Thank you First, for nearly getting me killed last night.
 

On 8 Oct 2006 05:18:23 -0700, "jonmorris"
wrote:
To clarify a few more things;

2) BTP at Kings Cross, where I've been asked to go next week to make a
full statement, confirmed the two people would have been security
guards (she mentioned the name of the company, but I don't remember it)
on contract with First Capital Connect.

I wonder what the guards are employed for. Wouldn't they have been
more use patrolling the train (and checking tickets if trained to do
so) rather than just waiting for trouble?
--
Peter Lawrence

Thank you First, for nearly getting me killed last night.
 

Peter Lawrence wrote:
I wonder what the guards are employed for. Wouldn't they have been
more use patrolling the train (and checking tickets if trained to do
so) rather than just waiting for trouble?

They were in the first class compartment at the end of the train (I'd
seen them come on when we left Kings Cross, and they were with a couple
of other people - possibly guards too, or just mates). They weren't
patrolling anything, let alone checking tickets.

Mind you, the uniformed guards never checked tickets either - but I
wouldn't expect them to as they'd need the relevant paperwork or
equipment.

Jonathan

Thank you First, for nearly getting me killed last night.
 

TBirdFrank wrote:
It provides, sadly, the best reason for having your own private
transport if you are out late at night, or arranging to travel in a
group.

As a bloke I never worried about travelling, late or exceedingly early
hours when younger, but as a dad, if my daughter's college activities
require her to be on campus late I would rather she gets a B & B up
there rather than taking a Preston M/cr - Manchester Hadfield late at
night.

And they call this progress ........... sheeesh!

Yet, there are those countries where women and children will quite
happily venture out late at night to use public transport and in
complete safety.

One of the reasons late night public transport, in the UK, is deemed to
be so unsafe is because it is so lightly used especially outside of the
South East and, in no small way, that's down to the car.

Of course, women alone in their cars, late at night, also cause some
concern.

What an age we live in but - and this is what so annoys me - there
really cannot be much excuse for it when elsewhere in the World these
matters are dealt with so well.

We really should not have to put up with it but as most of us resort
(if that's the right word) to our cars security on public transport
late at night has unfortunately become a minority issue - we just
don't care enough.

Thank you First, for nearly getting me killed last night.
 

In message . com, at
08:54:36 on Sun, 8 Oct 2006, jonmorris remarked:
I wonder what the guards are employed for. Wouldn't they have been
more use patrolling the train (and checking tickets if trained to do
so) rather than just waiting for trouble?

They were in the first class compartment at the end of the train (I'd
seen them come on when we left Kings Cross, and they were with a couple
of other people - possibly guards too, or just mates). They weren't
patrolling anything, let alone checking tickets.

Mind you, the uniformed guards never checked tickets either - but I
wouldn't expect them to as they'd need the relevant paperwork or
equipment.

Those trains don't have guards, and haven't had for a very long time.
Revenue Protection staff patrol a small number of trains, and security
guards were employed by WAGN on late night trains (and were allegedly
withdrawn by FCC, but it's always possible they've reinstated them).
--
Roland Perry

Thank you First, for nearly getting me killed last night.
 

"jonmorris" wrote in message
ups.com...
wrote:

2) BTP at Kings Cross, where I've been asked to go next week to make a
full statement, confirmed the two people would have been security
guards (she mentioned the name of the company, but I don't remember it)
on contract with First Capital Connect.

In all honesty, while this was obviously a very unpleasant journey, the
fact that the train carried two security guards is, to me, rather
reassuring. I'd prefer to have two trained security gaurds on hand than just
one old-fashioned railway guard. And, to be fair to them, they do seem to
have resolved the situation promptly and without major incident.

[Granted, you may have been put in a tricky situation at Hatfield, but your
account isn't exactly clear about whether you (or they) were forced to leave
the train unwillingly, or just allowed to terminate your journey as
planned.]

Walter Mann

Thank you First, for nearly getting me killed last night.
 

In article , (Roland
Perry) wrote:

Those trains don't have guards, and haven't had for a very long
time. Revenue Protection staff patrol a small number of trains, and
security guards were employed by WAGN on late night trains (and
were allegedly withdrawn by FCC, but it's always possible they've
reinstated them).

I've already reported here that First claimed to have kept the guards by
deploying their own staff when they took over the franchise. The
previous guard suppliers lost their contract.

Do keep up!

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Thank you First, for nearly getting me killed last night.
 

Roland Perry wrote:
Those trains don't have guards, and haven't had for a very long time.

I meant uniformed security guards (as you say below, they were used by
Wagn between Potters Bar and Stevenage and were totally useless but at
least wore Hi-vis vests with 'SECURITY' written on the back). A RPI
would obviously have the necessary equipment to issue penalty fares,
but I doubt they'd get involved with incidents - thus they're unlikely
to be seen at night when the network becomes free to use. This applies
on the Thameslink side too.

Revenue Protection staff patrol a small number of trains, and security
guards were employed by WAGN on late night trains (and were allegedly
withdrawn by FCC, but it's always possible they've reinstated them).

They must have done then, but definitely a different company (I think I
heard the name 'purple' mentioned by BTP). Having plain clothed
security on all late night trains (there aren't that many running)
would be a very good idea for both passengers and the train company.
Unfortunately, if they are ONLY there to protect property, then I don't
see why I should be that impressed.

Jonathan

Thank you First, for nearly getting me killed last night.
 

Walter Mann wrote:

In all honesty, while this was obviously a very unpleasant journey, the
fact that the train carried two security guards is, to me, rather
reassuring. I'd prefer to have two trained security gaurds on hand than just
one old-fashioned railway guard.

I wouldn't, as many low-wage security guards are just legalised thugs
without the requisite people skills. A professional railwayman would
be by far my preference, yet better would be two of them.

Neil

Thank you First, for nearly getting me killed last night.
 

Bob wrote:
BTP are running a survey about crime on the railway. You should forward
your observations.

I will.

Of course, I have no complaint about BTP here - they weren't involved
at all (which IS the problem - they weren't even notified until I told
them later). Since I've called them, they have given me a reference and
called me back to check I am okay. In due course, I am going to them to
make a formal statement.

Jonathan

Thank you First, for nearly getting me killed last night.
 

When returning to London from Peterborough, on a Saturday night last
month, on arriving at Peterborough station, it was swarming with police
who were detaining several men, who had presumably been causing
problems on the incoming train. Said train was sat on the platform in
darkness, with no indications on screens, and no staff seeming to know
whether it was going to go to London or not. In the end, it all powered
up and we were all on our way, and the carriage was full of beer cans,
both empty and unopened! A good haul in the end!