Railway Byelaws- do they have to be 'advertised' on stations

[Prairie_5542]

This may have been done before. I'm just asking do Railway Byelaws have to be advertised on stations. If someone were to contest a breach of a Railway Byelaw as that they didn't know/ they aren't advertised. How are they meant to know? Your help in this matter would be greatefully appreciated. Thanks.

 

[EM2]

Not as far as I am aware. I'm fairly sure that one of the basic tenets of law is that 'ignorance is not a defence'.
To continue with your example, you could therefore argue that because in many areas, a 30mph speed limit has no signs enforcing it, you 'didn't know' what the limit was when you went roaring down the road at 55...

 

[MikeWh]

Not as far as I am aware. I'm fairly sure that one of the basic tenets of law is that 'ignorance is not a defence'.
To continue with your example, you could therefore argue that because in many areas, a 30mph speed limit has no signs enforcing it, you 'didn't know' what the limit was when you went roaring down the road at 55...

But 30mph is the defined national speed limit on any road lit by street lights unless signs indicate otherwise on those street lights. According to the highway code.

 

[EM2]

But 30mph is the defined national speed limit on any road lit by street lights unless signs indicate otherwise on those street lights. According to the highway code.

Agreed, but you could not read the Highway Code at all, be lucky and correctly guess at all the questions you get asked on your test, and never actually know that.
I certainly was never asked it (in five tests ) but I did read the Highway Code!

 

[transportphoto]

Simple answer is no. Ignorance to the law is not an excuse.

 

[MikeWh]

Agreed, but you could not read the Highway Code at all, be lucky and correctly guess at all the questions you get asked on your test, and never actually know that.
I certainly was never asked it (in five tests ) but I did read the Highway Code!

I think the theory test you now have to pass first means that you undoubtedly would read the highway code. Plus ignorance is not a defence.

 

[EM2]

Plus ignorance is not a defence.

Which is the point I first made

 

[transportphoto]

Which is the point I first made

I think it's the point we're all making....

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I'm not sure how the driving of motor vehicles crept in here!

The 'enabling' Act for the making of Railway Byelaws was, until recently, the Transport Act 2000 and then the Railways Act 2005.

Schedule 20 of the Transport Act 2000 stated:

6 (1) Copies of bye-laws which have been confirmed shall be printed and a copy shall be kept

• (a) at the principal office of the Authority,.
• (b) at such of the stations designated for the purposes of this Schedule by the Authority as are affected by the bye-laws, and.
• (c) at the principal offices of the operators of the railway assets to which the bye-laws relate.

(2)The Authority shall supply (free of charge) one copy of the bye-laws to any person who applies for a copy or copies of them..

and

10 For the purposes of this Schedule a station is affected by any bye-laws if

• (a) the bye-laws apply to the station,.
• (b) the station serves any network to which they apply, or.
• (c) trains to which they apply stop at the station.

BUT, The above was repealled by the Railways Act 2005 and replaced with Schedule 9 which states:

Publicity for confirmed bye-laws

6 If the appropriate national authority has confirmed bye-laws—

• (a) copies of the bye-laws must be printed;.
• (b) at least one copy must be kept at the principal offices of the railway operator who made them;.
• (c) the railway operator must send one copy to the appropriate national authority; and.
• (d) the railway operator must supply one copy (free of charge) to every person who applies for a copy or for more than one copy.

So we can see that the obligation to supply a copy to railway stations was lost under the 2005 Act.

 

[Chapeltom]

I think the theory test you now have to pass first means that you undoubtedly would read the highway code. Plus ignorance is not a defence.

I didn't do any kind of learning for the theory test, no highway code or anything really. I know people who study for it and still haven't passed on their 4th/5th attempt. I went into it with only 6 months worth of driving in lessons and I already knew quite a bit on signs and stuff, oh and I passed 1st time 47/50, easy peasy mind you need 43 so there's not much margin for error.

I think personally with the bye-laws, there should be a common sense approach with people. Buy a ticket before boarding if you can, co-operate with railway officials e,g, present a ticket when requested, no anti-social behaviour etc. There's not much in the byelaws that stands out as "Oh I didn't know you couldn't do that on the railway". However if I was going abroad I'd try and acquaint myself with local laws/do my research before travelling.

 

[12CSVT]

There are some byelaws where many people do need educating.

For example, not holding train doors open, not riding bikes / skateboarding etc on stations.

 

[kieron]

There are some byelaws where many people do need educating.

For example, not holding train doors open, not riding bikes / skateboarding etc on stations.

There are "no cycling" signs by the entrances to Shotton station. You still get people cycling there, though. Education may make some difference, but it's not a panacaea.

 

[CyrusWuff]

Byelaw 6 is a good one:

6. Unacceptable behaviour

1. No person shall use any threatening, abusive, obscene or offensive language on the railway.
2. No person shall behave in a disorderly, indecent or offensive manner on the railway.
3. No person shall write, draw, paint or fix anything on the railway.
4. No person shall soil any part of the railway.
5. No person shall damage or detach any part of the railway.
6. No person shall spit on the railway.
7. No person shall drop litter or leave waste on the railway.
8. No person shall molest or wilfully interfere with the comfort or convenience of any person on the railway.

Pity it doesn't get enforced more...

 

[Peter Mugridge]

There are some byelaws where many people do need educating.

For example, not holding train doors open, not riding bikes / skateboarding etc on stations.

Agree. a number of staff could do with educating on that one as well; many times I have seen youths whiz around on these wheeled contraptions ( especially skateboards ) in front of staff who don't even bat an eyelid!

 

[causton]

Agree. a number of staff could do with educating on that one as well; many times I have seen youths whiz around on these wheeled contraptions ( especially skateboards ) in front of staff who don't even bat an eyelid!

I was going to complain to a nearby BTP officer about someone cycling down the platforms next to the cycle rack at Paddington, but they got off and walked past me in First Great Western uniform. It was at that point I gave up, when staff either don't care or know about the rules!

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Another one that really annoys me is nobody ever enforces the one way system on the stairs at Wimbledon; every time I am getting off an up 455 and head for the stairs, really crowded as an awful lot of other people get off there, the opposite side of the stairs heading towards the platform will be empty and I can guarantee 100% that at least three people will be forcing their way down the stairs everyone else is going up despite the prominent no entry signs at the top...:roll:

 

[455driver]

Agree. a number of staff could do with educating on that one as well; many times I have seen youths whiz around on these wheeled contraptions ( especially skateboards ) in front of staff who don't even bat an eyelid!

Once you have been told to "f##k off you c##t" a few times you tend not to bother again.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Another one that really annoys me is nobody ever enforces the one way system on the stairs at Wimbledon; every time I am getting off an up 455 and head for the stairs, really crowded as an awful lot of other people get off there, the opposite side of the stairs heading towards the platform will be empty and I can guarantee 100% that at least three people will be forcing their way down the stairs everyone else is going up despite the prominent no entry signs at the top...:roll:

Just hit them with your rucksack or elbow!

 

[AlexS]

You are generally well advised to save sticking your head above the parapet for serious safety related issues. Someone was tugging my arm yesterday desperately and grumpily pointing out that someone sat 150 metres away on the platform, away from everyone else was smoking.

They didn't seem to think that my dispatching a train at the time was a reasonable excuse not to break off what I was doing, and sprint up the platform to demand they stop.

Stopping people smoking is an ideal - you do it if you can but it's not the end of the world. Having to get involved with stopping a large crowd of drunks pushing their equally drunk mates along a platform on a luggage trolley is far more risky but also far more likely to prevent a serious accident from occurring, so generally I'll take the risk of the abuse and deal with that one.

 

[EM2]

I had an argument with someone riding a unicycle through the station, who was adamant that it wasn't a bicycle and therefore the byelaw didn't apply to him.
I pointed out that it says

Any person who enters, or is on, any part of the railway to which the public have access must be on foot

and he quite clearly wasn't, and also that our PA message specifically says cycles.

 

[Stigy]

Agreed, but you could not read the Highway Code at all, be lucky and correctly guess at all the questions you get asked on your test, and never actually know that.
I certainly was never asked it (in five tests ) but I did read the Highway Code!

The Highway Code isn't the law....I suppose it's a bit like the Condition of Carriage? However, motoring offences such as speeding are Strict Liability offences and are dealt with in the same way Railway Byelaws are (By way of a Fixed Penalty Notice, report for summons or a slap on the wrist and a telling off). Offences that are reported are heard at Magistrates' Courts.

Byelaws are Strict Liability offences also, therefore the offender doesn't have to see warnings etc. They either did it, or didn't do it.

 

[CyrusWuff]

The Highway Code isn't the law....

Whilst the Highway Code itself isn't the law, a not insignificant number of the rules contained therein are enshrined in law.

 

[brompton rail]

I had an argument with someone riding a unicycle through the station, who was adamant that it wasn't a bicycle and therefore the byelaw didn't apply to him.
I pointed out that it says
Quote:
Any person who enters, or is on, any part of the railway to which the public have access must be on foot
and he quite clearly wasn't, and also that our PA message specifically says cycles.

Err? So a wheelchair user has to get out and walk down the platform -likewise babies?

 

[EM2]

Err? So a wheelchair user has to get out and walk down the platform -likewise babies?

No. Because the next clause says:

No person shall be in breach of this Byelaw for properly using a baby carriage or wheelchair, except where there is a notice or instructions
given by an authorised person to the contrary.

 

[tsr]

Another one that really annoys me is nobody ever enforces the one way system on the stairs at Wimbledon; every time I am getting off an up 455 and head for the stairs, really crowded as an awful lot of other people get off there, the opposite side of the stairs heading towards the platform will be empty and I can guarantee 100% that at least three people will be forcing their way down the stairs everyone else is going up despite the prominent no entry signs at the top...:roll:

Indeed. I once apologised to a member of staff who squeezed past me whilst I went up the wrong side (I had been speaking to one of his colleagues at the bottom of the stairs on the wrong side of the fence, so I used the wrong side as a one-off to avoid brushing past alighting customers) and he actually told me never to worry about it because it is "never enforced and we barely notice ourselves" - or words to that effect. I too feel Wimbledon is actually a station where enforcement of that rule is really needed in the peak, bar rarer situations like mine.

But anyway... back on topic. Of course, not only do we have the point that ignorance is no defence, but also that the money spent putting copies of the byelaws on show once again in a prominent place on every station in the land would be rather more effective if used to pay for enforcement. Most customers don't yet know what the NRCoC says, so let's not ask them to read the Byelaws too - it would probably not happen and I suppose probably wouldn't deter anyone much from doing anything. And someone will always quibble that the signage isn't prominent enough when you point it out to them. Etc. You get my gist, I hope.

 

[Yew]

Simple answer is no. Ignorance to the law is not an excuse.

Yet despite this, there is very little focus on the legal system in compulsory education...