As for "standard" tax evasion - like the other 4 million self-employed people in the UK, there are records of how they're paid and they are required to file a tax return every year

 

The businesses who contract these self employed riders are presumably not paying NI contributions for them ?

Impossible to prove because you can - technically -pedal faster than the cut off point

 

It would be laughed out of court (although it wouldn't get that far)

 

You have to be caught in the act

 

...going up one way streets the wrong way, combined with data from nearby GPS devices in cars could determine if they were jumping lights etc. that (could be hacked, released pretending to be a hack by Facebook [that way they're not as bound by laws] or illegally scraped info bought on the dark web) could be processed by that big AI the HMRC is training up for a myriad of other things right now - and it wouldn't need to be end up in court, the app operators could simply blacklist them.

Edited October 30, 20232 yr by guerney

The businesses who contract these self employed riders are presumably not paying NI contributions for them ?

They would argue that they don't employ them. The couriers are self-employes and they contract them. That would be true if the couriers do deliveries for more than one food company.

Delivery rider tax evasion is peanuts compared to what the likes of Amazon, Google, Facebook, the rich etc. should be paying. It's more expedient to go for low hanging fruit and demonise the ever increasing numbers of working poor and those on benefits, than chase multiple linked shell companies through mutiple tax-haven jurisdictions and search for crypto assets converted to other cypto assets converted to currency, or look for ludicrously priced copyright of logos, designs, text ("intellectual assets") leased to different branches of themselves in different countries, sandwiched with other tax evasion schemes - the mix of all that and more can be quite bewilderingly complex and varied. Only the wealthy can afford to do it.

So is derestricting now out on this forum - previous questions were answered rapidly on how to do it. OR is this just for couriers

So is derestricting now out on this forum - previous questions were answered rapidly on how to do it. OR is this just for couriers

There's a difference between a guy that wants to get rid of the awkward and abrupt 15 mph cut-off on his 250w pedelec and these delivery riders, who have 30 mph electric mopeds.

 

As far as I'm concerned, I'm not here to judge people, nor enforce the law, nor would I encourage people to break the law, but if they need help to solve a problem, I'll always give it and I'll offer advice on safety aspects.

Why do you persist in getting this wrong?

 

We are signed up to BS EN15194, the legal technical standard which determines the motor rating, NOT the actual power. Nor does it set any maximum power.

 

So the actual power is not a matter for any court, only compliance with the law as it stands.

.

 

I have no problem with that but then why are we persisting in classing some ebikes as illegal which operate over 250W but require active cooling to do so. We are now seeing many hub motor ebikes with what are obviously 500W, 750W, 1000W motors certified under European certification as 250W and sold as 250W.

 

https://www.cyrusher.co.uk/products/xf650-ebike

 

In just about every country in the world these ebikes would be rated by their actual wattage but in the EU we have ended up with some extremely strange and illogical certification which allows a lot more than 250W but calls itself 250W. It's open season how you interpret the wattage so why are so many pointing the finger at ebikes that are typically much lower wattage than mid-drive motors as illegal?

 

I completely disagree with certification that allows for different interpretations but if that is what we have so be it. I'm in no way wanting to restrict power just apply those so called interpretations fairly and not try to limit it as a privilege for junk mid-drive motors with complex design and engineering, proprietary batteries and mountings, excessive drivetrain wear and restricted access to spares and which ultimately are expensive to buy and short life. If you want to give an unfair advantage to ebikes make it those which are environmentally more responsible, easy to repair and have a much longer lifespan.

 

Why should someone with a 500W hub motor have to keep looking over their shoulder for the police but someone who has a 900W mid-drive motor does not?

 

It's pretty clear the interpretation of what is classed as a 250W motor varies enormously in the EU and this isn't something you see at all outside the EU. In fact much of the EU certification is clearly stated with regard wattage for other items just like similar certification around the world. In the EU there are standards that are near identical to US standards they have kept them very similar.

 

To me the whole EU ebike certification is completely amateur and incompetent clearly written by people who didn't know what they were doing or biased it a certain way because of maybe commercial interests in Europe. It's just utterly moronic in so many ways. What sort of idiot would put a power rating label on a hub motor when its the controller that dictates power or force basic cadence sensors which force ebikes to 100% power and can be very dangerous instead of throttles. I've dealt with hundreds of different certification standards in my time due to being a compliance officer previously and nothing touched the incompetence of EU ebike certification.

 

The issue is caused by people who derestrict their bikes which voids the EN15194 conditions. Speed makes a huge difference in power requirement. You only need about 200W to maintain 15mph even when not pedalling or only ghost pedalling. So even if you have a 1000w bbshd fitted to your bike, you can't exceed the 250w limit on flat roads until you reach about 17mph unless you have a gale force wind in your face.

I have no problem with that but then why are we persisting in classing some ebikes as illegal which operate over 250W but require active cooling to do so. We are now seeing many hub motor ebikes with what are obviously 500W, 750W, 1000W motors certified under European certification as 250W and sold as 250W.

 

https://www.cyrusher.co.uk/products/xf650-ebike

 

In just about every country in the world these ebikes would be rated by their actual wattage but in the EU we have ended up with some extremely strange and illogical certification which allows a lot more than 250W but calls itself 250W. It's open season how you interpret the wattage so why are so many pointing the finger at ebikes that are typically much lower wattage than mid-drive motors as illegal?

 

I completely disagree with certification that allows for different interpretations but if that is what we have so be it. I'm in no way wanting to restrict power just apply those so called interpretations fairly and not try to limit it as a privilege for junk mid-drive motors with complex design and engineering, proprietary batteries and mountings, excessive drivetrain wear and restricted access to spares and which ultimately are expensive to buy and short life. If you want to give an unfair advantage to ebikes make it those which are environmentally more responsible, easy to repair and have a much longer lifespan.

 

Why should someone with a 500W hub motor have to keep looking over their shoulder for the police but someone who has a 900W mid-drive motor does not?

 

It's pretty clear the interpretation of what is classed as a 250W motor varies enormously in the EU and this isn't something you see at all outside the EU. In fact much of the EU certification is clearly stated with regard wattage for other items just like similar certification around the world. In the EU there are standards that are near identical to US standards they have kept them very similar.

 

To me the whole EU ebike certification is completely amateur and incompetent clearly written by people who didn't know what they were doing or biased it a certain way because of maybe commercial interests in Europe. It's just utterly moronic in so many ways. What sort of idiot would put a power rating label on a hub motor when its the controller that dictates power or force basic cadence sensors which force ebikes to 100% power and can be very dangerous instead of throttles. I've dealt with hundreds of different certification standards in my time due to being a compliance officer previously and nothing touched the incompetence of EU ebike certification.

 

[ATTACH=full]55157[/ATTACH]

Good points. A lot of people think things like that, but that's not how it is. You have the idea in your head that regulations should limit power, but they don't. Some other countries do, but ours doesn't. The only thing we have to do is comply with regulations, not make our own ideas of what somebody might have intended when they wrote them.

 

The only regulation on the power is that the motor must be rated at 250w or less. There is no regulation on how it should be rated other than the motor must be able to run at the rated power without overheating. It's normal in engineering to have a substational margin between the rated use and the actual use. The greater the margin, the less chance of failure. Safety margins of 300% are quite common.

There's a difference between a guy that wants to get rid of the awkward and abrupt 15 mph cut-off on his 250w pedelec and these delivery riders, who have 30 mph electric mopeds.

 

Of course there is a difference between a guy with 15mph restricted bike and the same guy with 30mph derestricted one. The difference is you (and others who give advice on how to derestrict bike), because you make that happen.

I have no problem with that

 

Then why do you obsess over it?

 

What is your problem with Cyrusher when they say this:

 

"So when you receive your new ebike now, there will be no throttle on the handlebar, and the motor is restricted to 250watts with a top speed of 25KMs (15.5mph).

Please note : Cyrusher do not condone the use of an unrestricted ebike on the roads within the UK."

 

In just about every country in the world these ebikes would be rated by their actual wattage

 

Not true, most of the world's countries have few or no pedelec regulations, but many are very similar to the EU, for example China, Australia, New Zealand, Turkey and EFTA countries. They all allow powers way over the nominal 250W.

 

It's open season how you interpret the wattage so why are so many pointing the finger at ebikes that are typically much lower wattage than mid-drive motors as illegal?

 

Precisely because they are often unregulated in so many other ways as well, for example 30 or 40 mph on bicycle brakes. Whereas the mid drive bikes from Bosch et al are strictly regulated down the approved assist speed limit and include all sorts of anti fiddling software. The power needed but without excess speed.

 

Why should someone with a 500W hub motor have to keep looking over their shoulder for the police but someone who has a 900W mid-drive motor does not?

 

Same safety reason as last answer.

 

I've dealt with hundreds of different certification standards in my time due to being a compliance officer previously and nothing touched the incompetence of EU ebike certification.

 

That is your mistaken opinion. Here is why you are wrong.

 

The wider EU, EEC and EFTA countries and China are where the machines powers have the most flexibility with regulation according to need.

 

And surprise, surprise, they are where assisted bikes have taken off so successfully. The rest of the world is nowhere in comparison.

 

Permitted power is a balancing act. 250 watts is often far too little to get up a hill or battle a headwind, 500 watts is often far too much when it is propelling at 30 mph, so flexibility is needed in how we allow pedelecs to perform to match a given need.

 

Hence the most extreme case of the 250 watt Lynch motor that delivers up to 5kW when that is needed to propel a pedicab or light delivery van at a slow walking pace. Or even the lowly early Powabyke which ouputted over 600 watts at 7 mph.

 

Get this into your head, that is how it has to be. Countries which don't allow that reality fail to make a success of assisted cycling, the USA being a prime example.

.

Edited November 19, 20232 yr by flecc

The only thing we have to do is comply with regulations, not make our own ideas of what somebody might have intended when they wrote them.

I don't think it's that simple, for example "Lord Rodger of Earlsferry's approach (in common with all those on the committee) was to identify the statutory intention to be imputed to Parliament in connection with the consequences of a breach" Soneji

 

I reckon the regulation wording is anything but incompetent and has the foresight to allow innovation in ebike applications. It can be waved at anti-cycle lobbies but technically the '250W' part hardly restricts us as individuals, it boils down to an engineer's opinion allowing those in power to end abuse by, for example, stopping certain imports if their usage gets out of hand. Cunning if you ask me, provided it's read carefully:

 

There is no regulation on how it should be rated other than the motor must be able to run at the rated power without overheating. It's normal in engineering to have a substational margin between the rated use and the actual use. The greater the margin, the less chance of failure. Safety margins of 300% are quite common.

Presumably those that suggest the power rules are abondoned or just revised are completly in favour of a very rigerous enforcement of the 15.5mph speed limit.

Presumably those that suggest the power rules are abondoned or just revised are completly in favour of a very rigerous enforcement of the 15.5mph speed limit.

The 15.5 mph limit is absolute, easy to understand and fairly easy to test.

 

The only thing that would muddy it a bit is if someone adjusted the setting in their controller to misrepresent the speed displayed. Then, any spin-up test done by the police would show the motor cutting at a displayed speed of 15.5 mph, which should be enough to satisfy them, but the actual speed might be 20 mph. As long as you're pedalling, they'd have no way to determine whether it's you or the motor powering the bike, so measuring your speed by pursuit wouldn't work. It's only when you get up to speeds of say 25 mph or more (MTB or City bike) that it would be obvious. Considering all that, a clever person could almost certainly get away with a bike set to 20mph if they did it right.

 

Also, EN15194 allows a 10% tolerance on the 15.5mph for measurement errors, which brings that maximum speed to 17.1 mph.

Edited November 19, 20232 yr by saneagle

Police over here have a simple pair of rollers which they can use to measure speed, simple but effective. They are mainly used to find tuned Mopeds rather than ebikes but could be used if required.

Police over here have a simple pair of rollers which they can use to measure speed, simple but effective. They are mainly used to find tuned Mopeds rather than ebikes but could be used if required.

The problem with an ebike is that you have to turn the pedals to make the motor go. If it goes without pedalling, it's illegal, so they don't need to check the speed.

Well maybe I am being overly cynical, but is it possible that there are people who want the, lets call them the 'daft' motor power rules, scrapped so that they can legally own a bike which can easily exceed the speed limit ?

I can easily exceed the speed limit already, but choose not to. I'd love to see 5kw cargo bikes making themselves useful on our roads.

Police over here have a simple pair of rollers which they can use to measure speed, simple but effective. They are mainly used to find tuned Mopeds rather than ebikes but could be used if required.

 

Do they carry those rollers about in police cars?

 

 

The problem with an ebike is that you have to turn the pedals to make the motor go. If it goes without pedalling, it's illegal, so they don't need to check the speed.

 

If I'm ever stopped by cops, I might offer to let them ride my bike around a bit, if they leave me their gun, badge, car keys, house deeds, wallet and first born.

I personally consider an unrestricted e-bike a safer option than one restricted to a 15.5 mph speed limit. As on occasion the ability to speed up and out of a tricky situation could be a life saver.

 

But im a fat ol git with a house and savings to loose.. Not a teen with a deathwish and feeling of invulnerability.

 

Ideally ebikes like any other vehicle should be ridden/driven within regulated limits while maintaining the ability to 'speed out' of those 'sticky patches' all too often encountered on 2 wheels. However the practicality of monitoring and enforcing a cycle speed limit not to mention the additional strain administration of fines and appeals would place on the already burdened legal system, mean that 'restricted by design' ebikes are a very practical solution to a real problem.

Ideally ebikes like any other vehicle should be ridden/driven within regulated limits while maintaining the ability to 'speed out' of those 'sticky patches' all too often encountered on 2 wheels. However the practicality of monitoring and enforcing a cycle speed limit not to mention the additional strain administration of fines and appeals would place on the already burdened legal system, mean that 'restricted by design' ebikes are a very practical solution to a real problem.

 

I've reached the conclusion that it was far better in the 1940s, '50s and '60s when every assisted cyclist had to have their machine registered and number plated, insured and also had to have a provisional or full motorcycle licence.

 

That didn't put anyone off using one since there were well over a million on our roads by the mid 1950s, even my father who had never driven anything motorised got one to commute on in his late fifties and passed his test to get rid of the L plates. Having to be registered, insured and licenced hasn't exactly stopped the world adopting cars.

 

But the benefits were obvious. Fully acting throttle, no problem, you were a motorcyclist. Only pedal if you want to. Ride at 20mph, 30mph, 40mph, why not, no problem for a motorcyclist. Have whatever power motor you wanted. Upgrade anytime to a scooter or motorbike, no problem.

 

Having to be registered was no problem, the LBS fitting the assist motor did that and fitted the number plate.

 

All in all, life was actually simpler without the must pedal to get assistance rule, the 15.5mph assist limit, the 250 watts limit, the weight limits we were stuck with for nearly fifty years,the risks of prosecution or getting one's bike crushed.

.

I've reached the conclusion that it was far better in the 1940s, '50s and '60s when every assisted cyclist had to have their machine registered and number plated, insured and also had to have a provisional or full motorcycle licence.

 

Wow... that is almost exactly what I was going to write... and then run fast before mob would lynch me. Now we can run together... we have greater chances.

Registration and accountability is what I would like to see. I don't mind power and speed limit. However speed limit 15mph makes sense as most bikes are simply not designed to travel at 30mph.

My wife told me delivery riders few times nearly hit her and my daughters on pelican crossing on their way to or from school. They simply don't bother to stop. This "I couldn't give a fck" attitude so common in our society (and on this forum) is what bothers me most.

If someone wants something someone will sell it them. I’m car driver, motorcyclist and cyclist sick of them getting away with no registration and insurance.

I would be happy with a cycle mot too, as long as costs are reasonable and no one is failed on a missing valve cap.

 

fwiw i experienced the opposite of Mrs [mention=35887]Az.[/mention] 's experience yesterday me and 3 other cyclists and 2 x pedestrians are waiting at the same pelican crossing and when the lights go green, Everyone makes eye contact with everyone else prior to moving and time stood still for a few seconds.. When we realised what was happening everyone started to grin a little, or did i just imagine that as i rode off on a clear path.

I personally consider an unrestricted e-bike a safer option than one restricted to a 15.5 mph speed limit.

 

But do you think it would be safer overall, if all e-bikes were unrestricted ?