Case has been resolved. Thank you to Trans Pennine Express, good customer service

davenport151

Unfortunately its still unclear as to the 'type' of train the OP was on. If it was a unit or carriage type there is usually a guard. albeit one hidden at the far end of the train in the cab.
I would also guess that the type of trains that do not have guards do have a commumications button to talk to the driver - someone did mentioned this earlier.
Hence the point of my mentioning a call to the BTP earlier assuming the OP (or someone else) had access to a phone.

Altarf

meer53 wrote: »

Loud passengers aren't an emergency though are they ?

But someone drunk screaming that you are a "motherf-ing w-ker" is not just a "loud" passenger are they.

davenport151 wrote: »

I would also guess that the type of trains that do not have guards do have a commumications button to talk to the driver

You would guess wrong.

For example, the trains I use to and from London have no guard or any other members of staff other than the driver, and the only way to speak to the driver is pull the emergency cord.

BMN

geordie_taxi wrote: »

Yes but drunken, threatening and abuse ones are, especially if all their aggression is towards you.



Railway byelaw 4 states



Railway byelaw 6 states



so if any rail staff are inform ie passenger verbal complaint, then the train company has a legal responsibility to do something about it.

IMHO Defo grounds for some compo

I don't know the legal position of this but from what you posted it how on earth did you conclude that the train company has a legal responsibility to do something about it.

The byelaws you posted only say that it's breaking the law for somebody to do one of those things. It doesn't say anything has to be done about it.

Altarf

BMN wrote: »

I don't know the legal position of this but from what you posted it how on earth did you conclude that the train company has a legal responsibility to do something about it.

The byelaws you posted only say that it's breaking the law for somebody to do one of those things. It doesn't say anything has to be done about it.

So an even better reason to phone 999 and pull the emergency cord if railway staff are deliberately ignoring bylaws that are there to protect passengers.

BMN

Altarf wrote: »

So an even better reason to phone 999 and pull the emergency cord if railway staff are deliberately ignoring bylaws that are there to protect passengers.

You didn't pay attention to what I said.
It's not the staff that are breaking the byelaws though is it?
It was the "drunken football fans".

geordie_taxi

BMN wrote: »

I don't know the legal position of this but from what you posted it how on earth did you conclude that the train company has a legal responsibility to do something about it.

well the legal standing i take it from is the way train companies enforce byelaw 18 (Ticketless travel in non-compulsory ticket areas) or byelaw 17 (Compulsory Ticket Areas) via prosecution in a court.

BMN wrote: »

The byelaws you posted only say that it's breaking the law for somebody to do one of those things. It doesn't say anything has to be done about it.

Byelaw 24 states

(2) Removal of persons

(i) Any person who is reasonably believed by an authorised
person to be in breach of any of these Byelaws shall leave the
railway immediately if asked to do so by an authorised person

see my earlier post for a definition of authourised person.

meer53

Altarf wrote: »

So an even better reason to phone 999 and pull the emergency cord if railway staff are deliberately ignoring bylaws that are there to protect passengers.

If i was on a train full of drunken football supporters who were shouting, the last thing i would do would be to pull the cord or dial 999 !

People say all sorts of stuff when they're drunk, sometimes, they even swear :eek: they're usually best ignored.

BMN

geordie_taxi wrote: »

well the legal standing i take it from is the way train companies enforce byelaw 18 (Ticketless travel in non-compulsory ticket areas) or byelaw 17 (Compulsory Ticket Areas) via prosecution in a court.



Byelaw 24 states



see my earlier post for a definition of authourised person.

You're missing the point or I'm not making myself clear enough: the byelaws you have posted don't place a legal obligation on the train company to actually do anything.

geordie_taxi

BMN wrote: »

You're missing the point or I'm not making myself clear enough: the byelaws you have posted don't place a legal obligation on the train company to actually do anything.

Yeah you're right the only legal obligation stated by the byelaws is held by authorised person must who must act if someone is in breach of a byelaw.

As that authorised person is appointed/trained by a train company do they share legal responsibility??

I think they do and you haven't posted any evidence to prove different

BMN

geordie_taxi wrote: »

Yeah you're right the only legal obligation stated by the byelaws is held by authorised person must who must act if someone is in breach of a byelaw.

As that authorised person is appointed/trained by a train company do they share legal responsibility??

I think they do and you haven't posted any evidence to prove different

Read the byelaws again. I can't find anywhere that even states an authorised person has to act if someone is in breach of the byelaws.

You've not posted any evidence of your point either. I can't because I'm arguing that this isn't covered by the railway byelaws - and that no such legal clause actually exists.