SWT: Barrier Policy - or not !!

[whole diary]

[moonrakerz]

You should write to SWT^▸ (South West Trains) to complain. They need to know when things like this happen.

I HAVE written to SWT to complain (not about this incident) and the responses I have had, have been - to be blunt, absolutely disgraceful ! What I classify as "bed bug" letters (qv).
I complained about their staff - this wasn't even mentioned in their first reply.
I have detailed specific questions that I want answered - completely ignored  - No,  I lie ! they say they have answered them - by ignoring them !!!!
I am about to fire off my fourth letter about the same incident - this time to the MD of SWT. I have contacted my MP^▸ (Member of Parliament) as well, I am not prepared to let this one lie !

But, at the same time as you sound off, put yourself in the position of the SWT guard... How would you fancy your chances tackling said bunch of drunk football supporters and trying to move them into overcrowded standard class accommodation single-handed? Of course in a perfect world that would be possible, but guards are humans too (as people often seem to forget). Would you have preferred the guard to (potentially) get assaulted?

I'm sorry,  but this reply is complete cop out ! To accuse me of "sounding off", I classify as the same pathetic, meaningless responses I have been getting from SWT when I complain ! If you can't stand the heat in the kitchen.....................

 If a TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) means what it says about fare abuse it should enforce it. Your argument is the same as the motorist is now suffering from - don't pick on those with no tax, no insurance, no MOT, that is too difficult ! - lets "do" the honest motorist who will pay up for doing 35mph in a 30 zone !

[Chris from Nailsea]

Ahem.

I do accept that you are frustrated at the apparent failure of SWT^▸ (South West Trains) to deal adequately with your complaints to them about their service, moonrakerz.

However, shouting at members of this First Great Western Coffee Shop forum about it is not going to achieve anything.  We have absolutely no influence over the decisions made by South West Trains, so we cannot be blamed for any problems you have experienced with them.

For you to respond to any helpful suggestion from any member here by calling it 'complete cop out' is not acceptable.

Please reconsider the tone of your post.

Chris.

[JayMac]

If a TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) means what it says about fare abuse it should enforce it. Your argument is the same as the motorist is now suffering from - don't pick on those with no tax, no insurance, no MOT, that is too difficult ! - lets "do" the honest motorist who will pay up for doing 35mph in a 30 zone !

35mph in a 30mph zone is against the law. What's being an honest motorist got to do with it? And in 2008 170,000 uninsured vehicles were seized. That was 465 illegally driven vehicles taken off the roads every day - so, patently not too difficult.

[moonrakerz]

For you to respond to any helpful suggestion from any member here by calling it 'complete cop out' is not acceptable.

Please reconsider the tone of your post.

Chris.

Chris,

I did consider the tone of my post, very seriously, before I posted it. I did not consider this suggestion to be "helpful".

I can only assume by his "nom de plume" that the poster who accused me of "sounding off" is (or was) a railway employee. I am afraid, to me, accusing me of "sounding off" is more of an "offence" against site rules than my saying that something is a "cop out" !
I am also accused of "shouting" which is most certainly not the case - could it be that I am criticising the Railway Companies just a little too much ? Can we have a little bit of balance here please ?

To go back to the start of this thread - It would now appear that it is quite acceptable for TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) employees to refuse access to part of a station to a pair of 60 year olds on the grounds that they are potential "fare dodgers" - YET - the same TOC seems to be unwilling to act when blatant fare dodging adversely affects one of these persons who has paid the full fare.
Yet again, I have to say (perhaps in slightly more diplomatic terms) that I find anyone who supports this attitude to be defending the indefensible.

I am not expecting that this site does anything about SWT^▸ (South West Trains)'s (or FGW^▸ (First Great Western)'s policies), not that I asked it to; however, I do not expect that a totally justified comment on this subject to be met with accusation of "sounding off" and of "shouting" by other site members. I would therefore respectfully ask that others also "reconsider the tone" of their posts .

Finally:

35mph in a 30mph zone is against the law.

In effect, so is SWT's blatant disregard of the rules laid down by DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) when SWT signed up to its franchise.

[Chris from Nailsea]

Thank you for your response, moonrakerz.

The poster who offered a comment as to whether any guard on their own should realistically be expected to deal with "a bunch of well oiled football supporters" (your words) is not, and has not been, a railway employee.

In terms of 'shouting' at members here: your use of so many capitals and exclamation marks, when posting here, amounts to that.

You are welcome to criticise any Train Operating Company just as much as you want, moonrakerz - but I repeat: all of your complaints against South West Trains are best directed at them, not at us on this forum.

Chris. 

[inspector_blakey]

I can only assume by his "nom de plume" that the poster who accused me of "sounding off" is (or was) a railway employee.

No need to assume in future, moonrakerz. For reference you can find out brief details of all the moderation or admin teams by looking here. And, in order to avoid potential conflicts of interest, Graham's eminently sensible policy is that none of us should be current or past railway staff.

[moonrakerz]

In terms of 'shouting' at members here: your use of so many capitals and exclamation marks, when posting here, amounts to that.

"Another violation of forum etiquette is posting in ALL CAPS. This is considered shouting and is very rude, in addition to being hard on the eyes. Something may be in caps for emphasis (e.g. I did NOT want to go!), but no post should be entirely in all caps."

^ An exclamation mark is like laughing at your own jokes.^   F Scott Fitzgerald:

 

No more...............(on this subject)

[moonrakerz]

No need to assume in future, moonrakerz.

My humble apologies to you Sir. I should have looked at your post of Dec 6th 2008 first.

[grahame]

There are certain things - like the forum agreements, and things like that - and details of the moderator team - that are "sticky topic"ed on the top of the introduction and chat board - which is the first board on the site.  That way, old posts that contain important data are kept easily to hand, rather than being lost in the sands of time.

According to the site stats, these two topics have been viewed no fewer that 9,000 times ... and I'm going to encourage anyone who's not stopped by them recently to go click on the following links for a quick reminder:

http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=1761.0

http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=1780.0