Cycle to work: Budget clampdown

[ebikeerwidnes]

Clearly it was, as you have to sign to say the bike will be primarily used for that purpose. In my case it was, asmit was for the two colleagues on my team who went for it,

That some people (and there is no evidence to say how many, the detractors are relying on pure conjecture and anecdote) take the pith doesnt alter the fact that is what the scheme is for, and they signed to agree to it.

Yes - in theory
but if you believe that the "signing for it" made any difference then you have an option of people that is not consistent with your employment history!!
It was designed to look right
but the total and complete lack of an enforcement meant that it was all show

I even knew a teacher who lived a 10 minute ride from school and had a great MTB type bike
but I only found that out when her class did a Bikeability course and she brought it into school in her car so she could do it with them!!!

mine was the only adult bike in the bike compound - which the kids loved and never messed with it!

 

[markemark]

Let people buy whatever price bike their employer is willing to pay for but cap the tax as if it were a decent branded ebike value.

 

[Dadam]

I agree

but the C2W scheme was never going to persuade the average person driving to work to swap to a bike

so it was always just something to get votes, as middle class people could use it to get a more expensive bike than they would be able to otherwise
but they would have got one anyway - just not got the "essential" carbon frame
or not the full suspension MTB
or whatever

and has been great for the ebike market as it makes them easier to justify to your wife cheaper

but it was never designed to make people swap to bike to get to work
otherwise it would have to include some form of monitoring
which would be intrusive, impractical and expensive

Hard disagree here. It absolutely was, and I was one of those average people. I got a low/mid range hybrid on C2W and the rest is history.

 

[FishFright]

I agree

but the C2W scheme was never going to persuade the average person driving to work to swap to a bike

so it was always just something to get votes, as middle class people could use it to get a more expensive bike than they would be able to otherwise
but they would have got one anyway - just not got the "essential" carbon frame
or not the full suspension MTB
or whatever

and has been great for the ebike market as it makes them easier to justify to your wife cheaper

but it was never designed to make people swap to bike to get to work
otherwise it would have to include some form of monitoring
which would be intrusive, impractical and expensive

Around here it's popular with manual workers as well .

 

[Dogtrousers]

I'd love to see some stats ... but I doubt they exist ... on the true extent to which the Cycle To Work scheme results in more people Cycling To Work.

We know there is at least some use of it just to get hold of a new toy. And obviously there is some bona fide use. I have no idea what the balance is.

And to what extent is not owning a bike the main barrier that stops people?

I have no idea of the answers

 

[Dadam]

I asked GPT the following: "Find survey data on the usage of the cycle to work scheme in the UK. Particularly any data on the proportion of people who actually used the bike to commute, as opposed to those who simply purchased a bike for leisure."

I found some relevant survey and evaluation data on the UK’s Cycle to Work Scheme (C2W) which help answer your question about how many scheme users actually commute vs use the bike for leisure.

---

✅ Key figures​

From the 2025 evaluation commissioned by HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) titled “Evaluation of the Cycle to Work Scheme: quantitative and qualitative research” (2022-fieldwork) (GOV.UK)

• 74 % of users reported that they cycled at least part of the way to work after using the scheme. (GOV.UK)
• Of those users, 48 % said they cycled all the way to and from work using the scheme bike. (GOV.UK)
• 26 % said they cycled part of the way to/from work. (GOV.UK)
• 25 % of scheme users said they did not cycle to work at all using the bike they accessed through the scheme. (GOV.UK)
• 39 % of users were “newly commuting cyclists” (i.e., they did not cycle to work before using the scheme but started doing so afterwards). (GOV.UK)
• Additionally, 51 % of users who already had access to a bicycle before joining the scheme reported they cycled more outside their commute since using the scheme. (GOV.UK)

---

🔍 Interpretation & caveats

• The fact that 25 % of users did not use the bike for commuting at all implies that a substantial minority accessed the scheme but used the bike purely for leisure or perhaps not at work commute.
• Meanwhile, about half (48 %) used it fully for commuting (all the way), and another ~26 % partially for commuting.
• So roughly ~74 % (48 + 26) did some commuting usage with their scheme bike.
• But the evaluation also notes that the scheme appeals strongly to people who already had a bike (62 % had access before the scheme) and many of them were already commuting by bike (38 % of all users had cycled to work before the scheme) so part of the scheme’s uptake is among existing cyclists. (GOV.UK)
• The evaluation explicitly states that some users used the scheme bike solely for leisure, despite the scheme’s intent of encouraging commuting. (GOV.UK)
• The sample size in the survey was relatively modest (n=438 users of the scheme within the past 5 years) so some caution is needed in generalising. (GOV.UK)

---

📊 Summary for your specific question​

You asked: the proportion of people who actually used the bike to commute, as opposed to simply purchased a bike for leisure.
Based on the data:

• ~48 % of scheme users cycled all the way to and from work using the bike.
• ~74 % of scheme users cycled at least part of the way to work.
• ~25 % of users did not use the bike for commuting at all (i.e., presumably leisure or non-commute use).
  Hence, roughly 1 in 4 scheme participants are not using the bike for commuting at all; about 3 in 4 are using it for some commuting; and about 1 in 2 are using it fully as a commuter bike.

---

If you like, I can check for breakdowns by type of bike (e-bike vs standard), by income group, or by how long they commute, to further refine how “true commuting use” differs by subgroup. Would you like me to look into that?

 

[FishFright]

You its gone full dumb when a bike forum starts complaining about people buying bikes .

 

[Baldy]

After all the
It is tempting to say put a cap on the bike price, but where? Looking at Ribble it would seem to need to be around £3k on ebikes and £2k on unpowered.

How come, whenever anyone asks on here "what bike should I use for commuting ". The stock answer is "don't use anything at all expensive as it will get nicked". Yet when buying a bike on C2W all of a sudden you "need" one costing at least £2k?
I've three bikes, a tourer, a gravel bike and a mountain bike. They all get a lot more hammer than the average commuter yet the most expensive was just £1600.

 

[Dan Lotus]

It all depends on where you are commuting to - my workplace has secure and covered bike parking, plus they have lockers, showers and a drying room.

Thus I bought a £2600 gravel bike on the c2w scheme with mudguards for an extra £55, added a Tailfin rack, bought separately, and that functions as a multiuse bike. Family rides, winter bike, commuter, light tourer.

The only time I would say a super cheap bike is needed for commuting is if you are parking it somewhere where thieving scum can easily gain access to it.

I've used C2W 3 or 4 times, and have found it very useful, not only for the commute to work, but for keeping me motivated to ride period.
A previous cheaper ~£700 c2w bike (Boardman hybrid) that I used when I only worked a few miles away, is still with us, gets serviced, and is used by both me and my partner, perfect town bike, go to the gym bike. Capable with mudguards and disc brakes, but not too desirable to attract the scum.

On a longer commute I had, IF the speed of electric bikes was increased, I would have been sorely tempted to get one to replace a car or bus journey. I'm fairly lucky that my works limit is 3K, partly because I, amongst others, suggested it needed to increase from the previous 1K, so on the whole I do count myself fairly fortunate.

There's not many perks out there in reality, and I think this is a really useful one in terms of encouraging people to get out, and exercise, and as a side effect, in all likelihood have improved mental health, have less sick days off work, and to be less of a drain on the NHS.

Perhaps it should simply be re-branded as a 'Let's get cycling' scheme, and then people would be less unhappy.

 

[winjim]

4k might get you an unnecessarily fancy carbon fibre twatmachine, but it could also get you a fairly low spec electric cargo bike, which can replace a car for a great number of journeys. If giving hardcore cyclists a new toy is the price of encouraging more people to consider cycling for ordinary day to day journeys then I consider it a price worth paying.

I do think the scheme could do with a rethink as it disproportionately benefits high earners, and I do think encouraging people into cycling requires investment into infrastructure, but I don't think capping the scheme is the way to go. Especially the language being used is feeding into anti-cycling rhetoric which isn't helpful.

E-bikes could solve many problems and we should be doing everything we can to incentivise their use. I was thinking about it as I rode to work this morning, along the Death Star trench of parked cars, over potholes and wet leaves, in the half light and pouring rain. A lease scheme is necessary due to the initial expense, but there's more to it than that.

 

[Dogtrousers]

How come, whenever anyone asks on here "what bike should I use for commuting ". The stock answer is "don't use anything at all expensive as it will get nicked". Yet when buying a bike on C2W all of a sudden you "need" one costing at least £2k?
I've three bikes, a tourer, a gravel bike and a mountain bike. They all get a lot more hammer than the average commuter yet the most expensive was just £1600.

I just put "aluminium flat bar road bike UK" into Google (cos that's what I'd look for if I was commuting - but that's just me). Discarding the cheapest as they may be a bit BSOish* the price range I'd go for seems to be £1000 - £1600 for some very nice looking bikes. Even nicer ones at 2k, so 2k isn't a bonkers point for a limit.

* Mind you the very cheapest was a Triban from Decathlon and they have a good rep. But the components are probably a bit on the cheesy side.

 

[Psamathe]

I've always regarded the C2W scheme as a means to encourage people to buy a bike through subsidising and spreading the cost. And to my mind that has to be better than not doing it.

It's a shame it's biased towards people working but better than not doing it. Broader inclusion would have been better.

Of course people will find loopholes or use it for purpose not intended (eg recreational bike, more expensive bike) but if result is more people on bikes then better than nothing.

There maybe better ways for Gov so encourage cycling but other ways were not offered and if other encouragement then do both.

 

[Psamathe]

It all depends on where you are commuting to - my workplace has secure and covered bike parking, plus they have lockers, showers and a drying room.

Maybe that's an aspect Government should look at eg tax breaks for companies spending on converting eg parking spaces into secure bike storage or infrastructure improving existing bike parking eg security. Offset the capital costs against tax, even some grants.

 

[winjim]

How come, whenever anyone asks on here "what bike should I use for commuting ". The stock answer is "don't use anything at all expensive as it will get nicked". Yet when buying a bike on C2W all of a sudden you "need" one costing at least £2k?
I've three bikes, a tourer, a gravel bike and a mountain bike. They all get a lot more hammer than the average commuter yet the most expensive was just £1600.

I commute on a cargo bike. I used to use it drop the kid off at nursery on the way, now I use it to do my shopping on the way home. My colleague commutes on an e-bike, without which she wouldn't be cycling at all as we live in a very hilly area. Each cost over two grand. Some people have the best of both worlds and use an electric cargo bike. I just walked past the bike park and there's a tern GSD with two child seats on the back. That's what, four or five grand? But it's replacing an awful lot of motor car usage.

 

[Drago]

Maybe that's an aspect Government should look at eg tax breaks for companies spending on converting eg parking spaces into secure bike storage or infrastructure improving existing bike parking eg security. Offset the capital costs against tax, even some grants.

Some council tax workplace parking, and the companies pass the cost on to the employee.