People boarding before everyone has alighted

[yorkie]

Doesn't that come under thr authorised person exemption.

Dispatchers are not authorising people to travel in 1st class. It's a common sense, pragmatic approach. Surely you can see this is common sense?

 

[matt_world2004]

Dispatchers are not authorising people to travel in 1st class. It's a common sense, pragmatic approach. Surely you can see this is common sense?

I didnt say they were authorising people to travel in first class merely board by the door.

 

[matt_world2004]

I guess you are not well travelled; people are encouraged to do this at times. If a common sense approach was not adopted, some people would miss the train from termini. "Sorry, you can't board this train unless you agree to upgrade"? I can't see it somehow!

I spend 7 hours a day 49 weeks of the year travelling in trains so probably spend more time in trains than you do tbh.

 

[xotGD]

So this morning at Leeds, everyone waited patiently for those getting off before starting to board....then one laggard needs to get off and fouls up the whole process.

 

[IanD]

So this morning at Leeds, everyone waited patiently for those getting off before starting to board....then one laggard needs to get off and fouls up the whole process.

According to the GODs rules, you would have all had to get off again and let the laggard alight.

 

[Bletchleyite]

AIUI it's "remaining" in 1st that is an issue. People who have walked through before arrival can be got on this one - nobody starts walking after the doors are open as you'd just walk up the outside, they all walk through and "remain" there in the way for a few minutes.

 

[BanburyBlue]

To be honest, my experience (currently most travelling is Cross Country in rush hour) is that mostly people do wait for people to get off before getting on. I've never been shouted out to get on, or abused for not. Not saying it doesn't happen, but perhaps not as common as some people think?

There are issues caused by people who seem to ignore the announcements of an impending station, wait for the train to stop, then start to tidy away their belongings, pack their bags, then start to amble towards the exit only to find a wave of 'joiners' heading their way.

I find more arguments, abuse and selfish behaviour caused once on the train with people trying to get to their booked seats than actually getting on and off the train.
- I do remember once getting on a very packed Voyager at the Coach F end (people squeezed into the vestibules, and standing all the way down the centre aisle of the carriage) for one woman to shout, "can you please move out of the way, I need to get to 1st class" - certainly a good way to endear yourselves to other passengers.
- And once there were two people once who spent what must have been 10 minutes arguing over the use of the priority seats! "I need to sit down I have knee problems", "well I have health issues too, so why don't you ask someone else to move", "really, so what are your 'health issues'" and so on.
- Plus the normal refuse to move out of a booked seat.

 

[Bletchleyite]

One thing worthy of note is that this isn't anywhere near as big a problem with doors at thirds as it is with doors at the ends, because someone being slow only blocks access to a few seats.

 

[mallard]

Isnt it a bylaw offence to board accommodation for which you do not have the correct ticket. Several people have been reported for exiting first class doors when they didnt have a first class ticket I dont see why entering should be any different.

The actual Byelaw says:

Except with permission from an authorised person, no person shall remain in any seat, berth or any part of a train where a notice indicates that it is reserved for a specified ticket holder or holders of tickets of a specific class, except the holder of a valid ticket entitling him to be in that particular place.

While I'm sure a lawyer could twist the definition, the word "remain" is key, transiting through a first class section (which as others have pointed out is often necessary on trains where first class is not at one end, or sometimes even then for access to short platforms) doesn't seem to be what the law is intended to prevent.

While I agree that all available doors should be used for boarding, in general the "polite" order of access should be (1) people disembarking, then (2) people boarding and finally (3) people moving through the train, especially from other carriages. On "Intercity" layout vehicles, the door between the saloon and vestibule is much more of a bottleneck than the external door, so people boarding the adjacent carriage and moving through do not speed up boarding in any appreciable way.

 

[matt_world2004]

The actual Byelaw says:



While I'm sure a lawyer could twist the definition, the word "remain" is key, transiting through a first class section (which as others have pointed out is often necessary on trains where first class is not at one end, or sometimes even then for access to short platforms) doesn't seem to be what the law is intended to prevent.

While I agree that all available doors should be used for boarding, in general the "polite" order of access should be (1) people disembarking, then (2) people boarding and finally (3) people moving through the train, especially from other carriages. On "Intercity" layout vehicles, the door between the saloon and vestibule is much more of a bottleneck than the external door, so people boarding the adjacent carriage and moving through do not speed up boarding in any appreciable way.

There have been people in disputes and prosecutions who have been pfd for exiting through the first class carriage at liverpool street

 

[mallard]

There have been people in disputes and prosecutions who have been pfd for exiting through the first class carriage at liverpool street

A PF is not a Byelaw conviction. I can certainly see some "enthusiastic" and poorly-trained RPO issuing a PF in such a circumstance, but (i am not a lawyer, if in this situation please consult someone qualified) I doubt it would hold up if it came to prosecution.

Besides, when an RPO sees someone exiting a first-class carriage, they could quite reasonably assume that the passenger has travelled in that carriage, even if they say they just walked through to exit more quickly.

 

[shredder1]

I stand at one side as people are getting off the train, however I`m 18 stone and if people are in my way while I`m getting off, I simply barge in to them and apologise at the same

 

[Ianno87]

- And once there were two people once who spent what must have been 10 minutes arguing over the use of the priority seats! "I need to sit down I have knee problems", "well I have health issues too, so why don't you ask someone else to move", "really, so what are your 'health issues'" and so on.

Personal highlight for me was asking a guy in his 40s/50s to move a bag off a seat in the Eurostar Paris departure lounge so my pregnant wife (who was feeling dizzy and nauseous at the time) could sit down (I explained she was pregnant and needed to sit down).

His response? "Well, I've got a wife too you know!" (who was busy shopping at the time). It took an older lady on the opposite side of the row to stand up and offer my wife a seat instead (for which we thanked her)...

 

[2HAP]

If there's a bag on the seat and the owner refuses to move it, I'm quite happy to land my 18 stone on it as I sit down. Said bag owner may have a different opinion though.

 

[al78]

If there's a bag on the seat and the owner refuses to move it, I'm quite happy to land my 18 stone on it as I sit down. Said bag owner may have a different opinion though.

I assume you can handle yourself if bag owner turns violent. If so, perhaps you should be employed as a guard, and challenge all the fare dodgers that are otherwise let off because it is too dangerous to try and make them pay up.

 

[Ianmel1969]

If i find my blocked I'd just say to them somebody's just thrown up in there. Usually does the trick and they move to another door!

 

[Bletchleyite]

If there's a bag on the seat and the owner refuses to move it, I'm quite happy to land my 18 stone on it as I sit down. Said bag owner may have a different opinion though.

I haven't done that, but I have said "Can you put it in the overhead?", if the response was in the negative "OK, I'll do it for you then" while motioning towards it, which is normally enough to make them do it.

 

[matt_world2004]

Personal highlight for me was asking a guy in his 40s/50s to move a bag off a seat in the Eurostar Paris departure lounge so my pregnant wife (who was feeling dizzy and nauseous at the time) could sit down (I explained she was pregnant and needed to sit down).

His response? "Well, I've got a wife too you know!" (who was busy shopping at the time). It took an older lady on the opposite side of the row to stand up and offer my wife a seat instead (for which we thanked her)...

I would have asked if her name was samsungnite and that she looked like a bit of a bag.

 

[jon0844]

This is the same argument as when two lanes go to one on the road. One group says you should all the road and ziplock at the end, the other says you should queue in the lane which remains open.

My view is if nobody is getting out* at a particular door even if it leads into first class, then if someone doesn't choose to use it, that is their choice and not my problem.

*obviously if someone is getting off then the same rules apply, wait until they have done so.

People may argue about two lanes going into one, but the correct answer is you use all road space and merge at the end, at a similar speed so no lane ever actually comes to a stop. It's not really open to debate, yet people on motoring forums do so every day. We are now having to put signs up for the idiots who see 'road works 3m' signs and then slow to form an orderly queue on a three or four lane motorway, with some deciding to even pull out and block off lanes as you get closer to the merging point. They then wonder why they queued for ages, and get all riled up over the 'queue jumpers' that could, and should, have comprised them too.

On a train, you'd expect people to use all available doors, with exceptions for those with reserved tickets, those travelling in a particular class, or having needs (like needing to be in the accessible area).

 

[Ediswan]

Getting *way* off topic....

People may argue about two lanes going into one, but the correct answer is you use all road space and merge at the end, at a similar speed so no lane ever actually comes to a stop. It's not really open to debate yet people on motoring forums do so every day. We are now having to put signs up for the idiots ....

Please put up those signs more often. It legitimises the desired behaviour.

 

[jon0844]

Getting *way* off topic....

Please put up those signs more often. It legitimises the desired behaviour.

They are becoming more common. The (official?) Highway Code twitter account also posts from time to time to tell people about this, keeping left unless overtaking and other basic stuff that some people - of ALL ages - seem totally unaware of, or believe they 'know better'.

 

[sefton]

On a train, you'd expect people to use all available doors,

Of course you would, but then you have some with these odd ideas that getting on and walking through first class is somehow cheating.

 

[jbqfc]

getting off at redhill this morning i had a woman try to barge on before any one got off i was first to get off so push her out of the way and got called a bad mannered (word on suitable for use on a public forum)

 

[Master29]

People seem to behave strange on the platform. You`ve only got to look at most of the platform being empty and everyone bunched into a few feet squared to realise that. As to people pushing onto trains before everyone has alighted, it`s not always easy when sometimes you can`t see anyone else getting on only to realise someone is halfway down the coach waiting to get off.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Getting *way* off topic....


Please put up those signs more often. It legitimises the desired behaviour.

Agreed. Merge in turn signs are a *lot* of help. As would Police charging people who attempt to block lanes to enforce queueing with dangerous driving and making a big thing of it.

 

[SquireBev]

Agreed. Merge in turn signs are a *lot* of help. As would Police charging people who attempt to block lanes to enforce queueing with dangerous driving and making a big thing of it.

I've only just realised that "Merge in turn" doesn't mean "Merge as the road curves"

This is why I don't drive.

 

[al78]

People may argue about two lanes going into one, but the correct answer is you use all road space and merge at the end, at a similar speed so no lane ever actually comes to a stop. It's not really open to debate, yet people on motoring forums do so every day. We are now having to put signs up for the idiots who see 'road works 3m' signs and then slow to form an orderly queue on a three or four lane motorway, with some deciding to even pull out and block off lanes as you get closer to the merging point. They then wonder why they queued for ages, and get all riled up over the 'queue jumpers' that could, and should, have comprised them too.

On a train, you'd expect people to use all available doors, with exceptions for those with reserved tickets, those travelling in a particular class, or having needs (like needing to be in the accessible area).

This is correct, zip merging is the most efficient way to get everyone through a section of dual carriageway with a lane closure, but the key thing is it only works if EVERYONE cooperates. What you have in reality is that someone tries to use the closed lane up to the point where it closes, everyone else thinks they are pushing in, and refuse to let them in. Eventually someone lets them in but the smooth zip merging is destroyed, and you are back to the jerky inefficient movement which is detrimental to everyone. A smooth zip merging requires everyone in the open lane to gradually allow a gap to develop as they approach the closure, then drivers from each lane pass through in turn, but people don't do this, and any one driver cannot control the behaviour of others. Unfortunately this is what happens when you have human beings which prioritise feeling and emotion over logic and reason where doing so is inappropriate.

 

[squizzler]

They are becoming more common. The (official?) Highway Code twitter account also posts from time to time to tell people about this, keeping left unless overtaking and other basic stuff that some people - of ALL ages - seem totally unaware of, or believe they 'know better'.

One solution off the roads that might work in this instance is the railway equivalent of the stickers you see on the rear of busses that says "Let busses pull out - Highway code rule (#X)". A prominent sticker near the door open button saying "Let passengers off the train before you board - Railway Byelaw (#Y)" might encourage the proper behaviour.

 

[IanD]

One solution off the roads that might work in this instance is the railway equivalent of the stickers you see on the rear of busses that says "Let busses pull out - Highway code rule (#X)". A prominent sticker near the door open button saying "Let passengers off the train before you board - Railway Byelaw (#Y)" might encourage the proper behaviour.

Let's have one on windscreens of tractors and jcbs "Do not hold up a long queue of traffic, especially if you are driving a large or slow-moving vehicle. Check your mirrors frequently, and if necessary, pull in where it is safe and let traffic pass - Highway Code Rule (#169)"

 

[fairysdad]

I've only just realised that "Merge in turn" doesn't mean "Merge as the road curves"

This is why I don't drive.

I do drive and have only just realised that!