Prove Its Yours

[martint235]

All that shows is you're daft enough to give your personal data to a company. What stops someone else registering your bike on another private site like Bike Register and claiming it's theirs?

Well they'd need the serial numbers, distinctive markings etc plus the ability to touch the pedals while sitting on the saddle.

Plus the company providing it have received accreditation from ACPO and the GSi. Getting accreditation from the GSi isn't easy.

 

[Brandane]

But with what legal grounding, given that, as you quite rightly say...



I would be amazed if that wasn't just your opinion, but the law - in Scotland as well as in England. In the absence of any such proof, taking away someone's rightful possessions is called theft, whatever the supposed motive. Why is the OP in the original thread now searching for invoices and the like? He shouldn't have to prove anything. It's his bike. Unless someone else can prove it isn't.

As for this thread, my bike's tagged. Tattoo'd on the frame. Can't remember who did it, but it would be easy enough to find out and I'd be on their database. I don't have any invoices or paperwork - bought it off ebay 18 months back. (I suppose if push came to shove there's probably still traces of the original deal on ebay's servers one way or another - tho' who'd have to pay the costs of tracking it down would be a moot point.)

The bottom line here is that there is a dispute of ownership. The Police are acting as referee, and as such they need to look at both sides of the story. Taking possession of the bike is simply a precaution to prevent the main evidence (the bike) being disposed of IF it transpires that it was indeed stolen, and to ensure it's return to the rightful owner.

 

[shouldbeinbed]

Interchangeable & non standard parts swapped out, knowing the tube in the tyre, secreted names and addresses, deposit of bodily secretions could all be after theft additions or changes though as could any personalisation of saddle height etc.

As could photos showing prior possession of the bike depending on the suggestion of when it was stolen. A pal of mine had his car for many years before it was taken off him as an outstanding stolen.

I have sales receipts and the original manual/bumf for 2 of mine and as one was C2W could chase up the agreements with work and cyclescheme. I could the shop I bought another one from to see if their records could assist me, without the receipt. The others are as above, modified mine and I know their little quirks but nothing more solid than that, it would be a case of saying to the accusor prove it isn't mine.

Interesting question.

 

[swee'pea99]

The bottom line here is that there is a dispute of ownership. The Police are acting as referee, and as such they need to look at both sides of the story. Taking possession of the bike is simply a precaution to prevent the main evidence (the bike) being disposed of IF it transpires that it was indeed stolen, and to ensure it's return to the rightful owner.

A dispute of ownership arises when someone says, without a thread of evidence, 'that's mine that is'. That is no grounds for taking away someone's property.

 

[Drago]

Immobilse is the national project endorsed by ACPO, now the Council of Chief Scrambled Egg Wearers. While one is always wise to be circumspect, it has been examined and studied by ACPO before gaining their approval as the one the 43 UK forces are supposed to endorse, so you're as safe as you can reasonably expect to be.

Furthermore, your entries are date and time stamped so so can't retrospectively create a record of someone else's bike and claim it as your own.

All that shows is you're daft enough to give your personal data to a company. What stops someone else registering your bike on another private site like Bike Register and claiming it's theirs?

 

[Illaveago]

Similarly, I have no experience south of the border, which is why I was asking if you had similar legislation down there. Surely you must have powers to seize property which you have reasonable cause to believe to be stolen? e.g. In this case where 3 people are trying to lay claim to the OP's bike.

I would have thought that the police down here have a similar right to sieze property where ownership is in dispute.

 

[Brandane]

A dispute of ownership arises when someone says, without a thread of evidence, 'that's mine that is'. That is no grounds for taking away someone's property.

But who makes the decision as to whose property it is? I have known of several cases where individual Police Officers have ended up in trouble (it's called neglect of duty) for failing to act on allegations of stolen property in similar circumstances to this case, where it has turned out that they have let someone wander off with what has transpired to be someone else's property and for it never to be seen again. It's a very, very, grey area for the Police and one where they have to tread very carefully. That is why I would err on the side of caution and seize the bike. It's not as if you're taking it forever, or accusing anyone of theft (at that stage); you're merely taking it into safekeeping.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

Rather than hijack the other thread, I'll ask the question here.
If you were out on a ride and asked to prove that the bike you were riding was legally yours, how would you go about it.

This is more about being able to prove, at the time, that it was yours.

What's the context and who is asking for this proof? I don't know what the other thread is so a link would be good.

My view, no matter who is doing the asking, is to say I don't need to prove it's mine, unless the questioner is a cop who can first tell me his reasonable grounds for suspecting it's stolen.

GC

 

[swee'pea99]

That is why I would err on the side of caution and seize the bike.

Well, I think you'd be on very dodgy ground. The Police are given all sorts of powers that, of necessity, have to be left subject to words like 'reasonable', giving the individual officer the right (and the responsibility) to use their discretion to decide on important matters, given the situation that confronts them. They have to be very careful to use such powers in a way that would stand up to the ultimate arbiters of what constitutes 'reasonable'. And I don't think you'd find many judges who'd agree that party one saying 'that's mine that is' (which appears to have been the sum total of 'evidence' offered in this case) constitutes adequate grounds for taking party two's property away.

 

[phil_hg_uk]

On my carbon I have a tiny chip in the lacquer. On both bikes there is enough snot here and there to do DNA testing. Also being clipped in is a sign it's mine. Also they are so big no one else can get on them #advantagetallgirl

I love these answers

 

[Shut Up Legs]

Holy moly! I just had a brainwave. The next time I remove the bottom bracket on my road or touring bike, I'll tape a sealed plastic bag to the outside of the plastic cylinder that fits between the 2 bottom bracket cartridges, said bag containing various personal details. Yes, I know, it's not easy to get at, but that's kind of the point, isn't it? No thief, or prospective thief, would think to look there.

 

[Brandane]

Well, I think you'd be on very dodgy ground. The Police are given all sorts of powers that, of necessity, have to be left subject to words like 'reasonable', giving the individual officer the right (and the responsibility) to use their discretion to decide on important matters, given the situation that confronts them. They have to be very careful to use such powers in a way that would stand up to the ultimate arbiters of what constitutes 'reasonable'. And I don't think you'd find many judges who'd agree that party one saying 'that's mine that is' (which appears to have been the sum total of 'evidence' offered in this case) constitutes adequate grounds for taking party two's property away.

Except that in this case you had 2 witnesses backing up one persons claim to the property, supported by an allegation that the bike had a unique identifying feature (the bent bars).
This thread is slightly worrying in that it seems some posters are wishing to have the Police's hands tied behind their backs even more than they already are. Consider the scenario where you have had a bike stolen, and some months later you see someone on a bike which you are convinced (rightly or wrongly) is yours, because it has a similar identifiable feature on it. You grab the bike and alert the Police. Officer turns up and says there is nothing he can do because you do not have sufficient proof there and then that the bike is yours. He lets the rider go with the bike, and 10 minutes later it is at the bottom of a canal.
I would be seething with the Police.

 

[Pale Rider]

Holy moly! I just had a brainwave. The next time I remove the bottom bracket on my road or touring bike, I'll tape a sealed plastic bag to the outside of the plastic cylinder that fits between the 2 bottom bracket cartridges, said bag containing various personal details. Yes, I know, it's not easy to get at, but that's kind of the point, isn't it? No thief, or prospective thief, would think to look there.

I have a business card in the seat post of the Cannondale.

But such measures only work if your bike is with someone else and you are trying to prove ownership.

In the case under discussion, all the other party would say is: "You put those hidden markers there after you stole my bike five months ago."

 

[summerdays]

I have a business card in the seat post of the Cannondale.

But such measures only work if your bike is with someone else and you are trying to prove ownership.

In the case under discussion, all the other party would say is: "You put those hidden markers there after you stole my bike five months ago."

But I have photos going back more than 5 months on the Internet .... So it can't be your bike can it?

 

[Salar]

In the old black and white days when I was at Junior school we all use to write our names and addresses down on bits of paper and stuff them in the handlebars...........parents instructions.

Bit stupid because everyone did the same