Towards a Revenue Protection Action Plan
INTEGRATED ACTION TO IMPROVE FARE COMPLIANCE
14 AUGUST 2025 - COUNCIL WORKSHOP
Christine Bulmer – Manager, Revenue Protection
Paul Tawharu - Senior Manager, Operations

Purpose
To propose a revenue protection action plan which takes an integrated
approach to improving fare payment behaviour.
AGENDA
1. Background
2. Principles informing proposed approach
3. Intervention approach
4. Proposed intervention spectrum
5. Update on infringement notices and default fares
6. Recommended next steps

Recap of previous engagement
• At Transport Committee Workshop on June 12 2025, Councillors requested
supporting information about issuing infringement notices on the Metlink
network, and providing equivalent default fares across the network.
• Councillor questions pointed to a need to contextualise these enforcement
actions within an integrated plan of wider interventions. Referring to
approaches taken by other public transport authorities – and considering the
customer experience of fare compliance measures – officers have designed an
integrated approach to improving fare compliance.

Rail - fare evasion
HOW WIDESPREAD IS FARE EVASION?
• Anecdotal observation indicates an increasing rate
of fare evasion that can become normalised if left
unattended.
• Comparing rail patronage (head count and
Automated Passenger Count) and ticketing data
indicates a relatively big variation in data across
different sources.
• Based on this level of aggregate information – current
estimate is that the variation associated with the rate
of non-payment is potentially in the range of 5% to
7% - but could be higher*.
• Every 1% fare evasion (non-payment) is estimated to
be equivalent of about $0.5m fare revenue foregone.
* These estimates do not account for other types of fare evasion
(e.g. ineligible concessions, over-riding ).

Types of Fare Evasion
CONCESSION  INELIGIBILITY  -  E.g. customer is not entitled to the concession (e.g. Accessible,
Child, Tertiary) but has gained access to a card with that concession loaded or is still using a
green child snapper when not at school
NOT TAGGING ON AND OFF -  The customer is not tagging on and off at the station. This will
only be picked up by onboard pass-ops  staff when the Snapper card is checked.  This typically
sits between 1-2% of journeys and may be people simply forgetting. Full fare checking (all
passengers, all services) is the only way of detecting the full extent of this issue.
CASH PAYMENT ONBOARD AS A “BACKUP”  -  Customer purchasing cash fare onboard after
being “checked”  or “prompted”  by staff. May not pay or volunteer payment if not directly
approach. The rate of cash use onboard has not been declining in recent months – suggesting
this is a growing form of fare evasion
NOT TAGGING OFF (INTENTIONAL DEFAULT FARE)  -  Customer don’t tag off and in extreme
!
instances (outbound to Masterton) there maybe a small value saving to the normal fare
NOT INTENDING TO PAY  -  Customer board service/s with no ability or intention to pay – at times
“avoiding” requests for payment from onboard staff or blatantly asking for a ‘slip’ or discretion
instead of payment.

Principles informing proposed approach
• Start with rail fare compliance – the move to bus
Design for the most challenging payment compliance environment first.
• Resolve a consolidated measure of fare compliance by rail line – and take a benchmark
Formalise data and reporting protocols using fare and passenger count data.
• Be customer-centred in implementation of interventions
o Acknowledge there is a spectrum of fare payment behaviour – and that actions to
curb fare evaders affect all passengers.
o Explain why fare payment is important, and what we’re doing to increase voluntary
payment of fares.
• Selectively use a range of action levers, and measure impact
Target different behaviours with appropriate interventions, monitor impact, and adjust
actions
• Apply actions consistently across the network
Plan and implement equivalent interventions across bus and ferry.

Intervention approach
The VADE approach enables a
community education and
awareness approach to improving
fare payment behaviour.
The intervention actions at the base
of the triangle will generally be used
to support those willing to comply,
while those at the top of the triangle
can be used in cases of active or
intentional non-compliance.
The approach does not require
intervention steps to be made
sequentially over time. However
there are impact measurement
benefits by starting with certain
interventions.

Proposed intervention spectrum

Measuring and benchmarking fare compliance
A. RESOLVE FARE DATA REPORTING
Metlink and Transdev are working to
resolve an accurate consolidated
SuperGold etc
measure of all fares paid, by rail line.
U 5
not itemised
by rail line
(except WRL)
Some fare
types are not
Cash fares only
currently
reported by
broken out by
value, not
rail line
number of trips

Measuring and benchmarking fare compliance
A. RESOLVE FARE DATA REPORTING
Metlink and Transdev are working to
resolve an accurate consolidated
measure of all fares paid, by rail line.
U 5
B. RESOLVE THE MOST
ACCEPTABLE MEASURE OF
PASSENGER TRIPS
Address discrepancies, resolve the
most accurate method – and lock in.
C. BENCHMARK FARE LEAKAGE
Set a benchmark from which to
measure impacts of compliance
interventions. Additionally, set a
benchmark of customer satisfaction
with Metlink payment compliance
actions.

Make it easy – streamline payment
OPERATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS
MAKE
IT EASY
1. Introduce digital payment options to
payment notices (in progress)
OBJECTIVE
2. Payment notice redesign will
• Make it easier for forgetful
additionally make it easier and faster
Snapper customers and
for train staff to process and issue.
those without cash to pay
their fare.
Note: When NTS is available customers
EVIDENCE OF IMPACT
have the option of paying fare by debit or
• Increased percentage of
credit card.
customers paying on
payment notices.

Guide and educate – remind and give the ‘why’
OPERATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS
1. Devise an onboard and online
EDUCATE
communications campaign
+ DETER
reminding customers of the
importance of paying.
OBJECTIVE
2. Concurrently, devise joint
• Educate and remind
Customer Service Ambassador/
customers that Metlink
Transport Officer campaigns of
takes fare payment
presence near card readers at
seriously, with the object of
key stations during peak hours,
deterring intentional fare
asking customers if they have
evasion.
forgotten to tag on/off.
EVIDENCE OF IMPACT
• Lower numbers of payment
Draft Metlink marketing campaign material
notices issued.
• Lower total fares evaded
• Customer satisfaction with
payment compliance
actions.
Working title for upcoming Metlink fare
payment awareness campaign

Implement deterrents – fare checking & default fares
OPERATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS
DIRECT
1. Implement campaigns of 100%
fare checking on all services
(where feasible for onboard
staff – this is currently being
trialed).
OBJECTIVES
• Deter fare evasion through
2. The default fare amount was
higher scrutiny of payment
increased as of 1 July 1 aiming
and reviewed default fares.
to decrease suspected mis-use.
3. Continue onboard and platform
EVIDENCE OF IMPACT
comms explaining the
• Higher cash fare payments
importance of fare payment.
and numbers of payment
4. Continuously review default fare
notices issued; drop-off in
amounts reducing opportunistic
default fares, esp. KPL &
misuse.
WRL
• Lower total fares evaded
• Customer satisfaction with
payment compliance
actions.

Enforce penalties
ENFORCE
OPERATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS
1. Only Metlink TOs are warranted
to issue ‘infringement notices’.
2. Transdev onboard staff can
OBJECTIVES
issue ‘payment notices’.
- Promote fairness across
3. Issuing infringement notices (is
the network
a last resort) to address
- Deter recidivist non-
persistent or intentional fare
paying customers
evasion.
EVIDENCE OF IMPACT
• Lower default fares
• Lower total fares evaded
Page 1 of the draft infringement notice

Recap of Warranted Authority
Under the Land Transport Act 1998, the Land Transport (Offences and Penalties) Regulations 1999,
and the Land Transport Amendment Act 2017, WTOs are authorised to:
- Request proof of fare payment
- Request identification details
- Issue infringement notices
- Direct individuals to disembark or not board
- Refer serious or repeated offences for prosecution.
HOW FARE DETECTION IS IDENTIFIED?
 Step 1: WTO boards vehicle or station and conducts checks.
 Step 2: Passenger asked to produce proof of payment.
 Step 3: Passenger refusal or inability to produce proof is recorded → offence detected

Infringement Decision Tree
SITUATION
ACTION
OUTCOME
Collect fare payment via online
First offence, low severity
payment portal - Verbal warning /
(Minor)
education and details collected
Recorded in system
and/or requested to disembark
service or not to board
Minor: Unintentional fare evasion, possible passive or opportunistic fare evasion; first offence
Repeat or deliberate offence
Requested to disembark service
$150 fee and recorded in
(Moderate)
or not to board and/or
Infringement notice issued
system
Moderate: Repeat offences; deliberate non-payment and active evasion of paying fare or staff checks
Infringement notice issued /
$150 fee and recorded in
Repeat or deliberate offence
Referral to Police / referral
system + Police interaction
(Serious)
to GW prosecution function
+ prosecution (if
if able to do so
applicable)
Serious: Fraudulent behaviour; refusal to comply; false ID; aggressive / hostile behaviour.

Next Steps
KAPITI
COAST
MASTERTON
Develop timebound action plan
August 2025
PORIRUA
UPPER
HUTT
CARTERTON
Resolve fare evasion measurement
September 2025
LOWER
HUTT
WELLINGTON
SOUTH
WAIRARAPA
Take benchmark measure – then
October 2025
implement interventions
Report actions/impacts in KPI reporting
November 2025

Question from Councillors
ANY QUESTIONS?

Document Outline