• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

What should the punishment be for leaving user worked level crossing gates open

philthetube

Established Member
Joined
5 Jan 2016
Messages
4,193
I see that the max fine for failing to close gates is a £1000 fine under the

Railways Clauses Consolidation Act 1845.​

As far as I can see leaving gates open is not a motoring offence and so generates a criminal record.

It ought to be an easy crime to catch and prosecute offenders. A little spent on enforcement could save a lot of money.

Should this be an endorsable offence?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

SynthD

Established Member
Joined
4 Apr 2020
Messages
2,055
Location
UK
It ought to be an easy crime to catch and prosecute offenders
Why do you think it will be easy? Do they all have cameras of suitable resolution pointed at people’s faces and vehicle number plates?
 

3RDGEN

Member
Joined
6 Mar 2023
Messages
648
Location
Hull
I see that the max fine for failing to close gates is a £1000 fine under the

Railways Clauses Consolidation Act 1845.​

As far as I can see leaving gates open is not a motoring offence and so generates a criminal record.

It ought to be an easy crime to catch and prosecute offenders. A little spent on enforcement could save a lot of money.

Should this be an endorsable offence?
Far more serious "crimes" being committed and totally ignored so why would you target closing gates?
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
113,741
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
It would probably be best if it constituted a motoring offence. If it applied 6 points then that might concentrate minds.

It is however hard to enforce as noted - these crossings won't generally have CCTV as @SynthD points out.
 

styles

Established Member
Joined
7 Dec 2014
Messages
4,941
Location
Gwynedd
One option would be to formalise the instructions signs in TSRGD as endorseable, which would then make it an offence to contravene them. These could then be dealt with by a fixed penalty notice for 3 points and a £100 fine or it could be referred to court where the fines can be higher, and discretionary disqualification may be given.

Another would be to make it a specific road traffic offence.

Another would be to make it a standalone offence elsewhere and specify the penalty.

In practice I doubt it would make any difference. People who leave the gates open likely aren't concerned that it's an offence, because after all it already is one (and it says so on the signs). And I think a £1,000 fine would already be enough to put people off if anything was going to. People leaving them open are either ignorant, lazy, or thinking to themselves oh I'm only going to be at the house 2 minutes doing this delivery, I'll close them on the way back.

As with many crimes, the risk of getting caught is a more effective psychological tool than the penalty for having been caught. To that end, rather than trying to change legislation, which takes an age and is subject to all sorts of objections and time wasting and likely wouldn't make much difference, Network Rail would probably be better off identifying the crossings where multiple reports have come in about gates being left open and installing CCTV, possibly with ANPR, and possibly with some AI software which proactively alerts a control room about gates being left open. I suspect this would have a greater impact on offending rates, even if the first action against a particular driver is just a warning letter to educate them on the rules and that enforcement actions will be taken if they repeat the action.
 
Last edited:

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
113,741
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
some AI software which proactively alerts a control room about gates being left open

I know people like finding uses for AI, but a couple of microswitches connected to a power supply and light bulb in the box* might be quite a bit cheaper :)

* A lot of lines with this sort of crossing are still absolute block, including I think the one where this incident occurred. But I'm sure there's an equivalent for remotely controlled routes.
 

styles

Established Member
Joined
7 Dec 2014
Messages
4,941
Location
Gwynedd
I know people like finding uses for AI, but a couple of microswitches connected to a power supply and light bulb in the box* might be quite a bit cheaper :)

* A lot of lines with this sort of crossing are still absolute block, including I think the one where this incident occurred. But I'm sure there's an equivalent for remotely controlled routes.
Yeah fair enough, I was just thinking if you're installing a camera anyway, might as well have the software detect somebody opening a gate then not closing it. But a hardware solution would work also :)
 

Egg Centric

Established Member
Joined
6 Oct 2018
Messages
2,905
Location
Land of the Prince Bishops
As far as I can see leaving gates open is not a motoring offence and so generates a criminal record.
Barring decriminalised parking/box junction type stuff, motoring offences are criminal and generate a criminal record. That they're not treated as a big deal is essentially because if they were society would collapse because so many people have them. Of course with our current fun trying to criminalise everything this is happening to general criminal records as well.

Anyway the fairly obvious problem with making this a motoring offence is that you don't need a vehicle to commit it!

An approach which might make more sense than any criminal sanction is that persistent misuse = the crossing being shut down. Would concentrate minds that.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
113,741
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Anyway the fairly obvious problem with making this a motoring offence is that you don't need a vehicle to commit it!

You don't, but the majority of instances of it will be by motor vehicle users, because many if not most of these crossings have a self closing gate for pedestrians next to the road gate so you can't leave those open, accidentally or otherwise.
 

styles

Established Member
Joined
7 Dec 2014
Messages
4,941
Location
Gwynedd
An approach which might make more sense than any criminal sanction is that persistent misuse = the crossing being shut down. Would concentrate minds that.
Then you would get neighbouring landowners who want rid of the crossing intentionally leaving them open to get them permanently shut. Then you'd have a right hassle if you needed to access a fishing spot or a mobile telecommunications mast.
 

Egg Centric

Established Member
Joined
6 Oct 2018
Messages
2,905
Location
Land of the Prince Bishops
Then you would get neighbouring landowners who want rid of the crossing intentionally leaving them open to get them permanently shut. Then you'd have a right hassle if you needed to access a fishing spot or a mobile telecommunications mast.
I hadn't considered this, and I guess Altnabrec proves they exist, so fair enough.

I'm still instinctively against further criminalising things though (I appreciate it is criminal but no one is prosecuted afaik).

The actual problem is crossing misuse anyway. Despite this country's rather unique obsession with fencing in railways the gates being open really isn't a problem in itself (I guess cows could get on the track maybe but I imagine farmers are much more careful), it's that the gate makes it clear it's a crossing so left open misuse is more likely . So how does better fixed signage compare on cost/benefit analysis versus likely costs of greater enforcement? Open question, I've no clue.
 

Top