“It’s not fair”: Bolt claims rival companies deliberately moving e-bikes to get them seized for bad parking

Could dodgy, pavement-blocking parking of e-bikes in London actually be being made worse by rival companies sabotaging each other? That’s the bizarre question being asked this morning after one operator, Bolt, compiled a dossier of evidence and sent it to The Times newspaper accusing its rivals of deliberately moving e-bikes to get them impounded by the council for bad parking.

Since London’s hire bike boom, hysterical headlines and column inches about dockless e-bikes blocking footways, roads and driveways have been a common sight in the press, but those complaints (often oblivious to anti-social parking of any vehicle that is not a bicycle) have usually come from disgruntled residents, business owners, or just columnists looking for some easy copy.

In a rather strange twist, today’s latest ‘e-bike parking row’ story, published by The Times, centres around allegations from the hire bike provider Bolt itself. A dossier of evidence shared with the newspaper accompanied accusations that Bolt’s bikes were “continually being moved out of their designated parking bays”, often “under the cover of darkness”, all apparently in the hope of the bikes being impounded by the council for bad parking.

> Business owner bills Lime £7,600 over parking row, after seizing e-bikes left on his property and taking operator to court

The allegations concern hire bike services in Kensington & Chelsea, where bikes impounded by the council see the operator whose bike it is subject to an £84.45 fine and daily storage fees.

Bolt provided The Times with ‘before and after’ pictures of bikes which were left appropriately parked by users, but were later seized by the council having been moved to unsuitable parking locations, such as blocking pavements and outside of designated parking bays.

Bolt believes there have been “repeated instances”, often at night, of its bikes being moved out of bays. The hire bike company’s photos show the space, where its bikes previously were, then filled by a rival company’s bike.

“We believe this is driven by significant overdeployment by other operators sharing the same parking infrastructure,” John Buckley from Bolt said. “When bays become filled beyond capacity, bikes are displaced and moved, creating enforcement issues for compliant operators.

“That’s not fair on residents who’ve parked properly, and it’s not fair on operators who are sticking to the rules. Parking caps only work if everyone respects them.”

It was reported that Kensington & Chelsea impounded in excess of 1,000 e-bikes from Bolt, Lime, Forest and Voi in the borough last year, resulting in more than £81,000 in fines and costs.

The Times also heard from an “industry source” who suggested operators may move rivals’ bikes out of high-demand bays to place more of their own bikes and get more use.

They said: “Each company has their own tech software telling them which bays they should be deploying to. Part of the reason why they might move a Bolt or another provider is to deploy their own bike because they know that’s a very in-demand bay and their bike may be used multiple times.”

> Lime bike boss proposes adjusting traffic lights “to reward safe cyclists”

London’s biggest dockless hire bike operator Lime replied to the accusations by stating that it does not instruct its on-street teams to overdeploy in parking bays, and would not move the bikes of other operators.

Forest and Voi both reported experiencing similar issues with their bikes being moved out of parking bays, both operators insisting their workers are told to not touch other companies’ bikes.

“Our focus is on being a responsible operator that delivers a service which works for riders and non-riders alike,” a Voi spokesperson commented. “We have seen repeated examples of properly parked Voi vehicles being shifted into unsuitable locations over the past three years, which we have reported to Transport for London, boroughs and other operators directly. The key driver of this issue is that certain operators are putting more vehicles on the street than permitted.”

Forest also said it had “raised this discrepancy with the relevant boroughs on multiple occasions” as “it is important that enforcement processes are accurate and evidence-based”.

A spokesperson for Lime stated: “Any instance of this occurring should be reported to Lime with the time and location so that we can investigate accordingly. Bays can become overcrowded and filled beyond capacity – but this is driven by riders and due to Lime’s popularity, especially in busy, high-traffic areas. We have an on-street team of over 400 working across London whose job is to ensure our bikes are always available where they’re needed most, while keeping busy areas clear and accessible.”

It’s ‘Wagatha Christie’ but for London’s micromobility. Perhaps there’s a detective over on Baker Street who can solve this one.