Trespassers

[Darandio]

If anybody cares to read what I write, I do not condone dangerous or criminal activity on the railway. However, I don't think that responsible people behaving responsibly are a danger. I wouldn't advocate walking on the ECML, but on minor lines, where trains are slow and audible (and crucially where the line is not electrified... doh!), it seems harmless enough to me.

It's going back a few days, but I notice you seemed to withdraw from replying once challenged. Maybe you are on holiday or god forbid, you followed your "harmless" actions and aren't with us any more.

Your posts do worry me, especially the "slow and audible" part. Try telling that to the pensioner who ended up with the 97/3 buffer (a 37/97 travelling at 27mph is still slow and audible, right?) through the front window. Granted, there was a fault in why it happened, but it is relevant and whether on foot, or within the confines of a vehicle, the same logic applies.

Have a piece of free advice. Dig a hole for yourself on this forum with your "harmless" advice, you live to fight another day. Follow your "harmless" advice and the hole you dig is there forever, surrounded by flowers.

 

[O L Leigh]

As a driver I have a limited time in which to make a judgement. If you're close to the line you'll get an earful of horn. Too close and I shall also be calling you in as a near miss.

From the cab of my train I cannot make a judgement as to whether or not you have a decent amount of commonsense, and nor will I have any idea that someone has either given you the green light to be somewhere you shouldn't or at the very least turned a blind eye to what you're doing. Consequently I'm going to treat you as a trespasser and report you as such. It really doesn't matter what defence you offer because it will come down to just one single question. Were you standing somewhere you shouldn't have been?

O L Leigh

 

[Greenback]

As a driver I have a limited time in which to make a judgement. If you're close to the line you'll get an earful of horn. Too close and I shall also be calling you in as a near miss.

From the cab of my train I cannot make a judgement as to whether or not you have a decent amount of commonsense, and nor will I have any idea that someone has either given you the green light to be somewhere you shouldn't or at the very least turned a blind eye to what you're doing. Consequently I'm going to treat you as a trespasser and report you as such. It really doesn't matter what defence you offer because it will come down to just one single question. Were you standing somewhere you shouldn't have been?

O L Leigh

A very sensible post there as usual O L Leigh.

I must admit, when I was younger, and to my eternal shame, I did occasionally walk along a railway line for a short distance as it was a quicker route between the pub and a sports club. At the time, I thought that I would b perfectly safe as there weren't many trains, they travelled slowly, I knew the timetable and I thought I'd have plenty of tiem to get out fo the way.

Having since been employed on the railway and having read a lot of RAIB reports of accidents at foot crossings, I realise how foolish I was. When I think of the consequences of an accident, not just fr myself, but for my fmaily friedns, the train crew and emergency services, I am appalled by the way I behaved, and for my complete arrogance. I would ask anyone wh goes on to any line when they don't have permission, to think about the potential consequences on others, rather than their own selfish desires to get to the pub quicker (me!), get a better photo, or whatever. Just don't do it, it's not worth it!

 

[Chester025]

So, to put the cat amongst the pigeons, hows about this scene at Bingen on the delightfully scenic Rhine Valley in Germany.


Unsafe? by Chester025, on Flickr

Yes that's right, an area of railway not protected by high fencing or some such 'arse covering' measures to prevent trespassing. This wasn't the only place this spectacale was seen. There are miles and miles (or should that be kilometres?) of unprotected track all over the place. What funny ideas these Germans have...

 

[nedchester]

So, to put the cat amongst the pigeons, hows about this scene at Bingen on the delightfully scenic Rhine Valley in Germany.


Unsafe? by Chester025, on Flickr

Yes that's right, on area of railway not protected by high fencing or some such 'arse covering' measures to prevent trespassing. This wasn't the only place this was seen. There are miles and miles (or should that be Kilometres?) of unprotected track seen all over the place. What funny ideas these Germans have...

Most odd. How can DB management sleep at night for the fear that someone might so easily walked accidentally onto their running lines........

 

[ainsworth74]

You should also see the statistics for line side deaths of non-railway workers in those countries which don't fence of their railways, you will find they are a hell of a lot higher overseas than here. As I recall Europe wide the UK had the lowest level of any country in Europe.

Personally I'm quite happy to have a very low number of people killed on the railway, it's better for the drivers and staff involved, it's better for the families of those that are killed and it's better for the passengers that face disruption during the clean up.

 

[GB]

Why has this thread been dragged up again?:roll:

The fact remains in THIS country the railways are required to be suitably seperated from the public. No amount of moaning is going to change that and if your so concerned about wanting to wonder around active railways either stick to those countries that permit it (to a certain degree) or get a job on our own railways.

I dare say that the general populations of places such as Germany and Switzerland are alot more respectful to this sort of thing than the majority of our people and as such can be treated with a little more trust.

Edit: As for the picture, while the fencing is of a different design and standard to here it is still barried in someway is it not?

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Anyway, two reasons why we and the continent differ like this:
1) We have a much lower rail-related death rate;
2) This country is full of idiots, either someone would mess around on it, or someone would have an accident because of it being like that and try to blame it on the railways.

 

[nedchester]

Why has this thread been dragged up again?:roll:

The fact remains in THIS country the railways are required to be suitably seperated from the public. No amount of moaning is going to change that and if your so concerned about wanting to wonder around active railways either stick to those countries that permit it (to a certain degree) or get a job on our own railways.

I dare say that the general populations of places such as Germany and Switzerland are alot more respectful to this sort of thing than the majority of our people and as such can be treated with a little more trust.

Edit: As for the picture, while the fencing is of a different design and standard to here it is still barried in someway is it not?

Why not bring it up again.

Chester025 demonstrates that there are other ways of doing things.

Just because we are over protective in the UK doesn't make it the only way (or even correct way) of doing things.

You may well be correct in the Swiss/Germans being more respectful and trustworthy but I do sometimes wonder as to the reason for this possibly mollycoddling people rather than allowing a little more personal responsibility. Of course many problems come from no win no fee solicitors (scum) who allow people to think they can sue for all sorts of things.

 

[starrymarkb]

I think you'll find that when the laws regarding the railway in the UK were first drawn up it was ruled that the railway company had to fence the line off where elsewhere it is the landowners responsibility to fence if required to prevent his animals etc wondering onto the line

 

[YorkshireBear]

if it was like that in chapeltown people would be killed regualrly, i see them play chicken at chapeltown station regularly and they have parties in tankersley tunnel

 

[MidnightFlyer]

That's a favourite around here too: inbetween Darwen/Cherry Tree-Blackburn-Colne/Clitheroe, this is a regular passtime at night: see who can do the most idiotic thing on a railway line. you go to the local station in the morning and someone will have trashed the shelter/paths/lamposts. Sad really.

 

[YorkshireBear]

That's a favourite around here too: inbetween Darwen/Cherry Tree-Blackburn-Colne/Clitheroe, this is a regular passtime at night: see who can do the most idiotic thing on a railway line. you go to the local station in the morning and someone will have trashed the shelter/paths/lamposts. Sad really.

it certainly is, one of them got arrested for putting a brick through train, wasnt a bad lad, just got drunk and therefore put no fight up to peer pressure. Real shame.
3rd rail has its uses

 

[networkrail1]

Hi Everyone.

Right then i have just finished reading all the posts on here so now its time to look at trespass from a totally new and different angle.

For starters lets totally clear our minds, forget risk ,forget a train traveling at 70-125mph, forget OLE and third rail ,forget point motors and switch blades in fact forget all the dangers of the railway.

Right have you done that is your mind clear OK here we go

Definition of trespass= Unlawful entry onto another's property , even if no harm is done to the property. A person who has a right to come onto the land may become a trespasser by committing wrongful acts after entry. For example, a mail carrier has a privilege to walk up the sidewalk at a private home but is not entitled to go through the front door. A person who enters property with permission but stays after he has been told to leave also commits a trespass. Moreover, an intruder cannot defend himself in a trespass action by showing that the plaintiff did not have a completely valid legal right to the property. The reason for all of these rules is that the action of trespass exists to prevent breaches of the peace by protecting the quiet possession of real property.

In the UK Network Rail own and operate the UK rail infrastructure, so the railways are PRIVATE land belonging to Network Rail, as said above if someone enters onto railway land without approval from the person who owns the land (namely Network Rail in this case) they are breaking the law, because they are on PRIVATE property.

The railways are not public.

Here is a example:-

You are a homeowner, your driveway is a mile long with a big gate at the end, this is your PRIVATE land.

One day 3 people climb over your, gate walk down your PRIVATE drive to your lovely house, walk into your house, walk around your house, into your bedroom and your children's rooms (not touching anything just looking), they then leave your house ,walk around your garden and then back down your drive and leave by climbing back over your gate.

HOW WOULD YOU FEEL?

These 3 people have broken onto your land walked around your house invaded your privacy and mostly TRESPASSED.

It is exactly the same when someone goes onto the railway, it is plain and simply PRIVATE land it is not public, so the public have no right to be there unless authorised by the land owner.

So risk, points, OLE, and trains mean nothing the main fact is you are on PRIVATE land that you have no right to be on and you should not be on it.

TRESPASS IS A CRIME.


I hope looking at trespass from this new angle will give some of you a better idea into trespass.

All the best.

Simon (Network Rail)

 

[LE Greys]

Hi Everyone.

Right then i have just finished reading all the posts on here so now its time to look at trespass from a totally new and different angle.

For starters lets totally clear our minds, forget risk ,forget a train traveling at 70-125mph, forget OLE and third rail ,forget point motors and switch blades in fact forget all the dangers of the railway.

Right have you done that is your mind clear OK here we go

Definition of trespass= Unlawful entry onto another's property , even if no harm is done to the property. A person who has a right to come onto the land may become a trespasser by committing wrongful acts after entry. For example, a mail carrier has a privilege to walk up the sidewalk at a private home but is not entitled to go through the front door. A person who enters property with permission but stays after he has been told to leave also commits a trespass. Moreover, an intruder cannot defend himself in a trespass action by showing that the plaintiff did not have a completely valid legal right to the property. The reason for all of these rules is that the action of trespass exists to prevent breaches of the peace by protecting the quiet possession of real property.

In the UK Network Rail own and operate the UK rail infrastructure, so the railways are PRIVATE land belonging to Network Rail, as said above if someone enters onto railway land without approval from the person who owns the land (namely Network Rail in this case) they are breaking the law, because they are on PRIVATE property.

The railways are not public.

Here is a example:-

You are a homeowner, your driveway is a mile long with a big gate at the end, this is your PRIVATE land.

One day 3 people climb over your, gate walk down your PRIVATE drive to your lovely house, walk into your house, walk around your house, into your bedroom and your children's rooms (not touching anything just looking), they then leave your house ,walk around your garden and then back down your drive and leave by climbing back over your gate.

HOW WOULD YOU FEEL?

These 3 people have broken onto your land walked around your house invaded your privacy and mostly TRESPASSED.

It is exactly the same when someone goes onto the railway, it is plain and simply PRIVATE land it is not public, so the public have no right to be there unless authorised by the land owner.

So risk, points, OLE, and trains mean nothing the main fact is you are on PRIVATE land that you have no right to be on and you should not be on it.

TRESPASS IS A CRIME.


I hope looking at trespass from this new angle will give some of you a better idea into trespass.

All the best.

Simon (Network Rail)

With respect, the railways are the private property of a company, not of an individual. Even George Hudson did not own his own railways, he had shareholders. It's hard to draw that kind of distinction. Of course, nobody should do this, and I wouldn't like people trespassing on the premises of my company, but it isn't my home and I wouldn't feel quite the same way as if it was.

As for the mansion, I would feel just the same as anyone who lives on a National Trust property, like a fish in a tank. Unfortunately, they have to live with it, otherwise they would have nowhere to live at all. I've known people who have to live like that, and they don't like it at all.

 

[Wyvern]

TRESPASS IS A CRIME.

Sorry to be picky but Trespass is from the Law of Tort. Thus I dont think it is actually a crime. That is, you cant prosecute people for trespass - a plaintiff has to sue.

 

[eos]

The law of trespass , in particular as it applies to Level Crossings, but applicable to any trespass can be found here :-
http://www.lawcom.gov.uk/docs/cp194_web(1).pdf

and I quote from page 180 in that document:-

The trespass offences
13.15 There are at least three trespass offences which apply throughout Great Britain. The principal one is that contained in section 55 of the British Transport Commission Act 1949. This section makes it an offence to trespass upon a railway where a notice at the nearest station warns against trespass. We understand that such a notice is placed at every station. The penalty for this offence is a fine up to £1,000 (level 3 on the standard scale).11 The other offences – under section 16 of the Railway Regulation Act 1840 and section 23 of the Regulation of the Railways Act 1868 – depend on specific warnings or requests being given to the trespasser before the offence can be made out. We focus on the section 55 offence as we understand from the British Transport Police that this is the offence which is most frequently charged in cases of suspected trespass on the railways. In England and Wales, a fixed penalty may be imposed for an offence under section 55 of the 1949 Act, although we have no evidence that fixed penalties are imposed in practice.12
13.16 The offence works by turning the civil wrong of trespass into a criminal offence. First, the offender must be trespassing. Trespass is the act of unauthorised and unjustifiable entry upon land in the possession of another.13 The notion of trespass is apt to encompass misuse at a private level crossing. Use of the crossing beyond that authorised by the right of way will be civil trespass. A person who is not authorised to use the crossing will always be a civil trespasser on the railway’s land if he or she uses the crossing. If an authorised person uses the crossing in a way or at a time not authorised by the right of way, that too will be civil trespass. This will include using the crossing at a time when it is cleared for a train to pass.
13.17 The situation is different at a public level crossing. The public in general has a continuing right to use a highway/road. The question is not without some difficulty. Our view is that a person who uses a public highway/road in defiance of a sign prohibiting such use (such as a red traffic light on an ordinary road) does not necessarily become a trespasser, although they may be liable to a separate penalty for failing to comply with the sign. In Harrison v Duke of Rutland,14 the Court of Appeal found that a demonstrator was a trespasser when using his right of way solely for the purpose of interfering with the landowner’s interests. However, in DPP v Jones (Margaret), the House of Lords held on the facts that demonstrators at Stonehenge had not committed the offence of holding a ..... continued.

 

[Stigy]

Sorry to be picky but Trespass is from the Law of Tort. Thus I dont think it is actually a crime. That is, you cant prosecute people for trespass - a plaintiff has to sue.

Trespass on the Railway or at Airfields is a crime. Trespass anywhere else is a civil matter and needs to be dealt with by warrant from the courts (Ie; Traveller encampments). To be able to arrest a suspect anywhere other than a railway or airfield for trespass, another offence would have to occur, such as theft (the offence then becomes buglary) or a breach of the peace. Bear in mind as far as Sec. 55 Trespass goes (railway) we're talking about lineside, and not somebody at a station who shouldn't be there, that's what byelaws are for. I would imagine both Railway Trespass and Airfield trespass have one major factor in common...DANGER!

 

[TDK]

After watching cideos of what can only be described as retards playing on lines this morning (i dont know why). Can we not do more there is videos on youtube showing it happen can we not charge them with this proof? I think if we started handing out £1000 fines or prison or cummunity serrvice on a regular basis people might stop.... ??? is there no more active way of prosecuting as a deterent

Would this also include the hunderds of enthusiasts trespassing, what is good for the goose comes to mind.

 

[Stigy]

Would this also include the hunderds of enthusiasts trespassing, what is good for the goose comes to mind.

It should do! It doesn't matter how reckless it is, or how alert one thinks they are, it's just as dangerous, and I'd imagine, unnerving for a train driver!

People can be prosecuted for it, but simply from viewing a YouTube video, it's unlikely BTP would either be bothered, or able to identify anybody. The way I see it, peple who blatantly play chicken with trains, need arresting or reporting for summons, the same with 'enthusiasts' who are clearly lineside, and not just off a platform ramp.

Those who chance their arm running accross a Level Crossing after the red lights have began to flash, are the ones suitable for a £50 ticket in my opinion.

 

[Wyvern]

Trespass on the Railway or at Airfields is a crime.

The person I was answering was writing about trespass in general. Railway trespass is covered by specific byelaws under delegated authority, and strictly is called "route crime". Similarly with trespass on an airfield or a military base.

 

[starrymarkb]

[youtube]ko4wYN-1SVU[/youtube]

I just remembered this video. And who was it saying the Germans had common sense?

 

[Stigy]

The person I was answering was writing about trespass in general. Railway trespass is covered by specific byelaws under delegated authority, and strictly is called "route crime". Similarly with trespass on an airfield or a military base.

Not being petty here, and I'm sure you were using byelaw only to diferentiate between a railway offence and a civil one, but Trespass on the Railway isn't covered by the Railway Byelaws, hence why Railway Trespass is contrary to Section 55 of the British Transport Commission Act 1949.

I apologise, I assumed you were talking about Trespass as a whole not being a crime.