BBC Breakfast item today on illegally modded ebikes

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Punishing the innocent with a kneejek response while doing little to inconvenience lawbreakers (who are already breaking laws and wont change just because a new law comes along) is the British way of doing things.

Yes - sometimes

but if it gets the right headlines on the right day then it is worth it

(to "the right people")

sometimes anyway
 

Drago

Legendary Member
but if it gets the right headlines on the right day then it is worth it

Ooh yes. Words like "crackdown" and "zero tolerance" are tough talk indeed, but talk is cheap, cheaper still when it comes from a politicians or public servants mouth.
 

classic33

Leg End Member
This fast food delivery rider wasn't quite fast enough when he decided to make off from CVU officers. The rider was detained after a short foot pursuit and the bike was seized section 165. No Driving Licence, No Tax and no Insurance. Seized
👩‍⚖️

546650639_122190964886511637_4353311643627285651_n.jpg
 

Alex321

Guru
Location
South Wales
One thought, my impression is many people on cycles have 3rd party insurance often through their house insurance (my own cover is bundled included with my house insurance not even an option). Given how any significant claim and insurance companies are reputed to try and worm their way out of liability, if rider causing damage or injury has their cycle checked by insurance company and it's found illegal won't the insurance company declare it's not covered as they didn't include such cover ie it's not a cycle.
Yes. They will consider it a motorised vehicle, and damage caused by use of those is specifically excluded from most policies (because they legally require a different type of policy)


Do insurance companies still do "knock-for-knock payment of claims (or whatever it is/was called where each company pays their own policy holder's claim irrespective of fault - how would that work is any of those involved tried to find a way out of liability?

It was never "Irrespective of fault". That was for cases where bot drivers were considered at least partly at fault.
 

Alex321

Guru
Location
South Wales
I think your guess is wrong, I've read nothing about a legal eBike being seized. I'm certain if that was to happen the owner would be shouting very loudly to the press.

The only seizures I read about are by the Police and Immigration, either the vehicle being seized is illegal or the person on the vehicle is.

He didn't say anything about "legal ebikes being seized", just that it is only people who stop willingly whose bikes are being seized.
 

Alex321

Guru
Location
South Wales
My wondering was that what we are discussing we are calling "illegal e-bikes" are not bikes and as never been tested/approved are not "motor vehicles".

Cars being driven without insurance are still cars, tested and approved as cars; it's just the drivers that are at fault and they are still driving "vehicles". What we are discussing are not.

Above is my non-expert wondering, not arguing any facts.

They are certainly "bikes", as that just means a two wheeled vehicle.

And they are also vehicles.

They are not vehicles which are legal to use on the road, but that doesn't stop them being vehicle, or bikes.
 

Alex321

Guru
Location
South Wales
I find it somewhat ironic that the police are having a crackdown on illegal ebikes but they have rowed back on taking action against motorists who close pass cyclists.

Not really they aren't.

They are rowing back on taking action over operation snap submissions. Some of which are close passes, others aren't, but it isn't because they are close passes that they are not being dealt with, it is because they haven't got the resources to handle all the submissions.
 

Mike_P

Legendary Member
Location
Harrogate
The legal / illegal "ebike" confusion in press coverage would be simplified if legal "ebikes" were to correctly referred to by everyone as pedelecs leaving ebike solely to the illegal ones
 

Drago

Legendary Member
Its slightly disturbing that an ill informed media refers to Sur-ron high performance elefrric motorcycles as "ebikes." Politicians with their knee jerk statements seem incapable of understanding the difference.

We're being tarred with someone else's brush, and legal users run and increasing risk of further onerous legislation through the behaviour people completely unrelated to their group.
 

Binky

Über Member
Not really they aren't.

They are rowing back on taking action over operation snap submissions. Some of which are close passes, others aren't, but it isn't because they are close passes that they are not being dealt with, it is because they haven't got the resources to handle all the submissions.

Wrong.
I spoke to a police officer who specifically deals with Op Snap submissions he told me they are not taking action on "mere" close passes as the police have been deemed insufficiently qualified to judge distance of how close car is to cyclist.
If there are further aggrievating circumstances, eg a close pass on a blind bend or a vehicle coming in opposite direction which causes overtaking vehicle to swerve in then they will take action but for a vehicle just overtaking too close they are not.
There's a whole thread on all this on this forum.
 
Top Bottom