There's a massive market for derestricted bikes in the Uk. Nearly everybody (but mainly men) that I speak to wants to know how to do it. Hopefully, there will be so many on the road, that somebody will allow them just like they did with 250w bikes, which are also illegal. It wouldn't surprise me if the powers that would be are well aware of what's going on, and they're monitoring the situation. It would be difficult to make a temporary trial, so this way they get all the data without putting their necks on the line. As long as there's no adverse affects, I'm sure they'll some way allow them officially in the future. Maybe we need to get more on the road to strengthen the case.

 

As EU members we are entitled to implement the L1e class permitting up to 45 kph and 500 watts rating. To do so means a simple regulatory change within existing vehicular laws previously adopted from the EU.

 

The DfT is currently opposed to doing that, but reversal is certainly easy.

 

However, that does mean some bureaucracy, registration, number plate and insurance. We can never have such permissions within the current unregistered pedelec class while members of the EU, unless the EU itself changes the law, which will never happen.

.

Edited August 31, 201411 yr by flecc

But are Bosch concerned about motors being derestricted once the warranty period expires?

Of concern should be the parts supply chain for common component parts as you know (over two months for a rim) esp. for a still in production bike - anyway that's another topic.

 

after the warranty expires, you're just buying parts for your bike, so I can't see why anyone from any brand would know or care really what you were doing. Its only during the warranty period that it matters because if what your doing over stresses the bike, beyond what its designed to do either by the type or riding or anything else, then there can be issues. Warranty covers manufacturing faults, not user error or crashing, or wearing out (unless its due to a manufacturing fault - all components have a natural life expectancy which is in distance not time generally).

 

2 months for a rim is because we're waiting for an identical part with the same stickers, if we could just supply any rim it would be a next day job. Any bike shop can supply a rim, but as KTM don't yet make rims or wheels (they are starting to in 2015), getting the exact replacement isn't straight forward.

Col,

 

The type of extended liability of which you appear to be concerned is a non-starter.

 

You could sell me an inner tube and I could strangle someone with it, do you fear murder charges from every tube you sell?

 

But as with most posters, your mind is made up, so don't sell S class bikes or dongles and sleep easy.

 

I'm afraid I see your OP more as a commercial expedient to cause fear and uncertainty in a market in which you choose not to compete.

I can remember when you didn't need a helmet on a motorcycle... Wind in my hair riding was way better than a helmet! I suspect that the law changes were driven by accident statistics and also suspect the same will apply with e-bikes. I think it's all a load of fuss about nothing...... Honesty, who cares? I don't understand why KTM keeps blowing this trumpet because they probably have small print somewhere absolving them of any responsibility for just about any eventuality. Then there's the *don't break the law" brigade, it's like being back at school! Hey boy, no running in the corridor! Come on guys... Get a life!

Col,

 

The type of extended liability of which you appear to be concerned is a non-starter.

 

You could sell me an inner tube and I could strangle someone with it, do you fear murder charges from every tube you sell?

 

But as with most posters, your mind is made up, so don't sell S class bikes or dongles and sleep easy.

 

I'm afraid I see your OP more as a commercial expedient to cause fear and uncertainty in a market in which you choose not to compete.

 

I can see why you can come to the conclusion.... but this is different, and your use of the inner tube to murder shows that you've not understood what I mean about liability.

 

Its not about being prosecuted for using the bike / inner tube / knife / gun illegally. Its about there being an accident and someone's (it could be the bikes owners, or any involved parties) insurance company looking for someone to take responsibility for the accident, and the use of the illegal vehicle on the road / bridalway could make people liable for the accident.

 

People like these guys

 

http://www.first4lawyers.com/personal-injury-claims/serious-injury/

 

have a field day.

 

Whether its the user, or them saying "I was sold this bike by company x, and they told me it was ok to use offroad"... or something similar. I know we're being overly cautious, but I don't want the test case to involve a KTM.

 

I didn't post this thread to ask all of your opinions on it or to spread fear. I was hoping one of the companies who do sell the dongles, or just straight up illegal bikes would post to say they have taken legal advice and its ok... or they haven't and they are just selling on the assumption that a lot of you have made that ..... it'll all be ok.

 

The reason is not because we've made the decision not to compete. We very much haven't made a final decision on it. The s class bikes are in our 2015 pricelist and dealers have ordered, but we've got a couple of months to gather all the information on this to make a informed decision, before we ship anything. This post to see what others in the industry thought and or do, was part of that information gathering process.

 

That was the point of it. All of you expressing your opinions is very interesting, but non of you sell these bikes or products, so aren't the people I targeted the question at.

Actually he's made the point several times that he's not interested in the usual legal versus illegal arguments. He says he's interested in hearing from fellow traders who do sell these bikes and dongles whether they have taken legal advice and if they are happy that they are legally covered. It's got nothing to do with the buyer at all.

 

This post crossed with the one above and he makes his own point better than me. I suspect that irrespective of attempts at legal sophistry here if a major accident and injuries occurred and it was worth it for the lawyers to go for them, it might well be difficult for a supplier of this kind of kit to get out of liability quite so easily.

Edited August 31, 201411 yr by JohnCade

Honesty, who cares? I don't understand why KTM keeps blowing this trumpet because they probably have small print somewhere absolving them of any responsibility for just about any eventuality.

 

yes, I appreciate you don't understand. So why post? If you don't care, or don't understand don't post.

 

Its impossible to put small print in anything to absolve responsibility for lots of things. Believe me, I've been to court 3 times about a variety of things and you can even get people to sign something and still you're not covered.

I've understood your intentions Col, but I cannot see any of the parties you wish to contribute doing so. They are after all your competitors for e-bike sales and will probably be happy for you to never enter the sales arena in question, so have little motivation to assist.

 

Your position is the same one they once faced, having to make their own decision. If they ever sought legal advice, it would be undoubtedly the same "don't" you received, the safest option answer lawyers always give.

 

Still, not my decision so 50cycles, ebikeshop etc, care to make any comment on what Col has asked:

I was hoping one of the companies who do sell the dongles, or just straight up illegal bikes would post to say they have taken legal advice and its ok... or they haven't and they are just selling on the assumption that a lot of you have made that ..... it'll all be ok.

at the moment this sector in the UK is tiny and all the brands should be working together to help our dealers make informed decisions, so that it can grow. The standard cycle industry is much more mature as a market and the brands all work together on lots of things. I don't see why this should be any different.

 

We're all working for the same goal, so a lack of clarity on these important issues helps no one.

Insurance could be another avenue.

 

Col's company may be able to get cover for a personal injury claim against them arising from the sale of an S class KTM.

 

It won't be straightforward, but in Lloyd's we have the best and most creative insurance market in the world, so I'm sure someone there would underwrite a policy.

 

http://www.lloyds.com/

Wouldn't it have been wiser to have emailed the businesses you have referred to rather than expect them to respond on a forum? They would be mad to in my opinion.

I believe that the whole point being made here, intentionally or otherwise, is customer awareness. Making sure they know what the law is and covering yourself by being able to prove you have done so. Selling a dongle and telling a customer what the limitations of its use and the affect on warrenty should be a given.

 

Similarly, you sell an ebike to a person that has a child that is under 14 years old. The child uses the bike and is hurt. If you did not tell the customer that use is restricted to 14 years and older then you, as a supplier, would bear some responsibility. However, it is usually the case where ignorance of the law is no excuse and the user is the one that must deal with the brunt of the responsibility.

 

I feel that KTM has bough a valid point of discussion to this forum and the scope of the response proves its worth with so many veiw points being raised. This is a subject that is not going to go away anytime soon.

Wouldn't it have been wiser to have emailed the businesses you have referred to rather than expect them to respond on a forum? They would be mad to in my opinion.

 

why would they be mad?? Have they something to hide? Its a point that should be being discussed and isn't. Why have these conversations in private, do you as an end consumer not want to know whats going on??

 

So we've put our head above the wall, and we can see no reason why others shouldn't want to discuss this issue.

 

So I ask again, why would they be mad??

Col

 

You are starting to come across as a single issue poster, trying to make a case for the same old issue coming from a number of different angles.

 

If you are so concerned about people invalidating their warranty perhaps you'd like to explain why you uploaded a Bosch dealer service sheet here:-

http://pedelecs.co.uk/forum/threads/bosch-crank-drive-whining-help-please.16701/#post-205355

 

particularly bearing in mind whoever suffered the popping noise was almost always within their warranty period & the Bosch manual says:-

Do not open the drive unit yoruself. The drive unit is maintenance-free and may be repaired only through a qualified repair person and only using original spare parts. This will ensure the safety of the drive unit is maintained. Unauthorised opening of the drive unit will void any and all warranty claims.

 

Did you ask Bosch before you uploaded that????

why would they be mad?? Have they something to hide? Its a point that should be being discussed and isn't. Why have these conversations in private, do you as an end consumer not want to know whats going on??

 

So we've put our head above the wall, and we can see no reason why others shouldn't want to discuss this issue.

 

So I ask again, why would they be mad??

 

Here's my reason Col. If I was still in the trade and was wondering whether to sell the bikes in question, the last thing I would do is ask legal or any other advice, since the lawyers answer would always be the safest, "Don't".

 

If I did make the mistake of asking, the last thing I would do is publically declare that fact, since it would then be ammunition for the wily lawyers you linked to. They could argue that you had been advised not to but had recklessly gone ahead anyway.

 

I'm sure those considerations will prevent others from responding as you've asked.

 

Instead of any of the above, I would just do as I've indicated, be satisfied that this is a user liability matter only as proven by so many other examples, many of which I've given above.

.

No worries then?

 

https://www.gov.uk/product-liability-and-safety-law

No worries then?

 

https://www.gov.uk/product-liability-and-safety-law

 

That is solely about safety and not legality, so it's hardly relevant to the S class e-bikes which are produced for safe road and off-road use within the EU and elsewhere. They comply with the EU wide L1e class and conform to all the safety requirements of that class.

 

That the UK doesn't implement the regulatory order to permit their usage here does not affect their intrinsic safety.

.

As I read it Col has concerns and followed the wise advice given in the above guidance.

 

"If you think you’re at risk, take advice from your business adviser or solicitor. Your trade association may also be able to give you information about standards and best practice in your industry"

 

Unlike some traders his Company is a member of BEBA and has a responsibility to adhere to the code of practice in the hope of presenting a sable industry and earning continuing user confidence in the product.

why would they be mad?? Have they something to hide? Its a point that should be being discussed and isn't. Why have these conversations in private, do you as an end consumer not want to know whats going on??

 

So we've put our head above the wall, and we can see no reason why others shouldn't want to discuss this issue.

 

So I ask again, why would they be mad??

Col, Are all the bikes you sell at present legal to use on the road in the UK?

Col, Are all the bikes you sell at present legal to use on the road in the UK?

 

Currently to the best of my knowledge and with the advise we have, yes all are legal as they are sold to our dealers. How they leave the store isn't something we can monitor exactly.

Currently to the best of my knowledge and with the advise we have, yes all are legal as they are sold to our dealers. How they leave the store isn't something we can monitor exactly.

That's good to know,Col. Thanks for a straight, clear answer!

I personaly can't see it being a problem if or until pedlecs become a problem like the scourge of incicidents involving mini-motos which can only cost from £100 or so - which were a bit more obvious by their appearance, sound and their cheap relative availibilty compared to push bike derived electric bikes.

 

http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/local-news/mini-moto-police-ops-rev-up-4219875

 

If pedlecs wether restricted or not get into the dabblers of teens and begin to be ridden recklessly in public that's when IMHO problems will begin.

Currently to the best of my knowledge and with the advise we have, yes all are legal as they are sold to our dealers. How they leave the store isn't something we can monitor exactly.

 

Actually they are not of course. They do not have the required plate affixed to the frame in an easily viewed position displaying the motor rated wattage, the battery voltage and the e-bikes weight.

 

It should also be remembered that for more than a decade almost all e-bike sellers have been selling illegal e-bikes, not only because they lacked that plate but because they were illegally powered with a 250 watts rating.

 

The position of all those e-bike sellers was no different to all the others who sell potentially or always illegal to use in the UK items, such as over 12 lbs pressure rated air rifles, shotguns, mini-motos and unapproved quad bikes, powered pavement scooters, Segways, radio comms devices with illegal transmission ratings or using unauthorised frequencies, bicycles without bells fitted, and of course S class e-bikes.

 

So as per those examples, since KTM UK are already selling illegal e-bikes, adding S class e-bikes does not present a new problem.

.

Well done Flecc. Somebody's finally getting it. I can't understand why the rest don't.

KTM UK are already selling illegal e-bikes, adding S class e-bikes does not present a new problem.

.

 

So KTMs are slow, illegal, and if you accidentally crush a grape on one Col's company is sued for millions.

 

No wonder he's worried.