Old story but now in the courts.
"Under the law, e-bikes which are fitted with an electric motor can only be driven without a licence or insurance if their power is limited and if the motor automatically switches off at speeds above 15.5 mph.
The court heard Mr Hanlon's bike was capable of going double that speed and as such should have been categorised as a motorbike"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-51647068
Interesting case. Another pedestrian steps out in front of a cyclist on an illegally modified bike 🤔
Witness said he thought it was going "easy to get for a normal ebike".... How does he judge that??
Some interesting statements which may give some riders cause for concern and also a rethink
Under the law, e-bikes which are fitted with an electric motor can only be driven without a licence or insurance if their power is limited and if the motor automatically switches off at speeds above 15.5 mph.
The court heard Mr Hanlon's bike was capable of going double that speed and as such should have been categorised as a motorbike.
Both the prosecution and defence agree that Mr Hanlon did not have a licence or insurance for a motorbike.
Going to be interesting to see how it develops and the knock on effect to those who have tampered
Somewhat lazy reporting.
Didn't see anyone suggesting that it was not being pedaled.
Either way..... Unrestricted ebikes are bad mmmkay. This all goes away if you stick within the confines of the law.
Im struggling to understand what speed he was doing. The story says he was 10mph over the speed limit, so suggesting 40mph? But then says the bike is capable of 30mph - which seems a bit contradictory. Unless he achieved the extra 10mph through leg power, which is possible I guess.
It's probably a 20mph zone.
Probably a 20mph zone 🙂
Edit: Damn, too slow. Should have de-restricted my typing 🙂
My understanding was that he was going 10mph over the ebike limit, so 25mph. So achievable on a normal bike.
Bit like the knob on the fixie who took the brakes off - how much did the modification affect his ability to avoid the pedestrian who appears to have stepped out without looking?
Every bike is ‘capable of going double that speed’
So yes it will be interesting to see how it goes.
AIUI, the law would class his machine as an uninsured, unlicensed, unregistered motorcycle, even if he had been travelling within the ebike power cut off point. (It seems that he was, in fact, really motoring along at the time of the accident)
Thats confusing then - surely the speed limit for an ebike is the same as any other vehicle - 30mph. The limit at which the assistance should cease is 15.5mph, but there would be nothing illegal about going faster per se provided there's no assistance. Going to be an interesting, albeit tragic case.
To be fair (harsh really), he'll get done for being stupid - illegal bike, but the pedestrian got punished far worse for their stupidity.
The court heard Mr Hanlon’s bike was capable of going double that speed and as such should have been categorised as a motorbike.
So presumably, if found guilty, he'll get points on his driving license and/or receive a driving ban alongside any fines…?
Witness said he thought it was going “easy to get for a normal ebike”…. How does he judge that??
Article says:
"He described riding along approaching the station and becoming aware of a bike travelling very quickly past him, but heading in the same direction as him."
It would be fairly obvious if someone came flying past at a speed way in excess of a normal overtake. If you ride somewhere with lots of cyclists (or in groups etc) you get to know the normal sort of speeds people do.
Actual speed limits don’t apply to normal bikes, as there is no requirement for a speedo to be fitted.
I would imagine they do apply to a bike is fitted with a speedo though, I could be wrong of course.
I would imagine they do apply to a bike is fitted with a speedo though, I could be wrong of course.
Calibration etc? I'd expect not.
One thing I've never understood is how this type of thing works in the US.
Over here we can't have nice things and everything is watered down or just plain illegal - electric skate boards, segways, electric scooters and proper ebikes, none of it allowed and ya boo to you for wanting to commute on anything other than pox ridden public transport
Yet in the states where litigation is 10x more rife than here you have Casey Neistat and the entire population of LA wizzing around on Boosted boards and non-pedal assist bikes with top speeds well in excess of 30kmh.....
This guy will get the book thrown at him for pimping his ebike, but IMO the things he really did wrong were break the speed limit by a few miles per hour, leave the scene after the accident...and live in the wrong country.
Another pedestrian steps out in front of a cyclist on an illegally modified bike 🤔
"Another"? This is the only one I've heard about. It's the one that the video was online when it happened. Woman walked into the road, without looking, right in front of him. Pure accident, whether it's had been ebike/bike/car/motorbike.
The Mail report has more detail, including witness reports that he wasn't pedalling.
https://www.****/news/article-8047629/Bricklayer-32-killed-woman-speeding-30mph-E-bike.html
Just a thought, but if he had a motorbike license, and 3rd party insurance, then the only charge they would be able to level at him would be the death by careless driving. But if he was 5mph under the speed limit, its hard to see that sticking...
Just to put things into context, I wonder how many pedestrians were killed by motorists on the same day?
Just a thought, but if he had a motorbike license, and 3rd party insurance, then the only charge they would be able to level at him would be the death by careless driving. But if he was 5mph under the speed limit, its hard to see that sticking…
Assuming he had the bike registered as an s-pedelec (number plates etc) and had appropriate safety gear on.
Actually the Mail report suggests it's a 20mph zone, so he was over the limit...
Not insured, so the family get nothing unless they want to take out a private prosecution.
Just reading up on the s-pedelec thing. So essentially a derestricted ebike is treated as a moped, needs to be registered with certificate of conformity etc. I wonder if there is an argument for a new category, which is easier to register and license. Hard to see in the longer term how the derestriction rules will be enforced, unless as in this case, something goes wrong, so would it not be better to make it easier for people to ride legally if they choose...?
No insurance means they can bankrupt him or get an attachment of earnings order?
DezB - the other case I was referring to was the brakeless fixie case.
wonder if there is an argument for a new category, which is easier to register and license.
Its there it's called an e bike and it's restricted to 250w and 15.5mph.
Anything else needs approval and plates and to stay off shared use paths.
The Mail report has more detail, including witness reports that he wasn’t pedalling.
But it's the Daily Mail so it's highly likely to be total bollocks anyway.
Actual speed limits don’t apply to normal bikes, as there is no requirement for a speedo to be fitted.
I would imagine they do apply to a bike is fitted with a speedo though, I could be wrong of course.
Speed limits, under road traffic act, apply to motor vehicles not bicycles
@trail_rat what I meant was a category which is in between the restricted e-bike and full blown motorbike. My thinking being if people want less restrictive bikes surely it would be better to make them easier to regulate, rather than ending up, as currently with possibly many thousands of illegal bikes..
One thing I’ve never understood is how this type of thing works in the US.
Different laws. I tested a Trek E-bike at a demo day in Santa Cruz. Basically motors up to 750W. Cuts out either at 20mph or 28mph depending on class. 20mph e-bikes legal anywhere bikes are. 28mph E-bike roads only.
https://currentebikes.com/ebike-classes-california/
Seems sensible to me. Effortless 20mph on the flat would make most commutes easy.
Actual speed limits don’t apply to normal bikes, as there is no requirement for a speedo to be fitted.
I would imagine they do apply to a bike is fitted with a speedo though, I could be wrong of course.
If the bike is an s-pedelec (a de-restricted-bike, electric moped, whatever you want to call it), then the posted speed limits apply and the bike is supposed to have a working speedo (in the same way that a moped, scooter, motorbike etc would have).
If it's a regular e-bike (one where the motor cuts out at 15.5mph), or a normal (analogue?) bike, then speed limits do not apply because it's not classifed as a vehicle, it's a bicycle.
A normal bike fitted with a speedo (any GPS for example) - the speed limits still don't apply, the only thing you can be done for is the reckless cycling or whatever law it was they got Charlie Alliston convicted with.
That reporting is atrocious, it's very confused about what the speed limit actually was, whether the rider had got the bike to that speed using leg-power alone or if it was under "throttle" to achieve that speed or what.
Then there's the strict liability angle which I think some cycling promoters favour. It cuts both ways, both "upwards" with cars and "downwards" with pedestrians.
the rider has been charged with death by dangerous driving which means the bike is being treated as a motor vehicle surely - as it should be.
https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/product-news/electric-bikes-uk-law-234973
Law seems quite straightforward it is a motorbike
Ask any road traffic officer and they will tell you how unreliable eye witnesses are
I was hit by a High Top Transit Van in camoflage bright white , the eye witness said I turned right across traffic in front of the oncoming car that then hit me. No mention of being punted up the road by a ****less Transit driver
Who really looks at cyclists to see of they are furiously pedalling or freewheeling anyways?
How many of Joe public can look at a bike and state the bike was doing 20mph , or 26mph with any accuracy?
I have always maintained a 30kph ( 18mph ) E bike limit is alot more sensible , safer and less likely to lead to de - restriction Being assisted up to 18mph , then using your own poweer to hold this or accelerate to 19 - 20mph is very realistic prospect. Still safe , plus hills hold no fear , and 18-19mph is probably greater than alot of car commute average speeds, in any built up area
No doubt the Daily Fail will wind up the cyclist haters into a Frenzy , the rider facing death by journo, and the defence lawyer doing a rubbish job at pointing out the real number of KSI on the highways of which maybe 1% go to court and get a prosecuction and make it into national newspapers
Lots of ebikers butthurt because the first thing they did when they bought their "ebike" was derestrict it before telling the world "they're not motorbikes".
Right?
Either way, dead person, uninsured ****...
Either way, dead person, uninsured ****…
Why is insurance important to the dead person?
singletrackmind
...I have always maintained a 30kph ( 18mph ) E bike limit is alot more sensible , safer and less likely to lead to de – restriction...
We've been through this process 120 years ago and then repeated 50-70 years ago. Motorised bicycles.
The big problem is that once they are capable of 30mph, then their brakes, suspension, and tyres are marginal, ie they become dangerous.
The answer is to beef all those things up. Before you know it you have a moped and the next evolution is morphing into a small motorbike.
Nothing wrong with that, but maybe the law needs to recognise that there is a need for low cost transport like that, and remove the need to pay "road tax" and perhaps institute some form of low cost insurance, ie make it as close to free as possible.
Nothing wrong with that, but maybe the law needs to recognise that there is a need for low cost transport like that, and remove the need to pay “road tax” and perhaps institute some form of low cost insurance, ie make it as close to free as possible.
Or maybe the people frigging their ebikes can get a license, insurance, pay vehicle excise duty accepting it’s not legal unless they do so. Or don’t frig their ebikes.
That reporting is atrocious, it’s very confused about what the speed limit actually was, whether the rider had got the bike to that speed using leg-power alone or if it was under “throttle” to achieve that speed or what.
Its also irrelevant whether he got there by leg power, gravity or the battery - the crown case (which doesn't seem to be in dispute) is that his bike was no longer a bicycle and is now a motor vehicle. The speed limit is irrelevant, you can be dangerous driving under the limit.
Thats confusing then – surely the speed limit for an ebike is the same as any other vehicle – 30mph. The limit at which the assistance should cease is 15.5mph, but there would be nothing illegal about going faster per se provided there’s no assistance. Going to be an interesting, albeit tragic case.
Actually there is no speed limit for bikes - they limit applied to motorised vehicles. AFAIR pedal assist ebikes are not classed as motorised vehicles either. Obviously if the crown case is correct this bike was no longer such a devices.
AIUI, the law would class his machine as an uninsured, unlicensed, unregistered motorcycle, even if he had been travelling within the ebike power cut off point. (It seems that he was, in fact, really motoring along at the time of the accident)
That is correct. He is being prosecuted as though it was a motorbike he was riding. His defence positions seems to be that whilst the vehicle was illegal the manner of the driving was not - i.e. if he had been riding a perfectly legal moped with a helmet and insurance at that speed in that way he would not be guilty of causing death by dangerous driving. I suspect there is a reasonable prospect of acquittal.
Why is insurance important to the dead person?
Might be relevant to their dependants?
The answer is to beef all those things up. Before you know it you have a small motorbike.
Nothing wrong with that, but maybe the law needs to recognise that there is a need for low cost transport like that, and remove the need to pay “road tax” and perhaps institute some form of low cost insurance, ie make it as close to free as possible.
Electic scooters/mopeds are 0 banded for road tax. You can get TPFT insurance on a scooter if you've passed your test for <£100 pa.
Just to put things into context, I wonder how many pedestrians were killed by motorists on the same day?
I think it works out at about 1 and a bit pedestrian per day for the whole year whereas OTOMH 5 pedestrians are killed by cyclists in a bad year but cyclists tend to fare worse at roughly 100ish a year.
So higher risk of death if your sat on the bike.
Still as a bit of random perspective about 3k people die from falling up/down stuff without help from a cyclist so doing your shoelaces up correctly should be a greater concern than of of being Killed by a cyclist tbh.
So in reality Based on the numbers other things should be centre of attention.
Electic scooters/mopeds are 0 banded for road tax. You can get TPFT insurance on a scooter if you’ve passed your test for <£100 pa.
This is what bugs me as there are legal means for what people want and people should be encouraged this direction.
You can also get liability insurance as part of British cycling membership, a lot of leg powered cyclists have insurance.
So in reality Based on the numbers other things should be centre of attention.
But he’s still a knob and the running away is indefensible.
I also think that riding down busy streets over the marked speed limit seems a pretty selfish act.
