Photographing in London Terminii

[Julian G]

The M4 starts west of Chiswick

Did the AZ tell you that
Edited (by doublepost prevention system):

PMSL

Can you translate
the PMSL and LMAO please

 

[AlexS]

I don't recall saying that Yorkie - read the post again - my point is that the job is difficult enough WITHOUT dickhead photters/spotters/neds/****s giving myself and my colleagues greif.

To be fair, if staff knew the rules they are meant to know, and didn't try and enforce non existant ones, they wouldn't get grief off photographers...

'course, there are some kind of morons that insist on it anyway. Only staff members I tend to have a moan at is when there is a guard with his feet up on the drivers console in the rear cab reading a paper instead of selling tickets at non staffed stations.

 

[TicketMan]

You moan at guards for not selling tickets? Why? You a revenue protection manager?

Yorkie - my point is that we have to deal with enough arseholes, without so-called enthusiasts giving us grief over bull**** issues

And whoever said staff don't know their own job is talking utter crap.

So far apart from vague bull**** about civil liberties, no-one has yet been able to give a reasonable explanation for their refusal to sign in at stations before photting. Yet you idiots expect staff to read to ATOC guidelines for rail enthusiasts. Why should staff give a toss about the guidelines when you lot ignore em anyway?

FFS:mad:

 

[yorkie]

Yorkie - my point is that we have to deal with enough arseholes, without so-called enthusiasts giving us grief over bull**** issues

In my experience, enthusiasts will only give "grief" if treated in a poor way. Just because some idiot has spat in a staff members face, that doesn't mean that enthusiasts should be treated badly as a result.

And whoever said staff don't know their own job is talking utter crap.

I don't think Alex was saying that about all staff, just some. But it is true that some (a minority) do not "know the rules", but that's the same in almost any job.

So far apart from vague bull**** about civil liberties, no-one has yet been able to give a reasonable explanation for their refusal to sign in at stations before photting.

I can't speak for everyone else, but I'll obey the law, which doesn't state any such requirement.

Yet you idiots expect staff to read to ATOC guidelines for rail enthusiasts. Why should staff give a toss about the guidelines when you lot ignore em anyway?

FFS:mad:

Who are "you idiots"?

I don't quote the guidelines as they are not byelaws, just guidelines.

I agree that, to some extent, if you go quoting the guidelines you are probably admitting you "should" sign-in, as it states that on the guidelines. Which is part of the reason why I don't go quoting from them.

The guidelines are, as far as I can determine, only available on the internet. It is wrong to expect all enthusiasts/staff to be aware of their existence. It is, however, correct to expect all staff to have been informed that photography is permitted, unfortunately not all employers train their employees sufficiently.

No need to brand people "idiots" or to tar enthusiasts with the same brush as people who spit. You're an enthusiast, and I woudn't label you in those categories!

 

[TicketMan]

I never pointed out that enthusiasts should be treated badly because scrotes attack staff. To suggest that that is what I said is absurd.

Anyway, since we're on about byelaws...

11.
(2) No person shall place, throw, drop or trail anything capable of injuring, damaging or endangering any person or any property on the railway

Tripods, anyone?

13.
(2) No person shall loiter on the railway if asked to leave by an authorised person

Hmmm... Hanging about on the end of a platform is loitering. Like it or not.

23.
(2)
(i) Any person who is reasonably believed by an authorised person to be in breach of any of these Byelaws shall leave the railway immediately if asked to do so by an authorised person

(iii) No person shall fail to carry out the instructions of an authorised person acting in accordance with powers given by these Byelaws or any other enactment

If you are caught loitering, and asked to leave, then the Byelaws state that you must leave. Simple.

Just for clarification:

25.
(1) Authorised person means:
(i) A person acting in the course of his duties, who is an employee or agent of or any other person authorised by the Operator or authorised by a person operating any railway assets, and

(ii) any constable, acting in the execution of his duties upon or in connection with the railway

 

[Sprog]

TM 1 - Yorkie 0



Round 2....FIGHT! *ding ding*

 

[LucaZone]

11.
(2) No person shall place, throw, drop or trail anything capable of injuring, damaging or endangering any person or any property on the railway

Tripods, anyone?

This is true, and many stations ive been to where carrying one, ive been told not to use it. However you cant be asked to leave because you have a tripod. If your not using it (as instructed) then it'd be classed as 'carrying' and if you get asked to leave because you're carrying something, then how are people with huge bags and trolleys allowed on trains...

13.
(2) No person shall loiter on the railway if asked to leave by an authorised person

Hmmm... Hanging about on the end of a platform is loitering. Like it or not.

Actually that says 'If asked to leave'. Thus it is obviously ok to stay at the end of the platform if noone asks you to leave. Only if it said 'No person shall loiter on the railway' would a train spotter be out of place. It will never say that though or anyone waiting for a train would have to leave! :P

23.
(2)
(i) Any person who is reasonably believed by an authorised person to be in breach of any of these Byelaws shall leave the railway immediately if asked to do so by an authorised person

Dont see how anyone could argue that one. If your asked to leave, you're asked to leave. You'll only make matters worse for all of us if you refuse and cause hassle.

(iii) No person shall fail to carry out the instructions of an authorised person acting in accordance with powers given by these Byelaws or any other enactment

Again, im not sure who has said they would refuse to sign in and get a pass to take photos, if asked to do so'. However there is nothing to say you HAVE to sign in volentarily AFAIK.

(ii) any constable, acting in the execution of his duties upon or in connection with the railway

Just to clarify on that one. Shouldnt it be ' acting in execution of their duties'? wouldnt want to upset Womens Rights groups :P

 

[TicketMan]

Quote:
Originally Posted by TicketMan
11.
(2) No person shall place, throw, drop or trail anything capable of injuring, damaging or endangering any person or any property on the railway

Tripods, anyone?

This is true, and many stations ive been to where carrying one, ive been told not to use it. However you cant be asked to leave because you have a tripod. If your not using it (as instructed) then it'd be classed as 'carrying' and if you get asked to leave because you're carrying something, then how are people with huge bags and trolleys allowed on trains...

My point is Tripods have to be PLACED in order to be used - by using a tripod, it can be argued that you are automatically in breach of this article of the Byelaws

Quote:
Originally Posted by TicketMan
13.
(2) No person shall loiter on the railway if asked to leave by an authorised person

Hmmm... Hanging about on the end of a platform is loitering. Like it or not.

Actually that says 'If asked to leave'. Thus it is obviously ok to stay at the end of the platform if noone asks you to leave. Only if it said 'No person shall loiter on the railway' would a train spotter be out of place. It will never say that though or anyone waiting for a train would have to leave! :P

I have no arguement with people hanging about at the end of the platform - hell, I do it myself on occasion. My argument is with the chaps on here who think it is their God-given right to be there, and think they have some kind of claim that they are on 'Public Land' (which they are not) and say they argue with staff when asked to move on.

Not quite sure what the " :P " is for...


Quote:
Originally Posted by TicketMan
23.
(2)
(i) Any person who is reasonably believed by an authorised person to be in breach of any of these Byelaws shall leave the railway immediately if asked to do so by an authorised person

Dont see how anyone could argue that one. If your asked to leave, you're asked to leave. You'll only make matters worse for all of us if you refuse and cause hassle.

THANK YOU - That has been the bass of my arguement for MONTHS!!!


Quote:
Originally Posted by TicketMan
(iii) No person shall fail to carry out the instructions of an authorised person acting in accordance with powers given by these Byelaws or any other enactment

Again, im not sure who has said they would refuse to sign in and get a pass to take photos, if asked to do so'. However there is nothing to say you HAVE to sign in volentarily AFAIK.

I believe the relevant posts have long been deleted by our Lords and Masters - believe me it has been said.

Also, txtspk isn't allowed - you'll get a bollocking for saying AFAIK


Quote:
Originally Posted by TicketMan
(ii) any constable, acting in the execution of his duties upon or in connection with the railway

Just to clarify on that one. Shouldnt it be ' acting in execution of their duties'? wouldnt want to upset Womens Rights groups :P

I agree that that is what it SHOULD say, however, my copy says "his", and I didn't want to be accused of paraphrasing/adapting the wording in any way - if anyone wants a copy I'm sure I can find a way of scanning it.

TM

 

[AlexS]

You moan at guards for not selling tickets? Why? You a revenue protection manager?

Yep. I'm not a manager, but I do moan at guards. And why? Because having got on at a non staffed station I should be able to buy a ticket from the conductor on board the train, that's in the charter thing. When I get off at New Street station having no ticket because the conductor has been taking a break when he should be working and get ambushed by the revenue protection people, I get rather annoyed, and end up reporting said member of traincrew having had to prove on the station CCTV system that I did in fact get off that unit and it did call at an unstaffed station. Like it or not, it is the conductor's job to sell tickets to passengers boarding at an unstaffed station, if they haven't done so and I end up getting taken to court for fare evasion, apparently I could end up taking return action against the TOC because of it's representative's actions. Much as I would like to put my feet up on the desk and read a paper when I am supposed to be working, it doesn't actually happen, and why the conductor should be any different, I don't know, especially when it might cost me 20 quid.

 

[Mojo]

Just to clarify on that one. Shouldnt it be ' acting in execution of their duties'? wouldnt want to upset Womens Rights groups :P

It's ok. "His" and "he" are commonly accepted words in "real" legislation as well as delegated legislation to mean "a person."

 

[Julian G]

TM 1 - Yorkie 0



Round 2....FIGHT! *ding ding*

If there was a word to describe that ,
then it be along the lines like "hellfire"

 

[Tom B]

In my capacity as a member of moderating staff:

TM 1 - Yorkie 0



Round 2....FIGHT! *ding ding*

If you're just trying to stir up trouble, refrain from posting.

In my capacity as a member:

You moan at guards for not selling tickets? Why? You a revenue protection manager?

What else are you meant to do? If you can't buy a ticket at your station because the sole multifare machine has broken and the PTE havn't replaced it, last time I looked at least you are meant to buy a ticket from the guard. If an RPI stopped you and enquired why you hadn't bought a ticket, one imagines that "The guard couldn't be bothered to sell me one" would not go down well, as the RPI would no doubt beleive the guard.

As for station staff I don't think anyones said they are adverse to speaking politely to the staff if asked, explaining what they're doing and cooperating if nescesarry - which may include signing a visitors book, yes. But as yet, no-one from NR has said "You MUST sign in at the station to take photographs". And I mean a proper instruction, not a little paragraph somewhere in an internal document.

It couldnt be policed anyway, any tourist just taking a couple of photos whilst waiting for a delayed train would not plod off to the office to get a permit...

 

[86242]

(2) No person shall loiter on the railway if asked to leave by an authorised person

Hmmm... Hanging about on the end of a platform is loitering. Like it or not.[/I]

If you have a valid ticket it is not 'loitering'. And why not remove all football fans from watching a football match as thats there hobby (in the same way this is out hobby) which has been known to cause far more trouble from watching a train from the end of a platform...

And I would refuse to move if I was ever asked to do so just for standing at the end of a platform. I would let them call the police and see what they would do. Lock me up for taking a picture of a train - this reall shows what this country has turned into...

 

[TicketMan]

As for station staff I don't think anyones said they are adverse to speaking politely to the staff if asked, explaining what they're doing and cooperating if nescesarry - which may include signing a visitors book, yes.

Mr **** may I direct you to the comment made by '86242' directly below your own.

Mr 86242, regardless of whether or nor you posess a valid ticket, if you are not intending to travel, you are loitering.

You people are unbelievable - I have provided extracts from the Byelaws, and still you argue your bull**** points.

Here is an interesting document, freely available on the internet:
http://www.sirimo.co.uk/media/UKPhotographersRights.pdf

May I draw your attention to the top of the second column on page 1:

Even where property is open to entry by the public in general,as in the case of most business premises, the owner or occupier has the right to demand that a photographer cease taking photographs and the right to demand that he leaves the premises

 

[86242]

Mr **** may I direct you to the comment made by '86242' directly below your own.

Mr 86242, regardless of whether or nor you posess a valid ticket, if you are not intending to travel, you are loitering.

You people are unbelievable - I have provided extracts from the Byelaws, and still you argue your bull**** points.

Here is an interesting document, freely available on the internet:
http://www.sirimo.co.uk/media/UKPhotographersRights.pdf

May I draw your attention to the top of the second column on page 1:

But if you have a valid ticket in most cases it would mean you are intending to travel...

If you want Railway Photography to get banned your going the right way about just another stage towards the goverment having even more control of peoples lives...

 

[TicketMan]

Someone who is intending to travel usually gets on a train, rather than loitering at the end of a platform.

I don't want railway photography to be banned, far from it in fact. But you lot who are arguing against signing into stations or whatever are the ones who are causing the problem, which will eventually lead to a blanket ban. In fact cos I'm an arsehole, i've already banned photting on my station unnoficially, so if I catch any of you lot I will take great delight in enforcing my ban

When will you lot realise that stations are private land, and you can't hamg about as you choose. I'm sure you don't look like a typical terrorist or whatever, but the fact remains that station security is there for a reason.

 

[86242]

Someone who is intending to travel usually gets on a train, rather than loitering at the end of a platform.

I don't want railway photography to be banned, far from it in fact. But you lot who are arguing against signing into stations or whatever are the ones who are causing the problem, which will eventually lead to a blanket ban. In fact cos I'm an arsehole, i've already banned photting on my station unnoficially, so if I catch any of you lot I will take great delight in enforcing my ban

When will you lot realise that stations are private land, and you can't hamg about as you choose. I'm sure you don't look like a typical terrorist or whatever, but the fact remains that station security is there for a reason.

As far as I can see you are the selfish type of railway staff that want to kick people off there stations. If this is your idea of 'fun' discouraging people from traveling with the company you work for I think they need a rethink on the staff they employ...

 

[TicketMan]

Most normal people would have seen that comment as 'tongue in cheek' - wasted on you kids...

Do you not see that by arguing with rail staff, as you 86242 have said you would, does the hobby no good whatsoever? Indeed that is more likely to lead to a ban if anything.

Anyway, the way I see it, the less people want to travel with my company, the longer I have to sleep in the back of the office, and abuse you lot on the internet

 

[devon_metro]

Didn't notice any 'kids' around here

 

[TicketMan]

Didn't notice any 'kids' around here

Look harder - kids are in charge

 

[86242]

Most normal people would have seen that comment as 'tongue in cheek' - wasted on you kids...

Do you not see that by arguing with rail staff, as you 86242 have said you would, does the hobby no good whatsoever? Indeed that is more likely to lead to a ban if anything.

Anyway, the way I see it, the less people want to travel with my company, the longer I have to sleep in the back of the office, and abuse you lot on the internet

Just shows how much you care about the company you work for... You won't be thinking that then you lose your job as no one wants to travel by your silly train company any more...

You really seem like the type of staff that let the railways down that don't even want poeple to travel by train...

 

[TicketMan]

Once again you respond to the ****take in my post, rather than the real issue.

Where is your response to the second paragraph of my post?

Do you not see that by arguing with rail staff, as you 86242 have said you would, does the hobby no good whatsoever? Indeed that is more likely to lead to a ban if anything.

Whether I like my company is not the issue.

For the record, I enjoy my job, and take pride in offfering a high standard of customer service. In return I get a lot of grief from chavs, and drunks, and all manner of other scrotes - it comes with the territory.

What I do not like is so called 'enthusiasts' giving me and my colleauges greif over their 'right' to take photographjs on private property, and loiter.

How ****ing thick are you people?

 

[86242]

Once again you respond to the ****take in my post, rather than the real issue.

Where is your response to the second paragraph of my post?



Whether I like my company is not the issue.

For the record, I enjoy my job, and take pride in offfering a high standard of customer service. In return I get a lot of grief from chavs, and drunks, and all manner of other scrotes - it comes with the territory.

What I do not like is so called 'enthusiasts' giving me and my colleauges greif over their 'right' to take photographjs on private property, and loiter.

How ****ing thick are you people?

Companies that have posters everywhere sayind don't assult our staff blah blah (I agree its wrong and in most cases staff handle there jobs very well at times then everything goes wrong) should ask themselves why anyone would want to assult there staff...

 

[TicketMan]

Companies that have posters everywhere sayind don't assult our staff blah blah (I agree its wrong and in most cases staff handle there jobs very well at times then everything goes wrong) should ask themselves why anyone would want to assult there staff...

WTF???????

What ****ing planet are you on? Yes, there are bad staff, but the kind of people who assault staff aren't exactly reasonable human beings. Those kinds of scrotes are the reason we have security staff in the first place!!!!!!!!

In any case, you still haven't answered the point in my previous posts...
I won't hold my breath, since you sir are clearly an idiot.

 

[86242]

you sir are clearly an idiot.

Nice thing to call someone (did I ever call you a anything?)

You seem to be a photographer but have banned taking photos from the station that you manage... Do you not find that SELFISH???

 

[TicketMan]

Nice thing to call someone (did I ever call you a anything?)

You seem to be a photographer but have banned taking photos from the station that you manage... Do you not find that SELFISH???

I could have called you much worse, but it would have been pointless cos the swear filter would have obliterated it anyway

Still haven't answered my point by the way. Didn't think you would

I have already stated that I WAS JOKING about banning photography - Reread my previous posts...

 

[devon_metro]

Nice thing to call someone (did I ever call you a anything?)

You seem to be a photographer but have banned taking photos from the station that you manage... Do you not find that SELFISH???

That's just silly if you ask me. As for loitering; this normally envolves people looking like they are up to something which is wrong. Taking photographs is not wrong. If you ban people from stations then does that not encourage certain people to trespass???? Which is wrong.

I was looking on the national rail website and it says enthusiasts are welcomed onto the station by the TOCs and can be asked to go away if they cause a nuisance etc.

IMO standing at the end of a platform where no passengers go is not a crime. As long as you don't trespass or cause an obstrustion etc. then i see no problem in it. So why is there such a problem, it is clear you photograph from stations. So therefore you must have been loitering.

 

[86242]

I could have called you much worse, but it would have been pointless cos the swear filter would have obliterated it anyway

Still haven't answered my point by the way. Didn't think you would

I have already stated that I WAS JOKING about banning photography - Reread my previous posts...

Is joking about a rule like that acceptable by a member of staff

and what is your 'point' anyway

and anyway I hardly spend much time on stations anymore as most stations are crap for photos but anyway its just another step away from a 'free country'...

 

[TicketMan]

THIS IS MY POINT!!!

Do you not see that by arguing with rail staff, as you 86242 have said you would, does the hobby no good whatsoever? Indeed that is more likely to lead to a ban if anything.

I have posted it twice, yet you have ignored it. As I expected...

I have NEVER said it is wrong to spot trains or photograph from stations. Several times I have stated that I do so myself occasionally. My arguement is with the minority who ignore instructions/requests from staff, and choose to argue, making an already difficult job harder.

 

[86242]

Do you not see that by arguing with rail staff, as you 86242 have said you would, does the hobby no good whatsoever? Indeed that is more likely to lead to a ban if anything.

There is a difference in refusing to move and arguring...