False Address & Name

[Flamingo]

Not even 18 days I would think? Revenue staff must deal with hordes of people and they can't possibly remember them all:cry:

You'd think that, wouldn't you
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'm surprised they haven't already got body cameras

They started issuing them with FGW, mainly to provide evidence in cases where the RPI is being threatened and verbally abused or assaulted.

I don't know if the evidence will stand up in court or not, apparently not one RPI wearing them has been subject to any verbal or physical abuse yet!

 

[Deerfold]

Not even 18 days I would think? Revenue staff must deal with hordes of people and they can't possibly remember them all:cry:

I've been surprised by shopkeepers who can remember me (and sometimes what I bought) after 1 visit months previously. Perhaps I'm just odd-looking?

I suspect those recruiting RPIs would tend to favour those with better than average memories.

 

[jon0844]

You do have to wonder if the camera might wind some people up ('why the f... are you filming me?'), but I guess most scrotes know more about CCTV rules than the rest of the public.

 

[Flamingo]

You do have to wonder if the camera might wind some people up ('why the f... are you filming me?'), but I guess most scrotes know more about CCTV rules than the rest of the public.

I've been told on more than one occasion "You're lucky there is CCTV on this train or I'd have you".

When I've replied "There isn't CCTV" there is usually a bit of bluster, but nothing more when they get told if they start something they WILL get hurt.

 

[jon0844]

I'd love to be there when you said that!

I assume that just after saying 'There isn't CCTV' you do this;

 

[Tibbs]

You'd think that, wouldn't you
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


They started issuing them with FGW, mainly to provide evidence in cases where the RPI is being threatened and verbally abused or assaulted.

I don't know if the evidence will stand up in court or not, apparently not one RPI wearing them has been subject to any verbal or physical abuse yet!

Body Cameras make both sides much more polite. I just hope they're not like the ones bailiffs have where they can be turned off and on.

I'm sure I saw a report about police body cameras in the US which showed that both assaults on police officers and violence complaints against police officers were down markedly after their introduction.

Here it is: https://ojpdiagnosticcenter.org/sit...download/Police Officer Body-Worn Cameras.pdf (and no, I'm not pasting the report in here.)

 

[PermitToTravel]

Body Cameras make both sides much more polite. I just hope they're not like the ones bailiffs have where they can be turned off and on.

There was a thread on them previously. They can be turned off and on.

 

[jon0844]

I expect there needs to be a good reason to switch it off though, especially if someone later demands to see the footage (data protection etc) or argues that something was said that needs to be verified.

Indeed, could failing to record cause problems for any prosecution in the future?

 

[6Gman]

I've been surprised by shopkeepers who can remember me (and sometimes what I bought) after 1 visit months previously. Perhaps I'm just odd-looking?

I suspect those recruiting RPIs would tend to favour those with better than average memories.

I once travelled on a Vagg's bus in Shropshire.

18 months later I caught a Vagg's bus in another part of the county. I mentioned to the driver that it was the same vehicle as the last time I'd travelled with Vagg's.

"I'd have been driving then, this is my regular coach. (pause) Oh yes, you travelled from Ensdon to Montford Bridge didn't you?"

The case rests!

 

[Flamingo]

I'd love to be there when you said that!

I assume that just after saying 'There isn't CCTV' you do this;

You HAVE been on my train

(The people who do the Avoiding Conflict courses despair of me - but it works! )
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Body Cameras make both sides much more polite. I just hope they're not like the ones bailiffs have where they can be turned off and on.

I'm sure I saw a report about police body cameras in the US which showed that both assaults on police officers and violence complaints against police officers were down markedly after their introduction.

Here it is: https://ojpdiagnosticcenter.org/sit...download/Police Officer Body-Worn Cameras.pdf (and no, I'm not pasting the report in here.)

I believe they are normally turned off, but if the situation is escalating, then they can be turned on, and the passenger informed everything is being recorded from that point. But I don't have them, and have not had a formal briefing on them, so I may have been misinformed.

 

[jon0844]

The council wardens wear stickers saying much the same as signs on trains etc, so I assume they don't even have to warn people.

But whatever the legal requirements, it might be down to individual policy on how to use them.

 

[dececco]

Thanks to those offering guidance. I'm going to speak to Northern and admit it as its the right thing to do and will allow for peace of mind. Hopefully they might be lenient but I am fully prepared for the worst.

I am intrigued though by people suggesting I should just keep quiet. Surely, that would be the worst thing to do, what with the consequences being drastically more severe if caught.

 

[dakta]

The worst thing to do is the bit that's done I think, anything else is damage limitation and the gamble of it's effectiveness.

Hope you get it all sorted.

 

[455driver]

Thanks to those offering guidance. I'm going to speak to Northern and admit it as its the right thing to do and will allow for peace of mind. Hopefully they might be lenient but I am fully prepared for the worst.

Good luck with it all!

I am intrigued though by people suggesting I should just keep quiet. Surely, that would be the worst thing to do, what with the consequences being drastically more severe if caught.

Of course they are not the ones in the sh+t if/when the TOC catch up with you!

 

[cjmillsnun]

Thanks to those offering guidance. I'm going to speak to Northern and admit it as its the right thing to do and will allow for peace of mind. Hopefully they might be lenient but I am fully prepared for the worst.

I am intrigued though by people suggesting I should just keep quiet. Surely, that would be the worst thing to do, what with the consequences being drastically more severe if caught.

This is the best course of action.

Be 100% honest with them from now on, and you may well get an offer of a settlement. This'll keep it out of court.

 

[timbo58]

I remember being casually threatened by some knobber on a late night train who insisted on smoking and telling him 'you throw a punch at me and my friend 'MR Bardic' will leave you a permanent 'BR' imprint on your face to show for it'.

never ever did so I hasten to add, but the old sportis and bardic combo were a good sword and shield I always found!

The sad thing is the modern Tocs think these sort of social misfits are their valued 'customers' when they are just fare dodging vandals and thugs who make everyones travel a misery and the Railway would be infinitely better off taking a far more assertive line with these type of people instead of molly coddling them as if they were of some value.

 

[Andrew1395]

I think the OP made a typo - It's a Lawn Firm he works for, that's why he has virtually grassed himself up on this Forum. Travelling without a valid ticket is silly enough, inventing implausible details even dafter. Confessing to strangers on the internet a virtual guarantee of ending up in the manure. Using the office PC to do so during office hours, possible disciplinary action. Bringing employer into disrepute if OP is prosecuted - possible dismissal.

 

[PermitToTravel]

I think the OP made a typo - It's a Lawn Firm he works for, that's why he has virtually grassed himself up on this Forum. Travelling without a valid ticket is silly enough, inventing implausible details even dafter. Confessing to strangers on the internet a virtual guarantee of ending up in the manure. Using the office PC to do so during office hours, possible disciplinary action. Bringing employer into disrepute if OP is prosecuted - possible dismissal.

We don't know which law[n] firm OP works for, so he's hardly bringing them into disrepute.

 

[DownSouth]

We don't know which law[n] firm OP works for, so he's hardly bringing them into disrepute.

Which would be why Andrew1395 wrote "if prosecuted" rather than "if posted on an anonymous web forum."

 

[Antman]

I've been told on more than one occasion "You're lucky there is CCTV on this train or I'd have you".

When I've replied "There isn't CCTV" there is usually a bit of bluster, but nothing more when they get told if they start something they WILL get hurt.

That's called threatening behaviour

 

[najaB]

"Don't hit me or I'll hit you back." can hardly be called a threat.

 

[Murph]

That's called threatening behaviour

"Don't hit me or I'll hit you back." can hardly be called a threat.

"You're lucky there is CCTV on this train or I'd have you" is threatening behaviour. Stating that there's no CCTV, but that you will defend yourself if attacked, is certainly not threatening behaviour.

 

[Antman]

"Don't hit me or I'll hit you back." can hardly be called a threat.

Telling somebody they WILL get hurt most certainly is though

 

[Flamingo]

Bless, next time someone threatens me I must remember not to say or do anything to hurt their feelings or upset them. What dreadful customer service!

 

[Murph]

Telling somebody they WILL get hurt most certainly is though

Nope, it is not when it is in direct response to someone threatening to assault you. "Watch out, or I'll have you" is clearly a threat, directly responding to it along the lines of "Try it, sonny, and you WILL get hurt" is not a threat, it's a combination of a promise/reminder that you will defend yourself, and a warning that they may not enjoy the experience. Context is everything, and the person who throws the first verbal punch does make a difference.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Bless, next time someone threatens me I must remember not to say or do anything to hurt their feelings or upset them. What dreadful customer service!

Best make them a nice cup of tea as well, just to be sure!

 

[Antman]

Nope, it is not when it is in direct response to someone threatening to assault you. "Watch out, or I'll have you" is clearly a threat, directly responding to it along the lines of "Try it, sonny, and you WILL get hurt" is not a threat, it's a combination of a promise/reminder that you will defend yourself, and a warning that they may not enjoy the experience. Context is everything, and the person who throws the first verbal punch does make a difference.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Best make them a nice cup of tea as well, just to be sure!

All I will say is that I know of a police officer who came very close to losing his job for something similar, it might have been ok in the good old days but not anymore

 

[455driver]

Nope, it is not when it is in direct response to someone threatening to assault you. "Watch out, or I'll have you" is clearly a threat, directly responding to it along the lines of "Try it, sonny, and you WILL get hurt" is not a threat, it's a combination of a promise/reminder that you will defend yourself, and a warning that they may not enjoy the experience. Context is everything, and the person who throws the first verbal punch does make a difference.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Best make them a nice cup of tea as well, just to be sure!

But not too hot just in case they scold themselves!

My standard reply was 'you get the first shot and then I will defend myself, lets see who goes to Hospital', funny enough no-one has taken me up on the offer whether I am at work or not!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

All I will say is that I know of a police officer who came very close to losing his job for something similar, it might have been ok in the good old days but not anymore

So one specific situation applies to everyone in the World does it?
But in your World its okay for people to threaten staff members who are simply trying to do their job! :roll:

 

[Antman]

But not too hot just in case they scold themselves!

My standard reply was 'you get the first shot and then I will defend myself, lets see who goes to Hospital', funny enough no-one has taken me up on the offer whether I am at work or not!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


So one specific situation applies to everyone in the World does it?
But in your World its okay for people to threaten staff members who are simply trying to do their job! :roll:

Of course it isn't okay but two wrongs don't make a right and surely it is better not to lower yourself to their level? I assume staff training doesn't advocate using a threatening attitude to such people?

 

[najaB]

I assume staff training doesn't advocate using a threatening attitude to such people?

Thing is, I wouldn't see it as threatening. If Flamingo or 445driver backed down meekly every time a s**thead started mouthing off then it would just encourage worse the next time. The kind of thing that they say doesn't escalate the situation (since it doesn't take 'power' or 'respect' away from the scrote) and at the same time lets them know who's really in control.

It's similar to how police deal with arresting people in rough neighbourhoods - they're firm enough with the bystanders to let everyone know who is in control, but not so much so that they (the bystanders) turn into a mob.

 

[cjmillsnun]

Of course it isn't okay but two wrongs don't make a right and surely it is better not to lower yourself to their level? I assume staff training doesn't advocate using a threatening attitude to such people?

So a threat of self defence in response to a threat of violence and a warning that in conducting said self defence, it is likely that there will be pain is lowering themselves to the scrote's level?

It is not incorrect behaviour in any form. I take it you have never been in a position where you have had violence threatened against you. I have, and you have to be assertive back, being passive will not diffuse a situation, and if it has gone to threats of violence, then you're past the point of them being reasonable in any shape or form.