Lighting regs and Police

[tyred]

Yes, buying legally compliant lights could be easier. Though making compliance information readily available at the point of sale would be good enough for me. That way, I can still buy lights that actually do produce some light...



is there any reason to sell non compliant bike lights?

If people buy them, shops will stock them.

I've always had mixed feelings about flashing lights on bikes. Yes, they probably are more visible, they also annoy the hell out of me. How anyone could ride with a flashing light on the front is beyond me. Some would also argue that it is difficult for anyone coming up behind to estimate the distance when a flashing tail lamp is used.

 

[Dan B]

unfortunately it is cut and dry, if you have no legal lights end of story. just look at the case involving the poor bugger whose payout was drastically reduced because he was not wearing a helmet even tho there is no law requiring one.

Er, what case was that?

 

[Rohloff_Brompton_Rider]

just google its not difficult to find. was late last year. probably a thread on here

 

[Dan B]

I'm having no success with obvious keywords, and I certainly don't remember it having been brought up before (I take some interest in these things). Do you remember the cyclist's name or where it happened or anything? I'm assuming you're not talking about Smith v Finch, because (a) it was 12 months ago, not "late last year", and more importantly ( the cyclist was awarded full damages. I don't think I've heard of any case more recent

 

[Dan B]

is there any reason to sell non compliant bike lights?

Off-road use is the most obvious one. Night-time MTBing

 

[HJ]

just google its not difficult to find. was late last year. probably a thread on here

There was a thread on here last year where the case was thrown out on appeal, yes the slimebags for the insurance industry have been trying it on, but have they really succeeded?

 

[Rohloff_Brompton_Rider]

http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/court-judgment-has-major-implications-for-cyclists-20250

 

[marinyork]

http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/court-judgment-has-major-implications-for-cyclists-20250

Can you please not post about a story we already know about that isn't relevant to lights. You're misapplying principles there, it is not the same thing at all. Under the same principles you'd get your full payout.

And can you please read some of the legislation quoted, some of the things you've added into your posts are not actually correct, nor even relevant (except where we discuss those sub issues in other threads which you should probably join in).

 

[ChrisKH]

"...liable for injuries because he had a helmet, but had not worn it."

Does that mean he had a helmet with him slung over the handlebars a la Cameron or it was in the deepest recesses of his garage?

So if I get rid of mine, I won't have a helmet so cannot have worn it, thus I am not partially liable?

All a little confusing. And diverting away from lights, so please ignore.

 

[Dan B]

http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/court-judgment-has-major-implications-for-cyclists-20250

What part of ' the motorcyclist was fully liable' did you miss there? That's certainly not "payment drastically reduced"

 

[Davidc]

I had a look at my lights when I went out earlier. They seem to all have various european numbers on them despite not having the BS number on them. If mine have those numbers presumably so do many other peoples', and that makes them legal.

 

[andrew_s]

Apparently the BS rating applies only to the reflector, and not the light itself.

It says BS6102/3 on the reflector, and BS6102/2 on the top of the red light casing (or the other way round). One is the reflector standard, the other is the light standard.

 

[marinyork]

I had a look at my lights when I went out earlier. They seem to all have various european numbers on them despite not having the BS number on them. If mine have those numbers presumably so do many other peoples', and that makes them legal.

It's all pretty silly anyway, all the CEN stuff will make it irrelevant, it's already there for other bike stuff.

 

[ufkacbln]

i think the law should stipulate that only legal lights should be sold. it's easy to do and then all lights would be legal. at the moment manufacturers stick in a piece of paper to get out of the cost of conformity tests. even by saying we should be brought in line with the rest of europe would not help as most lights sold in the uk are not marked with any standard. fyi any lights marked with any european member states standards are legal in the uk. i agree it is nuts and confusing.

edit: tbh the police and a technically possible ticket doesn't bother me. it's just the thought of my family and i losing money when i am knocked off by some moton with a good solicitor

Wherein lies another problem, I run lights that are totally illegal.

At 720 +240 Lumens on the front and three Blackburn Mars on the back, however I do have two "legal lights" and the rest are far superior.

If the only lights sold were legal then most "decent" lights would be off the market

 

[ufkacbln]

It says BS6102/3 on the reflector, and BS6102/2 on the top of the red light casing (or the other way round). One is the reflector standard, the other is the light standard.

Yet it has a flashing mode so cannot comply to British Standards that exclude flashing..........