Rail Community Officer powers

Tallguy said:

Hi. Can someone please explain the legal powers of a Rail Community Officer. I was challenged by one the other day who started demanding personal details (I was on railway property but not in a compulsory ticket area having finished my train journey for which I had a valid ticket). I refused to give my details at which point he said they were needed for an ‘investigation’. I refused again and he threatened me with arrest. I replied that he had no powers of arrest and told him to ‘shut up’ and walked off. He didn’t follow me.

I’d love to know what their role and powers actually are.

Click to expand...

I would think it reasonable to ask what he was investigating before handing over details...

If the RCO came up and said, "Good morning, I'm a Rail Community Officer for South West Railway. I need to have a chat to you about (whatever the supposed breach of the byelaws/other legislation is)" then the OP would be unjustified in going off in a huff with him. If the RCO just walked up and said "I need you to give me your name and address" then clearly there is a greater likelihood a reasonable person would firmly decline.

That said, it is difficult (though not impossible) to understand why a person having simply walked onto a railway station and taken a photograph having had no prior interaction with any staff would be met by an RCO walking up to them without so much as a "hello" immediately demanding their name and address. Perhaps a case of mistaken identity, someone involved in a ticketing dispute or somesuch had been identified as matching the OP's description and the RCO mistakenly thought it was the OP that had had the interaction with a colleague?

PupCuff said:

If the RCO came up and said, "Good morning, I'm a Rail Community Officer for South West Railway. I need to have a chat to you about (whatever the supposed breach of the byelaws/other legislation is)" then the OP would be unjustified in going off in a huff with him. If the RCO just walked up and said "I need you to give me your name and address" then clearly there is a greater likelihood a reasonable person would firmly decline.

That said, it is difficult (though not impossible) to understand why a person having simply walked onto a railway station and taken a photograph having had no prior interaction with any staff would be met by an RCO walking up to them without so much as a "hello" immediately demanding their name and address. Perhaps a case of mistaken identity, someone involved in a ticketing dispute or somesuch had been identified as matching the OP's description and the RCO mistakenly thought it was the OP that had had the interaction with a colleague?

Click to expand...

Well said.

philthetube said:

The BTP do have all the arrest powers of other forces, plus some other powers appertaining to the railway, suspecting someone of taking pictures of security equipment is plenty of cause do demand details, or even to arrest.

Click to expand...

No it's not the police cannot demand details even if they suspect hostile reconnessance they can arrest or detain and they can sieze the phone in question as evidence . But once established that it's not being used for the commission in terrorism must return

I used to be an 'appointed officer' with powers to enforce bits of national legislation and local bye-laws. I didn't have the power of arrest, but had very extensive powers of investigation and powers of entry. For instance I could demand to enter any commercial premises without a warrant. However, I never 'threw my weight around' unless the circumstances required it.
THE RCO will be an 'appointed officer' for the railway and its bye-laws.
The OP was on railway premises and had completed their journey. They therefore had no legal 'right' to remain on railway premises, an appointed officer of the railways then asked the OP for their name and address. The OP refused to give those details. Failure to give name and address to an appointed officer is obstruction....which is an offence, an arrestable offence. The RCO can't arrest you, but a BTP officer can. If I had been the officer I would have gone into full 'PACE' (Police and Criminal Evidence Act) mode. I would have informed the OP that failure to provide the personal details was an offence of obstruction, then cautioned them ( you are not obliged to say anything, etc), then asked for the details again. The caution also says that you are not under arrest, and are free to leave at any time...which the OP did....but an arrestable offence had been committed.

Lloyds siding said:

The OP was on railway premises and had completed their journey. They therefore had no legal 'right' to remain on railway premises, an appointed officer of the railways then asked the OP for their name and address. The OP refused to give those details. Failure to give name and address to an appointed officer is obstruction....which is an offence, an arrestable offence

Click to expand...

There's a step missing here. Failure to give name and address is only an offence where the person asking for them has the right to demand those details, because they reasonably suspect an offence has been committed. There is no offence committed in merely remaining on railway property longer than you strictly need to. It is only committed if you remain despite being asked to leave (either through trespass or loitering Byelaws, and/or the innumerable number of general railway laws against trespass).

So if the RCO asked OP to leave the station but OP refused, that is the point at which they could ask for OP's details. Not before.

ForTheLoveOf said:

There's a step missing here. Failure to give name and address is only an offence where the person asking for them has the right to demand those details, because they reasonably suspect an offence has been committed. There is no offence committed in merely remaining on railway property longer than you strictly need to. It is only committed if you remain despite being asked to leave (either through trespass or loitering Byelaws, and/or the innumerable number of general railway laws against trespass).

So if the RCO asked OP to leave the station but OP refused, that is the point at which they could ask for OP's details. Not before.

Click to expand...

There does not need to be an offence committed...they just need to have 'grounds' for asking you...loitering on private property, e.g. a railway station are grounds for asking. No step missing.

ForTheLoveOf said:

There's a step missing here. Failure to give name and address is only an offence where the person asking for them has the right to demand those details, because they reasonably suspect an offence has been committed. There is no offence committed in merely remaining on railway property longer than you strictly need to. It is only committed if you remain despite being asked to leave (either through trespass or loitering Byelaws, and/or the innumerable number of general railway laws against trespass).

So if the RCO asked OP to leave the station but OP refused, that is the point at which they could ask for OP's details. Not before.

Click to expand...

I strongly suspect there's a little more to the story than we're being told, and we'll likely never be told it. I find it hard to imagine that someone could be approached that quickly for just taking a photo, and that it so quickly escalated to a request for details being made and someone responding with 'shut up' and storming out.

It's also odd to come here asking for information, but clearly still believing what they originally thought and finding it unhelpful that everyone on here isn't in total agreement. Even after getting information, a letter to the TOC is going to be sent to ask them the exact same question...?

I am sure if a complaint is made, CCTV footage can then be pulled at and at least someone will get to the truth.

Lloyds siding said:

I used to be an 'appointed officer' with powers to enforce bits of national legislation and local bye-laws. I didn't have the power of arrest, but had very extensive powers of investigation and powers of entry. For instance I could demand to enter any commercial premises without a warrant. However, I never 'threw my weight around' unless the circumstances required it.
THE RCO will be an 'appointed officer' for the railway and its bye-laws.
The OP was on railway premises and had completed their journey. They therefore had no legal 'right' to remain on railway premises, an appointed officer of the railways then asked the OP for their name and address. The OP refused to give those details. Failure to give name and address to an appointed officer is obstruction....which is an offence, an arrestable offence. The RCO can't arrest you, but a BTP officer can. If I had been the officer I would have gone into full 'PACE' (Police and Criminal Evidence Act) mode. I would have informed the OP that failure to provide the personal details was an offence of obstruction, then cautioned them ( you are not obliged to say anything, etc), then asked for the details again. The caution also says that you are not under arrest, and are free to leave at any time...which the OP did....but an arrestable offence had been committed.

Click to expand...

By what you've described and the terminology used it doesn't sound as though you were an 'accredited person' under the Railway Safety Accreditation Scheme, and whilst the legal environment in which you were operating would be similar, not all of the things you have listed in there are correct in a railway context.

Any member of rail staff in the course of their duties or a police officer (termed an 'authorised person') can enforce the byelaws, it does not need to be an 'appointed officer', this terminology does not exist in railway law so far as I am aware. Whilst there may be no legal right to remain on railway premises, there is equally no legal prohibition on someone remaining on railway premises except in certain circumstances such as being in non-public areas or causing a nuisance. They could be going to purchase a ticket, or use station facilities, for instance, neither of which are offences.

An accredited person under RSAS can request name and address under the railway byelaws, if they reasonably suspect a person has breached the byelaws (which do create an offence of failing to give details, however the authorised person must tell the alleged offender the nature of the suspected byelaw breach and provide some form of identification) or under the RSAS regs, which along with the details of their individual accreditation state the offences which they are able to request name and address for. The accredited person under the RSAS regs must have reason to believe that the offence has taken place.

It seems sensible to consider things in these cases from the point of a magistrate (who are ordinary people like you or I) hearing the case; if the defendant was stood up in court and said, "yer 'onner, I didn't give my details because the bloke walked up to me, didn't identify himself or who he represented, I hadn't broken the law and he didn't explain what I was supposed to have done then he told me I didn't have to say anything in case it harmed my defence in court so I walked off", I fear it would make it somewhat challenging for the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt that an offence has been committed.

jon0844 said:

It's also odd to come here asking for information, but clearly still believing what they originally thought and finding it unhelpful that everyone on here isn't in total agreement. Even after getting information, a letter to the TOC is going to be sent to ask them the exact same question...?

Click to expand...

OP joined 9 years ago, interestingly their only other participation in the forum was when they joined in 2011, to ask another question for a third party concerning giving name and address. In that thread detail was also lacking until questions were asked by members in the know. Make of that what you will.

Is the concourse "Railway Property"?

A railway concourse may have retail outlets that are used by non-travelling people - I used to work next door to Cardiff Central and used the M&S on site virtually everyday - does that mean I was trespassing?

Oscar46016 said:

Is the concourse "Railway Property"?

A railway concourse may have retail outlets that are used by non-travelling people - I used to work next door to Cardiff Central and used the M&S on site virtually everyday - does that mean I was trespassing?

Click to expand...

The concourse is railway property, but many parts of the railway (such as stations) are open for the public to access for legitimate purposes. There is a presumption that unless otherwise restricted (eg a sign saying, "Staff Only" or a locked gate) you can pass through private property with valid reason - if this was not the case, the postman would not be able to pass through your front garden to post your mail through the letterbox, for example.

I suppose it depends what you were photographing and for how long, if it was just a snap of sun coming through canopy, then they should be investigating a lot of passengers and staff who've been taking pics of empty Waterloo during covid at 'rush hour'.

I'm hardly surprised the op is asking as they're are so many police/security/general staff in a variety of coloured hi Vis wandering about Waterloo that I haven't a clue what most of their roles are and I work for the railway. Afraid to say some people people put on hi Vis gear and given a title and think they can do whatever they like.

Oscar46016 said:

Is the concourse "Railway Property"?

A railway concourse may have retail outlets that are used by non-travelling people - I used to work next door to Cardiff Central and used the M&S on site virtually everyday - does that mean I was trespassing?

Click to expand...

Of course it's railway property, who do you think owns the land and buildings?

Just because someone uses the shops at Waterloo everyday, doesn't mean they have any right to complain if network rail (who run Waterloo) decide to close the concourse and prevent people from accessing the shops.

Similar to private roads that are regularly used by the public that get closed to the public once a year to maintain legal rights.

Taking, or appearing to take, photos of security measures is one of the handful of things *specifically* highlighted in the infamous 'see it say it sorted' video messages, which play on public screens at major stations, including Waterloo. It's therefore not completely surprising OP was approached. Of course in the absence of a recording the exact details of the conversation will forever remain unknown to us, but since when did that ever stop internet speculation...

cactustwirly said:

You said that PCSOs don't have a time limit for detentions, they are effectively civilians so cannot detain anyone in the first place.

Click to expand...

That's false.

221129 said:

That's false.

Click to expand...

Read the Police and Criminal evidence act.

harz99 said:

OP joined 9 years ago, interestingly their only other participation in the forum was when they joined in 2011, to ask another question for a third party concerning giving name and address. In that thread detail was also lacking until questions were asked by members in the know. Make of that what you will.

Click to expand...

Just because I don’t post on a forum doesn’t mean that I don’t view that forum from time to time. I first discovered split ticketing on this forum long before I registered to post on here in 2011. I ride the trains a lot and always remember my first use of split ticketing which was to get to Middlesborough to collect a car. The Trainline wanted £115 one way sending me via London. I took a different route taking about an hour longer for just £38.....it was 3 different tickets mind, each one totally valid.

You do not have to participate in this forum in order to use it.

Tallguy said:

You do not have to participate in this forum in order to use it.

Click to expand...

This is very true; many people read posts without posting themselves.

Anyway, if anyone has anything constructive to add relevant to the specific query, please do reply below, but can I ask that all further posts are on topic please, thanks

South West Trains have replied to my E Mail;

Our Rail Community Officers (RCO’s) work with the British Transport Police to provide a high profile, uniformed presence on our stations and trains. All of our RCO’s are accredited under the Railway Safety Accreditation Scheme (opens in a new tab). They’re able to enforce railway legislation using powers given to them by the BTP. Our RCO’s actively work to reduce crime, anti-social behaviour and create a safe travelling environment for all of our customers and staff.

We work very closely with the British Transport Police (BTP) and deploy our Rail Community Officers across our rail network to help keep you safe, happy and secure. That’s why you’ll see lots of them at our stations and travelling on our trains.

Thank you again for taking the time to contact us.

Click to expand...

So, now we know what an RCO’s powers are. And arrest isn’t one of them. Shame I didn’t get this on video as I would have happily posted it up on here and as the RCO doesn’t have the powers he said he had (that of arrest), I could have used it as the basis of a complaint. However with my word against his, there is no chance of a complaint being upheld so I won’t be submitting one.

I think that wraps this one up. Hopefully it won’t be 9 years before I post on this forum again.