"Dry Trains" - alcohol not permitted

[CC 72100]

There is no full alcohol ban anywhere which prevents you from taking sealed alcohol on a train. That is a myth which people keep trying to create on this forum.

Alcohol bans in the street and on trains etc relate to open containers and discretion IS used.

So if you turn up on a train with bags of shopping and there is a bottle of whiskey amongst the bread, milk, cheese and fish fingers in your tesco bags then you won't have any problems. Should you board a train after a football match wearing a football kit carrying a 4pack under your arm then you are less likely to have just been grocery shopping and they may well confiscate it from you. If you walk onto a scotrail train leaving Glasgow at midnight quite obviously drunk and swigging from a open beer can they may refuse you travel. Catching a dry train to a dinner party with a bottle if wine won't cause problems unless you are clearly drunk already. Or just stick it in a rucksack or handbag-unless you are travelling on a football train there won't be bag searches or anything.

Once again we see the great RailUK overreaction to a non existent issue!

Basically what I was trying to say but done with real-world examples, good post there!

 

[Murph]

The problem is that while 99% of staff may correctly apply discretion, anything less than 100% is a problem when the byelaws prohibit even carrying it out of sight:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/4202/railway-byelaws.pdf

4. Intoxication and possession of intoxicating liquor

(1) No person shall enter or remain on the railway where such person is unfit to enter or remain on the railway as a result of being in a state of intoxication.

(2)Where reasonable notice is, or has been, given prohibiting intoxicating liquor on any train service, no person shall have any intoxicating liquor with him on it, or attempt to enter such a train with intoxicating liquor with him.

(3) Where an authorised person reasonably believes that any person is unfit to enter or remain on the railway, or has with him intoxicating liquor contrary to Byelaw 4(2), an authorised person may:
(i) require him to leave the railway; and
(ii) prevent him entering or remaining on the railway until an
authorised person is satisfied that he has no intoxicating liquor with him and/or is no longer in an unfit condition.

That says to me that a jobsworth has a valid legal reason to deny me travel, in a situation where discretion should have been used. For the sake of this point, while I'm sober, orderly, polite, and happen to be carrying a sealed bottle in a bag.

 

[A-driver]

The problem is that while 99% of staff may correctly apply discretion, anything less than 100% is a problem when the byelaws prohibit even carrying it out of sight:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/4202/railway-byelaws.pdf



That says to me that a jobsworth has a valid legal reason to deny me travel, in a situation where discretion should have been used. For the sake of this point, while I'm sober, orderly, polite, and happen to be carrying a sealed bottle in a bag.

What a stupid thing to post, unless you can provide evidence of a 'jobs worth' stopping someone boarding a train with sealed alcohol on them? No you can't can you...why not? Well simply because it's a non existent issue. There are no jobs worth staff who will try to search your luggage for alcohol or refuse to let you go home from your shopping trip because there is a bottle of alcohol in your bags. None have the right to do so or the time to do so and unless you give them reason to believe you may cause problems (as I say that would be if you are clearly drunk and still drinking from an open bottle or are being abusive and drunk and carrying nothing else but alcohol) then no one will ever give you a problem.

Cigarettes are not permitted to be smoked on trains but have you ever heard of anyone being denied access to a train because they have an open packet of fags on them?

Think before posting, you are just trying to make a mountain out of a molehill. Accept that this clearly is not an issue and is being done for everyone's benefit- including drunk people- and not some railway executive on a power trip looking to flex their muscles a bit and upset innocent travellers!

 

[Murph]

Think before posting, you are just trying to make a mountain out of a molehill. Accept that this clearly is not an issue and is being done for everyone's benefit- including drunk people- and not some railway executive on a power trip looking to flex their muscles a bit and upset innocent travellers!

The issue that I have is that we're simultaneously being told that it is illegal to carry alcohol on certain services, then being told that it's perfectly ok to break that law in certain, less than perfectly defined circumstances. The law itself is quite clear. Having guidelines saying that it's sometimes ok to break the law, in situations not provided for by the law, that's just bizarre and very likely to lead to problems.

I'm certainly not claiming that there's a significant number of jobsworthy rail staff or BTP, just would be surprised if there are absolutely none out there. Most staff will probably do an excellent job and show discretion in appropriate circumstances, but the times where that can fail concern me.

To me, the correct way to deal with the problems would have been strong enforcement of byelaw 4(1), without declaring blanket bans under 4(2).

 

[A-driver]

The issue that I have is that we're simultaneously being told that it is illegal to carry alcohol on certain services, then being told that it's perfectly ok to break that law in certain, less than perfectly defined circumstances. The law itself is quite clear. Having guidelines saying that it's sometimes ok to break the law, in situations not provided for by the law, that's just bizarre and very likely to lead to problems.

I'm certainly not claiming that there's a significant number of jobsworthy rail staff or BTP, just would be surprised if there are absolutely none out there. Most staff will probably do an excellent job and show discretion in appropriate circumstances, but the times where that can fail concern me.

To me, the correct way to deal with the problems would have been strong enforcement of byelaw 4(1), without declaring blanket bans under 4(2).

No one is telling you to break any laws, you are just being over-dramatic.

You need to look at the reason for those rules and then think it through.

If a football train is put on specially and designated dry then they may well prevent you carrying any alcohol on at all but then you wouldn't catch a football train to get home from shopping- you'd only be on it if going to or from the match. Apart from that any ban is on the consumption of alcohol, not carrying it.

Stop trying to find problems where none exist-I can't see what you are hoping to achieve here and I fail to see why you are so anti these kind of band which are clearly done to benefit the majority of people.

 

[Murph]

No one is telling you to break any laws, you are just being over-dramatic.

ScotRail are saying that it's ok to use common sense for when you can break byelaw 4(2). https://www.scotrail.co.uk/alcohol-ban

They clearly state that carrying alcohol is prohibited, and that it's under the power of 4(2), then go on to say you can break it sometimes. That creates a grey area, and leaves scope for an innocent person to be unfairly dealt with by staff or BTP.

If a football train is put on specially and designated dry then they may well prevent you carrying any alcohol on at all but then you wouldn't catch a football train to get home from shopping- you'd only be on it if going to or from the match. Apart from that any ban is on the consumption of alcohol, not carrying it.

Stop trying to find problems where none exist-I can't see what you are hoping to achieve here and I fail to see why you are so anti these kind of band which are clearly done to benefit the majority of people.

Yes, I'd be avoiding the football special, and I have no issues with the use of byelaw 4(2) for such exceptional services.

The bans are being made under byelaw 4(2), which quite clearly bans the carrying of alcohol, and doesn't even mention consumption. It is my opinion that this is draconian and disproportionate, and that strong enforcement of 4(1) is the correct solution.

 

[A-driver]

ScotRail are saying that it's ok to use common sense for when you can break byelaw 4(2). https://www.scotrail.co.uk/alcohol-ban

They clearly state that carrying alcohol is prohibited, and that it's under the power of 4(2), then go on to say you can break it sometimes. That creates a grey area, and leaves scope for an innocent person to be unfairly dealt with by staff or BTP.
.

No they arnt, they arnt telling you it's ok to break a law and there is no grey area whatsoever , you are reading into this with the intention if finding a problem with it and no problem actually exists. I can't see what you hope to gain by doing this either.

If the problem you are suggesting or this grey area actually exists like you claim it does then please furnish us with some examples if issues arising from it-I take it you know of 'innocent' people denied access to a train due to them having alcohol somewhere on them? I don't know of any so id be very interested to hear your examples if this happening (and real life examples, hypothetical examples certainly don't count!)

If these issues exist then the press would have got hold of it now "man denied rail travel home from airport as bottle of expensive brandy found in the bottom of his suitcase".

These issues you suggest don't exist. There is no grey area and no one is telling you it's ok to break any 'laws'. You are getting silly now.

 

[Murph]

No they arnt, they arnt telling you it's ok to break a law and there is no grey area whatsoever , you are reading into this with the intention if finding a problem with it and no problem actually exists. I can't see what you hope to gain by doing this either.

Byelaw 4(2) is clear enough:

(2)Where reasonable notice is, or has been, given prohibiting intoxicating liquor on any train service, no person shall have any intoxicating liquor with him on it, or attempt to enter such a train with intoxicating liquor with him.

We are then told that we can break or ignore that, under certain circumstances, which is not something provided for by the byelaws or Transport Act 2000 (the act which enables the byelaws).

I think we'll have to agree to disagree here. I see a problem, and quite strongly disagree with the way 4(2) is being used, you don't. I do think that staff and passengers deserve a safe environment and journey, with protection from anti-social behaviour, just don't think that the use of blanket bans under 4(2) is correct, and that 4(1) was and is the correct approach.

 

[A-driver]

Byelaw 4(2) is clear enough:



We are then told that we can break or ignore that, under certain circumstances, which is not something provided for by the byelaws or Transport Act 2000 (the act which enables the byelaws).

I think we'll have to agree to disagree here. I see a problem, and quite strongly disagree with the way 4(2) is being used, you don't. I do think that staff and passengers deserve a safe environment and journey, with protection from anti-social behaviour, just don't think that the use of blanket bans under 4(2) is correct, and that 4(1) was and is the correct approach.

Sorry but you are completely misunderstanding this. Continue quoting by laws as much as you want but you are still misinterpreting this.

And you are still failing to back up these rather silly claims of yours with examples of actual problems or incidents.

I think you have a very vivid imagination and are just determined to find a problem here. No issues exist, no one is breaking any laws, no grey area exists, no one is having a problem catching a train whilst carrying alcohol for any reason apart from to drink it onboard and you are just trying your best to prove that an issue exists where it really dosnt.

So unless you can provide examples of real life issues (quoting a bylaw and saying it may cause an issue dosnt count) then I really can't see how there is a real problem here.

 

[Dumpton Park]

Certain bits of the Valley Lines are dry, although as I only saw a poster in passing when I was changing trains at Cardiff Central, I'm afraid I couldn't even begin to spell where - although it seems to be between certain stations, not set trains.

Perhaps worth adding that Scotrail's sleepers are certainly not dry. That said, their alcohol pricing is very odd - 1/2 bottle of vino 9 quid. Bottle 9.50!

Dp

 

[met331]

Robin hood line all trains and stations on Friday and saturday nights

 

[Markdvdman]

Merthyr To Pontypridd has a permanent alcohol ban but some people do flout it! To be fair, I have not seen it abused when I am on the service!

 

[cuccir]

Sorry but you are completely misunderstanding this. Continue quoting by laws as much as you want but you are still misinterpreting this.

And you are still failing to back up these rather silly claims of yours with examples of actual problems or incidents.

I think you have a very vivid imagination and are just determined to find a problem here. No issues exist, no one is breaking any laws, no grey area exists, no one is having a problem catching a train whilst carrying alcohol for any reason apart from to drink it onboard and you are just trying your best to prove that an issue exists where it really dosnt.

So unless you can provide examples of real life issues (quoting a bylaw and saying it may cause an issue dosnt count) then I really can't see how there is a real problem here.

I sympathise with Murph here, even if I think he's overstated the case. Just because TOCs act reasonably on this now, does not mean that legislation won't be abused either: in future; by a misinformed staff member; or as part of a dispute between a particular passenger and staff member.

I don't think that we need to label this 'disgusting', but I think it's always reasonable to be on the look-out where the potential for the abuse of civil liberties is brought in, whether intentionally or not. As things stand, that by-law is a potential danger, if implemented widely.