New bike-sharing scheme being ‘ruined by vandalism’, claims user
Handling problems: Ofo says it is upgrading security on its bikes to tackle vandalism
A new bike-sharing scheme in Hackney is “falling apart because of vandalism” less than two months after it was launched, according to one regular customer.
Chinese firm Ofo introduced 200 of its “dockless” yellow bikes to the borough in early September for a year-long trial, following an agreement with Hackney Council.
But local resident and Ofo regular Andrew, who did not wish to give his full name, says the scheme is “already being ruined by vandalism”.
He said his numerous complaints to the company about bikes being “trashed” or “dumped in bins” are “not working”, and he fears “teenagers have found a way to hack the bikes”, which are tracked using GPS.
In response, Ofo said it is “actively recruiting” more marshals, who round up and look after the bikes, as well as “upgrading security”.
Hackney Council says Ofo has a “memorandum of understanding for a one-year trial”, which can be “cancelled at any time if standards are not met”.
Ofo users have to create an account through the company’s app and can then unlock the bikes via bluetooth, paying 50p for every 30 minutes of riding.
The cycles can be traced through the app and picked up from wherever they were left, unlike so-called Boris bikes, which require a docking station.
Andrew said: “I want to raise awareness because I love the ethos of the scheme. It’s cheaper and more convenient than using a Boris bike, but unfortunately it is already falling apart – ruined by vandalism.
“Bikes are constantly being trashed and left in bins or on estates. I reported four of these instances to Ofo just last week, on top of many previous complaints, but all they’ve done so far is offer me a job as a marshal.
“I’ve had two of my own bikes stolen in the past three years, which is why I use these schemes so regularly, but my complaints to Ofo are not working.
“My fear is that teenagers have found a way to hack the bikes, so they can do with them what they please and dump them wherever they want.”
Ofo, which says there have been no reports of hacking, uses a geofencing system that means a bike must be parked in Hackney before that person is cleared to use the scheme again.
Rival firm oBike faced criticism earlier this year after its cycles, which are also “dockless”, were ditched in problematic places. Hammersmith and Fulham council later said oBike had not properly consulted it prior to launch.
Ofo’s UK operations director, Joseph Seal-Driver, told the Citizen: “We are working closely with the Hackney Council to ensure our service for Londoners is as robust as possible. We have 16 Ofo marshals on the ground in the borough and are actively recruiting more.
Seal-Driver, who said the company has been encouraged by the response to the scheme so far, added: “All of our bikes are GPS tracked and where there are any instances of misuse our team is able to respond quickly. We have had no reports of any of our bikes being hacked.
“We will be upgrading the security on our bikes to do all we can to minimise vandalism and ensure that Londoners have the transport options they need to get around the city.”
Commenting at the time of Ofo’s launch last month, Hackney’s transport chief Cllr Feryal Demirci said: “We are going to work with Ofo to make sure that users are given information on locations where they can park their bike in hot spot areas to prevent issues such as obstructing the footway and parking on busy narrow pavements.
“We want to make sure bikes are parked in the best locations and understand journey patterns to make sure bikes are properly distributed.
“That’s why we are pleased that Ofo have entered into a dialogue with us and committed to operational standards instead of just putting the bikes on the street and hoping for the best.”
A spokesperson for Hackney Council told the Citizen that Ofo has a “memorandum of understanding for a one-year trial”, which includes stipulations about where the bikes are located, how often they are serviced, and whether they meet safety standards.
Ofo must also liaise with the council before deploying more bikes.
The spokesperson, who pointed out that Ofo users can be banned if they continue to park incorrectly, added: “The council is in regular contact with Ofo and there are monthly meetings between Ofo and representatives from departments including parking, enforcement and Streetscene.
“The memorandum of understanding allows Hackney to cancel the trial at any time if standards are not met.”
I like the idea of the scheme, and I’ve used it a couple of times. I would love to use it more, but – the bikes shown on the map simply are not there when you look for them. Looking at the app, there are several bikes marked as being *inside* buildings – have a look, it’s pretty obvious.
The hacking comment is total conjecture. I’m surprised you printed it, with no supporting assessment about the feasibility from someone with some credibility.
More likely is that because the scheme is free, rather than 50p per ride, (some) people keep the bike inside, so they can use it for free next time. It would be easy to determine who, as they will be doing multiple journeys on the exact same bike. If it was a chargeable transaction, it would probably solve this problem.
The kids aren’t “hacking” OFO bikes. As interesting an idea as that is, and I am sure someone will to see what data they collect and how securely they handle customers’ details etc, dossers and kids are just smashing them open with bricks, and then braking off the digital “smart locks” where the GPS device is.
OFO is a $1 billion multi-national company.
Presumably it cynically choose Hackney as a launch place partly because its marketing people considered it to be full of tech savvy “early adopters” or middle class trend setters to raise “brand awareness” – forgetting that it is also a place with very high level of child deprivation amongst other classes and ethnicities.
As with other such “bubble” IT projects, the money isn’t just in bicycle hire but in venture captialism and further exploiting the personal data exploited by their devices as part of the greater Internet of Things. (NB-IoT? See; Narrowband Internet of Things).
Each Smart locks has a small inbuilt modems to connect to the internet, with SIM cards, antennas, real-time clocks, and NFC. The company is working with Vodafone in the UK, and Hauwei and state owned China Telecom in China.
Like Uber etc the devices collect lots of data about personal travel allowing users to be tracked on and off their bikes. Given that they are using public spaces, do they adhere to governmental standards of data-sharing, and of digital privacy?
Market proponents of such Narrowband IoT devices are waxing lyrically about how they are optimised to “deliver deep penetration” of our lifestyles, sold on the basis of being able to offer all kinds of “value-added” commercial services.
I am not sure I want my kids’ lives “deeply penetrated”.
Perhaps OFO should defensively invest some of its venture capital money in community bicycle schemes helping deprived kids get on bikes legally, rather than turn our pavements and communities into their profit margins?
Recently, we read LBH websites being “slammed” for being hard to read, are the bikes not a dangerous hazard to sight disabled citizens, wheel chair users, and mothers with buggies etc?
In China, the war for market share led to congested sidewalks and broken or unwanted cycles left in mangled piles.
Not unusual for Billion Dollar tech companies, OFO does not offer rewards for the public taking their time to report stolen or damaged bikes, but sells the idea of the public not only losing public space but working for the company for free as “sharing” and “good for the community”.
Its “cycle marshalls” are on a minimum wage, and even required to provide their own smart phones to work for the company.
“The community” presumably meaning its community of venture capitalists, thrilled at having a part of the Chinese IT market?
I don’t suppose our friends at LBH investigated Chinese reports where Ofo’s first users reported a 39.3% failure or malfunction rate, 1,000 of the 10,000 bikes in one area were damaged within a month, and parents are already suing the company for children being killed on their bikes. Another company lost 90% of its bikes (presumed either missing or stolen) and cities are having to draft legislation to regulate the industry.
More for the waste disposal team to deal with?
(Just an aside, if it’s Chinese and state owned technology, I wonder who holds keys to their “backdoors”? As it uses much the same technology as a mobile phone, presumably they are or at least could be, mobile surveillance devices? They are already mobile surveillance devices to some degree, with a claimed battery life of upto eight or ten years. What’s to stop them being fitted with microphones etc?)
Another post goes missing?
Keeping the conversation dumbed down again?
This will be a problem to begin with but yobs will get bored once novelty wears off. More bikes but also a strict approach to those kept off-street. Presumably you can see who last docked the bike and where – if it’s a registered user they need reprimanding with points deductions or other sanctions. I feel some sort method to lock bikes to cycle stands would mean opportunistic vandals couldn’t remove legally parked bikes and damage them which would help everyone. It’s an impossible job catching vandals so minimise the risk! The scheme ought to work in Hackney – lots of cyclists and places to go, so it’s important it succeeds as it will give other councils the confidence and evidence to support dockless – and the system can expand. I also think you need certain ‘guaranteed places’ bikes will always be available eg: Town Hall and stations – I would love to use thr system but every time i’m thwarted. If I knew 100% to go to a ‘guaranteed place’ for a bike I would. Marshals would have to ensure cycles were relocated here but with all the data collected you can see where bikes can be relocated from. They could be areas covered by CCTV also aiding security of cycles.
As far as I know, the Ofo scheme works by tracking the rider, via the App, not the bike. Hence the misleading maps. Perhaps the Beijing Bicycle Lock Company chose Hackney as somewhere to test the scheme’s ‘breakability’?
Disappointing to hear. Just started using this and finding it very useful. Hopefully Ofo can get on top of it.
damn gentrifiers – coming in and smashing up hackney.
Within days I have seen bikes, minus what I assume are tracking devices behind the saddle, being ridden around Stokie by adolescent boys. I had a look at the mounting on a bike that was still intact and it seems to be held in place with just a few Philips screws., Very tempting!
Of all the more community-friendly boroughs in London they chose Hackney… By the way I like the scheme. It could half the daily cost of my daily commute if these are more available – I live in Islington around Holloway area.