• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Word of warning

Status
Not open for further replies.

mawallace

Member
Joined
20 Nov 2006
Messages
291
A word of warning to all!


I had a day out spotting and photographing at a busy station today. It ended abruptly after an encounter with the BTP.

I had been at the end of the platform, level with the “Passengers must not cross the line” sign, when it started raining. There was a signal a foot beyond this sign (which provided shelter from the rain) and I therefore moved forward. It was probably three or four feet from the start of the ramp decline. I had probably been there ¼ hour.

I was then approached by two BTP. They explained that they had been summoned to visit me by a member of the TOC staff as two members of staff had seen where I was standing – and this was trespassing. Also a train driver had expressed concern as to how close to the track I had been.

I kept calm, explained that I was sorry if I had upset anyone, and I was undertaking my hobby in accordance with the Nat Rail guidelines (I had told the platform staff I was there) – I also pointed out that no member of staff had approached me to move

They said that they were fully aware that I could take pictures, and it was not that that was the issue. It was the issue as to where I was standing. I again apologised and promised not to stand there again.

This was when they turned nasty – If you admit you were standing beyond the “Passenger must not cross the line” sign – then I WAS trespassing – these signs mark the end of the platform. I explained that it DID not say “Passengers must not cross THIS line”.

At this point they said there was only one thing – they would issue a penalty ticket of £50 – the Offence “Trespassing across the lines of the Railway”. I said that was rubbish, I had not crossed any lines etc etc.

They then asked me for id, and used this to complete the form, and gave it to me.

They also told me “Stay on this station as long as you like, enjoy your day out, but do not cross those signs again”

So in conclusion, be careful – I feel a bit silly as I accept perhaps I moved further to the edge then I should have been, but also helpless as I have ended up with a penalty ticket which I feel unjustified. But n the other hand I cannot face appealing against and risking loosing!
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Daniel

Established Member
Joined
5 Oct 2005
Messages
2,529
Location
London
I'm sorry if this sounds harsh, but at the end of the day, however far you were past the sign, you were out of a passenger area, and because the sign was there to mark the boundary, it is actually trespass.

If I was the officer with you, as you were not on the ramp or physically on the track, I would just give a stern warning. However, I do feel that the police officer was within his right to act as he did.
 

Jordy

Established Member
Joined
9 Jun 2005
Messages
8,465
Location
WCML South
Indeed, although it is an annoying situation you were technically trespassing and they had the right to approach you.

However, the signs leave a little to be desired. Is the line "The railway line" or the (often non existant) line on the platform, where the sign it. The "Passengers must not pass this point or cross the line" sign is better, if it was a "Passengers must not cross the line" sign then I can see your mistake!
 

thefab444

Established Member
Joined
27 Oct 2006
Messages
3,688
Location
The New Forest
Those signs are rather ambiguous, if the station staff require pax/veg to not go beyond a certain point then there is a perfectly good "PASSENGERS MUST NOT PASS THIS POINT" sign available. The "PASSENGERS MUST NOT CROSS THE LINE" signs actually refer to the fact that passengers should not cross the line on foot, but do so by means of the subway or footbridge.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,439
Location
Yorkshire
Don't accept it!

It possibly will go on your record if an enhanced CRB check is done (perhaps someone can confirm?)

If people accept these things they will bully us even more!!

Appeal it. If you need to ask for donations to cover the cost of the appeal, I'd donate. We need to show these absolute jobsworths that they are totally wrong.

The lines saying "Do not cross the line" mean do not cross the railway line. You did not cross the line therefore you did not trespass. The possibility that you were too close to the platform edge is irrelevant as that is not trespass and thousands of people would be "guilty" of that every day (especially on London Underground for example).
 

eos

Member
Joined
7 Apr 2006
Messages
233
The word 'line' refers to the track, not an arbitarily painted and often missing line.
Try this sign and try and match it to a painted line.... http://railfoto.fotopic.net/p56876502.html

This is the correct sign to be displayed , saying 'do not pass this point'... http://railfoto.fotopic.net/p47996871.html

Try this and imagine how you can cross the (painted line) using the footbridge, which this sign imples is lawful... http://railfoto.fotopic.net/p743363.html on display on the station building in the centre of the platform. You have to pass the sign to go on the platform.

At the east end of Southampton station there is both signs displayed on the same post at the bottom of the ramp. Having checked into this previously, the ramp is considered to be part of the platform, and the 'track' or 'line' starts at the ballast, you will need to check back to pre-nationalisation for the origins of that.

If 'passengers must not cross the line' was intended to mean 'the painted line' how would passengers board a train on a station with yellow lines, blue lines ( Birmingham International) and Green lines ( london Midland stations with 2x 323's operation) painted along the length of the station.

Look at the picture on your own Fotopic site at Manchester Piccadilly http://markwallace.fotopic.net/p59330612.html . Exactly what line are they not supposed to pass , when the only one is on the edge of the platform and would make it illegal to board a train anyway.

I would write to a magazine like The Railway Magazine immediately .

Name the station on here please and it will be checked out...

My Advice is 'DO NOT PAY' the fixed penalty , and appeal... ( providing that the facts as stated are correct.) Did you photograph the sign or your position on the platform, Can you post a shot or two that you took from that position ( fotopic etc) and let us have the links for checking...

A dictionary definition can be found here :- http://www.thefreedictionary.com/line

quote - [Line] the railway or a single track of the railway Passengers must cross the line by the bridge only. - Unquote

The Line means the track NOT a painted line..

--------
The Office of the Rail Regulator does not give a deffinition of 'Line ' , see here http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/server/show/nav.3 but does give the following cover-everything definition of 'Track'- ( http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/server/show/nav.001002/chooseLetter0/T )

Track
Section 83(1) of the Railways Act 1993 defines “track” as follows:
“any land or other property comprising the permanent way of any railway, taken together with the ballast, sleepers and metals laid thereon, whether or not the land or other property is also used for other purposes; and any reference to track includes a reference to:
(a) any level crossings, bridges, viaducts, tunnels, culverts, retaining walls, or other structures used or to be used for the support of, or otherwise in connection with, track; and
(b) any walls, fences or other structures bounding the railway or bounding any adjacent or adjoining property”
 
Last edited:

37401

Established Member
Joined
12 Nov 2008
Messages
3,276
Location
Birmingham
I think the BTP were a bit too harsh on you, you realised there was a problem and you apologised and the sign says dont cross the line not dont pass this point. did/do you have the money for the fine? as stated by Yorkie an appeal would be good, to show we are sick of it all
 

william

Established Member
Joined
13 Jul 2007
Messages
1,439
Location
UK
A word of warning to all!


I had a day out spotting and photographing at a busy station today. It ended abruptly after an encounter with the BTP.

I had been at the end of the platform, level with the “Passengers must not cross the line” sign, when it started raining. There was a signal a foot beyond this sign (which provided shelter from the rain) and I therefore moved forward. It was probably three or four feet from the start of the ramp decline. I had probably been there ¼ hour.

I was then approached by two BTP. They explained that they had been summoned to visit me by a member of the TOC staff as two members of staff had seen where I was standing – and this was trespassing. Also a train driver had expressed concern as to how close to the track I had been.

I kept calm, explained that I was sorry if I had upset anyone, and I was undertaking my hobby in accordance with the Nat Rail guidelines (I had told the platform staff I was there) – I also pointed out that no member of staff had approached me to move

They said that they were fully aware that I could take pictures, and it was not that that was the issue. It was the issue as to where I was standing. I again apologised and promised not to stand there again.

This was when they turned nasty – If you admit you were standing beyond the “Passenger must not cross the line” sign – then I WAS trespassing – these signs mark the end of the platform. I explained that it DID not say “Passengers must not cross THIS line”.

At this point they said there was only one thing – they would issue a penalty ticket of £50 – the Offence “Trespassing across the lines of the Railway”. I said that was rubbish, I had not crossed any lines etc etc.

They then asked me for id, and used this to complete the form, and gave it to me.

They also told me “Stay on this station as long as you like, enjoy your day out, but do not cross those signs again”

So in conclusion, be careful – I feel a bit silly as I accept perhaps I moved further to the edge then I should have been, but also helpless as I have ended up with a penalty ticket which I feel unjustified. But n the other hand I cannot face appealing against and risking loosing!



I know just how you feel. EXACTLY the same thing happened to me but i was a couple of yards past a no fishing sign (it was the nearest comfortable spot to sit). Environment Acency officer come. i ended up with £75 fine oplus £75 costs. Felt rather stupid really. Theyre like parking attendants, with their lines/regulations, etc. for what seems unneccessary at the time you do feel 'robbed' or hard done by, but i suppose there has to be a line somewhere. take it on the chin mate and move on.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,439
Location
Yorkshire
I don't agree that he should 'take it on the chin'; as he was not in an area where he shouldn't have been and was not trespassing. As so many people are confused by these signs and they really should re-issue them to make it clear that "the line" means the railway line.

mawallace -Don't let the BTP bully you. They think you're a soft target. Prove you are not! They should be catching criminals instead of going for soft targets, and people like you can make a difference by appealing and ensuring that they get told by their superiors to stop harassing innocent members of the public. This will mean BTP spend more time doing something useful (although I realise they may not like it as dealing with an abusive chav who is threatening to beat people up is not as easy for them...)
 

william

Established Member
Joined
13 Jul 2007
Messages
1,439
Location
UK
I'm sorry Yorkie but if the sign said passengers must not cross the line and a BTP officer found him to be so, he hasn't got much of a leg to stand imo. It isn't worth the stress mate, trust me. Anyway, I'm sure many on here would love to know where this goes and what course of action you intend to take, please keep us informed.
 

william

Established Member
Joined
13 Jul 2007
Messages
1,439
Location
UK
Well, I suppose it depends upon the definition of the line! Mawallace said himself/herself that he/she took it to mean an imaginary line on the platform. That's what I'm basing my opinion on. Were gonna have to agree to disagree on this one Yorkie!
 

Phoenix

Established Member
Joined
11 Mar 2008
Messages
2,019
Location
birmingham
Personally rather than thrash the exact place of this line and wheathe it or had not been crossed it is always best in the "nanny culture" to always give a wider berth to the rules so they say "stand away from the line" give the line at least 2 foot.
mawallace I think that you didn't do any wrong as it was a simple misunderstanding and one of those lessons which we have all learn regardless if we admit it or not so honestly I wouldn't let it prey on your mind and destroy an otherwise great hobby.

Like I said just take ever rule literally and give it a wide berth.
 

eos

Member
Joined
7 Apr 2006
Messages
233
He did not CROSS the LINE as in the dictionary railway definition of track ( from his post anyway- and I have no doubt he was not anywhere near the tracks.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,439
Location
Yorkshire
It means the railway line and the photo posted above proves it, along with various other examples:

http://blog.garethjmsaunders.co.uk/wp-content/20071118_donotcross.jpg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/pikerslanefarm/2581830146/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/37984062@N03/3494440481

They should say what the alternative is, e.g. "footbridge" or "subway" however some are generic and do not specify the alternative (probably to avoid the situation in the last photo where one of the signs is wrong)

All these signs have the same meaning.

'Line' means railway line

'Line' does not mean an imaginary line that is in the BTP's imagination.
 

Phoenix

Established Member
Joined
11 Mar 2008
Messages
2,019
Location
birmingham
Problem is with this argument is although there is a great deal of evidence backing our friends case here he accepted to the authority that he did something wrong due to a common misconception even I have only realized so for him to re-tract his admittance to the deed and the whole situation is simply not possible as they say "don't say anything as it will be used against you"

Also yes an appeal for the funds of the fine is all well and good and I don't mind chipping in either but in no way will it do any good to the cause because frankly the BTP deal with trends of crimes and gangs not individuals and their opinions.

With the BTP and Network Rail there are major injustices towards enthusiasts daily and there is a great deal of us fighting this but we can only gain our full rights back if we give the boys in blue a wide berth because they are seriously waiting for the slightest slip up from the enthusiast because although they say they are "happy to welcome enthusiasts after recent negative events" they don't give a stuff about us and want us gone.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,439
Location
Yorkshire
I'm not chipping in to pay a fine that shouldn't be paid.

I will chip in toward the costs of an appeal and a case against the BTP, and I am sure we could get many others to do so if it comes to that.

... I have only realized so for him to re-tract his admittance to the deed and the whole situation is simply not possible ...
are you sure?
 

Phoenix

Established Member
Joined
11 Mar 2008
Messages
2,019
Location
birmingham
I'm not chipping in to pay a fine that shouldn't be paid.

I will chip in toward the costs of an appeal and a case against the BTP, and I am sure we could get many others to do so if it comes to that.


are you sure?

In my opinion yes because in an appeal or court of anything you say when when arrested or in this case questioned will be used against you so him apologizing basically confirmed that he did what they accused him off so to turn around and say "I don't believe what I did was wrong although at the time I admitted it" is surely a contradiction.

And honestly I wouldn't pay for an appeal because it would be a waste of time trawling through the system only to be shot down at the final hurdle so I would be more happy to help a fellow enthusiast because in this case I feel sympathy and after thoughts are what is needed in this situation not appeals and complaints.

I'm done end of....................for my part :D
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,439
Location
Yorkshire
If we accept guilt where there is none, then our rights are being eroded. We should not let that happen.

He has 28 days to appeal, it's not a lost case - far from it.

He is not guilty of the crime of trespassing on the railway line, therefore if he appeals he will be found not guilty, it will probably be thrown out very early in the process as it is so blindingly obvious.
 

Teaboy1

Member
Joined
12 Feb 2009
Messages
529
Location
Tickhill SY
I find this just typical of modern day H&S Britain where 'civil servant' need to justify their existence and produce figures and silly facts to prove their worth and value. The fact that these civil servants need to generate an income is also evident today, civil servants dont produce anything towards the countries GDP and so need to be seen as necessary for the rest of us to go about our daily business. Fact is this only ever happens in the UK, never never never in Italy or France unless you are doing something totally dumb.
I would say appeal and take it to court, there its you and a magistarte, he/she can see you are not a cable thief, vandal, nasty piece of work, etc. You can clearly say that the TOC / driver was simply over zealous and simply trying to generate favor with his/her manager.
GSM-R is a wonderful thing.....provided its used as it was intended. Fight man...dont give in !!<(<(
 

eos

Member
Joined
7 Apr 2006
Messages
233
I have had the chance to speak to 'those that know' this morning , you do not need to appeal, but write to the Chief Constable saying what I and Yorkie in this Forum have told you, anyone with sense knows that 'line' means 'running line' and not 'painted line'.
Also speak to the local press, and contact The Railway Magazine ( pm me for an address or phone number to contact directly.
If it could be established which station it took place at , then things would move apace as to getting the ticket cancelled ( subject to the facts being as stated). Was it Manchester Victoria or Manchester Piccadilly? If the latter it is becoming a trend on that station.

Regards
 
Last edited:

Oswyntail

Established Member
Joined
23 May 2009
Messages
4,183
Location
Yorkshire
I find this just typical of modern day H&S Britain where 'civil servant' need to justify their existence and produce figures and silly facts to prove their worth and value. The fact that these civil servants need to generate an income is also evident today, civil servants dont produce anything towards the countries GDP and so need to be seen as necessary for the rest of us to go about our daily business......
Just a small diversion off-topic, but...
If anyone made a similarly sweeping statement about "rail enthusiasts", when they really meant a small subset such as "bellowers", then we would all be grumbling about unfair treatment. Vast numbers of "Civil Servants" do provide a necessary and useful service, without which our lives would become even less tolerable. Please be more precise in future.
Back on-topic...
 

nedchester

Established Member
Joined
28 May 2008
Messages
2,093
If we accept guilt where there is none, then our rights are being eroded. We should not let that happen.

He has 28 days to appeal, it's not a lost case - far from it.

He is not guilty of the crime of trespassing on the railway line, therefore if he appeals he will be found not guilty, it will probably be thrown out very early in the process as it is so blindingly obvious.

Agree totally. The BTP officer is out of order here not the OP.

I am 100% sure that this fine will be dropped once the press etc are informed. The BTP officer should also be disciplined.
 

GB

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
6,457
Location
Somewhere
The BTP officer is out of order here not the OP
.

The officer was very harsh on issuing a ticket but I would not go as far to say he was out of order and the situation certainly doesnt warrant a discipline. He was acting in what he thought was correct and its already been pointed out many times above that the signs in question can be very ambiguous. Is it not feasable that the officer may have been confused just as much as the OP?

In anycase, the Police do get things wrong but that is also what the appeal process is for.
 
Last edited:

Teaboy1

Member
Joined
12 Feb 2009
Messages
529
Location
Tickhill SY
Just a small diversion off-topic, but...
If anyone made a similarly sweeping statement about "rail enthusiasts", when they really meant a small subset such as "bellowers", then we would all be grumbling about unfair treatment. Vast numbers of "Civil Servants" do provide a necessary and useful service, without which our lives would become even less tolerable. Please be more precise in future.
Back on-topic...

...there you go...spoken like a CS.....QED!!:lol:

...back to thread........yes go for the above advice, don't give in without a fight....with you all the way mate.
 

eos

Member
Joined
7 Apr 2006
Messages
233
In anycase, the Police do get things wrong but that is also what the appeal process is for.

Had it been street 'Plod' then I might have had a leaning to that line of thinking, but BTP are specifically trained in the legal situation on the railways.. So NO , BTP was entirely wrong to even do anything more than just 'view' the situation, then speak to the TOC personnel concerned about wasting Police time ....
 

westcoaster

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2006
Messages
4,223
Location
DTOS A or B
I had been at the end of the platform, level with the “Passengers must not cross the line” sign, when it started raining. There was a signal a foot beyond this sign (which provided shelter from the rain) and I therefore moved forward. It was probably three or four feet from the start of the ramp decline. I had probably been there ¼ hour.

I was then approached by two BTP. They explained that they had been summoned to visit me by a member of the TOC staff as two members of staff had seen where I was standing – and this was trespassing. Also a train driver had expressed concern as to how close to the track I had been.

At the end of the day you chose to move to a point no longer within a public area, which is then classed as tresspassing then expect the hand of the law to come down on you, play with fire you get burnt, the one thing that stands out is the fact a driver had also expressed concern to your position (this may have been your downfall, after all we do not want to see enthusiast injured/hurt).


They said that they were fully aware that I could take pictures, and it was not that that was the issue. It was the issue as to where I was standing. I again apologised and promised not to stand there again.

This was when they turned nasty – If you admit you were standing beyond the “Passenger must not cross the line” sign – then I WAS trespassing – these signs mark the end of the platform. I explained that it DID not say “Passengers must not cross THIS line”.

its good to see the BTP now know you can take photos/observe/scratch, obviously the campaigns in the railway journals are starting to work.

Why would you appologise if you had done nothing wrong?

They also told me “Stay on this station as long as you like, enjoy your day out, but do not cross those signs again”

let this be a lesson to everyone , that as long as you stay within the law you can enjoy your hobby without any problem. after all you would not see an aviation enthusiast entering a prohibited area and get away with it.

also is there any more info as to which station this happened at?
 

nedchester

Established Member
Joined
28 May 2008
Messages
2,093
At the end of the day you chose to move to a point no longer within a public area, which is then classed as tresspassing then expect the hand of the law to come down on you, play with fire you get burnt, the one thing that stands out is the fact a driver had also expressed concern to your position (this may have been your downfall, after all we do not want to see enthusiast injured/hurt)

RUBBISH!!! He was NOT trespassing he went past a sign that said DO NOT CROSS THE LINE. The only line there was was the RAILWAY LINE no other line. That's what the signs are there for. He was perfectly OK where he was.

The BTP officer could have been coming up with a 'story' that a driver had expressed concern.

As I said appeal, go to the press etc that'll make them change their minds. The OP is not guilty of trespass. End of!
 

Oswyntail

Established Member
Joined
23 May 2009
Messages
4,183
Location
Yorkshire
RUBBISH!!! He was NOT trespassing he went past a sign that said DO NOT CROSS THE LINE. The only line there was was the RAILWAY LINE no other line. That's what the signs are there for. He was perfectly OK where he was....
So he was "a foot" t'other side of the sign, and is OK? Would 2 feet be? OK, what about 100 yards? Not yet crossed any "line". I believe the signs are put there to control safety. Is there any room for leeway in this, and who do we trust to make a judgement? Is anyone safe beyond safety limits, or just those who are knowledgeable about the environment? Would "It's OK, officer, I understand the risks" be an acceptable response? We all know a sign is (usually) there for a purpose, so why ignore it?
Yes, the officer was somewhat heavy-handed, but that doesn't seem to be what the discussion here is about. We do not have a right to go wherever we like. "End of."
 

nedchester

Established Member
Joined
28 May 2008
Messages
2,093
So he was "a foot" t'other side of the sign, and is OK? Would 2 feet be? OK, what about 100 yards? Not yet crossed any "line". I believe the signs are put there to control safety. Is there any room for leeway in this, and who do we trust to make a judgement? Is anyone safe beyond safety limits, or just those who are knowledgeable about the environment? Would "It's OK, officer, I understand the risks" be an acceptable response? We all know a sign is (usually) there for a purpose, so why ignore it?
Yes, the officer was somewhat heavy-handed, but that doesn't seem to be what the discussion here is about. We do not have a right to go wherever we like. "End of."

So what does 'Do not cross the Line' mean then? It means do not cross the RAILWAY LINE. If the sign had said 'Do not pass this sign' then it would be different. The OP was on the platform three or four foot from where the ramp starts - therefore NOT TRESPASSING. Is it really that difficult for you to understand?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top