49 replies to this topic

[Prolixia]

Earlier today I walked past a sign on some railings that read something along the following lines. The railings were outside a business property and the sign wasn't an 'official' one (e.g. from the local council).

Any bicycles found locked to these railings will be removed. A charge will be made for their return.

I appreciate the general similarity to e.g. towing vehicles parked on private land, but there are a couple of interesting issues here:

• Removing a locked bicycle would necessarily* involve breaking either the bike or the lock. Bike locks can be jolly expensive (£50+).
  
• The "charge" the bicycle owner has to pay to before his bicycle is returned is completely unspecified - it could be 50p or £50k.
  
• The railings are on the property boundary - any bicycle locked to them will remain on the pavement with only e.g. one handlebar and a small portion of the lock crossing onto the private land.

Suppose that a security guard working for the business cuts a lock, removes a bike, then refuses to return the bike and broken lock until the owner agrees to pay £100. Would there be any criminal offences committed?

(* - Let's assume that the business owner isn't going to cut up his own railings)

Edited by Prolixia, 18 May 2012 - 02:55 PM.

[SC Ben]

Civil matter isn't it? Its private property and the owner should have read the sign

Edited by SC Ben, 18 May 2012 - 03:00 PM.

[Prolixia]

Is it? We're talking about a bike that isn't on the business's ground, that has been removed by damaging it or its lock. Civil matter was my first thought, but I'm not sure it's that simple.

[SC Ben]

Ok so you could argue ciminal damage for the lock but even then, I think you'd be finding it hard to get a charge for it as one would argue they should have read the sign and it was left at their own risk

[wanabe]

Few questions.
How would the company inform you that they have the bike?
What would happen if the sign states the above however before they remove it a 3rd party steals it. Where would the company stand?
Would it not be theft and possible crim damage?

[SC Ben]

Just wait for them to start fighting over it and have them both for affray! Then tell them they can both be taken to custody or agree no further action and dearrest....


Oh wait...

Its not theft because strictly speaking, they're not planning on permenantly depriving them of it... Just waiting till payment

[wanabe]

Just because there's a sign doesn't mean it's legal binding. I could put a sign on my door saying "Anybody who posts advertising leaflets through my door will have to pay me a £1000 fine" doesn't really mean anything.

Just wait for them to start fighting over it and have them both for affray! Then tell them they can both be taken to custody or agree no further action and dearrest....


Oh wait...

Its not theft because strictly speaking, they're not planning on permenantly depriving them of it... Just waiting till payment

But if they didn't pay what would happen to it? If I take somebody's TV and say give me £50 and you can have it back that's still theft.

[SC Ben]

True... However, I just think that civil matter would be best suited and claim for the damage through civil court as I know if I took one in and explained to my custody skipper that its all over a sign and the owner left it there by chance, she'd tell me where to go...

Although the sign is one put up by them, its still their property in my eyes!

[gordon]

I would have thought that the company would be well within its rights if the bike is on their side of the property line, but if the bike is on the public side of the fence they could be in trouble. They might be technically able to remove the lock on their side of the fence but I wonder if a good lawyer could then get a claim through the fact that they haven't made an effort to protect the bike from theft, or even claim that if the bike was stolen then the company as also jointly liable for the offence by cutting the lock first.

As far as I know though local authorities are allowed to remove bike from railings that are facing pavements or on the highway, and they just cut the lock and take the bike into storage until claimed.

If you are a business that keeps getting bikes locked onto your railings despite signs, if they have a legal basis which I'm not sure of, would be to buy a couple of bike locks and add your own lock to the bike with a label so they know where to come to get it unlocked, but you'd need to be careful not to damage the bike.

[GodAtum]

is it the same law for government buildings?

[stu0x]

Ok so you could argue ciminal damage for the lock but even then, I think you'd be finding it hard to get a charge for it as one would argue they should have read the sign and it was left at their own risk

So presumably if I put a sign up on the outside of my garden wall saying "anyone leaning against this will get a punch in the face", said chop-buster would be a civil matter, and not an assault? After all, they should have read the sign...

[Dave SYP]

Bicycles are generally removed from railings (that have signs displayed) due to them being left there by people who cannot read or blatantly disregard the signs. The signs are there for a reason, that the bikes would be causing an obstruction and / or a danger to pedestrians.

[Samson]

Bicycles are generally removed from railings (that have signs displayed) due to them being left there by people who cannot read or blatantly disregard the signs. The signs are there for a reason, that the bikes would be causing an obstruction and / or a danger to pedestrians.

With the official sign then that is usually true, but with the unofficial private signs it is usually just because it looks untidy or the owner just doesn't like it.

[Samson]

is there an official sign,, apart from a bylaw, what law are the bikers breaking

I'm not saying the are laws (It is not an area of law I am familliar with). All I was saying was that, from what I seen cyling around my neck of the wood, the Local Authority 'no bicycle parking' signs tend to be reasonably well focused on keeping the pavement clear etc, wereas private signs seem to be put up just for the hell of it with much less attention to being helpful to the public and pedestrians.

[Dave SYP]

I know where I live, universities, colleges, shops and some offices do it. If i paid for the upkeep of railings, fences, etc. in the course of running a business, I would do it too!

[gordon]

it was a genuine question, there must be a law that a) says you cant leave bikes on the pavement and b) gives the right to remove them or they couldnt do it

It should come under keeping the highways clear, and if not most councils have a bye-law that allows them to remove anything blocking the pavement (doubt they need a sign), in the same way that they can remove A-boards and other stuff too.

I know where I live, universities, colleges, shops and some offices do it. If i paid for the upkeep of railings, fences, etc. in the course of running a business, I would do it too!

Do they put up a sign, or do they actually remove the bikes? If they remove them what do they do with them?

[Dave SYP]

It should come under keeping the highways clear, and if not most councils have a bye-law that allows them to remove anything blocking the pavement (doubt they need a sign), in the same way that they can remove A-boards and other stuff too.



Do they put up a sign, or do they actually remove the bikes? If they remove them what do they do with them?

They normally 'clamp' them with an extra lock and charge for release. Signs are well displayed.

[wanabe]

They normally 'clamp' them with an extra lock and charge for release. Signs are well displayed.

So what is the actual point in the sign then?
If its :-
because it's blocking the footpath what use is it to put an extra lock on it? (it will be there longer)

If its because it looks untidy putting an extra lock on it is not going to make it tidier

[Dave SYP]

So what is the actual point in the sign then?
If its :-
because it's blocking the footpath what use is it to put an extra lock on it? (it will be there longer)

If its because it looks untidy putting an extra lock on it is not going to make it tidier

Well I suppose it's like prison should be to criminals, a deterrent. It inconveniences the cyclist who thinks that they can disregard warning notices and inconvenience other people really.

[gordon]

So what is the actual point in the sign then?
If its :-
because it's blocking the footpath what use is it to put an extra lock on it? (it will be there longer)

You mean like clamping?

[Jeebs]

Criminal damage for bolt cropping the lock and then obtaining money by meanaces, for withholding the bike unless a payment is made?

[Prolixia]

I think there is a danger of becoming side tracked as to the fairness of using someone else's railings to secure your bike.

I think there is at least an argument that the person who removes the bike and then tells the owner he has to pay a 'fine' to recover it commits the offences of criminal damage, theft and blackmail. Looking at the scenario from a purely academic perspective, are any of those actually applicable? More practically, if you were called to such a dispute would you consider nicking?

[Burnsy2023]

Criminal damage for bolt cropping the lock and then obtaining money by meanaces, for withholding the bike unless a payment is made?

Indeed. I see no legal right to crop the lock, so crim dam would be my first thought.

[Dave SYP]

I think most have signs to say that the bike will be 'clamped' and a fee for removal of the clamp, as a deterrent. Although, if someone has locked a bike to a fence having adequate warning notices displayed, I would see it as a civil matter whether locks were removed or not.

[Burnsy2023]

I would see it as a civil matter whether locks were removed or not.

Why?