• 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!

Scotrail and alcohol

Status
Not open for further replies.

Davester50

Member
Joined
22 Feb 2021
Messages
691
Location
UK
Do you stick rigidly to all rules including the not buying and consuming another drink while already drunk rule?
Licenced premises won't serve you if you're drunk.

Sometimes it's easier to just have a rule that covers all areas, rather than have multiple of exceptions for a million different scenarios and locations.
No, pre-covid we had that.
Dry trains for sports events worked for years.

Unless Scotland is awash with jobsworths on a power trip,
That's called the Scottish Government.

discretion by staff is usually the norm.
Which makes a mockery of having hard and fast rules.

Add to that the holier than thou Kier-late-night-beer-and-curry-during-lockdown-Starmer.

Didn't realise Keith was running the country.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

mmh

Established Member
Joined
13 Aug 2016
Messages
3,744
Do you stick rigidly to all rules including the not buying and consuming another drink while already drunk rule?
I believe that is legal, and that it's (technically) illegal to sell to sell alcohol to someone who's drunk. Technically of course, as otherwise all supermarket and pub staff would have been prosecuted. The other way around, pretty much everyone in the country would have too.
 

ld0595

Member
Joined
1 Aug 2014
Messages
569
Location
Glasgow
I can understand the reason for dry trains in certain circumstances (the football trains mentioned upthread!) but it does seem a bit OTT to have a blanket ban. Especially at a time when passengers are being encouraged to return to the railway. Part of the reason people travel by train rather than drive is so they can indulge in a few drinks.
I agree as well - the blanket ban is a bit OTT but I wouldn't let it completely change my plans so I can take LNER, XC or the car. Extortiate ticket prices and the HST/170/158 lottery already do that well enough! :lol:
 

Runningaround

Member
Joined
24 Mar 2022
Messages
799
Licenced premises won't serve you if you're drunk.
Really?

No, pre-covid we had that.
Dry trains for sports events worked for years.
They didn't did they

That's called the Scottish Government.


Which makes a mockery of having hard and fast rules.

What hard and fast rule? Don't come on the train still drinking if you are pissed. You can take drink on the train, you can be drunk before getting on. It's not hard is it really.

Didn't realise Keith was running the country.

I believe that is legal, and that it's (technically) illegal to sell to sell alcohol to someone who's drunk. Technically of course, as otherwise all supermarket and pub staff would have been prosecuted. The other way around, pretty much everyone in the country would have too.
You can be prosecuted for being drunk in a public place. Of course like every rule it's it's at the discretion and common sense of who's enforcing it.
Jobsworths are the extreme who'd crack down on every minute little detail and enjoy ruining others day(generally a lone passenger that won't put up a fight).
Then there is the coward who'll hide away, say nothing and let all hell break loose and leave the passenger to deal with it when it'd be better to deal with it earlier.

The best staff use common sense and will not confiscate your Christmas shopping.

I do wonder when the question '' How do you react to a situation'' some public facing staff may have lied on their answer.
 
Last edited:

Glasgowbusguy

On Moderation
Joined
21 Feb 2019
Messages
419
They need to rethink this policy, or get other TOCs on board and get them to also ban alcohol on the Scottish network.
99% of the Scottish network is ScotRail and the other Scottish only network Glasgow underground also has a booze ban
 

Deltic1961

Member
Joined
30 May 2018
Messages
645
Most places sell alcohol to make profit. Scotrail seem to have forgotten they are actually a business that needs to make money.

Equality, diversity and policies like this are far more important. Seems to be the Scottish government pushing this to all it's quangos and arms length organisations.

Also funny that Scotrail were constantly pushing the green agenda for months and as soon as COP26 was over it was dropped like a hot potato :)

Concentrating on running the rail service and making money should be their core function.
 

Glasgowbusguy

On Moderation
Joined
21 Feb 2019
Messages
419
So what's the point of rules if you can choose to ignore them?
Ask the Prime Minister, and the MP for Paisley and Renfrewshire South I suppose...
To use a saying my old manger loved "the enforcement of rules is directly related to how much a c**t a customer is "
 

Runningaround

Member
Joined
24 Mar 2022
Messages
799
Most places sell alcohol to make profit. Scotrail seem to have forgotten they are actually a business that needs to make money.

Equality, diversity and policies like this are far more important. Seems to be the Scottish government pushing this to all it's quangos and arms length organisations.

Also funny that Scotrail were constantly pushing the green agenda for months and as soon as COP26 was over it was dropped like a hot potato :)


Concentrating on running the rail service and making money should be their core function.
Have absolutely no comprehension on what this has to do with the topic.

Scotrail are there to run trains not profit from alcohol, although they will be a beneficiary for those who want to drink and not drive. Also by considering the majority of passengers, banning drunk people drinking more is sensible as it provides a better environment and will encourage more timid members of public to travel.
 

Davester50

Member
Joined
22 Feb 2021
Messages
691
Location
UK
Licenced premises won't serve you if you're drunk.
Really?

Ask a licencee that. Like one of my relations was for more than 20 years.
Plenty times folk have been told you've had enough, away home.

No, pre-covid we had that.
Dry trains for sports events worked for years.
They didn't did they

They didn't what? Exist, or work?
They definitely existed.

Which makes a mockery of having hard and fast rules.

What hard and fast rule? Don't come on the train still drinking if you are pissed. You can take drink on the train, you can be drunk before getting on. It's not hard is it really.

The hard no consumption of booze on ScotRail rule. There's no exemptions. That's a pretty hard rule.
The implementation of it and discretion is a completely different matter.

To use a saying my old manger loved "the enforcement of rules is directly related to how much a c**t a customer is "
Exactly! The age old attitude test!
 

Runningaround

Member
Joined
24 Mar 2022
Messages
799
Ask a licencee that. Like one of my relations was for more than 20 years.
Plenty times folk have been told you've had enough, away home.



They didn't what? Exist, or work?
They definitely existed.



The hard no consumption of booze on ScotRail rule. There's no exemptions. That's a pretty hard rule.
The implementation of it and discretion is a completely different matter.


Exactly! The age old attitude test!
There isn't a hard rule it's discretion.

If it was, you would not be allowed any alcohol on trains, which included your shopping

You telling me not one drunk person was served by your relation in 20 years, you realise three pints or more could be considered drunk?

Dry trains didn't prevent supporters being pissed and causing trouble; they might have eased it but they just went by coach instead.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,817
Location
Yorks
As you've been told umpteen times their isn't a hard rule it's discretion. If it was you would not be allowed any alcohol on trains which included your shopping

You telling me not one drunk person was served by your relation in 20 years, you realise three pints or more could be considered drunk?

Dry trains didn't prevent supporters being pissed and causing trouble they might have eased it but they just went by coach instead.

Law abiding people don't want to rely on discretion - i.e. staff being prepared to ignore a rule though. The rule should only kick in when people are drunk/causing trouble
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,429
Location
Yorkshire
There isn't a hard rule it's discretion.

If it was, you would not be allowed any alcohol on trains, which included your shopping...
If a passenger had a contract to travel and was not given reasonable notice of any alcohol restriction, I don't see how a train company could refuse to allow the passenger to take home their shopping provided they were within the luggage limits (unless the train company made alternative arrangements for the luggage to be conveyed/delivered)

I don't know if such an incident has occurred and been tested in court, but you so need to bear in mind that train companies don't always take into account all areas of law and can get themselves into hot water when they refuse to apply common sense and take into account the big picture.
 

Starmill

Veteran Member
Fares Advisor
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
23,224
Location
Bolton
I have seen bag searches carried out at Manchester Piccadilly before boarding the 2143 Saturday service to Stoke-on-Trent. The information on the Northern website does suggest that this is commonly done:

The following services are designated dry trains:

Saturdays:

19:44 - Whitby – Middlesbrough (March – October)

19:23 - Newcastle – Carlisle (all year)

21:25 - Newcastle – Carlisle (all year)

19:09 - Carlisle – Whitehaven (all year)

20:00 - Carlisle – Whitehaven (all year)

21:06 - Carlisle – Whitehaven (all year)

21:49 - Carlisle – Whitehaven (all year)

21:43 - Manchester Piccadilly to Stoke-on-Trent (November – December).

We also reserve the right to operate the last services on those routes as dry services on Bank Holiday Sundays too.
 

43066

Established Member
Joined
24 Nov 2019
Messages
9,213
Location
London
If a passenger had a contract to travel and was not given reasonable notice of any alcohol restriction, I don't see how a train company could refuse to allow the passenger to take home their shopping provided they were within the luggage limits (unless the train company made alternative arrangements for the luggage to be conveyed/delivered)

You won’t necessarily be given any notice. Ultimately the railway is private property and having a contract to travel doesn’t trump railway bylaws, or the criminal law. If a member of staff asks you to leave railway premises, and you refuse to do so, you will be committing a criminal offence (you could of course bring a claim for breach of contract at a later date if you so wished).

Pre Covid passengers turning up to board designated dry trains were given a straight choice between throwing away their alcohol (including closed containers) or not travelling, enforced by the BTP.

I don’t personally agree with blanket bans, and of course this kind of heavy handed enforcement should be kept to a minimum, but I certainly wouldn’t advise arguing the toss and insisting on carrying alcohol simply on the basis that you have a ticket!
 
Last edited:

Davester50

Member
Joined
22 Feb 2021
Messages
691
Location
UK
There isn't a hard rule it's discretion.

If it was, you would not be allowed any alcohol on trains, which included your shopping

You telling me not one drunk person was served by your relation in 20 years, you realise three pints or more could be considered drunk?

Dry trains didn't prevent supporters being pissed and causing trouble; they might have eased it but they just went by coach instead.

Can't be bothered arguing the toss any longer.
I know what it is. You think I'm wrong.
 

kristiang85

Established Member
Joined
23 Jan 2018
Messages
2,650
Law abiding people don't want to rely on discretion - i.e. staff being prepared to ignore a rule though. The rule should only kick in when people are drunk/causing trouble

Indeed.

The rule as it is means someone who necked a bottle of vodka in their home before going to the train and will potentially be drunk and disruptive on board isn't covered, yet the hardworking commuter who is having a small can of craft beer on their way home would be falling foul of it.

The rule is aimed at the former, but - when used to the letter - would only be implemented on the latter.

Hence why its a bit pointless.
 

43066

Established Member
Joined
24 Nov 2019
Messages
9,213
Location
London
Journeys on Merseyrail are so short that if you can't wait until you arrive for alcohol you need help.

I don’t know Merseyrail but, looking at LU which has a similar ban, some of the journeys can be quite long, but a significant number of passengers will be on the network for only a few minutes. As such, are the anti social behaviour issues really caused by on board drinking, or do they stem from people entering the network already leathered/coked up/spiced up etc.? In which case they could (and should) be denied access to the network under existing bylaws. If enforcement is as lax as it is on LU the “ban” is a paper tiger anyway!

Outside of specific football trains, I simply can’t agree with bans of this type. It strikes me as to be restricting legitimate behaviour for the sake of a few bad apples.
 

Runningaround

Member
Joined
24 Mar 2022
Messages
799
If a passenger had a contract to travel and was not given reasonable notice of any alcohol restriction, I don't see how a train company could refuse to allow the passenger to take home their shopping provided they were within the luggage limits (unless the train company made alternative arrangements for the luggage to be conveyed/delivered)

I don't know if such an incident has occurred and been tested in court, but you so need to bear in mind that train companies don't always take into account all areas of law and can get themselves into hot water when they refuse to apply common sense and take into account the big picture.
As I said earlier you aren't getting your shopping searched and confiscated and you aren't being stopped travelling after you've been to the pub and as some here have said you aren't being stopped for having a small drink.
The idea is to stop someone piling on drunk with more beer who's gonna get worse. then they have the power of using the ban. Its seem it's a rule that is used with discretion and not to the exact letter.
There are a few posters here who think it means alcohol in all forms is banned from a Scotrail train even if you've consumed a bit earlier on for all sorts of reasons.

It's like the smoking ban its only enforced where it harms and bothers others. Nobody is scrolling CCTV to send an officer out to an unmanned station in the middle of nowhere if you are having a fag in the carpark.
 

Glasgowbusguy

On Moderation
Joined
21 Feb 2019
Messages
419
If the fact you can't have a booze on a train journey is a decisive factor maybe you need some professional help
 

headshot119

Established Member
Joined
31 Dec 2010
Messages
2,052
Location
Dubai
If the fact you can't have a booze on a train journey is a decisive factor maybe you need some professional help

That's a little overreaction isn't it?

Now here me out as you obviously have strong views on this! If I have the choice between paying £50 - £75 for an off peak return to take me away for the weekend (Let's say out Friday evening back Sunday) or driving, driving will probably win on cost grounds. However if I take the train I can have a couple of drinks after a hard day in the office on the Friday, chill out, and I can do the same on the way home. If I can't drink on the train at all, I might be swayed into driving.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,429
Location
Yorkshire
As I said earlier you aren't getting your shopping searched and confiscated ...
I agree it doesn't happen, but I'm also saying I don't think it could happen.
If the fact you can't have a booze on a train journey is a decisive factor maybe you need some professional help
Who are you addressing and which post are you telling to?
But not having the ability to drink should not be the deciding factor
Did anyone say it is the deciding factor?

Surely there are many factors involved.
 

Runningaround

Member
Joined
24 Mar 2022
Messages
799
That's a little overreaction isn't it?

Now here me out as you obviously have strong views on this! If I have the choice between paying £50 - £75 for an off peak return to take me away for the weekend (Let's say out Friday evening back Sunday) or driving, driving will probably win on cost grounds. However if I take the train I can have a couple of drinks after a hard day in the office on the Friday, chill out, and I can do the same on the way home. If I can't drink on the train at all, I might be swayed into driving.

Thats not whats it's about though, doing that will likely result in a blind eye being turned, it's specifically aimed at trouble and using a rule to prevent it escalating, where the rule doesn't exist it makes staffs work harder.
Surely you know the difference in taking off a paralytic drunks beer off him and giving him a chance to sober up on the way home or groups knowing the rule then topping up on the train possibly leading to aggro as they get more drunk and loud.

I agree it doesn't happen, but I'm also saying I don't think it could happen.

Who are you addressing and which post are you telling to?

Did anyone say it is the deciding factor?

Surely there are many factors involved.
It's not going to happen to everyday passengers going about their day which included a bag with majestic wine written on it.
If an officer or security guard has the power of a booze ban then when someone drunk and in danger to themselves or others and will get worse if they drink more then a check of their shopping may happen, just like if underage drinkers are caught in a park it's poured down the drain
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,817
Location
Yorks
Indeed.

The rule as it is means someone who necked a bottle of vodka in their home before going to the train and will potentially be drunk and disruptive on board isn't covered, yet the hardworking commuter who is having a small can of craft beer on their way home would be falling foul of it.

The rule is aimed at the former, but - when used to the letter - would only be implemented on the latter.

Hence why its a bit pointless.

Exactly.

It also smacks of the sort of collective punishment ethos that's reminiscent of primary school.
 

headshot119

Established Member
Joined
31 Dec 2010
Messages
2,052
Location
Dubai
Thats not whats it's about though, doing that will likely result in a blind eye being turned, it's specifically aimed at trouble and using a rule to prevent it escalating, where the rule doesn't exist it makes staffs work harder.
Surely you know the difference in taking off a paralytic drunks beer off him and giving him a chance to sober up on the way home or groups knowing the rule then topping up on the train possibly leading to aggro as they get more drunk and loud.


It's not going to happen to everyday passengers going about their day which included a bag with majestic wine written on it.
If an officer or security guard has the power of a booze ban then when someone drunk and in danger to themselves or others and will get worse if they drink more then a check of their shopping may happen, just like if underage drinkers are caught in a park it's poured down the drain

As someone who holds a Personal License for sale of alcohol and who has worked in the night club industry I'm well aware of how differing groups or people react to alcohol.

My point was simply that someone deciding that an alcohol ban on the train means they'll drive doesn't have to point to the fact they have a problem with alcohol.
 

Runningaround

Member
Joined
24 Mar 2022
Messages
799
As someone who holds a Personal License for sale of alcohol and who has worked in the night club industry I'm well aware of how differing groups or people react to alcohol.

My point was simply that someone deciding that an alcohol ban on the train means they'll drive doesn't have to point to the fact they have a problem with alcohol.
Well you'll know who this rule is aimed at then and it's purpose.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top