Bike-sharing companies keep finding that people are terrible, in every city they enter
April 21, 2017
It’s been just three months after the first bike-sharing corporation arrived in Singapore, but the reporting of abuse and vandalism of shared bikes in the city keep popping up on social media.
The majority of these shared bikes are stationless, which means they don’t need to be docked at a designated blot. They lock themselves after your ride is over, and you’re meant to just leave the bike standing by the kerb.
But users have been ordering up bicycles outside their accommodations, avoiding others from using them. Some parties accompanied them up to their suite floorings, so they can’t be found easily by other users looking at the app 😛 TAGEND
Some bikes have even been spotted flung into drainages for no self-evident reason other than misfortune, perhaps.
The bikes have also been stripped for portions, although some have removed the bikes’ multitude dishes or QR codes, and even painting over the bikes to remove corporation livery, to claim the bikes for themselves 😛 TAGEND
Most of the abused bikes belong to either Singapore-based oBike, or Ofo, a bike-sharing whale based in China.
Despite cases of cruel action, bike-sharing fellowships have remained unfazed, with ofo and oBike insisting to the Straits Times that they have known a very low proportion of misuse cases.
Ofo told the Straits Times that its corporation does contact errant users, who end up apologising, adding that most of them believed that they could just hold on to a bicycle.
Mashable could not reaching Ofo for this story. But the company has encouraged Singaporean users to report editions through a email and flesh attach, which it posted on Facebook 😛 TAGEND
It also announced an image of a report made to the police about a viral video, which evidenced a soul throwing an ofo bike on the anchor 😛 TAGEND
oBike said in response to enquiries from Mashable that the number of bicycles that have been damaged constituted less than 1 percent of its fleet. The corporation said in February that it planned to bring in “tens of thousands” of bikes by mid-2 017.
The company has yet to restrict anyone from its service, but indicated that it would take appropriate actions including impelling reports to the police.
“It’s a practicable statu for us, ” announces a spokesperson. “oBike has given grim forewarns to[ abusive] equestrians and always tries to make the coming of educating and encouraging civic-mindedness among our users.”
Bike providers have introduced demerit systems.
Earlier this month, oBike also introduced a demerit organization, similar to that of its entrant, China-based Mobike.
Users start with 100 degrees, which get taken away for errant action such as forgetting to fastens the bike, or parking at non-designated areas. Customers are banned from exerting oBike when their orchestrates reach zero.
oBike has an eight-man operations team that can remove indiscriminately parked bicycles around the city.
When approached for criticism, Mobike spoke: “In China, just as in Singapore, there will always be a small minority of people who will take advantage of slipshod systems…We know that this is inevitable, and that is why we designed our organization to prevent this type of abuse.”
What a solicitor says
Priscilla Chia, a solicitor specialising in criminal and commercial-grade constitution at Peter Low& Choo LLC, said that companies could deal with bad action by lodging both a police report and claiming compensation.
Damaging the bikes could constitute an play of vandalism or misfortune, announces Chia. In Singapore, vandalism shall be subject to a maximum fine of S $2,000 ($ 1,431) or jail period of three years or less, and men would front a minimum of three apoplexies of the cane. Mischief carries a sentence of not more than two years, and/ or a fine.
But it could be difficult to identify who damaged a bike, Chia adds.
“For example, the video of the boy throwing the bike would probably be sufficient evidence[ to sue ], ” she spoke. “What would be difficult is if you ensure the damaged bike haphazardly on wall street …[ it] would be difficult to determine who made the damage.”