• 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!

Woman asked to give up seat on train for child.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,531
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
If there are other other available seats then no. In the same way you wouldn't get up if there were other available seats just because I preferred the one you're sat in.

If they are taking two seats then one of them is fair game. I wouldn't normally do this if another pair was available, but I do if one of them is desirable, e.g. table or extra legroom.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

221129

Established Member
Joined
21 Mar 2011
Messages
6,520
Location
Sunny Scotland
If they are taking two seats then one of them is fair game. I wouldn't normally do this if another pair was available, but I do if one of them is desirable, e.g. table or extra legroom.
Oh absolutely if its 2 seats then one of them is of course fair game.
 

Robertj21a

On Moderation
Joined
22 Sep 2013
Messages
7,518
The Victoria line carriage I was in on Sunday morning before 7 had more passenger than seats. Why?

Was it every carriage ?
Special event on ?
Tube trains are designed to move people quickly over small-moderate distances. Seats are not so essential.
Frequency could do with an earlier increase ?
 

james60059

Member
Joined
6 Jul 2006
Messages
839
Location
Hinckley
When I use to travel around with my Dad in London (he was a bus driver, now retired based at Chalk Farm and latterly Holloway) he was always adamant that I let an older (he meant elderly) person have a seat if the bus was loaded, which it was a fair few times. In fact one occasion, I was so engrossed in a magazine that I didn't notice an elderly standing as there was no seats. Needless to say he got out of his cab and told me to move, I was mortified but at the same time glad this lady could have a seat, plus it set an example too - one I still live by today on the rare occasion I use public transport.
 

molecrochip

Member
Joined
14 Jul 2017
Messages
57
Not exactly like other examples but a few weeks ago when I was travelling from Birmingham New Street to London Euston on a fairly busy Virgin Trains service I was asked to give up my seat to a child who looked about 5 as the mother had reserved the seat next to my reserved seat and they wanted to sit together (the child did not have a reservation). I had specifically booked that seat and if there was an similar unreserved seat I would have possible moved but as there was not I did not.
I've had this problem - 2 year old disabled child. PNot required to buy a ticket but needs to travel in a seat as travelling on lap could cause injury with their condition. I can't just buy a reservation, I had to buy a ticket which wasn't strictly necessary.

Child is now three, has wheelchair. Same TOC will reserve space on train and no need to buy ticket. Why? Because TOC has obligation to accommodate wheelchairs but apparently not other young disabled children.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,531
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
I've had this problem - 2 year old disabled child. PNot required to buy a ticket but needs to travel in a seat as travelling on lap could cause injury with their condition. I can't just buy a reservation, I had to buy a ticket which wasn't strictly necessary.

While I think this is a bit naughty with a disabled child (i.e. not making reasonable adjustments), were the child not disabled it would be correct that you should buy a ticket if you wish to ensure a seat. Children under 5 are only free if they do not occupy seats needed by fare-paying passengers. So it is right that a reservation should not be issued (for a non-disabled child) without paying a fare because that would prevent someone else reserving that seat.
 

molecrochip

Member
Joined
14 Jul 2017
Messages
57
While I think this is a bit naughty with a disabled child (i.e. not making reasonable adjustments), were the child not disabled it would be correct that you should buy a ticket if you wish to ensure a seat. Children under 5 are only free if they do not occupy seats needed by fare-paying passengers. So it is right that a reservation should not be issued (for a non-disabled child) without paying a fare because that would prevent someone else reserving that seat.
I wouldn't argue about buying a seat for a non-disabled child under 5 if you specifically want the additional seat. As you correctly point out, this comes back to 'need' which is protected in law and requires 'reasonable adjustment'.

I've heard back from the TOC who confirms that reasonable adjustments should be made for all passengers. They also confirm that a 3 year old is a passenger within these rules, just a passenger who is not required to buy a ticket. As for getting around the reservation point, they confirm that their special assistance team should be able to issue a reservation without ticket in these circumstances.
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
While I think this is a bit naughty with a disabled child (i.e. not making reasonable adjustments), were the child not disabled it would be correct that you should buy a ticket if you wish to ensure a seat. Children under 5 are only free if they do not occupy seats needed by fare-paying passengers. So it is right that a reservation should not be issued (for a non-disabled child) without paying a fare because that would prevent someone else reserving that seat.

LNER have done precisely that for me with no quibble - albeit on a fairly lightly loaded service.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,531
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
LNER have done precisely that for me with no quibble - albeit on a fairly lightly loaded service.

TBH, for all the millions of under-5-year-olds that aren't travelling on trains, I'd personally just switch to issuing zero-fare tickets for that age and allowing reservations on a blanket basis, or perhaps if zero-fare is too much of a nuisance you could make it a blanket £1 flat fare for any journey of your choice, be that Ryde Esplanade to Pier Head or Penzance to Wick. I get the reasoning behind it, but trains are not full-and-standing with very young children on any line.
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
TBH, for all the millions of under-5-year-olds that aren't travelling on trains, I'd personally just switch to issuing zero-fare tickets for that age and allowing reservations on a blanket basis, or perhaps if zero-fare is too much of a nuisance you could make it a blanket £1 flat fare for any journey of your choice, be that Ryde Esplanade to Pier Head or Penzance to Wick. I get the reasoning behind it, but trains are not full-and-standing with very young children on any line.

That would be useful. I totally get not having a toddler take up a seat in principle, but it's just not practical or comfortable for a long journey with a fidgety toddler - the extra space of two seats is certainly appreciated.

Better yet would be 'Kleinkindbereich' [Toddler Compartments], as seen on ICEs. Plenty of space to play *and* not pissing off other passengers to boot.

Would be a good one for the HS2 fleet...
 

Tobberz

Member
Joined
9 Jan 2018
Messages
28
A bemusing thread. There is no "right" or "wrong". There's just what people do, and what people don't do. It's entirely up to the individuals involved.
If the woman in question felt strongly, she'd have said "no". Is that right or wrong? No - it's neither.
Since she didn't feel that strongly, she said "yes". Again, neither right nor wrong. Neither proper nor improper.
Sure, the decision will depend on their ideals. But to suggest that there's some ingrained custom in society which dictates what is right, or that there is some deep rot in [the current year] that informs these decisions is preposterous.
 

njlawley

Member
Joined
5 Jun 2019
Messages
139
Location
Bournemouth
Winds me up this sort of stuff does. My 7 year old suffers from hypermobility and low muscle tone and very often finds standing painful. He would be mortified if I asked someone to give up their seat for him! In fact he’s normally the first up and offering his seat if we’re on busy public transport

My daughter does. She was once turfed out of a seat on the Piccadilly line by a woman demanding the seat. My wife nor I were able to do anything because the train was crowded and we were further down the carriage. Had I been closer, she'd have had a stern word!

I only found out after we got off the train and my daughter was in distress. She was already in pain due to her JHMS and the affect of walking around London.

She now has a TfL "offer me a seat" badge, and I've given her the instruction to never give up her seat of anyone does it again.
 

al78

Established Member
Joined
7 Jan 2013
Messages
2,400
A bemusing thread. There is no "right" or "wrong". There's just what people do, and what people don't do. It's entirely up to the individuals involved.
If the woman in question felt strongly, she'd have said "no". Is that right or wrong? No - it's neither.
Since she didn't feel that strongly, she said "yes". Again, neither right nor wrong. Neither proper nor improper.
Sure, the decision will depend on their ideals. But to suggest that there's some ingrained custom in society which dictates what is right, or that there is some deep rot in [the current year] that informs these decisions is preposterous.

Incorrect, there are social rules and guidelines of what is right or wrong behaviour, that is how we all interact in our ever more crowded societies, and is necessary for social order. For example, if someone was bullied/intimidated into giving up their seat that would be wrong, full stop, don't try and claim the objective is subjective.
 

trainophile

Established Member
Joined
28 Oct 2010
Messages
6,181
Location
Wherever I lay my hat
Incorrect, there are social rules and guidelines of what is right or wrong behaviour, that is how we all interact in our ever more crowded societies, and is necessary for social order. For example, if someone was bullied/intimidated into giving up their seat that would be wrong, full stop, don't try and claim the objective is subjective.

I think the point being made was that the giving up of a seat is down to the will of the person occupying it. Nothing to do with bullying or intimidating.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,685
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
Incorrect, there are social rules and guidelines of what is right or wrong behaviour, that is how we all interact in our ever more crowded societies, and is necessary for social order. For example, if someone was bullied/intimidated into giving up their seat that would be wrong, full stop, don't try and claim the objective is subjective.

Must admit the more I read this thread the more I yearn to live on a deserted island and not have to be part of all this!
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,429
Location
Yorkshire
A bemusing thread. There is no "right" or "wrong". There's just what people do, and what people don't do. It's entirely up to the individuals involved.
If the woman in question felt strongly, she'd have said "no". Is that right or wrong? No - it's neither.
Since she didn't feel that strongly, she said "yes". Again, neither right nor wrong. Neither proper nor improper.
Sure, the decision will depend on their ideals. But to suggest that there's some ingrained custom in society which dictates what is right, or that there is some deep rot in [the current year] that informs these decisions is preposterous.
I can't agree with this. It was clearly morally wrong and socially unacceptable for the person to say what it is alleged that they said, based on the account we have been given.
I think the point being made was that the giving up of a seat is down to the will of the person occupying it. Nothing to do with bullying or intimidating.
It's not acceptable for someone to be asking in the manner described:
“On the busy tube and managed to get a seat when a woman tells me give my seat to her son because ‘he’s just a child’.

“He looked 10 years old and she didn’t say he needed a seat for any particular reason.
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
In Nsw Australia it is expected Children Stand on trains if Paying customers need a seat also applies for buses that don't have dedicated school routes.

What doesn't help is that rules such as this one, in effect hangovers from the days of 'Children must be seen and not heard', are established as normal behaviour irrespective of actual needs.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,685
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
What doesn't help is that rules such as this one, in effect hangovers from the days of 'Children must be seen and not heard', are established as normal behaviour irrespective of actual needs.

This used to be in conditions of carriage in this country until relatively recently.

I can sort of see a vaguely persuasive argument based on the fact that they pay (considerably) less than adults - in some cases zero. Personally I’d increase child fares and ditch any free travel, then that argument goes away.
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
This used to be in conditions of carriage in this country until relatively recently.

I can sort of see a vaguely persuasive argument based on the fact that they pay (considerably) less than adults - in some cases zero. Personally I’d increase child fares and ditch any free travel, then that argument goes away.

Problem is, child fares (which are pretty heavily discounted when combined with a Family Railcard or whatever) are pretty much essential as a marketing tool to make a family travelling by rail cost-competitive with the family car.

Plus half-child fares are essential for school journeys, for kids who obviously can't drive nor are in employment.

Although with my own under-fives, I wouldn't necessarily mind paying a small nominal fare for them.

In fact for an adult and under 5 travelling together, if a railcard is already held, 1+1 on the Railcard is less than 1 adult undiscounted fare!
 

Spurs

Member
Joined
26 Jan 2015
Messages
86
In Nsw Australia it is expected Children Stand on trains if Paying customers need a seat also applies for buses that don't have dedicated school routes.
Sorry, but I really think you'd have to be a pretty horrible adult to take a seat off a six-year-old kid. They're clearly going to struggle more standing and holding on if it's a busy train.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,685
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
Problem is, child fares (which are pretty heavily discounted when combined with a Family Railcard or whatever) are pretty much essential as a marketing tool to make a family travelling by rail cost-competitive with the family car.

Plus half-child fares are essential for school journeys, for kids who obviously can't drive nor are in employment.

Although with my own under-fives, I wouldn't necessarily mind paying a small nominal fare for them.

In fact for an adult and under 5 travelling together, if a railcard is already held, 1+1 on the Railcard is less than 1 adult undiscounted fare!

I suspect it doesn’t help that trains are now rather busier off-peak than was the case when things like railcard child-for-a-pound fares came in. Few children travel at the busiest times - and those that do are often against the flow journeys I’d suspect. However over more recent years I’ve seen some vicious squabbles over seats as well as things like table bays, and the common theme is it’s nearly always on a busy weekend train, or some other time like Christmas shopping time or when there’s an event on.

I definitely think there’s a case for increasing child fares if trains are sufficiently busy that there’s insufficient seating to go round.
 

VT 390

Established Member
Joined
7 Dec 2018
Messages
1,366
I definitely think there’s a case for increasing child fares if trains are sufficiently busy that there’s insufficient seating to go round.
They could do this by giving the option of paying a fare and getting a seat or not and have to give up a seat if required by a fare paying passenger, this way it gives people both options.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,685
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
They could do this by giving the option of paying a fare and getting a seat or not and have to give up a seat if required by a fare paying passenger, this way it gives people both options.

That sounds very fair to me. Having said that I could see that being problematic to enforce, as those who don't pay would no doubt try it on, and it would put staff in a difficult position being expected to evict children from seats.
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
They could do this by giving the option of paying a fare and getting a seat or not and have to give up a seat if required by a fare paying passenger, this way it gives people both options.

That sounds very fair to me. Having said that I could see that being problematic to enforce, as those who don't pay would no doubt try it on, and it would put staff in a difficult position being expected to evict children from seats.

To be fair, that's basically what Eurostar do for small children. Pay a fare, get a seat. If not, on lap (unless there happens to be a spare seat).
 

trainophile

Established Member
Joined
28 Oct 2010
Messages
6,181
Location
Wherever I lay my hat
The rail industry needs to make its mind up whether it is an essential service predominantly for people who need to get around, or something to be encouraged for leisure purposes.

If current demand and capacity dictates that it’s the former, it should stop promoting itself as the latter!
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
The rail industry needs to make its mind up whether it is an essential service predominantly for people who need to get around, or something to be encouraged for leisure purposes.

If current demand and capacity dictates that it’s the former, it should stop promoting itself as the latter!

It's always going to be both. The capacity and infrastructure is sizes for peak demand, which is always going to have spare capacity to be sold off-peak via discounting to more price-sensitive travellers.
 

Mountain Man

Member
Joined
15 Jun 2019
Messages
310
Being London, I would say that the mother was very lucky to not receive a torrent of well-deserved abuse. It's utterly absurd (unless disabled etc) and these arrogant people need to be put in their place. A child is perfectly capable of standing, holding on as necessary.
Not always
 

Tom B

Established Member
Joined
27 Jul 2005
Messages
4,602
That would be useful. I totally get not having a toddler take up a seat in principle, but it's just not practical or comfortable for a long journey with a fidgety toddler - the extra space of two seats is certainly appreciated.

Better yet would be 'Kleinkindbereich' [Toddler Compartments], as seen on ICEs. Plenty of space to play *and* not pissing off other passengers to boot.

Would be a good one for the HS2 fleet...

I'm sure I've seen a "family carriage" - possibly on a GWT HST a few years ago? Perhaps operating as such outwith peak hours and at weekends etc.
 

nanstallon

Member
Joined
18 Dec 2015
Messages
736
This weak woman should have stayed sitting and told the mother where to go, why can't people stand up(no pun intended) for themselves these days?

It depends on how you were brought up. Not so easy when you've been brought up to feel inferior to others.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top