A new strategy to help combat bike theft

[wolver]

https://www.treadmtb.co.za/a-new-strategy-to-help-combat-bike-theft/

the TLDR:

How Cyclists and Bike Shops Can Get Involved

 Cyclists can join the fight against bike theft by registering their bikes with 529 Garage. The process is quick, free, and simple. All you need is your bike’s serial number, usually located on the underside of the frame. By registering, you are not only protecting your own bike but also contributing to a global network working to deter theft and recover stolen bikes.

Bike shops play a crucial role in this mission by enabling the 529 Garage feature in Hubtiger’s software. When activated, bike serial numbers entered during servicing are automatically checked against Project 529’s database, making it easier to reunite stolen bikes with their rightful owners.

Through the combined efforts of cyclists, bike shops, and the partnership between 529 Garage and Hubtiger, the fight against bike theft is gaining momentum, helping to recover stolen bikes and build safer, stronger communities one registration at a time.

[openmind]

But there is already a stolen bikes registry on The Hub?

[Bike Dewing]

4 minutes ago, openmind said:

But there is already a stolen bikes registry on The Hub?

Whats the harm.?

[madmarc]

Depending on how its used, there is a legal issue on this - Don't get me wrong, I fully support it BUT !

We had the same systm on construction equipment we sold as the OEM. Our clients were mainly rental shops who used to get their equipment stolen fairly often. they would then send us the SER No's which we entered onto our workshop database. Inevitably most of these machines would come into our workshop for repairs and service at some point. We would then contact the original owner as well as inform the current owner that the machine was stolen. In the begining and being naive to the law, we handed then machine back to the original owner only to get charged by the new owner for theft, on top we were sued for a replacement machine or same value in cash. Which we lost in court.

So what does the law tell us to do

Finding a possibly stolen machine we had to inform the original owner that we were in possesion of his stolen machine that he reported to us. As well as inform the new owner that the machine was stolen.

The original owner then needs to contact the investigsating officer at SAPS to come collect the machine as proof/evidence of the crime - If the machine was insured then the insurance company has to be informed by the original owner who in turn must contact the SAPS to collect the machine. Once the machine is collected by SAPS, only they can decide to hand it back to the original owner or the insurance company, or keep it as evidence for any possible court case.

If none of the above happens then we were obliged to hand back the machine to the new owner who originally brought it in for repair.

So according to the law you can only hand back the machine to the SAPS or the new owner. In most cases we handed it back to the new owner as SAPS were not interested in coming to our offices or the investigating officer had closed the file or could not be contacted even though the original owner was standing there watching this all happen.

If we handed it back to the original owner we would get charged with theft and expected to make the new owner whole again.

It became such a ball ache we stopped doing it - we simply informed the original owner we had recieved the machine and gave the new owners details to let them sort it out between themsleves.

And heres the kicker - Now with the new Poppi act (or whatever its called) you cant even give the new owners details to the original owner - He can sue you for breach of privacy.

The bottom line is only the SAPS have the legal right to confiscate propery suspected of being stolen and its up to them what happens after that.

So the only thing a bike shop can do is contact the original owner which is useless because they cannot hand the bike back to him

or

Contact the investigating officer if their details are recorded with a case number and hand it over to him as stolen property for confiscation.

I wonder how many bike shops are willing to get this involved when they realise the ball ache

[Bike Dewing]

19 minutes ago, madmarc said:

Depending on how its used, there is a legal issue on this - Don't get me wrong, I fully support it BUT !

We had the same systm on construction equipment we sold as the OEM. Our clients were mainly rental shops who used to get their equipment stolen fairly often. they would then send us the SER No's which we entered onto our workshop database. Inevitably most of these machines would come into our workshop for repairs and service at some point. We would then contact the original owner as well as inform the current owner that the machine was stolen. In the begining and being naive to the law, we handed then machine back to the original owner only to get charged by the new owner for theft, on top we were sued for a replacement machine or same value in cash. Which we lost in court.

So what does the law tell us to do

Finding a possibly stolen machine we had to inform the original owner that we were in possesion of his stolen machine that he reported to us. As well as inform the new owner that the machine was stolen.

The original owner then needs to contact the investigsating officer at SAPS to come collect the machine as proof/evidence of the crime - If the machine was insured then the insurance company has to be informed by the original owner who in turn must contact the SAPS to collect the machine. Once the machine is collected by SAPS, only they can decide to hand it back to the original owner or the insurance company, or keep it as evidence for any possible court case.

If none of the above happens then we were obliged to hand back the machine to the new owner who originally brought it in for repair.

So according to the law you can only hand back the machine to the SAPS or the new owner. In most cases we handed it back to the new owner as SAPS were not interested in coming to our offices or the investigating officer had closed the file or could not be contacted even though the original owner was standing there watching this all happen.

If we handed it back to the original owner we would get charged with theft and expected to make the new owner whole again.

It became such a ball ache we stopped doing it - we simply informed the original owner we had recieved the machine and gave the new owners details to let them sort it out between themsleves.

And heres the kicker - Now with the new Poppi act (or whatever its called) you cant even give the new owners details to the original owner - He can sue you for breach of privacy.

The bottom line is only the SAPS have the legal right to confiscate propery suspected of being stolen and its up to them what happens after that.

So the only thing a bike shop can do is contact the original owner which is useless because they cannot hand the bike back to him

or

Contact the investigating officer if their details are recorded with a case number and hand it over to him as stolen property for confiscation.

I wonder how many bike shops are willing to get this involved when they realise the ball ache

why do the good guys always get scr3w3d.!?

[Robbie Stewart]

Just insure it. Claim the loss if stolen and walk away from any possible recovered bike. It shouldn't be any more complicated. The hassle isn't worth it otherwise.

[Bike Dewing]

1 hour ago, Robbie Stewart said:

Just insure it. Claim the loss if stolen and walk away from any possible recovered bike. It shouldn't be any more complicated. The hassle isn't worth it otherwise.

I had a car stolen and recovered by Tracker many many years ago.. i didnt want it back, someone else had used and abused it. 😰 i could smell them on the car😳🤣🤣

[Robbie Stewart]

11 hours ago, Bike Dewing said:

I had a car stolen and recovered by Tracker many many years ago.. i didnt want it back, someone else had used and abused it. 😰 i could smell them on the car😳🤣🤣

This is my argument. The recovered stolen goods will 99% of the time not be in the original condition it was at the time it was stolen, and I'm pretty sure the insurance company will probably find a way to avoid paying out the claim for damages. I can't verify that assumption, but I've had issues with insurance squirming out of their responsibilities before. Hence I don't have Tracker on my vehicles and don't pay more for insurance either.

[Bike Dewing]

16 minutes ago, Robbie Stewart said:

This is my argument. The recovered stolen goods will 99% of the time not be in the original condition it was at the time it was stolen, and I'm pretty sure the insurance company will probably find a way to avoid paying out the claim for damages. I can't verify that assumption, but I've had issues with insurance squirming out of their responsibilities before. Hence I don't have Tracker on my vehicles and don't pay more for insurance either.

I agree completely.. 

it was gross, but insurance insisted on the Tracker.. i was young and dumb so i just agreed.. never ever again.. 

insurance is there to help replace, not recover in my opinion..

[love2fly]

1 hour ago, Robbie Stewart said:

This is my argument. The recovered stolen goods will 99% of the time not be in the original condition it was at the time it was stolen, and I'm pretty sure the insurance company will probably find a way to avoid paying out the claim for damages. I can't verify that assumption, but I've had issues with insurance squirming out of their responsibilities before. Hence I don't have Tracker on my vehicles and don't pay more for insurance either.

But at least the stolen goods would be removed from the thief, I still see that as a win!

[The Ouzo]

14 hours ago, Robbie Stewart said:

Just insure it. Claim the loss if stolen and walk away from any possible recovered bike. It shouldn't be any more complicated. The hassle isn't worth it otherwise.

my view.

In most cases I dont want the stolen goods back, but the outcome I would hope for is that the thief is tracked down and "persuaded" to stop stealing.

So by having the register, perhaps a trend can be picked up and make it easier to track down the thugs.

[Robbie Stewart]

49 minutes ago, love2fly said:

But at least the stolen goods would be removed from the thief, I still see that as a win!

 

40 minutes ago, The Ouzo said:

my view.

In most cases I dont want the stolen goods back, but the outcome I would hope for is that the thief is tracked down and "persuaded" to stop stealing.

So by having the register, perhaps a trend can be picked up and make it easier to track down the thugs.

I am on-board with the perp receiving their due reward, but let's be honest about the failures of the justice system in SA. I am not saying that they should get away with it, but from my perspective the hassle to pursue justice just isn't worth it anymore in this country. I wish it weren't so and maybe I'm just being pessimistic, but I've elected to just get on with my life. A car or a bike or a cell-phone is replaceable. First prize is for the criminals to be dealt with always though.