Angry Brexiteers contact Dutch bike parts website that stopped shipping to the UK; Nail trap found on popular MTB trail; Beryl Burton mural graffitied; Cycling can improve your chances of employment by 12%; Pro cycling’s baby boom + more on the live blog

51 thoughts on “Angry Brexiteers contact Dutch bike parts website that stopped shipping to the UK; Nail trap found on popular MTB trail; Beryl Burton mural graffitied; Cycling can improve your chances of employment by 12%; Pro cycling’s baby boom + more on the live blog”

1. Isn’t he breaching the rules

   Isn’t he breaching the rules on GDPR by including all the email addresses on the Twitter Pics?
   (Some are fake but some are not)

   Log In or Register to post comments

   • Ah, well, does the GDPR apply
     Ah, well, does the GDPR apply to data subjects outside the EU?

     Log In or Register to post comments

     • Sriracha wrote:

       Ah, well, does the GDPR apply to data subjects outside the EU?

       — Sriracha

       I don’t think it matters where the individual is located, but obviously a company operating outside of the EU (and not processing any EU data) won’t have to comply. Companies operating in the EU have to abide by GDPR for all individuals.

       Log In or Register to post comments

       • I am not a data reg lawyer

         I am not a data reg lawyer but my understanding is that the GDPR applies to EU citizens (regardless of their geographic location of the company or theoretically the resident). Now I don’t know what has been agreed on data protection in the trade deal – unless it is covered by the arrangements then hte GDPR would not apply as the data does not relate to EU citizens so should be in the clear.

         Log In or Register to post comments

         • Carior wrote:

           I am not a data reg lawyer but my understanding is that the GDPR applies to EU citizens (regardless of their geographic location of the company or theoretically the resident). Now I don’t know what has been agreed on data protection in the trade deal – unless it is covered by the arrangements then hte GDPR would not apply as the data does not relate to EU citizens so should be in the clear.

           — Carior

           My understanding is that the opposite applies. Companies operating in the EU have to be careful with processing personal information of any person, whereas companies outside of the EU won’t have to comply even if the individual is an EU citizen (the EU law wouldn’t have jurisdiction, so it’s irrelevant where the individual was born). It’s more complicated when EU data is passed across to non-EU companies and the brunt of compliance is on the EU companies sending that data across borders.

         • External-EU companies agree

           External-EU companies agree to comply otherwise they can’t do business. Yes if they breach it then the fines might not be enforceable but I suspect it depends on the company setup. After all the EU had the clout about IE being enforced in Windows bck in the day and other changes in Tech. 

           You are correct that it is up to the EU company when dealing with externals but normally it consists of “Where do you store our data and does it comply with GDPR or Safe Harbour?” (or whatever the new equivalent is) “The answer is no! Sorry we have to go elsewhere with our business”. Hence why most of them comply to it. 

            

         • In terms of GDPR protecting

           In terms of GDPR protecting EU nationals – I was thinking of the scenario when an EU national goes on holiday to a non-EU country and deals with a local business: GDPR would be irrelevant and only the local laws would apply.

   • AlsoSomniloquism wrote:

     Isn’t he breaching the rules on GDPR by including all the email addresses on the Twitter Pics?
     (Some are fake but some are not)

     — AlsoSomniloquism

     An email address doesn’t often identify an individual by itself (unless it’s something like firstname.lastname@smallcompany.com) so GDPR wouldn’t be applicable.

     Log In or Register to post comments

     • Quote:

       Under GDPR, email addresses are considered confidential and must be used and stored within strict privacy and security guidelines.

       And there is at least three there which fall under identifying the individual and their address. 

        

       Log In or Register to post comments

       • AlsoSomniloquism wrote:

         Under GDPR, email addresses are considered confidential and must be used and stored within strict privacy and security guidelines.

         — AlsoSomniloquism

         And there is at least three there which fall under identifying the individual and their address.

         Was french@french.com one of those?

         Log In or Register to post comments

         • Nope, I was thinking the

           Nope, I was thinking the first three. Might be Gmail or hotmail etc but one is Blueyonder as well which old virgin mail and I would be surprised is not his own. 

           TBH I’m not actually fussed by them being exposed as potential A-holes attacking him without full details, however I don’t want Bike Bits to be caught out and fined because he was showing them to be A-holes. 

         • AlsoSomniloquism wrote:

           Nope, I was thinking the first three. Might be Gmail or hotmail etc but one is Blueyonder as well which old virgin mail and I would be surprised is not his own. 

           TBH I’m not actually fussed by them being exposed as potential A-holes attacking him without full details, however I don’t want Bike Bits to be caught out and fined because he was showing them to be A-holes. 

           — AlsoSomniloquism

           That’s the thing though, with laws protecting individual privacy, you don’t get to decide who is and isn’t protected.

         • If someone is concerned about

           If someone is concerned about an email address being made public, it’s trivial to set up a throwaway email address and use that instead. Personally, I don’t have an issue with an email address being leaked if it doesn’t have any other identifying personal info.

         • Robb D touched on it but the

           Robb D touched on it but the annoying TOS that happens when you go onto web sites or go onto these contact apps state the rules on what they will be using the info for and promising to be resonsible with the data. Now I doubt BikeBits have in their rules or even that GDPR allow “them to be published on Twitter” in the TOS. 

           I agree with you that if the person is concerned, they can use throwaways and several on there have done that. But other people are not as net savvy and email addresses are normally one half of username/ password combo, hence the reason for extra protection

           However my main concern is someone reports Bike Bits on this and he is hit with a fine because it appears he also isn’t as net savvy to obfuscate the emails before posting.

         • AlsoSomniloquism wrote:

           However my main concern is someone reports Bike Bits on this and he is hit with a fine because it appears he also isn’t as net savvy to obfuscate the emails before posting.

           — AlsoSomniloquism

           He is “net savvy” enough to run an international online retail business and publish an online blog. I think he knows which buttons to press.

     • hawkinspeter wrote:

       An email address doesn’t often identify an individual by itself (unless it’s something like firstname.lastname@smallcompany.com) so GDPR wouldn’t be applicable.

       — hawkinspeter

       Yes, it absolutely would.  e-mail addresses, whether personal or work, are personal data under GDPR and must be protected.

       Log In or Register to post comments

       • alexls wrote:

         An email address doesn’t often identify an individual by itself (unless it’s something like firstname.lastname@smallcompany.com) so GDPR wouldn’t be applicable.

         — alexls

         Yes, it absolutely would.  e-mail addresses, whether personal or work, are personal data under GDPR and must be protected.

         — hawkinspeter

         Sorry, you’re right – I sit corrected. I’m too used to thinking of emails as being like postcards – you’re not always guaranteed that every link in an email delivery chain will be using encryption so the email address is quite often public in the same sense that a house address is public information.

         Log In or Register to post comments

       • The definition of “personal

         The definition of “personal data” still requires that the data should be sufficient to identify a specific individual, so while email addresses can be personal data, being an email address does not automatically make it personal data. 

         Log In or Register to post comments

   • This would assume that their

     This would assume that their isn’t a clause in the contact details stating that email addresses etc can be shared publically and that by contacting you are agreeing to these terms.

     Log In or Register to post comments

   • Lots of misunderstandings of

     Lots of misunderstandings of GDPR on this thread.

     TL;DR – move along nothing to see here. Zero chance of any GDPR action arising.

     1. Its designed to protect Europeans personal data.
     2. The UK is not in Europe but its still a potential breach of the UK Data Protection Act which was the GDPR enabling act in UK law.
     3. Though a thin trade agreement was signed no Data Adequacy agreement has been determined between the EU and the UK as to whether the Data Protection Act is sufficient on its own to ensure equivalency with GDPR . In theory it should be, in practise both the Law and the Processes by which those laws are enforced have to be deemed adequate and the UK is still in the process of convincing the EU on the process part.
     4. So the users whose emails are shown would have to make a complaint, and probably have it bounced back and forth between the ICO (UK) and the Dutch Data Privacy Office.
     5. Though email addresses are personal data they aren’t particularly sensitive elements, and that together with the tiny volume plus the murky Data Projection relationship between the EU and UK makes it effectively zero that any enforcement activity would occur from this
     6. In the vanishingly small likelyhood that the ICO actually issued a fine, it effectively has lost any ability to enforce a fine on a Dutch company that doesnt want to trade with the UK anymore.

     Log In or Register to post comments

     • “The UK is not in Europe but

       “The UK is not in Europe but its still a potential breach of the UK Data Protection Act which was the GDPR enabling act in UK law.” 

       If that’s the case, then were we told porky pies about those nasty unelected EU bureaucrat type folks imposing laws on us? 

       Log In or Register to post comments

       • Of course we were told

         Of course we were told massive porkies.  Because Lying Brexiting liars are gonna lie, or are believing the arch-liars and do the job of spreading their misinformation for them. 

         AFAIK 99% of EU rules have to have local enabling legislation in the individual countries.   There have even been instances where a country has been hauled up by the EU for writing the implementing law wrongly/weakly.  In the main the EU leaves it up to the country to determine how to comply with the spirit and intent of their rules, except where its mandated by treaty or EU processes.  Those rules are generally drawn up by commitees containing a respresentative of each country and approved both by the EU comission and the EU parliament.

         Any brexiteer telling you we didnt have control was a lying liar.  The control exerted was just expressed in different ways than electing a MP.   Also lets not forget that if your preferred candidate for a UK or regional MP doesnt get in or is in the opposition you have effectively no control either.

         The “taking back control” was just another con-job slogan just like everything else from Vote Leave.

         Now I’m doubly depressed because of remembering the above and that this is on page 3 of a Live blog comment.

         Log In or Register to post comments

         • So far we’ve banned pulse
           So far we’ve banned pulse fishing, abolished the tampon tax and announced a ban on live animal exports.

           Not bad for the first week.

           Then there are the trade negotiations with multiple countries, the massive overhaul of agricultural subsidies, the planned free ports etc.

           None of those things were immediately possible in the EU (pulse fishing will soon be banned by the EU admittedly).

           If we can now do multiple things we couldn’t do as an EU member only a bare faced liar would claim that we didn’t have more control.

         • Are they still supporting the

           Re Tampon Tax:Are they still supporting the womens charities they were using it for in the end?

           Edit: And as for Pulse fishing, as France has already banned it, why did we wait until after we left the EU? Was that just to save something up for the press releases?

         • I don’t know what they’re
           I don’t know what they’re planning to do with the money now.

           I didn’t know that France had already banned pulse fishing but the overall point stands.

           If we’re able to do things now that we were previously unable to do then we clearly have more control.

         • Rich_cb wrote:

           So far we’ve banned pulse fishing, abolished the tampon tax and announced a ban on live animal exports.

           Not bad for the first week.

           Then there are the trade negotiations with multiple countries, the massive overhaul of agricultural subsidies, the planned free ports etc.

           None of those things were immediately possible in the EU (pulse fishing will soon be banned by the EU admittedly).

           If we can now do multiple things we couldn’t do as an EU member only a bare faced liar would claim that we didn’t have more control.

           — Rich_cb

           You make Secret Squirrel’s point for him.

           France and Belgium have already banned pulse fishing, so we clearly didn’t need to leave the EU to do so. It’s almost as if the government delayed banning pulse fishing in order to fool the gullible that it was a Brexit benefit.

           The Tories voted against an amendment in 2015, that would have allowed us to abolish the tampon tax, following engagement with the EU. In any case, the EU is in the process of abolishing the tampon tax.

           So we’re left with live animal exports. Hardly compensation for losing freedom of movement, real time access to police databases, frictionless trade with our nearest neighbours, Erasmus etc etc etc.

           Oh and we had freeports in the UK up until 2012, when the Tories allowed the legislation to lapse as they were pointless.

         • It boils down to whether or
           It boils down to whether or not we can control things now that we previously could not?

           If we can then we have more control by definition.

           Parliamentary amendments are often just political theatre and those theatrical amendments are largely meaningless. ‘Engagement with the EU’ on that issue had been going on for years and had achieved nothing of substance. We have now completely abolished the tax, something we were unable to do before.

           EU Freeports are not in the same league as Freeports elsewhere, EU legislation essentially hamstrings them minimising their benefit to the economy.

           This is from fullfact.org: “A 2005 paper from a UN body said: “The [European] Commission does allow the establishment of free zones within its territory but its definition of free zone is a very narrow one.””

           We directly control more now than we did whilst in the EU, that is indisputable and that was my point.

2. Frankly, who gives a s**t. It

   Frankly, who gives a s**t. It’s just one supplier in a sea of suppliers. Non-story, remainer-division cr@p.

   Log In or Register to post comments

   • alexuk wrote:

     Frankly, who gives a s**t. It’s just one supplier in a sea of suppliers. Non-story, remainer-division cr@p.

     — alexuk

     Have you been using their contact form, alex??? 

     Log In or Register to post comments

     • Alex is obviously having a

       Alex is obviously having a bad Brexit. Let the poor soul  be.

       Log In or Register to post comments

       • Bigfoz wrote:

         Alex is obviously having a bad Brexit. Let the poor soul  be.

         — Bigfoz

         Isn’t everyone? I don’t know why the Brexiters are still angry. They “won”.

         Log In or Register to post comments

3. I’m still trying to work out
   I’m still trying to work out whether the BBC was deliberately trying to put Dutch Bike Bits across as just another EU business caught in the brexit crossfire, or whether they were plain negligent.

   Dutch Bike Bits is David Hembrow, a UK expat to the EU, with longstanding strong anti-brexit, pro-EU views. Nothing wrong with that. But for the BBC to platform his views as if it were just another foreign firm caught up in the Brexit cross fire is either disingenuous or naive.

   http://davidhembrow.blogspot.com/2016/06/brexit-my-country-was-taken-from-me.html?m=1

   Log In or Register to post comments

   • I think the other aspect that

     I think the other aspect that is worth a mention is that a number of EU member states already have similar VAT / Import / duty obligations that the UK now has – I believe NL is included in that list. 

     Log In or Register to post comments

     • all EU member states will

       all EU member states will have the same rules from July, it should have been implemented EU wide on January 1st, as with the UKs change,and ironically perhaps as it was originally an EU led policy, the UK has simply adopted it for them first. But the EU delayed their change to give all its remaining member states more time to make the changes, due to the efforts focussed on dealing with Covid currently.

       https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/business/vat/modernising-vat-cross-border-ecommerce_en

       Log In or Register to post comments

       • Awavey wrote:

         all EU member states will have the same rules from July

         — Awavey

         Only for shipments into the EU from non-EU countries (mainly to close a VAT loophole for low value goods).

         Within the EU, VAT collection is going to get easier. They are removing the limits that require member state registration and introducing a ‘One Stop Shop’, whereby all VAT is paid in a single state.

         https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/sites/taxation/files/vat-e-commerce-factsheet.pdf

         Log In or Register to post comments

   • migrant, not expat.

     migrant, not expat.

     (sorry, as a migrant, it’s a pet bugbear of mine – the way people refer to UK citizens living in the EU as ‘expats’, whereas EU citizens living in the UK are ‘migrants’. It stops there being a sensible debate about migration and freedom of movement.)

     Log In or Register to post comments

4. As soon as I saw the letters

   As soon as I saw the letters BBC I lost interest in the story.

   Log In or Register to post comments

5. The bikebits story is not

   The bikebits story is not really a brexit story, this is a UK policy to all online businesses selling into the UK, it is just now applied to EU businesses as well as businesses outside the EU.

   Fundamentally this is better for consumers, buying stuff overseas an then having VAT applied at customs causes delay at shipment, and also the royal mail (or other final delivery business) will collect the fee from the consumer, often with a mark up. In addition to goods costing more than is evident at the point of purchase.

   My recollection of recieving goods from outside the EU was that a £50 package would be liable for £10 VAT and then royal mail would charge a flat £8 for collecting this tax, whether the VAT was £5 or £200.

   If the supplier has 1000 cutomers a year then can charge each £1 to cover the £1000 fee, and the customer will be better off than dealing with the royal mail fees. If they have less than 1000 orders from the UK, then they may reassess whether it is worth their while.

   It seems right that businesses selling into the UK via mail, should not have unfair advantages of not paying VAT and so undercutting UK businesses.

   Log In or Register to post comments

   • I would say strictly as the

     I would say strictly as the change or charges did not apply whilst the UK was in the EU and they do now it is a side effect of brexit ? The effect expressed as a benefit or negative upon the supplier and consumer  is a different discussion. It will be for each company to choose the advantage to them as against the cost and your example is fair that the projected cost will need to be balanced against each potential purchase. It is not so much the charge of VAT as the rates were standardised within the EU as the additional administration and time that each company will now have to incorporate which will hit smaller companies more than larger companies and risks eroding consumer choice ?

     Log In or Register to post comments

     • Yes there is admin, but

       Yes there is admin, but surely the cost of that is not the £8 per order that the royal mail were taking from customers in order to recieve their delivery. An inefficient charging system caused partialy by th mail covering themselves against non payment.

       Sell to UK customers pay UK VAT, seems fairly simple to me. Don’t want to pay UK VAT, then don’t. bikebits is at liberty to make that decision, based on an assessment of their current business volumes.

       Potentially there may be a small reduction in choice, or we may see more choice within the UK. But there will certainly be an increase in clarity with customers no longer recieving deliveries with unexpected bills.

       Log In or Register to post comments

       • It’s a balance between

         It’s a balance between placing the admin burden on the customer versus on the seller. Obviously paying tax + fees at the point of import is an inconvenience, but for some customers that inconvenience is worth it if it means getting a particular item. I suspect there’s quite a lot of companies (especially American companies with a large domestic customer base and few UK customers) that won’t bother jumping through the extra hoops and that will just reduce options for customers.

         I don’t see why there couldn’t be a two-tier system. Companies that do a lot of business with the UK can register for VAT and pay it at the point of sale in order to provide their customers with a seamless experience. Non-registered companies are still allowed to send goods untaxed and require the customer to pay the taxes upon import.

         Maybe more could be done to educate customers about the taxes and fees so they are not “unexpected” but I don’t see an inherent problem with that system.

         Log In or Register to post comments

       • Great summary.  One element I

         Great summary.  One element I do think is a bit cheeky though is HMRC charging Businesses a fee for the priviledge of doing HMRC’s job for them.

         Log In or Register to post comments

   • I’ve always been a bit

     I’ve always been a bit confused by Brexit arguments as they seem to to want to cherry pick which bits of a free market economy / neo-liberalism suit them best.

     However, making it harder to buy from non-UK companies and protecting British business is surely what “some” Brexiteers wanted.

     I’ve never fully accepted the argument though. I prefer/choose to purchase from UK based companies that pay the requisit taxes to HMRC and employ people based in the UK. If all 17m Brexit voters did the same I think our economy would be much better for it.

     Log In or Register to post comments

   • Another alternative for a
     Another alternative for a small business is to simply set up a UK serving shop on eBay/Etsy/Amazon Marketplace etc.

     Increase the prices slightly to compensate for whatever fee the platform charges and all the VAT will be managed by said platform.

     Minimal investment required if you already have an online business.

     Log In or Register to post comments

   • This IS a Brexit story. If

     This IS a Brexit story. If the UK was still within the EU / single market these changes would not have occured. I take your point on the fairness of collecting taxes etc. but trade within the EU is streamlined by the fact that for the consumer all taxes have already been included (and paid). Different story outside the EU and that hasn’t changed.

     Log In or Register to post comments

   • The way I would like to see

     The way I would like to see it (neglecting just getting rid of VAT as inherently regressive) is that consumers can open an online acccount with HMRC. When they order something online they register the future delivery and make sure there is enough money in their account to cover the taxes and then everything is checked electronically and mail just flows through.

     Retailers could take advantage of an HMRC API to do the form filling out for you and if you already had your credit card linked with HMRC then you woudln’t need to even do anything yourself.

     Log In or Register to post comments

6. Re the Nail traps on MTB

   Re the Nail traps on MTB Trails

   “Ryan collected all the nails he could find and told us the incident was particularly concerning as the trail is popular with horse riders and dog walkers — not just cyclists”

   This attitude does get to me. I’m sure he doesn’t mean it but sounds like it would be less concerning if it were only targeting cyclists – No it F’ing wouldn’t

   If these don’t get investigated and treated seriously then one of these days someone is going to come of and land on these things and get life changing injuries. In fact they don’t even have to land on them, just crash because of them.

   If and when someone is caught doing this kind of thing they need to have have a long and well publicised prison sentence

   Log In or Register to post comments

   • To be fair to Ryan, he is
     To be fair to Ryan, he is probably looking beyond his own experience and social grouping and pointing out the wider effect of this crime, not just how it affects us. The inference that he injury caused by a nail through a horse’s hoof or dog’s paw is of greater harm than an inconvenient picture also seems pretty fair? His statement both increases the likelihood of getting police commitment to action and shows maturity and concern for others. He did not suggest the behaviour would be acceptable if only cyclists were affected.

     Log In or Register to post comments

   • You are really over-thinking

     You are really over-thinking this.  Of course he doesn’t mean it would be less concerning if only targeting cyclists which is why it wasn’t worth mentioning.

     Log In or Register to post comments

7. Can we please ban all exports

   Can we please ban all exports of Gammon to Europe for the timebeing.

   Log In or Register to post comments

8. I love the brexthick comments

   I love the brexthick comments about ‘ the war’ and ‘running away’. It’s the level their moronic ignorance works at. And the ‘corruption’ (obvioulsy) Like ‘bananas’ the  level of stupidity and ignorance is sad. 

   Log In or Register to post comments