• 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!

Enforcement of the new rules on social distancing, unnecessary journeys etc.

Status
Not open for further replies.

341o2

Established Member
Joined
17 Oct 2011
Messages
1,899
Of course if she failed to explain what she was doing then she failed to provide a "reasonable excuse". One suspects that if she had actually told officers what she was doing she'd have been left to go about her business or given advice.
Again, a like this one

https://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/n...us-woman-arrested-breaching-dispersal-notice/

PC Brooks was pulling vehicles over to listen to their excuses for being out and ended up arresting a woman who was “endlessly driving around for no reason”.

A post from Bournemouth South Police’s Facebook page said after lots of swearing from the woman PC Brooks pleaded with her to go home as her actions were putting lives at risk.

The woman replied saying she did not care and she will “do what I like”.


She was arrested a short while later for breaching a dispersal notice.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

341o2

Established Member
Joined
17 Oct 2011
Messages
1,899
This is factually incorrect.
Can you confirm that pls
Police are issuing tickets to any vehicle parked in the New Forest car parks or on verges. Also this https://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/n...or-no-harm-taking-short-drive-start-exercise/

REGARDING the recent debate on whether it is okay to drive for exercise. While it’s obviously not in the public interest to drive many miles to a crowded beauty spot, surely there is no harm in driving a mile or so to a large open space (like Canford Heath as was mentioned in a comment).
Note the 150 comments, many of them vitriolitic to the writer
 

AndrewE

Established Member
Joined
9 Nov 2015
Messages
5,063
Can you confirm that pls
Obviously it's time to remind ourselves what the (English) regs actually say:

Restrictions on movement


6.—(1) During the emergency period, no person may leave the place where they are living without reasonable excuse.

(2) For the purposes of paragraph (1), a reasonable excuse includes the need—

(a) to obtain basic necessities, including food and medical supplies for those in the same household (including any pets or animals in the household) or for vulnerable persons and supplies for the essential upkeep, maintenance and functioning of the household, or the household of a vulnerable person, or to obtain money, including from any business listed in Part 3 of Schedule 2;

(b)to take exercise either alone or with other members of their household;

(c)to seek medical assistance, including to access any of the services referred to in paragraph 37 or 38 of Schedule 2;

(d)to provide care or assistance, including relevant personal care within the meaning of paragraph 7(3B) of Schedule 4 to the Safeguarding of Vulnerable Groups Act 2006(3), to a vulnerable person, or to provide emergency assistance;

(e)to donate blood;
(f)to travel for the purposes of work or to provide voluntary or charitable services, where it is not reasonably possible for that person to work, or to provide those services, from the place where they are living;
(g)to attend a funeral of—
(i)a member of the person’s household,
(ii)a close family member, or
(iii)if no-one within sub-paragraphs (i) or (ii) are attending, a friend;​

(h)to fulfil a legal obligation, including attending court or satisfying bail conditions, or to participate in legal proceedings;

(i)to access critical public services, including—
(i)childcare or educational facilities (where these are still available to a child in relation to whom that person is the parent, or has parental responsibility for, or care of the child);
(ii)social services;
(iii)services provided by the Department of Work and Pensions;
(iv)services provided to victims (such as victims of crime);​

(j)in relation to children who do not live in the same household as their parents, or one of their parents, to continue existing arrangements for access to, and contact between, parents and children, and for the purposes of this paragraph, “parent” includes a person who is not a parent of the child, but who has parental responsibility for, or who has care of, the child;

(k)in the case of a minister of religion or worship leader, to go to their place of worship;

(l)to move house where reasonably necessary;
(m)to avoid injury or illness or to escape a risk of harm.

(3) For the purposes of paragraph (1), the place where a person is living includes the premises where they live together with any garden, yard, passage, stair, garage, outhouse or other appurtenance of such premises.

(4) Paragraph (1) does not apply to any person who is homeless.
Nothing about not using a car there...
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,519
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"

Howardh

Established Member
Joined
17 May 2011
Messages
8,120
I drive past a Morrison's on the way to Lidl (I prefer Lidl) - is that extra mile "unnecessary"?
 

scotrail158713

Established Member
Joined
30 Jan 2019
Messages
1,797
Location
Dundee
I drive past a Morrison's on the way to Lidl (I prefer Lidl) - is that extra mile "unnecessary"?
I wouldn’t say so. If you’d driven past one Lidl to go to another one however, then I reckon that’s “unnecessary”.
 

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
7,415
Obviously it's time to remind ourselves what the (English) regs actually say:Nothing about not using a car there...

Not specifically but as the intention is clearly to restrict movement it could easily be argued that you need a ‘reasonable excuse’ to be wherever you are. If you are in your car five miles from home then wanting a more scenic walk is not a ‘reasonable excuse’
 

341o2

Established Member
Joined
17 Oct 2011
Messages
1,899
Not specifically but as the intention is clearly to restrict movement it could easily be argued that you need a ‘reasonable excuse’ to be wherever you are. If you are in your car five miles from home then wanting a more scenic walk is not a ‘reasonable excuse’
That is the argument put forward, and as stated police are on the New Forest telling people to go home and issuing parking tickets.
There needs to be clarification of the rules. In France, you must exercise within 1km of your home address, for example
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,519
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
That is the argument put forward, and as stated police are on the New Forest telling people to go home and issuing parking tickets.
There needs to be clarification of the rules. In France, you must exercise within 1km of your home address, for example

I'd prefer there wasn't, because that is unduly restricting and would e.g. cause me to need to lap the (busyish) block instead of going for an out-and-back along empty paths. Just use some common sense.
 

Howardh

Established Member
Joined
17 May 2011
Messages
8,120
I'd prefer there wasn't, because that is unduly restricting and would e.g. cause me to need to lap the (busyish) block instead of going for an out-and-back along empty paths. Just use some common sense.
One Km would just about get me to the railway line!!
 

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
7,415
There needs to be clarification of the rules.
No there doesn’t, there needs to be an acceptance of the principle by those trying to avoid it!
If you tighten the specification of the rules you hugely increase the level of exceptions needed - “yeah, but what about [one’s rare combination of circumstances that would result in a copper letting you off anyway]”
 

CaptainHaddock

Established Member
Joined
10 Feb 2011
Messages
2,206
It appears some people still don't understand the difference between guidelines and laws.
 

island

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
15,979
Location
0036
Some Police Forces appear to be acting outside their remit.
Depends on what the tickets are for, I suppose. Parking on verges, which was cited, could well constitute the offence of parking in a manner likely to cause an obstruction. But the coronavirus regulations do not permit a penalty notice for being outside one’s home to be issued to a vehicle, it must be issued to a person.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,429
Location
Yorkshire
There needs to be clarification of the rules. In France, you must exercise within 1km of your home address, for example
I don't agree. That wouldn't be a clarification and I wouldn't agree with it being the law or a rule.
 

Darandio

Established Member
Joined
24 Feb 2007
Messages
10,672
Location
Redcar
I don't agree. That wouldn't be a clarification and I wouldn't agree with it being the law or a rule.

Depending on how things go over the next 2-3 weekends, we might well end up with it being a law or a rule. Unfortunately, whether you agree with it or not will be irrelevant. We are going to be at the mercy of those who think they can do what they want.
 

nlogax

Established Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
5,352
Location
Mostly Glasgow-ish. Mostly.
Depending on how things go over the next 2-3 weekends, we might well end up with it being a law or a rule. Unfortunately, whether you agree with it or not will be irrelevant. We are going to be at the mercy of those who think they can do what they want.

Can't help but agree. This weekend is going to be a big test for the entire country.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,519
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Depending on how things go over the next 2-3 weekends, we might well end up with it being a law or a rule. Unfortunately, whether you agree with it or not will be irrelevant. We are going to be at the mercy of those who think they can do what they want.

I can see a potential need for a rule like that but I wouldn't go with distance (I've explained why above), if it proves necessary I'd simply add a statement that the use of a motor vehicle or public transport to reach the exercise venue is not acceptable, but a defence to this is if your place of residence lies on a road with a speed limit in excess of 30mph and there is no footpath alongside it.
 

Busaholic

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
14,029
This is an exceptional situation and it isn't about preference, therefore if you *could* use online banking you should.

Regarding the post, it's easy to use the website to check prices and print postage, weigh on your kitchen scales and use a ruler/tape measure.
Not if you don't have a printer; in any case, you tell me how that Recorded Delivery letter including very private information and copies of official documents gets from my home to its intended recipient. By the way, whether I choose to bank online or not is my business alone and not yours.
 

Bantamzen

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2013
Messages
9,668
Location
Baildon, West Yorkshire
I can see a potential need for a rule like that but I wouldn't go with distance (I've explained why above), if it proves necessary I'd simply add a statement that the use of a motor vehicle or public transport to reach the exercise venue is not acceptable, but a defence to this is if your place of residence lies on a road with a speed limit in excess of 30mph and there is no footpath alongside it.

And if say a single mother lived in an area where it wasn't particularly safe to exercise in the intimidate area?
 

sheff1

Established Member
Joined
24 Dec 2009
Messages
5,459
Location
Sheffield
It appears some people still don't understand the difference between guidelines and laws.

And when the difference is clearly explained they take no notice and continue to spout their made up 'rules'. I have given up engaging with such people.
 

Enthusiast

Member
Joined
18 Mar 2019
Messages
1,043
It appears some people still don't understand the difference between guidelines and laws.
I think most people do. The matter being discussed here is clearly one of law. Parliament has enacted legislation which has been quoted here. The difficulty (as with many laws) is that they cannot legislate for every eventuality. That's why terms such as (in para 6.1) "During the emergency period, no person may leave the place where they are living without reasonable excuse" are used. The legislation then goes on to provide some examples of reasonable excuses but that list is not (and cannot be) exhaustive. Nor can the undertaking of activities which are deemed to be among the reasonable excuses be described in detail (hence the query above: "Morrisons is the nearest shop but I prefer Lidl. Is it "reasonable" for me to go to Lidl?"). Then there are the items being bought to consider. There have been reports of people shopping in Boots for their medicine but also browsing or buying perfume. The legislation states that Boots can open (as medicine's are essential). It also says that people are allowed to leave home for essential supplies. What it doesn't say is whether somebody shopping for their essential supplies in a shop that's permitted to open may or may not buy non-essential supplies at the same time. If it did, supermarkets would not be able to sell newspapers, and they clearly do. That's where the discretion of police officers and ultimately the decision of a court is called into play. Where long-standing laws are concerned police officers are provided with guidance on their enforcement. Courts are provided with case law when adjudicating or they simply make a decision and allow it to be challenged in a higher court if necessary. We don't have those luxuries here. These are extraordinary times and extraordinary measures. I think people need to embrace the spirit in which they were introduced and consider the overriding aim that Parliament had in mind when enacting them. Instead we read of ways to circumvent the regulations and to challenge their authority. As far as going out in a car is concerned the idea is to restrict it to a minimum to avoid casualties of road accidents gumming up the hospitals. Nobody needs to visit the New Forest in a car at present and I really cannot understand anybody doing so. I would be the first to criticise the police if they step out of line but these are unprecedented times and, unfortunately, the situation requires the use of unprecedented measures.
 

dvboy

Established Member
Joined
6 Sep 2011
Messages
1,937
Location
Birmingham
I agree.

I live on the edge of an urban area. Within 5 minutes of my house it's all fields. Therefore, I can go out on my bike and meet very few others. In fact I would say that cycling is safer than walking in regard of social distancing.

Obviously, matters are different if you live in central London, Birmingham or Leeds?

I live in central Birmingham. I can quite easily go out for a walk or run or bike ride in my local area without needing to drive miles out of the city and do it in the countryside. Apart from at the big supermarkets there are very few people about.

Anyway, having read the last few pages of this thread there is an incredible amount of whataboutery that can all be answered with common sense.
 
Last edited:

Thomas31

On Moderation
Joined
18 Feb 2020
Messages
57
Location
Ruislip

And surprise, surprise she’s just had her conviction quashed:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...wn-travel-newcastle-marie-dinou-a9444186.html

A woman who was fined £660 had been wrongfully charged with a crime under new coronavirus laws, police have admitted.

Marie Dinou, 41, had refused to give police officers her name, address or reasons for travel.

They questioned her because she was “loitering between platforms” at Newcastle Central station on Saturday.


She was convicted of an offence under the Coronavirus Act 2020 at North Tyneside Magistrates' Court on Monday, despite not being present at the hearing.


A judge fined her £660 and ordered her to pay a £66 victim surcharge and £85 in costs.
 
Last edited:

Greybeard33

Established Member
Joined
18 Feb 2012
Messages
4,229
Location
Greater Manchester
...if it proves necessary I'd simply add a statement that the use of a motor vehicle or public transport to reach the exercise venue is not acceptable, but a defence to this is if your place of residence lies on a road with a speed limit in excess of 30mph and there is no footpath alongside it.
Even main roads are so quiet now that I do not agree that is unduly hazardous to walk or run a short distance along one to reach a footpath or minor road. Clearly it is prudent to wear high visibility clothing, face the oncoming traffic and carry a torch during the hours of darkness.
 

neilmc

Member
Joined
23 Oct 2011
Messages
1,028
I think I'm incredibly lucky. I live in a rural area so have any amount of reasonable daily walks right from my doorstep. On the other hand all the honeypot tourist spots are the other side of the M6 so we get very few tourists and therefore unlikely to attract the attention of officious police, and in the same way I am unlikely to get stopped whilst driving as there is currently no public transport at all and a car is essential to any shopping. Having said that a police van passed me whilst exercising today - an extremely unlikely occurrence in normal times - and he just gave me a wave.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top