Great Western Coffee Shop

Have just returned from Edinburgh and been plagued with drunks all the way.
A completely drunk man boarded an arriva train at waverley at 8:00 and proceeded to drink several more cans of teannts lager,talking to himself loudly.
At 3 pm I was joined by an aggressively drunk man at Durham who stayed with me and the rest of the carriage shouting and being generally obnoxoious for a couple of hours.
And then between BTM and Bath I was joined by 30 drunk young things who partied in the train, drinking cider and wine, singing football songs, blocking the corridor etc, intimidating several passengers.
I have seen this type of thing many times before and the police seem totally disinterested, ebvven when there is a drunken brawl. The train crew have my sympathies. The woman guard locked herself in her compartment between Bristol and Bath. I would have done the same if I was her. I suggested to her that she should have refused to take the train out with drunks on it, but she was scathing and angry about the lack of help from transport police or indeed any support from her managers.
What is the company/railway line on this? What can be done to prevent trains becoming like our city centres?
I am inclined to pull the communication cord next time I feel threatened.Presumably the police would have to take an interest then.......

Yes, having experienced just this earlier this week......
In fact the drunk person was on the train at 10.30 AM!! After being told in no uncerain terms to curb the shouting and loud/lewd behaviour he was eventually ejected an hour later into the journey after vomiting on the train and rolling in it and also soiling himself!
The guard cleaned up the train before the journey continued.
Unfortuneatly, help (additional help) is not always at hand.

very common problem.
lost count of the amount of abusive drunks i have turfed off trains and stations.
and yes btp and fgw bosses are useless.

1 example
a conductor was verbally abused by drunks and one of them exposed himself to her,on being taken off the train by police he admitted the offence but nothing has been done about it.

makes a mockery of the posters fgw stick up saying abuse etc will not be tolerated and they along with btp will push for the highest possible sentance.

Tony, jester and smithy, I do sympathise with you on this one.

In Tony's case particularly: British Transport Police have offices at both Bristol Temple Meads and Bath Spa stations. Surely they had somebody on duty who could attend such an incident - particularly to back up a lone female member of staff?

jester - can I ask where your incident happened?

Chris  >:(

This drunk boarded at Exd and had downed a bottle of Jack Daniels (and poss some lager) by Ply.
Guy was off at St.Austell. He lay motionless on the platform while the guard (lone female) cleaned up with mop and bucket.

Thanks, jester.

That is just my point: where does it say, in any train staff's contract, that they should have to deal with such socially unacceptable behaviour in that way?  Or indeed, in any station staff's contract?

IMHO, that 'lone female guard' deserves AT LEAST a huge bunch of flowers from her manager, for dealing with that incident so well, and so professionally.

Chris.  ???

Me and Jim were on a 158 off down to Weymouth a few weeks back that forms the booze-ex from Weymouth on a Saturday with a female guard. She told some pretty frightening stories of what goes on and top marks goes to her for friendliness and considering it was an unrefurb with no CCTV, I doubt she had a pleasant journey home. 

Thanks for that, too, d_m.

I think that is where FGW management need to address such issues: for example, they should provide suitable staff for such services (they shouldn't just send a single female member of staff out there and expect her to deal with a carriage-full of drunks!) - and perhaps get British Transport Police to send along at least one of their Police Community Support Officers, to keep an eye on things?

 >:(

The problem is that these incidents never get reported, so the top brass in Swindon's ivory towers don't know the extent of the problem's, the BTP are hopeless in prosecuting these scumbags, because they obviously can't be arsed with the paperwork, local managers always seem to be moraly supportive after such incidents BUT it's PREVENTION thats needed, I would encourage any staff to report EVERY incident on the assault report forms at each depot, whether it be verbal or phisical and report to the BTP, I would urge any passengers to report these incidents to the BTP over the phone and get a log number, IF IT'S NOT REPORTED THEN NOTHING WILL BE DONE, despite how pointless it seems at the time, if a regular pattern builds up then the BTP have no option but to investigate.

The BTP have an office at Bath Spa Station ???? - where is that then Chris?

A fair challenge, ilovetrains:

Firstly, I remember an incident fairly recently where a female passenger was assaulted on the west-bound platform, and a senior member of the gateline staff actually shouted across to one of his colleagues on the opposite platform to "Get BTP!" while gesturing to the buildings further up on the opposite platform;

Secondly, I'm sure I've seen BTP PCSOs going through a particular 'private' door on that platform.

Are you suggesting that there isn't actually any formal BTP presence at Bath Spa?  If not, where is the nearest office (after BTM)?

Chris  >:(

I had the unfourtunate experience of seeing some myself yesterday, at Bath Spa. A crowd of around 10 boarded a Great Malvern service shouting, gesturing, swearing and bashing the train. The platform staff 'called the police' but despite the police station being 2 minutes down the road from Bath Spa, we were waiting 15 minutes. Eventually somehow the yobs were all ordered off the train by the platform staff and we got going. This was 10am!

i think there are plans to have a permenant community policing base at bath. PCSO's etc etc. Nearest police station is Avon and Somerset on Manvers Street. Nearest BTP office would be at Swindon on platform 3.

It is indeed - but that's not much good.  One of our moderators, travelling home yesterday, had problems at Bath Spa: he told us,

"The problem happened at Bath Spa on my trip up to Oldfield Park- a group of football yobs bashing the train and shouting, the police had to be called but didn't turn up for 15 minutes despite Bath Spa being 2 mins walk from the police station."

 >:(

Thanks for these replies. I have the number on myBTP number on my mobile now and will report these incidents when I see them. I still think though that FGW should have a clear policy that the guard must be allowed to refuse to allow the train to proceed if drunks get on, and that their asasessment of the situation must be respected. I don't see why there should be any flexibility about allowing drunk passengers onm trains. Afer all, many TOC's like Arriva for example, don't allow their staff any discretion if a passenger doesn't have the correct ticket or has forgotten their railcard. They are charged the full fare and there is no room for negotaition. The same attitude should be applied to drunks, or for that matter , in my opinion, anyone who drinks alcohol on trains.

FGW staff can, you are not actually allowed on railway premises intoxicated, according to Railway Bylaws I think.

The thing is, the company are not 100% likely (despite what is said) to back you up after you get assulted, so I am told..........

The guard always has the right to not take the train with drunks, the guard is the person in charge of the train!

Sadly things could be dangerous in confrontation, and hiding in the rear cab is easiest for the guards. 150/1s must be lifesavers at night!

They are anywhen for crew!

sorry i know im going threw all the old topics but i find them interesting, if half of the behavior described here happened on the streets most police officers would be there ... i hope anyway i have seen it happen and they would be moved on or if they dont move taken to the cell for the night but on the railways in lets face it a saftey critical environment drunks are alowed to do what ever they want its wrong, i think drinking should only be alowed on intercity trains and drinking on platforms and local services banned

No no no.  Don't ban drinking.  Just enforce the existing ban on disorderly drunkeness. 

BTW.  Can someone post the BTP number on this website.  I'm going to follow Vacmann's suggestion of reporting these incidents in future.

0800 40 50 40 - http://www.btp.police.uk/default.aspx (http://www.btp.police.uk/default.aspx)

Late night turns, especially between larger towns with pubs and clubs etc and the sticks can be a nightmare.  Personally, I always try to weed out potential troublemakers at the main station, where at least I have a dispatcher or two for back-up.  For the safety of myself and my passengers, I always attempt to exclude those who are obviously inebriated.  Even in my short career, I have refused to take a train out when it has been invaded by drunken yobs.  Fortunately, we were in a major station and cavalry soon arrived to persuade the merrymakers that they were not travelling.  However, I am the first to admit that this is not always possible.  

At such times, being a guard can be a thankless and even dangerous job.  Perhaps those who raise the issue of not having a ticket checked will realise that guards' duties are safety critical and that we are first and foremost, responsible for the safety of our passengers.

One thing that annoys me about ticket barriers is that despite FGW saying that they reduce antisocial behaviour they are left open in the late evening.  If we had more of them manned into the evening, fewer drunken yobs would reach the platform (where they are in danger of falling off the edge which isn't nice for the drivers who hit them or for the poor s*ds who have to clean up the resultant mess) and the trains.  If you excluded everyone who was visibly very drunk and everyone without a ticket from the platform the Guard's problems would be halved.

Any threatening situation whether it be verbal abuse or serious assult is much better happening at a station than on a train.  Escape routes, police and (in the worst case) ambulances are much closer at hand.

Perhaps if the Guard's refused to move trains more often and passngers routinely pulled the cord when they felt threatened by yobs, you would get an impact on FGW's performance statistics sufficient for them to take notice (after all keeping a yob off a train must be a cheaper way of improving performance than the engineering work required to lift a TSR - this is the kind of logic that appeals to the bean-counters).  If the consensus amoung both staff and passengers is that this is a serious problem then it could be solved by the rail unions and passenger groups working together to get BTP and FGW to take it seriously (ticketless travel has been tackled because it is a financial problem for the TOCs - anti-social behavious needs to become a cause of similar finacial problems for TOCs before they will take it seriously).  The unions need to encourage passengers to complain to FGW and report every incident to BTP.  In turn the passengers need to understand that the Guard is free to stop a train that he judges is safety0-comprimised by drunkards (I would hope that most passengers would be sympathetic to this if only it could be communicated to them right in order to break through the anti FGW attitude that many passenegrs have).

ATW (and I suspect other TOCs) do not pay passenger compensation for delays caused by antisocial behaviour (an idiot repeatedly pulling the communication cord on the Cardiff Manchester service I used in December for example attracted no compensation depite my being 1 hour late as a result).  I also suspect that they are allowed to exclude such incidents from performance stats as delays "outside the control of the railway"(is this true?).  Whilst these arrangement do have the appearance of being fair to the TOCs it does remove two incentives from them to sort out the problem and I would argue that the exceptions should be lifted.
 

One benefit of the 150 class then, doors can be opened from non passenger compartment.

Am I alone in being slightly concerned by this? If it's a personal decision then I'm perfectly happy to respect your choice; but if it's company policy to "exclude anyone who is obviously inebriated" from boarding a train, then I'm not too sure I like it.

Speaking as a father of a twenty-something year old daughter who to the best of my knowledge has never been in, let alone, caused any serious trouble over the past few years but who nevertheless goes out with girlfriends on public transport on a regular basis, has a good time and occasionally comes home (shall we say) fairly merry, I would feel a lot happier knowing that guards on trains extended their duty of care to both themselves and their passengers to include young ladies who have perhaps had one or two too many, than having to worry that there is a blanket ban imposed on anyone obviously inebriated boarding the train, leaving her stranded, potentially alone, late at night with little chance of getting home.

Clarification would be appreciated, please?

Its completely down to the guard. I'm fairly sure a group of girls wouldn't be excluded as threatening.

Cheers, d_m. I had a feeling common sense would prevail, but my training is such that I tend to take written statements  literally, so I just wanted to check :)

 ::)  Railway Byelaw 4 (1) provides that :-

"No person shall enter or remain on the railway where such person is unfit to enter or remain on the railway as a result of being in a state of intoxication."

Although my post could, at a pinch, have been taken to indicate otherwise, I was referring to our powers to exclude intoxicated persons who present such behaviour as to cause disquiet or fear on the part of staff and/or passengers and/or who may pose a clear threat to their own safety and/or that of others.  No one that I know wishes to persecute the odd reveller(s) who has/have had one too many and the decision to exclude or remove anyone from a train is not one which is taken lightly.  We are not policemen, merely railway staff attempting to provide a public service. 

With regard to 'duty of care', I accept that it extends to both passengers and staff, but should not include those who pose a threat as detailed above. If in doubt, unless in the direst emergency, a quick call to Control will provide valuable clarification and instruction on how to proceed.

I should also state that these are my own views and interpretation of Railway Byelaws.  They are not intended to convey FGW policy or practice.

G.Uard it's pretty difficult to argue with any of what you've said here. I've seen some fairly appalling behaviour on trains (one of the worst seems to be the last BRI to PAD service on a Saturday evening, which even though it leaves Bristol relatively early at 2233 always seems to have its fair share of loud and offensive passengers in an advanced state of inebriation). I don't think any reasonable person would expect the guard to try and check tickets at the same time as dealing the unruly pax. It's always struck me that it would make sense to roster two guards on those later trains, but of course that would cost extra money.

Latest news on that service, is that the union have advised guards to work to rule, i.e. only take the train out if it either runs non stop between the offending stations, remain in the brake van at all times, or that transport police accompany it between Bristol and I think Swindon.

This is due to attacks on passengers, and staff. When problems arose, more experienced guards were asked to work it, just to make sure the new ones were't getting out of their depth, and even the experienced men were being threatened and assaulted left right and centre.

When they know a lot of football fans will be on a train, there are police on it, why can't they apply the same common sense approach to trains such as this one?

I was going to say surely this is what British Transport Police are for, then I remembered that they exist to protect railway property.

My experience of drunks on trains has never been good. I have full respect for the staff who are brave enough to work the late trains particularly on friday and saturday nights.

Obviously there is a difference between a drunk and a violent antisocial drunk.

for example:

The person who has had one too many and staggers down the aisle and falls over (sober passengers laugh at this point ;D)
Someone who gets on the train, goes into First Class with no ticket and sits and sleeps for the remainder of the journey. (sober passengers ignore)

compared with:

Someone who slams people in train doors (Sober person swears loudly)
or the very drunk person who decides to relieve themselves on the platform (Sober person moves very quickly away)
Someone who throws threatening abuse at sober passenger (Sober passenger knows whatever they do/say will be wrong...)

Sentiment appreciated.

It's not very nice to be told, (by a drunken lout), that you "will have your ****ing head kicked in if you ask for a ticket", but on some trains, it's par for the course.  Unfortunately, many jobs which involve an element of public service also carry an element of risk.  However, I knew this when I signed up, as did my colleagues.

Common sense and experience usually enables guards to sort the harmless from the potentially dangerous drunk(s).  Nine times out of ten, this is sufficient, but anyone with experience in dealing with the inebriated will appreciate just how quickly a jovial mood can 'turn nasty'.  In a post above, a member voiced concern at what could be an arbitrary use of power in excluding drunks.  This is perfectly understandable, but the safety of the train, passengers and staff is paramount.  Guards are not social workers, paramedics, lawyers or policemen, although sometimes it appears that they should be.

Just a question, but how many nasty-drunks are there who use trains regularly.  Are there hundreds of these "people" or is it usually a dozen or so who cause most of the problems on a particular route.  If it is the latter then the problem ought to be soluable by policing / ASBOs etc.  If it is the former, this country is in huge trouble.
 

I sometimes wonder which is more dangerous?

I sleepy and confused drunk...

Or...

A Revenue Protection Officer in a very bad mood... :P

;D

Well said. I wholeheartedly agree. And despite the above...


...it's a testament to the professionalism of FGW's conductors that when I have travelled on the last service from Bristol to Paddington on a Saturday night they have not been hiding in the TGS but have been a visible presence in the train dealing with trouble when it occurs.

Going up through Cornwall on an XC Voyager the TM was selling a ticket to a Redruth drunk (penalty fare station), while doing so he suggested several times that the bloke might 'like a kip' and said he would wake him at his destination...fella promptly fell asleep - only problem was that he slumped half across the aisle but everyone had a pleasant journey.
 

there are times when drinking is not alowed on trains

section 129 of the 1993 railway act, railway bylaw 4

Drinking isn't allowed on any form of localised transport in London either, thanks to Boris Johnson :P

but has he got rid of the bendy busses?

You have been watching too much 'Top Gear' relex  ;D

indeedy.... scary thing is that i said that and then it was that show with him tonight repeated!

Policeman attacked by drunks on train

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/sussex/7881781.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/sussex/7881781.stm)

I was travelling on a XC service from Birmingham to Cardiff and there were 2 young guys who were drunk. They were harmless really and werent violent or anything but some passengers seemed to find them very annoying. One wouldnt sit down and the Train Manager said that if they didnt behave they would be asked to leave at the next stop.

Yes. Lucky the TM was reasonable some wouldnt be so patient.

I have to admitt drunks on trains are very annoying. Travelling back from Gunnislake on some Saturday nights and some of the passangers on there a cleary under the influence of alchohol. Also in the summer of 2008, I remember some teenagers drinking cider causing a bit of trouble. But as always nothing was done about it!

Is very easy to blame the BTP for not doing anything, but remember - they are pretty much funded solely by the TOCs.  If the TOCs were that bothered then they would invest in more officers.  Like Vacman says, the more you report, the more are seen by the number crunchers at HO. 

I have to agree.

The problem is that too many people assume someone else will do something about these kind of anti-social behaviour issues. Making a report of anti-social behaviour to the TOC concerned and BTP only takes a few minutes by phone - in BTP's case a free telephone number.

How did this thread suddenly get its life back?  The last post (two back) was in 2009.   :o

I suspect the responders did not notice the date.

Just browsing through the old topics!

I would like to share an experience with you about drinking and driving. As you well know, some of us have been known to have had, um, brushes with the authorities on our way home from the odd social session over the years.

A couple of nights ago, I was out for a few drinks with some friends and had a few too many beers and some rather nice claret.
 
Knowing full well I may have been slightly over the limit, I did something I've never done before - I took a train home.

I arrived back safely and without incident, which was a real surprise since I had never driven a train before and am not sure where I got this one from....

A slight edit of something I was sent a month or so back by a friend.

***Edit I didnt see it was a resurrected old thread***

And perhaps you didn't see this post from Phil back in December:

http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=11723.msg122240#msg122240

 :-X

Groundhog day (or evening)!!  Also , don't forget TheTrout's (much-edited) brush with an inebriated passenger.

On some forums, a new post not only pushes the thread to the top of the list, but it remains there if the new post is subsequently found to be spam and is deleted by the moderators.

I knew this was an old thread the minute I saw it in "Most Recent" on the home page... I remember posting a thread in here agessssss ago! (Sorry, yes my memory is good for annoyingly useless bits of information such as this)

I was just about to come in and see how it have been resurrected... But you beat me to it. Point that out...

Relex109's typical "Bachalour" antics when an attractive member of the opposite gender is involved caused a similar thread resurrection some time ago... Until someone spotted it :D ;D

I didnt see Phil's in December, was sent to me by a work colleague probably around December as well.

I have many of those... some on film... 2 were sent to BTP (One were I heard a rumor the person involved was charged with endangering railway safety. But cannot confirm accuracy of that so don't quote me there) and 1 to Avon and Somerset Police.

However reporting to the BTP and actions taken depends on the nature of the offence (at least that is my understanding)

I am lead to believe that if Joe Bloggs reports antisocial intoxicated behavior, then if the OB do attend then it is most likely in the case of Alcohol Behavior they'll be arrested under Section 5 of Public Order Act. Unless there is something more sinister to the matter.

If a fight breaks out and it's called in, it's my understanding that this is then a grey area. If Joe Bloggs calls in the fight, I have it on good authority that the police don't take action unless any of the directly involved parties makes a complaint.

On New Years Eve there was a fight that broke out in a Subway Restaurant that I also filmed and then actually assisted in getting under control before someone got seriously hurt. Whilst I continue to have the footage, the police did not attend and AFAIK no complaint from either party directly involved has been made to the OB. So therefore, despite I have the footage clearly showing a rather brutal scrap (one girl smashed the others head into the floor - the point where I decided to do something about it too...) Even if I did hand the footage to the police, unless a complaint is made by the directly involved persons. The OB AFAIK cannot do anything. I'm not sure if as a witness I could report it under a section 5 offence when taken into consideration I had to jump out of the way of a hot drink that went flying across the room. Said hot drink was mine!!! >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(

Well annoyingly since that situation the other Gent imbecilic child who started to try and break things up and to be totally honest failed miserably has decided to start threatening me and the four others who also filmed the incident (Turns out one of the girls involved was his girlfriend). The idiot demanded I hand over my iPhone for him to look through in front of Frome Relative Trout who was working and just as mift as I was about it... Over my dead body mate. The laughable thing was he also wanted to go through my laptop... Yea... About that... I work in IT... if I were gonna hide something do you really think I'm going to:

A) Put it in My Documents with the original filename... e.g. IMG_1234.MOV
B) Hide it somewhere like: C:\WINDOWS etc etc and remain the file extension from .MOV to .123 so it wouldn't show up on a search

* waits for EBrown to come up with better answers/options :P *

The Even more ridiculous thing about it was that he completely backed down when I stood up with umpf so my chair fell over backwards and I offered him the oppertunity to take the "dispute" outside............ He Declined... Good Decision and Correct Answer...! I was in a very, very bad mood that day ;D

I'm starting to adapt to the idiocies of late night behavour... Change of work hours me thinks... >:( ::) :o

That's not quite correct.

The scenario you describe above, isn't a breach of s5 Public Order Act, it is Affray!

Affray is two or more people fighting in a public place, to the distress of others. In this case neither victim needs to make a complaint for the police to proceed, the mere facts that a bystander was frightened is enough for a prosecution to take place.

Remember that if it is on the railway then it is much easier to use the bylaws rather than say, the public order act.  Magistrates much prefer bylaws anyway as it easier for them to prosecute on.   I believe it is bylaw 6, unacceptable behaviours for most ASB.

Byelaw 6 is titled (as Vacmanfan implied) 'Unacceptable Behaviour' and does cover this, remember if you molest of wilfully interfere with the comfort or convenience of another passenger you have breached the Byelaws.

Network Southeast you are of course correct. I did suspect that 2+ people fighting was section 4 POA. (Which is affray IIRC) but didn't check my facts.

Having re-read that post I am rather confused what I was trying to say myself... I made sense when I thought it. Having re-read it. It doesn't ::)

At the time of the incident the police were not called. And as of now I am not aware of anyone making a complaint. I doubt there will be either. My view is that everyone afterwards was rather embarrassed and just wants to drop it. Which personally I am happy with.

But my understanding and this was from an Officer. Was that a prosecution under POA can only take place if a witness makes a complaint. Affray is section 4 and then rioting being the worst; section 1 But Common Assault is very difficult if the victim doesn't press charges unless there are factors such as mental/physical factors etc. POA is easier than common assault as you say, because a witness(es) can say it caused then alarm and/or distress.

Which indeed is the original and perfectly valid point you raised!

That probably doesn't make sense either does it?!! ::)