Police ask for proof of bike ownership in Preston

Andrew N

As part of a crackdown on Bike thieves, police are stopping cyclists and asking for proof og bike ownership. Story from us with some comments from Lancashire Police. Already creating some unease among cyclists talking to us on twitter

http://www.goinggoingbike.com/blog/stop ... s-results/

Thoughts?

spasypaddy

i couldnt prove on the spot that any of my 4 bikes are mine, i'd hope that if i was wearing club kit with the club sticker on the frame would suffice. but apart from that i have nothing.

should i start carrying around a receipt for my Look 695 in my back pocket?

prawny

Actually reading the article it looks like a good idea, you often see on here sightings of chavs really nice bikes that raise suspicion, it wouldn't hurt for the rozzers to look into whether they are the owner. Obviously I'd be miffed if it happened to me, that's one of the reasons I don't dress like a chav 8)

DonDaddyD

I've often wondered what i would do if stopped and questioned.

"I have SPD-sl shoes/cleats which match the pedals" Would be my first answers....

sketchley

While I'll normally support campaigns to reduce bike theft. That cannot be legal? Who many of us carry the reciept for the bike around with us? They would have to have suspicion of at least handling stolen goods, then arrest me for the same, in order to take the bike. If they could not back the reason for arrest it's wrongful arrest and I would seek redress. I suspect there is more to this, maybe has to be combined with failure to provide details.

meanredspider

Good idea. Devalues stolen bikes very quickly.

If I didn't live in the lowest crime rate part of the country, I'd be getting all my bikes security marked and clearly identified. Certainly did when I lived in Cambridge.

prawny

Sketchley wrote:

While I'll normally support campaigns to reduce bike theft. That cannot be legal? Who many of us carry the reciept for the bike around with us? They would have to have suspicion of at least handling stolen goods, then arrest me for the same, in order to take the bike. If they could not back the reason for arrest it's wrongful arrest and I would seek redress. I suspect there is more to this, maybe has to be combined with failure to provide details.

Have you read the article? It's not just a random stop and search like the anti terrorism thing at the train station. I do not look at all like a muslim extremist :?

JamesFree

I have no proof of purchase for my bikes have bought them all from here, surely they have to prove its stolen

London_Falcon

I always have my blackberry with me. I guess I could use that to take a photo of the receipt or insurance docs. Actually, thinking about it my bike is registered on Alpha Dot (came free with the bike) and the confirmation email with certificate is also on my blackberry.

bails87

prawny wrote:

I do not look at all like a muslim extremist :?

Most terrorists don't :?
And I'm sure there are plenty of muslim extremists who don't 'look' like a mulsim extremist. You don't suddenly turn 'dusky' when you convert to Islam

bails87

I think if you look like a 'proper' cyclist and you could recite the spec of the bike like a lot of us on here could then you'd be fine. But I know my dad couldn't do that for his bike, my cousin wouldn't know what rear mech was on hers. So I'd like to think I'd be alright, but plenty of other genuine users wouldn't be.


And there may be plenty of people on nicked bikes who don't look 'dodgy'.

kelsen

Good idea but tough to execute without annoying a lot of people.

My only proof without turning the house upside down looking for a receipt would be that the saddle height, stem reach, and the angle of the handlebars are perfectly adjusted for my riding position.

...oh, and the majority of my cycling clothes don't clash with the frame colour!

jds_1981

There are some pointers to dodginess. For instance I noticed someone with a bike getting off the train at Finsbury Park once. Road cleats things for pedals. He then starts cycling along on it and having noticed me looking at it offers me a sale...

tailwindhome

Is this just 'random' stopping of cyclists and asking them to prove they own the bike?

We seriously think this is a good idea?

Shouldwe prove we own our laptops, ipods, trainers etc.?????


"Can you prove that is your wife and child sir?"

Wrath Rob

Too much mis-informed gumpf on here. Read the article!

Proof of ownership
The rider is then asked to prove, either with a receipt or some other proof, that the bicycle actually belongs to them. A failure to convince the police that the bike is not their own could see the bike being confiscated by the police.

We asked Lancashire Police to clarify what they termed as proof of ownership. They told us that if someone is stopped and cannot verify ownership on the spot, the bike can be seized and the person riding it will be asked to provide documents to prove ownership at a police station in order to get the bike back.

Acceptable documentation
Acceptable documentation regarding ownership is a receipt, a photograph of the rider on the bike seized, a house insurance document/bicycle insurance document that has the bike listed or a bank statement showing the purchase of the bike from a cycle shop. Lancashire Police said that inquiries could also be carried out with the shop that the bike was bought from to confirm ownership.

The decision on a police officer seizing a bike where proof of ownership has not been proved is left very much to the individual officer concerned and Lancashire Police is keen to stress that not every bike is confiscated.

Targeting riders
Police officers are of course not stopping every cyclist out riding their bike. People are only stopped from riding their bikes if an officer believes that the bike could be stolen, Lancashire Police told us. For instance, a man who is riding a woman’s bike or a child’s bike will be stopped as that instantly rouses suspicion.

Results so far
Neighbourhood officers in the Fulwood area of Preston have already seized 17 bikes in a fortnight after suspecting them to be stolen. One seized bikes has already been returned to the rightful owner.

I think that correct shoes/pedals, being able to talk about components etc would be good enough. I'm also getting mine fitted with one of those security tags (if Wiggle ever deliver it) so then I can simply say "its been chipped, check it against my address".

rick_chasey

I don't have a receipt. It was a present. From 5 years ago.

You can't retrospectively demand people have proof of purchase. You can make it an enforceable rule for all bikes bought from heron-in, but not for all bikes ever.

Mr Plum

DonDaddyD wrote:

I've often wondered what i would do if stopped and questioned.

"I have SPD-sl shoes/cleats which match the pedals" Would be my first answers....

Chances are you wouldn't be stopped then. On the other hand, if I nip out to the shop in trainers, jeans, t shirt it may look a bit suspicious because both my bikes have spd/keo pedals... I'd be seriously pissed off if I had a bike seized because I couldn't prove on the spot that it was mine.

DonDaddyD

Given that some I know still get stopped for driving cars that "they could never have possibly paid for legitimately simply because they don't look the part...." I think this is a dumb idea and would not trust police judgement (a guy who may or may not know anything about bicycles making an assessment that the cyclist - who doesn't have proof of ownership, who does? - owns the bike) entirely.

I remember a thread on here in Cake Stop about a Chinese/Asian guy riding a carbonfibre bike, that couldn't possibly be his because he didn't look like they type who would ride such a bike.

How about my 17/18year old brother on a £400 bike (which I gave him) in jeans and hoodie? All he cares about is that the brakes and gears work and tyres are pumped up. How's he going to prove he owns it or is the keeper of said bike...

gbsahne001

not a chance could I prove my 15year old bike was mine, the other 2 I could though but only by producing documents at the station.

tx14

Wrath Rob wrote:

Too much mis-informed gumpf on here. Read the article!

Proof of ownership
The rider is then asked to prove, either with a receipt or some other proof, that the bicycle actually belongs to them. A failure to convince the police that the bike is not their own could see the bike being confiscated by the police.

We asked Lancashire Police to clarify what they termed as proof of ownership. They told us that if someone is stopped and cannot verify ownership on the spot, the bike can be seized and the person riding it will be asked to provide documents to prove ownership at a police station in order to get the bike back.

Acceptable documentation
Acceptable documentation regarding ownership is a receipt, a photograph of the rider on the bike seized, a house insurance document/bicycle insurance document that has the bike listed or a bank statement showing the purchase of the bike from a cycle shop. Lancashire Police said that inquiries could also be carried out with the shop that the bike was bought from to confirm ownership.

The decision on a police officer seizing a bike where proof of ownership has not been proved is left very much to the individual officer concerned and Lancashire Police is keen to stress that not every bike is confiscated.

Targeting riders
Police officers are of course not stopping every cyclist out riding their bike. People are only stopped from riding their bikes if an officer believes that the bike could be stolen, Lancashire Police told us. For instance, a man who is riding a woman’s bike or a child’s bike will be stopped as that instantly rouses suspicion.

Results so far
Neighbourhood officers in the Fulwood area of Preston have already seized 17 bikes in a fortnight after suspecting them to be stolen. One seized bikes has already been returned to the rightful owner.

I think that correct shoes/pedals, being able to talk about components etc would be good enough. I'm also getting mine fitted with one of those security tags (if Wiggle ever deliver it) so then I can simply say "its been chipped, check it against my address".

I think our concerns are totally justified. The police are effectively treating every person with a bike as a potential suspect.

Kieran_Burns

I think if I was stopped by a Policeman and asked to prove that my property was my own, I would most likely fail the attitude test.

jimmypippa

TailWindHome wrote:

Is this just 'random' stopping of cyclists and asking them to prove they own the bike?

We seriously think this is a good idea?

Shouldwe prove we own our laptops, ipods, trainers etc.?????


"Can you prove that is your wife and child sir?"

from the article:

Targeting riders

Police officers are of course not stopping every cyclist out riding their bike. People are only stopped from riding their bikes if an officer believes that the bike could be stolen, Lancashire Police told us. For instance, a man who is riding a woman’s bike or a child’s bike will be stopped as that instantly rouses suspicion.
Results so far

Neighbourhood officers in the Fulwood area of Preston have already seized 17 bikes in a fortnight after suspecting them to be stolen. One seized bikes has already been returned to the rightful owner.

Yes I do. Bike theft is a problem, and someone riding the wrong bike is suspicious

cookdn

I was subject to a random stop by Cumbria Police back in March. Friend and I were heading back to Kendal after a day at Whinlatter Forest with two rather dirty MTBs on the roof of the car. It was about 2300 and as we came through the top of Windermere village we passed a patrol vehicle parked on the other side of the road. Next thing we know is we are being followed to be eventually be pulled over about a mile south on the main road.

The conversation was a bit bizarre as we had nothing tangible to prove that the bikes were our property and I don't think it was clear to them what they should be asking for. In the end popping the boot to display a couple of sets of dirty, damp and smelly bike kit seemed to satisfy them and we were sent on our way.

No problems being stopped, apparently there had been a spate of local bike thefts and if memory serves me right the WPC doing the talking was quite a looker.

joelsim

I think it's a good idea as long as it's not just black guys and people with big beards and no moustache that get stopped by the ever-evolving, dimwitted neanderthals that constitute our rozzers.

Very difficult to do in reality.

Jay dubbleU

What happened to innocent until proven guilty - I can't prove the bike I'm riding is mine - why should I have to ? This is just lazy policing - mind you they'd never catch anyone on those BSOs

greg66_tri_v2.0

The shoes/cleats response is superficially attractive, but all it proves really is that you're wearing shoes that fit you and have matching pedals and cleats.

If I were to nick a bike, it would take only a few minutes to fit my world-beating Podios to it, and then it would be a bike whose pedals would match a handful of cleats in the country. Doesn't prove it's mine.

Wait til the Met start doing this with people on Boris bikes...

SmellTheGlove

After verifying ID of the plod, a neat piece of card produced from a back pocket with the frame number printed on it might work wonders. Only topped by quoting it off the cuff. Surely if they're out looking for stolen bikes they're armed with the serials of the ones they're looking for, no? To me it's mere SUS otherwise.

The Real Radioactiveman

Doesnt bother me in the slightest.

If it means I suffer a slight inconvenience but criminal scum lose an income source I can live with that. I am sure they are using this to target criminal scum which they probably know and recognise already.

However I may not be so bothered because Both my bikes are named on my insurance policy.

edenchristopher

I think that some of you are over-reacting. The deterrent value of this, which we all welcome, is firstly advertising the campaign and secondly looking for how cyclists react when asked for proof of ownership. The police don't have the time or resources to start filling up bike pounds up and down the country and even the dimmest of them must know that almost 100% of cyclist don't carry proof of ownership with them.

Mr Plum

It does strike me as being not that far removed from licensing/registering.

nation

I don't have a clue how I'd prove ownership of any of my bikes, on the spot, while out and about. One is built from ebay parts, one I could potentially produce the cycle 2 work documentation for with a bit of searching, and the MTB was purchased ~10 years ago.

Given that I sometimes ride my Giant Defy wearing jeans, would that put me into the "suspicious" category? I'd be furious if the plod prevented me from getting to work by seizing my bike.