I used London’s hopper fare to take 28 buses in under an hour for £1.50. Here’s what I learned

Look! A bus! Image: Getty.

Since the beginning of this year, thanks to the “hopper fare”, Londoners have been able to take as many buses as they want within an hour, for £1.50. When introduced, the fare originally allowed you to travel on two in an hour; now, though, it’s unlimited. Most of you probably haven’t even noticed, but Transport for London (TfL) says that 13,000 people a day now benefit from the ability to take as many buses as they want.

Earlier this month, I was browsing the TfL website when I came across a vaguely interesting statistic. The record for most buses taken on a single hopper fare was 27. Twenty seven!

And so, I took it upon myself to attempt to break that record. It was the only logical thing to do.

One of the internet’s favourite transport YouTubers, Geoff Marshall, set a benchmark in this video back in January, managing 25 buses in an hour. One of his companions that day, Hugo, thinks he set the 27 record, by slipping in an extra bus on his hopper fare, and by jumping on and tapping in on a bus that he then didn’t travel on.

My challenge, then, was to ride 28 buses in one hour, on a single hopper fare, to beat the record. The planning was quite simple: to find a road, or an area of London, with a plethora of buses.


There could only be one place, really: Elephant & Castle. Ten separate buses run along Walworth Road/Camberwell Road, making it almost impossible to not get a bus.

When I decided that my attempt would be on Wednesday 24 July, I didn’t realise that it would be one of the hottest days of the year. As I found out later, 28 degree heat is not the ideal weather for running around Walworth getting on buses. London buses aren’t known for their coolness.

I planned my adventure for late-morning on a weekday, in order to avoid rush-hour traffic, but to take advantage of as busy a bus schedule as possible. Arriving at Elephant and Castle just before 11, the conditions looked near perfect for an attempt at the hopper record (apart, of course, from the heat): blue skies, reasonably clear roads, England vs Ireland in my headphones… Everything was going well until I boarded my first bus, the number 12, outside Elephant and Castle shopping centre, only to realise that I didn’t have enough money on my Oyster. Plan foiled at the first attempt.

So, after a brief interlude, wandering through a mercifully cool shopping centre to top up my Oyster, I returned to bus stop R. My first bus was a 468 to South Croydon. This I stayed on for two stops, as I immediately got caught up in road works at the top of Walworth Road.

Bus two was a 68 to West Norwood from Larcom Street, quickly followed by a 176 to Penge from East Street. Three buses inside six minutes – things were looking very hopeful for the record. Even with my limited maths skills, I could tell that a bus every two minutes would mean thirty in the hour.

At Westmoreland Road (K) I ran back to Westmoreland Road (J) – a very confusing system of two different bus stops for different routes along this bit of Walworth Road – and boarded a very sweaty, packed 171 to Bellingham. At least I didn’t have to travel all the way to Bellingham, a place that surely doesn’t actually exist, because I got off at the next stop, Camberwell Road/Albany Road.

An extract from the Camberwell Green bus map. Just in case it helps. Image: TfL.

Now things were really motoring, for along this short stretch of Camberwell Road, all the different bus routes stop together. And so I did quite a bit of jumping on and off buses for the next few buses, doing a mini loop around Camberwell Road/Albany Road (N), down to Bowyer Place (N), across the road to Bowyer Place (Z), and back up to Bowyer Place (X). Bus nine was a 45 to Clapham Park from the southbound Bowyer Place.

After 37 minutes, my £1.50 had bought me passage on 18 buses, and I was sweating more than I ever had. However, no one gave me a second glance. London is great. I must give a special thanks have to go to all the bus drivers who waited to let on a very strange looking man who ran for their bus, only to get off a stop later.

But then, disaster struck. In my hubris I stayed on a 12 from Medlar Street (A), which, to my horror, turned off at Camberwell Green onto Peckham Road. I had forgotten that this was where the magic ten bus routes diverged – with some going towards Peckham, and others up towards Denmark Hill – and so I found myself the furthest I had from Walworth or Camberwell Road for 40 minutes.

Running back to Camberwell Green, I boarded a 35, only to find that the driver was changing over. The same happened with a 42 and a 45 in quick succession. Thanks to the hopper fare, though, I’d still spent only £1.50, and was able to scratch these off my journey without feeling guilty about spending the extra money.

The hopper fare means you can jump off a bus when the drivers are taking an interminably long time, or when the dreaded “this bus will wait here for a short time, to help even out the schedule” announcement is made. It’s great.

I had been sucked into the Camberwell nexus, and my attempt at the record was severely in danger. Fortunately, I stepped onto a 468, and was whisked back up to safety – Medlar Street as some call it – where I boarded a 42 to Liverpool Street, then a 171 at Wyndham Road.

At this stage, I was back in the zone, running across roads, pelting it to adjacent bus stops, jumping on and off buses. My mind was a blur of red, and the only noise registering was the beeping of Oyster against yellow touch pad.


I leapt off bus 27 (a 148) at Medlar Street, and sprinted across Camberwell Road to make bus 28 just before the hour: a 40 to Clerkenwell Green. Strangely, none of the passengers on the bus shared my elation. I decided not to high five any of them. Still, it felt like a little bit of an achievement.

So: 28 buses in one hour, for £1.50. I haven’t held a record like this since I became the first to complete Hampshire Library Service’s summer reading challenge when I was about ten, and I’ve barely got over that.

I learnt three main things: the hopper fare is great, even if you’re not stupidly trying to beat a record; the bus service through Walworth and Camberwell is strong, and almost makes up for the lack of rail infrastructure in this stretch of Southwark; and the hopper fare actually lasts longer than the hour advertised. Whisper it quietly, you actually get an extra ten minutes leeway, so you have 70 minutes to jump from bus to bus (although I managed 28 in an hour). I saw my fare end when boarding a 12 at Bowyer Place.

Since completing the challenge, it has been pointed out by many people on Twitter that it would be hard to travel anywhere outside of London by bus for £1.50, let alone to take 28 separate journeys. Who would've thought that bus regulation was a good thing? (Everyone. –ed.) I certainly came away from the challenge more grateful than ever for London’s bus network.

All in all, to attempt to beat the record, you have to be really lucky with bus timings, service patterns, and the friendly drivers willing to stop for you. Should you want to beat my record, try and find a stretch of road where lots of buses use the same stops, so you can hop on and off buses. But make sure you don’t do it on one of the hottest days of the year; and, whatever you do, don’t get trapped in the Camberwell nexus.

 
 
 
 

The Tory manifesto promises to both increase AND decrease the rate of housebuilding

Housing secretary Robert Jenrick. Image: Getty.

In his 2014 Mansion House speech, the then-chancellor George Osborne expressed with uncharacteristic honesty the motives at the heart of how the Conservatives see British housing politics: “The British people want our homes to go up in value, but also remain affordable; and we want more homes built, just not next to us.”

Five years later these contradictions remain unreconciled and present in their manifesto, which contains two different and contradictory – but clearly extensively targeted and focus-grouped – sets of policies.

The Conservatives have two housing targets. The first is to make significant progress to hitting “our target of 300,000 houses built a year by the mid-2020s”. The second is their aim to build “at least a million new homes” during the next parliament, which implies a target of 200,000 homes a year. This is not only 100,000 lower than their initial target but also lower than the current rate of housebuilding: 213,660 new homes a year. They have therefore implied at separate points in the same manifesto that they intend to simultaneously increase and decrease the rate of housebuilding.  

There are similar conflicts in their approach to planning. They intend to make the “planning system simpler” while simultaneously aiming to introduce community-led design standards for development and planning obligations to provide infrastructure for the local community.

None of this is unsurprising, The Tories don’t seem to know if they want to build more houses or not – so of course they don’t know whether they wish to make it easier or harder to do so.  

Politicians like obfuscation on housing policy to placate NIMBY voters. Take for example prospective Conservative MP and ‘environmentalist’ Zac Goldsmith’s crusade to save treasured local car parks. The manifesto can equally be accused of pandering to NIMBY instincts, protecting their shire voters from all housing, including ones they might actually need or want, by promising to protect the greenbelt.  

Instead, Conservatives intend to foist development on Labour-leaning inner-city communities and prioritising brownfield development and “urban regeneration”. This requires massive, infeasible increases in proposed density on brownfield sites – and research by Shelter has shown there are simply not enough brownfield sites in cities like London. Consequently, it is not clear how such a policy can co-exist with giving these inner-city communities rights on local design. Perhaps they intend to square that circle through wholesale adoption of YIMBY proposals to let residents on each street opt to pick a design code and the right to turn their two-storey semi-detached suburban houses into a more walkable, prettier street of five-storey terraces or mansion blocks. If so, they have not spelt that out. 

Many complain of NIMBYism at a local level and its toxic effects on housing affordability. But NIMBYism at the national level – central government desire to restrict housebuilding to make house prices rise – is the unspoken elephant in the room. After all, 63 per cent of UK voters are homeowners and price rises caused by a housing shortage are hardly unpopular with them. 


There is anecdotal evidence that protecting or inflating the value of homeowners’ assets is central to Conservative strategy. When George Osborne was criticised for the inflation his help to buy policy caused within the housing market, he allegedly told the Cabinet: “Hopefully we will get a little housing boom, and everyone will be happy as property values go up”. More recently Luke Barratt of Inside Housing noted that most Conservatives he spoke to at the 2018 party conference were scared “they’d be punished by their traditional voters if the values of their homes were to fall”. He was told by a Conservative activist at the conference that, “If you build too many houses, you get a Labour government”.

But the senior figures in the Conservative Party are painfully aware that the continuing housing shortage presents major long-term problems for the Party. As the manifesto itself acknowledges: “For the UK to unleash its potential, young people need the security of knowing that homeownership is within their reach.” Perpetual increases in house prices are incompatible with this goal. The problem has greatly contributed to the Conservatives’ severe unpopularity with a younger generation priced out of decent accommodation. 

Equally, there is increasing evidence that ‘gains’ from rising house prices are disproportionately concentrated in the south of England.  The differences in housing costs between regions greatly reduce labour mobility, suppressing wage growth in the north and midlands, which in turn leads to greater regional inequality. The policy of coddling southern homeowners at the expense of the economic well-being of other regions is a major long-term stumbling block to Conservative desires to make inroads into the ‘red wall’ of Leave-voting labour seats outside the south.

Before dealing with the issue of where housing should go, you must decide whether you want to build enough housing to reduce the housing crisis. On this issue, the Conservative response is, “Perhaps”. In contrast, even though they may not know where to put the necessary housing, the Labour Party at least has a desire in the abstract to deal with the crisis, even if the will to fix it, in reality, remains to be seen. 

Ultimately the Conservative Party seems to want to pay lip service to the housing crisis without stopping the ever-upward march of prices, underpinned by a needless shortage. Osborne’s dilemma – that the will of much of his party’s voter base clashes with the need to provide adequate housing – remains at the heart of Conservative housing policy. The Conservatives continue to hesitate, which is of little comfort to those who suffer because of a needless and immoral housing shortage.

Sam Watling is the director of Brighton Yimby, a group which aims to solve Brighton’s housing crisis while maintaining the character of the Sussex countryside.