Tin Pot
Guru
No. I’m indicting most of the human race.
Cycle to Work Sneakiness
- Thread starter grellboy
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
No. I’m indicting most of the human race.
vickster
Legendary Member
Without any specific evidence
confusedcyclist
Veteran
I'm with @Tin Pot on this, there's lots of research into these kinds of behaviours, most people would commit such an act if they knew beyond reasonable doubt that they wouldn't get caught. Animals in the wild do not have principles and routinely steal from each other when the stakes are considered low. For all our self-proclaimed civilness, we are at heart just beasts like the rest.
Last edited:
Tin Pot
Guru
Unsurprisingly I didn’t put together a research paper for this thread, but you’re wrong. My opinion is based on the knowledge from expirements I’ve read over these past thirty years.
Here’s a quick find if you’re interested:
https://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/inside-the-cheaters-mind
Time Waster
Veteran
Never saw the value in C2W scheme. Not a high tax rate employee and so it drops the saving a lot. Add in the fact a lot of the schemes work on full rrp bikes but if you do even basic research you'll find good bikes that suit your needs at significantly below full rrp. It is highly probable that you can find a bike that's cheaper than you'd get on such a scheme and still get 0% finance from the retailer (or your credit card transfer if you go that way). Plus you don't have issues if you leave your job like the OP's "friend".
Personally I think you don't own the bike so hand it back. Then make them a ridiculously low value offer to chance your arm. You're leaving anyway so what's the downside with peeing off a few bean counters?
Definitely not try to rip them off with a dodgy bike that's not what you lease through the scheme. Bean counters make their pay by checking the details. They'll spot the difference even if they have no idea about bikes.
Personally I think you don't own the bike so hand it back. Then make them a ridiculously low value offer to chance your arm. You're leaving anyway so what's the downside with peeing off a few bean counters?
Definitely not try to rip them off with a dodgy bike that's not what you lease through the scheme. Bean counters make their pay by checking the details. They'll spot the difference even if they have no idea about bikes.
gaijintendo
Veteran
- Location
- Scotchland
I wonder if the new employer could buy the debt.
vickster
Legendary Member
Not sure what an expirement is but that article is about Americans
If most (to me that would be 80% plus) why aren't the majority of replies saying tell your "friend" to go for it?
Last edited:
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
He may not be so far from the truth. Roughly a third of adults have a criminal record, be it a reprimand, caution, or conviction, spent or otherwise - thats a rough guess calculated by various police forces, as the HO dont keep such figures, believe it or not.
Motoring convictions don't count, except for no insurance (dishonesty) or death by offences.
That's people with either dishonest or reckless behaviour track records, no matter how minor or distant. Add on top of that the number of offenders who have simply never been caught or identified, and you have a third + X, and a third plus is certainly a notable proportion
Motoring convictions don't count, except for no insurance (dishonesty) or death by offences.
That's people with either dishonest or reckless behaviour track records, no matter how minor or distant. Add on top of that the number of offenders who have simply never been caught or identified, and you have a third + X, and a third plus is certainly a notable proportion
confusedcyclist
Veteran
Anyone who says they never lie or cheat are probably post-rationalising justifications for their lies or cheats. For instance, how many would feel bad about taking a pen away from their workplace without permission, because money hasn't changed hands, it can be rationalised as not theft, but really, it still is (save the pointless examples of when an employer actually wants you to take pens away for work purposes!). Yet the same individual might never steal from the petty cash drawer. The only difference if the post rationalisation, your not stealing money, so it's not stealing. If you were ever to meet a man that couldn't lie, they might behave in very strange ways....
But is it in the same league as an employee that would get a bike on the cycle to work scheme but never intend to cycle it to work?
vickster
Legendary Member
The different schemes do seem to have different terms in this regard ie the extent to which a c2w bike should or must be used for commuting. Indeed, Some (if not all) offer the scheme to homeworkers
As pointed out, what the Op is suggesting is the theft of a bike that has not been (fully) paid for
Banjo
Fuelled with Jelly Babies
- Location
- South Wales
I would just say nothing,They may or may not ask for the bike back .Would any company really want a secondhand bike?
trying to pass off an old bike in its place would be fraud I would imagine.
trying to pass off an old bike in its place would be fraud I would imagine.
[QUOTE 5218371, member: 45"]Yes.
The OP is talking about someone stealing a bike. That's different to paying for a bike but not using it for its intended purpose.[/QUOTE]
As far as I'm aware, the cycle to work scheme requires participants to use the equipment for qualifying journeys in order to partake of the tax exemption. If you're not doing that, are you not 'stealing' the value of tax exemption being received?
Edit - I'm aware that a scheme needs to be available to all staff (although you can get exemptions to that too) but there is a distinction between employees who can make use of the loan scheme and those who can make use of the loan scheme and claim a tax deduction because of it.
The OP is talking about someone stealing a bike. That's different to paying for a bike but not using it for its intended purpose.[/QUOTE]
As far as I'm aware, the cycle to work scheme requires participants to use the equipment for qualifying journeys in order to partake of the tax exemption. If you're not doing that, are you not 'stealing' the value of tax exemption being received?
Edit - I'm aware that a scheme needs to be available to all staff (although you can get exemptions to that too) but there is a distinction between employees who can make use of the loan scheme and those who can make use of the loan scheme and claim a tax deduction because of it.
vickster
Legendary Member
I do believe schemes vary. Hence homeworkers being allowed to participate in some while others cite a notional percentage
