# Bike Register anyone?



## BianchiVirgin (27 Mar 2018)

Anyone use Bike Register or similar for their bike(s)? I'm using it for road and mountain bikes with marking kits also.


----------



## Drago (27 Mar 2018)

Yes.


----------



## Slick (27 Mar 2018)

I haven't even thought about it until very recently. I bought what I consider to be a reasonably expensive bike on line and the only proof of ownership is a text part payment receipt as I paid with ctw voucher. I see you can download a log book.


----------



## BianchiVirgin (27 Mar 2018)

Seems to be a good idea as it's fully supported by all UK police forces.


----------



## vickster (27 Mar 2018)

Yes, police marked a couple of my bikes last year FOC. Met do it weekly or fortnightly around my borough

Bike stolen was marked, never seen again but the sticker might be a deterrent and plenty of bikes do get recovered


----------



## mjr (28 Mar 2018)

Search for "Burglar's shopping list" for what happened to the similar police-supported immobilise. There's no reason bikeregister is any better IMO. Keep details and photos but the only upgrade worth a damn is a full mobile network tracker.


----------



## Crankarm (28 Mar 2018)

Nope. The fewer people that know the better. As above if you are really paranoid then fit a proper tracker otherwise don't skimp on good locks. Take detailed pictures of your bike including frame number and any distinguishing features or marks.


----------



## BianchiVirgin (28 Mar 2018)

Yes, but the etched number is permanent unless it is ground off/ buffed off and repainted. Bound to be a deterrent. However, with MTB and road, in my case, they're either under my butt or being transported and not used for commuting. I guess commuters who have to lock up daily are in a slightly different situation.


----------



## vickster (28 Mar 2018)

BianchiVirgin said:


> Yes, but the etched number is permanent unless it is ground off/ buffed off and repainted. Bound to be a deterrent. However, with MTB and road, in my case, they're either under my butt or being transported and not used for commuting. I guess commuters who have to lock up daily are in a slightly different situation.


If you want a real deterrent, paint your bikes in pink. Apparently most bikes are stolen by young macho men  who would target any other colour. This from a conversation with a lady I see around locally with a very nice pink roadbike whose families bikes were all nicked and hers not


----------



## mjr (28 Mar 2018)

BianchiVirgin said:


> Yes, but the etched number is permanent unless it is ground off/ buffed off and repainted. Bound to be a deterrent.


If that were true, why wouldn't frame numbers already have eradicated theft?



vickster said:


> If you want a real deterrent, paint your bikes in pink. Apparently most bikes are stolen by young macho men  who would target any other colour. This from a conversation with a lady I see around locally with a very nice pink roadbike whose families bikes were all nicked and hers not


Cambridge thieves will steal anything. I've called the cops (and had them show up) on a group of young men wheeling a wrong-size very pink roadster away from a cycle park towards a car park (where a van could easily be waiting). Maybe they were walking a relative's bike home after a mechanical but I think most people around here ghost or carry bikes in such situations, rather than walk them.


----------



## ozboz (28 Mar 2018)

I had my Surly reg by the Cops , it was nicked , the registration did not help get I back , but when it was found the markings stopped any arguments , but the little sticker that was on the down tube had been removed,


----------



## vickster (28 Mar 2018)

mjr said:


> If that were true, why wouldn't frame numbers already have eradicated theft?
> 
> 
> Cambridge thieves will steal anything. I've called the cops (and had them show up) on a group of young men wheeling a wrong-size very pink roadster away from a cycle park towards a car park (where a van could easily be waiting). Maybe they were walking a relative's bike home after a mechanical but I think most people around here ghost or carry bikes in such situations, rather than walk them.


OP doesn’t live in Cambridge


----------



## mjr (28 Mar 2018)

vickster said:


> OP doesn’t live in Cambridge


Nor do I, but their thieves travel here. Maybe not there, but there seem to be thieves everywhere...


----------



## HLaB (28 Mar 2018)

Four years or more back at Peterborough City Council event the Cambridgeshire police stamped my bike and put it in the bike register system and the details were to follow in the post a bit later. I'm still waiting.


----------



## Sixmile (28 Mar 2018)

I got two bikes marked and registered at an event in Belfast last Autumn. The peelers took all our details, saying that an email would be sent to confirm registration. Alas, no email ever arrived so I'm not sure if my bikes are actually registered.


----------



## mjr (28 Mar 2018)

HLaB said:


> Four years or more back at Peterborough City Council event the Cambridgeshire police stamped my bike and put it in the bike register system and the details were to follow in the post a bit later. I'm still waiting.


I remember when the first carbon bikes came out and the feds kept using the metal hammer stamps for a while...


----------



## Dirk (28 Mar 2018)

All my bikes are on Bike Register. It's free and has got to be better than doing nothing.
I've found it also helps to reassure a purchaser of ownership when selling a bike.


----------



## mjr (28 Mar 2018)

Dirk said:


> All my bikes are on Bike Register. It's free and has got to be better than doing nothing.


You can use "has got to be better than doing nothing" to argue for all sorts of daft actions.



> I've found it also helps to reassure a purchaser of ownership when selling a bike.


Some purchasers are foolish.


----------



## Dirk (28 Mar 2018)

mjr said:


> You can use "has got to be better than doing nothing" to argue for all sorts of daft actions.
> 
> 
> Some purchasers are foolish.


What's 'daft' about registering your bike on a reputable site such as Bike Register?
Some purchasers are indeed 'foolish', but a Bike Register log book is an added layer of reassurance, along with receipts etc. 
I doubt whether anyone selling a stolen bike could register it on a site such as Bike Register if it had previously been registered and reported as stolen.


----------



## vickster (28 Mar 2018)

Sixmile said:


> I got two bikes marked and registered at an event in Belfast last Autumn. The peelers took all our details, saying that an email would be sent to confirm registration. Alas, no email ever arrived so I'm not sure if my bikes are actually registered.


Think you can check online


----------



## mjr (28 Mar 2018)

Dirk said:


> What's 'daft' about registering your bike on a reputable site such as Bike Register?


I feel it's daft to give your personal details and your bikes' details away so cheaply for pretty much no benefit.

Why's Bike Register a reputable site? There appears to be little to distinguish it from various other competitors, including previous police-backed favourite Immobilise which failed to keep their site secure.



Dirk said:


> Some purchasers are indeed 'foolish', but a Bike Register log book is an added layer of reassurance, along with receipts etc.


Receipts are gold - no problem with that - but a Bike Register log book is basically marketing pap. Also, aren't you encouraging the new owner to give their personal info to Selectamark Security Systems plc? I can't see any instructions on how to delete a registration from their database - I wonder if that will change come May.



Dirk said:


> I doubt whether anyone selling a stolen bike could register it on a site such as Bike Register if it had previously been registered and reported as stolen.


I'd bet I could register a stolen bike on a credible-looking site and you pretty much can't register it on all of them. If you did, it could become an onerous amount of work every time you move home or buy or sell a bike.


----------



## Dirk (28 Mar 2018)

mjr said:


> I feel it's daft to give your personal details and your bikes' details away so cheaply for pretty much no benefit.
> 
> Why's Bike Register a reputable site? There appears to be little to distinguish it from various other competitors, including previous police-backed favourite Immobilise which failed to keep their site secure.
> 
> ...


Whatever.


----------



## mjr (28 Mar 2018)

Dirk said:


> Whatever.


There's no helping some people. They're just determined to give their personal details away to snake oil salespeople.

Anyway, can I interest you in buying a bridge? Or I'll give you 20% if you'll help me get my seized assets out of Zimbabwe?


----------



## Dirk (28 Mar 2018)

mjr said:


> There's no helping some people. They're just determined to give their personal details away to snake oil salespeople.
> 
> Anyway, can I interest you in buying a bridge? Or I'll give you 20% if you'll help me get my seized assets out of Zimbabwe?


I'm pretty sure that the people behind Bike Register wouldn't take too kindly to being described as 'snake oil salesmen', given that Bike Register is the only Police approved cycle database. 
As regards the rest of your post - well, that's just plain unnecessary, isn't it?


----------



## mjr (28 Mar 2018)

Dirk said:


> I'm pretty sure that the people behind Bike Register wouldn't take too kindly to being described as 'snake oil salesmen', given that Bike Register is the only Police approved cycle database.


It might be the only Police approved cycle database, but there are other Police approved property databases which let you register bikes, so it's a bit like that "Product of the Year" marketing label: meaningless.

Snake oil is "product with questionable or unverifiable quality or benefit" which I think is accurate. Keep your own records. Don't let some plc be able to publish them without your consent, like happened before.


----------



## Dirk (28 Mar 2018)

mjr said:


> Snake oil is "product with questionable or unverifiable quality or benefit" which I think is accurate.



That may be the case, but what you actually said was "snake oil salesmen", implying that they were knowingly deceiving people or selling fraudulent goods*.*
I would be very careful about making accusations like that, implied or otherwise, on a public forum and would need some substantial evidence to back up such a claim.
Do you have any?


----------



## mjr (29 Mar 2018)

Dirk said:


> That may be the case, but what you actually said was "snake oil salesmen", implying that they were knowingly deceiving people or selling fraudulent goods*.*
> I would be very careful about making accusations like that, implied or otherwise, on a public forum and would need some substantial evidence to back up such a claim.


OK, for the avoidance of doubt: I say/said Selectamark Security Systems plc is selling a product with questionable or unverifiable quality or benefit. I expect they stop short of selling fraudulent goods.

As to whether they're knowingly deceiving people... do you think "the only Police approved cycle database" is accurate when there's other Police-approved databases containing cycle details (but also other stuff), or whether "used by every UK Police Force" implies only someone in each police force has an account at Bike Register or it implies that police on the ground actually use it - that last one was what https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/selectamark-security-systems-plc-a14-269068.html hinged upon.

Now, back to my earlier question: what's the substantial evidence that Bike Register is a reputable site rather than just another typical freemium personal data collection operation? Any public tests of their security to make sure they're not another Immobilise, perhaps?


----------



## Milkfloat (29 Mar 2018)

Whilst not quite a vociferous as @mjr , I too have not loaded all my details onto these sites. I do however have everything needed to do so if the worst happens and my bike is stolen. I have the invoices, frame numbers, photos of frame numbers, components and descriptions ready to go, but I see no reason to upload this information until I really need to. I would rather keep control of the information, as it offers no benefit, only risk, until the bikes are stolen.


----------



## Dirk (29 Mar 2018)

mjr said:


> OK, for the avoidance of doubt: I say/said Selectamark Security Systems plc is selling a product with questionable or unverifiable quality or benefit. I expect they stop short of selling fraudulent goods.


So they are not, as you described them - "snake oil salesmen".



mjr said:


> As to whether they're knowingly deceiving people... do you think "the only Police approved cycle database" is accurate when there's other Police-approved databases containing cycle details (but also other stuff), or whether "used by every UK Police Force" implies only someone in each police force has an account at Bike Register or it implies that police on the ground actually use it - that last one was what https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/selectamark-security-systems-plc-a14-269068.html hinged upon.


But the judgement from the ASA said - "We therefore concluded that the claim that BikeRegister was used by every police force had been substantiated. We investigated the ad under CAP Code (Edition 12) rules (Misleading advertising), (Substantiation), and (Exaggeration), but did not find it in breach. "


----------



## confusedcyclist (29 Mar 2018)

Dirk said:


> So they are not, as you described them - "snake oil salesmen".
> 
> 
> But the judgement from the ASA said - "We therefore concluded that the claim that BikeRegister was used by every police force had been substantiated. We investigated the ad under CAP Code (Edition 12) rules (Misleading advertising), (Substantiation), and (Exaggeration), but did not find it in breach. "


 I think you missed this bit:



mjr said:


> Now, back to my earlier question: what's the substantial evidence that Bike Register is a reputable site rather than just another typical freemium personal data collection operation? Any public tests of their security to make sure they're not another Immobilise, perhaps?


----------



## Dirk (29 Mar 2018)

I'm not the one claiming that they are a bunch of dodgy ne'er do wells. Surely the onus is on the person making those claims to substantiate them?


----------



## mjr (29 Mar 2018)

Dirk said:


> So they are not, as you described them - "snake oil salesmen".


That's not exactly what I wrote, so I don't know why you put it in ""s, but if you define "snake oil salesmen" as outright fraudsters then no, they're sellers of snake oil instead, but that's really getting rather pedantic.



Dirk said:


> I'm not the one claiming that they are a bunch of dodgy ne'er do wells. Surely the onus is on the person making those claims to substantiate them?


Who other than you has ever called them "a bunch of dodgy ne'er do wells"?

Anyway, all I'm asking is that you substantiate this claim:


Dirk said:


> a reputable site such as Bike Register



Also, the bit of the ASA ruling not quoted earlier:


> We acknowledged that all 45 geographic police forces in the UK held accounts with BikeRegister, and that, wherever a bike was stolen, it would be possible for the relevant force to trace the owner if the bike was registered with BikeRegister.
> 
> We understood that the complainant had had their bicycle stolen in a different neighbourhood of London from where they lived, and had been told by the local police station that they did not use BikeRegister. However, we considered that consumers were likely to understand that it would not necessarily be the case that an account was held by police in every local neighbourhood.
> 
> We therefore concluded that the claim that BikeRegister was used by every police force had been substantiated.


So all that claim "used by every UK police force" means is that someone somewhere in the force has an account - not that it can actually be used by the officers recovering - doesn't anyone think that's dodgy behaviour?

They say that they'll track their users to "understand the interests and buying behaviour" and use their details for "other functions" but neither is explicitly mentioned on the registration forms on the website or the materials handed out at police cycle security events. Instead you have to go Menu → Information → Privacy Policy to discover this. Doesn't anyone think that's dodgy behaviour, not making it clear what people are signing up to? Isn't it dodgy when it's at a police event and the materials are made to look like police ones, with the checkerboard pattern? I suspect many people might not realise that they've given their info to a private company until later.

And now I've looked at it, how about the site setting Google Analytics cookies, but the cookie policy claiming that they are cookies for bikeregister.com and not mentioning Google? Instead, to find out about Google cookies, you have to look in the Privacy Policy not the Cookie Policy. That sort of stunt is less severe than capturing personal data and not rare but still indicative of dodgy behaviour IMO.


----------



## Dirk (29 Mar 2018)

mjr said:


> That's not exactly what I wrote, so I don't know why you put it in ""s, but if you define "snake oil salesmen" as outright fraudsters then no, they're sellers of snake oil instead, but that's really getting rather pedantic.
> 
> 
> Who other than you has ever called them "a bunch of dodgy ne'er do wells"?
> ...


OK - I really can't be arsed with this any more.
You win the internet.


----------



## SkipdiverJohn (29 Mar 2018)

If the authorities were serious about this, all they have to do is require every sale of a NEW bike sold in the UK to be recorded on an official database (PNC/DVLA etc) including details of the frame number and legal owner. You can't buy a TV set without giving your details, so it goes on the TV license database, and it would be just as easy to require all manufacturers/retailers to capture the customer's identity so the owner and the bike could be linked. Given that the most valuable bikes are generally the newest ones (and not the £20 secondhand station hacks used by many commuters), bike theft would instantly become more risky and less profitable.


----------



## mjr (29 Mar 2018)

Dirk said:


> OK - I really can't be arsed with this any more.
> You win the internet.


So we get a rare sighting of the lesser-spotted double-flounce, rather than actually try to substantiate the claim that the website of "I can't believe it's not imitating the police" bikeregister is reputable.


----------



## Dirk (29 Mar 2018)

mjr said:


> So we get a rare sighting of the lesser-spotted double-flounce, rather than actually try to substantiate the claim that the website of "I can't believe it's not imitating the police" bikeregister is reputable.


I don't need to substantiate anything. I, and many others, accept that they are a reputable site.
You are the one saying otherwise. It's up to you to provide evidence to back up your case.
That's generally the way these things work.


----------



## fixedfixer (29 Mar 2018)

I use a register and the bikes have an electronic tag thing in the frame. I used my work address and details- never cycle to work these days


----------



## mjr (29 Mar 2018)

Dirk said:


> I don't need to substantiate anything. I, and many others, accept that they are a reputable site.
> You are the one saying otherwise. It's up to you to provide evidence to back up your case.
> That's generally the way these things work.


Generally the person making the claim should provide evidence to back it up. The claims were that bike register is somehow reputable and better than doing nothing. Now, additionally, you're claiming that many others also consider it reputable.

I've been quite clear that I merely don't see the point or see any reason why bike register won't be another burglar's shopping list like immobilise was. Putting an address where the bike never is seems like a good idea but it still gives them your personal details.


----------



## Dirk (29 Mar 2018)

mjr said:


> Now, additionally, you're claiming that many others also consider it reputable.


That's probably because there are many thousands of registered users and the Police endorse the scheme.


----------



## mjr (30 Mar 2018)

Dirk said:


> That's probably because there are many thousands of registered users and the Police endorse the scheme.


Maybe they just thought that it must be better than doing nothing, possibly incorrectly, or they were registered before realising the full horror.

The police still endorse immobilise despite their data loss. It's not clear how closely the police are checking security on the IT services they endorse. The police are not IT experts.


----------



## Dirk (30 Mar 2018)

mjr said:


> Maybe they just thought that it must be better than doing nothing, possibly incorrectly, or they were registered before realising the full horror.








OMG what have they done?!


----------



## Slick (30 Mar 2018)

It's not so absurd. 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...150-million-myfitnesspal-accounts-were-hacked


----------



## mjr (30 Mar 2018)

Slick said:


> It's not so absurd.
> 
> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...150-million-myfitnesspal-accounts-were-hacked


Oh come on, it's not like it was a reputable website with millions of registered users.


----------



## Slick (30 Mar 2018)

mjr said:


> Oh come on, it's not like it was a reputable website with millions of registered users.


To be fair, I thought it was a good idea when the thread started.


----------



## ozboz (31 Mar 2018)

Slick said:


> To be fair, I thought it was a good idea when the thread started.



It is a good idea , as said it was a factor, a big factor in me getting my £1200 + Surly back , 
I noted on my thread at the time ,


https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/talk-about-lucky.227475/

So I do not think people should be discouraged from registering ,
I would find it hard to believe that all of us now have not got all their details /data on some website or gov gateway , 
ie DVLA, if people can hack the US Military ,German political aides etc , Id say anything can be hacked,


----------



## Dirk (31 Mar 2018)

I find it funny that some are disparaging about having data stored about them on Bike Register, but are quite happy to use mobile phones, Google, Facebook, Twitter and other social media.


----------



## Slick (31 Mar 2018)

I'm not disparaging but I like to think I'm careful. I only joined Facebook last year, as I moved to a new area and all the neighbours wanted me to join the village group. I deleted my account a week before the Cambridge Analytica scandal broke. I do use other sites like Strava so I may have a look to see exactly what details sites like that hold about me. My brother for instance, uses a ridiculous name on Strava for a couple of different reasons. I think @mjr has brought up some good points about keeping your details safe and some interesting alternative views on what on the face of things is a good idea. Use it, don't use it, it's up to you, but as a few others have already noted, there are alternatives and it just takes a bit more effort from you.


----------



## fixedfixer (2 Apr 2018)

Make sure you never start / stop strava until you are half a mile from your house. You can edit start and finish point before you share


----------



## BianchiVirgin (2 Apr 2018)

fixedfixer said:


> Make sure you never start / stop strava until you are half a mile from your house. You can edit start and finish point before you share



You can also put private areas on Strava for that very reason.


----------



## Drago (2 Apr 2018)

Or just don't share such data to begin with.


----------



## Deleted member 23692 (2 Apr 2018)

When I got my bike nicked, the local coppers (Notts Constabulary) hadn't heard of bike register, and when they tried to register they were blocked form doing so by their IT system. 

Nevertheless, I've got all my present 4 bikes registered on there... along with the nicked one


----------



## adamhearn (2 Apr 2018)

I'm not sure I see the point of the register. It would seem that recovery of said bikes is more down to luck rather than a database of numbers (i.e. a bike has to be found in circumstances where it's suspected of being stolen in order for the number to be checked).

Get insurance and move on if it does sadly happen.


----------



## classic33 (2 Apr 2018)

mjr said:


> I feel it's daft to give your personal details and your bikes' details away so cheaply for pretty much no benefit.
> 
> Why's Bike Register a reputable site? There appears to be little to distinguish it from various other competitors, including previous police-backed favourite Immobilise which failed to keep their site secure.
> 
> ...


Why would you have a bike you knew to be stolen?

The question relates to your claim of you being able to register one.


----------



## classic33 (2 Apr 2018)

adamhearn said:


> I'm not sure I see the point of the register. It would seem that recovery of said bikes is more down to luck rather than a database of numbers (i.e. a bike has to be found in circumstances where it's suspected of being stolen in order for the number to be checked).
> 
> Get insurance and move on if it does sadly happen.


Which is there in the hope you never have to use it. Also giving details to another party.


----------

