Virgin and dogs.

[rogger13]

On Nov 12 I had the pleasure to travel from Picc to Euston, 1st Class Virgin and reserved seats(birthday treat).
On arrival at Wilmslow I was agast, first to hear, then to see a middle aged couple coming down the aisle being dragged by a puffing black Labrador on a lead.(not an assistance dog) With a number of vacant seats in the vicinity I was extremely concerned this passenger group would decide to camp in my immediate area, and me suffer the dogs company for the next 2 hrs or so.
They hovered around looking longingly at the two seats near the wheelchair station, where a businessman was working, making noises that those seats would be perfect for them and their dog. Fortunatly he held his ground and they disappeared down the coach harranging a stewardess, never to been heard of again.(phew).
At the risk of upsetting railway enthusiast/dog lovers..........
Would I have any rights in not wanting a dog next to me for the next 2 hours?
I thought they used to travel with guard?

I actually don't mind dogs,just when I've paid good money have one sat next to me at best puffing at worst.......who knows what..?

Oh yes, does it need a first class ticket? or any ticket for that matter?

(ps.........1hour,57mins!!........why would want or need it faster than that??

 

[A-driver]

Dogs don't buy a ticket and unless they are causing a problem they are fine to travel. Yes you paid good money but so did the dogs owners-they paid possibly more money than you.

The dog wouldn't be allowed on the seat but there is no rule against a dog sitting near you. If it actually caused a problem and attacked you then it would be removed but if it just sat there then no problem.

Would you equally object to someone daring to sit near you on a train (public transport weather or not it's first class which is hardly exclusive) with a baby which is no different to sitting near you with a dog?

I fail to fully understand what your issue actually is here. Exactly what is wrong with a dog being in the same train carriage as you?

 

[Lockwood]

I'd rather a well behaved dog than a baby constantly screaming.

The seats with a large floor space would be a good place to put the dog, too.

 

[Geezertronic]

VT's National Rail Conditions of Carriage has a section it (and more details are in Appendix B)

http://www.buytickets.virgintrains.co.uk/nationalcarriage.aspx#section2

Some domestic animals are permitted to travel with you (as set out in Appendix B). Animals are not allowed on seats in any circumstances.

....

Appendix B:

11. Dogs must be kept on a lead throughout your journey, including any part of station property; other animals must not be taken out of their baskets or pet carriers. If your dog or other animal causes a nuisance or inconvenience to other passengers you may be asked to remove it from a train or railway premises by the Train Company or Rail Service Company staff.

 

[Butts]

VT's National Rail Conditions of Carriage has a section it (and more details are in Appendix B)

http://www.buytickets.virgintrains.co.uk/nationalcarriage.aspx#section2

Are cats also welcome ? - I hope so, no discrimination please

Have checked - up to 2 but they have to be kept in a cage/basket outrageous, at least you can take 2 free of charge.

 

[ATW Alex 101]

I'd rather dogs stayed off trains full stop. Disgusting smelly creatures.

 

[Urban Gateline]

I'd rather dogs stayed off trains full stop. Disgusting smelly creatures.

Agreed!

 

[Tomnick]

Disgusting smelly creatures.

I could say that about quite a few (human) passengers that I've encountered - and, equally, it doesn't fit the description of every dog that I've ever met!

 

[Sleepy]

As long as they stay on the floor and are well behaved not an issue for me. Give me them over rowdy drunks any time.

 

[broadgage]

I would prefer most dogs to most small children !
At least staff can remove a dog if it causes a problem, but removing a horrid child would be contary to the human rights of child or owner.

IME most dog owners keep the animal under better control than do those in charge of children.

 

[6Gman]

IME most dog owners keep the animal under better control than do those in charge of children.

Sadly I find owners accompanying dogs fall almost exactly 50:50 between two extremes:

1. The dog slumps on the floor for the journey, punctuated by occasional tail-wagging sessions and accepting stroking from passing passengers so inclined;

2. The owner encourages the dog [usually manky - like their owners ] onto the seat, then off again, then back, then for an excursion down the vestibule etc etc etc

Category 1 add a little pleasure to the journey; Category 2 do not!

 

[Blindtraveler]

I'd rather dogs stayed off trains full stop. Disgusting smelly creatures.

do you feel the same about assistance dogs?↲

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Agreed!

same question as above?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I would prefer most dogs to most small children !
At least staff can remove a dog if it causes a problem, but removing a horrid child would be contary to the human rights of child or owner.

IME most dog owners keep the animal under better control than do those in charge of children.

Have to agree with this, and whilst not wishing to tar all kids and there parents with the same brush I seam to have more than my share of noizy disruptive ones.

Interestingly though, i was recently on an Edinburgh to Aberdeen service with my Wife, her guide dog and a 3 month old kitten we were delivering to friends and the mum and 2 kids who boarded at Arbroth all stopped making a racket when they say the animals and my wife allowed them to stroke the dog.↲

 

[Nym]

Agreed!

Dirtyer than the humans I have to sit next to on the Piccadilly Line?

 

[ATW Alex 101]

Assistance dogs are a different story, they are there for a reason; to provide assistance to those who require it. I'm not particularly arsed about one of them on the train as they tend to be better behaved.

 

[Blindtraveler]

Assistance dogs are a different story, they are there for a reason; to provide assistance to those who require it. I'm not particularly arsed about one of them on the train as they tend to be better behaved.

Thanks Alex and sorry to sound a bit, urm, you know, I just get angry at anti dog people easilly. No offence ment or taken mate.↲

 

[ATW Alex 101]

Thanks Alex and sorry to sound a bit, urm, you know, I just get angry at anti dog people easilly. No offence ment or taken mate.↲

Not at all mate, you didn't cause offence I have bad past experience with dogs, hence me not really liking them

 

[Urban Gateline]

Dirtyer than the humans I have to sit next to on the Piccadilly Line?

Well the dogs travel free, the humans (mostly) pay for their travel. I just see dogs as a nuisance to be honest.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

do you feel the same about assistance dogs?

No, they are there for a very worthy purpose and I'd happily accept them!

 

[Blindtraveler]

Good man, again sorry to jump at you

 

[Monty]

My experience has taught me that canines have been amongst the better behaved passengers on my trains!

I find it disgusting that people view animals under our care with such contempt.

 

[Penmorfa]

I'm sure all anti dog members will be delighted to hear that they are not allowed on the Manchester Metrolink.

We were not aware of this rule when travelling earlier this year. On boarding our fourth tram of the day, the driver left his cab(!) and informed us of it. He must have been a dog lover as he kind of encouraged us to say we were taking the dog to the vet for urgent treatment. This is allowed in emergencies. We stayed on to the first station we could get a Northern Rail connection from.

 

[DarloRich]

I would prefer it if they banned idiotic humans. I wouldn't say some candidates have posted on this thread but...........

Dogs are fine as long as they are well trained, looked after and their humans are sensible.

 

[tsr]

It may just be a "down South" thing (which is very often where I use the railways!) but I rarely see dogs taken by their owners onto trains, and when I do, they are almost invariably well-behaved (or asleep). The most common example is when one or two of the local guide dog handlers take their trainees onboard, which of course I fully support.

Whenever dogs or other animals are well-behaved, I don't have a problem. As alluded to above, it can even have a calming effect, or start up conversation. I know of one or two dog owners who try their pets out on one of the more relaxed local heritage lines, which is usually slower and often less crowded.

I did start a thread recently about a dog dragging café furniture onto the line at Coulsdon South, so obviously there are drawbacks to animals using railways - some of which are rather unexpected! I agree that the key is responsible ownership and good training of animals (and humans, alike ). On the other hand, a couple of dogs were in the Tube station at Euston Square tonight, and their owners and the dogs provided a perfect example of how to behave together - a large Labrador-ish dog with one man, who was having a chat with someone holding a couple of puppies (I think) in a basket. No fuss, and quiet as anything.

 

[A-driver]

Whatever people's opinions on dogs, I do take issue with the OP basically stating that he was almost insulted and offended that he may have to sit anywhere near a dog. Seems completely over the top and no matter what class you are travelling in, other passengers have as much right to sit next to you weather they have a dog, baby, are wearing a suit, track suit etc.

 

[DarloRich]

Whatever people's opinions on dogs, I do take issue with the OP basically stating that he was almost insulted and offended that he may have to sit anywhere near a dog. Seems completely over the top and no matter what class you are travelling in, other passengers have as much right to sit next to you weather they have a dog, baby, are wearing a suit, track suit etc.

exactly - well said!

 

[Moonshot]

I kinda wonder if the OP would take a different stance if he saw the work that working dogs do when passengers have to sometimes filter through the drug screening intitiatives carried out by the BTP.......last time I saw that , at least 3 passengers were questioned....

 

[duncanp]

One issue that hasn't been mentioned so far is that the couple with the dog were "...making noises that those seats would be perfect for them and their dog..." and that when the person occupying the seat wouldn't give them up they disappeared off down the carriage "..harranguing a stewardess".

Personally I have no issue with well behaved dogs (or small children) on trains, and assistance dogs in particular are generally trained to cope with travelling on public transport.

However I think it is somewhat arrogant of the dog owners in the original post to expect people to move and give up their seats just because they have a dog. Also it is not acceptable for them to "harrangue a stewardess" just because they can't occupy the seat of their choice. If they haven't reserved that seat, then they don't have any more entitlement to it then anyone else.

If they have a need for a particular seat, then they should reserve it beforehand, just like everyone else.

I think the National Rail Conditions of Carriage quoted earlier have go it right. Whilst you have a right to take a dog on the train, you have a responsibility to make sure that it does'nt cause a nuisance.

 

[yorkie]

I kinda wonder if the OP would take a different stance if he saw the work that working dogs do when passengers have to sometimes filter through the drug screening intitiatives carried out by the BTP.......last time I saw that , at least 3 passengers were questioned....

But just because some dogs do a good job, that doesn't mean all dogs are well behaved! (same with Humans!)

I don't think there is enough information about the behaviour of the people or the dog for people to criticise the OP, as duncanp says there are hints that, assuming they are true (and we have no reason to believe otherwise) are cause for concern about the behaviour of the people with the dog. However the way it's worded isn't ideal as it does read a bit anti-all dogs. I assume that's not intended.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think the National Rail Conditions of Carriage quoted earlier have go it right. Whilst you have a right to take a dog on the train, you have a responsibility to make sure that it does'nt cause a nuisance.

According to an East Coast guard, it's acceptable for a dog to occupy a seat, and for that seat to be covered in dog hairs.

Fortunately East Coast customer services disagreed.

 

[A-driver]

One issue that hasn't been mentioned so far is that the couple with the dog were "...making noises that those seats would be perfect for them and their dog..." and that when the person occupying the seat wouldn't give them up they disappeared off down the carriage "..harranguing a stewardess".

Personally I have no issue with well behaved dogs (or small children) on trains, and assistance dogs in particular are generally trained to cope with travelling on public transport.

However I think it is somewhat arrogant of the dog owners in the original post to expect people to move and give up their seats just because they have a dog. Also it is not acceptable for them to "harrangue a stewardess" just because they can't occupy the seat of their choice. If they haven't reserved that seat, then they don't have any more entitlement to it then anyone else.

If they have a need for a particular seat, then they should reserve it beforehand, just like everyone else.

I think the National Rail Conditions of Carriage quoted earlier have go it right. Whilst you have a right to take a dog on the train, you have a responsibility to make sure that it does'nt cause a nuisance.

Considering we only have the OPs word that they wanted those seats and were harangueing a stewardess and considering that the OP is quite clearly very anti dog and dog owner combined with the tone of the post I think you could take that with a pinch of salt.

They may have passed comment that the seats would have been good but I doubt that they actually stood over the man sat down and tried to pressure him into moving. And even if they did, there is nothing wrong with politely asking someone to swap seats. If the person refuses then so be it but no harm in asking is there.

As for the stewardess, at a guess they just asked her if she knew what the best seats for travelling with a dog would be. I severely doubt they were honestly harassing her.

The OP was quite clearly put out that he had spent lots of money on a first class ticket as a treat for himself and then realised that it is still public transport and that dogs, babies and children may still sit near you. I think it's fairly obvious that details in the post are rather one sided and exaggerated to make the dog owners out to be the evil scum they are in daring to invade the exclusive and luxurious environment that is first class and the fright that the OP got when he realised that they may sit in empty seats near him with a dog(!) have rather watered down what actually happened which let's face it is "I was sitting in first class and 2 people got on with a dog and walked through the coach looking for empty seats they could sit in..."

There does seem to be a number of threads on here with people failing to realise that first class isn't exactly exclusive and that you don't have to wear an expensive suit, have a masters degree, have been trained in the correct etiquette and be very important to sit in there. It's equally used by families and leisure travellers from all walks of life.

 

[duncanp]

One wonders what ticket the people with the dog actually had then.

One can assume they must have had an off peak or anytime ticket, because if they were travelling on an advance ticket they would have had reserved seats, and would be entitled to ask the anyone occupying that seat to move.

The fact remains that if they didn't have a reserved seat, then they cannot expect other people to move just because they want that seat for them and their dog.

 

[table38]

One wonders what ticket the people with the dog actually had then.

Maybe they had a Rover