E-scooters to be allowed on public roads

[postman]

I have just got back from Jimmies hospital last chemo,we had on the pavement coming through the sheethole known as Harehills an electric bike.With humungous tyres.Wider than my old Honda 90.So i watched him,pavements,roads, crossing across the flow of traffic.Then using the cycle path in Meanwood.Had this been a motorcycle or scooter Honda Lambretta he would have failed his test.They are an effing nuisance.Why should road users who are being stung left right and centre have to put up with idiots like this,one day he is going to get squashed and his mates will say he was a great lad blah blah blah well he failed on all counts to think about his fellow road users.I wonder where drivers will stand if they need compensation from these bike and scooter owners when something serious happens.As you can tell i do not like these things.

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

How about tweaking the law to say that if anyone on a private escooter hits a ped on the pavement, regardless of how it happened since they're illegal in public, and shouldn't have been there anyway, its automatically their fault?. If full liability is on the escooter rider who insists on flouting the rules (I blame people like Boris for encouraging it, he racked up ££££ in fines for parking on double yellows) it may put some off.

Unfortunately our culture has become 'get-away-with-it-as-much-as-you-can'.

And yes, we need better enforcement which means more police which means spending more money on them.

I would support the idea that people riding "personal transport devices" in areas reserved for walkers to be assumed to be at fault by default

but you do need to allow for the situations where someone does something dumb and causes the whole problem themselves in spite of the scooterer (if that is a word) doing everything they could to avoid problems
Then, of course, the scooterer would have to show that the other person was responsible as the default would be that they caused the problem just by being somewhere they should not be
but they would be able to swap the "person at fault" if there was a good reason to think that was the case and over-ride teh deafult

I started using the concept of "personal transport user" because this would, of course, also apply to cyclists riding on the pavement
who we also know should not normally be there

 

[Drago]

There is no scenario where an illegal e-scooter rider travelling otherwise without insurance and otherwise in accordance with a licence would not be at fault were a problem to arise, unless the other parties involved acted maliciously or with intent.

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

There is no scenario where an illegal e-scooter rider travelling otherwise without insurance and otherwise in accordance with a licence would not be at fault were a problem to arise, unless the other parties involved acted maliciously or with intent.

What about if the scooterer was riding along perfectly sensibly and someone just walked out of a doorway without looking and without any warning??
Surely the walker would has some portion of the blame???

 

[classic33]

What about if the scooterer was riding along perfectly sensibly and someone just walked out of a doorway without looking and without any warning??
Surely the walker would has some portion of the blame???

They're classed as road vehicles, even those on the roads legally.

 

[icowden]

I have just got back from Jimmies hospital last chemo,we had on the pavement coming through the sheethole known as Harehills an electric bike.With humungous tyres.Wider than my old Honda 90.

With you on this one postie. These are not bikes they are electric motorcycles and the riders should be appropriately fined and have them confiscated. Big difference between these beasts and a little electric scooter.

 

[Drago]

What about if the scooterer was riding along perfectly sensibly and someone just walked out of a doorway without looking and without any warning??
Surely the walker would has some portion of the blame???

It might serve as a degree of mitigation, but in no way is it a defence.

Indeed, no insurance is an "absolute offence", ie, one for which there is no legal defence. You forgot, your granny died, ypu were abducted by aliens for sex experiements, you didn't receive a reminder, tough sheet - there is simply no defence in law. If you're caught you will be inevitably convicted.

In addition, a pedestrian has a reasonable expectation of being able to step out of a door without encountering a motor vehicle barrelling down the footway.

 

[grldtnr]

It might serve as a degree of mitigation, but in no way is it a defence.

Indeed, no insurance is an "absolute offence", ie, one for which there is no legal defence. You forgot, your granny died, ypu were abducted by aliens for sex experiements, you didn't receive a reminder, tough sheet - there is simply no defence in law. If you're caught you will be inevitably convicted.

In addition, a pedestrian has a reasonable expectation of being able to step out of a door without encountering a motor vehicle barrelling down the footway.

With you ,100% Drago, way I see it,if your barreling along ( not you per se!) Unlicensed. Uninsured , you still have a duty of care to avoid hitting a pedestrian, who ordainarily could reasonably expect to walk on the pavement. If that someone hits a Ped, even if they were not looking or took precaution to look, for instance they might be blind/ deaf. How could a illegal scooterist possibly know.
No doubt , if the 'Entitled' ,collided with someone, they are entirely at fault. It's no defence to say I can own it, if it's illegal to use.
A blatant travesty for government to allow these 'trial' schemes, where the providers are responsible to insure the riders, asvlong as i believe they
Suscribe to the scheme provideder , with absolutely no checks whatever, they could be convicted and disqualified motorist. , they still think they can whizz about, then there's the 'entitled' ,I bought so i'll use it.

NO ! you can't.

 

[grldtnr]

It might serve as a degree of mitigation, but in no way is it a defence.

Indeed, no insurance is an "absolute offence", ie, one for which there is no legal defence. You forgot, your granny died, ypu were abducted by aliens for sex experiements, you didn't receive a reminder, tough sheet - there is simply no defence in law. If you're caught you will be inevitably convicted.

In addition, a pedestrian has a reasonable expectation of being able to step out of a door without encountering a motor vehicle barrelling down the footway.

I am curious about the abducted Alien sex experiments......how weird !

 

[Drago]

I am curious about the abducted Alien sex experiments......how weird !

It seemed very natural when it happened to me!

 

[postman]

I am curious about the abducted Alien sex experiments......how weird !

i have heard from a good source that Aliens are coming on Sunday to abduct youngish,fit,good looking,tall intelligent males to breed with.I might be off line a while,but i will be back.

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

It might serve as a degree of mitigation, but in no way is it a defence.

Indeed, no insurance is an "absolute offence", ie, one for which there is no legal defence. You forgot, your granny died, ypu were abducted by aliens for sex experiements, you didn't receive a reminder, tough sheet - there is simply no defence in law. If you're caught you will be inevitably convicted.

In addition, a pedestrian has a reasonable expectation of being able to step out of a door without encountering a motor vehicle barrelling down the footway.

I agree that there is still a problem with e-scooters not wearing the right gear and the whole insurance and documentation stuff
that is just a slam dunk - if I can get down with the kids for a moment (sorry)

it is the concept of liability if someone doing something clearly stupid and being in collision with someone technically illegal (and actually illegal) but being careful and behaving

I would think that the rider should not take the full blame - although the fact that they should not have been there means they get some of the liability

clearly my example is not perfect - you do have the right to wander onto the pavement and not expect to meet a lump of metal moving at speed

but if the piece of metal - plus rider - was - for example - being ready carefully and slowly - and already half way past when the walked just walks directly into them

anyway - whatever
they should not be on the pavement and generally if something happens it is therefore their fault

unless the other person does something really stupid

I'll let the lawyers argue the dividing lines

 

[Dogtrousers]

I agree that there is still a problem with e-scooters not wearing the right gear and the whole insurance and documentation stuff
that is just a slam dunk - if I can get down with the kids for a moment (sorry)

it is the concept of liability if someone doing something clearly stupid and being in collision with someone technically illegal (and actually illegal) but being careful and behaving

I would think that the rider should not take the full blame - although the fact that they should not have been there means they get some of the liability

clearly my example is not perfect - you do have the right to wander onto the pavement and not expect to meet a lump of metal moving at speed

but if the piece of metal - plus rider - was - for example - being ready carefully and slowly - and already half way past when the walked just walks directly into them

anyway - whatever
they should not be on the pavement and generally if something happens it is therefore their fault

unless the other person does something really stupid

I'll let the lawyers argue the dividing lines

Your case isn't entirely hypothetical. There was a similar (ish ... sort of ... well, not completely different anyway) case where a lady rejoicing in the name of Giovanna Drago sued Brent Council for damages resulting from an e-scooter + pothole accident. It was thrown out, but not because she was riding an illegal machine, rather because she didn't have sufficient evidence.

https://www.driving.co.uk/news/ille...ury-claim-in-first-uk-court-case-of-its-type/

 

[vickster]

i have heard from a good source that Aliens are coming on Sunday to abduct youngish,fit,good looking,tall intelligent males to breed with.I might be off line a while,but i will be back.

They’ll be sadly disappointed by every specimen they find…

 

[Drago]

Your case isn't entirely hypothetical. There was a similar (ish ... sort of ... well, not completely different anyway) case where a lady rejoicing in the name of Giovanna Drago sued Brent Council for damages resulting from an e-scooter + pothole accident. It was thrown out, but not because she was riding an illegal machine, rather because she didn't have sufficient evidence.

https://www.driving.co.uk/news/ille...ury-claim-in-first-uk-court-case-of-its-type/

Although the question there was one of civil liability and not criminal law.