More Seizures

[flecc]

But as saneagle said, it is the labelling that is a vulnerable area for legal eBike owners, I would advise anyone with a legal eBike to pay particular attention to this area.

I added this to my previous post:

An order to destroy is to deal with vehicles that cannot be legal at the time, such as privately owned e-scooter. Clearly that doesn't apply if a label or plate is missing from an EAPC and it is the only fault, so any attempt to get such an order can be successfully challenged in court, or preferably before the hearing.

However, I don't believe the police are seizing bikes on this alone.
.

 

[Waspy]

I added this to my previous post:

An order to destroy is to deal with vehicles that cannot be legal at the time, such as privately owned e-scooter. Clearly that doesn't apply if a label or plate is missing from an EAPC and it is the only fault, so any attempt to get such an order can be successfully challenged in court, or preferably before the hearing.

However, I don't believe the police are seizing bikes on this alone.
.

If you look at my video clip in post #516, they do indeed seize a bike on this alone.

You seem to have good knowledge of eBike legislation sir, so what is your opinion of conversion kits?

What would be the point of a 'plate' or label 'durably fixed' stating the name of the manufacturer of the vehicle (a bicycle) if the bicycle was manufactured 20 years before I added a conversion kit?

I have a label on the motor, does that suffice?

 

[flecc]

You seem to have good knowledge of eBike legislation sir, so what is your opinion of conversion kits?

Here's what I posted in my thread on the law:

Kit Motors
Be aware that hardly any of the above applies to kits or any home construction, the regulations only being for manufactured pedelecs. So both individuals and suppliers operate in a legal vacuum in which all try to supply and/or use as closely conforming to the complete e-bike law as they can, trusting that is acceptable. That has always worked throughout all of Europe and the UK without any mention of a possible prosecution, providing the three main points of the law are adhered to, i.e. 250 watts maximum assist, 15.5 mph maximum assist speed and power only when pedalling.

However, I can tell you the legal way of dealing with a kit, athough no-one has ever done it:

1) Buy and fit the motor kit.
2) Make an appointment at an approved vehicle testing station, paying the £55 test fee.
3) Most often the purpose of this is to get an SVA (Single Vehicle Approval), entitling it for use as a type approved motor vehicle. However your intention will be to get the inspector to agree that it meets the pedelec requirements so is exempt from being a motor vehicle and is approved as a pedelec.

However, if you get and accept SVA approval as well at the same time, as specified earlier in getting legal permission, you will be able to have a fully acting throttle on a post December 2015 pedelec with it still considered a bureaucracy free pedelec, a bonus. I repeat though, no-one to my knowedge has ever done this to create a kit pedelec so it's never been necessary, but it is the DfT specified correct way when creating any motorised vehicle from more than one vehicle or from parts.

What would be the point of a 'plate' or label 'durably fixed' stating the name of the manufacturer of the vehicle (a bicycle) if the bicycle was manufactured 20 years before I added a conversion kit?

No point at all. Only the date of the creation of an EAPC applies, before or since 1st January 2016.

I have a label on the motor, does that suffice?

The law says affixed to the EAPC in a prominent position, so on a motor might not suffice. The power in watts on a motor can be damning though, 251 watts or above can condemn it.

If you haven't seen it before, have a look at my thread on all EAPC legal matters: LINK
.

 

[Jaxter]

Alarm alarm wake up and smell the coffeee

im fully awake and alert, i honestly just find this discourse boring and usually spouted by bores, a`la Farage and every other ......

 

[lenny]

Illegal e-bikes seized and crushed, say council

Birmingham city crackdown sees 16 e-bikes seized and crushed

The e-bikes had been illegally upgraded to reach speeds of up to 40mph, says Birmingham City Council.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Peter.Bridge]

If you mean that by turning the pedals slowly in a low gear with the rear wheel off the ground, a legal eBike in level 5 assist will only indicate 15-16 MPH, that is true. But I'm not sure if all police are aware of this. If they spin the pedals vigorously by hand to see what speed they can get, it is easy to get 30MPH showing.

Ah - I see what you mean - it is indicating 30 mph without the motor assisting - perhaps they should confiscate unpowered bikes on that basis as they would show the same !

 

[flecc]

Ah - I see what you mean - it is indicating 30 mph without the motor assisting - perhaps they should confiscate unpowered bikes on that basis as they would show the same !

I covered this aspect in post 519 :

"The question of "wheel in the air" speed testing is a sticky one, since the law specifies a strict cut off at 15.5mph which the police are relying on. However, the law also specifies it as the assist speed cut off, so since in such a test the assist function, which needs power, was not being used, the test is arguably invalid."
.

 

[saneagle]

I covered this aspect in post 519 :

"The question of "wheel in the air" speed testing is a sticky one, since the law specifies a strict cut off at 15.5mph which the police are relying on. However, the law also specifies it as the assist speed cut off, so since in such a test the assist function, which needs power, was not being used, the test is arguably invalid."
.

When police prosecute you for speeding in a car, they wouldn't succeed in court unless they used a calibrated and certified device to measure your speed. An ebike LCD does not qualify as such a device, and it's likely to be a long way from accurate.

 

[flecc]

When police prosecute you for speeding in a car, they wouldn't succeed in court unless they used a calibrated and certified device to measure your speed. An ebike LCD does not qualify as such a device, and it's likely to be a long way from accurate.

Indeed, they are obviously relying on their accused giving up rather than challenging. That said, it seems many of those they seize have more than one, or even several obvious illegalities.
.

 

[saneagle]

Indeed, they are obviously relying on their accused giving up rather than challenging. That said, it seems many of those they seize have more than one, or even several obvious illegalities.
.

I believe that you're mainly right, but some policemen are pretty thick, arrogant and tyrannical - often indicated by a badge that's like a black and white union jack with a blue line across it that they where on their uniform against uniform policy. These guys just want to impose their power over you. The way the auditors deal with them is to threaten them with civil lawsuits, which seems to be a moderately successful tactic.

 

[Waspy]

Ah - I see what you mean - it is indicating 30 mph without the motor assisting - perhaps they should confiscate unpowered bikes on that basis as they would show the same !

Professional cyclists average 25-28MPH on flat terrain, all perfectly legal (even in a 20MPH zone).

A middle-aged woman going shopping on her eBike at 18MPH is getting her bike crushed LOL

 

[Waspy]

What a mess the whole UK eBike scene is right now.

For ten years the police totally ignored them (and e-scooters) but now they're having a Blitzkrieg on e-cyclists.

I think when my battery eventually fails on my conversion, I'll break it for parts and sell it and then I'll just buy a Wisper or something (other eBikes are available) but it had better have a cast iron plate with all the legal requirements on it rivetted to the frame.

 

[flecc]

Professional cyclists average 25-28MPH on flat terrain, all perfectly legal (even in a 20MPH zone).

A middle-aged woman going shopping on her eBike at 18MPH is getting her bike crushed LOL

But the difference is for perfectly good, sound and rational reasons as I've explained at length before.

Power assistance is allowed on bicycles for those who need it, not as a general provision to increase performance. The legislation is therefore aimed at utility cyclists who tend to cycle at under 15 mph, more commonly at around 10 to 12 mph. Lycras who ride at over 20 mph are completely irrelevant, clearly they do not need assistance.

Some safety laws are needed since unlike the operators of other powered vehicles, e-bikers are not tested in any way for proficiency. These laws and the reasons for them are as follows:

Assist speed limited to 25 kph/15.5 mph. This emphasises the need over performance factor, but more importantly it's connected to the fact of no rider proficiency testing. Physical fitness, reaction times, eyesight and hearing are broadly connected, we can be reasonably confident that the fit lycra is overall fairly safe in these respects at the speeds they can reach.

The utility riders who the e-bikes are intended for are often going to be elderly with those facilities often impaired in many ways. They can often be partially disabled with impairments affecting safety. In the absence of rider testing the safety of the public at large has to take precedence.

To enlarge, E-bike riders are a completely unknown, untested and untraceable group with nothing known or tested about their mental and physical competence. They are not insured to protect others interests and in the UK they can be as young as 14 years. Elsewhere there is no lower age limit. As such they cannot be let loose on unrestricted vehicles. Since bicycles are accepted to be safe for anyone, restricting to only the bicycle like performance of the rider makes sense and is consistent.

To summarise, bureaucracy free pedelec law is not daft or irrational, and those who feel it is simply haven't considered all the relevant factors.

For those who want higher speeds there is another bicycle based class, (the S class high speed pedelec with some added bureaucracy) but to date our DfT will not permit it unregistered. That is where any lobbying should be directed, not at changing pedelec law, probably getting extra restrictions added for all of us.
.

 

[Baz the balloon man]

Not in one document.

First there is exemption (h) in Type Approval law which qualifies an EAPC to be a bicycle in law:

(h) pedal cycles with pedal assistance which are equipped with
an auxiliary electric motor having a maximum continuous
rated power of less than or equal to 250 W, where the
output of the motor is cut off when the cyclist stops
pedalling and is otherwise progressively reduced and
finally cut off before the vehicle speed reaches 25 km/h;

Then there are the labelling rules which are fragmented. However here is an authoritive statement from the DfT:

Confirmed as below by James Brown, International Vehicle Standards, Department for Transport:

"As part of the GB EAPC amending legislation, that will come into force on 6 April 2015, the requirement for the marking identification has been amended. Previously a plate showing the manufacturer, maximum continuous rated power output and voltage was necessary, from April 6 2015 the requirement will be that the manufacturer, maximum continuous rated output and maximum assisted cutoff speed shall be marked on the cycle."

This should be in the form of a plate or permanent label bearing all three items of information, mounted in a prominent easily read location on the bicycle.

Then there's EAPC throttles permitted by type approval, the proof of this included in the relevant type approval manual.

Then there's grandfather rights that permits EAPCs legally supplied before 1st January 2016 to indefinitely retain any throttle they already had, no formal statement available.

Finally there's the definition of maximum continuous rated power contained in technical document EN 15194, making it clear there is no actual legal limit to the wattage power available of an EAPC.

Mostly beyond a police officers pay grade understanding.
.

Thanks very helpful so if a business makes e bikes from kits and standard bicycles say Bodge it and Scarper bikes just a T/A name do they or that person them become the manufacturer when they build a bike using different brand e components ie Bafang and KT for instance ? Or if some one leaves a Suntours motor 250W motor on say a Carrera but changes the rest of the components to a road legal specification are Halfords still the manufacturer or is this now an illegal modified e bike ?

Seems a bit of a grey area and open to challenges

 

[Baz the balloon man]

What a mess the whole UK eBike scene is right now.

For ten years the police totally ignored them (and e-scooters) but now they're having a Blitzkrieg on e-cyclists.

I think when my battery eventually fails on my conversion, I'll break it for parts and sell it and then I'll just buy a Wisper or something (other eBikes are available) but it had better have a cast iron plate with all the legal requirements on it rivetted to the frame.

Yes I think it’s the Wild West that’s why I just took off the thumb throttle on the bike not needed and just draws attention to the bike although my wife’s Giant has a factory fitted one 4MPH or walk assist

 

[Baz the balloon man]

If you mean that by turning the pedals slowly in a low gear with the rear wheel off the ground, a legal eBike in level 5 assist will only indicate 15-16 MPH, that is true. But I'm not sure if all police are aware of this. If they spin the pedals vigorously by hand to see what speed they can get, it is easy to get 30MPH showing.

The 'wheel off the floor test' is just ridiculous IMHO. Why don't they just ride the bike? In a low gear, ghost pedalling in max assist mode?

I think the whole business is just too complex for plod to comprehend.

But maybe I'm just reading too much into it and most of them know they need to go after the 52v 15000w dinner plate specials with a twist and go throttle.

But as saneagle said, it is the labelling that is a vulnerable area for legal eBike owners, I would advise anyone with a legal eBike to pay particular attention to this area.

I think with the wheels off the ground most bikes could exceed 20MPH if they had a Speedo without being an e bike .

 

[Baz the balloon man]

The one that leaves you vulnerable is the label. Can they seize and destroy your bike just for not having one, in which case the police don't need to discuss the validity of any other part of their assessment? The government guidelines say you must have a label or markings with the prescribed information, so if one item of the information list is missing, can they still seize and destroy your bike? Is there an actual law about that?

Let's say that you get a piece of notepaper, write on it the motor manufacturer, 250w, 36v, max speed 15 mph, then selotape it onto the crossbar. Does that meet the legal requirement, leaving you the opportunity to dispute the validity of any wheel in the air test?

I have a 20 year old Giant Lafree here for instance say in that time it’s had a paint job so all original markings have gone the rules are not really fit for purpose with all the grandfather rights just a big fudge .

 

[flecc]

if a business makes e bikes from kits and standard bicycles say Bodge it and Scarper bikes just a T/A name do they or that person them become the manufacturer when they build a bike using different brand e components ie Bafang and KT for instance ?

Bodge it and Scarper (BS Bikes) are the manufacturer. For example a Winchester bicycle shop started creating assisted bikes using a Chinese front hub motor with a custom controller and battery pack typically fitted to Cannondale road bike models, marketed under the Cytronex brand over several years.

Or if some one leaves a Suntours motor 250W motor on say a Carrera but changes the rest of the components to a road legal specification are Halfords still the manufacturer or is this now an illegal modified e bike ?

No, Halfords are no longer the manufacturer, but since the specification is to legal standards, it is privately created kit EAPC

Seems a bit of a grey area and open to challenges

Only a grey area in the sense that all kit bikes are unless submitted to a testing station to validate their status.
.

 

[flecc]

I have a 20 year old Giant Lafree here for instance say in that time it’s had a paint job so all original markings have gone the rules are not really fit for purpose with all the grandfather rights just a big fudge .

Why do you complicate things, it is NOT a big fudge? It merely shows that such laws cannot of course be backdated to before something is manufactured or permissions first given.
.

 

[lenny]

Seized Leicester e-bikes hit 239 as city crackdown continues
The operation aims to make pedestrianised areas more safe
"All compliant e-bikes must also display required manufacturer details, battery information and maximum speed specifications."

Seized Leicester e-bikes hit 239 as crackdown continues

The operation aims to make pedestrianised areas more safe

www.leicestermercury.co.uk