totally not worth the paper its written on. All that does is show that you know you're doing something wrong.

Excuse my ignorance, but what exactly would YOU be doing wrong?

Excuse my ignorance, but what exactly would YOU be doing wrong?

 

Col is concerned that as a seller he could be held liable for misuse by the owner of the bike.

 

Most of us disagree, but there's no doubt if I happened to crash into Wayne Rooney and ended his career there would be a big claim somewhere.

Col is concerned that as a seller he could be held liable for misuse by the owner of the bike.

 

Most of us disagree, but there's no doubt if I happened to crash into Wayne Rooney and ended his career there would be a big claim somewhere.

I guess I was looking for something more specific. I get the impression that he's kind of creating his own problem here and discussing it publicly could even make it a self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

EDIT: In your example, how could anyone other than the rider be held responsible? If I decide to do 120mph down the M1 and kill somebody, I'm pretty sure Honda wont be held responsible.

Excuse my ignorance, but what exactly would YOU be doing wrong?

 

you might have missed this link.

 

https://www.gov.uk/product-safety-for-manufacturers

 

supplying bikes that aren't considered safe to use on the roads. (and I mean safe for the rider AND other road users) has large implications that some seem not to understand, and I'm trying to establish why? Because as Flecc has pointed out the default response from any with professional legal qualifications is always "don't do it" but with some big businesses doing it, and lots of people on here advocating the use of more powerful and faster motors I was hoping someone on here could give some legal justification for their confidence. Not just to reassure me, but also all the people using these bikes.

 

So far nothing has actually come up. Its just people trying to say, they'll be ok... because others are doing other things that are illegal. Which isn't a good defence for anything in a liability case.

I guess I was looking for something more specific. I get the impression that he's kind of creating his own problem here and discussing it publicly could even make it a self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

EDIT: In your example, how could anyone other than the rider be held responsible?

That's the problem, which Is why all the other traders are doing what I suggested - keeping their mouths shut and their heads down. The whole thing is a mess. It's every man for himself until it gets sorted - hopefully in 2016.

I guess I was looking for something more specific. I get the impression that he's kind of creating his own problem here and discussing it publicly could even make it a self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

EDIT: In your example, how could anyone other than the rider be held responsible?

 

My belief is that only the rider could be held responsible.

 

However, when there's lots of money to be paid out insurance companies tend to look for someone else to pay it.

 

The maker/seller of the bike is likely to have more money than the rider, so the temptation will be to follow that money.

 

Moral of the story for Mr Average Cyclist is to have some public liability cover.

I think he's doing two things. One he's being cautious, which in a businessman is advisable. Particularly in an area like this. The other is he's trying to call out the sellers of these bikes and devices in public.

 

They haven't chosen to respond. Which is perhaps wise, but does say something about their confidence in their immunity from any liability resulting in the use or misuse of their products.

Edited September 2, 201411 yr by JohnCade

The whole thing is a mess. It's every man for himself until it gets sorted - hopefully in 2016.

That's an understatement, but I'm not sure it will be any clearer in 2016. It seems it isn't illegal to sell them now - unless explicitly stated so in 2016, this isn't going to change is it?

you might have missed this link.

 

https://www.gov.uk/product-safety-for-manufacturers

 

supplying bikes that aren't considered safe to use on the roads. (and I mean safe for the rider AND other road users) has large implications that some seem not to understand, and I'm trying to establish why?

There's nothing inherently unsafe about an s-class bike is there? Surely if there was, they wouldn't be allowed to be used under registration elsewhere in the EU.

EDIT: In your example, how could anyone other than the rider be held responsible? If I decide to do 120mph down the M1 and kill somebody, I'm pretty sure Honda wont be held responsible.

 

yes but you're driving a car that is considered safe to be on UK roads, its only your speed thats the problem bit. Honda haven't sold you something that can't be used on the road. Its a subtle but important difference.

 

Imagine riding your riding your eBike on a canal path s class or dongled one, and you are doing 19mph, you come round a corner and hit a horse which knocks the rider off and they have serious injuries that keep them off work for 6 months and their insurance company comes after you the individual rider, they will also come after the dealer and the brand if they can to recover the costs.

 

So far all the debate seems to have been about prosecution for riding an illegal bike, I am now asking about liability. A big difference.

 

There's nothing inherently unsafe about an s-class bike is there? Surely if there was, they wouldn't be allowed to be used under registration elsewhere in the EU.

 

they can be used elsewhere with registration, helmets and everything else. The reason they are not allowed on the roads / trails here, is 100% because of safety. If they are ever allowed, they will be considered like mopeds, and the same laws will apply.

 

EDIT - should also add... you as an individual would obviously be liable for the accident in any event, but if you were on a normal road legal bike, you'd be solely liable, unless the bike was faulty in someway. The reason the dealer or brand would be liable if you were on an S-Class or dongled bike is that the goverment have said they aren't safe to be used, but you'll have been sold one, so some responsibility is passed up the chain depending on how things are handled.

Edited September 2, 201411 yr by KTM Bike Industries UK

Col, on the basis that it's not currently illegal to SELL them (and we're fairly certain that's the case) would a professional indemnity insurance solve your worries?

Is there anything to actually back this up? Any statements, letters, emails or anything in writing from the time? Because this would be very useful for everyone.

 

I do have some documentation, but as I've posted before, I acted for BEBA in the strictest confidence so cannot disclose the traffic police officer by name or the police force involved. I also have no wish to embarrass them.

 

However, since you are a BEBA member, you can simply ask them. David Miall will probably be the most fully informed on the intended case.

 

You have no fear of prosecution in this respect since April 2013, as I've reported a waiver has been in place since then, stopping police forces from implementing the 200 watts limit of EAPC law, but only that part. The rest of the EAPC law can and is being implemented and the EAPC regulations are the only ones in force in the UK. Once again, consult BEBA for they were a party to that meeting at which the DfT created the waiver.

.

Edited September 2, 201411 yr by flecc

Col, on the basis that it's not currently illegal to SELL them (and we're fairly certain that's the case) would a professional indemnity insurance solve your worries?

 

we have that.... but we're advised that, whilst it is not illegal to sell them, if we do start selling them - it might not cover us.

we have that.... but we're advised that, whilst it is not illegal to sell them, if we do start selling them - it might not cover us.

Effing b*****d underwriters! I'm sure they make it up as they go along.

 

In my experience, business and ethics do not mix, so I think your conscience and foresight is to be applauded while this mess is being sorted (if it is at all that is). For the time being though, I think you're fighting against the tide.

I do have some documentation, but as I've posted before, I acted for BEBA in the strictest confidence so cannot disclose the traffic police officer by name or the police force involved. I also have no wish to embarrass them.

 

However, since you are a BEBA member, you can simply ask them. David Miall will probably be the most fully informed on the intended case.

 

You have no fear of prosecution in this respect since April 2013, since as I've reported a waiver has been in place since then, stopping police forces from implementing the 200 watts limit of EAPC law, but only that part. The rest of the EAPC law can be implemented and the EAPC regulations are the only ones in force in the UK. Once again, consult BEBA for they were a party to that meeting at which the DfT created the waiver.

.

 

as I keep trying to say... its not prosecution we're talking about. But yes thanks I'll speak to David and see if we can get some details of the important documents to reassure the powers that be.

we have that.... but we're advised that, whilst it is not illegal to sell them, if we do start selling them - it might not cover us.

Col, here is a practical suggestion.Why not import an s-class KTM and attempt to register, tax and insure it for road use. Then we would all know if it was possible and how difficult it was.

Col, here is a practical suggestion.Why not import an s-class KTM and attempt to register, tax and insure it for road use. Then we would all know if it was possible and how difficult it was.

Blimey! The last thing I expected from this thread is a sensible suggestion. Why have you not already done this Col?

You do that all the time Flecc; choosing selected snippets of facts interspersed with anecdotal tales of prosecutions that never concluded with convictions then arguing black is white as if you know more about EAPCs and the law than anybody else.

 

I do love it when someone joins the e-bike world less than a year ago and then presumes to lecture me! Actually Tom, I possibly do know more about e-bike law than anyone else, since I not only know the UK and EU laws, on this subject I also know the Federal law and all the individual state laws in the USA, the laws in the the non-EU countries of Norway and Switzerland, and these laws in numerous other countries around the world. After all, I was working in the trade on power assisted bicycles in 1950 so have a fairly long grounding in the subject.

 

I obviously cannot advise you as to why the police chose to use illegal vehicles since only they will know that. I suspect it might be due to ignorance of this complex subject. Alternatively, they may have made the same mistake as much of the e-bike trade in 2003, misinterpreting the 2002/EC/24 EU two and three wheeler type approval law when it was adopted by the UK on 10th November 2003, since when these problems arose.

 

However, I can point you to arrests and EAPC seizures for destruction under the 1983 EAPC legislation dating from five years later and beyond.

 

On the morning of Thursday the 4th December 2008 the Metropolitan Police conducted an extensive operation specifically to seize a number of illegal EAPCs, arresting the riders. The EAPCs in question were trikes, pedicabs operating in London, falling victim to the 1983 EAPC legislation when their riders fitted e-bike motors to make their life easier. Some of the motors were 250 watts, legal for e-trikes only under our law, but others were illegally higher powered. However, all were illegal under our EAPC law which specifies a maximum e-trike weight of 60 kilos which the pedicabs could not meet. That made the prosecution very easy, no complex legal arguments about motor power needed. This makes you wrong in your claim that the EAPC regulations are redundant.

 

It also conveniently makes you wrong about the EU law being in force in the UK. You see, with my comprehensive knowledge of world-wide e-bike regulations, I know that they have no e-trike weight limit. So if the EU regulation had force here, the police could not have carried out that whole operation or subsequent ones, such e-pedicabs being legal in mainland Europe under EU law.

 

Below is the link to news of that London police operation. The EAPC seizures have continued, over 300 London ones in 2012 alone, reported elsewhere on the web.

 

London police seize illegal e-trikes

 

Following this and my preceding reply to KTM on page 7, hopefully the doubters will at last accept the facts in lieu of their mystical beliefs about e-bike law.

.

Edited September 2, 201411 yr by flecc

The default response from any with professional legal qualifications is always "don't do it" but with some big businesses doing it, and lots of people on here advocating the use of more powerful and faster motors I was hoping someone on here could give some legal justification for their confidence. Not just to reassure me, but also all the people using these bikes.

 

So far nothing has actually come up. Its just people trying to say, they'll be ok... because others are doing other things that are illegal. Which isn't a good defence for anything in a liability case.

Having thought about this for a bit, is it not just a case of those who take the biggest risks in business, usually reap the biggest rewards. Also, 'default responses' from lawyers are very rarely based on anything resembling reality, more the worst-case reflection on the state of the world in which we live today.

For anyone unhappy with their purchase of a 250W electric bicycle that was expressly told at the time of purchase that it was legal to use on the road should seek consumer advice from the Citizens advice, as they have recently been allocated funding for this purpose, and can try an obtain a refund.

Ok, whilst this thread has been bumbling along (and actually for some time before I posted this little test to see if anyone responded). We have been thinking about what to do, and how to handle this. So now in an effort to end this for everyone... he's what we know.

 

Col, here is a practical suggestion.Why not import an s-class KTM and attempt to register, tax and insure it for road use. Then we would all know if it was possible and how difficult it was.

 

Yes, we do Hoppy, that is the plan... as soon as KTM have a production one ready we will bring one into the UK and try to register it with the DVLA and insure it. We will of course post the results.

 

We suspect that by 2016, the UK will have caught up with the EU and we'll be able to register them, but we will see.

 

Next. As I've said above, we're totally confident that the 250w bikes are ok to be used on the UK roads and offroad, and no one should be prosecuted and us as a brand and our dealers can't be liable for these bikes being involved in accidents. Any attempt by people to say they are not ok to be used, is just an attempt to justify their use of higher powered bikes, which are very much not the same thing.

 

With regard to Dongles and bikes that are over 250w. We will not be offering them to UK customers, unless they can prove they have private land to use them on. There are a number of reasons for this, that include but are not limited to our liability should you being involved in an accident. There are a number of people who are using these illegal bikes who don't appreciate the risks they are taking, and the brands and dealers selling them are putting their customers at risk of prosecution, and hefty liability.

 

No one in the trade who sells these items has responded and I think its clear why. They are basically taking a massive risk, and yes whilst there is big reward for them now selling these bikes, having looked at all the evidence and consulted widely.... we wont be selling them until they are legal, I'm not prepared to risk my company and my customers driving licenses and finances.

Ok, whilst this thread has been bumbling along (and actually for some time before I posted this little test to see if anyone responded). We have been thinking about what to do, and how to handle this. So now in an effort to end this for everyone... he's what we know.

 

 

 

Yes, we do Hoppy, that is the plan... as soon as KTM have a production one ready we will bring one into the UK and try to register it with the DVLA and insure it. We will of course post the results.

 

We suspect that by 2016, the UK will have caught up with the EU and we'll be able to register them, but we will see.

 

Next. As I've said above, we're totally confident that the 250w bikes are ok to be used on the UK roads and offroad, and no one should be prosecuted and us as a brand and our dealers can't be liable for these bikes being involved in accidents. Any attempt by people to say they are not ok to be used, is just an attempt to justify their use of higher powered bikes, which are very much not the same thing.

 

With regard to Dongles and bikes that are over 250w. We will not be offering them to UK customers, unless they can prove they have private land to use them on. There are a number of reasons for this, that include but are not limited to our liability should you being involved in an accident. There are a number of people who are using these illegal bikes who don't appreciate the risks they are taking, and the brands and dealers selling them are putting their customers at risk of prosecution, and hefty liability.

 

No one in the trade who sells these items has responded and I think its clear why. They are basically taking a massive risk, and yes whilst there is big reward for them now selling these bikes, having looked at all the evidence and consulted widely.... we wont be selling them until they are legal, I'm not prepared to risk my company and my customers driving licenses and finances.

yes troll, sorry i mean col..

yes troll, sorry i mean col..

 

think what you like.

 

I asked a couple of perfectly relevant and interesting questions. The fact that no one chose to answer them... is an answer in itself.

as soon as KTM have a production one ready we will bring one into the UK and try to register it with the DVLA and insure it. We will of course post the results.

 

We suspect that by 2016, the UK will have caught up with the EU and we'll be able to register them, but we will see.

 

If the UK is not up to speed when you try, under present law you will find that S class bike will not be accepted as it is. A huge range of modifications are necessary, but no need to take my word for it, here's a link to a thread where someone has effectively done it already:

 

Creating a faster legal e-bike in the UK

 

we're totally confident that the 250w bikes are ok to be used on the UK roads and offroad, and no one should be prosecuted and us as a brand and our dealers can't be liable for these bikes being involved in accidents. Any attempt by people to say they are not ok to be used, is just an attempt to justify their use of higher powered bikes, which are very much not the same thing.

 

Of course all current 250 watt e-bikes restricted to 15.5 mph are now ok to be used since the April 2013 waiver that I have drawn attention to, despite the law still stating them to be illegal. The sooner this mess is sorted the better, but it seems we may still have a long time to wait. The DfT have repeatedly failed to meet every previous target for updating, so I have little confidence in the 2016 indication.

 

And of course if the forthcoming referendum results in us leaving the EU, there will be no more harmonising changes. That will present a new problem in respect of the temporary waiver!

,

Edited September 2, 201411 yr by flecc

Faster e-bike.

 

I can see why he chose to go the route of converting a Moped as it avoided the type approval but it does mean he was handicapped by a significant weight penalty which translates into a much increased power requirement.