and Merseyrail
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both 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!
Alcohol confiscation SouthEastern
- Thread starter DeverseSam
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
If we're going to continue down the rabbit hole, then my response is that it's not clear if post #23 was actually referring to the point of this thread, but - if it was - then notwithstanding the caveats posted above, the question wasn't worded in such a way that differentiated between who did or didn't have the authority to confiscate alcohol, and the response by @norbitonflyer appeared to be suggesting that a 15-year-old couldn't have alcohol confiscated, to which my response was purely to that point.
My responses have been in reference to the quoted posts, and cannot be taken as applying in any context other than the context provided.
This is all a moot point, because as stated above, the view of someone who watched the video was that...
...and if the teenagers had refused to be relinquished of the alcohol, then it could have resulted in various scenarios, such as the police being called and/or an investigation into possible use of a child ticket by someone over 15. So they were wise to relinquish the alcohol.
There is a clear difference between holding cans/bottles of alcohol and having them stashed away in your bag, having been out shopping. Indeed, just yesterday I witnessed people were denied entry to York station due to holding such cans/bottles (with the clear intent to consume on the train, having been at the races), while I had some alcohol packed away in my backpack and wasn't questioned. Those holding cans/bottles of alcohol were required to get rid of them before entering the station. Given they had clearly been at the races, any claim they had been shopping and were going to consume the alcohol at home would not have fooled anyone.
...is very much true, though in my days of going to away football fixtures on a regular basis, I absolutely remember people who were aged 16/17 at the time absolutely having it both ways - despite being entitled to neither - as much as they could (albeit not at the same time), by being on child tickets on the train, and consuming alcohol (purchased by someone else) in the pub before the game. Sometimes they then got away with a child entry into the ground, but other times they'd had too much to drink at that point, so were refused on that basis.
I hope you aren't involved in the serving of alcohol in that situation, it most certainly isn't legal. You need to be 16 or older to have alcohol with a meal.
Not correct on two counts: firstly the age is 16, and dining cars and vehicles are not licenced premises.
(They don't have to give you free tap water, guess how I found this out in the Virgin Trains complaints dept!)
izvor
Member
Not going to add to needless speculation here, but I do understand that SouthEastern Enforcement Officers have additional powers compared to those of other TOCs, including arrest and manhandling of persons. Confirmation welcome; this came from one of them I was talking to some tears ago.
norbitonflyer
Established Member
I stand corrected. Did it used to be 14? or is 14 the limit for some other alcohol restriction?
Potentially confusing it with the law until 1995 that under 14s couldn’t enter the bar area of a pub?
brad465
Veteran Member
Which led to the most British of final day celebrations:
(Video of BBC News London covering drinking party on the Underground on last day this was legal)
Merseyrail and Tyne & Wear too.
In terms of sealed bottles, some LNER services from Aberdeen are completely dry - and this is enforced with searches to stop Geordie oil rig workers from sneaking booze on and getting tanked up after months offshore.
Even licenced premises only have to supply free tap water if they can reasonably do so. Snowdon Summit is (or at least was on my last ascent) licenced but doesn't provide tap water on the basis that there is no mains supply which reaches that high.
norbitonflyer
Established Member
That was it.
Or the power to size internet wibble.
a_c_skinner
Established Member
- Joined
- 21 Jun 2013
- Messages
- 1,699
I'd really like to see the authority for this. One hates to mention AI but Google's AI says this is not the case. We all of course have powers of arrest.
rmHawk765
Member
Unfortunately this gets a lot more complicated due to privacy concerns etc, whereas a bottle is just a bottle.
As the poster of #23, my point was to ask if it was true that one (anyone, any age) cannot carry sealed closed alcohol containers (eg beer bottles from shopping) on a train. It is a straightforward and serious question.
Nothing prior to my post indicated that anyone knows what their age was apart from their being teenagers, although I gather that there were some theories on TikTok that they were on child tickets. I did not follow the TikTok link right through because I reached a point where it required me to join TikTok. Even so, the reports here seemed to be that the TikTok commenters did not know their age either - post #8 says that someone else (on TikTok) said 18+
I agree, nothing online (google or otherwise) suggests they have power to arrest.
Without knowing the full context it is difficult to make conclusive comments. However, if the on-train staff were of the opinion that the teenagers were already intoxicated, then bylaw 4(1) would apply:
No person shall enter or remain on the railway where such person is unfit to enter or remain on the railway as a result of being in a state of intoxication.
If that were the case, then bylaw 4(3) comes into play, which gives permission to an authorised person to 'prevent [them] entering or remaining on the railway' until they are '...satisfied that they have no intoxicating liquor in their possession...'. An authorised person is defined by bylaw 25(1) as 'a person acting in the course of their duties who: (a) is an employee or agent of an Operator, or (b) any other person authorised by an Operator'.
From this simple reading of the bylaws, it would seem that the on-train staff fit the criteria as authorised persons and that, by confiscating the alcohol, then they are satisfying bylaws 4(3). This is, of course, dependent on the teenagers concerned being intoxicated (and therefore covered by bylaw 4(1) - which is very much a value call, and probably needs more than a short video to come to a proper opinion.
No person shall enter or remain on the railway where such person is unfit to enter or remain on the railway as a result of being in a state of intoxication.
If that were the case, then bylaw 4(3) comes into play, which gives permission to an authorised person to 'prevent [them] entering or remaining on the railway' until they are '...satisfied that they have no intoxicating liquor in their possession...'. An authorised person is defined by bylaw 25(1) as 'a person acting in the course of their duties who: (a) is an employee or agent of an Operator, or (b) any other person authorised by an Operator'.
From this simple reading of the bylaws, it would seem that the on-train staff fit the criteria as authorised persons and that, by confiscating the alcohol, then they are satisfying bylaws 4(3). This is, of course, dependent on the teenagers concerned being intoxicated (and therefore covered by bylaw 4(1) - which is very much a value call, and probably needs more than a short video to come to a proper opinion.
That appears to permit authorised persons to require people to leave the railway, not necessarily take their alcohol.
It permits them to give them the choice of getting off the train or giving up their alcohol. There isn’t enough context in the video to know if this is the choice offered.
- Joined
- 21 Jan 2008
- Messages
- 5,215
We appear to be going round in circles now, so I think we will just draw this one to a close as we don't know the whole story anyway.
thanks all.
thanks all.
That absolutely isn't the case.
It was reported that they were in child tickets and that they "relinquished" the alcohol when challenged. As stated above, they can't have it both ways (people who try to have it both ways tend to be entitled to neither in my experience)
Edit: just to confirm, the staff pictured have specific powers delegated to them by the BTP under the Railway Safety Accreditation scheme to remove and dispose of alcohol from children
Last edited:
- Status