Woman obstructs train doors

55013

I have a right to free speech

As do the people whose posts you regularly seek to have removed.

Kiko4564

Going back to topic did the rather obnoxious woman have any right to obstruct the doors and delay the entire train?

Mistral001

It is obvious that although the OP made efforts to help her it was done under protest and with an attitude of resentment directed towards her as a person. Perhaps not surprising that the help was not fully welcomed.

Kiko4564

Mistral001 wrote: »

It is obvious that although the OP made efforts to help her it was done under protest and with an attitude of resentment directed towards her as a person. Perhaps not surprising that the help was not fully welcomed.

I accept that I did protest her actions on here after the event. I do accept that I do obviously had an attitude of resentment, which was formed after the event. However this is not what happened at the time. The help was neither welcomed, nor not welcomed, but simply turned out to be unneccessary, as the driver decided to instead leave his cab to speak to her directly.

She never reacted to my actions, the off duty cleaner (who I shall call John), did react by telling me to just "come on" i.e. carry on walking home, instead of trying to assist her. John later explained that I am best off just ignoring people like her, and that had I assisted her child down the steps 1) I would have delayed the train as she would have not have stood clear of the doors to allow it to depart, and therefore potentially been liable for delaying the train as the pushchair was on the top of a non-accessible footbridge, and not already on the platform and 2) Had the child fallen out of the chair and been injured, or worse still killed as a result of me assisting her, then legal action could have been taken against me.

Mistral001

Look OP. You appeared to comply with this young lady's wishes to hold back the train, which she was doing by illegal means by standing in the way of the doors. When her cunning plan did not work, she took it out on her "accomplice".

Sometimes we wonder why people look the other way when there is a "situation" on public transport. This incident would demonstrate perhaps why.

Kiko4564

Mistral001 wrote: »

Look OP. You appeared to comply with this young lady's wishes to hold back the train, which she was doing by illegal means by standing in the way of the doors. When her cunning plan did not work, she took it out on her "accomplice".

Sometimes we wonder why people look the other way when there is a "situation" on public transport. This incident would demonstrate perhaps why.

But technically it did work until she abandoned her plan by deciding to leave the train in accordance with the driver's instructions. After the driver reacted by deciding to close the doors and depart the station she then shouted obscentities (which I will not be posting on here) at the driver, not at me, or John, her partner, or anyone else. That was bang out of order! :mad:

I did not have anything to do with it, apart from attempting to explain the situation to the driver. After disembarking I did not get back on board, operate the emergency alarm, or stand in the doors, or anything else. The fact is that she was being so vague that I did not know what she was on about, until later on as the incident developed. At which point I decided to leave the station and head home, in accordance with John's suggestion to just "come on" and leave her to it. He was not even acting in the execution of his duty, as he was not on duty as a member of railway staff, let alone an "authorised person" within the context of the 2005 Railway Byelaws, which I don't think he is.

Mistral001

Kiko4564 wrote: »

But technically it did work until she abandoned her plan by deciding to leave the train in accordance with the driver's instructions. After the driver reacted by deciding to close the doors and depart the station she then shouted obscentities (which I will not be posting on here) at the driver, not at me, or John, her partner, or anyone else. That was bang out of order! :mad:

I did not have anything to do with it, apart from attempting to explain the situation to the driver. After disembarking I did not get back on board, operate the emergency alarm, or stand in the doors, or anything else. The fact is that she was being so vague that I did not know what she was on about, until later on as the incident developed. At which point I decided to leave the station and head home, in accordance with John's suggestion to just "come on" and leave her to it. He was not even acting in the execution of his duty, as he was not on duty as a member of railway staff, let alone an "authorised person" within the context of the 2005 Railway Byelaws, which I don't think he is.

So there is nothing to this thread only just a rant about someone flipping out and using obscenities on a train/platform.

photome

Mistral001 wrote: »

So there is nothing to this thread only just a rant about someone flipping out and using obscenities on a train/platform.

Is it not about a 70s car stuck on a footbridge?

Kiko4564

photome wrote: »

Is it not about a 70s car stuck on a footbridge?

No, see above.

molerat

So, let me get this straight. If you create a fuss, make a nuisance of yourself and break the rules at a railway station you are a chav, correct ?