Smoking bylaw question

[Intermodal]

ATOC would very much like for the whole railway network to be non-smoking for publicity purposes but unfortunately as tony_mac states this is not the case. When I was on Inverness station I was told by a member of the BTP I was free to smoke at the outer ends of the platforms as long as I didn't wander underneath the station shelter.

I would never smoke under an enclosed or substantially enclosed area or next to any non-smoking sign on the railways as I know it makes me liable for prosecution - but if it is allowed then what is the problem in doing it as long as I'm not standing right next to a group of people who don't want it? If I am in a tight group of people I either won't smoke because of the risk of annoying/burning people or I will ask them first.

As an interesting point is that I know some TOCs play announcements that state that smoking is prohibited in all areas around their stations and not to smoke until you are off the station premises - but would this stand up in court if there was no signs? I don't think it would as what the byelaw says is clear, it has to be near a sign that prohibits it and an announcement is not a sign.

 

[eMeS]

... Also smoking ... is illegal on all railway property.

So why did a railway employee in HiVis outfit openly smoke at the end of the platform beyond the end-of-platform fence, and not on the platform side of the same fence?
(The station was Milton Keynes Central, if that's relevant and it was a Sunday morning.)

 

[Intermodal]

The amount of misinformation in this thread really isn't very good. I've made my point already but there simply is no law that states that smoking is illegal on all UK railway stations - it just isn't.

 

[bnm]

When the smoking ban was introduced, the railways decided that is would ban smoking on every railway station regardless of enclosed or not and the by-laws were amended to reflect this

The byelaws merely state 'near which there is a notice indicating that smoking is not allowed.' And no amendments have been made to them in relation to smoking since the Smoke-free Regulations Act came into force.

There is not a general ban. No sign, in unenclosed or substantially unenclosed area then no offence is committed if you light up.

Unless you can point me to legislation indicating this general ban on every railway station.

 

[Greeny]

Very interesting thread. I don’t know if there is a general ban on smoking or not, so I don’t smoke on Stations - I smoke outside Station main entrances, but there is always the possibility that some jobsworth or nutter looking for attention or an excuse to complain will blow that up into something major. Unfortunately, there are plenty of such creatures to be found. Don’t get me wrong, I have no problem with people who genuinely object to smoking, my problem is with individuals who use other people smoking as an excuse for feigned outrage and high handed behaviour.

G

 

[island]

Most platforms are unenclosed, and it is illegal to smoke on them, sign or not (apart from the fact it is an offense in itself NOT to display a sign anyway.

This is entirely incorrect.

 

[ReverendFozz]

I dont know much about the law, but if there is a sign saying no smoking then I accept that as not being allowed to smoke even if it is unenclosed, take my local station, Seaham on the Durham Coast, I never smoke on the platform, I will have a crafty one beforehand.

Only time I have smoked on a platform was at Leeds a few years ago, got off one train, heading to another platform, some guy ran toward the train I got off, knocked me flat on my face, got a bloody nose and nearly dislocated my shoulder, once I got up, cleaned my face and had my mate twist my arm and shoulder, I asked a member of staff where I could go for a fag, and he said to walk down to the part of the platform that is not under the roof, and providing nobody was there then I could spark up there, just told me to go and sort myself out as I was shook up over what happened.

I do sort of feel for the OP, I think a slap on the wrist and a firm telling off is appropriate in this instance

 

[Andrew Nelson]

This is entirely incorrect.

You may want to look at this then.

http://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/Content.aspx?id=1099

And this:

http://www.rgsonline.co.uk/Other_Organisations/ATOC/ATOC Good Practice Guides/ATOCGPG015 Iss 1.pdf

Particularly, this bit:

ATOC Good Practice Guide – Control of Smoking

"thus at most stations the smoking ban has been extended to include platforms and station footbridges entirely, even where these are uncovered. ..."
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
And this:

http://www.london-se1.co.uk/news/view/3230

 

[Butts]

Just a minor point = Scottish Law is different -in Scotland you can smoke in a non enclosed area on railway property.

I was in Stirling Station the other day and posters advertise the fact that smokers are requested not to smoke under the canopied areas but are free to do so in the "open areas". These signs are springing up all over Scotland thankfully.

This sensible compromise should be effected in all Railway Stations where practicable.

I often have a smoke in the numerous "open air" portions of Birmingham International Station and have often been joined by employees.

 

[tony_mac]

You may want to look at this then.
....

and where does any of that say they can ban it without putting up signs?

Yes, ATOC said they would do that (in England and Wales), but actually Merseyrail never agreed to it, and it still requires signs to be erected - which is mentioned in the document you linked to.

The legislation requires that legally compliant signing must be affixed at
the entrance all areas for which it prescribes a smoking ban and be clearly
visible.

Technically, signage in areas where smoking is been banned by railway
byelaws rather than the legislation itself should exhibit a different sign
(which makes this differentiation clear).

 

[Andrew Nelson]

and where does any of that say they can ban it without putting up signs?

Yes, ATOC said they would do that (in England and Wales), but actually Merseyrail never agreed to it, and it still requires signs to be erected - which is mentioned in the document you linked to.

I Said it was an offence NOT to display as sign;

http://collections.europarchive.org...efreeengland.co.uk/what-do-i-do/business.html

http://www.wandsworth.gov.uk/info/1086/smoking_ban_enforcement/437/smoke-free_wandsworth/4

So, infact, I was correct.

Open platforms are smoke free, and a sign is manditory.

QED.

 

[tony_mac]

It is an offence not to display a sign for indoor / covered areas.

What law do you think means that smoking is banned on uncovered platforms?

(Here's a clue, ATOC think it is Railway byelaws .....)

 

[bnm]

You may want to look at this then.

http://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/Content.aspx?id=1099

And this:

http://www.rgsonline.co.uk/Other_Organisations/ATOC/ATOC Good Practice Guides/ATOCGPG015 Iss 1.pdf

Particularly, this bit:

ATOC Good Practice Guide – Control of Smoking

"thus at most stations the smoking ban has been extended to include platforms and station footbridges entirely, even where these are uncovered. ..."


http://www.london-se1.co.uk/news/view/3230

knowlroad, none of those quoted links change anything that has been said before on this thread regarding the legislation.

If the area is unenclosed or substantially unenclosed and there is no 'No Smoking' sign in the vicinity, then someone lighting up does not commit an offence.

The FGW link you posted says this, "Signage is in place to clearly indicate where smoking is prohibited...." That's fine and confirms what is written in the byelaws. But it remains the case that if there is no signage and you are not in an enclosed or substantially enclosed place then you don't commit an offence by smoking just because you happen to be on railway property. Many station car parks are on railway property, many approach roads to stations are on railway property, some platforms do not have signs, particularly at unmanned rural stations. In all those cases it is allowable to smoke on railway property.

The Railway Group Standards document you linked to says nothing new either. In fact it just reinforces what I and others have already been saying:

The legislation bans smoking in publicly accessible enclosed and partially
enclosed premises. This affects trains, stations and work places.
Extending this ban to open areas - such as platforms and station
footbridges - falls within the scope of existing byelaws which state (in
section 3 - Smoking) :
‘No person shall smoke or carry a lighted pipe, cigar, cigarette, match,
lighter or other lighted item on any part of the railway on or near which
there is a notice indicating that smoking is not allowed. ‘

And finally as for the story from 'London se1' you linked to, it is made clear in the article that those issued with fixed penalty notices were smoking in an enclosed space.

 

[Andrew Nelson]

knowlroad, none of those quoted links change anything that has been said before on this thread regarding the legislation.

If the area is unenclosed or substantially unenclosed and there is no 'No Smoking' sign in the vicinity, then someone lighting up does not commit an offence.

The FGW link you posted says this, "Signage is in place to clearly indicate where smoking is prohibited...." That's fine and confirms what is written in the byelaws. But it remains the case that if there is no signage and you are not in an enclosed or substantially enclosed place then you don't commit an offence by smoking just because you happen to be on railway property. Many station car parks are on railway property, many approach roads to stations are on railway property, some platforms do not have signs, particularly at unmanned rural stations. In all those cases it is allowable to smoke on railway property.

The Railway Group Standards document you linked to says nothing new either. In fact it just reinforces what I and others have already been saying:



And finally as for the story from 'London se1' you linked to, it is made clear in the article that those issued with fixed penalty notices were smoking in an enclosed space.

A station forecort is NOT an enclosed space.

You are obviously under the missaprehension that a sign makes the law, it does not. A statute makes the law.

Would it be legal to mug sombody on the street, because there was no sign forbiding it?

 

[tony_mac]

You are obviously under the missaprehension that a sign makes the law, it does not. A statute makes the law.

Have you actually tried to read the byelaw?
It has been quoted in this thread.

 

[Mutant Lemming]

So let's say you are at Urmston having a smoke in the outdoor bit of the pub that is on the platform but behind the picket fence and your smoke drifts over to the strictly non smoking open to the elements part of the platform ..or even over passengers alighting from a train that has just pulled in. Would you be guilty of not keeping your errant smoke under control ?

 

[bnm]

A station forecort is NOT an enclosed space.

From the article you linked to:

"The operation came after an exhausting re-education programme informing the public about not smoking on the forecourt and bus station area," says PC Marshall

"Despite putting up extra posters warning that the canopy area on the forecourt was considered an enclosed space and on the spot fines would be imposed, smokers continued to ignore the warnings.

You are obviously under the missaprehension that a sign makes the law, it does not. A statute makes the law.

At the risk of it being ignored again, let me quote the Railway Byelaw once more:

"No person shall smoke or carry a lighted pipe, cigar, cigarette, match, lighter or other lighted item on any part of the railway on or near which there is a notice indicating that smoking is not allowed."

Would it be legal to mug sombody on the street, because there was no sign forbiding it?

Don't be silly. Not in any way a similar scenario.

 

[Andrew Nelson]

From the article you linked to:



At the risk of it being ignored again, let me quote the Railway Byelaw once more:

"No person shall smoke or carry a lighted pipe, cigar, cigarette, match, lighter or other lighted item on any part of the railway on or near which there is a notice indicating that smoking is not allowed."



Don't be silly. Not in any way a similar scenario.

Nevermind, if you had one to mind.

A sign makes no difference. IT IS AN OFFENCE NOT TO DISPLAY A SIGN.

 

[tony_mac]

Nevermind, if you had one to mind.

A sign makes no difference. IT IS AN OFFENCE NOT TO DISPLAY A SIGN.

You are being ridiculous.

Read the byelaws, they have been quoted often enough.

 

[Greenback]

Knowlroad, it is no disgrace to admit you made a mistake. You have posted incorrect information and been challenged on it. Quite rightly.

Now, please, can it be laid to rest?!

 

[Butts]

Knowlroad, it is no disgrace to admit you made a mistake. You have posted incorrect information and been challenged on it. Quite rightly.

Now, please, can it be laid to rest?!

Seconded... all this tension I'm off for a smoke

 

[Intermodal]

All the literature you have posted, knowlroad, states that signs must be exhibited at the entrance to a smoke-free premises. I don't know if you've read the Health Act 2006, but an open platform is not a smoke free premises and the railway byelaws do not define it as such either.

 

[bnm]

Seconded... all this tension I'm off for a smoke

I would be too if I hadn't recently given up. So a coffee it is for me.

But should I relapse then I reserve the right to have a cigarette on the approach road to Bristol Temple Meads (railway property), by the taxi rank at Bristol Parkway (railway property), on the footpath to my local unmanned station (railway property) and anywhere else on railway property that is not enclosed, substantially enclosed or is not near a 'No Smoking' sign.

 

[island]

As I've posted at length before...

There are two sets of laws restricting smoking at railway stations. The Health Act prohibits smoking in enclosed areas, and requires that signs are displayed at enclosed areas stating the prohibition. However, if a sign isn't displayed, smoking is still illegal in an enclosed area.

The railway bye-laws prohibit smoking on the railway where a no-smoking sign is displayed. This is a rather special case as laws go — the presence of the sign is what brings the prohibition into effect.

So if you are in an unenclosed area and there are no no-smoking signs (e.g. Fishguard Harbour station), you are welcome to smoke.

The two laws may overlap, but it is only by the most tortured misreading of the laws that one can conclude that the Health Act requires signage to be displayed in non-enclosed areas of the railway, which would then prohibit smoking in those non-enclosed areas.

 

[table38]

"Interestingly" I am of the opinion that the smoking shelter at Manchester Piccadilly just outside the main car-park door adjacent to Platform 1 does not comply with the legislation...

Curses! A swift investigation this evening reveals it's a free-standing shelter with no back wall, but positioned about 2" from another wall, so I guess that compiles.

Opportinity for another rant denied to me

 

[Greenback]

Opportinity for another rant denied to me

Don't worry, I'm sure another opportunity will be along shortly!

 

[STEVIEBOY1]

After reading these comments again, am I correct, could you really be fined up GBP 1000.00 and or get com service for smoking where you should not, is jail ever an option. ? (I Thought I was hard done by when I got caught years ago in school, see comment 21 above.!)

 

[MKB]

The enforcement officer guy told me when I recieve the letter, to write down my evening exactly as I told him, and that he'd written on his form that he would verify my story (he gave me his badge number, and also pointed out that no one would make up a story like that in order to get away with smoking, and that I did indeed look like I'd had a crappy evening). To his credit, he was very polite and friendly about it.

Speaking as someone who strongly supports the smoking ban and would like to see it extended, I nevertheless think it's a sad indictment of our times that the "enforcement officer" did all of the above.

The old-fashioned approach of using one's common sense to decide (where it's appropriate) to mete out a stern ticking off rather than instigating a quasi-judicial process seems to have been lost these days.

The application of rules, regulations and byelaws and laws as black-and-white issues with no scope for mitigation, leniency or common sense is partly to blame for the contempt in which "the authorities" are commonly held in the present day.

 

[es373]

*takes a long drag on a cig a blows it in MKB's face*

Ban that!

Lol

 

[Butts]

With regard to the "no smoking signage" and not smoking with in it's immediate proximity....

Does the law stipulate how far away from the signage you could smoke and not commit an offence....

ie If you are 10 yards away would that be ok ?