Is there a link to the original report ?? It seems clear in what is written that it was a modified ebike ? However because of that it would then be classed as a motorbike and would require licence/insurance etc. However it seems that there is a bit more detail available elsewhere ?
Ebike court case
- Thread starter Blue Hills
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Is there a link to the original report ?? It seems clear in what is written that it was a modified ebike ? However because of that it would then be classed as a motorbike and would require licence/insurance etc. However it seems that there is a bit more detail available elsewhere ?
OP
OP
- Location
- London
Thanks for the reply.
I thought riding a derestricted ebike was a crime. Are you saying it's not and that folk have to be caught by not having a licence for a different type of vehicle?
Why hasn't he been charged with anything relating to the vehicle? Seems odd.
Typo corrected to "deristricted"
Last edited:
Pale Rider
Legendary Member
Using an illegal ebike on the road otherwise responsibly is a construction and use offence which would only be dealt with by a fine.
This defendant has killed someone, so that trumps other possible charges.
He is charged with the more unusual offences of causing death while driving unlicensed and causing death while driving uninsured.
They both carry a maximum of two years.
The death by careless is the most serious which has a maximum of five years.
Its not a crime to have a non road legal ebike, as its perfectly legal to use them on private land.
The offences that you can be charged with, are when you use them on the road. Had he not hit and killed this woman and was just stopped by the police, he could have been charged with riding with no licence and insurance. As it is, it seems they've lumped this in with causing death on a motor vehicle without a licence & insurance.
This ebike rider, that shouldn't have even been on the road, not only hit and killed this woman. But then the coward tried to escape from the scene, taking the evidence of his non road legal ebike with him. Caring only about not getting nicked, without a thought for the poor woman he hit.
I hope they throw the book at him and he gets the maximum sentence allowed.
I hope they throw the book at him and he gets the maximum sentence allowed.
as far as i am aware, he didnt take the bike with him, it was dumped on the roadside. if he had, then no one would know it was an ebike or illegal ebike
He did take the bike with him, he ran off carrying it. It was only when he was further away did he dump it.
As you know, because of the heavy weight of ebikes, they are hard to carry for any meaningful distance. This one being non road legal will have an even heavier motor.
There is CCTV of the incident showing the impact through to him carrying the bicycle away from the scene. It was found dumped a mile away.
Btw it looks indistinguishable from a normal MTB.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7238430/woman-killed-dalston-kingsland-road-electric-bike/
im not clicking on a link that is quoting the SUN newspaper.............
Pale Rider
Legendary Member
Looks like a pringled front wheel which is why he had to carry it.
No sign of a large battery pack, but he wouldn't need one if he was only commuting a few miles.
ebikeerwidnes
Guru
- Location
- Z’ha’dum
I agree - but in this case it seems to be the only actual CCTV of the incident so I held my nose and had a look
quite informative - he was going very fast for a bike - and she had quite a long way to walk/run to get up to him - but he made absolutely no attempt to slow down of swerve - I can only assume he was distracted by a phone or something
Although she did move quite quickly!
In any case he should not have been on the road on that thing - and whatever he was riding he should have been paying FAR more attention to the road
in this case 2 people were not paying attention and their paths crossed in a bad way - but in the end the one on the faster, more powerful and more potentially deadly object has to bear the most responsibly
In the same way that if a car and bike collide - you know the rest
In the end - sympathy to the family of the poor woman who died
So the verdict is in on the case of a "cyclist" charged with causing death by careless driving, and driving without a licence, on an illegally quick electric motorbike.
The only thing this has to do with cycling is that the electric motorbike started life as a bicycle before being illegally modified.
I am baffled how this particular uninsured individual was given not guilty verdict. Can anyone enlighten?
The only thing this has to do with cycling is that the electric motorbike started life as a bicycle before being illegally modified.
I am baffled how this particular uninsured individual was given not guilty verdict. Can anyone enlighten?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-51707616
I suspect that the aquittal is on technicalities. It would be interesting to see more detail.
I suspect that the aquittal is on technicalities. It would be interesting to see more detail.
steveindenmark
Legendary Member
A real travisty. But like you say, probably on technicalities.
steveindenmark
Legendary Member
It would be guesswork.
