HSBC- the world's local bank.

I realise bankers are not exactly flavour of the decade. However, mine is going to extraordinary lengths to vex me at the moment. I went to Milan on New Year's Eve a couple of years ago (the day I joined Twitter as it happens, very hungover, in Milan airport, at the behest of @jameszabiela with whom I'd gone there.) and was highly inconvenienced when my card didn't work in an ATM I tried in town. Upon my return, I went into my local branch (Sloane Square at the time) and complained. The rather sniffy bank teller told me it was for 'my own good' as for all they knew my account was being pilfered by some sort of international hacking ring. The haughtiness with which this was delivered merely added to my annoyance. My attitude is, if they're so vigilant and customer care focused- they've got your number? Call you? They're quick enough to do so if you go over your overdraft by one nanopenny!

So now, whenever I go abroad, I ensure they are informed. Fair play to them, I thought, protecting the innocent and naive customer from their own folly. They're 'the world's local bank' after all, so they probably know best about travelling. But then I remembered that once I had had fraud on my card- originating from Costcutter in Streatham. My card was cancelled straight away, and a full refund delivered. Doubtless in accordance with come banking code or other- they are not known for their compensatory generosity. Which got me thinking- it's not for MY good at all, is it?

The reason HSBC have such Draconian criteria for this is that THEY don't want to lose the money. I have a few different accounts for one thing and another, and as I'm going abroad in a few days I thought I ought to notify them. HSBC have a facility on their home page to do this. I called RBS which is probably the account I'll be using most, and they said they don't have a facility for this. I got the chap's name, rank and serial number and said 'So, if I'm locked in negotiations with a sarong vendor on Rai Leh beach and having haggled it down to 20 baht I can't get my money out; you will deliver unto me your first born child?'

He said (to appease me) 'I'll make a note on the account, but it really isn't necessary.'

HSBC have such stringent measures because they know that if anyone fraudulently gets money from your account, they will have to refund it and don't get it back. Where does it go from here?

HSBC HQ:
'Charlie, Alasdair's getting money out from a cashpoint in Fulham. He NEVER goes west of Waterloo! Call the SWAT team! De-activate everything on his account! Lock that baby down'

It's ridiculous.

So, imagine my chagrin when I received a letter from them this morning, telling me that from now on, whenever I want to log into my account on the internet, I will have to use a card security reader.

Log in.

Not 'buy the Koh-I-Noor diamond'.

Log in.

A couple of points. This is ridiculous. I do banking all the time at work and at home. It's hard enough remembering keys wallet and phone without having to fanny about with a card reader as well. But worse than this is the sycophantic simpering of the accompanying letter.

'We're constantly evolving how we keep YOU protected, Secure Key is the latest of these innovations... it helps YOU ensure only YOU can access your internet banking...it's sleek design means it should [should? what the fuck do you know about my wallet?] fit easily into your purse or wallet'

So, basically, I've got to lug around a ZX Spectrum everywhere I go so I can access banking online. To me, this totally defeats the convenience of online banking. And my money is fine, old chum, if it gets fraudulently stolen, you'll give it back. A better approach from my point of view would have been something along the lines of:

'We keep getting shafted by online fraud. This is actually costing YOU money, because trust me, anything we have to shell out more than comes back to us - we just raise your charges or interest rates or account fees. Failing that, the government just gives it to us but we shaft you anyway'

What this Portas-esque approach would lack in subtlety, it at least would make up for in straight talking and lack of condescension.

iPhone - Argh! O2 - Argh! 3G in London - Argh!

I have long been a fan of the iPhone. I also have a macbook, and vastly prefer them to PCs. I like the interface, and they seem better suited to music and straight audio and visual media consumption, which is all I really use a home lappy for. I can't be bothered with the maintenance aspect of PCs either; trojans, malware, and viruses are (for now anyway) not things I have to worry about. Grist to the mill of the mighty Apple corporation also. I do think that inspiring such fanaticism is a fine and balanced line for Mr J and co to tread though- as we all know, there is a fine line between love and hate. Their recent staggering arrogance and proprietary behaviour will, in my humble opinion, be the source of their ultimate dilution.

More of that another time. I want to specifically castigate the iPhone, or more precisely it's symbiosis with O2.

I may need some help here, but is it all networks that get no signal in London? Something to do with density/ tall buildings? I live and work in the centre of one of the most vibrant and economic centres of the world. The 3G reception in N1 (work) and SE1 (home) is so bad, I have it permanently turned off. I have wireless at home and office so it's not a deal breaker, but even so, you'd expect better. And then browsing on the go?

Don't even get me started.

To be fair, in the west end and heart of the city, you can turn on 3G and it tends to be ok. In N4, N5, N16, an iPhone 3GS just will not function as a phone at all. I called O2 about this in August last year, and after much badgering, they told me they were upgrading their 3G network in that part of London, and it was best to turn 3G off. I now have an iPhone 4

It's still the same.

Five months later.

In the whole of the northern half of a city inhabited by 7.5 million people.

But as a phone it works fine with 3G turned off- it's just an issue for internet access via 3G.

But hey, that's ok, because as an O2 customer, you get free access to BT Openzones! Problem solved. Except you don't. If you were to take a casual stroll from Angel station up past Islington Green, your iPhone would be constantly connected to BT Openzone. But once you get 50 yds from the station, it will not work. No connection. So you have to turn it off. And then with no 3G, you're back on the 'dot of doom'. 1G reception. I'd be quicker going to the library and looking up the information I required in an encyclopaedia.

Because it seems to me that 95% of BT Openzones are not available for free to iPhone O2 customers. They are pay as you go zones, slaved off business or home hubs, which are understandably ubiquitous in the capital.

Do they tell you this in the shop? No.

Do they tell you this on the phone when you call them? No.

Please, someone tell me, is the iPhone any better on another network?

Even if it isn't, my next phone will, on current form, be the HTC HD-7. Windows 7 is lovely, and it works, unlike Vista which was like a baboon with an abacus. It has a bigger screen, is thinner, costs much less, and by the time my iPhone4 contract is up in about a year, will have all the apps I will ever need.

Not only that, increasing my insurance from £7.50 to £15 a month? At least Dick Turpin wore a mask.

So, do others have the same problems with their smartphones in North London?
Is it iPhone related?
Is it a universal problem with O2's network?
What do you think?

Throw him to the lions! Probably. Or maybe not.

I read that a 32 year old man has been arrested on suspicion of the murder of Jo Yeates. And with it, the sickening realisation that in the minds of many of the population, a sigh of relief is breathed, as this monster is now out of society's way and safely in custody.

A few words about judicial process. I hasten to add that I have no specialised knowledge in this area.

There are a number of instances which may give the police cause to make an arrest. They may be circumstantial, accusatory, evidence based, whatever. In order to question a person thoroughly, it is necessary to remove them from normal circulation and place them at the disposal of the police. Once the suspect has been arrested, more evidence is gathered. The police will then either charge the suspect, or release them on bail to return to a police station after a set amount of time, or remand them in custody until a set date in the future whilst the file is reviewed by the CPS.

If released on bail, the police will continue to gather evidence, and have a threshold past which there is sufficient cause for them to pass the file to the CPS who will then decide if there is sufficient evidence to provide the realistic prospect of a conviction.

All of this is done without the CPS seeing any defence material or mitigation. That starts after the person has been charged, if indeed they are.

The fact that conclusions are leapt to, and speculation is thrown about by the sensationalist media in this country not only ruins people's lives; it genuinely spoils the chance of a successful conviction of the perpetrator. There are a number of tiny issues which can prejudice a jury or a trial - and thank God these safety nets are in place - and the more of this ill intentioned gasbagging that goes on, the less chance there is of this case being solved.

If the man who has been arrested is guilty of this horrific crime, the 'public interest' these tabloids and their sycophants harp on about would be much better served by them shutting up and allowing the judiciary to carry out its function in a proper fashion.

And if you think I'm exaggerating, maybe you'd like to think about how the life of the retired schoolteacher, Mr. Jefferies has changed since his arrest and subsequent release. Not for the better, I suspect.

Grammar and spelling, innit.

Although I definitely didn't think so at the time, I am now very pleased to have studied Latin at school. I absolutely hated it. My attention span, even then, was woefully inadequate and I remember with crystal clarity the reverie I would enter as conjugations and declensions washed over me, if not all of the words themselves. An unruly child, the fact that my Latin teacher had the charisma of a tin of tuna didn't help me embrace the language with any of the passion I devoted to subjects in which I was more interested.

The thing about Latin though, is that it really does help you understand where our language comes from. It is also a very precise language - hence very good at steering away from ambiguity. I imagine this is why scientific phyla are given Latin designations. You know where you are with it. It does, as they say, exactly what it says on the tin. Which may seem obvious, except that so much of today's languages do not. They are, for the most part, derivations of a mish mash of other languages, strewn across the globe as one regime toppled another and mother tongues changed hands at the behest of tyrannical despots. There's bits of Viking, French, and doubtless other titbits rolled up in the words we use every day. We have irregular verbs, words that have two meanings, different spellings of the same word - none of this in Latin. Which is why it is a language that is still highly regarded.

I know that a lot of people are of the opinion that it doesn't really matter if you get the spelling right, because as long as the other person understands what you are trying to communicate, then its job is done. I'm afraid I have to say I don't agree. I think that language gives us identity, and I also think that if you want people to take what you have to say seriously, the very least you can do is present it correctly. I'm not too fussed on the '8 items or less' argument (In case you aren't aware, the correct phrase would be '8 items or fewer'). To me, that's possibly going a bit far. It does niggle me; but then I accept that I am more finickity than most.

I thought that to save me ranting every time I see it, I'd just get the right bits down here so anyone who likes can use it as a quick reference guide. Or tell me to sod off, whichever you deem appropriate. I don't want to get too stuffy about it, and start going into the overuse or misuse of some words (for example the trend to, like, put the word 'like' everywhere...) as I think this is more a reflection of current argot rather than a lazy or ignorant misuse of language. What would really make my day would be if you can spot a mistake in this blog. The last thing I want to do is come over all highbrow, but I can't even look at Facebook now without seething. Our kids use it every day, is it any wonder that we sometimes struggle to comprehend things they have written?

I hasten to add at this point that there is every chance there will be errors in this very piece - I don't want to get overly pedantic about it, and have quite deliberately adopted a conversational tone, not thinking too much about being obsessed with grammatical correctness. I also accept that it's very easy to get frightfully caught up in the finer nuances of inflection and suggestion inherent in different words and phrases. I just want to make a few basic observations.

So, here we go, in no particular order:-

THEIR - means belonging to them. It is possessive.

THERE - indicates something's position. As in, 'the car is over there'

THEY'RE - is a contraction of 'they are'

*

ARKS - a collection of large boats, such as the one used by Noah and a number of animals, to survive during a flood

ASK - to put a question to someone

*

YOUR - is possessive. 'I have borrowed your book'

YOU'RE - is a contraction of 'you are'

*

ITS - is a possessive pronoun, i.e. belonging to 'it' whatever 'it' may be. As in, 'the elephant is known for its fondness of sticky buns'

IT'S -  a contraction of 'it is' or 'it has'. As in, 'it's been great to see you'

ITS' - DOES NOT EXIST!!

*

BROUGHT - the past tense of 'bring'

BOUGHT - the past tense of 'buy'

*

EFFECT - more commonly a noun - Something brought about by an external influence. Can be used as a verb if the agent caused something to happen. For example, 'the manager effected positive improvements in the office'

AFFECT - almost always a verb - To have an influence on. For example 'High interest rates can affect house prices'

*

TO - in a direction so as to reach

TOO - another word for 'also'

*

PACIFIC - a large body of salt water occupying nearly half the surface of the earth

SPECIFIC - having a particular bearing or reference

*

LOOSE - not tied down

LOSE - unable to find any more

*

Correct - 'I would have remembered my coat had I known it would rain'

Incorrect - 'I would of remembered my coat had I known it would rain'

*

It's 'definitely', not 'definately'. Imagine it being from 'infinite'

*

The following are two separate words; not one

A lot

Thank you

THE APOSTROPHE

While we're here, let's have a little chat about the apostrophe. The purpose of the apostrophe is to denote ownership, or contraction.

By contraction, I mean as in doesn't (does not)

By ownership, I mean as in 'the dog's bone'

If you don't put in an apostrophe, it means the word has been made into a plural. For example 'We have over two hundred cars in stock'

Equally, if you put in an apostrophe when you mean to pluralise, you look like an absolute idiot:

'Get your Christmas Tree's here!' NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

REALISE/ REALIZE, etc.

This is an interesting one. Most people (myself included) assumed that 'realize' was an Americanisation, and that realise was the correct spelling. In fact, I was incorrect. Either is fine in this country. In these matters of debate, I refer to Oxford Dictionaries and they give their conclusions here

TEXT ABBREVIATIONS


Due to the shortened nature of texts/ tweets, abbreviations are often used. There are no hard and fast rules here, but I wonder if any of you share my opinions:

ur - You are
yr - Your

m8 - Not acceptable in any situation whatsoever if you are over 14. And even then, frowned upon.

luv - Hell no.

CAPITALISATION

Capital letters are for the beginnings of sentences and for proper nouns. Or acronyms. Nowhere else.

Yours Sincerely - NO


Yours sincerely - YES


When I started to type this, I thought it would be a paragraph or two. As you can see, it has expanded rather beyond that. I'd be delighted to know if you can think of anything I have missed, or if you think I am mistaken anywhere - by all means comment below. And feel free to pass it amongst your peers. Hope you like it, it makes a change from me banging on about Bromptons...

Pottering...

I started this blog post a couple of weeks ago, but have only just finished it, so it's slightly out of date, but hey ho. About 3 weeks out of date. But the content still relevant.

I cycle every day. Normally to work and back, about 9 miles in all, and nipping out on appointments during the day. Most weekends, I think I'll spend the days gadding about the capital, swooshing down back alleys and cobbled pathways with a sense of direction hovering somewhere in between a black cab driver and Sherpa Tensing. The reality is usually far from this. Usually it goes Friday, beer at the office, beers at a pub afterwards, home, sleep, wake up, sofa. Not very inspiring and certainly not the 'lad about town' persona I envisaged as a teenager. If I need to buy stuff, my beloved Brompton gets a cursory glance as I leave the flat, get on the bus, and engage in the melée of London shopping with all the other lemmings.

But this week has been different. A particularly nasty bout of food poisoning last weekend led me to the conclusion that I have been burning the candle at both ends. A couple of weeks of veg, salad and abstinence was self-prescribed. Saturday morning rolled around and lo and behold, I had made good on my pledge. It was therefore an altogether brighter eyed and bushier tailed creature that arose, needing to acquire some new shirts and a present for the little nephew (3 tomorrow...)

I have two bikes. One is a Marin Belvedere which is a mid-range commuter bike, and one is a Brompton M6L. The reality is, I never use the Marin. In my head I like the idea of touring about the place on it, but I think my bicycle use is only ever going to be confined to travelling to places I need to get to - in London there is no finer way to do this than on a Brompton. For a more detailed explanation of why the Brompton is a superior and sublime way of personal transportation; Will Self does it brilliantly here.

Well, there is - it's a Canondale Bad Boy 8 with a Rohloff 14 speed hub on the back end, but spending £2,300 on a bike is excessive even by my standards. And you can't quickly jump on a tube with it if it rains or you get a puncture. Or fall victim to spontaneous intoxication.

I bought my Brompton through the cyclescheme. Basically, your employer buys the bike, and you pay for it over the year, but they take the deductions from your salary before deductions - mine is £72 a month, but after tax in real terms it means I lose about £40 a month from my take home pay. It's a good way to get a better bike than you might be able to otherwise. You need to keep the tyres pumped up on a Brompton, to between 85 and 100psi as the wheels are small and you notice the traction loss if you don't, but apart from that, the sturdy steel frame and hub gears mean it is pretty much maintenance free. I could bang on about how much I love it til the cows come home, so I'll leave it there as that's not really what I'm on about today.

I left home at about 10am having looked at a map and attempted to commit it to memory. The problem is that the River Thames twists as it goes through London, rather than going in a straight line, and my sense of direction is flawed at best. In theory, you head west from where I live, come to Westminster Bridge, pop over and follow the river. In practice, you ride merrily around in circles for a while before finding a main road and going the way you know. But herein lies the rub. As anyone who knows me will tell you, my patience is in short supply. I used to become incredibly frustrated when getting lost and reach for the iPhone maps app to find where I was and hare off in the correct direction. The solution is an attitude adjustment. The way I approach it now is to figure that I know roughly what direction I'm going in, I know what I want to achieve, but if I take a wrong turn and end up a bit lost it's not the end of the world. For more details on this philosophy, you could do worse than read 'Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency' by Douglas Adams. I get to see a bit more of London and hopefully the cumulative result is that I ultimately learn more about this awesome city. I ended up going over Vauxhall Bridge, then just turned left and headed down the embankment. I have to admit, I thought Battersea Power Station was west of Battersea Bridge, so I've learnt a bit there. One of the things I love most about cycling is that you really learn how London fits together. I know lots of people (and I daresay there are millions living here) who perceive the geography of London to be accurately reflected in the tube map. Honestly, nothing could be further from the truth. I do not cycle quickly, I stop at lights (mostly), and don't really know my way around and I still guarantee I get places quicker by bike than any other method of transportation. It took me 30 minutes door to door to get from Bermondsey St to Battersea Bridge. To get to Sloane Square by equivalent public transport is quoted by TFL as being 34 minutes. Not much difference you might think, until you bear in mind that a) You have to walk to Bermondsey tube station, through one of the less salubrious areas of London, b) I got lost. If I hadn't it would have been a lot quicker, and c) The health and aesthetic benefits of cycling. Lovely morning of shopping, nice amble home. 

A lot of people bang on about the perils of cycling in London. As this is a bit of an intro to my cycling aspect of the blog, I shall set my beliefs on this topic out here:- 

Some people in the world are idiots. 

Not all cyclists are idiots, not all cab drivers are psychos, not all white van men are potential murderers, car drivers are not the modern day incarnation of the four horsemen of the apocalypse. Therefore, comments like 'Cyclists are a  bunch of idiots' or 'F***ing white van man, they AIM for cyclists' are greeted by me with scorn and derision. Let me give you an example from only this morning. If you go over London Bridge, you bear left after the top and go up King William St and come to some traffic lights outside the Bank of England. The second the lights turn green, if you pedal like mad, you will make the lights at the beginning of Cheapside to go up to St Paul's cathedral. As the lights are about to go red, the build up of traffic waiting for them to change has gone, so pedestrians think it's safe to cross. Therefore when a young lady casually strolled out into the road and across, little did she realise that there was a courier on a hybrid and me just behind him hammering it for all we were worth to make the lights. he rammed on the anchors, I went slamming into the back of him. Whose fault is this? The pedestrian didn't look. They assumed the traffic had gone and couldn't hear an engine. The guy in front of me was doing the same as me, no blame on him for pulling up short. We were cycling perfectly legally. The pedestrian crossing indicator was on 'red man', the lights were green. I do add at this point that electric cars (Prius, Gwhizz, etc) make no noise either. I'm amazed no-one's died yet from not hearing them - I think a lot of people have to admit they rely as much on their hearing as anything else when judging approaching traffic. Darwinian...?

The reality is, we were all a little bit to blame. Pedestrian should have looked. We shouldn't have been going so fast. I hasten to add that the lack of damage to bikes or people illustrate that this wasn't the worst collision to have ever hit the headlines. If you are nervous, cycle slowly. Pretty much anywhere you need to get to can be reached using back roads or parks. 

For months I said I would never cycle, you must be mad, it's a death sentence, etc etc. Now, I'd never travel any other way. I used to watch cyclists haring up the outside of queues of traffic and wonder how on earth they knew what they were doing or if they were just kamikaze. When you start, you will learn through observation how people get around, and it is up to you to decide what you feel comfortable doing. I take it pretty easy, but if I'm on the way home I'll boot it a bit and work the heart rate up as I know I can have a shower when I get home. 

It's certainly more healthy than sitting on the 43 from Friern Barnet. 

My beloved Brompton

I wanted to do a little piece about my bicycle

Lucky you, you can even see a reflection of me taking the picture in the background if you squint. I wanted to explain the make, model, spec, and a little about how it works, what makes it different, and why I configured it the way I did. Certainly, before I bought it, there was a lot on the net raving about Bromptons, some disparaging vignettes, but not a huge amount in terms of practical explanation about why it does what it does. Even the guy in the shop struggled with explaining some of it as they are a bit of a specialised field.

I have a Brompton M6-L, and the individual constituents and costs are itemised below:-

Brompton M Type bike           £600
Standard ratio 6 speed gearing £120
Mudguards, no rack                 £45
Black Frame                             £0
Orange extremities                   £25
Brooks B17 Special Saddle     £50
Schwalbe Marathon Tyres       £10
Battery Lighting                       £35
C Bag Set                                 £95
Eazy [sic] wheels                     £15

There are 3 types of Brompton - M, S, and P. The S is sporty (not really in my repertoire), with flat handlebars, and the P has handlebars I cannot understand. Check the Brompton website for details. The M type is the original, and has 'sit up and beg' handlebars, as befits a more upright riding style. If you want to race, get a bloody Trek Cyclo Cross. Incidentally, more on lycra clad Adonis' with cleats on their 2 mile commute from Highbury to Houndsditch another time. Brompton say no bike is standard, a cynic might see this as a great way to charge for all kinds of bolt-ons, but there you go.

I went for 6 gears. You can get single speed, or 3 speed also. For me, I always knew I didn't need 27+ gears (no-one does, certainly not in London. Marketing and little else) but the thought of leaping to single speed was a little daunting. The gears are definitely one of the best things about the Brompton. They are hub gears. Basically, this means that there is a barrel on the back axle which contains a load of cogs. As you change gear, the different cogs engage with each other and made it harder or easier to pedal. Remember Grifters? Same thing. On the rear, there is a dérailleur, similar to the cogs on the rear cassette of a road/ mountain bike, but there are just two. The great thing about hub gears is that you can change them when you are stationary and start off in the right gear without having to do all that clicky clacky business to get where you want. It really makes me hoot when the lights go green and I pootle off whilst the be-sunglassed hi-vis athlete honks high out of the saddle, looking like he's pedalling through black treacle as his shimano gears clatter in panic like a foot-treadle loom circa 1790. The hub gives you the three gears you use, the dérailleur gives you the option of a slight variance in each gear - you can change the dérailleur on the left hand control while pedalling like on a normal bike with cassettes and dérailleurs. For the one on the right, you should stop pedalling for a split second to allow the cogs to engage, particularly if down-shifting. If this sounds complicated or labourious, trust me it isn't. Bear in mind this is a bike used for cycling around London - lots of stop starting, and top end speed not the be all and end all. Ask any cyclist and they will tell you that Bromptons have a turn of speed and acceleration that is alarmingly impressive. Don't bother off the lights, you won't win.

I see some Bromptons with racks on the back. I don't know why - the clearance from the ground is so low that anything you could get on there would hardly carry anything. The way to carry things on the Brompton is by way of front luggage. The bike can come (they all do, although they are theoretically optional) with a tapered plastic block which fits directly to the chassis of the bike just above the front wheel. To this, you clip on a frame onto which you can slip any of the types of Brompton luggage. I bought the C Bag which has a 25 litre capacity, and then later on the basic fabric basket which is 24 litres. The C Bag has pockets all over the shop, and a bright yellow lining so you can find things easily. Tip: You can remove the frame and use it as a messenger bag easily. Often I was lugging the whole thing round with me when I didn't need to. Once you've got the frame, you can buy any of the Brompton bags to fit on it. I use the basket on a daily basis, capacity only a bit less than the C bag, but arguably more usable as it is a square space. You can chuck everything in it and pop it on and off as and when. It costs £16.50. Here it is:

I was umming and ahhing for a while about the colours. Plain black was what I defaulted to, but I knew if I went for that option I would be annoyed I hadn't been more adventurous. I got the orange front and rear extremities at an additional cost of £25. I've not seen another like it. The Brooks saddle in brown clashes a bit with the black tubular frame (see my hatred of this colour clash elsewhere in the blog) but I can live with it. If I had my time again, I'd probably go for burgundy or dark blue. Although I quite like the white one, 70s Porsche Carrera styley. Hey ho. The Brooks saddle is an essential for any bicycle. Vastly superior to the ones that come with. Bikes and their saddles are a bit like ipods and their headphones. A shame to have such good hardware and be so dismissive of the peripherals.

The standard Brompton tyres are ok, especially now they have Kevlar lining, but the Schwalbe marathons are much superior for a modest cost. Don't bother with the Kojaks unless you're mental and live in a country where it never rains.

If you test ride a Brompton, you may find that your feet catch on the standard trolley wheels at the base of the seat pillar as your foot comes up at the back - this problem will be averted if you use the Eazy wheels - they are a lot thinner. Essential. I've seen roller blade wheels on the back of some which I will get one day when I get around to it. Which means I'll never do it. What a lot of people don't realise is the sheer brilliance of the design. When folded, the carrier block protrudes in such a way that you can attach your bag to it and tow it around the shops like a trolley.

Not only does this save hugely on bags and so forth, it means you don't have to leave your bike unattended.

So that is a brief description of my bicycle. There is also something more about a Brompton that it's difficult to  put into a little bit of writing. The way it has a distinct 'Londonness' to it. The way it collapses like something out of Harry Potter into a confusing mesh of metal and rubber.  I have cycled it off road - it's a complete disaster whatever their website says. This is an animal for the urban jungle, and it is, like so many animals found throughout nature, perfectly suited to it's environment. More than that, it is a beautiful example of pure British, illogical, brilliant design. It's as British as cucumber sandwiches and the smack of leather on willow. I love that it makes no sense to flip the back wheel under the frame. I love the fact the frame and pillars seem to bend round corners to make it into this compact package in less than 30 seconds when you need to jump on a bus or in a cab . Or that you can use it as a trolley. Or that it has a part called 'the nipple'. I wouldn't want to ride anything else.

Lock it. Leave it. Lose it?

My hesitation with cycling around town shopping, apart from laziness, is the fact I hate leaving bikes in London locked up. If someone here wants to nick your bike here, they will nick it. I work in affluent Islington; home to media darlings, politicians, and other simliar Eloi. However, a local bobby told me that on the nearby Packington estate, the fire engines have police escorts. The reason for this is that 'yoofs' set off bin fires just to get the fire engines in the estate so that they can nick the 'jaws of death' off the back of the vehicles. These intimidating tools, used to cut people trapped out of smashed up cars, can snip through pretty much anything you can wrap around your trusty steed like a knife through butter. So a certain degree of judgment has to be employed. To me it's absolutely ridiculous to not use something you own for fear of it's theft or damage - what's the point of owning anything? My bike is insured (you can put it as an add on to your home insurance, but I'd advise against it as you probably don't want to lose the no claims benefit) on a stand alone policy at a cost of £10 a month through cycleguard. It specifies that I have to lock it with a silver graded lock or better if I leave it. The specification of lock obviously varies with the cost of the bike. I use a Magnum courier lock pictured here:-

If you use anything less sturdy, you might just as well leave it unlocked with a note wishing them enjoyment of your bike in the future. Or enjoyment of the small amount of crack they will receive from the fence they pass it to. NB if it does get nicked, wait a couple of hours, go on gumtree where it will pop up for sale, and visit with a large friend/ baseball bat *insert disclaimer*

A tip for locking: make sure the lock goes through the triangle of the frame. Not through the wheels or forks or saddle post or crank: they'll have it off in a second. Try and lock it as tight as you can so potential thieves can't wedge anything in to get it off. Park near a security camera. None of these things will ensure it won't be nicked, but do your best and get it insured. If it gets nicked, it gets nicked. I lock mine in Brompton 'parked mode' with the back wheel flipped under the frame. Here it is on Kings Road in Chelsea

The triangular part of the frame is a lot smaller on the Brompton, but I've done a close up so you can see it going through the triangle of the frame which is an unbroken steel barrier.

Even despite this, I'm never too comfortable leaving it for more than 20 mins. Goes without saying, don't lock it to a short post or even a post that's just over head height - they'll whip it over in no time. So, good luck, try and remember not to affix it to anything that isn't set in concrete, and console yourself with the fact that if it does get pinched, you can always claim and get a nice new one. 

That one you wish you'd got. The one with the carbon forks and the disc brakes. Because no-one will nick that one...