Is evading the lavatory entry fee seen as harshly as evading a fare?

[Metal_gee_man]

I think everyone would prefer free toilets but once they become free they can very quickly deteriorate in terms of cleanliness and availability (vandalised cubicles etc). Victoria isn't the nicest toilet now after going free.

St Pancras often has queues, sometimes even for men, while King's Cross is pretty clean and without queues - but costs 30p.

The St Pancras toilets under the SE Platforms are heavily abused, never cleaned properly due to not being able to be partially closed to do the job properly, the cubicles are regularly frequented by the local homeless as an overnight shelter whilst the rest of the toilet then stinks from the excessive body odour!

I for one don't appreciate paying for toilet use, but I must say when I had to pay for the toilets in Victoria because of the vast size of them they were always pretty well maintained, clean and bordering on a pleasant place! Sadly the abuse that free toilets get drags the standards down, and I guess the levels of staffing also drop due to Network Rail needing to fund it themselves

 

[Warwick]

Toilets at Paddington yesterday. 30p entrance fee. Toilet blocked - nice! One lot of wash basins out of use, the other not working properly. Not a good result for spending thirty pennies.

 

[Steve Harris]

I seem to remember that when I was a lad access to the urinals was free but entry to a cubicle was chargeable. As any need to use the latter involved much more physical contact with the facilities (and more attention to detail re cleaning) plus of course the need for the provision (hopefully!) of toilet paper, this distinction always seemed reasonable and sensible to me.

I remember that too. Sunny Hunny (Hunstanton) as it was known.