• Dear Guest, and welcome to RailUK Forums. Our non-railway discussion forums are currently restricted until members have five or more posts, and you will not be able to make a new thread or reply to an existing one in this section until you have made five or more posts elsewhere on the forum.

TFL and TOC dual stations and COVID rules?

GodAtum

On Moderation
Joined
11 Dec 2009
Messages
2,494
So I use Wimbledon station. With TFL having a mask requirement, where do I put one on? I use platform 10 (TFL tram) and sometimes platform 9 (SWR). Will there be some sort of invisible line down the middle? When does the underground station, the lower concourse stairs?

Same with Richmond, will it be only platforms 6-7 I need to wear a mask?

How about Twyford, Slough, or West Ealing (both GWR and TFL use the same platforms)?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
55,103
Location
Yorkshire
If you are travelling on a (non-TfL) National Rail service, I do not think that you can be contractually obliged to wear a mask at any point. But others may disagree (see https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/changing-conditions-of-carriage-travel.219886/ )

At the end of your journey it is a moot point, as the worst they can do is ask you to leave the station, so the question only arises at the start of (or during, if interchanging) your journey.

if you are covered by an exemption (which includes anxiety among other things) you could have an exemption card in your wallet, to produce if challenged (there is no requirement to show one, but it might make things easier, and avoid the need to say anything)
 

GodAtum

On Moderation
Joined
11 Dec 2009
Messages
2,494
So for example, if I'm travelling on a tram I will be required to wear a mask, but when I arrive at Wimbledon as soon as I step from platform 10 to 9 I can take it off (as that is SWR)?
 

Watershed

Established Member
Joined
26 Sep 2020
Messages
2,645
Location
UK
So I use Wimbledon station. With TFL having a mask requirement, where do I put one on? I use platform 10 (TFL tram) and sometimes platform 9 (SWR). Will there be some sort of invisible line down the middle? When does the underground station, the lower concourse stairs?

Same with Richmond, will it be only platforms 6-7 I need to wear a mask?

How about Twyford, Slough, or West Ealing (both GWR and TFL use the same platforms)?
TfL's Conditions of Carriage state you must wear a face covering:
  • "when travelling on our services" and
  • "when in our bus and rail stations, on our platforms"
As Wimbledon, Richmond, Twyford and Slough are not TfL managed stations, I don't think they can classify any part of those stations as "our" stations or "our" platforms. Hence the mandate can't even apply until you board the service.

West Ealing is a TfL Rail managed station, so if you are boarding a TfL Rail service and are travelling under the TfL CoC, you would need to wear a face covering once you pass the entrance to the station building. However, if you are using a paper ticket on your journey, I would say that is a journey made purely under the NRCoT, so TfL's "mandate" doesn't apply to you.

If you are travelling on a GWR service then the TfL CoC are of no relevance to your journey and so again, you don't have to wear a face covering. Of course, you might well intend to travel on a GWR service when you enter the station, and thus not need to wear a face covering, but then decide to take a TfL Rail service that turns up sooner... ;)

It's almost completely unenforceable and TfL know it - Commissioner Andy Byford more or less went so far as to admit this before they decided to keep the mandate.
 

317 forever

Established Member
Joined
21 Aug 2010
Messages
1,572
Location
North West
There will be some anomalies within the mask wearing rules. For example, travelling from Euston to Harrow & Wealdstone you will need to wear a mask if using London Overground (or Underground via Oxford Circus) but not London North Western. Similarly, you will need them from Paddington to Hayes & Harlington on TfL Rail but not Great Western.
 

3rd rail land

Member
Joined
30 Jan 2019
Messages
368
Location
Where the 3rd rail powers the trains
It's almost completely unenforceable and TfL know it - Commissioner Andy Byford more or less went so far as to admit this before they decided to keep the mandate.
Totally agree. No staff member of sound mind is going to try and challenge anyone not wearing a mask. It's simply not worth the hassle.

I suspect this will end up like the pay when challenged principle. People will not bother with a mask unless challenged at which point they will don one. I suspect the warm weather will only increase the number of people doing this.
 

infobleep

Established Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
10,615
Could they add a requirement to need to wear a mask at a station run by TfL? So bit a condition of travel but a requirement for those at the station. Obviously, exemptions, as there are now, would apply

Would Khan have the legal power to do that and if he did, would it take too much time to draft up a law or by-law to cover it?
 

Watershed

Established Member
Joined
26 Sep 2020
Messages
2,645
Location
UK
Could they add a requirement to need to wear a mask at a station run by TfL? So bit a condition of travel but a requirement for those at the station. Obviously, exemptions, as there are now, would apply

Would Khan have the legal power to do that and if he did, would it take too much time to draft up a law or by-law to cover it?
It couldn't fall under a condition of carriage, if you're not travelling with TfL.

It could only really happen if the TfL Byelaws were changed to mandate mask wearing, which is certainly not an overnight process and I believe may require ministerial approval.
 

island

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
12,588
Location
0036
It couldn't fall under a condition of carriage, if you're not travelling with TfL.

It could only really happen if the TfL Byelaws were changed to mandate mask wearing, which is certainly not an overnight process and I believe may require ministerial approval.
It requires both that and a 28-day consultation.
 

Paul Jones 88

Member
Joined
15 Dec 2020
Messages
235
Location
Headcorn
Liverpool Street to Cheshunt, Overground compulsory masks.

Liverpool Street to Cheshunt, Greater Anglia optional masks.

Is that how it works?
Overground no alcohol,
Greater Anglia alcohol permitted has been a thing for years on this route.
 

infobleep

Established Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
10,615
It couldn't fall under a condition of carriage, if you're not travelling with TfL.

It could only really happen if the TfL Byelaws were changed to mandate mask wearing, which is certainly not an overnight process and I believe may require ministerial approval.
So can they specifically mandate it at stations if travelling with them even if they don't run or own the station? I mean legally speaking rather than practically speaking

Liverpool Street to Cheshunt, Overground compulsory masks.

Liverpool Street to Cheshunt, Greater Anglia optional masks.

Is that how it works?
Overground no alcohol,
Greater Anglia alcohol permitted has been a thing for years on this route.
That is my understanding
 

Watershed

Established Member
Joined
26 Sep 2020
Messages
2,645
Location
UK
So can they specifically mandate it at stations if travelling with them even if they don't run or own the station? I mean legally speaking rather than practically speaking
It would depend on the wording of any altered Byelaws, but in principle, yes.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
55,103
Location
Yorkshire
I think that's unlikely. I doubt the police will want to enforce it, and the condition of travel is probably not going to last nite than a few weeks.
 

Snow1964

Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
1,088
Location
West Wiltshire
TfL has issued a new Conditions of carriage dated 19th July 2021

Per section 2.4 passengers over 11 must wear a face mask (unless exempt) until further notice

Section 2.5 has a few more what you can’t do including using hoverboards on buses and trains. (yes seriously that is listed)

Plenty of other interesting clauses eg
section 8.2.1 Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, the train services we offer must be provided ‘with reasonable skill and care’.


And for those who don’t want to pay to use buses, it seems under section 10.1.2 if you get a mobility scooter or wheelchair you can travel free (doesn’t appear to be any requirements to actually need it)

As the document is 41 pages long, and some of the clauses are quite long, I’m not going to attempt to quote them.
 
Last edited:

MikeWM

Established Member
Joined
26 Mar 2010
Messages
2,508
Location
Ely
TfL has issued a new Conditions of carriage dated 19th July 2021

Never looked at these before, but it seems a fairly odd document. For example what does 2.1

We always try to run reliable services. Sometimes our services have to change at short notice for reasons beyond our control or that of our contractors. For up to date information on any changes or cancellations, you should check online attfl.gov.uk/status-updates or call TfL Customer Services on 0343222 1234.

have to do with a 'condition of carriage'?!
 

WelshBluebird

Established Member
Joined
14 Jan 2010
Messages
4,096
I guess masks and the various COVID rules are the most obvious examples, but I'm somewhat surprised similar questions haven't come up before to be honest. E.g. with the TfL alcohol ban etc.
 

jumble

Member
Joined
1 Jul 2011
Messages
737
TfL's Conditions of Carriage state you must wear a face covering:
  • "when travelling on our services" and
  • "when in our bus and rail stations, on our platforms"
As Wimbledon, Richmond, Twyford and Slough are not TfL managed stations, I don't think they can classify any part of those stations as "our" stations or "our" platforms. Hence the mandate can't even apply until you board the service.

West Ealing is a TfL Rail managed station, so if you are boarding a TfL Rail service and are travelling under the TfL CoC, you would need to wear a face covering once you pass the entrance to the station building. However, if you are using a paper ticket on your journey, I would say that is a journey made purely under the NRCoT, so TfL's "mandate" doesn't apply to you.

If you are travelling on a GWR service then the TfL CoC are of no relevance to your journey and so again, you don't have to wear a face covering. Of course, you might well intend to travel on a GWR service when you enter the station, and thus not need to wear a face covering, but then decide to take a TfL Rail service that turns up sooner... ;)

It's almost completely unenforceable and TfL know it - Commissioner Andy Byford more or less went so far as to admit this before they decided to keep the mandate.
My favorite is standing on the platform at Amersham
You need a mask
Get on first train
If Chiltern no mask
If Met mask required
Get off Harrow mask required
Stay on train get off Marylebone no mask required

As you say unenforceable and as I have observed elsewhere no one is very interested in enforcing in any case
I mean can you imaging trying to evict someone from the network knowing they will enter probably it somewhere else as soon as your back is turned?
 

takno

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2016
Messages
3,579
Never looked at these before, but it seems a fairly odd document. For example what does 2.1

have to do with a 'condition of carriage'?!
Seems pretty standard to me. They're making it clear that they are providing no guarantees (and therefore not committing to any form of redress) if the service doesn't run as timetabled. In order to strengthen their case in not providing redress, they are providing a route for telling you when things won't run as planned.
 

MikeWM

Established Member
Joined
26 Mar 2010
Messages
2,508
Location
Ely
Seems pretty standard to me. They're making it clear that they are providing no guarantees (and therefore not committing to any form of redress) if the service doesn't run as timetabled. In order to strengthen their case in not providing redress, they are providing a route for telling you when things won't run as planned.

Perhaps - though the 'our responsibilities' bits in the NRCoT for example seem rather less vague and rather more concrete.
 
Last edited:

infobleep

Established Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
10,615
Just heard Mr Khan on LBC, talking to James O'Brien, say they are looking into making the wearing of face masks a by-law.

The YouTube video of their chat, which has just finished, is available at

Go 41 minutes into it to watch the discussion.

I assume if it was made a by-law then the Met Police could get involved, whereas at the moment they can't.

If it was made a by-law would that affect other operators?

I wonder if other local authorities could do something similar?
 

Watershed

Established Member
Joined
26 Sep 2020
Messages
2,645
Location
UK
Just heard Mr Khan on LBC, talking to James O'Brien, say they are looking into making the wearing of face masks a by-law.
Unsurprising but nevertheless disappointing. If this makes it into a Byelaw, you can be sure masks will stay mandatory for the foreseeable future, if not forever. Is that Khan's vision of the future? The "new normal" :|

Of course any new Byelaws would have to be approved by the government. But that's rarely more than a rubber stamping exercise, and the government appears in no mood to stop anyone from mandating masks.

I assume if it was made a by-law then the Met Police could get involved, whereas at the moment they can't.
Yes, though I imagine there would be some degree of reluctance to dedicate resources to such 'minor' crimes.

In theory the police could get involved now, if TfL staff tell someone to leave the network and they refuse to do so - it would fall under the usual trespass laws.

If it was made a by-law would that affect other operators?
It depends on the wording - but it may well capture someone who is travelling on a non-TfL operator for as long as they are on the TfL managed station's premises (i.e. until they board the train).

I wonder if other local authorities could do something similar?
Their only relevant powers would be to give directions imposing restrictions on individual premises under the "No. 3 Regulations". However it would appear they're excluded from giving directions that apply to public transport. So, in essence, no.
 

island

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
12,588
Location
0036
There’s also a 28-day consultation process before they can make a new byelaw.
 

3rd rail land

Member
Joined
30 Jan 2019
Messages
368
Location
Where the 3rd rail powers the trains
I think TfL intend to keep this until next spring. Certainly over the winter…
This does appear to be the case. I take issue with organisations that try to force people into wearing face coverings. Asking people politely to wear one when in stations and on trains is perfectly reasonable but trying to make it a legal requirement, via bylaws, when the prime minister has said it is now optional is a step too far in my opinion. Unfortunately for me I live in London and don't drive so I have little choice but to use TFL services to get around the city.

As I've previously said I doubt staff will be too keen to enforce face coverings. Sure they could involve the police if it were made a bylaw but I doubt the police would be too keen to send officers to such low level offences. Far more important things to be dealing with.
 

infobleep

Established Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
10,615
There’s also a 28-day consultation process before they can make a new byelaw.
Well if they are serious, and I think they are, they will undertake that.

If they don't of course them hopefully people would point this out.

Whether one agrees or disagrees with it, they should still follow due process.

This does appear to be the case. I take issue with organisations that try to force people into wearing face coverings. Asking people politely to wear one when in stations and on trains is perfectly reasonable but trying to make it a legal requirement, via bylaws, when the prime minister has said it is now optional is a step too far in my opinion. Unfortunately for me I live in London and don't drive so I have little choice but to use TFL services to get around the city.

As I've previously said I doubt staff will be too keen to enforce face coverings. Sure they could involve the police if it were made a bylaw but I doubt the police would be too keen to send officers to such low level offences. Far more important things to be dealing with.
Well some might say the Prime Minister shouldn't have made it optional. So Mr Khan is just correcting the PMs mistakes.
 

island

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
12,588
Location
0036
As I've previously said I doubt staff will be too keen to enforce face coverings. Sure they could involve the police if it were made a bylaw but I doubt the police would be too keen to send officers to such low level offences. Far more important things to be dealing with.
Indeed. When the National laws were in place most forces would not attend a failure to wear face covering incident unless there was an assault or other aggravating matter.
Well some might say the Prime Minister shouldn't have made it optional. So Mr Khan is just correcting the PMs mistakes.
Sadiq should stop trying to second guess the people in charge of the country and stick to his knitting, balancing TfL’s budget would be a good starting point.
 

infobleep

Established Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
10,615
Indeed. When the National laws were in place most forces would not attend a failure to wear face covering incident unless there was an assault or other aggravating matter.

Sadiq should stop trying to second guess the people in charge of the country and stick to his knitting, balancing TfL’s budget would be a good starting point.
He is the mayor of London so he has jurisdiction over London. Maybe if the people in charge of the country didn't remove the requirement to wear a mask he wouldn't be doing this.
 

takno

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2016
Messages
3,579
He is the mayor of London so he has jurisdiction over London. Maybe if the people in charge of the country didn't remove the requirement to wear a mask he wouldn't be doing this.
He's the mayor of London so he has the power to run buses and all sorts. That really doesn't amount to jurisdiction - basically in terms of creating laws he can do a few bits and pieces with the consent of the government, who are actually in charge.

Maybe the government should be allowed to get on with running things without the ridiculously puffed up mayor confusing everybody
 

jumble

Member
Joined
1 Jul 2011
Messages
737
He is the mayor of London so he has jurisdiction over London. Maybe if the people in charge of the country didn't remove the requirement to wear a mask he wouldn't be doing this.
Sadiq Kahn is not a national politician and is not in government despite the fact that he would like to believe he is.
Surely you can see that mandating that people wear masks on empty open platforms is absurd and is in no way about health but control.
I am in agreement with @3rd rail land that no one is going to enforce this even if the byelaws are changed as someone only has to say I'm exempt and the enforcer then has to lose all interest.

Why does Sadiq make up rules that are contrary to Government policy? Because he can!
Why do some people claim to be exempt to bypass those rules? Because they can!
 
Last edited:

Top