Bike stolen from Tesco Superstore

[newts]

That's a very clean square cut through stainless steel, no heat mark or spelching of the metal on the cut line🤔

 

[presta]

Generally I would just take it for granted that rack providers aren't taking any responsibility for the bikes. The camera sign might imply otherwise, but I think it's probably just there as a deterrent, I very much doubt that anyone's paid to sit watching CCTV all day.

 

[Bonefish Blues]

Generally I would just take it for granted that rack providers aren't taking any responsibility for the bikes. The camera sign might imply otherwise, but I think it's probably just there as a deterrent, I very much doubt that anyone's paid to sit watching CCTV all day.

Well they are, but their focus is likely to be Aisle 5, not the bike racks.

 

[alicat]

Welcome to the forum. I can't see that Tesco are to blame for some thieves stealing your bike. Apart from anything else, the thieves were very determined....

 

[Ajax Bay]

Well equipped thieves, anyway.
Be aware of another wheeze with these type of bike railings.
Cut it through at leisure and then tape over.
Return to harvest bikes locked to severed railing without attracting attention 'cos of the angle grinder.
Renew harry black maskers for the next unwary sod.

 

[classic33]

That's a very clean square cut through stainless steel, no heat mark or spelching of the metal on the cut line🤔

Looks as though an industrial pipe cutter was used, not an angle grinder.
You can make out the roller marking on the rail.

 

[IanSmithCSE]

Good morning,

...... Define victim blaming (tip: this is not it)......

You may prefer another term but a new poster posts about his loss and is then told to add some form of wheel locking so that it can't be ridden ......... he's just had his bike nicked and there is no reason to believe that adding such a lock would have made any difference.

I was pretty annoyed to find my commuter nicked https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/norco-pinched-just-in-case-anyone-sees-it-on-ebay-etc.284440 a while back.

The poster of that post didn't feel a need to respond so it is surprising that you do.

.... Do you suggest that a local authority should be liable if a bike is stolen having been locked to one of their publicly funded cycle racks?....

No and that is not what I said in relation to the supermarket.

I was suggesting that a potential liabilty may have be acquired as result of posting a sign that could reasonably interpreted as stating something that was not in fact the case.

So if the local authority posts a sign saying Cyclists your bike is safe here as we have 24 hour security above one of their cycle racks and they don't have such security then yes I am suggesting that they may have liablilties for the loss.

Not because of the theft but because the cyclist may have used the information that the security was in force when deciding to leave the cycle there.

........What a load of codswallop (I'm writing this in case someone comes on your post in a search at some later date).......Arguing that a sign of the type described forms a contract is so flawed as to be laughable.........

You are perfectly entitled to your opinion and I had to smile at the confidence you have in it.

I remember when wheel clamping first started, most people assumed that it was illegal, how on Earth can someone deprive me of my car just because I parked on their car park. It turned out to be legal.

When "fines" for parking on private land started appearing most people assumed that it was illegal, it turned out to be legal.

When these "fines" for parking on private land where challanged as they were compensation for breach of contract so should only be a few quid, it turned out to be legal as it was reasonable to set them at a level to act as a deterent.

Almost everybody in life, be they real people or legal entities such as a company, are responsible for their actions and as a general princple if you tell an untruth expecting people to act on that then there may be consequences.

You may dislike the word contract and sure I can spend hundreds of words calling it an agreement, an encouragement to act in a certain way or many other things until we end up with tldr; contract.

I've have a supermarket just a bit too far to walk to in the lunch break with similar racks and have been contemplating locking either a 753 Raleigh, actually pretty much worthless but easy to believe that it is valuable, or my Ribble ebike.

Other than I am a cynic/realist I would take a sign that says CCTV in operation to mean something different to one that uses the more common wording of CCTV may be in operation. The second wording is far more common because it is almost meaningless yet complies with various regs requiring that notification of recording be given.


Bye

Ian

 

[cyberknight]

Where i lock the bike up at work it has cctv and a combination lock padlock to access the area but there are still signs telling us we leave bikes there at our own risk the same as the company car park which has card activated barriers.
I hasten to add i have my own locks for the bikes in the lock up area .

 

[Ajax Bay]

Thank you for your considered answer/commentary @IanSmithCSE

 

[bonzobanana]

Good morning,

You may prefer another term but a new poster posts about his loss and is then told to add some form of wheel locking so that it can't be ridden ......... he's just had his bike nicked and there is no reason to believe that adding such a lock would have made any difference.

I was pretty annoyed to find my commuter nicked https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/norco-pinched-just-in-case-anyone-sees-it-on-ebay-etc.284440 a while back.

The poster of that post didn't feel a need to respond so it is surprising that you do.


No and that is not what I said in relation to the supermarket.

I was suggesting that a potential liabilty may have be acquired as result of posting a sign that could reasonably interpreted as stating something that was not in fact the case.

So if the local authority posts a sign saying Cyclists your bike is safe here as we have 24 hour security above one of their cycle racks and they don't have such security then yes I am suggesting that they may have liablilties for the loss.

Not because of the theft but because the cyclist may have used the information that the security was in force when deciding to leave the cycle there.



You are perfectly entitled to your opinion and I had to smile at the confidence you have in it.

I remember when wheel clamping first started, most people assumed that it was illegal, how on Earth can someone deprive me of my car just because I parked on their car park. It turned out to be legal.

When "fines" for parking on private land started appearing most people assumed that it was illegal, it turned out to be legal.

When these "fines" for parking on private land where challanged as they were compensation for breach of contract so should only be a few quid, it turned out to be legal as it was reasonable to set them at a level to act as a deterent.

Almost everybody in life, be they real people or legal entities such as a company, are responsible for their actions and as a general princple if you tell an untruth expecting people to act on that then there may be consequences.

You may dislike the word contract and sure I can spend hundreds of words calling it an agreement, an encouragement to act in a certain way or many other things until we end up with tldr; contract.

I've have a supermarket just a bit too far to walk to in the lunch break with similar racks and have been contemplating locking either a 753 Raleigh, actually pretty much worthless but easy to believe that it is valuable, or my Ribble ebike.

Other than I am a cynic/realist I would take a sign that says CCTV in operation to mean something different to one that uses the more common wording of CCTV may be in operation. The second wording is far more common because it is almost meaningless yet complies with various regs requiring that notification of recording be given.


Bye

Ian

Realistically nowadays supermarkets don't even bother to stop shoplifters in their store and the police aren't interested unless the theft is over £200. I'm sure Tesco are happy to provide CCTV footage if available for the crime but I see no liability for Tesco or any other supermarket or store. CCTV in operation means just that you can't assume that means responsibility for any thefts committed. If I put a CCTV in operation on my house does that mean I am liable for any bike stolen outside within the view of the CCTV. Also who is going to tackle someone with a cordless grinder? At best they can provide footage. We are already paying enough for food shopping with perhaps a good few percent added for store theft I don't want to add another percentage for stolen bikes outside stores. All costs add up hugely. Just compensating one person for a bike of £300 value will probably mean thousands of pounds spent by the supermarket itself in labour time and other costs.

I've seen people on forums state their nice bike pretty much only goes on loop rides starting at the house or maybe from their car and then ends up back there. If they are lucky enough to have secure storage at work then fair enough they might use it for commuting. That is a realistic viewpoint. Others have grunged up their bike to destroy its resale value, bad paintwork etc. You have to adapt to your environment as sad as that is.

 

[Brandane]

Others have grunged up their bike to destroy its resale value, bad paintwork etc.

This is my tactics. An old Trek 6500 SLR mountain bike. I stripped it to it's frame then used a spray can of gold paint on it. Put it back together and soon realised that it actually looked BETTER than it had previously! Ok, the Trek branding wasn't visible, but it was still a good looking bike with good components - which would be desirable to any bike thief with a bit of knowledge. So I then took a paintbrush and a tin of paint to it (without bothering to strip it down first) to make it look REALLY bad! It's my bike of choice for visiting big towns or cities, but I still wouldn't leave it for long or without a sturdy lock to a solid object.

 

[brucers]

The best thing to come out of this thread is not to use racks provided by stores. Where possible, I lock my bike to a lampost etc rather than racks provided because racks are often positioned in out of the way, round the corner type places, making It easier for thieves to work unmolested.
In truth, the stores do not give a damn. My good lady had her locked bike stolen from Lidl. When we told them their response was a sort of shrug of the shoulders, yeah, we've had a spate of that lately.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Don’t lock your bike to a trolley, it’ll end up in the canal.

 

[TheDoctor]

No canals where I live
We got a big lake though...

 

[MidnightRider]

Its perhaps a bit late to reply to this, but re legal responsibility and notices/cameras, you could try contacting 'The Black Belt Barrister' a UK barrister who posts info and answers questions on YouTube, he has a good reputation for being helpful about a wide range of stuff, from commenting from a UK perspective on cases of international interest to covering parking fines etc.

I am sad to know another bikes gone. I used to use 2 high grade Abus Ulocks with an extension cable when I used to park in Bath and I would still wonder if the bike would be there when I got back. Security is the absolute worst thing, it really discourages cycling. There seems an attitude that if you spend a lot of saved up money on a bike, one somehow deserves to get it nicked, or that a £2000 bike is somehow of less value than a £2000 2nd hand car.