# How strict is Cycle to Work?



## BSA (7 Aug 2009)

My work place do not offer the cycle2work scheme but my wifes does. I am desperate for a new bike.

If my wife applied and bought a bike for me on the pretence of it being hers would her workplace really find out, would they care?

I know you are supposed to use it to cycle to work on which she has no intention.

Is this fraud?


----------



## ianrauk (7 Aug 2009)

I have a friend who does that, he bought a bike through his scheme for a mate of his.


----------



## addictfreak (7 Aug 2009)

BSA

We have used the CTW scheme to our advantage completely, some guys even bought two bikes. Some didnt buy bikes but bought wheels etc. I bought a bike that over the £1000 limit, just paid the difference up front to my LBS.
I think basically its down the the shop you go to, some will play it by the book others will bend over backwards to help.


----------



## theclaud (7 Aug 2009)

At the risk of being a killjoy, this kind of discussion doesn't do a lot to advance the cause of schemes that are designed to encourage cycling. The BTW scheme notionally encourages novice or occasional cyclists to try commuting to work, but in practice it is becoming a way for experienced cyclists to upgrade their kit. I haven't got a problem with that in itself, and a bit of extra trade for LBSs is a good thing, but there is such a thing as cynical exploitation.


----------



## l4dva (7 Aug 2009)

My work place aren't even bothered if you actually use the bike to commute to work on. Loads here have brought full on mountain bikes and use them on the weekends but still drive there cars to work. I'm hopeing to buy another bike once this current one runs out. Still got another 6 months to wait though.


----------



## summerdays (7 Aug 2009)

I know of at least 2 that bought through the bike to work scheme and started commuting as a result so it has worked in that respect.


----------



## nigelnorris (7 Aug 2009)

I used a mate's scheme to buy myself a bike to commute on, whereas he would never have used it for himself. Ironically my own employer got round to starting up a scheme now so I can use that to buy myself another bike for the weekends if I want. Swings and roundabouts I guess.


----------



## threebikesmcginty (7 Aug 2009)

Don't look theclaud but..... 

I wonder if we could start a swap scheme whereby people who's stingey useless lazy bastard employers (like mine) who don't/won't provide a C2W scheme could get them from members who's lovely generous employers do.

The end result is the same isn't it? - the Gov't has subsidised another bike on the road and where's the harm in that?

As many people as possible should take advantage of this scheme before they realise it's actually something good and useful and therefore kill it.


----------



## theclaud (7 Aug 2009)

threebikesmcginty said:


> Don't look theclaud but.....
> 
> I wonder if we could start a swap scheme whereby people who's stingey useless lazy bastard employers (like mine) who don't/won't provide a C2W scheme could get them from members who's lovely generous employers do.
> 
> ...



Don't get me wrong - I think the scheme is a good thing, and as Summerdays suggests, it might even be working. There's no excuse for employers not signing up. But I think it's not too much to ask that people taking advantage of tax breaks do so for genuine reasons (and that could include getting a more suitable bike) and that the scheme is not simply exploited to provide new toys for rich boys.


----------



## addictfreak (7 Aug 2009)

Claud

For me its not about 'new toys for rich boys' , its giving me the chance to buy the bike I drool over at the bike shop window.
And quite how you seem to think im exploiting anything is beyond me. Im allowed £1000 which I got and am paying for in line with the argeement. The other 500 came out of savings. I have not claimed above the limit and am getting any other tax relief than that im entitled too.


----------



## VictorL (7 Aug 2009)

theclaud said:


> There's no excuse for employers not signing up.



Erm, yes there is - it's called cashflow. If 100 employees all purchased a £500 bike and accessories, the company would have to fork out £50,000 which would be repaid over 12 months.

Do you know how much a bank loan of £50,000 would cost over 12 months?

Cash is king and most sensible employers will not stretch themselves in the current climate.

If the government wanted to, they could do this directly with tax codes to encourage cycling to work, in the same way that they used to with company cars.

Don't blame the employer, blame the government.


----------



## Downward (7 Aug 2009)

VictorL said:


> Erm, yes there is - it's called cashflow. If 100 employees all purchased a £500 bike and accessories, the company would have to fork out £50,000 which would be repaid over 12 months.
> 
> Do you know how much a bank loan of £50,000 would cost over 12 months?
> 
> ...



But its like lending £50k and getting back £60K in 12 months.


----------



## andyfromotley (7 Aug 2009)

Oh it is most definitely fraud. The scheme is quite clear. the bike is to be used primarily for the employee to cycle to work. What you are suggesting is a stone bonker criminal offence. 

Now consider this, could you live without your wifes wage? Because most workplaces would instantly sack people who were caught doing this. Is a new bike worth that? 

Having said that i suspect that your chances of being caught are about nil. But it was this sort of sharp practice that people found so abhorrent in MP's.

IMO you should just redouble your efforts to get your employer to adopt the scheme. Not easy i know as i spent the last two years trying to convince my last employer to adopt it. Unsuccesfully.

Good luck anyway.


----------



## Downward (7 Aug 2009)

andyfromotley said:


> Oh it is most definitely fraud. The scheme is quite clear. the bike is to be used primarily for the employee to cycle to work. What you are suggesting is a stone bonker criminal offence.
> 
> Now consider this, could you live without your wifes wage? Because most workplaces would instantly sack people who were caught doing this. Is a new bike worth that?
> 
> ...



Technically though all the stipulations are is that it is used by her to commute to work on more than it's used by her for private use.
She is within the law to cycle 100 yards and stick it in the shed for a year until paid off where she can then give it to you.


----------



## timmcp (7 Aug 2009)

I got mine on the cycle to work scheme, the only problem I had was that I have to use the car to do my job. So I emailed our HR department and told them that I wanted to register, the only problem was I used the car for work. I got an email back to say they have no way of monitoring the scheme anyway, so your registration has been approved. Even my line manager signed my form to allow me to apply for the voucher.

I have cycled to work twice now, mainly because I enjoyed cycling there. So I dont suppose anybody can complain!


----------



## Niche (7 Aug 2009)

BSA said:


> My work place do not offer the cycle2work scheme but my wifes does. I am desperate for a new bike.
> 
> If my wife applied and bought a bike for me on the pretence of it being hers would her workplace really find out, would they care?
> 
> ...



Yes it is fraud
Not worth the risk
Bikes are really not that expensive


----------



## addictfreak (7 Aug 2009)

Christ! Some of you must be frightened of your own shadow. 

If your like me, I have worked all me life right from leaving school never claimed a thing. Dont you deserve a little something? Or are you going to let all those 'poor' people have it all. You know the ones I mean, the ones who cant afford to live but have cable TV, 4 mobiles phones and a Subaru.


----------



## Downward (7 Aug 2009)

Anyway what are they going to do ? Ask you if you cycled to work ever ?
Even if they did you would just say yeah I cycled on Xday 3 weeks ago.
I have never been asked and haven't even been asked about my 2nd time signing upto the scheme.
The bike I put on the form won't be available anyway as I couldn't put a price or model as the 2010 models prices and specs are not out yet so I just said Bike X at £1k.

The bike I was supposed to be getting last time was out of stock for 6 weeks so I got a different one too.


----------



## addictfreak (7 Aug 2009)

Downward 

Your right mate. It purely about the voucher price, no one ever checks what you have bought. Im lucky enough to have 3 bikes, only one on CTW. At work no one would have a clue what bike im on or how much it cost.
All we have here are the anally retentive, who are scared to do anything. No wonder we are breeding a nation of losers!


----------



## Panter (8 Aug 2009)

threebikesmcginty said:


> The end result is the same isn't it? - the Gov't has subsidised another bike on the road and where's the harm in that?
> 
> As many people as possible should take advantage of this scheme before they realise it's actually something good and useful and therefore kill it.



+1


----------



## VictorL (8 Aug 2009)

Downward said:


> But its like lending £50k and getting back £60K in 12 months.



How do you work this out?


----------



## asterix (8 Aug 2009)

But could you get your moat cleaned?


----------



## Downward (8 Aug 2009)

VictorL said:


> How do you work this out?



Savings on NI contributions.


----------



## youngoldbloke (8 Aug 2009)

Given the huge loopholes apparent, why not just open the scheme to everyone, or rather invent a new scheme, that would give similar advantages to pensioners, self employed, unemployed (- enabling them to 'get on their bikes' more cheaply!) etc, etc. We already have 'exercise on prescription', why not 'bike on prescription' - BOP. The health and environmental benefits of introducing such a comprehensive scheme would surely outweigh any costs to the exchequer. 
Anyway, being one of the retired, I am _really_ p....d off that _I_ can't get a new £1000 carbon bike for £600. How about a shady (and no doubt illegal) scheme for surrogate BTW applications to benefit the likes of me?


----------



## VictorL (8 Aug 2009)

Downward said:


> Savings on NI contributions.


Don't think it would be £10k saving on NI contributions - but regardless, a company would still need to find the £50k and at the moment, cash is better in the bank for a lot of businesses.


----------



## nosherduke996 (8 Aug 2009)

The scheme is totally unfair anyway as the more you earn, the more discount you are entitled to.And God forbid you should be self employed then you have got no chance.
As usual its all take and no give by the goverment.


----------



## Typo (8 Aug 2009)

Downward said:


> Savings on NI contributions.


And add on capital allowances, if your employer pays Corporation tax.


----------



## nigelnorris (8 Aug 2009)

I've seen self employed people mentioned in this thread a number of times, and can't help thinking that they [mostly though of course there will be exceptions] will have no need of this. Surely if you are self employed or own a company then you can claim a commuter bike as a business expense, and the tax write down over 3 or so years would be as much as the C2W scheme savings anyway?

I know this will cause arguments, but when it comes down to the unemployed an awful lot of people [me included probably but I've not really thought it through], are going to baulk at the thought of giving them bicycles for effectively nothing. If a person is claiming benefits then the only way to pay for a bike is either to up his/her benefits or just give him/her the thing. Either way it's the taxpayer doing the work, in a very different way from an employed person taking advantage. Fine, make a bike a signing on bonus when a person gets a job if it would be useful for the commute, but to just hand the thing over as a gift doesn't seem right [to me, at the moment, though I haven't really put a lot of thought into this].

On a separate issue, and this is a genuine question, - [Disclaimer, don't know anything really about business accounting, this is just thinking out loud], don't employers who sign up for the scheme get the same tax breaks, thus enabling them to get a substantial return for their investment anyway. On a £1000 bike they get the VAT back [assuming big enough to be VAT registered which they almost certainly are if they employ enough people to justify starting a scheme], then they get to write down something like 1/3 of the value of the bike against tax during the year of the lease. So they make something like £100 on the deal as a rebate from the taxman?


----------



## Downward (8 Aug 2009)

VictorL said:


> Don't think it would be £10k saving on NI contributions - but regardless, a company would still need to find the £50k and at the moment, cash is better in the bank for a lot of businesses.



Sorry its 9% ! which is £5k ish !


----------



## Downward (8 Aug 2009)

nigelnorris said:


> I've seen self employed people mentioned in this thread a number of times, and can't help thinking that they [mostly though of course there will be exceptions] will have no need of this. Surely if you are self employed or own a company then you can claim a commuter bike as a business expense, and the tax write down over 3 or so years would be as much as the C2W scheme savings anyway?
> 
> I know this will cause arguments, but when it comes down to the unemployed an awful lot of people [me included probably but I've not really thought it through], are going to baulk at the thought of giving them bicycles for effectively nothing. If a person is claiming benefits then the only way to pay for a bike is either to up his/her benefits or just give him/her the thing. Either way it's the taxpayer doing the work, in a very different way from an employed person taking advantage. Fine, make a bike a signing on bonus when a person gets a job if it would be useful for the commute, but to just hand the thing over as a gift doesn't seem right [to me, at the moment, though I haven't really put a lot of thought into this].
> 
> On a separate issue, and this is a genuine question, - [Disclaimer, don't know anything really about business accounting, this is just thinking out loud], don't employers who sign up for the scheme get the same tax breaks, thus enabling them to get a substantial return for their investment anyway. On a £1000 bike they get the VAT back [assuming big enough to be VAT registered which they almost certainly are if they employ enough people to justify starting a scheme], then they get to write down something like 1/3 of the value of the bike against tax during the year of the lease. So they make something like £100 on the deal as a rebate from the taxman?



It's not a gift we still have to pay for it we just get tax relief. It's the same as childcare vouchers.

Anyway with all this commuting to work they should pro rata my car park pass because I still have to pay for this even if i drive in once in a blue moon.


----------



## youngoldbloke (8 Aug 2009)

- to continue my earlier ramblings - Perhaps a BOR scheme ('bike on retirement', tax free) might be the answer for those like myself excluded from, and envious of C2W - maybe one should be able to opt for either a free bus pass or a BOR voucher?


----------



## addictfreak (8 Aug 2009)

When they start making evryone work until they are 70 you might get one!

Seriously, I think thats a good idea. What better way to keep older pepole fit and active. Has to have benefits all round.


----------



## purplepolly (8 Aug 2009)

Better still, give them to younger people or reduce vat on all bikes at point of sale. It's daft that the governement wants to reduce car usage and has initiatives to try and get people to exercise more, but then charges vat on bikes.


----------



## andyfromotley (8 Aug 2009)

addictfreak said:


> Christ! Some of you must be frightened of your own shadow.
> 
> If your like me, I have worked all me life right from leaving school never claimed a thing. Dont you deserve a little something? Or are you going to let all those 'poor' people have it all. You know the ones I mean, the ones who cant afford to live but have cable TV, 4 mobiles phones and a Subaru.



sorry but i cant agree with those sentiments. Like you i have worked all my adult life. I dont believe that i 'deserve' something extra. If thats the case why not just fraudulently claim benefit? Perhaps steal something? 

I'm not scared of my own or anyone elses shadow, i just like to try and do the right thing. Yes it can be hard and pisses me off at times but sometimes lifes like that. And no i dont mean to condemn those who would do this, in the scheme of things its pretty small beer, but that dont make it right.


----------



## Downward (9 Aug 2009)

MP'S Expenses (Or in fact any public sector workers Expenses) V paying for a bike and getting Tax relief ?

Believe me when the higher earners are claiming expenses for taxi 's for a 2 or 3 mile journey (Trains are available you know) I wouldn't criticise anyone for taking advantage of the cyclescheme whether or not it was for their own benefit.


----------



## youngoldbloke (9 Aug 2009)

Trains available for 2 or 3 mile journey ???? - not unless you are very fortunate in where you happen to be. Change the rules, so that the interpretation is less flexible. I don't see that you can criticise anyone for claiming what they are allowed to claim, be it expenses or C2W. Maybe only allow one C2W voucher per person per 5 years (say), if it is being abused. Judging by the predictions regarding future public spending - or lack of it - such schemes may not have much time left anyway.


----------



## Downward (9 Aug 2009)

youngoldbloke said:


> Trains available for 2 or 3 mile journey ???? - not unless you are very fortunate in where you happen to be. Change the rules, so that the interpretation is less flexible. I don't see that you can criticise anyone for claiming what they are allowed to claim, be it expenses or C2W. Maybe only allow one C2W voucher per person per 5 years (say), if it is being abused. Judging by the predictions regarding future public spending - or lack of it - such schemes may not have much time left anyway.



Well they pulled the PC scheme. Anyway with us we have people choosing to get taxis and putting it on expenses rather than catch the train.
For us in the city trains and bus services are readily available.

There are a few people I know who will catch the train and bus over a taxi but most can't be bothered as they let the taxpapyer pick up the bill.


----------



## theclaud (10 Aug 2009)

addictfreak said:


> Claud
> 
> For me *its not about 'new toys for rich boys' , its giving me the chance to buy the bike I drool over at the bike shop window*.



I'm not sure of the difference, but I wasn't aiming the comment at anyone in particular. It's just that cyclists, as a group, are not hard-up or desperately in need of subsidy, and affluent men are the biggest consumers of expensive leisure-related goods. If you're buying kit that makes it easier for you to cycle where you might otherwise have taken the car, then I think it's a good thing. Using it to get a full-sus or downhill mountain bike that is only ever taken out on the trails is clearly something of an abuse of the system. I don't think it's a particularly appalling thing to do, but I don't want to hear the same people who do it whinging about MPs' expenses, and I would rather people did it discreetly so as not to get the system a bad name - it makes it more difficult to present a case for progressive forms of tax relief when the current ones are wasted on those who don't need them.


----------



## ed_o_brain (10 Aug 2009)

+1 to what theclaud said.

If the general public impression of the scheme is that people who already have 'expensive' bikes are using it just to get even more expensive bikes then the plug might get pulled, just like the computer scheme a few years ago.

That said, I'm considering using it once my first month of probation is over to get another commuting bike.


----------



## addictfreak (10 Aug 2009)

Ed
I tend to disagree. If you are a commited cyclist who commutes to work on a regular basis, why not have the best bike. If that allows you to enjoy cycling at weekends etc then so be it. As I said before the limit is £1000, so who decides who gets what.
Maybe we should parade with our existing bikes and be inspected.
For me my purchase allows me not only to cycle to work (which i do everyday) but it has also allowed me to enjoy a more serious level, which i may not have been able to do otherwise.


----------



## philipbh (10 Aug 2009)

addictfreak said:


> Ed
> As I said before the limit is £1000.



This is only the limit of the scheme though and this first £1K can be put towards a more expensive bike if you fund the difference. 

Incidentally my firm isn't interested in joining the scheme - we are only a group of 5 and one of the Directors (of two) says "but I've already got a bike, so why would I be interested"

The other one was straight on to the child care voucher scheme though !


----------



## Theseus (10 Aug 2009)

philipbh said:


> This is only the limit of the scheme though and this first £1K can be put towards a more expensive bike if you fund the difference.



Nope, sorry, you can't top it up and stay within the rules.


----------



## addictfreak (10 Aug 2009)

Touche

Yes you can, no where in our agreement does it state that the cost of the bike must not be more than £1000. 
£1000 is merely the maximum voucher available. Maybe your scheme is different to ours, as there do seem to be several in operation.


----------



## philipbh (10 Aug 2009)

Bu&%er! 

Thought you could - have read that others have 

(puts down Pinarello Catalogue)


----------



## Wheeledweenie (10 Aug 2009)

philipbh said:


> Bu&%er!
> 
> Thought you could - have read that others have
> 
> (puts down Pinarello Catalogue)



The Evans Ride to Work scheme that my company uses allows you to spend more than the £1,000 if you use your own money to top it up. I know a few people who have done it.


----------



## addictfreak (10 Aug 2009)

If an employer wants to provide bikes over £1000 they have to apply for a credit license, then you can actually get a voucher for more.

If they will only go to £1000, then you simply pay the difference up front. You are not breaking any rules in doing this, should you keep the bike at the end of the agreement you simply pay the final fee. If you hand it back then its you who are the loser. You have not conned anyone dispite what some a claiming on here.

Since the start of this thread I have actually checked with my HR dept, who informed me that I was perfectly within my rights to do this. They also infromed me that you dont actually have to buy a bike, should you already have one that needs some upgrading (new wheels/gears etc) then that is also allowed.
The only thing that is frowned upon is buy two bikes or buying a bike for someone else.

As I say this may well vary depending on scheme/employer


----------



## philipbh (10 Aug 2009)

Picks up Pinarello Catalogue!

Seems fair enough to be able to top it up - though there are some decent enough bikes around for 1K (thinking of the Scott Speedster that Evans have discounted down from £1399 to £999 )


----------



## Wheeledweenie (10 Aug 2009)

The Evans Ride to Work one won't let you just buy accessories, you have to buy a bike. However, two bikes are allowed if you need one to get to a station and one kept the other end if they're not allowed on your train route at peak times.


----------



## summerdays (10 Aug 2009)

I thought two bikes were also permissible if they provided different functions - winter/summer bike too.


----------



## Arch (10 Aug 2009)

addictfreak said:


> Ed
> For me my purchase allows me not only to cycle to work (which i do everyday) but it has also allowed me to enjoy a more serious level, which i may not have been able to do otherwise.



So how about I get a bike to cycle to work, which I do anyway, and then get a subsidy to buy a horse, so that I can ride in my spare time? Oh, and some cinema tickets. And chocolate.

I'm with TheClaud on this one.

(My employer is, I suspect too small to support the scheme, and anyway, since both the boss and I have multiple bikes already and are running out of storage space, we're sorted...)


----------



## spandex (10 Aug 2009)

When I was working in a bike shop a guy came in with his kids and got them bikes and off the top of my head it came to £1300 and he just paid the difference.


----------



## addictfreak (10 Aug 2009)

So if you get a bike you can only ride it to and from work? I just dont see your logic. Its a win win situation, could for me, good for the enviroment, good for my local LBS, and hopefully good for employers in raising levels of fitness and hopefully reducing sickness levels.

As you say you have a bike already, you choise not to renew it. Good on you and good luck with your choice. But that is YOUR choice, mine is different. Would you remove my right to choose, because it doesnt fit with yours!

To be honest I find your last post just a tad childish.


----------



## theclaud (10 Aug 2009)

addictfreak said:


> So if you get a bike you can only ride it to and from work? I just dont see your logic. Its a win win situation, could for me, good for the enviroment, good for my local LBS, and hopefully good for employers in raising levels of fitness and hopefully reducing sickness levels.
> 
> As you say you have a bike already, you choise not to renew it. Good on you and good luck with your choice. But that is YOUR choice, mine is different. Would you remove my right to choose, because it doesnt fit with yours!
> 
> To be honest I find your last post just a tad childish.



Who are you talking to?


----------



## addictfreak (10 Aug 2009)

Arch


----------



## spandex (10 Aug 2009)

Arch said:


> So how about I get a bike to cycle to work, which I do anyway, and then get a subsidy to buy a horse, so that I can ride in my spare time? Oh, and some cinema tickets. And chocolate.
> 
> I'm with TheClaud on this one.
> 
> (My employer is, I suspect too small to support the scheme, and anyway, *since both the boss and I have multiple bikes already and are running out of storage space,* we're sorted...)




There is all ways room for one more


----------



## philipbh (10 Aug 2009)

Its an interesting debate though and I'm left wondering why the scheme isn't open to everyone on a personal level - which I suppose still wouldn't stop the rules being bent and "buying for someone else"

 The government could zero rate bicycles and allow the tax relief to be claimed through a Tax Return submission and / or Tax code change


----------



## theclaud (10 Aug 2009)

addictfreak said:


> Arch



I see. Well - I don't see what's childish about it. In fact, it seems to me to be quite grown-up to take responsibility and ask what you actually need before you insist on getting everything you possibly can. What seems childish is to rush in and grab the most expensive present, just because you can.


----------



## addictfreak (10 Aug 2009)

Phil

There are many things that could be done indeed. The trouble is, as always the way in which the scheme is run. So many different schemes and employer rules. I couldnt agree more that it should be open to all.


----------



## addictfreak (10 Aug 2009)

And how do you know I didnt need a new bike? You dont really do you. 
If I had bought a bike for £1000 pounds would that have made you happy? I suspect not because according to you I didnt need it.


----------



## theclaud (10 Aug 2009)

addictfreak said:


> And how do you know I didnt need a new bike? You dont really do you.
> If I had bought a bike for £1000 pounds would that have made you happy? I suspect not because according to you I didnt need it.



Like I said - my misgivings aren't directed at anyone in particular. You might well need a new bike, and if I were going to buy a bike through the scheme, I would buy a good one. I'm just not a fan of the general practice of squeezing everything you can out of a system for the sake of it. If you need it, or will make good use of it, fine. But there are obviously ways to exploit it for cynical gain.


----------



## philipbh (10 Aug 2009)

theclaud said:


> ask what you actually need before you insist on getting everything you possibly can.



However, if you are eligible and can take up the scheme then you should (whether you have multiple bikes or not).

Its maybe a naive thought but surely (?) the more people using the scheme, the more successful it is seen to be and therefore likely to be continued.

More bikes being sold keeps the bike retailers / mechanics / accessory makers in business too, in addition to all the health and environmental benefits previously mentioned.


----------



## Downward (10 Aug 2009)

Anyone who moans about the scheme is just jealous.
It's not something for nothing anyway. I am just giving my employer £1k to reduce my salary which reduces my tax and ni and they lease me a bike. The bike isn't owned by us its the employers. They can turn round after 12 months and say thanks but we are having your bike now..


----------



## BSA (11 Aug 2009)

Wow, start a thread and go away for the weekend and look what happens!

I not sure what to do, I dont want to deceive anyone I guess I am frustrated with my works lack of enthusiam for the scheme. 

People are sort of correct I will buy a new bike (for comutting) regardless of using the scheme. I just thought my wife will never use the scheme so I would take advantage. 

Now I feel like a criminal!


----------



## philipbh (11 Aug 2009)

Is it possible that Mrs BSA would buy the bicycle under the scheme in order to get to the level of fitness required for the daily commute by practising in the privacy of "BSA Acres"

And then lend the bike to BSA


----------



## skwerl (11 Aug 2009)

The problem with the scheme is it's greenwash. Govt introduced it to be seen to be doing something about reducing commuter traffic in cities. An easy system that scroes a few points. Same deal with the tax-free PC scheme, aimed at getting everyone access to a computer so the UK would look good on the international PC-literacy scale. Problem there was that people who already owned a PC decided to get themselves a laptop/second PC, etc. and those the scheme was aimed at either didn't know of it's existence or didn't see the benefit/couldn't afford to take part.

It strikes me that a much easier approach to looking green on a national level would be to make bikes and accessories VAT-free. It's very easy to implement and needs no involvement from employers and employees. It would pu the bicycle into the necessity items list of VAT-qualifying goods - surely a positive step to changing the view of cycling. I guess the financial impact would be too high though.


----------



## FootSore (11 Aug 2009)

BSA I think you can use scheme legitimately.

Mrs BSA must use the bike predominently for work. So as long as she does more rides to work on it than to the shops then she complies with the scheme. As an example if she rode to work once and then never rode it again she has used it more for work and therefore complies. In fact she has to complete only part of the journey - maybe from the car park to the front door.

The scheme makes no mention on the allowance for other people (e.g. Mr BSA) to use the bike. They neither forbid it nor allow it. As they don't forbid it then it is acceptable.

FootSore


----------



## DieselDemon (11 Aug 2009)

BSA said:


> Wow, start a thread and go away for the weekend and look what happens!
> 
> I not sure what to do, I dont want to deceive anyone I guess I am frustrated with my works lack of enthusiam for the scheme.
> 
> ...



No need to feel like a crminal. Nothing to say your Wife can't lend you the bike now and again, and again and again. Go for it you deserve it.


----------



## trsleigh (14 Aug 2009)

I bought a bike three years ago on a 18 month lease scheme, final payment to own bike outright was approx 3% or less in some cases.

The company is now running the scheme again and so I've applied for another bike ( n+1 etc ), a Brompton P6R+ 
However, it seems that HMRC are getting restless. I've heard from our HR dept that that HMRC are insisting that the final value that the bike is bought from the company at is related to a true 'fair market value' Apparently it has been suggested by HMRC that sources such as eBay are used by the company to determine this. If this is true I cannot see any point to the scheme. Especially with bikes such as Brompton that hold their value well. 
What would be the point of leasing a bike for a year for approx £600 then paying another £400 ( probably a fmv for a Brommie with SON ). It will totally negate the point of the exercise.
I just hope that someone, somewhere, has got the wrong end of the stick on this one.


----------



## addictfreak (14 Aug 2009)

trsleigh said:


> I bought a bike three years ago on a 18 month lease scheme, final payment to own bike outright was approx 3% or less in some cases.
> 
> The company is now running the scheme again and so I've applied for another bike ( n+1 etc ), a Brompton P6R+
> However, it seems that HMRC are getting restless. I've heard from our HR dept that that HMRC are insisting that the final value that the bike is bought from the company at is related to a true 'fair market value' Apparently it has been suggested by HMRC that sources such as eBay are used by the company to determine this. If this is true I cannot see any point to the scheme. Especially with bikes such as Brompton that hold their value well.
> ...



Absolutely, it would not be worth it. An awful lot of suppliers offer 0% interest these days sometimes up to 3 years depending on what you spend.
I reckon that if I paid a true market value for my MTB at the end of the scheme then it would cost me more than the original value.

Perhaps the scheme is becoming a victim of its own success.


----------



## Downward (14 Aug 2009)

addictfreak said:


> Absolutely, it would not be worth it. An awful lot of suppliers offer 0% interest these days sometimes up to 3 years depending on what you spend.
> I reckon that if I paid a true market value for my MTB at the end of the scheme then it would cost me more than the original value.
> 
> Perhaps the scheme is becoming a victim of its own success.



All the more reason to get in while you can.


----------



## HJ (14 Aug 2009)

youngoldbloke said:


> - to continue my earlier ramblings - Perhaps a BOR scheme ('bike on retirement', tax free) might be the answer for those like myself excluded from, and envious of C2W - maybe one should be able to opt for either a free bus pass or a BOR voucher? B)



Great idea, and it would work out cheaper for the country in the long run...



andyfromotley said:


> sorry but i cant agree with those sentiments. Like you i have worked all my adult life. I dont believe that i 'deserve' something extra. If thats the case why not just fraudulently claim benefit? Perhaps steal something?
> 
> I'm not scared of my own or anyone elses shadow, i just like to try and do the right thing. Yes it can be hard and pisses me off at times but sometimes lifes like that. And no i dont mean to condemn those who would do this, in the scheme of things its pretty small beer, but that dont make it right.



Well said, good to see that there are still people in this country with a moral backbone. There is far to much of a something for nothing attitude which has developed in this country since the 1980's, whether it guaranteed bonuses, MP's expense, or just plain fraud, it has somehow become acceptable. Well it shouldn't be, we all loose by it in some way...


----------



## HJ (14 Aug 2009)

philipbh said:


> Its an interesting debate though and I'm left wondering why the scheme isn't open to everyone on a personal level - which I suppose still wouldn't stop the rules being bent and "buying for someone else"
> 
> B) The government could zero rate bicycles and allow the tax relief to be claimed through a Tax Return submission and / or Tax code change



Why not, the government is already subsidising the buying of new cars through the scrappage scheme. Given their supposed targets on health and the environment, tax relief on bikes would be a much better idea...


----------

