Using the SOS Alarm when overcarried?

[Intro298]

I made a journey from Wimbledon to West Hampstead Thameslink this evening, changing at Streatham onto the St Albans City train. The train was an all stations as shown on the platform and the on train electronic displays. However we went non-stop from St Pancras to St Albans City, and many of us were severely overcarried. No announcements, and the electronic display still showed all stations.
I exceeded my maximum journey time, and will obviously be an hour late at my destination. I doubt I can get delay repay as I was already over my daily cap.
What do I do about the exceeded maximum journey time on my Oyster, and how I ensure I am only charged for the daily cap today?

Inspired by this post in the Disputes & Prosecutions section, would it be appropriate to use the SOS alarm in a situation like this where a train skips multiple scheduled stops with no audio or visual warnings (e.g announcements or warning on the PIS)?

 

[Mattplans]

I have no doubt that the platform screens displayed the alterations, but not from Wimbledon where they joined the train. The driver is advised of the alterations - probably happened at Blackfriars - and I simply don't understand why they were unable to advise the passengers of the changes.

Side note; I'm not entirely convinced that people who do use the emergency handles for inappropriate reasons are ever pursued by the railway. At least not from my perspective on the Southeastern metro lines.

When these alarms are pulled must you stop at the next platform or the next booked stop?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I would seriously consider it for unannounced overcarriage on a DOO train as the driver could be incapacitated in some way (though normal safety devices could stop the train in this situation nothing is foolproof).

If the train had a guard I'd expect them to be aware and deal with it if it was incorrect.

 

[800001]

Inspired by this post in the Disputes & Prosecutions section, would it be appropriate to use the SOS alarm in a situation like this where a train skips multiple scheduled stops with no audio or visual warnings (e.g announcements or warning on the PIS)?

Be interesting to know how many people were over carried, and how many had headphones/earphones in.

Seems very strange for no manual announcements to be done when so many stops were going to be missed out.

 

[185]

If the train had a guard I'd expect them to be aware and deal with it if it was incorrect.

Part of the contact of employment for DOO driver is to make relevant announcements and these should be no more, or less clear and relevant than that of any guard.

That said, the behaviour of some silly RPOs, especially in the down in Network SE area, and up in Merseyrail / Northern land - I've far more sympathy for those passengers who do pull a passcom for that particular reason.

 

[Snow1964]

Be interesting to know how many people were over carried, and how many had headphones/earphones in.

Seems very strange for no manual announcements to be done when so many stops were going to be missed out.

The reason for having calling screens showing stops is so people with hearing difficulties, or who use headphones to block out excess announcements can check where the train is calling.

I cannot think of any good reason why a token PA announcement would be deemed ok to run fast and continue to display the stations being skipped. The PA is a complimentary info source, not the exclusive source.

This has to be control or train crew laziness, not bothering to update the calling pattern (I am not familiar with Thameslink fleet so not sure if updates are sent remotely by controller, or manually entered on a panel in cab), either way someone didn't bother to do their job properly, with consequences for (lots per Op) people.

 

[AverageJoe]

The reason for having calling screens showing stops is so people with hearing difficulties, or who use headphones to block out excess announcements can check where the train is calling.

I cannot think of any good reason why a token PA announcement would be deemed ok to run fast and continue to display the stations being skipped. The PA is a complimentary info source, not the exclusive source.

This has to be control or train crew laziness, not bothering to update the calling pattern (I am not familiar with Thameslink fleet so not sure if updates are sent remotely by controller, or manually entered on a panel in cab), either way someone didn't bother to do their job properly, with consequences for (lots per Op) people.

Do you know this for fact?

 

[800001]

The reason for having calling screens showing stops is so people with hearing difficulties, or who use headphones to block out excess announcements can check where the train is calling.

I cannot think of any good reason why a token PA announcement would be deemed ok to run fast and continue to display the stations being skipped. The PA is a complimentary info source, not the exclusive source.

This has to be control or train crew laziness, not bothering to update the calling pattern (I am not familiar with Thameslink fleet so not sure if updates are sent remotely by controller, or manually entered on a panel in cab), either way someone didn't bother to do their job properly, with consequences for (lots per Op) people.

In that case why after one or two stations missed did no one think to press the call button which communicates with the driver (not the stop train button).

If that was me on train and I realised it was not stopping where it should id be wanting to speak to driver.

Seems very strange that all these people over carried just sat there all the way to St Albans.

 

[styles]

Side note; I'm not entirely convinced that people who do use the emergency handles for inappropriate reasons are ever pursued by the railway. At least not from my perspective on the Southeastern metro lines.

I suspect it's a mixture of two reasons.

The first being why people aren't often pursued for calling emergency services for things which aren't really an emergency but could plausibly be described as police or healthcare or urgent ish matters. In these instances we don't really want to discourage people from calling in the future when it could be a real emergency just because last time they thought their call was warranted they got slapped with a £1000 fine. Same reason we don't charge people for mountain rescue callouts when people go up Snowdon in flip flops and get frostbitten feet. We want them to call when needed, because if they don't, or they leave it too late, it can be more serious, more difficult to deal with, and more expensive.

The second being I suppose the grey area of what is 'improper use' of a passenger emergency alarm. If you're a wheelchair user and your passenger assistance doesn't turn up and the doors are about to close, is that improper use? I think it would be a bad look if nothing else to punish somebody for this. Then follows, what about non-wheelchair or assistance requiring passengers who are having their stops skipped without prior warning? Does it make a difference if it's the last service of the day and it could leave people stranded many hours from home in the middle of the night?

Pulling the emergency alarm to tell the driver a knock knock joke, clearly improper use. A train unexpectedly skipping every scheduled stop? I don't think that's so clear cut.

 

[renegademaster]

The thing is once they've missed the station, 95% if the time because they've been told to skip stops but forgot to tell the customers, or customer was zoned out when it was announced, calling the alarm is essentially pointless since theirs not exactly much they can do, it's not like they just put it reverse and return to the stop. The correct thing to do is get off at the next stop and consult station staff.

If the driver has skipped multiple stops by accident I'm sure control can give them the bollocking and the customers don't need to

 

[Bletchleyite]

The thing is once they've missed the station, 95% if the time because they've been told to skip stops but forgot to tell the customers, or customer was zoned out when it was announced, calling the alarm is essentially pointless since theirs not exactly much they can do, it's not like they just put it reverse and return to the stop

The reason to pull it would be a concern that the driver was not in proper health (possibly delirious) and thus there is a danger to the train.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

In the case of Thameslink, I've been on a few "fast" runs on purpose; usually what will happen is that the platform screens will show the cancelled calls as such with a line through them - but of course only from the time the decision has been made to cancel the stops and run fast. On board, there is usually a verbal announcement at the stations leading up to the fast run, but I don't think I have ever seen the internal screens changed - they often usually still announce each station as we charge straight through it.

My suspicion is that this is what happened here - most people missed the on board announcement and had boarded at a station prior to the decision being made to skip some stops?


Edited: Typo

 

[renegademaster]

The reason to pull it would be a concern that the driver was not in proper health (possibly delirious)

That would be an extremely unlikely scenario

Normally it's some kind of mix-up involving a skip stop order

 

[Bletchleyite]

On Thameslink I have heard automatic announcements along the lines of "the destination or calling points of this train have changed, please listen for announcements". But that probably relies on the driver pressing the right button.

 

[styles]

The thing is once they've missed the station, 95% if the time because they've been told to skip stops but forgot to tell the customers, or customer was zoned out when it was announced, calling the alarm is essentially pointless since theirs not exactly much they can do, it's not like they just put it reverse and return to the stop. The correct thing to do is get off at the next stop and consult station staff

Perhaps not, but I'd rather be one stop late than 15 stops late. Much easier to get back.

Also passengers can't be expected to know the driver has dead man's switches etc; for all they know the driver could be unconscious and the train needs stopping.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That would be an extremely unlikely scenario

Normally it's some kind of mix-up involving a skip stop order

Quite probably. The driver can of course avoid the delay that would cause by making an announcement, as they clearly know about it!

It's worth noting that the Eschede crash in Germany might have been avoided if passengers had pulled the cord as soon as severe rough riding started rather than wondering, so one should never be discouraged from doing so if one is in any way concerned.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Jan 2026 ==

Perhaps not, but I'd rather be one stop late than 15 stops late. Much easier to get back.

Also passengers can't be expected to know the driver has dead man's switches etc; for all they know the driver could be unconscious and the train needs stopping.

There are scenarios where safety devices may not stop the train if running on greens, eg if the driver is conscious but delirious eg having had a minor stroke.

When doing risk assessment, "severity 1" generally requires action even if it is "likelihood 5".

Other factors might further influence this, eg crossing points at a higher speed than normal.

 

[renegademaster]

Perhaps not, but I'd rather be one stop late than 15 stops late. Much easier to get back.

Unless you end up some out the way station with 1tp2h instead of a busy major station

On many DOO trains the passcom doesn't instantly stop the train either

 

[styles]

Unless you end up some out the way station with 1tp2h instead of a busy major station

On many DOO trains the passcom doesn't instantly stop the train eithet

Sure, I'm just giving examples of why a passenger might legitimately want to use the alarm. Not saying it will *always* be better stopping shorter.

I certainly wouldn't expect passengers to know whether it would automatically stop the train or not, but even if they knew it didn't, they might at least think contacting the driver or guard (again, passengers might not know there is no guard), they can check it's not a fault.

 

[renegademaster]

Sure, I'm just giving examples of why a passenger might legitimately want to use the alarm. Not saying it will *always* be better stopping shorter.

I certainly wouldn't expect passengers to know whether it would automatically stop the train or not, but even if they knew it didn't, they might at least think contacting the driver or guard (again, passengers might not know there is no guard), they can check it's not a fault.

It's still not exactly something you should encourage even if I don't agree with fining them

Either the driver, PIS, control or the guard made a mistake, it's better for them to try and fix it rather than random passengers pulling alarms to give their 2 cents,

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's still not exactly something you should encourage even if I don't agree with fining them

Either the driver, PIS, control or the guard made a mistake, it's better for them to try and fix it rather than random passengers pulling alarms to give their 2 cents,

It should never be discouraged to use the alarm if concerned for the safety of the train.

It's all avoidable by making proper announcements, anyway.

 

[PLY2AYS]

Unless you end up some out the way station with 1tp2h instead of a busy major station

On many DOO trains the passcom doesn't instantly stop the train either

There’s a passcom override button in cab, on pretty much all rolling stock I believe.

Pulling the egress though, would absolutely stop the train, often in the middle of nowhere.
This is an uncontrolled evacuation and would mean an emergency call should be made by the driver and that should stop every train in a 6 mile radius (GSM-R coverage dependant)

 

[styles]

It's still not exactly something you should encourage even if I don't agree with fining them

Either the driver, PIS, control or the guard made a mistake, it's better for them to try and fix it rather than random passengers pulling alarms to give their 2 cents,

I'm not encouraging it, but we can't be surprised if passengers end up sounding the alarm on a train unexpectedly hurtling through all its calling points.

It is better for the driver to fix it, but they didn't.

I don't think anybody is advising using the alarm to 'give their 2 cents'.

 

[Snow1964]

It's all avoidable by making proper announcements, anyway.

On board, there is usually a verbal announcement at the stations leading up to the fast run, but I don't think I have ever seen the internal screens changed - they often usually still announce each station as we charge straight through it.

And as said earlier, announcements shouldn't be conflicting with visual information, should change both. If can't change both should not call at less than minimum displayed, the railway is supposed to be for passengers,

There is no point in installing the screens giving calling patterns if they are not going to be updated to display correct info.

If anything things making a verbal announcement only is good enough, even if it conflicts with other info, they need to wise up to modern disability thinking.

Actually a poor PA announcement is worse than back in 1980s when many trains had no PA because an effort to inform passengers of the change was made then.

 

[N1]

And as said earlier, announcements shouldn't be conflicting with visual information, should change both. If can't change both should not call at less than minimum displayed, the railway is supposed to be for passengers,

There is no point in installing the screens giving calling patterns if they are not going to be updated to display correct info.

If anything things making a verbal announcement only is good enough, even if it conflicts with other info, they need to wise up to modern disability thinking.

Actually a poor PA announcement is worse than back in 1980s when many trains had no PA because an effort to inform passengers of the change was made then.

Not just thinking, but legislation.

Not making an announcement, or updating the internal screens is a breach of the The Rail Vehicle Accessibility (Non-Interoperable Rail System) Regulations 2010 (on trains that are in-scope of these regulations, which class 700 are)

Passenger information​

11.—(1) The interior of a rail vehicle must be fitted with a public address system for audible and visual announcements.

(6) Subject to sub-paragraph (7), the public address systems inside the rail vehicle must be used—

(a)to announce the next station, or stop, at which the vehicle will be stopping, not less than once during the period beginning five minutes before the vehicle is expected by the operator's staff to stop at that station or stop;

(b)to announce any delay exceeding ten minutes to the scheduled timing for that journey;

(c)to announce any diversions from the route shown in the published timetable for that journey; and

(d)to make emergency announcements.

(7) Sub-paragraph (6) (a) does not apply if the timetabled journey time between stations or stops is less than two minutes.

Skipping stops is a diversion from the route shown in he published timetable

 

[Mattplans]

I don't think I have ever seen the internal screens change

I have never seen them update with a new calling pattern, but sometimes the internal screens will display a message suggesting something is amiss, and the external displays show this and hide the calling pattern internally

I imagine this is linked to this:

On Thameslink I have heard automatic announcements along the lines of "the destination or calling points of this train have changed, please listen for announcements". But that probably relies on the driver pressing the right button.

 

[blimmo]

There is no point in installing the screens giving calling patterns if they are not going to be updated to display correct info

I would go further and say screens giving incorrect calling patterns is actively harmful. If I see a screen saying my stop I will assume the train is going to stop there, I shouldn't have to worry that maybe I missed a quiet PA announcement 10 minutes ago. If they said nothing I'd at least try to check with other sources.

 

[Dr Hoo]

I recently joined a late-running Thameslink to St Albans at Wimbledon that was run fast from Tooting to Blackfriars. All very well handled from the platform at Wimbledon to the on-train screen and announcements. Completely competent (and had the desired effect of making up the time). So it can be done. Nobody caught out as far as could see.

 

[milooo]

I was on a thameslink from Peterborough southbound and we were only told we were going non-stop to Hitchin just before passing Huntington..

 

[renegademaster]

It should never be discouraged to use the alarm if concerned for the safety of the train.

you will be creating more a safety risk distracting a driver than the infinitesimal chance it's a delirious driver rather than a communication error or something wrong with the PIS.


The average customer might not know that and I don't think you should fine anyone, but you should know better

 

[Belperpete]

I think any TOC that tried prosecuting a passenger who operated the alarm in this situation would have a hard time of it. The passenger would surely have a good defence.

To get back to the OP's original question, whether operating the alarm in this situation would be the best thing to do is debatable. If the driver was running non stop by mistake, you might make him realise his mistake and stop at subsequent stations. However, if he had been instructed to do so, e.g. because of late running, delaying the train further may not help.

Is the driver allowed to have a conversation (potentially a whole string of conversations with passengers in different coaches) while driving at speed?