Dear Councillors of the London Borough of Richmond upon Thames,

I am writing to urge you to reconsider the decision to grant exclusive e-bike operating rights to a single provider. This decision deeply concerns us, especially in the SW13 (Barnes) area, where transport flexibility and accessibility are already constrained.

Barnes is not a typical London neighbourhood. It is effectively surrounded on three sides by the River Thames and dependent on a small number of road and rail exit points.

This creates a natural bottleneck. When combined with the continued closure of Hammersmith Bridge to general traffic, the result is increased congestion on the limited available road routes, reduced resilience in the local transport network and greater reliance on public transport and micromobility options. In this context, maintaining multiple, flexible transport options is essential.

Residents in SW13 are already experiencing a constrained and fragile transport environment. Rail services from Barnes and Barnes Bridge are relatively low frequency compared to other parts of London, with limited off-peak services and reduced Sunday timetables. These lines are particularly vulnerable to disruption, including engineering works and line failures, national rail strikes and service suspensions due to infrastructure issues. When disruption occurs, there are very few alternative routes available due to the geography of the area.

There has just completed a consultation on the status of bus routes, with the outcome including the removal of the 533 route and restructuring of others, which will reduce direct journeys and increase reliance on interchanges.

Taken together, this means the transport network serving SW13 is both limited and lacking resilience.

Given these constraints, dockless e-bikes play a critical role: providing an alternative during rail disruption or strikes; bridging gaps between limited rail and bus services; offering a reliable way to exit and enter the area when roads are congested and; offering a quick route out of the area via Hammersmith bridge which is otherwise only accessible on foot. They function as a key resilience layer in the local transport system.

It is also important to recognise that e-bikes are already embedded in daily routines. Many older school children and sixth form students use Lime bikes to travel to and from school which is particularly relevant in SW13, where public transport options are limited and distances to secondary schools and colleges often exceed walking range.

Removing a widely used and familiar provider risks disrupting established travel patterns, increasing reliance on already constrained buses and trains and potentially increasing car journeys at peak times. This runs counter to wider objectives around sustainable and independent travel for young people.

The exclusion of Lime introduces several clear disadvantages:

1.   Loss of consumer choice. Residents will be restricted to a single provider (Forest), removing competition on pricing, service quality, and usability.

2.   Availability and reliability. Lime operates one of the largest and most widely available fleets in London. Moving to a single-provider model reduces availability and creates a single point of failure.

3.   Pricing and access. Lime offers bundles and ride passes that reduce costs for regular users. These options will no longer be available, and alternative pricing structures may not suit all users.

4.   Imposed advertising model. Forest’s ad-supported model introduces advertising as a condition of lower-cost usage, which should not be imposed through public policy decisions.

5.   Loss of familiarity. Many residents are already familiar with Lime’s system. Forcing a change introduces unnecessary friction, particularly for occasional or less confident users.

6.   Council’s own assessment of service quality. It is particularly concerning that, according to reporting on the procurement process, Lime scored more highly on service quality criteria than Forest, yet was not selected. This indicates that service quality and user experience were not the decisive factors in the decision.

Lime is widely used by visitors travelling into the borough, particularly along Thames-side routes. Restricting Lime bikes from being parked or hired within the borough means fewer visitors are likely to cycle into areas such as Barnes, journeys may terminate outside the borough boundary and local businesses risk reduced footfall from these users. This introduces a potential negative economic impact that should be carefully considered.

The council has suggested that a single-operator model delivers benefits such as improved parking compliance, reduced street clutter, and easier regulation.

However, these outcomes are not dependent on exclusivity. For example, designated parking bays, geofencing, and enforcement mechanisms can be applied equally across multiple operators. Other London boroughs successfully operate multi-operator models with clear rules on parking and fleet management and a regulated framework can deliver consistency without eliminating competition.

The decision to move to a single provider is therefore not a necessity, but a policy choice. As such, the claimed benefits of exclusivity do not withstand scrutiny, as they could be achieved without removing consumer choice or reducing system resilience.

Richmond upon Thames has one of the highest council tax rates in London. Residents therefore reasonably expect strong service provision and high levels of accessibility. However, the current direction of policy is reducing bus connectivity, maintaining limited and fragile rail services and restricting micromobility choice. This represents a mismatch between taxation levels and service outcomes.

The exclusivity arrangement is reported to generate an additional ~£1 million per year for the council over Lime’s proposal, which is a modest but not transformational financial benefit given the council achieved a net surplus for the 2024-25 financial year. This modest benefit is offset by a meaningful reduction in transport flexibility, resilience, and consumer choice

This proposal reduces transport options in an already constrained and disruption-prone area, disproportionately affecting SW13 due to geographic limitations. The decision to limit the service provision of dockless e-bike service providers ignores evidence of superior service provision from Lime and introduces reliance on a single provider. As well as disrupting established travel patterns, including school journeys, it risks negative impacts on local businesses and visitor access. The justification for the decision relies on benefits that could be achieved without exclusivity and appears to prioritise limited financial gain over public utility.

I implore the council to rethink this decision and consider a model that accommodates multiple e-bike providers, which will ensure that all residents of the borough, especially those in under-served areas like SW13, have access to effective and reliable transport options.

Please take our concerns seriously and reconsider this significant decision for the welfare of our community. Sign this petition to support transport fairness and flexibility in Richmond upon Thames.