BTP would like your views

[BTP Marketing]

Good morning. British Transport Police is conducting a public consultation to help shape our policing plans for next year. If you get a moment (the survey takes less than 2 minutes to complete) we would love to hear your views. To take part simply visit:

www.btp.police.uk/survey.aspx

Many thanks

British Transport Police

 

[Albatross]

I've filled it in.

While I'm on though get your Manchester based officers to try a post 9pm train patrol, can't remember last time I saw an officer on board. Must be two years ago minimum.

Allow me to suggest the last Hadfield.

 

[Antman]

Also done it, I can't remember the last time I saw a uniformed BTP officer on a train, occasionally on the London underground

 

[Aictos]

Survey filled in

 

[OLJR]

The question about which three areas to focus on was quite tricky. So many of them should be areas for the police to emphasise.

In the end I said criminal damage, drug dealing and theft of personal property on the intuitive grounds that an environment without petty crimes may be an environment where serious crimes may be less likely to occur. But I have no evidence to back my intuition up.

When it came to what else could we do to make you feel safer I also felt that this was a difficult question. In the end I said that continuous improvement to general law and order may be more important than rail-specific actions.

 

[d1672]

Filled this in .

 

[WatcherZero]

I went for focus on vandalism/petty crime, trespass/damage to lineside equipment. The other more serious crimes I thought could be left to regular police while BTP should focus its resources directly on railway issues and precursor crimes that could lead to more serious crimes being perpetrated later. I.e. make the railways a hostile environment for criminals.

My local station actually has a BTP police station on the platform however you never see them except when they are manning ticket barriers (which they shouldnt be doing!) or driving off to deal with lineside trespass, the police station has darkened windows which doesnt help with the visibility issue. however at places like Man Pic they are quite a visible presence.

 

[Flamingo]

Done it. Greater visibility out of hours and dealing with ticket fraud (or even acknowledging it's a crime, not a "Civil Matter" as a colleague was told by them recently) would be good.

Mod's, would it be worth making this thread a sticky for a few weeks?

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Done.

Would love to see the BTP actually travel on trains at night - all too often I see them just on the platform getting everyone on, which only moves any potential trouble away from the station (where there is vast staff presence) to the train (where there is none).

 

[tsr]

All done. To be honest, I would have preferred to tick 5 or so options as priorities, but I can see why this wouldn't be terribly helpful from a statistical point of view! I have added a number of comments which I hope are of use.

 

[PermitToTravel]

Done it. Greater visibility out of hours and dealing with ticket fraud (or even acknowledging it's a crime, not a "Civil Matter" as a colleague was told by them recently) would be good.

Mod's, would it be worth making this thread a sticky for a few weeks?

Do Policing Service Agreements between the TOCs and BTP include enforcement of fare regulations? I was under the impression that BTP are only interested if name and address are not given

 

[DelayRepay]

I've done the survey... but like others have the police should really focus on all of these activities.

We had a similar survey from our local community police asking what their priorities should be. One of the options was "Reduce crime". I would have thought that was a given....

 

[Flamingo]

Do Policing Service Agreements between the TOCs and BTP include enforcement of fare regulations? I was under the impression that BTP are only interested if name and address are not given

According to some BTP officers ticketing issues are a civil matter, and nothing to do with them.

 

[Taunton]

I found it was difficult to pick only three among a large list, all of which I would think are their responsibilities. I select things against the person, such as late night presence and pickpocketing, but I don't want it to then be seen that I don't think cable theft or other items on the list are not worthy of their complete attention, and I'm aware that these simplistic box-ticking exercises can lead to such an emphasis.

It was disappointing there was no "dealing with drunks", which is not just a late night issue, or steaming, which continues to crop up, and I would have liked to have seen crowd control in there as well, because a PC in uniform always subdues things better than the best-meaning rail staff.

 

[Clip]

Done.

Would love to see the BTP actually travel on trains at night - all too often I see them just on the platform getting everyone on, which only moves any potential trouble away from the station (where there is vast staff presence) to the train (where there is none).

I agree with the sentiment of this but logistically its a nightmare

 

[infobleep]

There use to be metal detector checks at Guildford station and when this happened they would close the back entrance off. The following night whilst leaving the back entrance some young people dropped a bottle and said we can do that here because the police are not at the back.

I didn't report it as I wouldn't remember what they looked like and it wasn't as serious as someone being attacked.

To me it highlighted that if they wanted to do the job properly, they needed to do the metal detector checks at both ends.

They don't do them at all now. I don't know why they stopped. Perhaps it made no difference.

 

[Carlisle]

There use to be metal detector checks at Guildford station .

They also used to happen fairly regularly at certain football matches etc I attended but not seen them for a long time now, must be either cutbacks or different approach to dealing with certain potential crimes these days

 

[londiscape]

Done it, but disappointed to see that question 2 was limited to 3 selections. I would have chosen 6 given the chance.

 

[maniacmartin]

According to some BTP officers ticketing issues are a civil matter, and nothing to do with them.

Except when the TOC staff are in the wrong, when it is civil. :cry:

 

[BTP Marketing]

Thank you all so much for taking the time to tell us what matters to you; more than 1 in 10 of all visitors to the consultation have come from Rail Forums.
We're sorry you can't check more than three boxes on question two, but this consultation is about setting our priorities for the years ahead. While there are a lot of aspects to a safe railway, we've got to focus on what matters the most.
If you haven't yet joined the consultation, there's still time - tell us what matters to you.

 

[Class 170101]

In the end I said criminal damage, drug dealing and theft of personal property on the intuitive grounds that an environment without petty crimes may be an environment where serious crimes may be less likely to occur.

I have to agree with these sentiments however, having filled in the survey the next question could have been used to add additonal priorities (by writing them). However dealing with the low level crime and disorder I also hope will deter higher level offending.

 

[Sdisp2]

BTP are a rare site in the Arun valley area. Eyewitness reported a few times including assault on a conductor but have never heard or seen anything in relation to these reports. If assault on a conductor doesnt warrant a follow up then ticketless travellers etc are not ever likely to be a high priority.

 

[323235]

According to some BTP officers ticketing issues are a civil matter, and nothing to do with them.

well I would view fare evasion as a crime and without a doubt the most common on the rail network and the BTP should do their uttermost to support the industry to tackle it as such. People deliberately walking away without paying for something is not on, whether it's a rail fare or a packet of burgers at Aldi.

 

[Taunton]

well I would view fare evasion as a crime and without a doubt the most common on the rail network and the BTP should do their uttermost to support the industry.

There is quite enough evidence that there is now gross confusion over what fares are valid on which operator or which train, ticket purchase facilities being downsized, passengers being openly let into trains and then subject to penalties, and the like - and this all makes up the "easy meat" of penalty fares, pretending those thrown by this are criminally evading their fare, meanwhile the openly criminal about it seem to get let off by staff and management on the grounds that it would be too difficult/dangerous to enforce.

Those of us who are supportive of BTP can see why they don't want to get drawn into this mess.

 

[LateThanNever]

There is quite enough evidence that there is now gross confusion over what fares are valid on which operator or which train, ticket purchase facilities being downsized, passengers being openly let into trains and then subject to penalties, and the like - and this all makes up the "easy meat" of penalty fares, pretending those thrown by this are criminally evading their fare, meanwhile the openly criminal about it seem to get let off by staff and management on the grounds that it would be too difficult/dangerous to enforce.

Those of us who are supportive of BTP can see why they don't want to get drawn into this mess.

True. Although as IUI the BTP are paid for - at least in part by the train operators. So shouldn't he who pays the piper etc?

 

[PermitToTravel]

There is quite enough evidence that there is now gross confusion over what fares are valid on which operator or which train, ticket purchase facilities being downsized, passengers being openly let into trains and then subject to penalties, and the like - and this all makes up the "easy meat" of penalty fares, pretending those thrown by this are criminally evading their fare, meanwhile the openly criminal about it seem to get let off by staff and management on the grounds that it would be too difficult/dangerous to enforce.

Those of us who are supportive of BTP can see why they don't want to get drawn into this mess.

I think people had more in mind those travelling without any tickets / intent to pay, rather than wrong routes / operators / trains etc

 

[Flamingo]

There is quite enough evidence that there is now gross confusion over what fares are valid on which operator or which train, ticket purchase facilities being downsized, passengers being openly let into trains and then subject to penalties, and the like - and this all makes up the "easy meat" of penalty fares, pretending those thrown by this are criminally evading their fare, meanwhile the openly criminal about it seem to get let off by staff and management on the grounds that it would be too difficult/dangerous to enforce.

Those of us who are supportive of BTP can see why they don't want to get drawn into this mess.

The reason management tell us to avoid the openly criminal is because of the lack of back-up:

 

[Stigy]

There use to be metal detector checks at Guildford station and when this happened they would close the back entrance off. The following night whilst leaving the back entrance some young people dropped a bottle and said we can do that here because the police are not at the back.

I didn't report it as I wouldn't remember what they looked like and it wasn't as serious as someone being attacked.

To me it highlighted that if they wanted to do the job properly, they needed to do the metal detector checks at both ends.

They don't do them at all now. I don't know why they stopped. Perhaps it made no difference.

They're not done anymore as it was a pointless exercise in the majority of cases. They had no power/grounds to force people to go through them so what was the point, other than public reassurance? Anybody with a knife would just avoid them! Granted they flagged up other issues such as drug trafficking due to people's body language and shifty behaviour leading one thing to another.

 

[PermitToTravel]

They're not done anymore as it was a pointless exercise in the majority of cases. They had no power/grounds to force people to go through them so what was the point, other than public reassurance? Anybody with a knife would just avoid them! Granted they flagged up other issues such as drug trafficking due to people's body language and shifty behaviour leading one thing to another.

I'm not sure about the railway, but usually when these are deployed it's on the basis that passing through them is a condition of entry, and if you'd like not to be searched you can't enter the premises

 

[Stigy]

I'm not sure about the railway, but usually when these are deployed it's on the basis that passing through them is a condition of entry, and if you'd like not to be searched you can't enter the premises

From experience they're not positioned on the entrance/exit forcing you to pass through. At least not where I work. I guess smaller stations could differ. It's a persons right, even if not everybody likes it, not to walk through one, therefore you can't deny travel for this reason. Also, setting the sensor off isn't grounds for a search alone....another reason they're a tad pointless.