Making member pages, works on one context but not the other?

I've been following this tutorial: http://rtfm.modx.com/display/revolution20/Making+Member-Only+Pages
to create members only pages. On this site I'm also using babel and have two context. For some reason this works on my new language context but not the original one "web". In the new context a page that is protected shows a 401 error if I try to enter. But on the "web" context the page just stays on the starting page but changes the address in navbar to the protected address.

So in someways it works, I cant access protected pages as an anonymous user but in one context it shows a 401 error in the other one the protected pages doesn't load but the address is changed. How can I make both get the 401 error?

What is the unauthorized page setting for the "web" context? It will need its own setting, or it will use the default system setting (resource #1 by default).

I think that is what I have made.
I have three resource groups (though I think having two might be better). There is public(context web) which only has the startpage for the web context. Then public(context fr) for the other context where only the entry page for that context is. Last there is the resource group called protected where all other resources are.
In the attached images you can see the settings I have for the anonymous user group.

What kind of different setting could I have to the web context to make it work?

Other problem:
The access policy in "Resource Group Access" called "Load & List Only" is a duplication of load only where I've added list permission as well. Strange thing about this is that when you edit the resource group access using that access policy it shows that it has all permissions from the original "ObjectTemplate" (policy template). When I first select it as access policy it say its only two permissions. Its only when I update it this happens even after flush permissions, cache etc. I've made another question about this here: https://forums.modx.com/thread?thread=80307#dis-post-442542 And this happens in both Rev 2.2.5 and 2.2.6 dev. I checked in in the database how this policy is storred and there it only has 2 permissions.

Should this be reported as a bug since no one knows how to fix this?