Theft of bike in train question

My partner had her bike stolen on her usual commute from work. She doesnt lock her bike in the bike section of the carriage as she always understood that this was not allowed. She usually keeps an eye on it but due to people being in the way she couldnt on this occasion. The insurance wont pay out unless we can prove that it is against railway policy to allow bikes to be locked to the carriage. Does anyone know what the rules are on this?

Which TOC was operating the train?

I think the rail companies request you use their velcro cycle straps to secure your bike, and that you don't use your own bike lock (Virgin certainly states this). It is so that the bicycle can be moved out of the way in the event of an emergency evacuation. I can't confirm whether this policy is universal across the entiore rail network, I'm sure someone with more knowledge than me can clarify.

SpacePhoenix said:

Which TOC was operating the train?

Click to expand...

Southern, she was travelling from Worthing to Hove, and the suspect took the bike off at Southwick. We also phoned Southern Customer Services, and spoke to staff at Brighton and Victoria stations, none of whom knew if there was any written policy on this, or indeed had any idea themselves about the issue. As the latest poster points out, assuming you can find anywhere to attach the lock, there are many good reasons why locking a bike within a carriage is undesirable.

How about byelaw 6(3)?

"No person shall... fix anything to the railway."

Dr Hoo said:

How about byelaw 6(3)?

"No person shall... fix anything to the railway."

Click to expand...

Great thanks. I had a feeling that there might be something in the byelaws. It would also help if there was policy on this too. Ive also posted this issue onto one of the Cycling Uk forums in which a poster reported a similar incident and a subsequent poster refers to specific wording in some of the TOC's cycling on trains documentation.

It definitely is a rule.

I expect if you write to the train company in question (GTR) they will confirm this in writing, and this evidence should be accepted by the insurance company.

In fact it's here...
https://www.thameslinkrailway.com/travel-information/on-board/bringing-a-bike

If you’re bringing your bike on the train, please don’t lock it to any part of the train or leave it unattended.

Click to expand...

...however the last part may potentially be an issue!

But if she was initially sat with a view of it, and the train subsequently became very crowded at a later station, then I'd hope the insurance company would take a pragmatic view.

"please don't lock it to any part of the train ..."

I can vision an insurance company treating that as advice, not an official instruction, so the bike could have theoretically have been locked without breaching any rule. Need to get the official legislation down in writing.

@pat okeeffe If the insurance company refuse to pay please, please, please take your case to the Financial Ombudsman. It won't cost you a penny (the company has to pay the ombudsman's fee even if your complaint isn't successful). It's only by people complaining that regulators become aware of insurance companies taking the proverbial like this and can do anything to act on it.

al78 said:

"please don't lock it to any part of the train ..."

Click to expand...

Anything that starts with "Please" is not an instruction, it's is a polite request.

Although locking the bike wheels to its frame won't actually stop it being removed from the train, I can't imagine people carrying the bike off, especially if it's an opportunistic thief looking for a quick ride somewhere before dumping it.

route:oxford said:

Anything that starts with "Please" is not an instruction, it's is a polite request.

Click to expand...

Or a well-mannered instruction

Is there not appropriate signage on board? A photograph of that, along with a letter of confirmation from the TOC, ought to prove the point. I would hazard a guess though that the insurer will then move to some sort of argument about taking due care as it was left unobserved, or suggesting that a lock should have been used on the bike itself. Presumably BTP have issued a crime reference number and advised that they have obtained CCTV? On-train theft is usually part of a campaign by regular offenders, which BTP tend to take seriously.

yorkie said:

But if she was initially sat with a view of it, and the train subsequently became very crowded at a later station, then I'd hope the insurance company would take a pragmatic view.

Click to expand...

Hmm, not sure I agree. You are required to take reasonable care of your property by an insurance contract, and to me it is not reasonable care to leave something unattended without it being in sight unless it is locked[1], or it is in the kind of area of the train that requires staff facilities to extract it e.g. HST van areas or Pendolino bike areas where it is effectively checked baggage (and in that case I'd expect to need to remain in the adjacent coach to be able to keep a *bit* of a watch even if there was no seat, though Pendolinos handle that one with the 4 seats marked RESERVED CYCLIST).

Reasonable care on a crowded train probably would include moving from a seat to stand by it (unless a medical condition precluded standing), or even removing it from that train if it was not possible to take reasonable care of it on board.

[1] Obviously if locking it is not permitted, as in this case, you are required to take other mitigating action. No different to if you are cycling to somewhere and there is a big sign banning locking cycles there, it isn't acceptable just to leave it there then claim on insurance when it's nicked, you will have to go further away to find somewher suitable then walk.

Bletchleyite said:

Hmm, not sure I agree. You are required to take reasonable care of your property by an insurance contract, and to me it is not reasonable care to leave something unattended without it being in sight unless it is locked[1], or it is in the kind of area of the train that requires staff facilities to extract it e.g. HST van areas or Pendolino bike areas where it is effectively checked baggage (and in that case I'd expect to need to remain in the adjacent coach to be able to keep a *bit* of a watch even if there was no seat, though Pendolinos handle that one with the 4 seats marked RESERVED CYCLIST).

Reasonable care on a crowded train probably would include moving from a seat to stand by it (unless a medical condition precluded standing), or even removing it from that train if it was not possible to take reasonable care of it on board.

[1] Obviously if locking it is not permitted, as in this case, you are required to take other mitigating action. No different to if you are cycling to somewhere and there is a big sign banning locking cycles there, it isn't acceptable just to leave it there then claim on insurance when it's nicked, you will have to go further away to find somewher suitable then walk.

Click to expand...

Thanks everyone for your comments and suggestions.

Southern features several seats beside the bike areas (usually about 4 seats, for a bike space which can comfortably accommodate a couple of bikes), as well as ample standing room, but I would on the other hand completely agree that locking is both impractical and not officially permitted, and if somebody is already sitting in the bike areas, it may not be possible to ask them to move. Said seats are also often the tip-up type which are designed to allow accommodation of wheelchairs near to wider vestibule access and/or toilets.

A tricky one!

Did she report it to the police too?

Bletchleyite said:

[1] Obviously if locking it is not permitted, as in this case, you are required to take other mitigating action. No different to if you are cycling to somewhere and there is a big sign banning locking cycles there, it isn't acceptable just to leave it there then claim on insurance when it's nicked, you will have to go further away to find somewher suitable then walk.

Click to expand...

There is a world of difference when parking a bike outside. There is always somewhere to lock it legally if you look hard enough and are prepared to walk for a bit. That is not true in the confines of a railway carriage where it has to be put in one specific place and circumstances may prevent the owner from watching it like a hawk.

al78 said:

That is not true in the confines of a railway carriage where it has to be put in one specific place and circumstances may prevent the owner from watching it like a hawk.

Click to expand...

Indeed, good luck keeping an eye on a bicycle placed in the racks on an XC 200/221, for instance...

gray1404 said:

Did she report it to the police too?

Click to expand...

Yes she did all that as soon as she realised it was missing before she got to Hove station.

Interesting comments also about the difficulties in keeping an eye on bikes held in some of the cycle storage areas on cross country trains. This had also occurred to me. This also applies to the stock on the GWR train to Malvern from Brighton in which she sometimes travels on her morning commute to Worthing.

Arctic Troll said:

Indeed, good luck keeping an eye on a bicycle placed in the racks on an XC 200/221, for instance...

Click to expand...

Sitting in that carriage facing the bike area (or standing in that vestibule if full) would allow you to keep enough of a watch to see if the bike was being removed. Ensuring you went to the toilet while not at a station stop would ensure it could not be removed while doing that.

Bletchleyite said:

Sitting in that carriage facing the bike area (or standing in that vestibule if full) would allow you to keep enough of a watch to see if the bike was being removed. Ensuring you went to the toilet while not at a station stop would ensure it could not be removed while doing that.

Click to expand...

Hardly anyone is going to choose to make a long distance journey while stood in the vestibule if you have a seat.

yorkie said:

Hardly anyone is going to choose to make a long distance journey while stood in the vestibule if you have a seat.

Click to expand...

Then don't make it with a bicycle if you require insurance cover.

My point isn't that it's an ideal condition, my point is that insurance requires you to take reasonable care of your property for it to pay out, and leaving an item unlocked and out of sight is not reasonable care, regardless of the circumstances that led to that being the case.

If it was specifically "on train bicycle cover" then we might be heading towards an unreasonable contract, but I don't think we are; if it isn't possible to keep a bicycle safe on board either in person or by locking it then that situation is simply not covered by the policy. Just like, for example, if you went to a concert which did not allow large suitcases, and you simply left yours outside, that would not be covered either.

That VTWC Voyagers have a bit of a design flaw with the bicycle storage does not imply any responsibility on an insurer to vary their terms and conditions to suit.

Bletchleyite said:

Hmm, not sure I agree. You are required to take reasonable care of your property by an insurance contract, and to me it is not reasonable care to leave something unattended without it being in sight unless it is locked

Click to expand...

Hmm. This isn't a problem unique to bikes - eg luggage racks where your seat faces the other way, or where people are standing in the aisle inbetween (TBH, even if you can see it, if you're sat half way along the carriage, what are you going to do to stop somebody grabbing your bag and jumping off the train just before the door closes?). One has always been required to use a bit of trust on trains, but insurance companies probably don't agree.
On the original point, it hardly seems reasonable to expect somebody to stand with their bike for, potentially, many hours.

It's also not reasonable to expect an insurance company to pay out for the theft of an unguarded valuable item. It's no different to the fact that most won't pay out for a mobile phone left sitting visible on a car seat rather than in a locked glove box. Or indeed if you left one on the train table and went to the loo.

The upshot of this is probably simply that cycle carriage on a busy train is not an insurable risk; you choose to take the risk yourself, you run a second cheaper less attractive bicycle for such purposes, or you find a different way of getting where you are going.

I certainly have taken the risk of leaving a bag of clothes in the overhead and gone to the buffet/toilet, mitigating slightly by making sure I only go to those facilities when a station stop is not due, so if it goes missing I've at least got a small amount of time to find out where on the train it has gone missing to. But in the end I accept the risk of losing some not particularly valuable items, I would not expect this sort of loss to be insurable. My laptop etc go with me, and indeed are only insured if they are on my person (i.e. force or a threat thereof would be needed to part me from them) or they are in a private place (e.g. home) with the doors locked.

I'm sure an insurance contract could be arranged with a broker to cover a completely unattended bicycle on a train (just as you can probably get an insurance contract to cover a motor vehicle left parked with the keys in it). But because of the very high risk of theft, particularly if a valuable road bike, say, I'd expect that contract to be very, very expensive - possibly the full value of the bike per two to three years or even more (in the case of the car probably more than its value per year as theft is near certain). Most people don't want to pay that, so they have to take reasonable care to keep the cost low. I again maintain that it isn't reasonable care to have a valuable item out of your sight in a public place, whatever the reason for doing so.

Just about the only reason I could think of that might be acceptable would be being ordered by a Police Officer or member of railway staff to leave the bicycle unattended to the exclusion of all other options including leaving the train with it (e.g. if the train was on fire between stations and you were being evacuated from it), and even then that may not be covered if the reason for such orders was "force majeure" or terrorism.

Bletchleyite said:

It's also not reasonable to expect an insurance company to pay out for the theft of an unguarded valuable item. It's no different to the fact that most won't pay out for a mobile phone left sitting visible on a car seat rather than in a locked glove box. Or indeed if you left one on the train table and went to the loo.
.

Click to expand...

This would appear to be heading to a conclusion of "if you can't afford to lose your bike, don't take it on trains". Which is probably something the TOCs would be delighted about, but maybe not so much the cyclists...

Insurance companies pay out for luggage stolen from racks on trains all the time. Why not a cycle?

swaldman said:

This would appear to be heading to a conclusion of "if you can't afford to lose your bike, don't take it on trains". Which is probably something the TOCs would be delighted about, but maybe not so much the cyclists...

Click to expand...

In what way? I have never been unable to keep my bike attended in some form (i.e. within sight) while carrying it on a train other than on a Pendolino where you wouldn't get it out without some noise, song and dance of taking it through coach A or a carriage key. Sometimes that means you have to give up the chance of a seat, and sometimes it means you have to let a busy train go. Such is life.

falcon said:

Insurance companies pay out for luggage stolen from racks on trains all the time. Why not a cycle?

Click to expand...

I wouldn't expect an insurance company to pay out for luggage stolen from a luggage rack where you had left it there then moved to another part of the train and left it completely unattended. Indeed, even the TOCs request you not to do that (for different reasons). I always place my luggage within sight, or at least such that it would not be possible for someone to remove it without going into sight between picking it up and disembarking (and watch that space very carefully when the doors are open).

Bletchleyite said:

In what way? I have never been unable to keep my bike attended in some form (i.e. within sight) while carrying it on a train other than on a Pendolino where you wouldn't get it out without some noise, song and dance of taking it through coach A or a carriage key. Sometimes that means you have to give up the chance of a seat, and sometimes it means you have to let a busy train go. Such is life.

Click to expand...

So I guess you don't travel on Advance tickets?
Regardless, my point from earlier still stands: "Give up the chance of a seat" on a long journey is not reasonable.

Bletchleyite said:

I always place my luggage within sight, or at least such that it would not be possible for someone to remove it without going into sight between picking it up and disembarking (and watch that space very carefully when the doors are open).

Click to expand...

What happens if you get on a crowded train where the only available seat faces away from the only available luggage rack? Do you, again, opt to stand for hours to stay with your luggage? I guess that's your right, but I don't think it's something that many would consider to be a reasonable expectation.

What happens if you get on a crowded train where the only available seat faces away from the only available luggage rack? Do you, again, opt to stand for hours to stay with your luggage?

Click to expand...

Yes. I do not place valuable luggage out of my sight; I would decline to board a train if it were not an option to keep valuables in sight for whatever reason. I on occasions might choose to place non-valuable luggage out of my sight in such circumstances (e.g. a bag of dirty clothes), but in doing so I accept that the risk of theft is solely mine; it is not a reasonably insurable risk.

I guess that's your right, but I don't think it's something that many would consider to be a reasonable expectation.

Click to expand...

I fundamentally disagree. It is not at all reasonable to place your valuable personal possessions out of your sight and then to expect someone else to pay in the likely event of them being stolen. It's akin to deliberately leaving your car unlocked with the keys in the ignition. It is simply not acting responsibly, and I would not want my insurance premia going up to pay for people who are acting in that way.