Search results for:

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.

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.

Right, I actually got a reply from my friend. The door situation is as such: The front door is keyed. Only residents have access. The stairwell is keyed to separate it from the other flat below, so is definitely supposed to be private. The bedrooms are keyed as the norm in student housing.

The tenancy agreement does not mention anything about the fire exit so my friend had absolutely no way to know. None of his flatmates were aware either. The first time they saw the door in use was when the security guy was destroying the bike- he was caught in the act but the damage was already done. The kicker here is that as a private staircase there's no confusion as to who the bike belonged to.

This isn't a bike being trashed outside someone's home. This is a bike being trashed inside it.

Also to set the record straight as you seem to doubt it, it's genuinely not my bike. If a power-mad nightclub security guard had trashed mine I'd be much angrier than this!

My shoes are perfect, thank you very much.

Again, I'll try and get some more info on the status of the stairwell. As far as I remember the front door is locked with a regular key, not an intercom/buzzer, and has a post slot. Either way, having an explicit post/courier option doesn't give some random security guy the right to enter, as last time I checked nightclubs aren't generally part of the postal service, who usually have special agreements on this.

Well, thanks guys, this thread has been quite entertaining. I'll try and post an update once I've collected the bike on Sunday and we've had a chance to talk to the nightclub staff about compensation for the damages.

Chain another bike the security guard to the railings and then start a fire in the nightclub.

FTFY

All I'd really like to see out of this is for my friend to be compensated for the quite frankly excessive damage caused to his bike. The argument of the club (if they present one) is irrelevant. Their security guard destroyed the bike, and the bike was not moved out of the way as a result of the damage.

The security guard took it upon himself to remediate the situation how he saw fit, without considering the other less destructive options. Whatever the regulation surrounding the fire exit, this does not change the fact that he wilfully destroyed the bike whilst it was on private property to which he had no absolute right of access. Even if the building was owned by the club (which I highly doubt as a background check indicates the club is a commercial tenant), entering without permission and causing damage contravenes the right to Quiet Enjoyment which a tenant holds.

And in answer to the questions above about the postal delivery point, I don't know, but the norm around here is for post to be delivered to front doors only.

Even so, this doesn't justify or permit criminal damage.

To be honest I'm pretty upset, it was a nice bike, and I've lost out too. The deal was that I repaired the bike on my friend's offer that once he no longer needed the bike at the end of the academic year, he'd give it to me. It's nothing particularly special as a bike but I quite fancied the frame for building a sweet touring/commuting hack.

Welcome to student lettings.

Would if I could. I'll try and get a look at the agreement over the weekend and see what's going on. I'm supposed to be picking the remains up on Sunday to see if there's anything at all I can do in terms of repairs to the bike. I think the stays are crushed beyond a bit of cold-setting though.

Backstop, it's not the legal advice side that I was curious about. I'm asking "on here" as this is a forum of city cyclists, to whom this sort of thing is likely to have happened before and they might have some wise words of wisdom.

Here's a picture from another angle to show just how much damage was done. Honestly, I've seen bikes that have been outright vandalised in better condition than this, I mean, who rips a derailleur off like that?

Absolutely not! I have become embroiled in this as the resident guy who knows about both bikes and legal stuff.

My main reason for caring is that I rebuilt this bike as a favour for my friend about two weeks ago, and it was in absolutely beautiful time-warp condition, save for lots of seized grease from age/storage.

I basically offered to deal with it on his behalf as he doesn't really feel comfortable making legal demands of people.

Suits work. They convey authority. I'm always surprised how much more cooperative people are inclined to be when you are wearing a nice suit. If I went in wearing my ratty jeans and a loud t-shirt and pulled the letter out my cycling bag I imagine they'd just tell me to F off.

Just to be absolutely clear here, I'm not denying that the bike was possibly obstructing an exit. I'm saying that the response does not befit the initial issue. The bike was locked inside the private residence into which the exit leads. Obstruction or not, the guard entered private property and willingly caused damage instead of attempting a peaceful and non destructive resolution. That's the real issue here.

How would you feel if someone walked into your home and trashed your things just because they were vaguely near a fire exit?