Cycle to Work Scheme - Rip Off.

[pshore]

I don't agree with that.

The original guidance was only 22 pages in total and was the most straight forward tax-related government document I have seen. For instance:
"There should be no automatic entitlement for the employee to take ownership of the cycle and cyclists’ safety equipment at the end of the loan period"

But it is not that straight forward.

What I find most odd about the scheme is that scheme administrators are following the rules as laid down by the HMRC, but the HMRC are still turning a blind eye to the fact that this is a hire scheme (on paper) and is being used as a route to purchase a cycle. I asked my scheme administrator how many people had handed their bikes back at the end of 12 months, out of thousands of hires - none.

The HMRC normally close loop holes used to abuse the tax system and this is one area that could be 'clarified' leaving a lot of unhappy purchasers.

Another route to unhappiness will be if a scheme administrator goes bust. The debt recovery firms will not be offering the bikes to the purchasers at the end of the hire period because they can probably get more for them through auction. (I still think 25% for some bikes at 12 months is undervaluing them).

So, even if you read all the small print and enter into this scheme, you are taking quite a risk. Personally, it is not one I would take again.

 

[Jezston]

Even worse than I suggested.

You are throwing out a blanket dismissal of all those who have administered cycle to work schemes on the basis of one specific scheme.

No I'm not. Norm, I'm not meaning to make what I've said some kind of personal attack on your abilities as an administer of the scheme!

I'm talking about people like cyclescheme.co.uk and Evans who had websites saying "enter your tax code and bike value here - ok you pay this much a month and at the end you pay this much", and because so many organisations like this were doing this, HRMC had to issue guidance stating they were doing it wrong, and this caused a bit of a brouhaha amongst those who'd taken out these schemes beleiving what they were told would happen.

 

[John the Monkey]

We need a poll to find out how many C2W users actually do the 50% work related journeys (as per the agreement) on their C2W bikes.

I'm guessing it'll be around 50%

Of the people I know here, it's in the order of 80-90%. LOTS of Bromptons.

 

[Paul Walters]

Wow. What?

I'm basing it on the rules as presented to myself, my colleagues and friends who have signed up to the scheme 'pre-clarification', and so many people on here who have said they were told under the scheme that they would pay £x a month then at the end they'd pay no more than a month's worth and the bike is theirs - and then found out at the end of the scheme - post-clarification - that was actually wrong.

That's what we were told would happen, that was what we expected to happen, that isn't what happened. It's not really fair to criticise those who fell victim to being misinformed by the people who run the schemes, because we never read the official DFT Guidance that I'm sure few of us knew anything about.

Thank you

 

[evilclive]

Another route to unhappiness will be if a scheme administrator goes bust. The debt recovery firms will not be offering the bikes to the purchasers at the end of the hire period because they can probably get more for them through auction. (I still think 25% for some bikes at 12 months is undervaluing them).

Don't forget the cost of collecting the thing. There's no money for debt recovery firms in a collection of second hand bikes - they have to get the bike off you in order to sell it, and it's very easy to make it cost them more to recover it from you than it makes them at auction.

 

[pshore]

Don't forget the cost of collecting the thing. There's no money for debt recovery firms in a collection of second hand bikes - they have to get the bike off you in order to sell it, and it's very easy to make it cost them more to recover it from you than it makes them at auction.

In the terms and conditions, you might have to send the bike back at your own cost if I recall correctly.

What I was saying was a bit hypothetical, but the main point is that all the risk is stacked against the consumer. This is not a very simple way to purchase a bike.

There is a similar salary sacrifice scheme at work for getting you to buy a lower emissioned car. I wonder how that compares for T's and C's. The potential saving (or loss) is far bigger.

 

[huxley]

hi
v got a c2w agreement out with Halfords as it is my empoyer aswell i had to go with them,
but dose anyone know if i could get another scheam out now,
my one dont run out till september

(i have got the boardman team fs and have had a few problems with it )