£160 bike nicked, 23p compensation - How does that work then?


It's a bit more complicated than that...


Resting in suspended Animation
Unfortunately for the victims it is a case that as the thief was actually caught stealing so many bikes, that as it says in the article the compensation gets split between so many people.

I suppose it might be a minor consolation that the thief was actually caught and taken to court. If just the 1 bike had been stolen it'd be pretty unlikely that'd have happened and he'd still be 1 bike down :sad:. 21 bikes means its marginally more likely he'll get rumbled, but also means less compensation.


Evidence based cyclist
The thief should be made, as part of community service (under supervision, obviously), to do unpaid work for the victim up to the value of the goods he stole.

So in this case, clean the entire house 4 or 5 times, mow the lawn, that sort of thing.

Not very practical, I grant you.
Happens all the time. Most people that assault me in my line of work end up getting an order to pay compensation at court. However, as they rarely work I then get that compo years down the line, in dribs and drabs of £2 cheques, that normally stop before the full amount is reached anyway.


Legendary Member
Nr Cambridge
The criminal justice system is a joke.

My car was broken into, parts and tools stolen. The cuplrits were identified (x2), prosecuted and convicted of only theft not criminal damage as well. One of them, the accomplice, was fined half the value of the damage and theft done to my car. The other, the main instigator apparently, was given 20 hours community service, no fine. I submitted a detailed order for compensation. My insurance excess is £1,000 but the cost of repairs and replacement of stolen property came to less than this figure. So I needed re-imbursement. Anyway why should I claim from my insurers who will merely re-coup their loss from me over time by increasing my premium? The magistrates or prosecutor or both were TOTALLY incompetent in failing to fulfil my request for re-imbursement to put me back in the position I was prior to the break in.

If the thieves and vandals cannot make satisfactory restitution to the value of goods they have stolen or damaged then they should be made to work to pay me until such time the debt they owe me is satisfied. If they can't then I take the view I effectively own them until such time I discharge what they owe me.


Faster on HFLC
Slightly off topic but my mum is swapping her car, called the insurance and the difference was 2p between old car and new. They made her pay it by debit card! I know from our business that it would have cost them more in bank fees to transact the 2p, anywhere between 5p - 12p! Madness!
Top Bottom