Forum menu
Just speaking to a colleague who's hoping to buy her new bike on bike to work scheme but apparently the bosses are being a bit sticky about it. Partly because they say as the bike is company property, leased back, until the employee has fully paid for it, they're exposed to a liability in the case of her having an accident.
Is this correct or have they got their wires crossed? If it's not correct, can anyone point me in the direction of the info that clarifies this?
ta
Do you have company cars? It's excatly the same as their liability for that, i.e. none. The employee who leases the bike is responsible for ensuring it is in fit condition etc etc
My HR dept asked the same question, so I mailed Cyclescheme and the DoT (or whatever it's called now). Both came back and said that the employer had no liability for any injury to an employee that occurs while riding a bike they've received through CtW. Probably best to mail them and get an official confirmation to show your boss, as he probably won't take my word for it.
I would have thought that in extremis the employer may have a legal duty of care. This is the case if an employee uses a car (either company or employee's own) for company travel.
I work for a liability averse German company and we offer CtW without issue.
Dekerfer - Member
I would have thought that in extremis the employer may have a legal duty of care. This is the case if an employee uses a car (either company or employee's own) for company travel.
Ah - but we're talking about commuting, not company travel. I think that makes a difference.
Druidh, you may well be correct.
Does the employee have a liability to insure the bike and be able to prove that this cover exists?
In my case - no need to insure it, but the employee [i]is[/i] responsible for replacing it in the event of loss.