• 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!

Enforcement of the new rules on social distancing, unnecessary journeys etc.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,685
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
Sounds like somebody was listening - good news:




Thankfully, the government is displaying more disability awareness than is present from some on this forum.

Firstly, I don’t see why we have to make a case for something by way of taking the line: uneasy about something = doesn’t understand. It’s perfectly reasonable and valid to look at something and form a conclusion that the benefits (in this case of allowing an exemption) *don’t* outweigh the disbenefits. Your conclusion may be different, but that doesn’t automatically make it valid just because you believe you understand something better.

I don’t have a massive problem with allowing an exemption, but this needs to be very much based on an *exceptional* need. So it should be based on very clear and compelling medical need, not just someone declaring themselves part of a group and using this as justification in their mind to carry out a banned activity. So at the very least I would expect anyone in that position to be carrying a letter signed by a medical professional, in the same way I’m carrying evidence to justify my movements.

Exemptions are very dodgy ground as once the wider population see exemptions then others will seek to justify their own non-compliance, and sooner or later the whole thing will break down. You will no doubt say that people should focus on themselves, but like it or not it’s human nature to notice what others are doing, especially when there’s preferential treatment going on.

So in essence exceptional cases shouldn’t be an issue subject to being strictly controlled and not abused. But I think we’ll agree someone declaring themselves mildly autistic and wanting their weekly trip on a train is an easement too far. I’m using that as a potential example, I’m not suggesting anyone’s doing that. However on balance I don’t believe avoiding distress for autistic people is enough of a reason to be risking lives. Sorry if you believe differently.
 
Last edited:

krus_aragon

Established Member
Joined
10 Jun 2009
Messages
6,042
Location
North Wales
Why is it such an issue? Surely the four reasons cover most reasons why anyone *needs* to get anywhere?
I'm chomping at the bit to go pick up some vintage computers I've volunteered to repair. I was due to collect them in person five weeks ago, but I called things off as I started showing symptoms, and then the lockdown started. It's annoying, as repairing them would be perfect hobby work for me to do while stuck at home!

While the risk is low (drive fifty miles, move several metal boxes from one car boot to another, drive home), and I might be able to shenaneganise the journey within the restrictions for Wales (travelling for volunteer work, which can't be done at home), it doesn't really fit the spirit of them. Plus, she-who-must-be-obeyed has put the kibosh on the whole idea for the time being.

As a result, I'm really looking forward to any change in the restrictions, to see if we agree that I can go and fetch them. Maybe in another week or two...

(Everyday life, on the other hand, is perfectly manageable for our family for now. No big issues there.)
 

7Paul7

Member
Joined
10 Feb 2020
Messages
96
Location
Billingham
I'm chomping at the bit to go pick up some vintage computers I've volunteered to repair. I was due to collect them in person five weeks ago, but I called things off as I started showing symptoms, and then the lockdown started. It's annoying, as repairing them would be perfect hobby work for me to do while stuck at home!

While the risk is low (drive fifty miles, move several metal boxes from one car boot to another, drive home), and I might be able to shenaneganise the journey within the restrictions for Wales (travelling for volunteer work, which can't be done at home), it doesn't really fit the spirit of them. Plus, she-who-must-be-obeyed has put the kibosh on the whole idea for the time being.

As a result, I'm really looking forward to any change in the restrictions, to see if we agree that I can go and fetch them. Maybe in another week or two...

(Everyday life, on the other hand, is perfectly manageable for our family for now. No big issues there.)
Is using a courier a viable option?
 

Mogster

Member
Joined
25 Sep 2018
Messages
902
Funnily enough I saw something similar yesterday on my daily exercise. A bloke initially walking some distance past 2 cyclists sitting down taking a break walked right up to them to tell them off about social distancing....

The madness is starting to set in... o_O

A elderly friend has had an anonymous letter posted through her door saying that if she continues to receive visitors she’ll be reported to the Police. The “visitors” are nurses from the local
GP surgery...
 

111-111-1

Member
Joined
20 Jul 2019
Messages
170
Of course in this instance the difference between 2 yards or 2 metres is not of great significance.
A elderly friend has had an anonymous letter posted through her door saying that if she continues to receive visitors she’ll be reported to the Police. The “visitors” are nurses from the local
GP surgery...

Hopefully the person making the call will be charged with wasting police time.
 

krus_aragon

Established Member
Joined
10 Jun 2009
Messages
6,042
Location
North Wales
Is using a courier a viable option?
It could be, but I suspect not. I don't know exactly how many items I've got to pick up: it's four computers, but I don't know if they've all got keyboards, mice, crt monitors, etc, and there may be some boxes of software too. It'd be quite a hassle for my contact to box up, and the "risk" that I'd be avoiding would still be present for the couriers sent to collect and deliver the boxes.

Plus, there's the issue that I'm fixing these so they can be sold to raise monet for a computer software preservation fund. Spending extra cash to ship them about would make a dent in the proceeds. :(
 

Enthusiast

Member
Joined
18 Mar 2019
Messages
1,045
Therefore, from an enforcement perspective, anyone out and about with a cough might be ordered to go home and self isolate, regardless of the police officer's ability to diagnose different types of cough.
On what grounds (provided they are out and about with a "reasonable excuse")?

It's true that under the Coronavirus Act a police officer has the power to "direct the person to go immediately to a place specified in the direction which is suitable for screening and assessment", or "remove the person to a place suitable for screening and assessment." But before doing so he has to have "reasonable grounds to suspect that a person ...is potentially infectious." He does, though, have no power to order him to go home.

As mentioned, lots of people out and about may have a cough. But it's quite a stretch from that for a police officer to suspect they are potentially infectious. There is also, of course, the trifling problem that places "suitable for screening and assessment" seem to be a bit thin on the ground.
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,191
Location
St Albans
Haha!

Added benefit: When you're cycling, passing cars will definitely keep a safe distance from you (from the POV of accidents).

But do those social distancing rules apply to the sides of your front door as well?
It depends on what sort of 'social relationship' you have with your doorframe, (or anybody else's). :)
 

Bantamzen

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2013
Messages
9,673
Location
Baildon, West Yorkshire
A elderly friend has had an anonymous letter posted through her door saying that if she continues to receive visitors she’ll be reported to the Police. The “visitors” are nurses from the local
GP surgery...

The worrying thing is about these kind of incidents is that they are starting to become more & more commonplace. And its what happens when you try to operate through fear, in this case with the "You're killing people" or "You're killing the NHS" type messaging that is quite literally being rammed down our throats almost 24/7. Now don't get me wrong, I understand the thinking behind it, short, sharp messaging to ram home an urgent point. But sometimes too short or too sharp a message can have unfortunate effects, in this case people are literally starting to see each other as potential killers, and as such people are starting to assume others' guilt. Its a dangerous precedent that won't easily be reversed.

Somewhere (I forget exactly where now) someone considered that it was important not to get bogged down in too much detail, as many people simply wouldn't engage with it. However in these cases the opposite is also true, give too little information and you won't get the level of engagement you would want. With hindsight I feel that the social distancing messages were too vague, and really needed a good proportion of the population to understand both the reasoning behind it, and how they wanted people to engage with it. So rather than shouting "Stay at home!" & "Stay 2 metres away!", more detail was needed. So something like "We are asking you to stay at home unless <list potential reasons for leaving>, because <list reasons why it will help the NHS>" & "We are asking you to keep 2m spaces between non-household members whenever you can, and where it might not be possible keep it to a minimum & don't cough, sneeze etc". OK nowhere near as catchy, and wouldn't fit in a #hashtag, but it wouldn't provoke the kind of irrational fear reactions that results in some of these kinds of incidents.

Now I know some people will argue that this crisis needs a fear response, but I firmly believe that most people are inherently rational, and had a more considered, calm, & detailed approach been taken by the government to delivering the message instead of the 30 second advert approach (i.e. give 'em a catchphrase), we wouldn't be seeing all this & people would be less likely to break current conventions. Unfortunately the precedent has now been set, and believe me when I say this, it will not be forgotten by the likes of Cummings. We have shown as a nation that all we need for state compliance is a bit of Orwellian fear. We are in it together, but some are more in it together than others....
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Don't know about anyone else, I'm not complying because of fear, I'm complying because of altruism, mostly. I suppose you could call that "fear of being responsible for someone else getting ill" but it's not the sort of fear in question in the above post. I'm struggling to get scared of catching it because I'm relatively low-risk, and because I think I've already had it.

The messaging needs to be simple so that it lodges in the public’s head.

"See it, say it, sorted"?
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,191
Location
St Albans
Don't know about anyone else, I'm not complying because of fear, I'm complying because of altruism, mostly. I suppose you could call that "fear of being responsible for someone else getting ill" but it's not the sort of fear in question in the above post. I'm struggling to get scared of catching it because I'm relatively low-risk, and because I think I've already had it.



"See it, say it, sorted"?
or "Get Brexit Done", no maybe not. :)
 

farleigh

Member
Joined
1 Nov 2016
Messages
1,145
Don't know about anyone else, I'm not complying because of fear, I'm complying because of altruism, mostly. I suppose you could call that "fear of being responsible for someone else getting ill" but it's not the sort of fear in question in the above post. I'm struggling to get scared of catching it because I'm relatively low-risk, and because I think I've already had it.



"See it, say it, sorted"?
I agree I think.

I will always comply with something that is reasonable and has been explained to me. If people tell me I can't do something with no reason then I will resent it and question it and quite possibly ignore it. Like if they banned exercise beyond 1km from my house, (which I think is now unlikely) I would probably take my chances and ignore it.

Also, enforcement by fines does not convince me.
 

Bantamzen

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2013
Messages
9,673
Location
Baildon, West Yorkshire
The messaging needs to be simple so that it lodges in the public’s head.

But as I have said this results in the kind of behaviour recently described in this thread. The of wasting Police time is increasing as people start to become vigilantes, even when there is no reason to do so. A complex and longer term situation requires more information.

Don't know about anyone else, I'm not complying because of fear, I'm complying because of altruism, mostly. I suppose you could call that "fear of being responsible for someone else getting ill" but it's not the sort of fear in question in the above post. I'm struggling to get scared of catching it because I'm relatively low-risk, and because I think I've already had it.

I wish I could believe that much of the country is the same as you, however scratch that surface and you quickly come to find that altruism quickly turns to self-preservation. Maybe not so much on here, but on social media it is rife.

"See it, say it, sorted"?

Ah, the much RUK berated phrase. The problem with the covid situation is that people are starting to see what they want to see, neighbour going out every day in their car? Say it! Neighbour getting visits from non-family members? Say it! Sorted? Well no, as demonstrated both these scenarios were people adding 2 & 2 and getting 357.

or "Get Brexit Done", no maybe not. :)

I've nearly spat coffee over the screen! :D
 

superjohn

Member
Joined
11 Mar 2011
Messages
531
Also, enforcement by fines does not convince me.
Fines as a policy seems the best option, prison would be too harsh and community service is hardly practical at the moment. The problem is they seem rather pathetic fines, £60 reduced to £30 if paid quickly is the sort of sanction you would expect for dropping a crisp packet. Many less altruistic people would be happy to chance it on that basis.

A more substantial fine might be a better deterrent but there may be limits to what police can issue on the spot rather than going though court proceedings.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
I wish I could believe that much of the country is the same as you, however scratch that surface and you quickly come to find that altruism quickly turns to self-preservation. Maybe not so much on here, but on social media it is rife.

One thing that this does make very obvious (if it wasn't anyway) is just how much of the population, predominantly younger and female, lives somewhere between a state of permanent fear (of crime etc), sadness[1] and virtue signalling by claiming those things.

[1] I don't mean clinical depression, which doesn't have a trigger, I just mean being sad about absolutely everything bad in the world. I briefly experienced the former because of an adverse reaction to an asthma medication[2] (which I was quickly changed off, fortunately) - it was an interesting insight - I basically felt permanently sad and tearful for absolutely no reason whatsoever, and that must have been at the mild end of things.

[2] Fostair "conventional inhaler", having switched to the powder version it immediately fixed itself, so it must have been something to do with the delivery mechanism e.g. the aerosol propellant. If you're on asthma medication of any kind and you have depression, it might well be worth bringing that up with your GP or asthma nurse - there are loads of different ones so it's easy to try another.
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
27,542
Location
Redcar
The problem is they seem rather pathetic fines, £60 reduced to £30 if paid quickly is the sort of sanction you would expect for dropping a crisp packet.

That of course is the penalty for a first offence it can escalate to nearly £1,000 for repeat offenders. I'm not sure asking someone to pay £1,000 for a first offence (particularly where that offence might be the result of a mistake about what is a reasonable excuse) would be particularly fair!
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
That of course is the penalty for a first offence it can escalate to nearly £1,000 for repeat offenders. I'm not sure asking someone to pay £1,000 for a first offence (particularly where that offence might be the result of a mistake about what is a reasonable excuse) would be particularly fair!

You could, but it would mean all cases would need to go to Court to ensure it was fair, and the Courts probably don't have the capacity. Keeping it low means that people probably won't bother to challenge it even if it was wrong, it's just not worth the effort for £30 for many. I would imagine a great many incorrectly issued Penalty Fares go unchallenged for that same reason.
 

krus_aragon

Established Member
Joined
10 Jun 2009
Messages
6,042
Location
North Wales
That of course is the penalty for a first offence it can escalate to nearly £1,000 for repeat offenders. I'm not sure asking someone to pay £1,000 for a first offence (particularly where that offence might be the result of a mistake about what is a reasonable excuse) would be particularly fair
But not in every juristiction. I recall that Wales' legislation just went with a fixed ₤60 sum. Some have been commenting that it's not much of a deterrent to a family contemplating relocating to their second home over Easter, when they'd probably spend that much on petrol to get here.
 

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
7,420
But not in every juristiction. I recall that Wales' legislation just went with a fixed ₤60 sum. Some have been commenting that it's not much of a deterrent to a family contemplating relocating to their second home over Easter, when they'd probably spend that much on petrol to get here.
If caught they would get sent home. If they refused then that is another offence to be charged for.
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
27,542
Location
Redcar
But not in every juristiction. I recall that Wales' legislation just went with a fixed ₤60 sum. Some have been commenting that it's not much of a deterrent to a family contemplating relocating to their second home over Easter, when they'd probably spend that much on petrol to get here.

You know I really wish someone would have ensured that the legislation, in whatever form, was the same amongst the four nations to avoid even further confusion like this! Thanks for pointing that out as I wasn't aware of this difference between England and Wales.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
You know I really wish someone would have ensured that the legislation, in whatever form, was the same amongst the four nations to avoid even further confusion like this! Thanks for pointing that out as I wasn't aware of this difference between England and Wales.

There are quite a few, e.g. Wales has defined "one exercise per day" in law and England hasn't.
 

krus_aragon

Established Member
Joined
10 Jun 2009
Messages
6,042
Location
North Wales
But not in every juristiction. I recall that Wales' legislation just went with a fixed ₤60 sum. Some have been commenting that it's not much of a deterrent to a family contemplating relocating to their second home over Easter, when they'd probably spend that much on petrol to get here.
You know I really wish someone would have ensured that the legislation, in whatever form, was the same amongst the four nations to avoid even further confusion like this! Thanks for pointing that out as I wasn't aware of this difference between England and Wales.
Having checked my facts, the £60 increases to £120 for the second offence, but doesn't escalate further (as it can in England).
 

lyndhurst25

Established Member
Joined
26 Nov 2010
Messages
1,406
New police guidelines issued today of what constitutes a reasonable excuse for being out of one's home. They seem quite sensible and I hope that certain overzealous police forces take note.
 

Attachments

  • What-constitutes-a-reasonable-excuse.pdf
    119.5 KB · Views: 69

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,685
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
New police guidelines issued today of what constitutes a reasonable excuse for being out of one's home. They seem quite sensible and I hope that certain overzealous police forces take note.

The use of the word "excuse" I think was unfortunate.

Excuse - "seek to lessen the blame attaching to (a fault or offence); try to justify. "

To me the word immediately carried a negative inference.
 

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
7,420
Must be quite a few folk breaking the rule about maintenance and upkeep but not buying stuff for renovation....
Surprised by the definition of driving for exercise - just gives them more arguments.
”it’s an hours drive but I am going for a four hour walk”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top