Sur-ron in the news

Sad times. Elgin and Elgin youth have been in the news too much recently what with the murder of the bus driver by a 15 year old. Some very bad decision making going on.

I know it's wrong to jump to conclusions, but when I saw the models of the cars involved, I couldn't help but wonder where any "blame" might lie.

Oh god that is terrible, three of them on a single Surron!

And I'm not sure I want to know how they managed to collide with four cars at the same time.

I know it’s wrong to jump to conclusions, but when I saw the models of the cars involved, I couldn’t help but wonder where any “blame” might lie.

a blue Vauxhall Mokka, a red Renault Clio, a black Vauxhall Corsa and a white VW Golf.

That's a fair spread of stereotypes from "given up with life" to "if I just car scene a bit harder I can still catch an STI off a teenager in my 30s".

Any time I see a youth on one of these things in Edinburgh I'm amazed there's not more fatalities. When you see them pulling wheelies on the wrong side of the road, weaving all over the place it's like they have a death wish.

I know it’s wrong to jump to conclusions, but when I saw the models of the cars involved, I couldn’t help but wonder where any “blame” might lie.

Nothing at all to do with being three-up on an illegal motorcycle then?

Terrible incident.

Whatever the underlying causes, it's a tragedy.

Can't help but wonder why the BBC story chose to leave out the word Sur-ron. Quite important to the story that the lads were on an illegal electric motorbike

I’ve put a complaint in regarding the poor use of terminology.
It’s so important parents and everyone knows these aren’t e-bikes and if their child or neighbour or friend has one, they may as well be racing around on an unregistered scrambler.

"Nothing at all to do with being three-up on an illegal motorcycle then?"

Even dickheads might actually be travelling correctly when hit by a negligent driver from time to time.

Can’t help but wonder why the BBC story chose to leave out the word Sur-ron. Quite important to the story that the lads were on an illegal electric motorbike

As a former news reporter, I can reassure you that nobody will have decided to leave any details about the Surron out.

The BBC will just be sharing the details that the police have provided.

Those details will have been transcribed by the press office, based on the incident report from the scene.

Ignorance rather than malice, basically.

As a former news reporter, 

I don't believe that - you seem to be able to spell and have the ability to construct a readable sentence!  😀

Even dickheads might actually be travelling correctly when hit by a negligent driver from time to time.

Yeah, I’m gonna go with no on that one. Not least because more than one pillion passenger is illegal, there’s also no way of a 14 year old legally riding anything on the road that can take a pillion.

There’s benefit of the doubt, and there’s roadmen on Surrons.

I don’t believe that – you seem to be able to spell and have the ability to construct a readable sentence! 

I was a sub-editor for more years than I was a reporter.

I don't think local news organisations have many of those any more, sadly.

they may as well be racing around on an unregistered scrambler.

Welcome to rural life

"hey may as well be racing around on an unregistered scrambler."

Only good thing about these bikes is the local youth have stopped trying to steal my MX bikes. But still two young people dead is a tragedy.

Took me a few reads to realise they were 3 up.

terrible tragedy.

Hopefully this gets reported accurately so other youngsters can be made aware of the dangers.

Welcome to rural life

Welcome to Swansea.

"The BBC will just be sharing the details that the police have provided."

Surely they've just nicked the story from the Scottish website??

45-50mph and no safety lid or any protective equipment. Any accident at those sorts of speeds are 50/50 to being fatal.

The driver of one of the cars, a 54-year-old man, was also seriously injured.

is who I feel sorry for the most.

Even dickheads might actually be travelling correctly when hit by a negligent driver from time to time.

A crash involving 4 cars? We don't know the details of course, but I think its more likely the 14 year old on an illegal bike with 2 passengers is probably the one responsible.

Can’t help but wonder why the BBC story chose to leave out the word Sur-ron. Quite important to the story that the lads were on an illegal electric motorbike

You may have also noticed the BBC news article chose not to mention the makes and models of the cars involved.
Nothing sinister, they just didn't want to name brands.

Reporting Scotland now calling it an electric bike and describing it as a Sur-on electric trail bike.

You may have also noticed the BBC news article chose not to mention the makes and models of the cars involved.
Nothing sinister, they just didn’t want to name brands.

The BBC have form for leaving out details that might lead people to invoke stereotypes or jump to conclusions, even when that information is pretty core to the context of the whole story. And also when those stereotypes and conclusions are very often accurate.

I presume they have editorial guidance to omit.

crewlie
Full Member
Reporting Scotland now calling it an electric bike and describing it as a Sur-on electric trail bike.

Did anyone else send them a message, or do I get to claim this one?

Nothing sinister, they just didn’t want to name brands.

Car brands is different. They are all still cars. Describing a Sur-ron as an ebike is a bit like calling a Typhoon Fighter (that takes off about 500m from this fatality) a "single seater light aircraft". Whilst in roughly the right ball park every reader will have an initially very skewed idea of the details.

Did anyone else send them a message, or do I get to claim this one?

I made a complaint to the BBC.

My only thoughts are with the injured legal road users and any pedestrians that could get injured or worse, I'm surprised there isn't more cases like this every week.
As for Sur-ron scrotes, play stupid games win stupid prizes, every single one I've seen has been a wrong un.

Some great humanist attitudes being shown on this thread.
I'm not enamored with ****s on electric motorbikes, but I'm also not a fan of families losing their kids as a result of teenagers doing the sort of stupid shit teenagers do.
And we don't even know the facts here, it's just stereotypes and assumptions. That's got a history of being a great idea, hasn't it? There'd be an awful lot of us not around if it weren't due to luck in teenage years I suspect. Have a ****ing word with yourselves. Some parents have lost their children

"but I think its more likely the 14 year old on an illegal bike with 2 passengers is probably the one responsible."

You're probably right, but its a good job neither of us are crash investigators.

Holy **** some of you are right nasty bastards.

You have no idea what happened and already it's the kids at fault. You're as bad as any anti-cyclist **** that cheers whenever one gets run over.

They could well have been overtaken by two shit boxes on a blind bend, first one hits oncoming car and second swerves into them to avoid.

You don't know anything so why don't you **** off with the conjecture until the facts are known.

As for "road men" **** off with that London shite.

Calm down dear

Fact is, the unfortunately lads were breaking at least one law, so they're not blameless.

Sad he hear of such a loss of life just for some cheap thrills. However nothing is new here other than the motorbike being powered by electric. Similar stories are found in the past of fearless young men dying when seeking a bit of fun. I'd say most member's on here have a story or two where they made a lucky escape from a moment madness when going through their teen years (me included).

RIP fellas, thoughts with your friends and families.

I’d say most member’s on here have a story or two where they made a lucky escape from a moment madness when going through their teen years (me included).

This is a very fair point. I did some daft stuff. Pretty sure the only person at risk was me - that's where it crosses the line imo.

45-50mph and no safety lid or any protective equipment. Any accident at those sorts of speeds are 50/50 to being fatal.

I've gone quicker than that in the Alps on a road bike and in lycra shorts and jersey (obviously I had my helmet on as I have to be safe - sarcasm alert!)

A national speed limit single carriage way has a higher top speed than that.

every single one I’ve seen has been a wrong un

Nice to know we still live in a society where being a wrong un is judged on the way you look.

Fact is, the unfortunately lads were breaking at least one law, so they’re not blameless.

They were kids doing the stupid shit kids do.  Part of driving a car responsibly is assuming kids are going to be out doing stupid shit.  Not that most drivers got that memo.

While I'm all for presumption of innocence, one Sur ron taking out 4 cars (all of which were being driven at the time) sounds like a bit of a magic bullet type scenario if we assume all four cars were 'just driving along'.

Yes, yes, war on motorist blah blah... but I wouldn't be too quick to jump to the conclusion that the only parties in the wrong here were on the Sur-ron.

is who I feel sorry for the most.

Interesting that you have concluded that this person was doing absolutely no wrong.  Maybe you've had different experiences of the average 54 year old male driver to me but I think I'll reserve judgment about who deserves the most sympathy until we at least have some information about the crash.

Do we know where they got the motorbike from?

Interesting that you have concluded that this person was doing absolutely no wrong.

what I’ve concluded is that the person riding 3 up on a Suron is definitely 100% doing something illegal.  The bloke in the SUV may have been but that is less likely. (Because it isn’t 100%)
As with all these cases you wonder how a 14 year old got hold of the bike & who bought it for him.

They were kids doing the stupid shit kids do

You've quoted me, but I'm really not sure how that makes them blameless. If they weren't out breaking the law, no-one would be dead.
Ah man, me and my brothers did some proper stupid shit in the 70s - plenty of fires, motorbikes, blades..etc could've resulted in death... my brother setting fire to a barn. If he'd died in there he wouldn't be blameless.
It's sad, but that's how it is.

The bloke in the SUV may have been but that is less likely.

It's the implied hierarchy of blame/sympathy I object to.

Middle aged bloke in an SUV who got injured.  Most likely a decent chap just driving along.

Three small hatchbacks.  Suspicious choice of cars suggest they may be boy racers but without any direct evidence yet they are given the benefit of the doubt.

Three teenagers on a Sur-ron.  Obvious bad-uns and almost certainly to blame (although we're struggling how they could take out 4 cars if all the other cars were 'just driving along', therefore why less benefit of doubt given to potential boy racers).

We know nothing at this point.  People jumping to conclusions about who deserves sympathy shows just how firmly entrenched car culture is.    Sure, these kids were doing something that was illegal.  I would be very surprised if the drivers involved have never done 31mph in a 30 zone.

"We know nothing at this point."

Local "understanding" (which is > than internet understanding but < actual fact) is that some of the folk in the some of the cars and the lads on the Sur-ron did actually know each other.......make if that what you will.

Aside from the bickering and conjecture - as a legit ebike manufacturer or retailer, how do you make sure your product isn't drawn into this by lazy language?

And edit - grrrr Android access to this site appears to have caused up quotes etc again.

And being Scotland I'm not sure the general public will ever get access to the formal inquiry. It seems it's not published in the same way as England and Wales. Someone with more knowledge can maybe add more. I was present at a fatality last year when a 23yr old died in a three car accident and thankfully only injured the people in the other cars when he tried an impossible overtake on a blind bend. The report on it seemingly never became public. Not quite sure how it works here.

They were kids doing the stupid shit kids do.

and errr….

It’s the implied hierarchy of blame/sympathy I object to.

Fact is, this is a tragedy. It makes me angry. There are hoards of bikes like these being used dangerously both on & off road and the potential for death & injury is high. The attitude of ‘it’s just kids being kids’ really pisses me off.

"It’s the implied hierarchy of blame/sympathy I object to."

This. I've been a motor claims manager in a previous life, assume nothing till you have all the facts.

The report on it seemingly never became public. Not quite sure how it works here.

I've made this point many times in regard to the A9. Being aware of the cause might help drivers avoid incidents in future. For instance, I was told that one reason for collisions at the Craggie junction, just south of Inverness, is that traffic exiting the B9154 can find it difficult to spot southbound A9 traffic due to the placement of a large road sign. As a result, I'm always that wee bit more cautious when approaching. I'd like to think that someone in authority was collating these issues in order to advise on road design changes but I see little evidence of this.

Anagallis I don't judge people on the way they look, that's a nonsensical conclusion, it's their reckless illegal behaviour I go off, check your self-righteousness.

I’d like to think that someone in authority was collating these issues in order to advise on road design changes but I see little evidence of this.

DfT were supposed to be setting up the Road Safety Investigation Branch but who knows if it’s actually happened.

How overloaded would a Sur-Ron be with 3 on board? You REALLY think it will be doing any sort of decent speed?

We used to ride places 3 up, one on the back and one on the bars, how is this any different?

You're all presuming blame purely based on what they were riding. Stop and have a think about that. As I said before you lot are no better than the drivers that celebrate cyclists getting killed or run off the road.

You’re all presuming blame purely based on what they were riding. Stop and have a think about that.

Given the main thrust of your point is that you can't stand sweeping generalisations, I object to yours....

“How overloaded would a Sur-Ron be with 3 on board? You REALLY think it will be doing any sort of decent speed?”

Top speed will be pretty much the same unless it’s going uphill.

A sad state of affairs, which could be much less bad if the sale of these was properly regulated.

Given the main thrust of your point is that you can’t stand sweeping generalisations, I object to yours….

You know who I'm talking to, if you're not doing that then obviously...

Stop and have a think about that. As I said before you lot are no better than the drivers that celebrate cyclists getting killed or run off the road

Yeah, I've thought about it, and if you're saying we are [i]all[/i] celebrating something, then maybe you're the one who needs to do a bit of thinking.

@desperatebicycle Really?

Read what I wrote in the post literally before yours.

Ffs, this place...

Condolences to the kids families, it's just a horrible scenario, personally, from the information so far i just put it down as misadventure, it happened at 2000hrs, so getting dark, or dark, on an A road, chances are the Sur-Ron wasn't the road version, 3 up on it, so control would be difficult, not seeing any real nasty comments here, just folk talking from experience of seeing similar stuff, i haven't seen any of the daily mail style 'pulling wheelies in balaclavas whilst swearing at nuns' stuff.

I think Sur-Rons are just too uncontrolled these days, and also scramblers and so on, i do wonder who sells them to kids without much thought for the outcomes that could happen, police round here don't tend to bat an eyelid at them, i can see their point in a way, chase them, accident happens and it's front page news, don't chase them, then the police aren't doing their jobs, it's up to the sellers and companies to be brought to task via the government or police.

There are hoards of bikes like these being used dangerously both on & off road and the potential for death & injury is high.

There are hoards of driver's who are also acting illegally but not quite illegally enough for them to get prosecuted.  Or even for anyone to notice given how pervasive and entitled car culture is.

Personally I'm more worried about all the 'legal' drivers out there than the illegal motorbike riders.

The assumption that because they were riding 3 up on an illegal motorbike so they must have been to blame is wrong without any more information.

The attitude of ‘it’s just kids being kids’ really pisses me off.

I hate to tell you, but it is kids just being kids.

I have done plenty that was at least as stupid if not more so in my life.  I'm sure pretty much everyone has at one point or another.

Part of being a responsible road user is understanding that.  Like I said, it's something that the vast majority don't seem to understand due to just how ingrained car culture is.

The bit you seem to be missing is that by saying ‘kids being kids’ you are implicitly accepting that they were doing something stupid & dangerous. So you are yourself accepting that they were doing something which, at least in part, contributed to the incident. Stereotyping?
Personally I accept that we don’t know all the facts. It could be all the driver’s fault. However, the probability that an underage rider on an illegal overloaded electric motorcycle, might well have been culpable is, in my view, quite high.

The bit you seem to be missing is that by saying ‘kids being kids’ you are implicitly accepting that they were doing something stupid & dangerous.

Don't think anyone is arguing riding 3 up on an illegal motorbike is stupid and dangerous.

However, what you seem to be missing is that it's possible to be doing something stupid and dangerous and if there is an accident it is still entirely someone else's fault.

What I am arguing against is the various posters on this thread (in various different posts and in various different ways) who have come to the conclusion that it must have been the kids' fault.  We can't come to that conclusion yet but car culture means the assumption is that if a middle aged man is driving a sensible car then he couldn't possibly have been at fault.

On a supposed cycling forum, the fact that so many people are happy to accept that conclusion as fact shows just how far car culture has embedded itself in our wider culture.

Could be the kids were entirely at fault.  Maybe ir's even likely that the kids were entirely at fault.  I just think jumping to that conclusion says something.

However, what you seem to be missing is that it’s possible to be doing something stupid and dangerous and if there is an accident it is still entirely someone else’s fault.

No. I disagree. If the stupid & dangerous action contributed to the accident then it isn't entirely someone else's fault.

I'll give you an example: A few years ago there was a video of a motorcyclist (in his 20's I think) who was killed by a car right hooking him as he approached a junction at a ton. His Mum had released it as a warning about the dangers of speeding. The car driver had been in a right filter lane to turn & if IIRC they had about a 7 second view up the road of the biker approaching. They weren't even done for driving without due care.

I remember being in the car after that, counting out 7 seconds & wondering how on earth you could have a clear view before turning and not noticing a motorbike coming towards you. Even at 100mph. For me the car driver is clearly at fault, but the guy who died was also responsible for going at that speed, especially at a junction where a car is waiting to turn. What was he thinking?

You have to accept that there is a level of behaviour which means that even the dopiest of drivers have an excuse to say that they are not to blame. We still have no idea how this accident happened, but I don't find it hard to feel that there  is the potential for completely stupid behaviour to have played a major part in it.

In this case, even if you make an allowance for it being a 14 year old, you also have to look at who provided him with access to the bike.

Yeah, I totally disagree.
It's like when I did a speed awareness course and the instructor said it's always a speeding driver at fault if they hit a pedestrian. The dopes on the course were arguing, but it's obvious to me - if the driver hadn't been breaking the law by speeding, they wouldn't have even been in the place where the accident happened.

And being Scotland I’m not sure the general public will ever get access to the formal inquiry. It seems it’s not published in the same way as England and Wales.

Ive seen FAI reports before now.   Published in the usual way

No. I disagree. If the stupid & dangerous action contributed to the accident then it isn’t entirely someone else’s fault.

So simply by being there they have to bear some responsibility for the accident?  Regardless of how they were riding?

Good to know.  We're just going to pretend the vast majority of drivers don't do something illegal on pretty much every journey.

It’s like when I did a speed awareness course and the instructor said it’s always a speeding driver at fault if they hit a pedestrian. The dopes on the course were arguing, but it’s obvious to me – if the driver hadn’t been breaking the law by speeding, they wouldn’t have even been in the place where the accident happened.

Yep, I agree.  But it's not really what we are talking about.

So simply by being there they have to bear some responsibility for the accident?  Regardless of how they were riding?

Having taken part in a few Accident Investigations, some via road traffic incidents, it is the case, they'll look at contributory factors, aggravating factors, etc to work out how and why the incident occurred, human factors tend to make up a large part of this usually, and unsafe acts is the top of that issue, followed by intentional and unintentional acts and so on.

You've also got to remember investigations aren't just bounded to that specific accident, they're also to see if there's anything contributing that could be managed better to minimise similar incidents occurring in the future.

Having taken part in a few Accident Investigations, some via road traffic incidents, it is the case, they’ll look at contributory factors, aggravating factors, etc to work out how and why the incident occurred, human factors tend to make up a large part of this usually, and unsafe acts is the top of that issue, followed by intentional and unintentional acts and so on.

Yes, and my point is I think we should wait for accident investigators to do so instead of assigning blame based on the fact they were on a Sur-ron and therefore obviously bad-uns.

"It's obvious to me - if the driver hadn’t been breaking the law by speeding, they wouldn’t have even been in the place where the accident happened."

I don't get this. It's a stupid argument. There are plenty of decent reasons not to speed, this isn't one of them. What if the driver had been doing 29.9 instead of 30.1? What if the driver had slowed down to 20mph two miles back to allow someone else to cross? Or to check his whatsapp whilst still driving? If the (e.g.) pedestrian had had one shreddie fewer in the morning? Or paused to check his messages before he crossed? Or failed (or passed) his exams 15 years previously which led to them living in different cities?

"Going too fast to stop" - fair enough. "Going at a speed which made severe consequences inevitable, rather than unlikely" -fair enough. "different speed/different place" = stupid argument, you may as well say if he'd been going 10mph faster for the last 5 miles, the accident wouldn't have happened.

We can’t come to that conclusion yet but car culture means the assumption is that if a middle aged man is driving a sensible car then he couldn’t possibly have been at fault.

I think anyone who has every cycled on the road would know that this isn't true. But on the other hand, I use the roads as a driver, motorcyclist, cyclist and pedestrian and the vast majority of other road users are reasonably sensible, but apart from one I saw being ridden on the road, with a helmet and a numberplate, every single Sur-Ron I've ever seen has been ridden by someone wearing a balaclava and riding dangerously somewhere they shouldn't be. So on the balance of probabilities...

I made a complaint to the BBC about the use of the term e-bike. They have responded…

Dear bensales

Thank you for getting in touch with us about the BBC News website and referring to an ‘e-bike’ in our recent coverage of a fatal incident involving two teenagers in Moray.

The reference in question reflected the terminology used by the authorities in relation to this incident; - https://www.scotland.police.uk/what-s-happening/news/2024/march/appeal-following-fatal-crash-on-the-a941-lossiemouth-to-elgin-road/ - however, having raised your complaint with senior news editors, they agree that an electric motorbike is a more accurate description of the vehicle, and the story has been updated to reflect this. A link to the explainer on what the law is around e-bikes has also been included: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65855198

We appreciate your feedback and thank you again for taking the time to contact us.

So on the balance of probabilities…

On the balance of probabilities, no matter what the rider is wearing, a single Sur-ron crashing into four separate cars seems highly unlikely to me.

It's enough to give me pause, at least.  Not enough for many others, it seems.

On the balance of probabilities, no matter what the rider is wearing, a single Sur-ron crashing into four separate cars seems highly unlikely to me.

Like @onewheelgood, the only way Surrons are ridden where I live is by balaclava wearing scrotes, on the back wheel, weaving in and out of traffic, and usually on the wrong side of the road deliberately playing chicken. As the A941 Lossiemouth to Elgin road is a pretty major road, I can very easily see it that a bike being ridden in that manner, three up, loses control and pinballs off multiple other vehicles heading in both directions.

I don’t relish the death of the people involved, but I can’t find any sympathy for them either based on experience. If that makes me a bad person, so be it.

 If that makes me a bad person, so be it.

OK.

When are we going to wake up? “Sports Utility Vehicles” clearly have no place on the roads.

@bensales, I had the same reply from the BBC. Came here to post it but you beat me to it.

Shit for all concerned.
Reading some of these comments did make me wonder if any Sur-rons have ever been Road registered?
E-motorbikes are certainly the weapon of choice to rag about round here.
I was under the impression no crash helmet means the police don’t give chase.

As for fault and doing illegal things, I knew a biker who never actually had a license. Was knocked off and badly injured by a car driver, the car driver was found to be at fault and the biker received compensation for injuries caused.

Reading some of these comments did make me wonder if any Sur-rons have ever been Road registered?

More than I’d have thought, but very few.

[img] [/img]

Don’t the cops have some? They would obviously be registered .

I wonder how mush a legal suron is to insure? They must be nicked within minutes of purchase.