Feet on Seat

[stellios]

Hello,

 

I have fallen foul of Mersey Rails Feets on Seats policy. Having read previous threads on the matter, it looks like I will have to "foot" the fine as my feet were resting on the white side panels of the seat.

 

What does concern me is the conduct of train guard. It came as quite a shock that he was issuing me a caution (something I thought only Police had the power to do). Anyway when asked if I understood the caution, I said no (under the assumption he didn't have the power to caution me). After this process repeated itself for several times, he threatened to contact the Transport Police, at which point I reluctantly complied with his requests for details.

 

I am still very upset by the whole incident and I want to complain about the treatment I received. Will I be able to obtain the recording from his CCTV device? If not what is the best way to resolve this incident?

 

Many Thanks

[BazzaS]

Hello,

 

I have fallen foul of Mersey Rails Feets on Seats policy. Having read previous threads on the matter, it looks like I will have to "foot" the fine as my feet were resting on the white side panels of the seat.

 

What does concern me is the conduct of train guard. It came as quite a shock that he was issuing me a caution (something I thought only Police had the power to do). Anyway when asked if I understood the caution, I said no (under the assumption he didn't have the power to caution me). After this process repeated itself for several times, he threatened to contact the Transport Police, at which point I reluctantly complied with his requests for details.

 

I am still very upset by the whole incident and I want to complain about the treatment I received. Will I be able to obtain the recording from his CCTV device? If not what is the best way to resolve this incident?

 

Many Thanks

 

Why are you upset?.

Did he use foul or abusive language?. Did he raise his voice?.

 

Or was he just doing his job?. You did have your feet on the seats, did you not?.

You did claim not to understand the caution (though it is apparent you did understand, since you note you just wrongly assumed "he didn't have the power to caution me").

Are you upset that he threatened to contact the Transport Police (to see if they could get the details you were refusing to give him).

 

You can ask for the CCTV, but unless he behaved badly, rather than merely in a manner different to what you had hoped, how will it help you?. What if they review the CCTV and note a further offence by you (such as not supplying details when requested, if that was what your intent was with claiming you didnt understand the caution?).

 

What are you saying he actually did wrong that the CCTV will show?. If you wish to complain you'll need to highlight what you are complaining about, rather than a general "I was upset by events" .... and you haven't yet actually given examples of what gave you reasonable cause to feel upset.....

Edited September 8, 2013 by BazzaS

[stellios]

Thanks for coming back to me.

 

In response to your points.

 

Feet were on the seat structure, so not too many gripes about the potential resulting fine.

 

No abusive language or raised voices from either party.

 

I had trouble getting my head round the gravity of the wording (not the wording itself) of the caution, when i asked him to elaborate he keep repeating the wording before threatening to bring in the transport police. Is it an assumption that caution to only understand words, but not necessarily the context they could be used in?

 

As previously mentioned, after the threat of the police involvement I reluctantly confirmed my understanding.

 

I asked when I could leave the station and I was told as soon as I had gave my details. However, I wasn't allowed to leave until those details were checked.

 

Essentially, I am upset because I wasn't allowed to make an informed choice about how to respond to accusations. I felt threatened into complying and then I was lied to. Not sure if that is grounds to complain?

 

Hypothetically, If I had exercised my right to silence and attempted to leave the train/station would they have any right to detain me?

 

I think it might be best just to pay the fine and put it down to a bad experience.

 

Cheers

[Consumer dude]

I guess if you didn't understand the caution it would have been within your right to say so..

[stellios]

I did say, several times, but got very anxious when threatened with police involvement. Every time I asked him to elaborate on any part of the caution, he would just repeat himself.

 

I just don't think the situation was handle well by the member of staff.

[Consumer dude]

The fear of the police being called because you didn't understand something is a fear you can do without. Sounds to me you then acted because of the fear and this could be seen as acting under duress..

[stellios]

Ha, Consumer, I actually said that I would be providing the details under duress.

 

He had some form of recording device on him. I asked if I could film it with my phone but was told that I could not film because it is private property.

 

Really have no idea where I stand with this?

[Consumer dude]

Seem like you have two issues. Firstly your feet on the seat and secondly understanding the caution..

[stellios]

My feet were on the seat(seat frame to be precise), I didn't realise I had broken a broken a bye-law until it was pointed out to me (although I know from various walks of life ignorance is not a valid excuse).

 

What does concern me is the process of issuing a civil caution and collecting details. Can threats and lies be used to coerce someone into providing information?

[stellios]

"...This means that you have the right to leave at any time."

 

I've found this in relation to civil cautions...this certainly wasn't explained to me, in fact I was told I could only leave once i had given my details.

[dx100uk]

lies, where did he lie?

 

dx

[stellios]

I asked if I could leave, he said once I had "provided" my details. I tried to leave but he said I had to wait till he had "checked" my details. In both cases neither response was correct.

[renegadeimp]

Whatever you do, you will still be 'charged' as you committed the offence.

[dx100uk]

I asked if I could leave, he said once I had "provided" my details.

I tried to leave but he said I had to wait till he had "checked" my details.

In both cases neither response was correct.

 

he is quite within his rights to detain you

and to verify whom you are.

 

what makes you think not?

 

dx

[stellios]

DX - Because I am not under arrest?

 

I am trying to educate myself as I go a long this evening so any guidance would be most welcome,

but my understanding is that under a civil caution I have the right to leave at any time?

 

rene - I will accept the fine if it comes to that, I won't accept being misinformed, threatened and lied to.

[dx100uk]

you are on private land under the railways act he can .

 

pers I don't think feet on seat, will go anywhere

 

you've nothing to lose

 

you might not even get a letter at all.

 

await and see

 

if you get one

 

then start worrying about the situation.

 

dx

[firstclassx]

you are on private land under the railways act he can .

 

pers I don't think feet on seat, will go anywhere

 

you've nothing to lose

 

you might not even get a letter at all.

 

await and see

 

if you get one

 

then start worrying about the situation.

 

dx

 

Sorry, but feet on seats will definitely go somewhere. It is Merseyrail's most common (500+ / year) prosecuted Byelaw offence.

 

That said, if it is his first time, I can guarantee the £50 Administrative Penalty will be offered, in writing, within the next 3 months. If it is a second offence, it will definitely proceed to prosecution.

 

A. If you receive a letter from the Prosecution Department claiming that an offence has been committed, you may be offered a warning along with an Administrative Penalty. The current penalty is £50.00 for a breach of a byelaw, and £75.00 for a Railway Regulation Act 1889 section 5 offence. The most common penalties are for byelaw 6(8), or feet on seats/seat structure as it is more commonly known, and Railway Regulation Act 5(3a), or travelling without a valid ticket or pass, or the means of payment, (fare evasion) as it more commonly known.

Link (Word DOC)

Forget the rest of your gripes, pay the £50 and the matter is closed.

 

I will just advise you that administrative penalties are not offered to people who "dispute" or "have a problem with" the incident. Primarily because payment of the admin charge should indicate that you unconditionally accept your wrongdoing. If you have a problem with the incident, court is the fairest best place to decide the outcome.

 

Therefore, if you wish to complain, I suggest you keep your head down for the time being, pay the £50 without any complaint, and once the matter has been settled, you can THEN write in with your comments.

 

Incidentally, you cannot be detained for a Byelaw offence, BUT you were hardly "prevented" from leaving. You could have walked away without them preventing you from doing so, but the British Transport Police/CCTV may get involved and the matter could escalate when you are eventually found again.

Edited September 9, 2013 by firstclassx

[Stigy]

Stellios,

 

it was your legal obligation to supply your name and address in this scenario under Railway Byelaw 23,

and any refusal of this can and often does lead to further prosecution under this bylaw,

meaning a subsequent offence to contend with

 

. Also, if he does persist in refusing his details he's most likely going to be arrested when the Police do turn up.

 

After the caution, he should have been told that he was not under arrest and as such was free to leave at any time.

This is prior to asking further questions.

The suspect should be cautioned after s/he has supplied their details though.

 

Cautioning is carried out by all manner of non-police agencies including; TV Licencing, RSPCA, DWP, VOSA and many more.

 

In fact, any agency that is likely to proceed with a prosecution will likely use the caution.

 

The Police also caution when reporting a suspect for an offence and it doesn't necessarily mean they're being arrested.

Edited September 9, 2013 by Stigy

[stellios]

stigy/firstclass - Thanks for the detailed response.

 

After consideration, I think you're right to suggest sucking it up, paying the admin fee and moving on.

 

Do you know if I can pay this prior to papers going out?

 

Also, is this breach of bye-law on any records other than MerseyRail/National Rail?

 

I am disappointed by the miss information given by the inspector re being able to leave, however if I walked, I am sure I would be liable for a much greater punishment.

 

Speaking of complaining post paying the fine, can they reopen it retrospectively or review it for other breaches of bye-laws?

[firstclassx]

stigy/firstclass - Thanks for the detailed response.

 

After consideration, I think you're right to suggest sucking it up, paying the admin fee and moving on.

 

Do you know if I can pay this prior to papers going out?

 

Also, is this breach of bye-law on any records other than MerseyRail/National Rail?

 

I am disappointed by the miss information given by the inspector re being able to leave, however if I walked, I am sure I would be liable for a much greater punishment.

 

Speaking of complaining post paying the fine, can they reopen it retrospectively or review it for other breaches of bye-laws?

 

No, it takes about 2 months for the paperwork to reach the prosecutor. The Byelaw Enforcement Officer has to produce an MG11 (statement) based on his interview with you, the admin team have to put your details on the database, and cross check for any previous offences. Then, around once a month, the department runs a massive "mail merge" macro and sends hundreds of letters out at the same time.

 

IMO, you are going to be better just paying the £50 and forgetting about it.

 

Details are kept with Merseyrail only, unless the Data Protection Act requires them to share the data for limited specified reasons.

[stellios]

Thanks very much for your input.

[Stigy]

 

IMO, you are going to be better just paying the £50 and forgetting about it.

 

Details are kept with Merseyrail only, unless the Data Protection Act requires them to share the data for limited specified reasons.

Not sure if I've mis-read this somewhere....Was this definitely dealt with by way of a £50 penalty? Seems he was reported for the offence and thus can't, at this stage at least, pay the £50 and be done with it. Or is it the norm for all offenders for these offences to be reported, and subsequently dealt with by way of a penalty of £50.

[firstclassx]

Not sure if I've mis-read this somewhere....Was this definitely dealt with by way of a £50 penalty? Seems he was reported for the offence and thus can't, at this stage at least, pay the £50 and be done with it. Or is it the norm for all offenders for these offences to be reported, and subsequently dealt with by way of a penalty of £50.

 

It is reported to the prosecutions team, once the database is checked for no previous, a £50 penalty letter is issued. This is standard practice for Merseyrail. (£75 for Regulation of Railways Act 1889 offences where tickets have NOT been altered and the value of the fare is under £10).

 

If previous Byelaw offences exists, a summons is issued instead.

 

The only time these "administrative penalties" are NOT offered is if the "offender" has had a particularly distasteful attitude or they dispute the facts of the incident.

[Stigy]

It is reported to the prosecutions team, once the database is checked for no previous, a £50 penalty letter is issued. This is standard practice for Merseyrail. (£75 for Regulation of Railways Act 1889 offences where tickets have NOT been altered and the value of the fare is under £10).

 

If previous Byelaw offences exists, a summons is issued instead.

 

The only time these "administrative penalties" are NOT offered is if the "offender" has had a particularly distasteful attitude or they dispute the facts of the incident.

 

Oh right, thanks for clearing that up.

 

Seems the case with a lot of other TOCs too, although not a standard procedure as such...or as far as the customer is concerned.