The time required for on-board fare collection can slow bus operations significantly. The more successful the service is, the greater the problem, as additional passengers create delays at every stop. Some fare collection policies put a greater burden on customers, such as the requirement to have exact change, whereas others make transit use easy. A BRT system design should consider fare collection policy in terms of its impact on both bus dwell time and passenger convenience.
Many transit agencies offer prepaid fare media, such as a season pass, stored value card, or ticket. If a driver is required to inspect passes, boarding can be longer than with payment in change. An electronic fare box with a card reader can reduce boarding time for pass holders.
Fare cards with a microchip, or smart cards, can allow transit agencies to offer a more sophisticated fare policy. Contactless smart cards need only be waved at a marked spot, and therefore can reduce payment time.
One solution is to use a pay-on-exit policy for outbound trips. Passengers can board using all doors. Speedy bus boardings frees up bus berths. Since passengers exit in small batches, the delay per stop is much less. This policy can also be combined with a free-fare zone (see below) and distance-based fares.
Another way to remove the fare collection process from the vehicle is to create passenger loading platforms. The bus tubes in Curitiba, Brazil are the most famous example of this strategy. Passengers
enter the loading area by paying a fare in a turnstile. The tubes are staffed. The tubes not only serve a fare collection function but also provide platforms for level boarding (that is, no steps between the boarding area and the vehicle). El Trolé, a trolleybus system in Quito, Ecuador, also uses boarding platforms. Free-fare areas are used in Portland, OR and Seattle, WA. Several other operators offer free downtown circulators (such as Denver's Mall shuttle and Orlando's Lymmo). Unless the loading platforms are staffed, as they are in Curitiba, achieving an acceptably low fare evasion rate may be difficult.In Toronto these types of stations are used to provide barrier-free transfers between bus and rail. Passengers arriving by subway wait inside the station for their bus. The bus route number is illuminated at the appropriate berth when a bus arrives. Boarding and alighting passengers are separated by a divider on the platform. All alighting passengers exit from the rear door, and all boarding passengers use the front door.
Similar arrangements can be used for bus to bus transfers. Curitiba, Brazil has constructed transfer terminals at the end of each of the main radial routes. Neighborhood and circumferential routes converge on these terminals. Using a timed-transfer system, buses are scheduled to arrive at the same time, facilitating transfers from any route to any other. The entire station is a paid area, meaning that transfers are barrier-free.
This system has often been called an honor system, but it operates on the honor system in the same way that parking meters do. Fines must be high enough and enforcement frequent enough to produce a fare evasion level which is acceptable. The mechanism for paying the fine, or in some cases, a super-fare, must be administratively simple. The public must believe that inspections are random, and not prejudicially directed at certain types of people.
In Europe, ticket vending machines are often provided wayside, and ticket validation boxes are located near all doors. San Francisco Muni has proposed a modified proof of payment system which it intends to test on two of its heaviest-use lines. Passengers paying cash must board at the front door. Their paper transfer then becomes their proof of payment. Passengers with a pass may board at any door.
A major disadvantage of proof of payment is the need for additional staff to perform the inspections. However, the advantage of reduced dwell time may outweigh this additional cost, particularly for high-demand routes. Although proof of payment presents public relations and financial challenges, the potential benefits are high. For this reason, all new light rail systems in North America which have opened in the 1980s and 1990s use proof of payment. Therefore there already is considerable experience with the policy.