Most recent activity
-
Here's the crease, for the interested.
-
Easily replaced bike if you have the money. Not everyone is so fortunate. FWIW, other people keep their bikes there and at the bottom of the stairwell too. As far as all the residents were concerned the door was disused. Also it's clear that the door would have opened just fine with the bike where it was, hence if it was simply the service door the residents assumed it was (they have a shared boiler and stuff) then it would have been fine.
The whole legal action thing is not because of the bike's value, it's the principle. In the way or not, you don't go to town on somebody else's things, especially when it's on their property, not yours. I don't see why the landlord's going to be in the slightest bit bothered and to be honest if they get in trouble over the fire exit down the line then it's only fair, they're the most hated student lettings company in the city for a reason.
There isn't much the commercial neighbour could do in this situation anyhow, all they have access to is a stairwell which, if they're damaging property on, I imagine the lettings company will be less inclined to maintain their right of access to. To be honest I don't think it will go as far as the police/court, I'm pretty sure they'll fork over the cash with their tail between their legs on this one.
-
Right, just to clear all this up: I picked up the bike this evening. We agreed that leaving it where it was was a bad idea to limit future provocation. It's in a pretty bad state. Back wheel is utterly wrecked as anticipated, dérailleur is smashed to hell, frame is bent. At first inspection I thought it would possibly be a simple cold-set and dropout alignment job but I've found a crease below the brake bridge I don't like. There are also a fair few deep gouges and scratches where the whole bike's been chucked around. Going to get the second opinion of a professional frame-builder this week but I'm pretty sure the whole thing's had it.
The only new thing I learned is that there is a camera owned by the landlord that is covering the entire stairwell of which the centre of shot is precisely where the bike is locked. Presuming they play ball this will be pretty damning evidence against the security guard and I really doubt the club will be foolish enough to think otherwise. Having actually been able to look in person it appears the guy attempted to twist the bike free and then took out his frustrations on the bike when this was unsuccessful. Obviously this is not a sensible way to remove a locked bike- it's pretty clear that he made a decision that was way beyond his pay grade, and that once he started causing damage to property he should have stopped.
Having had a look at the door it's a really funny situation but I can see how it makes sense- the access from the door does lead down the stairs where there is an actual fire door that opens onto a service yard and doesn't actually cross any further property, looks like a dodgy HMO compromise. Turns out the managing company of the building is a "known" entity for doing things perhaps less than above board. For the record, the actual, legitimate, marked fire door downstairs which is presumably part of the club's fire escape policy is actually behind a whole stack of bikes and assorted junk, and is pretty much inaccessible, which makes the whole matter even more ridiculous.
Also for those making stupid comments about "knowing legal stuff"- though IANAL my family are in law so I know a fair bit and have plenty of legal resources / access to legal advice already.
Having looked at the situation I agree it will probably become a police matter. The current plan is to approach the club and inform them of the issues, state that it's believed to be criminal damage, and ask if they'd be willing to resolve amicably by means of compensation, and that if not that the matter will be passed to the police and an N1 claim filed with the County Court.
As far as this forum is concerned the matter is probably closed here, I was hoping for information on similar incidents and repairs to bikes in this situation but it seems to have basically turned into a free-for-all justice war about bikes in corridors.
-
Communal, yes. Public, no.
-
I mean, given their lack of knowledge my friend and his flat could have just as easily put a bookcase or something equally immovable over the door. I just don't get why the exit would go completely unmentioned... Also if it's leading directly into a private residence does the security guy even have the right to enter without 24h notice in writing?
As far as I understand, quiet enjoyment takes precedence over all other restrictions other than actual emergencies. So, in case of fire the door could be opened with warning, but not for a mere inspection.I think the bigger can of worms is what the security guy was doing even being there in the first place.
-
It's communal within a single dwelling. No mention beyond that in the contract of restrictions. It's behind two locked doors, how much more private does it need to be????
In this situation the tenancy agreement needs to explicitly forbid, not permit, such action, or otherwise make it clear that the staircase is not subject to the same basic rights of all tenants under the Covenant of Quiet Enjoyment.
-
I now have the answer to this. Nowhere in the tenancy agreement is the fire exit mentioned. There's no reason to assume that is what it is. Could just as easily be a store cupboard which is what everyone thought, given that it literally opens into the residence.
-
Witnesses (the other flatmates) caught the guy damaging the bike. They were home so it's not like he had no option to talk to them.
Friend has contacted the club. Police will be informed shortly. Just going to let it run it's course.
Have had confirmation from a frame builder that repair is not possible. Combined with witness and camera footage I think even the snakiest of club owners will pay up.
As to the whole "was my friend wrong" thing. I think the point people are missing is that his bike was not in the way of anything. It was just there. Outside the door to his room. It was not preventing the opening of the door or access to it. Pretty reasonable if it's inside your own property, I think.
Sure, if the door was a major thoroughfare it might have been in the way, but we're talking about a blank door on a private staircase which none of the residents had ever seen used or opened, so their collective line of thinking is hardly unreasonable.