Local Borrowing Scheme
Author: Al
What NEED does this meet?
A lot of physical equipment is held by people which is under-utilised; both in terms of manual equipment for gardens and intellectual assets like books. A system that allows people to know what is available locally and borrow it could enable a better community for all.
What is the APPROACH?
Based around postcode data and anonymised names, a database of ‘shared’ assets could be built up. A simple booking system would then allocate them as requested.
This is basically a form of physical ‘peer-to-peer’ system.
What are the BENEFITS to people?
Community groups, the poor and elderly can gain access to expensive or unusual equipement for temporary use without the hassle of renting or applying for grants.
A sense of community based around the old ‘borrowing a cup of sugar’ idea is regained.
What is the COMPETITION?
Commercial rental companies exist for some of the larger items but should not be too affected (could be involved as part of their commercial charitable projects).
Local libraries will be affected by some of the book and intellectual property borrowing.
What BUDGETS & LOGISTICS are required?
Main problem is engendering trust: i.e. will goods be returned in time. Idea does not currently have a reasonable reward (for allowing items to be borrowed)and punishment (for failure to return items) aspect.
Second major issue is misuse of system as a burglars’ shopping list. Database must not show too much local data before user is checked and approved.
Cost is based around web-design and database creation (also access to postcode database).
This is a really good idea.
The key to it working is to make people provide verifiable information before joining.
For example, eBay make you sign up with a credit card. If you’ve got a credit card you’re traceable so you’re less likely to take someone’s money and run that if you can sign up annonymously.
This would also be a way around the borrowing issue.
Essentially, you could set up a credit agreement that states that if you go over the “free” period you agree to pay a fixed rate (say 1-2% of the retail value of the item per day) to borrow it.
The agreement would be with the site, who would pass (most of) the money onto the lender in the event the item was overdue.
The cerdit contract could also state that if the item was not returned within a fixed period (say 30 days) after the item was due then they could ask for it’s forceable return – ie go to court for a warrant.
Other than compensation for overdue items I don’t think you should have a reward for lenders. Otherwise they’re hiring .. and there are all sorts of legal implications to that.
Also, it kills the spirit of the site. It’s meant to be a community site – not eBay for lenders.
I don’t think a “burglar’s shopping list” is a major issue.
a) users would be anonymous, so the only way to get the address would be to be the “borrower” – and if your house gets burgled the next week you’ll know who the borrower was.
b) Burglars don’t generally make a shoppinbg list for small items like DVD players or lawnmowers – they’re opportunists. They’ll see a house that looks like it might have some decent stuff inside and has an open door.
Let’s face it, most houses have books and DVD players in .. why go online to check? Unless you’re planning to lend the Mona Lisa on the site I don;t think this would be a problem.
I like this idea and agree with the general proposition that there is a lot of stuff which we all own that is (or appears to be) under-utilised and having a system to share these things would help build a community feeling.
My reservation is based on the possibility that many things which appear to be under-utilised, aren’t. For example, I have a personal collection of several hundred books. Clearly, I don’t use all of them all the time. Probably I haven’t looked at some of them in years (but which?). But their utility is that they are available whenever I need them, not that they are constantly being read. The books are mostly reference and non-fiction; the fiction books that I’ve read and won’t read again go to the charity shop.
Of course, I do lend books to people sometimes. But they are friends who I know and trust and I don’t do it very often.
How would your system handle:
– the rapid recall of an item if it’s unexpectedly needed by the owner;
– severe damage to an item so that it was unusable when returned (whether malicious, negligent or accidental);
– compensating the owner for delapidation due to normal wear and tear;
– or, allowing lenders to ration the availability of their goods easily so that lending happens infrequently and wear and tear is minimised.
Bookcrossing works well for books where the intention is to give them away, not get them back:
http://www.bookcrossing.com/
I suspect that better solutions to the problem of maximising resource utilisation would be:
1. Establish cheap hire shops as nonprofit social enterprises. They could gain economies of scale in purchasing, maintenance and administration (as well as build up those skills in their employees) while at the same time making expensive or rarely-used goods available to everyone.
2. Establish “UnCharity Shops” where the aim, again, is to offer cheap second-hand goods to people rather than to fundraise for a particular cause. They would sell donated goods and employ their staff rather than use volunteers. This would be socially-redistributive and resource/energy conscious.
Possibly, these two could be combined under one roof.
Of course, neither of these are web projects and they don’t directly address the intention of promoting neighbourliness.
Great idea — this sounds the same as the “KOODLE” proposal suggested recently on this site. And it links nicely with the “website for every street in the country” too.
Very promising idea, I have been looking at formalising an existing informal scheme that happens locally but, as always, the issue of liability has reared its head.
AFAIK if you lend a tool to a neighbour and they get hurt, you can be held liable if it contributed to their injury. Even if it’s not your fault, the hassle and cost of defending a claim is expensive. Generally a homeowner’s insurance will protect you from the cost of defending yourself but because of that, I’m happy to lend my neighbour my spade but not my chainsaw.
Now if I set up a scheme linking people willing to lend with people wanting to borrow, I am trying to find out if I will – as the broker – incur liability?
I’m afraid that the informal advice I have is that I would be. Certainly, if someone was hurt, someone would someday try to sue me and thus I would incur the cost of defending that.
The cost of getting a reliable answer is already too expensive. My intended scheme is for simple stuff like lending someone a high chair or a folding cot when their grandchildren visit or a ladder but those kind of items are notorious for accidents and hence liability claims. Under HSE rules, I would have a responsibility to regularly inspect the items loaned and keep the records and so on. Hence, this is why very few of these schemes exist.
Very sad.