Creak to crack!

[David Lloyd]

"Ian Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 04 Jul, Alex Butcher <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Wed, 04 Jul 2007 05:29:22 -0700, David Lloyd wrote:
>>
>> > IF someone was buying a bike under the cycle to work scheme, I would
>> > consider them to be the buyer and their employer to be acting as a
>> > loans
>> > company.
>
> I think you are wrong.
>

No, I definately would consider the employer to be acting as a loans
company. Whether I'm right to do so is another matter. In a hire-purchase
situation, the goods remain the property of the hp company until they are
paid for, but this does not change the rights of the purchaser. I don't
think this changes just because the government has put special provisions in
place re tax for the cycle to work schemes.

David Lloyd. Boy did I get wet today! Doesn't matter when you're going to
dump yourself in the shower when you get home.

 

[Ian Smith]

On Thu, 05 Jul, David Lloyd <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> "Ian Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > On Wed, 04 Jul, Alex Butcher <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> On Wed, 04 Jul 2007 05:29:22 -0700, David Lloyd wrote:
> >>
> >> > IF someone was buying a bike under the cycle to work scheme, I
> >> > would consider them to be the buyer and their employer to be
> >> > acting as a loans company.
> >
> > I think you are wrong.
>
> No, I definately would consider the employer to be acting as a
> loans company.

I was referring to your opinion - I think your opinion is wrong - not
that you hold an opinion. That's normal English usage, so far as I am
concerned - if A says "I think the moon is made of cheese" and B says
"I think you are wrong", B is not generally disputing that A _thinks_
the moon is made of cheese, but rather is disputing what the moon is
made of.

> Whether I'm right to do so is another matter. In a hire-purchase
> situation, the goods remain the property of the hp company until
> they are paid for, but this does not change the rights of the
> purchaser. I don't think this changes just because the government
> has put special provisions in place re tax for the cycle to work
> schemes.

But that's the point - the arrangements have to explicitly be not a
loan and not a hire purchase. It needs to be the company buys and
owns the bike, and then lends it, gratis, to the employee.

There doesn't have to be any salary sacrifice. The company could
choose to pay a cash bonus to employees who sign up to the scheme.
It's hard to describe an arrangement where you don't need to pay
anything to anyone as a loan or a hire purchase.

I don't really understand the comment "I don't think this changes..."
It does change the situation, because the employee DOES NOT buy the
bike, so laws (like consumer protection) which protect private
individuals in dealings with companies simply wouldn't apply - no
private individual has bought anything, a company has made a
business-to-business transaction. Frankly, it doesn't much matter
what you consider the situation to be - no individual has bought the
bike (at this stage - potentially the borrower of the bike may buy it
in due course).

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

 

[Alex Butcher]

On Thu, 05 Jul 2007 07:09:33 +0000, Ian Smith wrote:

> On Wed, 04 Jul, Alex Butcher <[email protected]> wrote:

[snip]

>> Yes, as I was reading through the sample loan agreement, it occurred to
>> me that despite the fact that my employer is the owner, I'm still the
>> purchaser.
>
> I don't think you are.
>
> If you are, you'll need to pay VAT on the purchase. Did/will you?

Apparently so, but I think that's due to my (public sector) employer's VAT
status rather than anything else.

> regards, Ian SMith

Best Regards,
Alex.
--
Alex Butcher, Bristol UK. PGP/GnuPG ID:0x5010dbff

"[T]he whole point about the reason why I think it is important we go for
identity cards and an identity database today is that identity fraud and
abuse is a major, major problem. Now the civil liberties aspect of it, look
it is a view, I don't personally think it matters very much."
- Tony Blair, 6 June 2006 <http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page9566.asp>