Consequences of drinking wine or beer on a 'dry train'

[SussexMan]

All very well but if you had over £100 in whisky wrapped in your bag (real scenario) and someone asked you if you had alcohol in your bag, what would you say?

What is a "real scenario"?

If it is a scenario then people are telling you what they think would happen.

If it is real then perhaps you can tell us what happened.

 

[Flamingo]

All very well but if you had over £100 in whisky wrapped in your bag (real scenario) and someone asked you if you had alcohol in your bag, what would you say?

Decision time.....the man on the forum said it would be ok even though the bylaw says no.

I would say "I have an unopened bottle which I don't intend to open. It's an expensive gift for somebody. If I'm not allowed carry it can I please leave my bag in your compartment until I get to my station, and I'll come and get it from you at the station? Thanks for your help"

 

[VauxhallandI]

What is a "real scenario"?

If it is a scenario then people are telling you what they think would happen.

If it is real then perhaps you can tell us what happened.

I think you might actually know what I mean.

It is a real scenario that I have had said goods on me on a train. The next bit is the question of what happens if the dry block is on.

 

[DarloRich]

What, if any, are the consequences of taking a glass worth of wine or beer onto an EC dry train and drinking it?

I have seen people arrested when they refused to comply with instructions issued by the police on the disposal of their booze I have also seen the police allow people to consume their alcohol before boarding ( if they had one or two cans)

I know many people who have got around these bans through the creative use of everyday items to carry their alcoholic beverages. I couldn’t possibly comment further.....

 

[Tetchytyke]

Especially if it is secured inside a sealed item of luggage!!

I'm sure Arctic Troll knows that really.

I specifically asked East Coast that and they said no. The wording of the Byelaw is specifically no possession of alcohol.

If it had been a £5-10 bottle of wine and not three days before Christmas I'd have probably taken the risk. I'm yet to be stopped at Kings Cross as I generally don't get on trains absolutely hammered. But when it's more expensive, and the TOC say no, then it's a bit of a gamble. I'm not a gambler, especially as I have rotten luck.

I have seen plenty of other people be asked what is in their baggage though- think groups of men with a holdall- and I'm not sure (being an ex-copper) you'd be expecting me to lie to the BTP would you?

 

[A-driver]

I specifically asked East Coast that and they said no. The wording of the Byelaw is specifically no possession of alcohol.

If it had been a £5-10 bottle of wine and not three days before Christmas I'd have probably taken the risk. I'm yet to be stopped at Kings Cross as I generally don't get on trains absolutely hammered. But when it's more expensive, and the TOC say no, then it's a bit of a gamble. I'm not a gambler, especially as I have rotten luck.

I have seen plenty of other people be asked what is in their baggage though- think groups of men with a holdall- and I'm not sure (being an ex-copper) you'd be expecting me to lie to the BTP would you?

"What's in the suitcase please sir?"

"Just clothes, am on my way home for Xmas"

Not lying but why specifically mention "xmas presents including some expensive booze".

Sorry but you are trying to find problems where none exist.

I've said before and you still won't listen but what are they trying to achieve with dry trains? A safe environment for all passengers and minimal delays from people drinking themselves silly on board. That is targeting people drinking cans of beer, cheap wines, miniature shots etc.

Someone carrying a gift wrapped and sealed bottle of drink is not going to fit into that profile. They are never going to search fully suitcases, only carry on type bags and carrier bags which may contain cans of beer.

This isn't airport style security, just a heavy staff and police presence to enforce and reassure that drinking will not be tolerated on board the train. If you are stupid enough to get a gift wrapped bottle of drink out on the train and show it off then you may have it confiscated. If you say nothing and keep the Sri in your case In the overhead racks or vestibule bag storage then you won't have any issues.

So in short, yes-I'm suggesting lying if you want to look at it like that. Unless you give them reason to suspect you are smuggling booze onto a dry train in order to drink it on board and cause trouble then they arnt going to be interested in you. That's all there is to it. Stop blowing it out of proportion.

 

[Llanigraham]

I specifically asked East Coast that and they said no. The wording of the Byelaw is specifically no possession of alcohol.

If it had been a £5-10 bottle of wine and not three days before Christmas I'd have probably taken the risk. I'm yet to be stopped at Kings Cross as I generally don't get on trains absolutely hammered. But when it's more expensive, and the TOC say no, then it's a bit of a gamble. I'm not a gambler, especially as I have rotten luck.

I have seen plenty of other people be asked what is in their baggage though- think groups of men with a holdall- and I'm not sure (being an ex-copper) you'd be expecting me to lie to the BTP would you?

Oh come on!?
You are looking for problems, not resolutions!
And making life intentionally difficult for your self.
I'm sure there was also an "attitude" test, so perhaps you failed that?
I see a pattern here.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

I get around East Coast’s dry trains ban by dressing up as Jesus and if the BTP find my bottle of wine say “Sorry mate, it was water when I put it in my bag”.

 

[Flamingo]

I get around East Coast’s dry trains ban by dressing up as Jesus and if the BTP find my bottle of wine say “Sorry mate, it was water when I put it in my bag”.

I think you probably do

 

[island]

Oh come on!?
You are looking for problems, not resolutions!
And making life intentionally difficult for your self.
I'm sure there was also an "attitude" test, so perhaps you failed that?
I see a pattern here.

I also think the requirements will be applied with a large dose of common-sense.

 

[Tetchytyke]

I also think the requirements will be applied with a large dose of common-sense.

I asked East Coast if I could take the wrapped item with me in a suitcase (using the DVT if necessary) and they categorically said no. This left me with two choices: take the risk of seeing it confiscated at Kings Cross, or post it by courier separately.

Relying on "common sense" is fine when you're talking about a £10 bottle, less so when it's a £50 bottle. It only takes one person to have had a common sense failure- perhaps after stopping the 27,417th football fan saying the same thing ("it's a present, honest guv'nor, look it has a bow on it and everything")- and that's a lot of money (literally) down the drain.

The point was that they don't give adequate warning of dry trains- certainly not at point of sale- which causes problems later.

 

[A-driver]

I asked East Coast if I could take the wrapped item with me in a suitcase (using the DVT if necessary) and they categorically said no. This left me with two choices: take the risk of seeing it confiscated at Kings Cross, or post it by courier separately.

Relying on "common sense" is fine when you're talking about a £10 bottle, less so when it's a £50 bottle. It only takes one person to have had a common sense failure- perhaps after stopping the 27,417th football fan saying the same thing ("it's a present, honest guv'nor, look it has a bow on it and everything")- and that's a lot of money (literally) down the drain.

The point was that they don't give adequate warning of dry trains- certainly not at point of sale- which causes problems later.

Why on earth did you ask? It's just looking for problems by asking rather than assuming it's ok and keeping it quiet.

They can't start saying certain drinks in certain packaging are ok as then people will try taking drink on as a gift and consuming it on board

The very fact you asked them shows you are looking for problems and not using common sense. No one will look for expensive alcohol in your suitcase - you are missing the entire point of a dry train.

This thread just needs a bit of common sense to be applied (which is exactly what police and staff will be doing providing you as the passenger are also doing so by not asking if you can take alcohol on a train listed as dry).

 

[sheff1]

Why on earth did you ask? It's just looking for problems by asking rather than assuming it's ok and keeping it quiet.

On ticketing issues passengers are always being to told to ask if in doubt. When they do not ask and are 'caught out' because they assumed something was OK they are pilloried on here for not asking. Therefore, I can quite see why someone would ask when they were unsure about a different aspect of railway regulations especially when the item being carried was an expensive one which they did not wish to lose.

As it turns out EC confirmed the item was indeed prohibited. If AT had not asked and then been refused access to the train I can guarantee that if he then came on here seeking advice, people would have said 'you should have asked, not assumed'.

 

[MikeWh]

I'm sorry but Arctic Troll has a point. If the person at East Coast that he asked was using the same common sense that staff on here assure us would happen on the ground then there wouldn't be a problem. The fact that someone in authority did not apply common sense makes it a problem.

And please don't go on about assuming it would be ok and keeping quiet. The railway has a long history of applying rules that fly in the face of common sense. Professor at Darlington, couple at Eastleigh, etc etc.

 

[A-driver]

On ticketing issues passengers are always being to told to ask if in doubt. When they do not ask and are 'caught out' because they assumed something was OK they are pilloried on here for not asking. Therefore, I can quite see why someone would ask when they were unsure about a different aspect of railway regulations especially when the item being carried was an expensive one which they did not wish to lose.



As it turns out EC confirmed the item was indeed prohibited. If AT had not asked and then been refused access to the train I can guarantee that if he then came on here seeking advice, people would have said 'you should have asked, not assumed'.

I'm sorry but Arctic Troll has a point. If the person at East Coast that he asked was using the same common sense that staff on here assure us would happen on the ground then there wouldn't be a problem. The fact that someone in authority did not apply common sense makes it a problem.

And please don't go on about assuming it would be ok and keeping quiet. The railway has a long history of applying rules that fly in the face of common sense. Professor at Darlington, couple at Eastleigh, etc etc.

But that still misses the pint completely.

Answer why it is a dry train please? What are they hoping to achieve by this?

Now they don't carry out full bag searches. They have no interest in suitcases. They are simply targeting drunk football fans. This is being blown out of all proportion. Of course the policy must be a complete ban to avoid discrimination claims but AT was not the target of the dry train. Asking about it and making a fuss is pointless. They are simply not goo to look for or find Xmas presents containing alcohol.

This thread is just getting silly now.

 

[Flamingo]

I'm reminded of a phrase I heard once, "a solution looking for a problem"...

 

[najaB]

I'm reminded of a phrase I heard once, "a solution looking for a problem"...

I agree that it's not a common problem, but picture the situation: A nice, polite, law-abiding citizen arrives at the train station (with bottle of wine or whisky in their bag) and finds a sign saying "No alcohol allowed on board". They ask you "Oh, I didn't realise. Can I take this with me?"

What will you say to them, bearing in mind there's a bunch of likely lads standing right behind them with a multi-pack of Stella peeking out of the top of their carrier bag?

 

[Flamingo]

Personally, I'd offer to mind it in a secure area of the train until I got to their stop. And then do the same for the beer drinkers.

 

[Llanigraham]

I asked East Coast if I could take the wrapped item with me in a suitcase (using the DVT if necessary) and they categorically said no. This left me with two choices: take the risk of seeing it confiscated at Kings Cross, or post it by courier separately.

Relying on "common sense" is fine when you're talking about a £10 bottle, less so when it's a £50 bottle. It only takes one person to have had a common sense failure- perhaps after stopping the 27,417th football fan saying the same thing ("it's a present, honest guv'nor, look it has a bow on it and everything")- and that's a lot of money (literally) down the drain.

The point was that they don't give adequate warning of dry trains- certainly not at point of sale- which causes problems later.

And to repeat myself.
Oh come on!?
You are looking for problems, not resolutions!
And making life intentionally difficult for your self.

 

[sheff1]

But that still misses the pint completely.

However, it doesn't miss the point.

Someone might assume that if they hold an Advance ticket from Newcastle to London but are offered a lift to Durham they could join their booked train there without problems. Of course, such an assumption would be incorrect and 'common sense' doesn't come into it - the regulations are clear.

The regulations banning alcohol are also clear and if someone is found breaking them common sense is again irrelevant. Some, like flamingo, would apply common sense, others may not ... and there is no way an intending passenger could know which sort of person they would meet. Saying 'I assumed it would be OK' to one of the latter would get you nowhere.

 

[A-driver]

However, it doesn't miss the point.

Someone might assume that if they hold an Advance ticket from Newcastle to London but are offered a lift to Durham they could join their booked train there without problems. Of course, such an assumption would be incorrect and 'common sense' doesn't come into it - the regulations are clear.

The regulations banning alcohol are also clear and if someone is found breaking them common sense is again irrelevant. Some, like flamingo, would apply common sense, others may not ... and there is no way an intending passenger could know which sort of person they would meet. Saying 'I assumed it would be OK' to one of the latter would get you nowhere.

But how on earth would any staff or police ever find the alcohol wrapped up in a suitcase?

Has anyone ever seen anyone having their suitcase fully searched before boarding a dry train? No? Didn't think so. Why not? Simply because the contents of a suitcase are not the intended purpose of the dry trains.

 

[najaB]

Personally, I'd offer to mind it in a secure area of the train until I got to their stop. And then do the same for the beer drinkers.

Fair enough. I knew there was a reason I liked you.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Has anyone ever seen anyone having their suitcase fully searched before boarding a dry train? No?

I have!

Why on earth did you ask? It's just looking for problems by asking rather than assuming it's ok and keeping it quiet.

Because I didn't fancy getting to Kings Cross and be faced with missing my booked train or throwing away an expensive gift.

Personally, I'd offer to mind it in a secure area of the train until I got to their stop. And then do the same for the beer drinkers.

Excellent. I'd expect 99% of railway staff to be just as sensible.

There's always one though...

 

[A-driver]

I have!

Do tell because I don't believe you for a second. Not at all.

I have sat in our mess room at kings cross dozens of times watching ques of people boarding dry trains out the window and never have I seen them look in a suitcase. They are looking in carrier bags and rucksacks mainly of people who are pretty obviously coming back from the football. The families dragging suitcases, kids, prams etc are generally waved on, perhaps a cursory look in any carrier bags.

Sorry but I refuse to believe that you have ever seen staff or police going through a passengers suitcase and pulling all their clothes etc out simply looking for a smuggled can of beer. If you have witnessed it then I'm pretty sure they were searching their bags for security reasons and had reason to do so.

When 500 people are filing past a dozen police officers do you really think that they are for to be pulling ordinary members of the public out to fully search every bit of heir luggage?! Possibly if someone in a football kit walks past with a case acting drunk they may do as that is reasonable to suspect them of having a case of booze but not a 'normally' dressed person...

And I can assure you 100% that they wouldn't unwrap your xmas presents. This is a dry train, not airport security looking for hidden weapons and explosives.

Heavens sake, the staff and police are looking for obvious booze. Not master smugglers-if any booze gets through it will be dealt with on the train if they are found drinking it.

You may aswell suggest that they pull people out for full strip searches incase they are trying to smuggle miniature bottles up their trouser legs...

You need to be realistic here as you seem to be in some awkward, problem creating fantasy land!

 

[Flamingo]

Excellent. I'd expect 99% of railway staff to be just as sensible.

There's always one though...

Well, if you are not going to accept the repeated reassurances of the many experienced staff posting on the thread, I guess that nothing short of repeal of the bylaw is going to change your mind.

Sorry you feel that distrustful of us all.

 

[Llanigraham]

I have!

Of course you have!! :roll:

Porcine aviators come to mind.

 

[cjmillsnun]

Personally, I'd offer to mind it in a secure area of the train until I got to their stop. And then do the same for the beer drinkers.

That works for me.

 

[Greenback]

This thread seems to have run its course now.