This week's "Paddington 24/7" on Channel 5: an observation

[jednick]

This irritated me somewhat.

They showed a middle-aged bloke arriving at Paddington. He had been reported to the BTP by the guard on the GWR train for appearing "lost".

So, the BTP questioned him. To be fair, they spoke to him in a kind manner. Then they phoned up some hospitals and care homes in Bristol to see if he had been reported missing.

It turned out the bloke wasn't missing, he had all his valid tickets and just wanted to visit London!

Ok, he did seem a little eccentric, but he had done nothing wrong!

How would you, or anybody else, feel if GWR / the BTP treated you like this? Bear in mind, the guy did come across as a little strange, but why did the guard report him to the police, and what gave them the idea he might be "missing"?

How about GWR get sued for the distress caused to the poor bloke?

Ok, somebody's going to say he got reported because his behaviour on the train was odd and it arroused the guard's suspicions. But, he was wrong!

BTP/GWR guard: "He seems odd. We think he's escaped from a mental hospital". How judgmental is that!

How would you feel?

I felt so sorry for the poor bloke, he accepted it all so pleasantly.

 

[Carntyne]

If train crew have a concern about a member of the public then they're right to call for assistance to make sure everything's OK.

Why would GWR be sued? Bizarre.

 

[trainophile]

I missed that episode, but from what you say it sounds like the guard was taking his "duty of care" responsibilities seriously, and making sure the chap was in fact okay. I'd rather that than read in the paper of another railway suicide because "no-one seemed to care".

 

[king_walnut]

We don't really know the full story. I doubt the guard would have made the decision to call BTP just for a laugh. There must have been more to it.

 

[Tooktook]

I understand your point.

But id personally rather risk offending someone than missing an opportunity where a genuine intervention was required.

 

[221129]

Can't tell if this is a wind up or not?

 

[Bromley boy]

Someone looks a bit odd and is (eg) loitering on a platform without catching a train - they could be a spotter/vulnerable individual/potential suicide... How would you decide?

People with severe MH issues frequently board trains - how do you identify the mentally ill and vulnerable from the drunk/drugged or mildly eccentric?

What you need to remember is that the staff concerned have to make a snap judgment, and they only have their first impression to go on. There simply isn’t time to be precious about offending someone.

I reckon platform staff and guards (who constantly observe passengers’ behaviour) develop a pretty keen eye for identifying people at risk versus a bit eccentric. So they got it wrong this time, but I’d have thought most people in that bloke’s position would be grateful that the staff were looking out for him.

 

[ooo]

Having watched this he didn't seem overly annoyed about having been stopped

 

[jednick]

I suppose you can look at it from the other angle and, yes, they were trying to show they care.

At least the bloke didn't seem to mind.

I suppose I'm putting myself in his shoes. I mean, they were basically saying because he was perceived as being a bit odd, they think he's escaped from a mental hospital, or something similar.

The commentator said the guy was arousing suspicion because he had stayed on a train for too long, or something. But it was proven he had all his correct tickets.

He said he wanted to be free and able to travel as he liked.

 

[Bromley boy]

I suppose you can look at it from the other angle and, yes, they were trying to show they care.

At least the bloke didn't seem to mind.

I suppose I'm putting myself in his shoes. I mean, they were basically saying because he was perceived as being a bit odd, they think he's escaped from a mental hospital, or something similar.

The commentator said the guy was arousing suspicion because he had stay on a train for too long, or something. But it was proven he had all his correct tickets.

He said he wanted to be free and able to travel as he liked.

Don't forget the programme is edited so the viewer isn't necessarily seeing the whole picture.

Both the guard and the BTP clearly felt there was something about his demeanour that was worth investigating further.

 

[DriverToBe]

The guard was concerned because the guy had gone form Bristol to Paddington to Bristol and back to Paddington

 

[jednick]

Why sue GWR?

If I was that man....

"Your guard reported me to the police, who detained me, questioned me, and insinuated I had escaped from a mental hospital. Yet it was proved that I had done nothing wrong and I had all my valid tickets for the journeys I made. Plus I find it extremely offensive that just because I am a little eccentric, you think I belong in a mental hospital".

 

[221129]

Why sue GWR?

If I was that man....

"Your guard reported me to the police, who detained me, questioned me, and insinuated I had escaped from a mental hospital. Yet it was proved that I had done nothing wrong and I had all my valid tickets for the journeys I made. Plus I find it extremely offensive that just because I am a little eccentric, you think I belong in a mental hospital".

Which is not grounds to sue....

 

[jednick]

The guard was concerned because the guy had gone form Bristol to Paddington to Bristol and back to Paddington

It was proved he had all the valid tickets for the journeys he made. It's his business why he did those journeys.

 

[jednick]

Which is not grounds to sue....

You would have grounds to sue if you were detained falsely. How about "undue stress caused".

 

[Bromley boy]

I'm starting to agree with the previous poster who believed this thread was a wind up...

 

[GatwickDepress]

Why sue GWR?

If I was that man....

"Your guard reported me to the police, who detained me, questioned me, and insinuated I had escaped from a mental hospital. Yet it was proved that I had done nothing wrong and I had all my valid tickets for the journeys I made. Plus I find it extremely offensive that just because I am a little eccentric, you think I belong in a mental hospital".

Leaving aside the fact that isn't grounds to sue, perhaps in America... Nobody said it quite like that though, did they? There is a fine line between genuine yet tactful concern and going "'ere mate, you're not a nutter from a loony bin, are you?"

I've been asked plenty of times if I'm "alright" by railway staff and had BTP question me several times, as I don't look like a conventional enthusiast. I've never once got offended by this. In fact, I'm proud that our staff care about their passengers enough.

 

[221129]

You would have grounds to sue if you were detained falsely. How about "undue stress caused".

GWR are not detaining anyone.

 

[jednick]

It was proved he had all the valid tickets for the journeys he made. It's his business why he did those journeys.

The guard was concerned because the guy had gone form Bristol to Paddington to Bristol and back to Paddington

GWR are not detaining anyone.

No, but the GWR guard's actions caused the BTP to do so.

 

[221129]

No, but the GWR guard's actions caused the BTP to do so.

If this ever went to court you would be laughed out of it in about 3 minutes.

 

[jednick]

The guard was concerned because the guy had gone form Bristol to Paddington to Bristol and back to Paddington

I've done a similar thing. I biked into town, and then I realised I left my bike lock at home. So I have to immediately bike back home, get the lock and bike back into town. From an observer's point of view I've done similar to the bloke who went from Bristol to Paddington and repeated his journey. He had his reasons! Who are we to judge what they might be?

 

[221129]

I've done a similar thing. I biked into town, and then I realised I left my bike lock at home. So I have to immediately bike back home, get the lock and bike back into town. From an observer's point of view I've done simlar to the bloke who went from Bristol to Paddington and repeated his journey. He had his reasons! Who are we to judge what they might be?

The 2 are not at all comparable.

 

[6Gman]

No, but the GWR guard's actions caused the BTP to do so.

He wasn't "detained" by anybody. BTP had a chat with him, checked his story and let him continue.

 

[GB]

No, but the GWR guard's actions caused the BTP to do so.

Better sue the guards parents too while your at it. It was their actions all those years ago that allowed the guard to make his action.

 

[jednick]

The 2 are not at all comparable.

Ok. But say, I go from for example Crewe to London and back. Then I immediately repeat the journey. Yes, this would be unusual. But providing I have all the correct tickets for every part of the journey made, why should it be questioned the reasons why I'm doing that?

 

[jednick]

He wasn't "detained" by anybody. BTP had a chat with him, checked his story and let him continue.

True. But I bet if he had just walked off, they would have stopped him.

 

[6Gman]

Ok. But say, I go from for example Crewe to London and back. Then I immediately repeat the journey. Yes, this would be unusual. But providing I have all the correct tickets for every part of the journey made, why should it be questioned the reasons why I'm doing that?

Because staff are exercising a duty of care by checking that there is nothing wrong ...

Why do you find this such a hard concept to grasp?

 

[6Gman]

True. But I bet if he had just walked off, they would have stopped him.

Says you.

 

[jednick]

Because staff are exercising a duty of care by checking that there is nothing wrong ...

Why do you find this such a hard concept to grasp?

I have empathy for people. I just feel sorry for him that just because the bloke seemed a little odd, they think he's escaped from a mental hospital.

 

[221129]

I have empathy for people. I just think just because the bloke aeemed a little odd, they think he's escaped from a mental hospital.

Were you there?