20 working days of receipt 88% 95% 97% 97% 99% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 0 if no further action required 3 % replies to cases dealt with direct without referral to an operator 3a Reply within ten working days of receipt 87% 98% 99% 100% 100% 99% 100% 100% 100% 100% 98% 90% +8 if no further action required 3b Reply within 20 working days of receipt 95% 98% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 0 if no further action required 4 Mean score for respondents to LTW survey expressing 46 66 73 72 77 59 70 -11 satisfaction with outcome of case 5 Mean score for respondents to LTW 73 survey expressing 61 72 78 77 84 72 +1 satisfaction with the speed of response 6 Mean score for respondents to LTW survey expressing 61 75 83 80 85 67 79 -12 satisfaction with handling of case

Page 7 of 8 4.4. The demand for London TravelWatch's services increased marginally in quarter two of 2012 even though spring and early summer are a generally quieter time. The anticipated busy period during and post the Olympics and Paralympics did not materialise although the number of incoming cases remained higher than usual.

4.5. We did receive complaints about transport during the Jubilee weekend. Operators ran weekend services and although some of these were enhanced, this was insufficient to cope with the amount of people moving around the capital and wishing to take part in the festivities. Lessons were clearly learnt in advance of the Games.

4.6. We have received an increasing number of complaints from passengers about penalty fares and how they have been administered. Because of this we have changed our approach to these complaints and are now directly challenging the train operating companies rather than their penalty fares appeals bodies. We are doing more to ensure that appropriate discretion has been applied when considering the circumstances of individual passengers who have made genuine mistakes. We are also having discussions with different train operating companies about their processes to try and secure general improvements.

TfL customer service

4.7. After a long campaign, we were pleased that in September TfL finally began to publish their complaints data and to do so in a format that enables comparison with the number of complaints per 100,000 journeys received by the train operating companies. Further analysis of the information revealed a high incidence of complaints about ticket machines on the DLR, and London Overground. This is consistent with some of our own previous observations and we will continue to monitor the position closely.

4.8. We continue to receive complaints from passengers who are confused about the use of Oyster PAYG and we will be conducting further research into this.

5. Staffing Issues

5.1. London TravelWatch moved premises in July 2012 to much smaller accommodation and now shares the London Pensions Fund Authority’s offices near Tower Bridge. The planning of the move diverted some staff resource away from usual business operations and put pressure on staffing capacity. However, staff coped remarkably well with the move, which was achieved with the minimum disruption to services, and have settled well in the new offices.

5.2. We have continued to invest in the training and development of staff to ensure they are equipped to carry out their new roles following the restructure.

Janet Cooke Chief Executive, London TravelWatch

Page 8 of 8