BBC Northwest - Virgin Trains

Idiot, I've have given her serious verbal if she touched my kit.
 
Technically I think it is although I doubt it would be taken up as a criminal matter.
 
Yeah that's assault alright.
I'd kick up the biggest fuss you've ever seen, simply because of how rude she is.

I'd be getting some serious compensation from First Great Western, or whoever the woman was working for.
 
Am I the only saddo who wants to go round and play with the geezer's railway layout?
 
45689ajax said:
The way that she says "how dare you?", made me laugh.
Click to expand...

Actually she had a point. Mr. Tan was at fault, she advised him of it in a hasty but not impolite fashion and pointed out that he needed permission.

IMO her error was in quickly saying "no" when he asked for permission, she ought really to have told him how to obtain it and/or offered to assist him in obtaining it. If she touched his kit that was a mistake too, though whether she did or not is unclear from the film.

The old saying "ignorance of the law is no excuse" applies here. The spotter looks a berk for not knowing you need permission. I wonder if there is a sign somewhere, it's maybe not huge enough? You would think that it was common knowledge in train spotting circles as it ought to be amongst togs.

Again folk here rush to defend the tog. Why? He was in the wrong. I would have sought permission first. If I were approached as in the film I would have apologised and turned off the camera whilst I discussed the issue with the guard.

The guard will be aware that they can't make you delete anything and are almost powerless to move you on, that puts them in an uncomfortable position.

Had the guy been adjacent to the station, outside the property boundry then the confrontation would not have happened at all.

There are so many incidents like this one and they just fuel a sense of injustice in some photographers. I don't get it. All it needs is a little forethought and/or common courtesy and it is easily resolved.
 
it's alive said:
Actually she had a point. Mr. Tan was at fault, she advised him of it in a hasty but not impolite fashion and pointed out that he needed permission.

IMO her error was in quickly saying "no" when he asked for permission, she ought really to have told him how to obtain it and/or offered to assist him in obtaining it. If she touched his kit that was a mistake too, though whether she did or not is unclear from the film.

The old saying "ignorance of the law is no excuse" applies here. The spotter looks a berk for not knowing you need permission. I wonder if there is a sign somewhere, it's maybe not huge enough? You would think that it was common knowledge in train spotting circles as it ought to be amongst togs.

Again folk here rush to defend the tog. Why? He was in the wrong. I would have sought permission first. If I were approached as in the film I would have apologised and turned off the camera whilst I discussed the issue with the guard.

The guard will be aware that they can't make you delete anything and are almost powerless to move you on, that puts them in an uncomfortable position.

Had the guy been adjacent to the station, outside the property boundry then the confrontation would not have happened at all.

There are so many incidents like this one and they just fuel a sense of injustice in some photographers. I don't get it. All it needs is a little forethought and/or common courtesy and it is easily resolved.
Click to expand...

No disputing that she had a point, and that Mr. Tan was technically in the wrong. I do think that she went over the top in her attitude (the "how dare you?" still makes me laugh).
Seems to be that she had a little bit of power, and was determined to us it.
 
45689ajax said:
No disputing that she had a point, and that Mr. Tan was technically in the wrong. I do think that she went over the top in her attitude (the "how dare you?" still makes me laugh).
Seems to be that she had a little bit of power, and was determined to us it.
Click to expand...


No technicality about it. Cut and dried.

Actually I think that she had a responsibility to stop Mr. Tan but almost no power to actually cause him to do so. Would you like to be in that position?

Taking that perspective she did what she could. Imagine her dismay when Mr. Tan appeared to be going to take no notice. Her only recourse should he not pay her heed is to call the police and cause a scene. I'd be a bit agitated at that point I reckon.
 
I saw this and thought it must be a quiet night for news if this is a 'story' !

He was in the wrong. He is on private property and had no permission from anyone to film or photograph. I do agree that her attitude was inappropriate as she was acting in a professional capacity when requesting him to stop. As he continued to film I think she had the right to block any further filming. You see this all the time on tv shows where they encroach onto private property with film cameras.

How dare he !!! lmao. That has gotta be quote of the year !
 
northernstar074 said:
I saw this and thought it must be a quiet night for news if this is a 'story' !

He was in the wrong. He is on private property and had no permission from anyone to film or photograph. I do agree that her attitude was inappropriate as she was acting in a professional capacity when requesting him to stop. As he continued to film I think she had the right to block any further filming. You see this all the time on tv shows where they encroach onto private property with film cameras.
!
Click to expand...

The thing is, she didn't have the right to physically stop him filming (If that is what happened).
 
This whole issue is complete *******s. Back in the day when I used to enjoy trainspotting I always had my little disc camera with me and would happilly snap away and take allsorts of photos on stations, at level crossings, next to lines and even inside depots.

This ridiculous hysteria that has been allowed to fester and grow needs to be stamped out now. It's pathetic.
 
tigerimages said:
This whole issue is complete *******s. Back in the day when I used to enjoy trainspotting I always had my little disc camera with me and would happilly snap away and take allsorts of photos on stations, at level crossings, next to lines and even inside depots.

This ridiculous hysteria that has been allowed to fester and grow needs to be stamped out now. It's pathetic.
Click to expand...

Hear hear.
 
RichardtheSane said:
The thing is, she didn't have the right to physically stop him filming (If that is what happened).
Click to expand...

I agree she didn't have the right to physically stop him filming. However I would have thought that you would have the right to cover the lens to prevent any further filming once the person has been asked to stop. Also wouldn't the right to use reasonable force come into this ? Maybe to remove someone from private property when they are doing something they shouldn't be ? Wouldn't he be regarded as trespassing on railway property ?
 
I've just tried to look at Macclesfield Station on Google Earth and a cartoon woman popped up on the screen and said.......

HOW DARE YOU !!!


She then formated my PC and sent the Anti-Terrorist Squad round


:nono:
 
mrgubby said:
I've just tried to look at Macclesfield Station on Google Earth and a cartoon woman popped up on the screen and said.......

HOW DARE YOU !!!


She then formated my PC and sent the Anti-Terrorist Squad round


:nono:
Click to expand...

:lol::lol:
 
mrgubby said:
I've just tried to look at Macclesfield Station on Google Earth and a cartoon woman popped up on the screen and said.......

HOW DARE YOU !!!


She then formated my PC and sent the Anti-Terrorist Squad round


:nono:
Click to expand...

LMAO !!!! That is classic !!!! :lol::lol::clap::clap::lol::lol:
 
The transport police have some guidelines re. station photography on their website someone might be able to find, and clarify.
 
Ugh. I have had this happen to me at this very station years ago.

I was taking pictures on my film Sigma SLR.

Macclesfield is 10 mins drive from me so I know exactly what this place is like.

Theres less security at Manchester Picc! lol

THe whole situation is just plain wrong.
 
I've also heard trainspotters being referred to as 'unpaid eyes and ears' for the station staff. Why brush them off when they are more likely to see people hanging around looking shifty and suspicious. They can tell if it's a fellow spotter or not with a couple of questions etc.

This has been mentioned before but when an incident takes place, the Plod will be asking for anyone who may have photos that could help trace the guilty party. People will say sorry, not allowed to take photos.
 
Adamski said:
This has been mentioned before but when an incident takes place, the Plod will be asking for anyone who may have photos that could help trace the guilty party. People will say sorry, not allowed to take photos.
Click to expand...

Indeed...wasn't it after 7/7 that they appealed for any photographs of the underground system at the time?
 
Be interesting to see if Virgin have any policy agaisnt photography of their trains.
The lady who told him to stop was an employee of Virgin meaning (i think) has little right to tell the man he couldn't record video from within the platform.
 
It does no harm whatsoever. Putting up a tripod does no harm whatsoever, especially if it's at the end of the platform where the most common place to take train photos usually is. It's all rubbish.

I think it's even rich calling railway stations private property too, they're interchanges or intersections where people pass through they aren't ultimate destinations. They're public places.

People like this women clearly have nothing more important to be doing in their roles so they create work for themselves to justify their position.
 
vibrantcolour said:
The transport police have some guidelines re. station photography on their website someone might be able to find, and clarify.
Click to expand...
When I first saw this thread I went looking for a photo of trainspotters, thinking that a photo of 20 anoraks all standing on the platform holding cameras would illustrate how silly this woman was.

About the 3rd suitable photo on Google images was this one:
trainspotters.jpg

and it's on the National Rail Enquiries website, linking to their Guidelines for Rail Enthusiasts page.

That page does say you should get permission from a Duty Station Manager or other member of staff, but I still think it's pretty daft - it's so darn obvious that someone with a camera on a station platform is a trainspotter.

I don't have any truck at all with the idea that a conspicuous photographer might even possibly be a terrorist - if you wanted to photograph for nefarious purposes you would just use a cell phone camera, or a compact P&S or just use a concealed SLR. You could easily fit a 400mm zoom in the bottom of a shopping bag, cut a hole in the side and if you were to fill up a 4gig card with pictures you'd be sure to get a few useable photos without bringing yourself to anyone's attention. Why the heck would a terrorist photograph a station, anyway? You could just get a plenty good enough look at whatever you were interested in by riding up & down a few times to the next stop.

The only reason I can see for trainspotters checking in with railway staff is if they don't have a camera - you could easily worry that a solitary bloke standing at the end of the platform might be a suicide risk.

Just because the station are legally in the right about having to be asked, doesn't mean this woman isn't an idiot for making such a big fuss about it. They should have a policy in place to simply ask "suspicious characters" loitering about the platform why they're there. It's hardly that hard, is it?

Stroller.
 
it's alive said:
Actually she had a point. Mr. Tan was at fault, she advised him of it in a hasty but not impolite fashion and pointed out that he needed permission.

IMO her error was in quickly saying "no" when he asked for permission, she ought really to have told him how to obtain it and/or offered to assist him in obtaining it. If she touched his kit that was a mistake too, though whether she did or not is unclear from the film.

The old saying "ignorance of the law is no excuse" applies here. The spotter looks a berk for not knowing you need permission. I wonder if there is a sign somewhere, it's maybe not huge enough? You would think that it was common knowledge in train spotting circles as it ought to be amongst togs.

Again folk here rush to defend the tog. Why? He was in the wrong. I would have sought permission first. If I were approached as in the film I would have apologised and turned off the camera whilst I discussed the issue with the guard.

The guard will be aware that they can't make you delete anything and are almost powerless to move you on, that puts them in an uncomfortable position.

Had the guy been adjacent to the station, outside the property boundry then the confrontation would not have happened at all.

There are so many incidents like this one and they just fuel a sense of injustice in some photographers. I don't get it. All it needs is a little forethought and/or common courtesy and it is easily resolved.
Click to expand...


So if you was on a holiday with your family and wanted to take a video of them leaving would you think of going to the station master to ask for permission before you decided to take a picture, No, i dont think you would. She should not have touched the camera nor should she have spoke to him in such a negative tone.
 
I think this "security risk" and "threat of terrorism" is a load of bunk. I'm not sure what the underlying motive behind it but I'm sure there is one. I'm not usually one for conspiracy theories but we've had a couple of serious terrorist incidents in the past 5 years, which pales in comparison with what happened in the 80s with the IRA. I don't recall such limits on freedoms back then. Now, if you're not a terrorist, you're a paedophile, and I'm not talking about just photography although we seem to be bearing the brunt of this paranoia.

Seriously though, how is a guy on a train platform with a handycam a security risk? How is someone in a shopping centre taking a few snaps a security risk? What is going on with all this "permission" crap?

I literally can not get my head round why permission is needed to take photos of the interior of a shopping centre or of a train platform (or the trains themselves). Am I missing something blindingly obvious? Privacy? Oh, I get it.. it's quite acceptable for streets and shopping centres to be lined with CCTV cameras and invade our privacy.

As for "suspicious characters".. surely any terrorist worth their salt would never, ever look "suspicious". How do people think they've got away with it in the past? And how the hell would an average person in the street have any idea on how to recognise a terrorist? Someone wearing a turban or slightly ethnic clothing? That the police have published those posters should be a crime in itself. Those are just fear-mongering.

Anyway. Rant over. It's all *******s.
 
This is nothing new. Way back in the '70's I needed a shot of an express train rushing through a station. I was politely informed that I had to have permission from the Station Manager. A quick conversation, problem solved.
 
foodpoison said:
I know that Rick :p

But don't other company's trains pass through eachother's stations?
Click to expand...

Don't think the Train Companies own the stations. It's Network Rail and I read recently that they have a policy of welcoming spotters.
 
Network rail own all stations and the whole infrastructure. They are clear that photography is allowed.

They also *dont* state that you need to get permission for your visit, they merely request that you inform a member of staff of your presence.

Although Network Rail own the stations, various rail companies operate and manage these properties on behalf of them. So technically the train company staff do have the authority to 'hoof you off' so to speak.

However, their rules are clear. Photography is permitted and you're only requested to inform them of your presence, not actually request permission.
 
Marcel said:
However, their rules are clear. Photography is permitted and you're only requested to inform them of your presence, not actually request permission.
Click to expand...

That's good to know AND good practice to observe anywhere there is uniformed security. An upfront chat of 30 seconds is far preferable to an embarassing confrontation some time later.

As I enjoy candid portrait shooting I find that this is the only way to avoid attention.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top