Incident at Ticket Block

[Blinkbonny]

I witnessed a somewhat disturbing scene at a station this week whilst out on my travels. Waiting to get off the train I was alongside a young woman who saw I was looking for a litter bin and remarked that they don't seem to have them on the trains any more. I bemoaned that fact and got of at the stop alongside her.

It was an un-barriered station (as I think is more or less the entire line) but I noticed two Revenue Protection guys by the exit gate checking tickets.
I passed through (without being stopped as it happens) but then behind me I heard this woman shouting quite wildly "I've told you I don't know where my ticket is. It was on my phone!"

Looking round I saw her trying to walk past the Revenue guy and he was continually moving to step in front of her to prevent her leaving. I don't think he touched her at anytime. She then screamed at him "I've just lost a baby!"

At this point I decided that this wasn't Street Theatre and I wasn't keen to stand watching, so I went on my way.

I don't know how it played out. I noticed the guy's partner getting into a parked car as I walked off.

It did leave me wondering a number of things though. I know these guys have no power to detain you so presumably the woman had every right to just walk away? In which case it makes their presence a bit superfluous if anybody just wishes to ignore them.

Stepping in front of her: I could see why he would do it, but I can also see why he might have chosen not to if it had been a six-foot bloke holding a can of Special Brew.

What the woman shouted: Very distressing - but obviously not something that should be weaponised in this way.

The bloke getting into the car: It almost looked as if he was leaving his mate to it - but more likely he had a radio or something in there? But with a view to what?

All in all, I was left with a distinct sympathy for how difficult these guys' jobs are - and when I returned to the station an hour later and the same man asked (with sorry grace!) to see my Rover ticket I was happy to make every allowance for his surly attitude. I had had the option of just walking away, he had had to deal with it and then continue the rest of his shift.

Would love to know what should happen in this sort of situation though.

 

[LowLevel]

They do have powers of detention but in most circumstances are instructed not to exercise them by their employer, there might be exceptions, I'm not sure. If our lot want people to be detained they usually arrange for a uniformed or plain clothed BTP officer to be present at the block, sometimes with spectacular results. I have seen RPIs using the numbers tactic though - 4 or 5 closing up and blocking the exit themselves so it isn't possible to walk by.

Liverpool Lime Street is a very regular one for officers grabbing "difficult customers" unawares.

 

[Bensonby]

As above, revenue officers do have a power to detain. This derived from s.5 of the Regulation of Railways Act 1889: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/52-53/57/section/5

Whether they are trained/insured/authorised by the TOC to exercise the power is another matter though.

 

[AlterEgo]

I have never seen an RPI physically detain someone and don’t believe they are authorised to do so by their employers, regardless of the power enshrined in law. You must always give your name and address as a minimum, but you do not have to answer any of their questions and you are free to leave at any time.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

As above, revenue officers do have a power to detain. This derived from s.5 of the Regulation of Railways Act 1889: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/52-53/57/section/5

Whether they are trained/insured/authorised by the TOC to exercise the power is another matter though.

The insurance element is irrelevant. There will be suitable public liability insurance in place anyway.

Looking at the law, it's not for the TOC to "authorise" either, it's a statutory power given to all officers of the railway. Even if a TOC had explicitly said NOT to use the power, it would still be an absolute defence to any charges of assault or false imprisonment. It may be an employment matter, although if the power was being exercised lawfully, and the circumstances genuinely warranted such action, they may be in a bit of a pickle at an employment tribunal.

I doubt they are trained specifically in detention, but technically there is no requirement for training, much in the same way as you or I can make an arrest (aka a citizens arrest) without training, in which case it's all about what's reasonable in the specific circumstances. The lack of training would be useful for a TOC though if attempting to distance the actions of their employee, especially when considering Health and Safety requirements.

There's all sorts of case law on detention in the rail industry. One case got quite far in the Appeal Courts and essentially the passenger lost, and she in that case, even had a valid ticket, (albeit wouldn't show it), and was left with extensive bruising to her arm when an inspector in London grabbed her and detained her.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

It's also worth looking at the behaviour of the traveller involved:

(I) got of at the stop alongside her. (...)

It was an un-barriered station (...) then behind me I heard this woman shouting quite wildly "I've told you I don't know where my ticket is. It was on my phone!"

Looking round I saw her trying to walk past the Revenue guy and he was continually moving to step in front of her to prevent her leaving. I don't think he touched her at anytime. She then screamed at him "I've just lost a baby!"

These are circumstantial but they're consistent with the traveller not having a ticket (first they claimed to have lost their ticket from (with?) their phone, then they claimed a special reason for not being interviewed). If the matter went to court I'd expect the prosecution to seek proof of the traveller's claims - and if they couldn't be proved, invite the bench/jury to draw a negative conclusion.

 

[nanstallon]

The insurance element is irrelevant. There will be suitable public liability insurance in place anyway.

Looking at the law, it's not for the TOC to "authorise" either, it's a statutory power given to all officers of the railway. Even if a TOC had explicitly said NOT to use the power, it would still be an absolute defence to any charges of assault or false imprisonment. It may be an employment matter, although if the power was being exercised lawfully, and the circumstances genuinely warranted such action, they may be in a bit of a pickle at an employment tribunal.

I doubt they are trained specifically in detention, but technically there is no requirement for training, much in the same way as you or I can make an arrest (aka a citizens arrest) without training, in which case it's all about what's reasonable in the specific circumstances. The lack of training would be useful for a TOC though if attempting to distance the actions of their employee, especially when considering Health and Safety requirements.

There's all sorts of case law on detention in the rail industry. One case got quite far in the Appeal Courts and essentially the passenger lost, and she in that case, even had a valid ticket, (albeit wouldn't show it), and was left with extensive bruising to her arm when an inspector in London grabbed her and detained her.

Not very nice.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

Not very nice.

Lawful / permissible doesn’t always equate to right or nice unfortunately!

Fortunately actual detention on the railway will be extremely rare. I am quite sure a seasoned inspector will be able to utilise other behavioural and verbal techniques to persuade a potential offender to cooperate, without the need for detention or even the threat of it.

However, I can well believe that there are elements in society who will persistently or seriously offend without fear of consequence, so in rare cases, more forceful detention until the arrival of the police will likely be quite justified and reasonable, so long as the member of staff feels comfortable enough doing so, and is prepared to justify their actions, probably to their employer!

 

[185]

I have never seen an RPI physically detain someone and don’t believe they are authorised to do so by their employers, regardless of the power enshrined in law. You must always give your name and address as a minimum, but you do not have to answer any of their questions and you are free to leave at any time.

Operators may or may not authorise their staff to prevent a passenger from leaving... but at one operator who discourage staff blocking exits, a 2-hour long morning peak "Operation Walker" saw 17 passengers who believed they were free to ignore staff and leave... detained by three plain clothes police loitering out of view outside the entrance.

All were PNC'd for subsequent prosecution (three of which were also arrested for other matters) - a good strategy to encourage passengers to consider the increased problem they could face if they walk off - a penalty fare is preferable to a court appointment with the police.

 

[XAM2175]

All were PNC'd for subsequent prosecution (three of which were also arrested for other matters) ...

They were Police National Computered?

 

[Elecman]

I would think so as that type of Miscreant is often wanted for other criminal transgressions

 

[Tallguy]

The insurance element is irrelevant. There will be suitable public liability insurance in place anyway.

Looking at the law, it's not for the TOC to "authorise" either, it's a statutory power given to all officers of the railway. Even if a TOC had explicitly said NOT to use the power, it would still be an absolute defence to any charges of assault or false imprisonment. It may be an employment matter, although if the power was being exercised lawfully, and the circumstances genuinely warranted such action, they may be in a bit of a pickle at an employment tribunal.

I doubt they are trained specifically in detention, but technically there is no requirement for training, much in the same way as you or I can make an arrest (aka a citizens arrest) without training, in which case it's all about what's reasonable in the specific circumstances. The lack of training would be useful for a TOC though if attempting to distance the actions of their employee, especially when considering Health and Safety requirements.

There's all sorts of case law on detention in the rail industry. One case got quite far in the Appeal Courts and essentially the passenger lost, and she in that case, even had a valid ticket, (albeit wouldn't show it), and was left with extensive bruising to her arm when an inspector in London grabbed her and detained her.

Well there’s a contradiction - The insurance element is irrelevant. There will be suitable public liability insurance in place anyway.

The right and powers may be enshrined in law but the TOC is quite entitled to instruct its staff not to use those powers should it choose to do so.

 

[Hadders]

The issue is one of safety, these incidents have a nasty habit of turning violent with the BTP often miles away. And if you do detain them what do you do with them - call the BTP who again are often miles away. If you're going to detain people it really needs to be a joint operation where BTP have sufficient numbers in attendance, often fare evasion will be the least of the issues discovered at such operations.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

Well there’s a contradiction - The insurance element is irrelevant. There will be suitable public liability insurance in place anyway.

The right and powers may be enshrined in law but the TOC is quite entitled to instruct its staff not to use those powers should it choose to do so.

Just because something is potentially uninsured does mean it can't be done or it somehow becomes automatically banned or illegal.

Whereas I stated that regardless, they will have suitable insurance for this particular event by virtue of their public liability insurance.

As you say, the TOC can say whatever it likes, but they'd have a difficult time at an employment tribunal for dismissing somebody who was simply exercising a right that Parliament gave that person, so long as the circumstances warranted it. An employer can tell you whatever they like, it doesn't mean that what they tell you is automatically binding! A lot of employee terms and conditions are almost certainly unenforceable or would require professional legal opinion to even begin to enforce.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

As you say, the TOC can say whatever it likes, but they'd have a difficult time at an employment tribunal for dismissing somebody who was simply exercising a right that Parliament gave that person, so long as the circumstances warranted it.

But no TOC would dismiss someone for following the law.

What they might well do is dismiss someone for not following a lawful instruction from their employer (an instruction not to detain passengers) and I don't see that an ET would have much difficulty in seeing that as gross misconduct.

There's nothing in the law that requires servants of the railway to detain passengers - all the law does is give them the authority to do so. And the rulebook takes that authority away, so dismissal would be for not following the rules.

(Yes, there's all sorts of subtleties around employee knowledge of the rules and proportionality, but since we're talking hypotheticals here, let's keep it simple and concentrate on the issue that would make a difference - and that's what grounds would be given for dismissal.)

(Edited: discretion > authority)

 

[LowLevel]

Just because something is potentially uninsured does mean it can't be done or it somehow becomes automatically banned or illegal.

Whereas I stated that regardless, they will have suitable insurance for this particular event by virtue of their public liability insurance.

As you say, the TOC can say whatever it likes, but they'd have a difficult time at an employment tribunal for dismissing somebody who was simply exercising a right that Parliament gave that person, so long as the circumstances warranted it. An employer can tell you whatever they like, it doesn't mean that what they tell you is automatically binding! A lot of employee terms and conditions are almost certainly unenforceable or would require professional legal opinion to even begin to enforce.

In the modern UK you'd be a brave person to just grab hold of and start restraining someone without appropriate training. At worst the results, no matter how virtuous, could see you spending a very long time in prison if it goes wrong. That's the point - there are ways and means of doing it and the staff in question generally have not been told how to do it.

 

[island]

Security staff training teaches that one can repeatedly move into the way of another person as a way of preventing them from leaving an area. As long as you do not commit an assault.

A similar technique is used by the “paedo-hunter” groups online who try to entrap someone into coming in person on the premise of meeting a child for illegal activities, and then keep that person in place pending the arrival of the police.

As you say, the TOC can say whatever it likes, but they'd have a difficult time at an employment tribunal for dismissing somebody who was simply exercising a right that Parliament gave that person, so long as the circumstances warranted it. An employer can tell you whatever they like, it doesn't mean that what they tell you is automatically binding! A lot of employee terms and conditions are almost certainly unenforceable or would require professional legal opinion to even begin to enforce.

Nonsense. An employer is entirely within its rights to instruct members of its staff not to take an action that the member of staff would be legally allowed to do but for the instruction, and would very easily win any putative employment tribunal case taken should a member of staff be dismissed for gross insubordination.

 

[jumble]

Operators may or may not authorise their staff to prevent a passenger from leaving... but at one operator who discourage staff blocking exits, a 2-hour long morning peak "Operation Walker" saw 17 passengers who believed they were free to ignore staff and leave... detained by three plain clothes police loitering out of view outside the entrance.

All were PNC'd for subsequent prosecution (three of which were also arrested for other matters) - a good strategy to encourage passengers to consider the increased problem they could face if they walk off - a penalty fare is preferable to a court appointment with the police.

TFL were fond of this pre covid
You could see uniformed RPIs at Gate Blocks and a token BTP officer but then a few burly men with large feet hanging around outside the station

 

[PeterC]

TFL were fond of this pre covid
You could see uniformed RPIs at Gate Blocks and a token BTP officer but then a few burly men with large feet hanging around outside the station

Most people are unobservent and miss the other burly men waiting at the bottom of the escalator to catch people doubling back.