|
|
Post by Becs Faversham on May 7, 2008 11:18:01 GMT
In the new today it says that Boris is looking to ban alcohol on tube, trains and buses. Trying to work out say for example how far does the ban apply. How would it work on trains? i.e. outside London would you still be able to drink? say get to Swanley then open that can?  |
|
|
|
Post by Richard Trevithick on May 7, 2008 14:50:57 GMT
On the face of it, FANTASTIC news! At the moment, it's only tubes, DLR & buses that it will be effective on, from 1st June. London Overground will be some time later as apparently he has to apply for the government to change the byelaws. Presumably this could be extended to most TOCs as the vast majority share the same byelaws. I did think it was already part of the Railway Byelaws that you weren't supposed to consume alcohol, but a quick check on the Southeastern website reveals this is not the case: www.southeasternrailway.co.uk/main.php?page_id=119Presumably, this is because it would harm revenue from the drinks trolley that very few people actually use!   At the end of the day, it may well become illegal on SET trains too, but the big question is, will anyone bother to police it? It seems like most guards turn a blind eye to feet on seats, smoking, playing of loud music and general vandalism (which are all currently covered by the existing byelaws), so I see very little chance of them trying to stop drunken yobs from throwing cans of Stella around 1st class! Richard |
|
|
|
Post by O.V.S.Bulleid on May 7, 2008 20:09:29 GMT
My Dear Mr Trevithick
Bylaws are a nightmare, take for example: -
22. Fares offences committed on behalf of another person
(1) No person shall buy a ticket on behalf of another intending to enable another person to travel without having paid the correct fare.
This seems to make it illegal for any person to ask for two returns to London at a booking office on the basis that one person is paying for another and as such the second person would not have paid the correct fare. It also logically stops a ticket being given as a present. But I wonder if it also stops train companies giving tickets to people who visit them on business or travel agents who have an allocation of free tickets to use on business trips?
On the question of an alcohol ban it could be reasonable for GoVex to place a blanket notice on passengers not to bring alcohol onto all trains - by quoting each and every train in their timetable. I think that you would find that Buffets and Trolleys come under different licencing laws - which has always allowed trains to be able to sell drinks outside of normal pub hours.
Yours sincerely
O.V.S.Bulleid
|
|
|
|
Post by Richard Trevithick on May 8, 2008 0:36:38 GMT
Interesting wording, Mr Bulleid.
After reading it a number of times, my only conclusion to the completely nonsensical wording is that it's aimed towards people who have some kind of a discount card. It therefore prohibits person A buying person B a return to XYZ on person A's young-persons railcard (or similar discount card). For me, the key was at the very end with "correct fare". I could be very wrong though!
Why are they not written in plain English, or would that perhaps be too sensible?
Kind regards,
Richard
|
|
|
|
Post by genehuntisking on May 8, 2008 8:06:06 GMT
I would say the railcard explanation is a good one. I suspect it is probably written by a lawyer. When did they ever speak plain English? These things tend to be written to avoid Fare dodger A having an oh so clever barrister who can wriggle their way out of it and get them off paying on a technicality.
Nobody is ever going to prosecute you over buying a ticket for someone else, provided you buy them a ticket of the correct price. Now this assumes you can find someone to actually sell you that ticket, but thats another matter!
My experience of dealing with ticketless passengers is the honest ones (who may have boarded the wrong train, or over slept, or been unable to buy a ticket) will tell you all the things they can do. The dishonest ones spend all their time telling you the things they can't do. Most railway staff have heard all the sob stories before, and can tell genuine problems from those trying it on.
As an example my father boarded the wrong train after taking his car to be serviced one morning, and found himself non stop to Cannon St instead of travelling one stop up the line! On arrival at Cannon St he offered to pay for his error, and was promptly shown to the nearest train back to where he needed to go without further ado or payment. Needless to say as I work on the railway I promptly disowned him for making such a basic error!!!!
My recollections were that fraudulent travellers have an ill health gene, which seems to be inherited. They always seem to be travelling to visit their sick aunt, sick grandmother, or sick mother. By a strange quirk they never seem to be travelling to visit a sick male relative.
Another regular excuse is that they are involved in a court case which doesn't allow them to carry money or any form of plastic. However undetered by this I would point them in the direction of the local police station who I felt sure would sympathise with their plight and be able to assist. Strangely very few actually wanted assistance in finding their way to the local police station. Can't think why....
The Gene Genie
|
|
|
|
Post by sirhenryivatt on May 8, 2008 10:54:58 GMT
My dear genehuntisking Have you notived that due to the excessive amount of inbreeding, these slack-jawed, window lickers, have at least a dozen grandmothers in varying degrees of ill health! I remain, Sir, Yours &c., H.A.I. |
|
Neil
Junior Member
Posts: 54
|
Post by Neil on May 14, 2008 14:17:55 GMT
Mmm
Not so sure about this one particularly if it's extended to SET
As someone who has a long commute London-Ramsgate the occasional can of beer on the train(especially on a hot day after a hard days work) can be rather pleasant. In my experience of later night travel the problem people are already drunk before they get on the train - an extra can or two makes no different
From my point of view I'd rather see anti-social behaviour dealt with firmly whether or not drink is involved rather than bring in a rule which would be very difficult to implement and a bit hard on a lot of travellers (particularly us long distance ones)
|
|
|
|
Post by genehuntisking on May 14, 2008 15:26:17 GMT
Mmm From my point of view I'd rather see anti-social behaviour dealt with firmly whether or not drink is involved rather than bring in a rule which would be very difficult to implement and a bit hard on a lot of travellers (particularly us long distance ones) Well said. Drink does play a part, but not nearly the whole story. This whole thing appears to be a quick headline grabber. Gene Genie |
|
|
|
Post by lordbarne on May 22, 2008 10:09:36 GMT
I am of the opinion that in addition to banning alcohol, it would be an advantage to the majority if takeaway hot food was also banned. I had the misfortune last evening of somebody who sat next to me consuming a burger and chips, the smell of which polluted much of the carriage. To their credit they did take the wrappers with them when they left the train, but the earlier smell I could live without.
|
|
