• 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!

Taking complimentary newspaper from First Class without permission, theft or not?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mag_seven

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
1 Sep 2014
Messages
9,994
Location
here to eternity
Mod - split from this thread

However what really shocked me was the woman who casually picked up a Times off the pile on the luggage rack as she passed through.

That's been going on on GWR for years - if they leave them out on the racks, there is nothing they can do about it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Carlisle

Established Member
Joined
26 Aug 2012
Messages
4,124
That's been going on on GWR for years - if they leave them out on the racks, there is nothing they can do about it.
Abosoluley & to my knowledge those left over at the end of the day simply get binned anyway
 

6Gman

Established Member
Joined
1 May 2012
Messages
8,383
I have also when sat in Standard on a Virgin train see people disappear and return with bottles of water from the 1st Class fridges. I know on the scale of things it's not a serious matter, but it's a bit cheeky isn't it?

No.

It's theft.
 

mrcheek

Established Member
Joined
11 Sep 2007
Messages
1,463
Theft? Report it to the police then and see what response you get.

The police are far too busy attending sensitivity training to investigate such things. But its still theft
 

6Gman

Established Member
Joined
1 May 2012
Messages
8,383
Theft? Report it to the police then and see what response you get.

I wasn't there. Just making the point that helping yourself to the property of other people is theft.

Whether the police would choose to respond is neither here nor there.

It's not cheeky; it's theft.
 

6Gman

Established Member
Joined
1 May 2012
Messages
8,383
It is theft, fact.

Thank you.

It's really quite simple.

If you need to walk through First Class then you walk through. But you don't help yourself to things you've not paid for on the way through.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,539
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Thank you.

It's really quite simple.

If you need to walk through First Class then you walk through. But you don't help yourself to things you've not paid for on the way through.

Indeed, I completely agree. Walking through, as long as you don't hang around, is no massive issue. Taking things you haven't paid for is theft and can and should land you in custody. It's no different to stealing that self-same newspaper or bottle of water from a newspaper shop.
 

bionic

Member
Joined
8 Nov 2013
Messages
883
All this talk about people nicking copies of The Times... maybe they'd just run out of bog roll in the toilets?
 

sheff1

Established Member
Joined
24 Dec 2009
Messages
5,459
Location
Sheffield
It's really quite simple.

If you need to walk through First Class then you walk through. But you don't help yourself to things you've not paid for on the way through.

First Class passengers haven't paid for them either - the items are complimentary :).
 

MCSHF007

Member
Joined
7 Dec 2015
Messages
396
First Class passengers haven't paid for them either - the items are complimentary :).

So are the complimentary catering items. All part of what a first class ticket entitles you too (and presumably factored into the first class fares). Next?
 

LAX54

Established Member
Joined
15 Jan 2008
Messages
3,753
First Class passengers haven't paid for them either - the items are complimentary :).

They are part of the ticket price, maybe 'free' at source, but paid for by the ticket holder, but by saying they are free, there is no obligation on the TOC :)
 

lancastria

Member
Joined
4 Jul 2017
Messages
45
Location
North and London
They are part of the ticket price, maybe 'free' at source, but paid for by the ticket holder, but by saying they are free, there is no obligation on the TOC :)
The free Times is likely what is known as a 'bulk'. The paper produces these for special distribution, usually for free.
What has happened on these trains is that the newspaper company likely pays the train company to give its paper away free, because First Class travellers are the kind of income group the paper wants.
The newspaper company would be delighted that anyone picks up the paper, and I daresay First Class travellers don't care and nor do the train crew. I'm just wondering who does care about Standard Class passengers picking up a free copy of the newspaper? And, separately, who is harmed by this behavior?
 

Blinkbonny

Member
Joined
16 Mar 2018
Messages
349
The newspaper company would be delighted that anyone picks up the paper, and I daresay First Class travellers don't care and nor do the train crew. I'm just wondering who does care about Standard Class passengers picking up a free copy of the newspaper? And, separately, who is harmed by this behavior?

Well I'd be a bit miffed if there's none left for me.
I get annoyed if somebody's nicked the crossword section!
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,539
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
First Class passengers haven't paid for them either - the items are complimentary :).

They are complimentary to First Class passengers. Therefore only First Class passengers are entitled to take them. Therefore taking them if you have not paid a First Class fare is theft.

If I put some sweets on a table outside my house, say, and have a sign on them stating "free sweets for children" (dodgy as that would look), adults taking them, unless they had the intention to give them to a child, would be stealing them. Money doensn't have to come into it, it's simply about who is entitled to them in the opinion of the present owner.
 

Fawkes Cat

Established Member
Joined
8 May 2017
Messages
2,943
Taking a free morning newspaper in the evening that you are not entitled to is close to being a victimless crime. The content of the paper (this morning's news) is out of date so of very little value, and the artefact itself is no more than paper and ink: indeed, the two having been combined probably means that the newspaper is of less value than clean newsprint and a bottle of ink taken separately. And if you don't grab the paper, the traincrew will have to spend time and effort on picking up the stack of free papers and throwing them away.

So in practice, no one will care if in the evening someone takes a copy of the Times that they aren't entitled to. But it is still theft. If you took it, that must mean that it has some value to you. Why were you not prepared to give some of that value to the owner to compensate them for the loss of their asset?

And since it is theft, there is a moral risk to society. If it is ok to relieve a railway company of a newspaper that is (if anything) a liability to them, then surely it is little different to not pay a train fare? The train will run whether or not you buy a fare and (subject to overcrowding) the space you occupy would otherwise just be vacant. If it's okay to bilk a train fare, then surely Tesco won't miss you doing your weekly shop for free? And so on. By far the easiest line that draw is the one that says 'Thou shalt not steal' rather than the one that goes on to say 'except in the following circumstances, which should be considered illustrative rather than exhaustive.'
 

PR1Berske

Established Member
Joined
27 Jul 2010
Messages
3,025
The police are far too busy attending sensitivity training to investigate such things. But its still theft
"Free to those who can afford it, very expensive to those who can't"

They're bulk bought newspapers essentially already paid for so theft is the last thing this is. A bit cheeky, yes. But taking a complimentary newspaper for yourself? Not theft.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,539
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
"Free to those who can afford it, very expensive to those who can't"

They're bulk bought newspapers essentially already paid for so theft is the last thing this is. A bit cheeky, yes. But taking a complimentary newspaper for yourself? Not theft.

It absolutely is theft because (a) it isn't yours, and (b) you have not been offered it. It doesn't matter what the procurement method is.

Theft is basically defined as taking something that is not yours with the intention not to return it. Nothing else matters in defining it. For instance, taking something out of a skip or rubbish bin is theft. It might not be theft anyone would prosecute, but it's still theft.
 

PR1Berske

Established Member
Joined
27 Jul 2010
Messages
3,025
And since it is theft, there is a moral risk to society. If it is ok to relieve a railway company of a newspaper that is (if anything) a liability to them, then surely it is little different to not pay a train fare?

False dichotomy.

The newspapers are bought in bulk, they're already paid for.

Boarding without paying is an offense. Picking up a complimentary newspaper is not.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,539
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
False dichotomy.

The newspapers are bought in bulk, they're already paid for.

They were paid for by the TOC. The TOC owns them. The TOC has decided it wishes to give them to those holding First Class tickets. If you take one not holding a First Class ticket, you have taken it without consent without intention to return it[1]. You have stolen it.

[1] This second requirement is why we have a specific charge of TWOC (taking without consent) for a motor vehicle, because someone could potentially get out of a theft charge with "but I just borrowed it".
 

Belperpete

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2018
Messages
1,575
If the newspapers have been left out so that passengers can help themselves, and there is nothing to say that they are only for first-class passengers, then I doubt it could be classed as theft.

To take the sweets analogy of a previous poster, it would be like leaving a pile of sweets outside your house with with a sign saying "help yourself", and then claiming an adult had stolen them, because you only meant them for children.
 

Fawkes Cat

Established Member
Joined
8 May 2017
Messages
2,943
False dichotomy.

The newspapers are bought in bulk, they're already paid for.
You have bought the possessions in your house. So if I enter your house (through an open door to avoid us getting diverted onto any other offences of breaking and entering) I can take all the possessions and will not have stolen them. Yes?
 

mrcheek

Established Member
Joined
11 Sep 2007
Messages
1,463
"Free to those who can afford it, very expensive to those who can't"

They're bulk bought newspapers essentially already paid for so theft is the last thing this is. A bit cheeky, yes. But taking a complimentary newspaper for yourself? Not theft.

Im amazed we are still discussing this.
Apparently, there are people out there who dont know what the definition of theft is.
"Dishonestly appropriating property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it" is the legal definition. (Theft Act 1968)
You might argue the permanently depriving bit, but you would lose if it went to court (although of course the rail company would lose out in terms of public relations for being petty)
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,539
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
If the newspapers have been left out so that passengers can help themselves, and there is nothing to say that they are only for first-class passengers, then I doubt it could be classed as theft.

To take the sweets analogy of a previous poster, it would be like leaving a pile of sweets outside your house with with a sign saying "help yourself", and then claiming an adult had stolen them, because you only meant them for children.

They are situated in the First Class coach, to which Standard passengers are not meant to have access other than to pass through where absolutely necessary. That alone is evidence enough.
 

duffield

Established Member
Joined
31 Jul 2013
Messages
1,304
Location
East Midlands
If the newspapers have been left out so that passengers can help themselves, and there is nothing to say that they are only for first-class passengers, then I doubt it could be classed as theft.

To take the sweets analogy of a previous poster, it would be like leaving a pile of sweets outside your house with with a sign saying "help yourself", and then claiming an adult had stolen them, because you only meant them for children.

A good lawyer could certainly argue that, in the absence of a sign saying "Complimentary newspapers, for First class ticket holders only" you genuinely believed the papers were free for anyone to take, and if it was bought up that they were only in the First Class coaches, add that you had assumed this was merely for the added convenience of First class ticket holders, *or* that you were unaware of the fact there there were no copies in any Standard class coach *or* that you had got in a random coach, picked up what you believed was a free paper, and found your reserved seat in another part of the train without even noticing you had been in first class. It is in fact quite possible that some or all of these reasons genuinely apply to at least some people, particularly infrequent and less observant travellers.

However, I would agree that *if* you do actually know that the complimentary items are only for First class ticket holders then you have committed theft even if a successful prosecution would in effect be impossible due to the above.
 

lancastria

Member
Joined
4 Jul 2017
Messages
45
Location
North and London
Taking a free morning newspaper in the evening that you are not entitled to is close to being a victimless crime. The content of the paper (this morning's news) is out of date so of very little value, and the artefact itself is no more than paper and ink: indeed, the two having been combined probably means that the newspaper is of less value than clean newsprint and a bottle of ink taken separately. And if you don't grab the paper, the traincrew will have to spend time and effort on picking up the stack of free papers and throwing them away.

So in practice, no one will care if in the evening someone takes a copy of the Times that they aren't entitled to. But it is still theft. If you took it, that must mean that it has some value to you. Why were you not prepared to give some of that value to the owner to compensate them for the loss of their asset?

And since it is theft, there is a moral risk to society. If it is ok to relieve a railway company of a newspaper that is (if anything) a liability to them, then surely it is little different to not pay a train fare? The train will run whether or not you buy a fare and (subject to overcrowding) the space you occupy would otherwise just be vacant. If it's okay to bilk a train fare, then surely Tesco won't miss you doing your weekly shop for free? And so on. By far the easiest line that draw is the one that says 'Thou shalt not steal' rather than the one that goes on to say 'except in the following circumstances, which should be considered illustrative rather than exhaustive.'

You are confused! Dodging the fare on a train is much different to picking up a free paper; let me explain -- without revenue trains won't run; if you pick up a free newspaper you are not entitled to, the trains will still run.
The trains cost money to operate and dodging a fare is stealing money from the TOC, this is a social evil.
The bulk newspapers are provided free, in fact the newspaper company probably pays the TOC to provide the newspaper. This is the model for Metro newspapers at rail stations and on buses.
When you take a free newspaper, you are not depriving anyone of money, and the newspaper company would be delighted you are reading its product.
Train crew won't care if you take the paper, unless the TOC underlines that a free paper is part of the complementary service for travel. Anyone who buys a First Class ticket because of a free paper is deluded. They can buy a standard ticket and a copy of the paper at the station for tens of punds, sometimes hundreds, less than the First Class fare. People never travel First for a free newspaper, the choice is inspired by different reasons.
 

NoOnesFool

Member
Joined
26 Aug 2018
Messages
602
I was surprised at how many people seemingly deliberately board (and alight) at a 1st Class door then walk through to/from Standard coaches. This was on GWR on Friday, and happened at almost all the station stops. To be fair the coach arrangement on GWR can be a bit haphazard, with no particular order. However there's no real excuse when leaving the train.

However what really shocked me was the woman who casually picked up a Times off the pile on the luggage rack as she passed through. Nice little saving if she does that every day on her commute home!

I have also when sat in Standard on a Virgin train see people disappear and return with bottles of water from the 1st Class fridges. I know on the scale of things it's not a serious matter, but it's a bit cheeky isn't it?
I recall a certain First Class Crew Leader who actively requested that Standard Class passengers do not walk through first to alight as we approached a London terminal, and rightly so. If you want the status of leaving a First Class door, then pay for it. I seem to recall an old thread on here of a pax leaving a commuter train (I want to say at Liverpool Street) and being Penalty Fared. It's a simple concept, unless you have a First Class ticket, keep out of First Class accomodation. That includes First Class vestibules.

Regarding the woman you saw taking a Times, well on the trains I work on, it's not uncommon to find pax walking through First and helping themselves to a First Class water on their way to Standard. Usually business commuters. No respect.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top