Cycle to work scheme ... on a clapped out old bike!

[jimmynoboat]

Met a bloke a while back who'd had a new bike on the cycle to work scheme. He decided it was too nice to use for work so he goes to work on the old one he already owned.

Am I the only one who thinks this is not what the scheme was set up for?

[downfader]

I agree with you, and he should be thankful that he got a bike out of his employer. I never managed to get one out of the NHS (with atleast 4 other people in my dept being in the same position)

[rbrian]

Seems to me it was set up to annoy me because my employer won't do it!

[MikeL]

You'ld be on rather stronger ground if he kept driving to work, and drove the new bike somewhere in his huge chelsea tractor to cycle round the woods on the odd sunny afternoon

...he should be thankful that he got a bike out of his employer....

Well, he is paying for it: he just gets a tax break on it. I think it's fair enough. It's a perk to encourage people to do the socially useful thing and cycle to work, and he is! Just because he already has a clapped out bike does not make it a wheeze.

I never managed to get one out of the NHS

It's stupid the way provision is so arbitrary and patchy in a national scheme in the National Health Service. Our hospital is very well organised with CTW (and not much else, alas). I'm in the process of getting a Brommie.

[DaveP]

IIRC the scheme was intended to get people cycling to work. So if he's cycling to work it seems fair enough to me!
Eventually the new bike wont seem so precious and will start to be used for more mundane trips.

Hmmm. D'you think theres any chance of a scrappage scheme for bikes?

[richardyorkshire]

I have a bike purchased through the cycle to work scheme. The documentation I was given said that, for a bike purchase to qualify for the tax benefits, you had to use it for at least half your journeys to work. I understand there is no duty on companies to prove their employees are using the bicycles. So there's no incentive for your employer to do any checks.

But it seems to me that if you don't use the bicycle regularly to cycle to work, you may well be committing tax fraud. I guess the government isn't terribly bothered about it, so I suppose you can get away with it.

But the huge budget deficit we are accruing looms large in my mind, and I'd hate the government to decide that a good way of saving money is to cancel the cycle to work scheme.

[EdinburghFixed]

I have a bike purchased through the cycle to work scheme. The documentation I was given said that, for a bike purchase to qualify for the tax benefits, you had to use it for at least half your journeys to work. I understand there is no duty on companies to prove their employees are using the bicycles. So there's no incentive for your employer to do any checks.

But it seems to me that if you don't use the bicycle regularly to cycle to work, you may well be committing tax fraud. I guess the government isn't terribly bothered about it, so I suppose you can get away with it.

You've got it the wrong way around - half the time you *use* the bike, should be as part of a journey to work (and partial journeys count, i.e. to ride to a station or park your car and ride the rest of the way). But not the other way around!

So if you ride the new bike for a week (10 journeys), then you can safely park it up and ride it every weekend for 2 1/2 months. Ride it for a month (~45 journeys) and you can park it and ride every weekend for the rest of the year (at which point it will becomes yours in truth anyway).

So it's not that bad... I've only had my bike for a few weeks but already I could use it for pleasure only and still meet the government's strictest criteria.

[NUKe]

In my work place I m am often a loan voice when it comes to the cycle work scheme and I probably, I am here as well. I do not believe the cycle to work scheme does anything to encourage people to cycle to work. If you can afford to buy a 1000 pound bike to cycle discounted to 600 then you can afford to buy a sub 400 pound bike which will be more than adequate for the purpose of cycling to work.

The scheme is more likely to be used, by people who already ride to work, to ride more expensive cycles, and its only really an advantage to the 40% tax payers. I personally think this money could be much better spent by the Government on cycling facilities which make it safer and more convenient for people to cycle.

There is one real positive though, it has been a real shot inthe arm for the cycling retailers, even if skewd to the large nations such as Halfords and Evans.

Before anybody questions Would I'd use the scheme if it was available. The answer is yes if I was in the market for another bike.

If employers want to encourage people to cycle to work then provision of suitable facilities to lock the bike safely and Changing facilites

[EdinburghFixed]

But lots of people don't buy £1000 bikes discounted to £600 anyway. I know plenty of people who have bought more like £250 bikes (pre-discount) instead.

Having said that, I do think the scheme would be just as effective at encouraging commuting, and less useful for subsidising enthusiasts' whim bikes if the limit was £500. Not that I think "wasting" tiny amounts of money on getting people nice bikes is really up there on the list of things the government does that concerns me!

[kwackers]

In my work place I m am often a loan voice when it comes to the cycle work scheme and I probably, I am here as well. I do not believe the cycle to work scheme does anything to encourage people to cycle to work. If you can afford to buy a 1000 pound bike to cycle discounted to 600 then you can afford to buy a sub 400 pound bike which will be more than adequate for the purpose of cycling to work.

The scheme is more likely to be used, by people who already ride to work, to ride more expensive cycles, and its only really an advantage to the 40% tax payers. I personally think this money could be much better spent by the Government on cycling facilities which make it safer and more convenient for people to cycle.

There is one real positive though, it has been a real shot inthe arm for the cycling retailers, even if skewd to the large nations such as Halfords and Evans.

Before anybody questions Would I'd use the scheme if it was available. The answer is yes if I was in the market for another bike.

If employers want to encourage people to cycle to work then provision of suitable facilities to lock the bike safely and Changing facilites

Not completely convinced, I do believe it has encouraged some people to cycle to work (certainly has here).
There is one group in particular I think has benefited - the train commuting folder lot. A half price Brompton suddenly makes it look a bit more viable.

I have a couple of BTW bikes, I paid extra to get the ones I wanted and I really like them. I don't think I'd have bought them without the scheme and because they're such nice bikes I enjoy riding them. My commute is a fair distance and tbh I'm not convinced I could be bothered cycling it on a hack so it may well be that I not commute by bike if it weren't for the scheme - or certainly less frequently. (Although I'd make up for that by doing more leisure cycling - but I don't think that's what it's about.)

[NUKe]

Whilst i acknowledge you might be right about the brompton users, The folding market is tiny and in this market there are suitable folders just not as trendy for what people need Dawes and Falcon both do ones around the 200~300 mark. But yes the scheme made people think about buying one. But this is tiny in comparison to the middle class grab on all the other bikes.

And 2 bikes from the scheme your being greedy

I still think the Bike to work scheme is more of a middle class tax grab and in its self it has minimal affect on people commuting. And like I said previously If my employer ran it, and I was inthe market for a new one,I would use it silly not to, but IMHO it does little to promote cycling.

[kwackers]

And 2 bikes from the scheme your being greedy

And why not...

I still think the Bike to work scheme is more of a middle class tax grab and in its self it has minimal affect on people commuting.

You still need to want a bike - a £1000 bike for £500 is still £500, unless you want it you've just chucked £500 into the back of the garage.

[Chiz]

I know a few people who already rode their £1k+ road machines into work, the used the cycle to work scheme to treat themselves to new mountain bikes 'for the weekend'. If cycle to work was available to me I'd probably do the same, although I'd probably try to get my hands on a galaxy or suchlike 'for the weekend'.

My girlfriend got a Chris Boardman mountain bike on cycle to work last year, I've ridden it to my work more than she has to hers.

[FatBat]

It could be argued that the scheme can facilitate cycling to work in the way the original poster mentions - eg. I've got an old bike that is ideal for commuting - it has lights, mudguards, pannier rack (plus a single pannier), bomb proof wheels and hubs to cope with the potholes and has served my commuting needs well for about 15 years now. A change in circumstances means I'm not cycling to work at present, but I could given a little encouragement.

In order to get fit, I want to get a stripped down racer to use on evenings and at weekends. Without Cycle-to-Work, I could convert my existing commuter into such a machine, but it would then be unsuitable for commuting. With Cycle-to-Work, I get a discounted racer and the commuter is there for use on the journey to work!

Regarding the cost to the Government;- when they can give people £1000 towards a new car, I think the few hundred quid (max) given to people towards a bike is trivial. And, if giving money to people to buy bikes means less money for cycle-facilties (like the shared-use paths we get round here), even better!

[NUKe]

Regarding the cost to the Government;- when they can give people £1000 towards a new car, I think the few hundred quid (max) given to people towards a bike is trivial. And, if giving money to people to buy bikes means less money for cycle-facilties (like the shared-use paths we get round here), even better!

One tax loop hole does not justify another one. The rational behind the car scrapage scheme was something different,it was about saving Jobs,and it has a limited life span. The supposed aims of the cycle to work scheme were given as the health of the nation, and cutting congestion, both of which there seems to be limited evidence of. My main arguement, and it is my arguement I am not speaking for anybody else, is that it has done little for getting people to cycle to work. There are a few people who now have nicer bikes and there will always be a few exceptions such as the folding brigade that Kwackers mentioned, that now take folders to the station. But on the whole the government could have put the money to better use if it wanted to encourage cycling.