Cycle to Work outrage

[MacB]

but I'll be looking for at least £200 an hour.

Hmmm, £200 per hour, task required, Norm shutting up........are we talking money well spent here

You should be able to crunch the No's to assuage most employers. I think the main problem are those where the answer is no without even thinking about it.

I still think the government could do more to help encourage cycling for those not able to participate in CTW.

 

[shouldbeinbed]

no probs I'll trust you, I saw a million quoted somewhere.

We've (finally!!) got a b2w scheme, that's where I got the £1000 over 12 months from and @ OP it's a Police Force scheme referenced heavily to the local Fire Service one and run through Cyclescheme.

Also our policy has (mis)interpreted the 50% stipulation to mandate 50% of my commuting must be by the b2w bike until I've paid off the lease and either handed it back or paid the FMV buy out.

Our problem is that there was no addition or change to the infrastructure on the various sites and the local attitude that we're some sort of soft target for 'you can't do that its H&S' and for us apparently we contravene DDA too for parking a bike under a dead end stairwell away from any access or egress point!!!

I've got a nice long list of emails asking for detailed clarification all ignored of fobbed off to someone else.

I'm getting to the point of Union and Grievance to get a documented reason why as I'm sick of the default admin position of prohibition and ignorance and now we've got a b2w scheme and green policy in operation asking for less car use, I feel there is a genuine mandate from the force for me to use a bike rather than me just being some crank who made a bizarre lifestyle choice not to drive to work - which is the way I am and always have been made to feel by my local site admin & management.

 

[Crankarm]

Would contacting the local rag be of any use if you had an intransigent employer who simply point blank refused to consider the scheme with no explanation and the said employer was a government or local government department? Might embarrass them into providing one. Just make sure they don't find out it was you who tipped off the local rag. A little difficult if you are the only one in the office pushing for it........

When I was at IKEA they refused point blank as well. I said it would sit well with their image of cheap, clean, simple, sustainable living, green considerations, etc. They weren't interested. Whilst I was trying to convince them, a huge smoking shelter was built which took 3 weeks from start to finish, was started 3 months after the extension to the aged bike shed was commenced which itself took 8 months to complete, well nearly, it wasn't totally finished. Many racks weren't under cover as originally planned. The racks were really crap racks as well those channel ones very close together. Very few used them so the main shed was still packed.

 

[Norm]

Hmmm, £200 per hour, task required, Norm shutting up........are we talking money well spent here

*cough* *cough* shuddupayaface!* *cough*

... apparently we contravene DDA too for parking a bike under a dead end stairwell away from any access or egress point!!!

DDA?

I used to work in Empress State Building, one of the biggest Met offices in London, apparently, and there were no more than half a dozen cyclists on 30 floors. Which was handy as I used their racks for my motorbike.

The fallacy about "50% of commuting must be by bike" afflicted my previous employers too. Idiots.

 

[Bromptonaut]

Junglegusset,

I struggle enough to keep the up to date with organisation of the civil side justice system without worrying about the crim side. However, I assume as probation you are presumably allied in some way to NOMS and thus the Ministry of Justice?

MoJ staff have a C2W scheme through which I run a very nice M6L Brommy. Still have an issue about how they calculate any final purchase value, but that's another issue!!

 

[SilentSoulDragon]

DDA = Disability Discrimination Act? Due to someone who is able to cycle but not carry the bike down/up the stairs to where they suggested the bikes be stored.

Just my guess so might not be right.

 

[Lizban]

Can someone clear up this 50% commuting part of C2W - my understanding is that the primary purpose for the bike must be commuting - hence the 50% useage has come from there - is this not the case?

 

[abchandler]

Can someone clear up this 50% commuting part of C2W - my understanding is that the primary purpose for the bike must be commuting - hence the 50% useage has come from there - is this not the case?

You have to sign paperwork that says at least half of the journeys the bike makes will be part of a journey to work. No records need to be kept.

On another point - our company has a loan period of 12 months but a repayment period of 2 months. We could also operate a waiting scheme so that Fin Director has final say on how many employees can be repaying at any one time. We only have three people who have ever used it, so that's a bit theoretical for us.

 

[andyfromotley]

You may recall that about 2 years ago i had a long running battle with my then employer about C2W. They just werent interested. I banged my head against the brick wall until it got sore and i gave up!

Fortunately i changed employer to one that runs the scheme, now i just have to convince then to use someone other than Halfords!

 

[Norm]

Can someone clear up this 50% commuting part of C2W - my understanding is that the primary purpose for the bike must be commuting - hence the 50% useage has come from there - is this not the case?

Yes, that is the case. The words from the DfT are:

The exemption removes the tax charge that would otherwise apply to cycles and cyclists’ safety equipment loaned to employees provided the following conditions are met:

• Ownership of the equipment is not transferred to the employee during the loan period;
• Employees use the equipment mainly for qualifying journeys; i.e. for journeys made between the employee’s home and workplace, or part of those journeys (for example, to the station), or for journeys between one workplace and another
• The offer of the use of a loaned or provided cycle (i.e. one for which ownership is not transferred to the employee) is available across the whole workforce, with no groups of employees being excluded. This does not necessarily have to be through a Cycle to Work salary sacrifice arrangement.

The tax exemption only applies when an employee mainly uses the cycle and cyclists’ safety equipment for qualifying journeys. A qualifying journey for an employee means a journey, or part of a journey,

• between his or her home and workplace, or
• between one workplace and another,

in connection with the performance of their duties of employment. So, for example, cycling to and from the station to get to work would qualify. In this case, ‘mainly’ means that more than 50% of use of the cycle and safety equipment must involve a qualifying journey.
Employees are not expected to keep mileage logs but employers should make clear to them that if they do not use the cycle mainly for qualifying journeys, they may lose the benefit of the tax exemption. In that event the employer would have to report the benefit in kind on form P11D, and account for Class 1A NICs, in the normal way. The employee would be liable for the tax due on the benefit in kind.

My italics.

I think that's about as clear as any government document. In summary, most of the journeys during the loan period should be for work, either commuting or moving between work sites.

 

[Ivan Ardon]

What do you pay for a disposal fee / final payment, Norm?

I'd have thought the Inland Revenue (if they ever got interested) would be coming after you if you were paying a small final payment on a three month old bike.

 

[Norm]

What do you pay for a disposal fee / final payment, Norm?

Only had one bike bought on our scheme *ahem* which doesn't come up until January. The revenue won't be pinned down but have accepted 5% so that is what I'll be offering at the time.

 

[Twanger]

"The expense! It'll bankrupt us"....you can also point out that the company is saving national insurance on the sacrificed salary as well, so is coming out ahead. So if we go back to the hypothetical situation where 1000 people buy 1000 quids worth of bikes and gear each, causing a cash outlay of 1,000,000 quid....well, that is 128,000 quid the employer is NOT paying on NIC.

 

[Norm]

And £130k of VAT it can reclaim. I'd think that most would pay out £1m to get a return of £260k but that's just the accountant in me.