"Clark F Morris" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 3 Sep 2006 17:51:07 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message .com, at
08:51:12 on Sun, 3 Sep 2006, furnessvale remarked:
Given that rail companies have to pay directly for the services of BTP
whereas comparable non rail transport companies have the services of
home office forces for free

Gosh, did Gordon reduce business rates to zero while I wasn't watching?
I assume that rail companies also pay the business rates. Major
terminals for most forms of transport have some kind of security force
with varying amounts of police power. Rail is probably unusual in
also providing a security presence on the right of way.

Operational railway land is not subject to rates.

In message , asdf
writes

LU have a similar tactic to this. Trains of withdrawn 1983 stock are
placed at strategic locations around the network. They are then
allowed to become completely covered in graffiti. Each time one of
these decoys is vandalised, it's one less cleanup job on an actual
service train.

In fairness, that's not the real reason they are parked up there.

They were intended to provide us with some extra stock on the Picc to
enhance what was available. LU isn't exactly blessed with lots of
unused sidings so they ended up stored in places like Uxbridge and South
Arrer.

Once they decided that this plan wasn't going to work, they have slowly
been removed for scrapping. Once of the main problems now is that
they've been there for so long that the only way out is to be lifted
onto a low loader.
--
Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building.
You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK
(please use the reply to address for email)

In message , at
15:26:13 on Mon, 4 Sep 2006, Bigguy
remarked:
I assume that rail companies also pay the business rates. Major
terminals for most forms of transport have some kind of security force
with varying amounts of police power. Rail is probably unusual in
also providing a security presence on the right of way.

Operational railway land is not subject to rates.

Ah HA! A hidden subsidy.
--
Roland Perry

On Sun, 3 Sep 2006 00:27:55 +0100, Pyromancer wrote in
, seen in uk.railway:

[...]
If those caught doing anti-social things were quickly and painfully
punished, *and* if detection rates were improved so that said thugs knew
they would eventually get caught and dealt with (this being the
difficult and expensive bit that most Daily Wail types forget about),
then I believe we would see a change.

You don't need the pain. You just need to catch the buggers and punish
them - embarrassing the Hell out of them by splashing them all over
the paper the first time they're caught and convicted at an when they
are legally responsible will work.

Most of the problem nowadays is that people know they stand very
little chance of being caught, not the effectiveness of any punishment
when they do get prosecuted.


In any case, with the sort of anti-social hardcases you're thinking
of, the scars from the physical punishment would merely be worn as a
badge of honour. Not quite the effect you intend, methinks.
--
Ross, in Lincoln, most likely being cynical or sarcastic, as ever.
Reply-to will bounce. Replace the junk-trap with my name to e-mail me.

Demonstration of poor photography: http://www.rosspix.me.uk - updated with NL & LU pix
AD: http://www.merciacharters.co.uk for European charters occasionally gripped by me

On Tue, 05 Sep 2006 01:34:44 +0100, I wrote in
, seen in uk.railway:
On Sun, 3 Sep 2006 00:27:55 +0100, Pyromancer wrote in
, seen in uk.railway:

[...]
If those caught doing anti-social things were quickly and painfully
punished, *and* if detection rates were improved so that said thugs knew
they would eventually get caught and dealt with (this being the
difficult and expensive bit that most Daily Wail types forget about),
then I believe we would see a change.

You don't need the pain. You just need to catch the buggers and punish
them - embarrassing the Hell out of them by splashing them all over
the paper the first time they're caught and convicted at an when they
are legally responsible will work.

Makes no sense, that, does it?

It should say...
"...the first time they're caught and convicted at an age when they
are legally responsible..."

Which makes more sense. To me, anyway.
--
Ross, in Lincoln, most likely being cynical or sarcastic, as ever.
Reply-to will bounce. Replace the junk-trap with my name to e-mail me.

Demonstration of poor photography: http://www.rosspix.me.uk - updated with NL & LU pix
AD: http://www.merciacharters.co.uk for European charters occasionally gripped by me

On Mon, 4 Sep 2006 17:26:11 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at
15:26:13 on Mon, 4 Sep 2006, Bigguy
remarked:
I assume that rail companies also pay the business rates. Major
terminals for most forms of transport have some kind of security force
with varying amounts of police power. Rail is probably unusual in
also providing a security presence on the right of way.

Operational railway land is not subject to rates.

Ah HA! A hidden subsidy.
ARe any of the following subject to rates?
1. Highway facilities.
2. Pipelines
3. Port facilities.
4. Waterways.
5. Air traffic control facilities.
6. Airports.

In message , at 01:32:13 on
Tue, 5 Sep 2006, Clark F Morris remarked:
Operational railway land is not subject to rates.

Ah HA! A hidden subsidy.
ARe any of the following subject to rates?
1. Highway facilities.
2. Pipelines
3. Port facilities.
4. Waterways.
5. Air traffic control facilities.
6. Airports.

Most are listed at:

http://www.voa.gov.uk/business_rates/RLI/Scats/scat.htm

But it doesn't show the level of rates applied to each of those special
categories.
--
Roland Perry

"John Mara" wrote in message
...

I guess I was looking at it more from the policing side than the
prosecution side. Did British Rail have railway police? Do the new
private companies have their own police?


The British Transport Police, formed in 1825 (1), deal with railway related
crime.

(1) http://www.btp.police.uk/History%20S...ety%20Main.htm

As far a getting rid of graffiti goes, the New York City Transit Authority
got rid of graffiti by cleaning it up as soon as it happened. There were
graffiti cleaning crews at most terminals. I was once on a train which
had some fresh graffiti on one side. I was sitting in the first car so I
overheard the radio conversation between the train operator and the
dispatcher. We had to wait for the other terminal track to open up so
that the graffiti would be on the platform side where the cleaners could
get at it.

On London Underground, trains are normally sent to depot at the first
opportunity to have grafiiti removed, once reported. If it is wet of
offensive, the train is normally taken out of service and sent to depot for
cleaning immediately.

On the other hand, NYCTA has had no luck at dealing with window
scratching. I suppose replacing the window every time would be too
expensive. I wonder if the scratch repair products used on car
windshields would work.

Sacrificial plastic coatings are being used on refurbished District Line
trains to prevent the damage done by "Dutch etching".

In message , Roland Perry
writes
In message , at 01:32:13 on
Tue, 5 Sep 2006, Clark F Morris remarked:

Operational railway land is not subject to rates.

Ah HA! A hidden subsidy.
ARe any of the following subject to rates?
1. Highway facilities.
2. Pipelines
3. Port facilities.
4. Waterways.
5. Air traffic control facilities.
6. Airports.

Most are listed at:

http://www.voa.gov.uk/business_rates/RLI/Scats/scat.htm

But it doesn't show the level of rates applied to each of those special
categories.

But you can search by category at
http://ratinglists.voa.gov.uk/irl2k5/mainController?action=InitialiseApp&listYear=2000& lang=E

The 23 items listed, with a number since deleted, for cat 231, Railways
& tramways, seems rather short. Clearly some railway lands are more
operational than others.
--
Goalie of the Century

"Brian Begg-Robertson" wrote in message
news:7E9Kg.3096
PRISON DOESN'T WORK.

Only when they let them out!

--
Ken Ward

"Society for the production of Maritime Reefs using MerseyRail 142's"
(For membership email... )
"Leave the Mobile Phone at home day Oct 25th 2006"