Merseyrail Feet on Seats Query

[M60lad]

I was wondering if someone could help me, a 15 year old friend of mine was travelling on Merseyrail for the first time this morning and he accidently put his feet on the seat in front of him and unfournatly for him he got court by 2 Merseyrail enforcement offices who took down his details, the thing is he's quite worried and upset as he's never done it before and he's wondering what will happen next so I was wondering if someone in the know on here could help me in someway to explain to him what's going to happen next as I know he doesn't want a criminal record.

If it helps the enforcement officer said she wasn't going to caution or arrest him as he was under age

 

[185143]

I was under the impression from conversations I've heard on trains that it was an on the spot fine?

 

[clagmonster]

I suppose it could come under this byelaw:
"6. Unacceptable behaviour
(4) No person shall soil any part of the railway."
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/4202/railway-byelaws.pdf

I would wait and see what comes through the post. If they threaten prosecution, attempt to reach an out of court settlement.

 

[Camden]

I was under the impression from conversations I've heard on trains that it was an on the spot fine?

No. I don't believe they have the powers to do that. When I have travelled on the system I have seen the occasional person get caught, and it has always been a process I have observed, with no conclusion.

I'm sure someone will be along shortly to explain the situation in case of prosecution. The question relevant to the OP is what will the person be prosecuted for, and what is the outcome from that eg criminal record, or just a nasty fine.

There is a page here http://www.merseyrail.org/about-merseyrail/revenue-protection-policy.aspx with a download FAQs on prosecution at the bottom which perhaps gives some comfort that the situation might be resolvable outside the court system entirely, which would obviously negate the whole criminal record question anyway.

Hopefully the OP's friend can just settle this with being a young first time offender and has learned his lesson, and will be a little bit more respectful of his surroundings next time he goes to Liverpool. As a regular visitor, I am a massive fan of their enforcement and all it has achieved, and I know that people there think likewise.

 

[reb0118]

... he got court....

Ah, so he has already appeared in front of the magistrate? Did you mean caught?

Seriously though, because of his age Merseyrail will probably not go through with any byelaw prosecution but I would hazard a guess that they might write to his parents to apprise them of the situation. Merseyrail may also keep his details on file in case of any repeat performances - but to be fair I find this unlikely but that said he should take this as a salutary lesson and not repeat this behaviour.

When does your friend turn 16?

.... he doesn't want a criminal record...

Tell him not to worry about this as even in the extremely unlikely event that he was prosecuted for this then as the offence is a byelaw offence it will be non recordable therefore no record.

 

[sarahj]

I do love the word 'accidentally' . I get trains full of folks who do that, and then when I walk off they 'accidentally' go back up.:roll:

As for your friend, its just more than likely a basic caution, or ASB warning. If he 'accidentally' does it again and is caught again, more might come of it.

 

[transmanche]

Did you mean caught?

[...] I would hazard a guess that they might write to his parents to appraise them of the situation.

Did you mean apprise?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I have seen as many well-dressed young business people who are prone to do this as the school-age generation. I wonder why there is a need felt to do such a thing?

 

[bb21]

I have seen as many well-dressed young business people who are prone to do this as the school-age generation. I wonder why there is a need felt to do such a thing?

I have observed over time all sorts of people, many of whom well dressed and not always young, who probably would never think of breaking the law in any other shape or form but feel quite easy putting their stinking feet up on seats, on buses and trains.

Some people just seem to have no manners these days, or respect for anything other than their own personal property.

 

[jon0844]

I Tweeted a photo not so long ago of someone that didn't perhaps fit the stereotypical profile...

https://twitter.com/jmcomms/status/611526450462752768/photo/1

 

[Polarbear]

I have observed over time all sorts of people, many of whom well dressed and not always young, who probably would never think of breaking the law in any other shape or form but feel quite easy putting their stinking feet up on seats, on buses and trains.

Some people just seem to have no manners these days, or respect for anything other than their own personal property.

Couldn't agree more. I cannot see how anyone could "accidentally" put their feet on seats. It's a conscious decision that's taken to do this - no accident.

 

[185]

Knowing Merseyrail's approach to this with kids, the way it generally is dealt with is by way of bring them in to Rail House - Liverpool, parents present, and tell them off - then most importantly warn them if it occurs again, the company will bring a prosecution in a youth court.

For the one feet on seats case that actually went to magistrates, Merseyrail were laughed out of court....
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1562141/Feet-on-seat-student-escapes-conviction.html

"An application for £150 towards prosecution costs in the case brought by Merseyrail was also rejected by the three magistrates."

 

[reb0118]

Did you mean apprise?

Indeed so. I have been hoist by my own petard - and not for the first time. Post edited.

For the one feet on seats case that actually went to magistrates, Merseyrail were laughed out of court....
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1562141/Feet-on-seat-student-escapes-conviction.html"

Was this very case not discussed on this august forum? I remember the comment that she may have left court without a stain on her character but she potentially left a stain on the seat!

A slight point of order I believe, from my brief reading of the above article, that this was not the only "feet/seat" case in front of the magistrates but that the defendant was the only one to appear in person that day.

I do love the word 'accidentally' . I get trains full of folks who do that, and then when I walk off they 'accidentally' go back up.:roll:

This is a common occurrence. I find a swift about turn often catches them in the act. If I am in a particularly punctilious mood my next comment to them is "Do you like x?" where x is the next booked stop. "Why?" is often the response and I inform them that they will shortly become better acquainted with the place if I catch them at it again!

Another less confrontational method is to use the tannoy to embarrass someone, that you have previously warned in quiet, that you are watching them on the CCTV and to remove their offending appendages pronto. This also has the advantage of embarrassing others in the same situation who you have not had the chance to speak to in person.

NB The above scenarios only occur after a generic PA announcement and polite but firm individual warnings.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Tell him not to worry about this as even in the extremely unlikely event that he was prosecuted for this then as the offence is a byelaw offence it will be non recordable therefore no record.

It is not unlikely, Merseyrail operate zero tolerance on Byelaw offences, a policy which while seemingly draconian[1] has generally reduced antisocial behaviour significantly.

It is very likely that he will be prosecuted and fined under the relevant Byelaw. However as noted above these are not recordable offences.

[1] It includes putting feet on the seat frame etc, which I don't see an issue with. TBH, I think when they refurbed the stock they should have installed a mix of airline and longitudinal seating which would have removed the issue.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Edit: I just realised this is a kid...prosecution less likely but a talking to perhaps likely!

 

[Aldaniti]

I have seen as many well-dressed young business people who are prone to do this as the school-age generation. I wonder why there is a need felt to do such a thing?

I think standards really have slipped in the last two or three decades Paul. I don't think we can isolate any particular part of society either. I've come across some very respectful youngsters and some quite disagreeable pensioners. I believe part of the problem is that Bobbies have gradually retreated to the comfort of their police cars and are now only a responder service. Bobbies on patrol are a thing of the past, except perhaps on a Saturday afternoon when the football supporters come out to play. And when organisations such as Merseyrail take an approach that is to be congratulated and supported, they are often let down by magistrates and the Criminal Protection Service. Only in Britain.....

 

[Parham Wood]

I do not see anything in the Merseyrail byelaws that prohibits feet on seats or have I missed something? The only thing I can see is a reference to soiling. Since most shoes have some dirt on their soles this could rub off on the seat or fall off onto it and soil it perhaps microscopically or perhaps visibly. For a clean shoe I can't see how it could be proved the seat was soiled. For muddy shoes etc. it would be much easier. I assume putting one's feet/shoes on a clean cloth or something would not be soiling. In which case could a railway employee request a person removes their feet assuming they were not preventing others from sitting there? I am thinking mainly of people who for a medical condition need to put there feet up. Putting feet directly on seats was something I was always taught not to do and of course I would not condone anyone doing this on the railway. Would you class bare feet or feet in socks on a seat as soiling? This would be no worse than sitting on the seat in shorts as your skin could be touching the seat.

 

[transmanche]

I do not see anything in the Merseyrail byelaws that prohibits feet on seats or have I missed something?

The article linked to in post #12 says that a woman was charged that she "did molest and wilfully interfere with the comfort or convenience of any person on the railway by putting your feet on the seat while on a rail journey to Chester".

That's an offence under Merseyrail byelaw 6.8.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

. . . .

For the one feet on seats case that actually went to magistrates, Merseyrail were laughed out of court....

. . . .

A slight point of order I believe, from my brief reading of the above article, that this was not the only "feet/seat" case in front of the magistrates but that the defendant was the only one to appear in person that day.

Reb0118 is correct. Merseyrail had successfully prosecuted many hundreds of feet-on-seats offences under Railway Byelaw 6, and the Prosecution were NOT 'laughed out of court'.
collector has clarified that it was Chester Magistrates who found for the passenger in the case reported, but that the majority of these Offences are prosecuted successfully in Liverpool or Wirral Mags.

I do not see anything in the Merseyrail byelaws that prohibits feet on seats or have I missed something?

Try this:-

6. Unacceptable behaviour

(1) - (7)
(8) No person shall molest or wilfully interfere with the comfort or convenience of any person on the railway.

 

[Fare-Cop]

Yes, it seems that in that one case that Chester Magistrates took a strangely unrepresentative view of the matter compared to other Courts, who have been much more robust in recognising the offence and dealing firmly with this anti-social activity.

 

[Puffing Devil]

Yes, it seems that in that one case that Chester Magistrates took a strangely unrepresentative view of the matter compared to other Courts, who have been much more robust in recognising the offence and dealing firmly with this anti-social activity.

That's the lottery that is sometimes the magistrate's court. There are no piblished guidelines for this offence. Other benches who regularly travel by train my take a very different view.....

 

[Fare-Cop]

There are no piblished guidelines for this offence....

Not correct. As DaveNewcastle correctly points out, the alleged offender is charged under NR Byelaw 6 and this is what the National Railways Byelaws (2005) document actually says:

24. Enforcement
(1) Offence and level of fines
Any person who breaches any of these Byelaws commits an offence and, with the exception of Byelaw 17, may be liable for each such offence to a penalty not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.

Furthermore, the Magistrates sentencing guidelines at table 'A' give further guidance in relation to plea for strict liability matters.

 

[DeeGee]

I do not see anything in the Merseyrail byelaws that prohibits feet on seats or have I missed something? The only thing I can see is a reference to soiling. Since most shoes have some dirt on their soles this could rub off on the seat or fall off onto it and soil it perhaps microscopically or perhaps visibly. For a clean shoe I can't see how it could be proved the seat was soiled. For muddy shoes etc. it would be much easier. I assume putting one's feet/shoes on a clean cloth or something would not be soiling. In which case could a railway employee request a person removes their feet assuming they were not preventing others from sitting there? I am thinking mainly of people who for a medical condition need to put there feet up. Putting feet directly on seats was something I was always taught not to do and of course I would not condone anyone doing this on the railway. Would you class bare feet or feet in socks on a seat as soiling? This would be no worse than sitting on the seat in shorts as your skin could be touching the seat.

This interests me. I don't have a medical condition, but I do have an exciting, energetic hobby which can leave me with really quite knackered legs at the end of a weekend. Part of the reason I choose rail over road is because, cooped up in a car for three or four hours my legs can stiffen up quite noticeably and become uncomfortable. By rail, I can get up an walk up and down the train when I need to, and yes, also put my (stockinged) feet up if I'm lucky enough to get a square to myself.

My first experience of rail travel was on slam-door (CIG?) stock in the 1970s on the Brighton Mainline, and learning to read I was fascinated by all the warning notices (Alarm - Penalty for improper use £50, for instance) and I seem to recall a notice asking for feet not to be put on seats. Consequently, I know that it is an issue and I therefore always remove my shoes if I need to elevate my legs. Is this wrong? Sometimes I've even managed to catch sleep on a quiet train with my feet on a seat.

If there's a risk of my being fined for this, I'd better cease and desist forthwith.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm only aware of Merseyrail enforcing in that manner.

 

[Fare-Cop]

Is this wrong? Sometimes I've even managed to catch sleep on a quiet train with my feet on a seat.

If there's a risk of my being fined for this, I'd better cease and desist forthwith.

All the TOCs could, if they chose to, pursue the matter if the member of staff spotting it believes there is evidence of soiling, or the risk of soiling, but the reality is in many years as an inspector a long while ago all I ever did was gently remind the traveller that they may be transferring dirt from the floor to the seat and ask them to put their feet on the floor where they belong.

Only rarely did I get someone object or become argumentative and at that point a further gentle reminder that I didn't really want to spend time seeking confirmation of their name and address to make a report, which could easily result in further (expensive for them) action for what is perceived as an anti-social activity. I never did have to follow that through.

Much depends on the attitude test as always. Neil is right, the only company that pursues this actively at present is Merseyrail, but there's nothing to stop others following suit.

 

[anme]

Only in Britain.....

Please could you elaborate on this comment?

 

[Camden]

Yes, it seems that in that one case that Chester Magistrates took a strangely unrepresentative view of the matter compared to other Courts, who have been much more robust in recognising the offence and dealing firmly with this anti-social activity.

Yes, and of course the papers love the "loony prosecution of educated girl" angle, hence the (sole) years old article.

There are only two things that anyone need note about that particular episode, and combine them:
1) That it happened in 2007, 8 years ago, and such prosecutions haven't been in the papers since.
2) That the OP's friend has in 2015 had his details taken, with information on Merseyrail's website indicating quite clearly that prosecution does happen.

If 2007 was the watershed that some seem to be claiming, then the OP wouldn't be posting here now.

Regards the byelaw mentioned earlier, as someone who regularly travels on various cities transport systems, I can categorically state that "feet on seats" certainly interferes with my comfort and convenience. I get on a train in Birmingham and the seats can be absolutely filthy and worn, especially the edges of them. Once you notice it, and think about it, and consider the various inevitable components of that encrustation, and notice the various yoofs sat around with their feet up, both shoes on and off, then it makes you reticent to sit down. It certainly ticks me off when I do sit down and one of them gets on, sits on one of the opposite seats and puts their feet up on the seat next to me. I get on a train in Liverpool and the seats are seats. Clean and comfortable, sit down, travel. As it should be.

No one's got anything to complain about in regards to this enforcement.

 

[Puffing Devil]

Not correct. As DaveNewcastle correctly points out, the alleged offender is charged under NR Byelaw 6 and this is what the National Railways Byelaws (2005) document actually says:

24. Enforcement
(1) Offence and level of fines
Any person who breaches any of these Byelaws commits an offence and, with the exception of Byelaw 17, may be liable for each such offence to a penalty not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.

Furthermore, the Magistrates sentencing guidelines at table 'A' give further guidance in relation to plea for strict liability matters.

Not Correct. You have referenced the Byelaws themselves. In the Magistrates' Court Sentencing Guidelines you'll find that the only offence with a published guideline is for S5 the RORA (1889).

It is the Sentencing Guideline that benches will use to determine their sentence for a given offence. If there is no guideline they will use their experience, like offences and their Legal Adviser to decide on an appropriate sentence. (p. 147 of the Guidelines referenced above)

What is appropriate without (or sometimes with) a guideline can vary between benches.

 

[GatwickDepress]

To be honest, when seats are for the plomping of stinking arses, feet on seats don't really concern.

 

[Fare-Cop]

If there is no guideline they will use their experience, like offences and their Legal Adviser to decide on an appropriate sentence. (p. 147 of the Guidelines referenced above)

Correct, but in practice, what will the Legal Advisor who doesn't normally hear such cases do ?

In my experience they will normally ask the prosecutor if they can provide any assistance and what would I (if it were me) or any other prosecutor worth their salt refer to ??????

What would the Magistrates then be guided by ???

 

[transmanche]

Not correct. As DaveNewcastle correctly points out, the alleged offender is charged under NR Byelaw 6

Technically the Merseyrail byelaws, as the NR byelaws do not apply on Merseyrail. (The end result is the same though.)