ByeLaw 9 (3)..

[dcbwhaley]

.. states
No person shall open a barrier or any other gate on the railway except where there is a notice indicating that it may be used by him or with permission from an authorised person.

At my local station there are two ways of getting to platform 2. Going through the ticket office onto platform 1 then using the pedestrian overbridge. Or going under the line on the road and through a gate onto the platform. Since I buy my tickets in advance I usually take the second option since it is slightly less energetic

But the gate has no notice on it and there is rarely an authorised person around to give permission. So should I give myself up to BT police for repeated violations of the byelaw? And what punishment can I expect?

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

.. states
No person shall open a barrier or any other gate on the railway except where there is a notice indicating that it may be used by him or with permission from an authorised person.

At my local station there are two ways of getting to platform 2. Going through the ticket office onto platform 1 then using the pedestrian overbridge. Or going under the line on the road and through a gate onto the platform. Since I buy my tickets in advance I usually take the second option since it is slightly less energetic

But the gate has no notice on it and there is rarely an authorised person around to give permission. So should I give myself up to BT police for repeated violations of the byelaw? And what punishment can I expect?

Byelaw 18(1), and perhaps Byelaw 23(1), are pretty much the only Byelaws enforced. It's a ridiculous situation, since the Byelaws ought to be there to punish antisocial behaviour (which is much less acceptable on trains than in public, seeing as in many cases you don't have much of a choice in terms of moving if you don't want to delay your journey or want to keep your precious seat). Instead, the Byelaws are used to punish failing to buy a ticket - something which has no causative relation to antisocial behaviour, and which there is no justification for making a criminal matter out of.

 

[dcbwhaley]

Byelaw 18(1), and perhaps Byelaw 23(1), are pretty much the only Byelaws enforced. It's a ridiculous situation, since the Byelaws ought to be there to punish antisocial behaviour (which is much less acceptable on trains than in public, seeing as in many cases you don't have much of a choice in terms of moving if you don't want to delay your journey or want to keep your precious seat). Instead, the Byelaws are used to punish failing to buy a ticket - something which has no causative relation to antisocial behaviour, and which there is no justification for making a criminal matter out of.

So I might get away with it? That is a relief!

I suppose that I could put a notice on the gate myself since the byelaw doesn't specify who has the authority to post such a notice

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

So I might get away with it? That is a relief!

I suppose that I could put a notice on the gate myself since the byelaw doesn't specify who has the authority to post such a notice

You would be committing an offence under Byelaw 6(3) in affixing this notice:

No person shall write, draw, paint or fix anything on the railway.

... but enforcement of that offence is unlikely at best!

 

[Warwick]

Byelaw 18(1), and perhaps Byelaw 23(1), are pretty much the only Byelaws enforced. It's a ridiculous situation, since the Byelaws ought to be there to punish antisocial behaviour (which is much less acceptable on trains than in public, seeing as in many cases you don't have much of a choice in terms of moving if you don't want to delay your journey or want to keep your precious seat). Instead, the Byelaws are used to punish failing to buy a ticket - something which has no causative relation to antisocial behaviour, and which there is no justification for making a criminal matter out of.

Sometimes I think that you're my alter ego in that you print such common sense.

 

[30907]

Is there any signage whatever in the vicinity to indicate that this is a public route?

 

[dcbwhaley]

Is there any signage whatever in the vicinity to indicate that this is a public route?

No. There is simply a pedestrian sized gate which leads from the platform to the public road

 

[mikeg]

I'm too at a loss as to how this byelaw works. For example at Nottingham the rear entrance is unbarriered whereas the front entrance has ticket gates which are in near constant operation, or were last time I was there. There is appropriate penalty fare signage and a TVM at the rear entrance but no sign saying you may bypass the barriers to use this or that byelaw 9 doesn't apply here. What is the situation here?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm too at a loss as to how this byelaw works. For example at Nottingham the rear entrance is unbarriered whereas the front entrance has ticket gates which are in near constant operation, or were last time I was there. There is appropriate penalty fare signage and a TVM at the rear entrance but no sign saying you may bypass the barriers to use this or that byelaw 9 doesn't apply here. What is the situation here?

Practically? As long as you have a ticket (i.e. are not using it to bypass the barriers in order not to pay) nobody will say a thing. If you *do* do it to bypass the barriers in order not to pay, 18 (1) or RoRA are a much more likely prosecution. (Northern are quite fond of doing this at an unbarriered exit at Manc Vic).

 

[mikeg]

I was more thinking of the legal standing should you encounter an ultra-desperate revenue protection operation. Of course practically is all that matters until such a thing happens then the hypothetical becomes practically. It's always been important to me that the law is just and works for the public good. In this case it could potentially do the contrary and therefore if the answer is I could be done under byelaw 9 for using said rear entrance (which was the most practical entrance when walking from my house) then we need to fight to change the law.

Incidentally the entrance was widely regarded as the 'faredodger's favourite and there were occasionally EMT revenue staff standing there, just beyond the TVM. Of course I never avoided paying/travelled without a valid ticket!

 

[Steveoh]

I'm too at a loss as to how this byelaw works. For example at Nottingham the rear entrance is unbarriered whereas the front entrance has ticket gates which are in near constant operation, or were last time I was there. There is appropriate penalty fare signage and a TVM at the rear entrance but no sign saying you may bypass the barriers to use this or that byelaw 9 doesn't apply here. What is the situation here?

The rear entrance is a public right of way, which goes over the footbridge.

 

[krus_aragon]

No person shall write, draw, paint or fix anything on the railway.

Laughably, that reads like it could extend to repairing bicycle punctures or typing fanfiction on a laptop. Just as well that the bylaws are so often disregarded...

 

[dcbwhaley]

Laughably, that reads like it could extend to repairing bicycle punctures or typing fanfiction on a laptop. Just as well that the bylaws are so often disregarded...

Or making a sketch of the station. That is primus inter pares with the rest of the byelaws when it comes to bad drafting. There doesn't seem to be a definition of what "railway means" either.

 

[krus_aragon]

Or making a sketch of the station. That is primus inter pares with the rest of the byelaws when it comes to bad drafting. There doesn't seem to be a definition of what "railway means" either.

On the plus side, it would force people dressed as cowboys to keep their guns in their holsters. :P

 

[Stigy]

Byelaw 18(1), and perhaps Byelaw 23(1), are pretty much the only Byelaws enforced. It's a ridiculous situation, since the Byelaws ought to be there to punish antisocial behaviour (which is much less acceptable on trains than in public, seeing as in many cases you don't have much of a choice in terms of moving if you don't want to delay your journey or want to keep your precious seat). Instead, the Byelaws are used to punish failing to buy a ticket - something which has no causative relation to antisocial behaviour, and which there is no justification for making a criminal matter out of.

For the most part, it’s lack of knowledge of staff to report offenders for other byelaw offences, as well as the TOCs a lot of the time only willing to prosecute when there’s a financial loss to the company. Also, because it’s mainly Revenue Protection staff who report offenders, the clue is in the name as their bread and butter is ticketless travel. I’ve reported numerous offenders for many a Byelaw breach, but I’m not revenue protection staff. Some more conscientious Revenue Staff do the same, but I agree it’s not common.