no, it wouldn't be the same. 500W is totally illegal.

250W is not legal but not illegal.

I'd like all the suppliers of BPM bikes and Cyclotricity to think hard about their responsibility.

Extract from a BEBA member user manual of an EN15194 approved 250W rated bicycle:

 

"There is a twist throttle provided on the right handlebar grip.

There is a red button by the throttle which, when pushed in, activates the throttle. Ensure that it is only pushed in when the throttle needs to be activated.

To use the throttle start pedalling as normal and once you have reached the speed you wish to travel at then twist the throttle.

After the throttle is used you can stop pedaling and the motor speed will be maintained.

Obviously, if the bicycle is used under throttle only without pedal assistance then the range will be substantially reduced."

 

Is the user covered by the waiver?

 

Yes. The UK's EAPC law includes throttle independent control and always has done. The waiver is additional and quite specific as you've seen, it concerns only the permission to have 250 watts power rating. It also stresses that the use of an "off-road" button is definitely not permitted, that expression "off-road" understood to be an additional speed control.

 

I really don't understand all this silly fuss. Over the years the DfT have stated their intention to adopt 250 watts to harmonise with the EU, the first occasion when I remember them doing that was online in 2005.

 

Following the acceptance of the EU type approval law in 2003 which exempted 250 watt pedelecs from type approval law as motor vehicles, e-bike manufacturers and importers openly supplied 250 watt rated machines, the DfT always knowing this.

 

When the status was queried at various times, the DfT statement was always that they would not rule, a case was needed for the courts to give a ruling. Finally the police attempt to bring a case that I mentioned gave that opportunity for the DfT wish to be granted just over a year ago, but as you now know, they blocked that instead. That was because they recognised and acknowledged that the situation was no longer reversible, 250 watts was the de facto standard, regardless of what any court decided.

 

Since they had accepted the principle of 250 watts, it's acceptance into law was publically stated official policy, and the position on the roads was beyond correction, there was no longer any point in getting the opinion of the judiciary. They had after all held a lengthy public consultation with interested parties, including all members of this forum, on what the provisions of the new 250 watt law should be when it was adopted. Therefore, using the material from that consultation a meeting was convened with the major interested parties at which the waiver for 250 watts was agreed to cover users until the law revision. The only other possible concession at the meeting was that they would consider whether to continue with independent throttle control in the law revision, following the high demand for that facility.

 

There are reasons why the new law is not yet in place. At the time of the foregoing the EU's own law was in a state of flux, since there were new powered two wheeler classes being introduced and some changes had been made in Germany's S class. In addition the EU parliament had made a recommendation that the pedelec power limit be removed altogether, control being by the 25 kph assist speed limit plus a maximum weight limit. Therefore the DfT were unable to proceed with harmonisation until they knew what they were going to harmonise with.

 

They have since given a target of 2016 for the introduction of the EU style new UK law, dispensing with the need for the waiver.

 

Meanwhile internationally respected companies like Bosch, Panasonic and Yamaha continue to supply 250 watt machines to the UK market, knowing that they are immune from any incidental liability due to the additional 50 watt rating, and a number of police forces use 250 watt e-bikes, recognising that they cannot be prosecuted for that. They after all have been in receipt of the DfT direction not to prosecute 250 watt usage! I see no possible justification to question the status of 250 watt e-bikes any more.

.

Edited July 27, 201411 yr by flecc

It would be the same if you were riding a 500w bike. The charges would relate to using a bike over 200w

 

Once again you attempt to ameliorate your own criminality by encompassing all EAPCs over 200w in one great illegal basket.

 

Those who ride 250w bikes have many defences they can rely on in court should they ever face prosecution for non-adherence to the UK law, not least of which is the police issue we have known about for some time.

 

On the other hand, although I'm not a lawyer, unlike so many others here judging by the authority with which some express legal opinion, those who choose to ride 500w machines simply would not have a leg to stand on. The various defences which would be applied to 250w EAPCs would be entirely inapplicable on those 500w motor vehicles.

 

I can understand that you would like to mitigate the seriousness of your law-breaking but your childish outpourings such as, "Well, they're all guilty too cos they ride 250w EAPCs!" really won't wash in any court. Unlike you, most of us don't exhort others to ignore the law by flagrantly fitting non-compliant power systems or adjusting systems to operate outside legal parameters.

 

Most of us develop a greater sense of responsibility with age but I think you see yourself as some devilish rebel and people's champion for the cause of riding mopeds without authority.....whatever motivates you, don't you think it's time you grew up and showed some real responsibility?

 

Tom

It would be the same if you were riding a 500w bike. The charges would relate to using a bike over 200w, so all rider would need to do is point to the Sussex police (for example), and say, "In that case I'm reporting them, please prosecute them too".

 

Maybe this is why they don't check. The only thing the police can get them for is offences relating to the manner of their riding.

 

It would be the same if you were riding a 500w bike. The charges would relate to using a bike over 200w, so all rider would need to do is point to the Sussex police (for example), and say, "In that case I'm reporting them, please prosecute them too".

 

Maybe this is why they don't check. The only thing the police can get them for is offences relating to the manner of their riding.

 

My argument would be if it's ok for the police to use a 250wt motor unencumbered (my understanding being that no special provisions had been made for them) then it should be ok for me to do the same.

 

If I'm using a 500wt motor which would be encumbered in the EU I would reasonably expect it to remain encumbered in the UK given that we are working towards adopting the EU standards which have decided that 250wts is the safe power limit.

 

Phil

If I'm using a 500wt motor which would be encumbered in the EU I would reasonably expect it to remain encumbered in the UK given that we are working towards adopting the EU standards which have decided that 250wts is the safe power limit.

 

Phil

 

Yes, the DfT have made clear their implacable opposition to having over 250 watts in the legal pedelec class. 250 watts is their final limit for unregistered two wheelers.

I have not been convinced by the statement made here that users are totally protected from prosecution and despite requesting guarantees that all users will be protected none have been given.

 

In theory you will not be protected from prosecution for having a 250 watt rated machine until the law is changed, so neither I nor anyone else will give such a guarantee that you are totally protected. But I'm prepared to state that such a prosecution being brought is highly unlikely, and that a conviction will not happen if the person being prosecuted notifies the DfT, either directly or through BEBA.

 

Efforts to obtain further clarity are utterly pointless anyway, since all e-bikes on UK roads are illegal, even when 200 watts or less. Virtually all always have been, so prosecution has always been possible in areas not covered by any waiver.

.

Edited July 27, 201411 yr by flecc

250W is not legal but not illegal.

 

In terms of the law (like the speeding analogy) it is an absolute offence.

Once again you attempt to ameliorate your own criminality by encompassing all EAPCs over 200w in one great illegal basket.

 

Those who ride 250w bikes have many defences they can rely on in court should they ever face prosecution for non-adherence to the UK law, not least of which is the police issue we have known about for some time.

 

On the other hand, although I'm not a lawyer, unlike so many others here judging by the authority with which some express legal opinion, those who choose to ride 500w machines simply would not have a leg to stand on. The various defences which would be applied to 250w EAPCs would be entirely inapplicable on those 500w motor vehicles.

 

I can understand that you would like to mitigate the seriousness of your law-breaking but your childish outpourings such as, "Well, they're all guilty too cos they ride 250w EAPCs!" really won't wash in any court. Unlike you, most of us don't exhort others to ignore the law by flagrantly fitting non-compliant power systems or adjusting systems to operate outside legal parameters.

 

Most of us develop a greater sense of responsibility with age but I think you see yourself as some devilish rebel and people's champion for the cause of riding mopeds without authority.....whatever motivates you, don't you think it's time you grew up and showed some real responsibility?

 

Tom

You're completely wrong on just about every point.

You're completely wrong on just about every point.

 

You don't explain why Tom is completely wrong on just about every point, and this because you have no explanation. His words sum you up nicely.

You don't explain why Tom is completely wrong on just about every point, and this because you have no explanation. His words sum you up nicely.

 

I'm sure most people that read what's written will figure it out. I took you for an intelligent person. I thought you of all people would see it. Maybe you'd like to explain it on my behalf.

 

Some people come on this forum to try and help others, by posting useful information. Some people come on the forum just to try and knock people down, normally by spouting sh!t. As far as I'm concerned, Oldtom is one of them. I liken him to a parasite. Nothing of any good has come out of what he's written, and I, like many others I guess, wish he'd crawl back in to his hole and stay there.

 

 

They have since given a target of 2016 for the introduction of the EU style new UK law, dispensing with the need for the waiver.

 

.

 

Now published as (EU) No 168/2013 is this what the DfT are waiting for?

 

See Resources tab on the top toolbar for free download link or alternatively go to:

 

http://www.dft.gov.uk/vca//vehicletype/revised-framework-directive-motorcycles.asp

 

where you can purchase a copy:rolleyes:

 

Relevant to us:

 

Article 2

 

Scope

 

1. This Regulation shall apply to all two- or three-wheel vehicles and quadricycles as categorised in Article 4 and Annex I (‘L-category vehicles’), that are intended to travel on public roads, including those designed and constructed in one or more stages, and to systems, components and separate technical units, as well as parts and equipment, designed and constructed for such vehicles.

 

This Regulation also applies to enduro motorcycles (L3e-AxE (x = 1, 2 or 3)), trial motorcycles (L3e-AxT (x = 1, 2 or 3)) and heavy all terrain quads (L7e-B) as categorised in Article 4 and Annex I.

 

2. This Regulation does not apply to the following vehicles:

 

(a)

 

vehicles with a maximum design speed not exceeding 6 km/h;

 

(b)

 

vehicles exclusively intended for use by the physically handicapped;

 

©

 

vehicles exclusively intended for pedestrian control;

 

(d)

 

vehicles exclusively intended for use in competition;

 

(e)

 

vehicles designed and constructed for use by the armed services, civil defence, fire services, forces responsible for maintaining public order and emergency medical services;

 

(f)

 

agricultural or forestry vehicles subject to Regulation (EU) No 167/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 February 2013 on the approval and market surveillance of agricultural and forestry vehicles (22), machines subject to Directive 97/68/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 1997 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to measures against the emission of gaseous and particulate pollutants from internal combustion engines to be installed in non-road mobile machinery (23) and Directive 2006/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2006 on machinery (24) and motor vehicles subject to Directive 2007/46/EC;

 

(g)

 

vehicles primarily intended for off-road use and designed to travel on unpaved surfaces;

 

(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;

 

(i)

 

self-balancing vehicles;

 

(j)

 

vehicles not equipped with at least one seating position;

 

(k)

 

vehicles equipped with any seating position of the driver or rider having an R-point height ≤ 540 mm in case of categories L1e, L3e and L4e or ≤ 400 mm in case of categories L2e, L5e, L6e and L7e.

 

and under section - definitions

 

(35)

 

‘maximum continuous rated power’ means the maximum thirty minutes power at the output shaft of an electric engine as set out in UNECE regulation No 85;

 

also under the COMMISSION DIRECTIVE 2013/60/EU:

 

Article 5

 

1. Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by 30 June 2014 at the latest. They shall communicate to the Commission the relevant text of those provisions forthwith.

 

When Member States adopt such measures, these shall contain a reference to this Directive or be accompanied by such a reference on their official publication. Member States shall determine how such a reference is to be made.

 

2. Member States shall communicate to the Commission the text of the main provisions of national law which they adopt in the field covered by this Directive.

 

Article 6

 

This Directive shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

 

Article 7

 

This Directive is addressed to the Member States.

 

Done at Brussels, 27 November 2013.

Edited July 28, 201411 yr by shemozzle999

Sozs... for the normal people that walk amongst us how much is a pint of milk?

Now published as (EU) No 168/2013 is this what the DfT are waiting for?

 

No, that is still just the type approval legislation that I've already quoted as being 2002/EC/24 when it was passed into law. The EU has been doing a tidying up of that to include the later amendments, republishing it under the new 2013 number.

 

Although that dealt with some of the delaying issues I mentioned, it didn't cover the EU parliament recommendation, though that has since been rejected by the European Commission. I understand the earliest that our changes can be fitted onto the DfT's schedule is 2016 now.

.

Sozs... for the normal people that walk amongst us how much is a pint of milk?

 

49p as at this morning in one supermarket.

.

the way I see it:

1. If your bike has EN15194, you have nothing to worry about

2. 500W and above have no chance of getting EN15194. Whoever tries to sell you one of those, ask to see their EN15194.

3. The chance of being stopped by the Police is very small, but grows quicky with more wattage over 250W.

4. If stopped by the Police, they will have a problem finding some legislation to charge you with other than being in control of a vehicle while drunk, speeding and riding dangerously.

49p as at this morning in one supermarket.

.

 

HA!

Cheers mate... always the informative one is you.

 

Just a thought... Can I drink it unencumbered?

HA!

Cheers mate... always the informative one is you.

 

Just a thought... Can I drink it unencumbered?

Are you sure his information is accurate? Do they still sell pints of milk in the supermarket. I thought they went at the same time as bent bananas.

Obviously this is not correct since EC/81/82/83/999 when 568ml became the order of the day.

In a forum where some members have the need to go bigger and to intercept the inevitable a 1136ml is available but I'm guessing this will be for off road drinking only.

Doubt they'll be a waiver on this.

Phil

Are you sure his information is accurate? Do they still sell pints of milk in the supermarket. I thought they went at the same time as bent bananas.

 

The actual volume in the milk bottle is irrelevant. EN15194 is only concerned with the milks flow multiplied by its pressure.

Further to the post by trex above.

 

NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT.

 

If your motor is 250 Watts or less, you have nothing to worry about.

If your motor exceeds 250 Watts, you have only two things to worry about.

 

Whether you get stopped by the Police or not. If you don`t get stopped, you have only two things to worry about, whether you have an accident or not.

 

It you don`t have an accident you have nothing to worry about. If you have an accident, you only have two things to worry about, whether you live or whether you die. If you live, you have nothing to worry about.

 

If you die, you have only two things to worry about. Whether you go to heaven or to hell. If you go to heaven, you have nothing to worry about.

 

If you go to hell, you will be so busy shaking hands with your old pals, you won`t have time to worry.

Are you sure his information is accurate? Do they still sell pints of milk in the supermarket. I thought they went at the same time as bent bananas.

 

No, the UK have stubbornly stuck to pints measures, even in the larger sizes. The 2 pint container marked as containing 1.136 litres for example. I think this was originally due to the continuing use of the one pint glass milk bottles for a long time.

 

Very different from weights, where the government bullied greengrocers and the like into metric compliance, even to the extent of fines and confiscating imperial weights and scales.

 

They can't do anything about our chains though, locked to 1/2 inch pitch etc.

.

HA!

Cheers mate... always the informative one is you.

 

Just a thought... Can I drink it unencumbered?

 

Yes, unencumbered, unencucumbered, or unenchanted, guzzle away, but just watch the BMI.

.

No, the UK have stubbornly stuck to pints measures, even in the larger sizes. The 2 pint container marked as containing 1.136 litres for example. I think this was originally due to the continuing use of the one pint glass milk bottles for a long time.

 

Very different from weights, where the government bullied greengrocers and the like into metric compliance, even to the extent of fines and confiscating imperial weights and scales.

 

They can't do anything about our chains though, locked to 1/2 inch pitch etc.

.

Thanks. That's cheered me up. I've just put on "God save the Queen", and I stood up and saluted to her picture on my wall the whole way through,

You'd have been better going down the local to salute, where it's the pint that still reigns supreme

Thanks. That's cheered me up. I've just put on "God save the Queen", and I stood up and saluted to her picture on my wall the whole way through,

 

Fond memories of Alf Garnet complete with bicycle clips flash through my mind.