Cycle to work scheme dishonesty

[Easy_Rider]

What are your thoughts about people who claim for the money/bike but have no intention of using it for work? I know of some people who have claimed but don't use it to cycle to work. There was another person who wanted to claim but lived 49miles from work :shock: I convinced her it was dishonest to do so.
Worst of all these people work for a public body, it makes me mad.

Mrs E_R has the chance to claim, but we live too far from her work to justify it, she would be struck off from her Accountancy association for dishonest behaviour if she did claim but she wouldn't dream of it even if that threat didn't exist.

Where do people think the money comes from? I hate this take what you can attitude :evil:

(oh and take a guess what that public body is!)

 

[JeRkY]

I am sure there are people on here who have used the scheme despite already owning more bikes than the average halfords store has in stock at any one time.

Does your judgement pass onto these people too?

As for the original comment, I can sort of see your point, but it will be relative few people who do that I would of thought. Just looking around London at all the people looking awfully unconfident on a bike during the commute seems to show that the scheme is having an effect at increasing the numbers of those taking 2 wheels to work.

 

[Easy_Rider]

I like the scheme, if it gets people cycling to work then it's great, reduces congestion, gets people healthy. But if someone has claimed with no intention of using the bike to cycle to work then i'm not going to agree with that. The money is coming out of all our pockets, why should someone working hard on minimum wage, living just above the poverty line subsidise someone else' bike fetish?

 

[Tallpaul]

If they are getting on a bike for any reason, it's a good thing.

 

[lewis1641]

there are a lot of boardman por's on ebay for £700 so i think a lot of people are using it as a loan.

i would love to be able to use the scheme but being self employes, i dont think i can.

i do ride to work 90% of the time too.

 

[JeRkY]

I like the scheme, if it gets people cycling to work then it's great, reduces congestion, gets people healthy. But if someone has claimed with no intention of using the bike to cycle to work then i'm not going to agree with that. The money is coming out of all our pockets, why should someone working hard on minimum wage, living just above the poverty line subsidise someone else' bike fetish?

Does that mean you do or dont object to people such as fellow members of this forum, with a plethora of servicable bikes, many of whom who already commute via bike using the scheme?

Just interested.

 

[Easy_Rider]

Does that mean you do or dont object to people such as fellow members of this forum, with a plethora of servicable bikes, many of whom who already commute via bike using the scheme?

Just interested.

Well put it this way, if the Institute of Chartered Accountants would more than likely strike Mrs E_R off for dishonest behaviour then what conclusion would you draw from that? Accountants must be honest in all their behaviour otherwise it undermines what they do.

In my mind I agree that it's dishonest to claim without the intention.

 

[cchris2lou]

I am thining of getting yet another bike on the scheme , but might not use it for work all the time .

 

[JeRkY]

Does that mean you do or dont object to people such as fellow members of this forum, with a plethora of servicable bikes, many of whom who already commute via bike using the scheme?

Just interested.

Well put it this way, if the Institute of Chartered Accountants would more than likely strike Mrs E_R off for dishonest behaviour then what conclusion would you draw from that? Accountants must be honest in all their behaviour otherwise it undermines what they do.

In my mind I agree that it's dishonest to claim without the intention.

To be honest I am just playing devils advocate here, my company doesnt run the scheme, and I do have more than enough bikes already.

But if I were in a company using the scheme, and (as I do) commute to work daily no matter the weather on a bike I already owned. I would be rather miffed that employee X was able to claim best part of 50% off a shiney new bike, whilst I was compelled by moral reasons to pay double if I fancied getting the exact same bike. It could be possible to see it as a work related bonus.

 

[cchris2lou]

I think the rules of the scheme only say you have to ride to work on a regular basis , not everyday by all weather .