To as long whose side you'd have been on on this train?

[WanderingNotLost]

Apologies in advance, it's a Daily Mail story

Personally I think it's bad form to not move your bags if people need seats but to be fair, if it had been me on the receiving end of the "I'm carrying a baby, you have to respect me" line it would have got my back up!

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat/2803177-who-s-in-the-wrong

I think they were both rude. I didn't like the comment about having to respect because she had a baby . I also was disgusted at the older lady demanding respect for elders and betters !

Not clicking that link but I've read it elsewhere.
Both of them were uncooperative and rude.

Oops posted to soon.

So now mn lifts stories from the mail that are actually from mumsnet?!

In fairness it doesn't show the beginning of the exchange so her comments might have been because the older lady was being rude. It was explained quite clear that due to disruption the seats had been declassified so all seats were free to all passengers. Therefore the woman with the baby was fully entitled to sit down. Even if that had not been the case I think you have to be a pretty shitty human being to not let a woman carrying a baby sitting down on a free seat, there is absolutely no excuse for her behaviour.

They were both equally rude but she was wrong to be sitting in first class without a first class ticket.

The train had been declassified due to problems so anyone was free to sit anywhere. You have to be a special kind of arsehole to think your bags should take priority on a seat over a human being carrying a baby.

Purplepinic as I said in above post the seats had been declassified due to service issues so the seats were no longer reserved for first class, it had been announced at the previous station.

She shouldn't have been there without a first class ticket unless train staff had said it was ok due to overcrowding or similar. If I'd shelled out extra for a first class ticket I'd be pissed off that someone thinks they can just waltz in there because they have a baby. But then people who use seats for luggage piss me off too. Nobody comes out of this covered in glory.

They were both rude.

The seats were declassified.

Geillis the train staff had said it was OK due to overcrowding. That is literally what declassified means here. Which has already been pointed out. 3 times. And in the video.

They were both rude and arrogant.

Ok fair enough, I missed that in the article and only saw the bit from the train company about how you still have to have a first class ticket to use a first class priority seat. I haven't watched the video because my tablet is playing up and I can't switch the sound on.

Fair enough Geillis

Train was declassified. I've been in this position before where someone has refused to move their bags off the seat. Never in 1st class though. On my route the 1st class passengers are really nice - have often seen heavily pregnant mums to be get their upgrades paid for by other passengers so they can have a seat.

Unless that woman had bought a ticket for her bags she can't dictate who sits anywhere.
I'd bet money that if it had been a big burly bloke who sat next to her, she would have said absolutely nothing......

Declassified seats or not. Presumably the older lady bought 1 ticket for 1 seat. Whoever sits in the other seats is really none of her business.

I'm firmly on the side of the woman with thr baby. As a passenger, she has a right to the seat. The other woman's bags gave no such right. Having asked once, I would have picked them up and dumped them on the floor.
Babies are part of our society and people don't get to declare that they don't want to sit next to them. It is public transport - the clue is in the name. Anyone who doesn't want to share, should stay off it!

People baggsying seat with bags are one of my biggest bugbears. I tend to make a point of asking them to move their bags even if there are other seats available.

That old lady is vile - but I can equally see that if you've paid for a 1st class seat which isn't cheap, you'd be a bit aggrieved when the seats are declassified. We went on a weekend break to London a few years back, and splashed out on 1st class seats - it was around £300 return for 2 tickets opposed to £120 each normally so it was very much a treat. We had a lovely quiet journey down, but the return was awful as the train was overcrowded and we ended up with a load of lads off a stag do that helped themselves to the seats around us. I've never heard such vile offensive language in my life, and although they were moved once, they came straight back and the conductor seemed to give up. We were fuming and it's put me off ever paying it again. It's terrible though that so many people were against a young mum with a baby having a seat.....for safety reasons alone, it's a nightmare trying to keep your balance on a moving train. I feel bad for her.

If the train is declassified then 1st class passengers will often get a refund.

Did anyone hear the guy talking at the end offering her a seat further up the carriage? He sounded dishy and very charming.

Yeah the woman with the bags may have been annoyed that she had paid for a first class ticket but her issue is with the train company who will more than likely issue a refund. The lady with the baby was not the same as a bunch of lads on a stag party, in fact the woman with the bags only argument was she didn't want to sit next to a "screaming baby" (Baby was quiet as a mouse).