Fawkes Cat
Established Member
- Joined
- 8 May 2017
- Messages
- 2,987
No, because as I quoted from the NRCoT near the beginning of the thread:
The railway company explicitly does not take responsibility.
-
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!
Rail company's liability for stolen luggage
- Thread starter limmerbucket
- Start date
- Status
No, because as I quoted from the NRCoT near the beginning of the thread:
The railway company explicitly does not take responsibility.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
No, they re not implicitly saying that. You may take up to the maximum luggage allowance, at your risk. You have no right to be next to your luggage - if you don't like that, don't want to take the risk, then don't take the luggage with you.
Not the complete answer at all, but some adjustment to seat layout might help with this particular problem.
Luggage racks tend to be near the vestibule doors for obvious reasons. But they are often followed by airline seats facing into the carriage. If instead these airline seats faced the nearby racks it would be easier for the passenger to oversee his/her luggage. Indeed the oversight of the racks by everyone in those seats would be a deterrent to bag-pinchers.
At the moment it’s often possible to pop in from the vestibule, pinch a bag and pop out again without anyone noticing.
Luggage racks tend to be near the vestibule doors for obvious reasons. But they are often followed by airline seats facing into the carriage. If instead these airline seats faced the nearby racks it would be easier for the passenger to oversee his/her luggage. Indeed the oversight of the racks by everyone in those seats would be a deterrent to bag-pinchers.
At the moment it’s often possible to pop in from the vestibule, pinch a bag and pop out again without anyone noticing.
EssexGonzo
Member
- Joined
- 9 May 2012
- Messages
- 636
Hmm, this thread has gone the way one would have expected on an industry-biased forum. The rules are indeed written down, the company has declared itself not culpable and the TOC did not (let's assume) nick the luggage. Black and white. Them's the rules, it's always the customer's fault. I'm not saying they should pay.....
However, let's take a step back into reality for a moment.
The racks are at the end of carriages, and customers are heavily encouraged to leave their luggage there. The TOC has failed to supply a secure luggage area. Why on earth is that?
There's nowhere else to put it. On the neighbouring seat? In the aisle? We all know that's stupid and anyone doing it will be flamed around here.
Oh yes. They can stay with it. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. What a stupid comment. Just think about that for a moment.
The presence of CCTV, and the signs promoting it, are meant to discourage and reassure. The TOC has knowingly given this impression to the customer and has not warned him/her of potential corruption and failure of service when the footage may be needed.
"Don't take luggage". Ridiculous. The railway industry and the government is actively encouraging long distance travel (normally with luggage) by rail instead of car or air. To then look the other way when something is nicked after someone has done exactly what has been encourage, is expected and is the only luggage option is disingenuous at best. Laughable at worst.
"Don't take the risk". Why should it be a material risk to take luggage on a train?
I'm not saying that the TOC should put their hand in their pocket in this case but what I am saying is that a change of culture is required on this topic - y'know, look at things from the customer's perspective? If most of the posts, or their meaning/implication, are to be followed, then anyone with luggage should take the car or fly where luggage can be secure. On no account should the train be take as the TOC has no accountability for or desire to give a toss about the security of luggage.
If the loss occurs because I am prevented or discouraged by the Company from being by my luggage, then that loss is - at least in part - the fault of the Company or its staff, as it prevented me from looking after it.
tiptoptaff
Established Member
- Joined
- 15 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 3,028
But it really isn't
No, I think that the meaning/implication of these posts is to keep a watchful eye on your luggage, but I would suggest that the amount of luggage that gets stolen is very small, it is not a material risk, and you should not go overboard in fear.
Obviously never put any valuables in any luggage which is not with you.
Life is full of risks, large and small. Some of these risks you can insure against. When you go by train there is a risk of pickpocketing, assault and luggage theft, amongst others. When you go by car there is a risk of carjacking, theft of car etc. The railway industry has a police force to keep the situation under control (but never 'risk free') and in the case above the bag was eventually recovered. No doubt there are also some carriage design mitigations too. (The Indian Railways, for instance, have steel bars for you to chain your luggage to) It is important that all instances are reported.
The retail industry is actively encouraging people to come to their shops, and it is possible that shoppers may get pickpocketed, or their shopping stolen, but that doesn't make it an absolute liability of the shop. Likewise, if you want to remove all risk of pickpocketing, don't go outside your house.
I think some of the reaction here is to the suggestion that TOCs should be compensating for stolen luggage. From my experience it is amazing how much laptops/i pads/ designer clothing etc is contained in lost or stolen bags. Whilst the industry needs to mitigate against luggage theft as far as practicable, compensation culture would have all sorts of unintended consequences.
As for a comparison with flying, well there are plenty of stories of stuff stolen from airline luggage ...... However, the airline industry has had to take steps over the years to restore confidence that was dented a little in the 1980s
Sorry, but no. You are responsible for your luggage. If you choose (a) to travel with more luggage than you can keep with you; and (b) to put anything of value in the said same luggage then you and only you bear the liability.
As an aside, comparison to the airline industry is pointless as the railway doesn't (with a few exceptions) operate checked baggage services.
If you need to be near your bags then stand in the vestibule.
ashkeba
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 May 2019
- Messages
- 2,171
Which many people now seem to do. Not a good situation but until we get more trains with luggage racks in full view, what do TOCs expect?
ashkeba
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 May 2019
- Messages
- 2,171
No idea but I've done that before. I think it's OK as long as you don't expect sympathy if you miss your stop because you struggle to unlock.
It's minimal security, though, as a good yank will probably break the loop or handle of the luggage.
Locking anything to the train stands a chance of it being removed by the police as a potential security threat.
Luggage in the aisle is not acceptable. If someone trips over it expect to be on the receiving end of a lawsuit.
If you're on my train and think you're going to tough it out about blocking the aisle with your luggage then please think again - I make one polite request (with assistance in moving offered), then one direct instruction, then I remove it myself and if you obstruct me then you will find yourself being removed from the train for refusing to obey a safety instruction.
It's not fair for someone who has mobility issues or is visually impaired to hurt themselves moving about the train because you think you're playing a power game with the train operator.
Luggage provision on many UK trains is indeed rubbish. It's never going to be feasible to fit every train with space to store a large suitcase at every seat. If you bring large items you take your chances with the bulk storage.
ashkeba
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 May 2019
- Messages
- 2,171
As someone with mobility issues, let me remind you that the current luggage situation is discriminatory as well as insecure, but there are far bigger problems that should be dealt with first. I still don't believe the 2020 target is going to be hit.
As for locked luggage being removed as a security risk, that's nonsense, as a bag bomber isn't going to draw attention to it like that, plus a simple "whose case is this?" question would get an answer.
I've never been removed from a train. Most railway workers are considerate and help us to work around the design flaws of the trains they have to work.
Removal from a train is a very last resort and thankfully one I've never had to undertake for this issue as I do appreciate the luggage storage situation is pretty grim on the majority of trains that I work hence my offer of assistance. Storage in the aisle is not an acceptable solution to the problem.
The main contributor I find is the lack of under seat back storage on back to back seats that's come in since high backed seats were introduced. Class 158s originally came with large end of carriage racks for example and ample storage in the saloons behind the seat backs. On any refurbished units most of that is gone for which you can blame tbe Department for Transport and it's obsession with headline seating figures (it even counts tip up seats in cycle spaces).
Passenger incidents are obviously only brought to light if they're reported but we've certainly had staff lose working time recently due to injuries sustained falling over people's luggage carelessly abandoned in the aisle.
Articles being locked to trains or stations except where they're intended to be so - IE station bike racks - are taken seriously by the security services.
I once had a bike locked to my train, the careless owner actually cleared off without it and reported it missing on a connecting train several hours later and the next working for my train was heavily delayed as the transport police refused to let it depart until they'd thoroughly inspected and removed the bike. Apparently they've been used for nefarious purposes during the Troubles.
ashkeba
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 May 2019
- Messages
- 2,171
The IRA's so called bicycle bombs were in packages on the bike. That's why people have to mess about removing luggage and keeping it with them. Recorded attempts of putting bombs in frames have been pathetic - there's not much space in there and it tends to eject the saddle forcefully, which points nearly straight up in sensible storage (unlike the Azumas?)
I agree about the loss of space behind pairs of seat backs. That used to be a godsend. No lifting and trying to stay upright on a swaying train. But I'd decline if someone offered to lift my case because I don't know if they'll be around a minute or two before my stop when I need to start wobbling to the exit, or if I want to go to the buffet. That's not assistance. That's trapping me.
Why don't railway seats have underseat storage like airlines? There's often a bar and sometimes legs in the middle instead of further forwards, plus junk like power sockets hanging down. Are Azuma any better under there?
Carelessly abandoned is something else. I try not to obstruct the aisle, pulling my bag (usually small) as far into my foot space as I can (or the neighbouring seat space if unoccupied), but I can understand why people end up doing it. I carry third party liability and legal defence insurance partly in case I trip or hit someone with my aids, but I'd be astonished if someone won a lawsuit for basically not looking where they're walking on a crowded train.
BluePenguin
On Moderation
It's a coincidence that I found this thread as a friend of mine left her luggage on the train on her way back from Litchfield.
She called London North Western who contacted the driver who managed to find her case and moved it to the front of the train, although not into the cab. However, later someone else stole it from the train!
My friend knows the layout of those specific trains better than I do, claims that if the driver had left the case where it was originally then it would have been safer and she would have had a greater chance of retrieving it when the train got to Birmingham. So far customer services have not been very helpful at all.
Does she have a case for negligence and entitled to the replacement of her bag and her belongings inside it?
She called London North Western who contacted the driver who managed to find her case and moved it to the front of the train, although not into the cab. However, later someone else stole it from the train!
My friend knows the layout of those specific trains better than I do, claims that if the driver had left the case where it was originally then it would have been safer and she would have had a greater chance of retrieving it when the train got to Birmingham. So far customer services have not been very helpful at all.
Does she have a case for negligence and entitled to the replacement of her bag and her belongings inside it?
cactustwirly
Established Member
They will on a HST, but not on a 22x or 387 IME
ashkeba
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 May 2019
- Messages
- 2,171
Is it the 221 where a "cabin max" bag in the overhead seems to fit but will fall out easily and injure those below? I hope the new stock is specced to handle such bags but I suspect not.
It is clear that the two instructions "keep your luggage with you or in sight at all times" and "do not place luggage on seats or obstruct the aisle" cannot both be complied with on certain types of train. If you were to try and do so as per:
then a dozen people standing/sitting in the corridor by the luggage racks on a XC train is going to go down really well with the guard and trolley staff. Even if the staff were happy for you to do that, you can guarantee there will be confrontations at every stop as people attempt to leave and join the train.
Last edited:
Maybe. Not the strongest one (since she forgot the case in the first place), but the fact that customer services said (effectively) "We'll get your case back to you." and the driver moving it can both be construed as the TOC taking responsibility.
BluePenguin
On Moderation
I will tell her to call the customer services again and explain. Fingers crossed she will get somewhere.
Of course she wouldn't have this problem had she not left her case on the train but that's the beauty of hindsight.
I once left my suitcase in the luggage rack as I dashed off the train at St Pancras to make a tight connection at Kings Cross. I was so focused on being the first off the train that I completely forgot. I didn't even realise until we were leaving Peterborough, the next stop York. Fortunately the staff looked after my bag until my friend from Finsbury Park could go and collect it for me.
ForTheLoveOf
Established Member
- Joined
- 7 Oct 2017
- Messages
- 6,416
If it had merely been a case of your friend leaving her bag on the train, no, as has been the agreed consensus on this thread.
But seeing as an employee of the company took care of the bag by removing it from its original position, and then left it in an insecure location rather than doing the far more sensible thing of taking it into the cab with them, I think it is a lot easier to obtain recourse against the TOC.
I think that negligence is fairly well, even if not 100%, made out. Bear in mind that for civil claims such as this would be, it is not necessary to prove the negligence beyond all reasonable doubt. It is merely necessary to prove it on the balance of probabilities.
If you can obtain confirmation that the driver moved the bag in writing, this will be very useful evidence if they are unwilling to reimburse your friend the value of the bag and its contents.
Note that there is no entitlement to betterment, and accordingly your friend cannot expect to be paid the cost of a new bag plus a new set of whatever was inside (e.g. clothes) - it will be for the value of the chattels at the point they were mishandled.
It will also be for her to show, on balance, that the things claimed were indeed in the bag, and accordingly it may be highly expedient to make an urgent request for the CCTV to be obtained, bearing in mind this is often automatically deleted either 7 or 28 days after it is taken.
not doubting anyone in the least here but if i was instrimental in recovering lost luggage i would take it into the cab or other safe place automatically
is it was too bulky to be safe in the front cab it would be places in another locked area like another cab
either the driver was new and flustered or there is more to the story we need to know
but iff fully as described i agree the railway or its agents have taken full control and responsibility for the safety off the luggage but are entitled to remove any normal lost luggage charges from the value off any possible claim
tiptoptaff
Established Member
- Joined
- 15 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 3,028
When calculating damages, you must also expect a reduction to reflect the contributory negligence of your friend. Ie, her initial act of leaving the bag on the train will be seen as negligence in itself. And damages will be reduced by the % that it is felt her own negligence caused the loss. So, for example, if a udgej decided that because she left the bag on the train, she's as responsible for loss as the TOC, then if successful her damages would have halved.
In this case, I can see negligence on both sides so if they do eventually agree to pay some compensation, don't necessarily balk at it being less than the amount she's asked for.
In this case, I can see negligence on both sides so if they do eventually agree to pay some compensation, don't necessarily balk at it being less than the amount she's asked for.
EssexGonzo
Member
- Joined
- 9 May 2012
- Messages
- 636
So the message I'm hearing on this thread from those in the rail industry appears to be either:
"Don't bring luggage. We can't take any responsibility that it might be there at the end of the journey."
Or,
"Bring luggage at your own risk. The areas we've provided for it have a medium+ risk of theft. You can't have it near you when you're sat down even though we're clearly stating it's your responsibility (no don't laugh, we mean it). Make sure you can see it at all times, because it's always your fault. If you want to be sure it won't be stolen, you can stand in the vestibule, outside of the saloon part of the carriage watching it through the vestibule door. Oh, and we don't really care that you'll therefore stand for a long-distance journey, which are the very journeys where luggage is carried and where racks are provided."
As long as we're clear on the luggage-carrying value proposition, I can't see an issue.
"Don't bring luggage. We can't take any responsibility that it might be there at the end of the journey."
Or,
"Bring luggage at your own risk. The areas we've provided for it have a medium+ risk of theft. You can't have it near you when you're sat down even though we're clearly stating it's your responsibility (no don't laugh, we mean it). Make sure you can see it at all times, because it's always your fault. If you want to be sure it won't be stolen, you can stand in the vestibule, outside of the saloon part of the carriage watching it through the vestibule door. Oh, and we don't really care that you'll therefore stand for a long-distance journey, which are the very journeys where luggage is carried and where racks are provided."
As long as we're clear on the luggage-carrying value proposition, I can't see an issue.
Haywain
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 15,178
I'm guessing that you'd prefer it to be: "Bring what you like, leave it where you like, forget about it for the duration and we'll take full responsibility". Have I got that right?
ashkeba
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 May 2019
- Messages
- 2,171
That's a nice strawman you've built there!
How about "Bring luggage at your own risk and put it in the low-theft-risk areas we've provided for it reasonably close to your seat and in full view"?
tiptoptaff
Established Member
- Joined
- 15 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 3,028
Statically its low risk. The number of thefts per bag carried is actually very very low
EssexGonzo
Member
- Joined
- 9 May 2012
- Messages
- 636
Oh dear, you're not paying attention. Do TOC-supplied luggage racks count as "leave it where you like"? And replace "full" with "some" responsibility. as opposed to the underlying "it's all on the punter" vibe in this thread. If customers are actively encourage (or maybe forced as there really isn't a choice, is there?) to use luggage racks, some responsibility should fall on the TOC.
That's more like it - some shared risk (however low) rather than throwing it all back in the customer's face.
Haywain
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 15,178
Paying full attention thanks. My OTT comment was a direct response to your OTT rant.
Nobody is 'forced' to bring luggage or to travel by train, and "at your own risk" means precisely that. However, where TOCs (such as LNER*) provide secure luggage accommodation that is not accessible to passengers to monitor I am sure they are then happy to accept some liability. The simple fact is that they cannot monitor every luggage storage area of trains and therefore cannot accept responsibility for theft.
*Using storage space in the DVT of electric sets.
- Status