Are Electric Scooters Road Legal or Not!?

[Reorte]

7 minutes ago, PenrithBeacon said:

Personally I think they need to be regulated and equipped with flashing lights to make them visible. It would also help if the users were obliged to wear helmets and at least one item of hi-viz.

 

Those won't stop them hitting you, and I doubt many people walk in to them.

[TheQ]

It is a problem, I Have a 125 that will do 70mph, but the drivers assume it's a 50cc moped as it's got L plates on it. They do stupid things desperately trying to get past, before they realize I'm already doing the limit in a 60 zone. Or they pull out on you assuming I'm only arriving slowly..

[Nearholmer]

17 minutes ago, PenrithBeacon said:

On one of my very rare visits to the local town centre shops somebody was riding one of these things far too quickly through the throng.

 

Which is illegal, unless you happen to live in one of the trial cities and the throng happened to be in an area where they are permitted for the trial (which sounds unlikely).

 

All the flashing-lights and hi-viz in the world won't cure illegality - that needs enforcement of the law, either by the police (probably too busy) or security staff (if there are any).

[John Harris]

22 hours ago, Ray Von said:

I recently spent a weekend in London and was amazed at the number of electric (stand on) scooters on the roads.  I was under the impression that they were only road legal if HIRED but these were clearly not. 

It wasn't just a case of youngsters zipping around for fun, many were grown adults in suits, clearly on their way to the office etc. 

Personally, I could really make use of one, but was always put off by the fact that I thought that they were only for use on private land (and despite seeing plenty about where I live, you can bet your bottom dollar that I'd be the muggins to get a fine!)

I can't see anything online that suggests that they are road legal - and yet they were ubiquitous in the capital, often with an oblivious police presence nearby! 

If anyone can clarify, I'd be very grateful.  Cheers.

 

In London, the only places you can use these scooters legally is on private ground and the only trial is at the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park in Stratford, here

 

That said, the trials underway are intended to pave the way for their use on roads, though simple physics suggest that the average UK road is not ideal for a vehicle which such small wheels.  Obviously on the roads they will be fighting for space (hopefully not literally) with cyclists.

 

I have seen adult 'manual' (?) scooters being used on pavements and within shopping centres, which seem just as bad for pedestrians. 

 

It's worth adding that groups representing blind people are not happy about these things and their "silence", electric cars will be required to have a sound in the future.

 

I also think the fashion will fade a bit once the weather becomes wet and cold, the advantage is that you ride in your normal clothes, I'm guessing sitting all day in a sodden suit is not ideal. 

 

jch

Edited October 7, 2020 by John Harris

[Kickstart]

8 minutes ago, big jim said:

we only noticed the 50cc rule when looking for a bike, we had been looking at 125cc but then had to narrow the search down 

 

I won’t lie in saying I’m worried sick about him having a motorbike, especially one limited to 30mph, he’s just started an apprenticeship at a butchers that’s 10 mile from home in Audlem, the road there is a bit twisty but quite fast in places and I’m worried about him pootling along at 30mph with cars travelling somewhat faster behind him and catching up On the bends

 

at least with a 125 you can do that little bit quicker (Up to 60mph) to keep up with traffic flow which is probably around the 45mph mark 

16 year olds have been limited to 50cc since the 60s I think. At first there was no power or speed limit, but they had to have pedals by which they could be propelled. With some of them being rather quick in 1977 the limit changed to 50cc and 30mph max, but the requirement for pedals was removed. But a 16 year old could still ride the older unrestricted mopeds (with pedals) if registered before the law changed. Later on the limit changed marginally to 50kmh (~31mph), and has since been reduced to 45kmh (by introducing a new licence group for mopeds, removing the ability to legally ride older mopeds capable of more than 45kmh).

 

125s came into more common use in the early 1980s when the learner limit changed from 250cc to a 9kW / 125cc limit for 17 year olds. 9kW was enough for around 70mph, although to be honest as most of the sports 125s were 2 strokes that had been restricted to 9kW, a very large number (probably the majority) derestricted them to do around 90mph. The learner limit changed slightly to come into line with Europe, increasing to 11kW (enough for about 80mph), although the age limit didn’t change (many European countries allow mopeds at 14 and 125s at 16 - and in some 14 year olds can ride mopeds with no need for numberplate, etc).

 

Personally, I agree with you about the speed. It is ok around cities and the like, but fast A roads are a pain. I would be tempted to use the back lanes; indeed on a full power 50cc bike I own (Japanese import, does 50mph, and proven when I took it down a drag race strip!) I avoid faster roads

 

The current electrically assisted bike rules came about from the 1980s changes that allowed the Sinclair C5. Anything that doesn’t comply with those rules is technically a motorcycle, and hence need to comply with all the motorcycle requirements (lighting, indicators, registration, licence, insurance, etc)

 

All the best

 

Katy

[Ray Von]

13 hours ago, Hal Nail said:

On the subject of e scooters, the BBC reported about a couple of weeks ago they are likely to be made legal shortly as they are seen as a solution to the reduction in public transport capacity due to covid distancing.

I'd be interested to see that report.  If it happens what would be the licensing requirements I wonder, similar to moped - CBT and provisional driving licence?

[ejstubbs]

1 hour ago, Kickstart said:

Yamaha RXS100? Listed as 72mph, and with 12.2hp

 

Hah, nope - Honda H100.  It was 1989 and just needed something cheap to get me through my test and so I could get a full licence before the tiered licensing regime came in to force.

[ejstubbs]

1 hour ago, Reorte said:

Those won't stop them hitting you, and I doubt many people walk in to them.

 

Agreed.  This sort of thing happens all too often though: a few idiots cause problems and enough noise is made that a whole new raft of additional regulations end up being imposed (many of which are added for no good reason other than that someone suggested they might be a good idea, on the basis of no actual evidence whatsoever) which everyone then has to comply with even though enforcement is usually carried out very selectively if at all (with the new laws all too often being used as a way to punish someone who has rubbed a copper up the wrong way rather than actual dangerous behaviour i.e. something that you can be "got" for if they feel like it).  But all the while the idiots will keep on being idiots...

 

See also: the rows that led to the Dangerous Dogs Act, and the current pressure to curtail land access rights in Scotland following the outbreaks of "dirty camping" when lockdown was lifted in the summer.

[Kickstart]

7 minutes ago, ejstubbs said:

 

Hah, nope - Honda H100.  It was 1989 and just needed something cheap to get me through my test and so I could get a full licence before the tiered licensing regime came in to force.

I had one also, it was my first bike . 58mph was the claimed top speed (at which point being quite low geared they were a LONG way past peak power). Claimed 11.2ps at 6000rpm

 

All the best

 

Katy

[Fat Controller]

12 minutes ago, ejstubbs said:

 

Agreed.  This sort of thing happens all too often though: a few idiots cause problems and enough noise is made that a whole new raft of additional regulations end up being imposed (many of which are added for no good reason other than that someone suggested they might be a good idea, on the basis of no actual evidence whatsoever) which everyone then has to comply with even though enforcement is usually carried out very selectively if at all (with the new laws all too often being used as a way to punish someone who has rubbed a copper up the wrong way rather than actual dangerous behaviour i.e. something that you can be "got" for if they feel like it).  But all the while the idiots will keep on being idiots...

 

See also: the rows that led to the Dangerous Dogs Act, and the current pressure to curtail land access rights in Scotland following the outbreaks of "dirty camping" when lockdown was lifted in the summer.

The dreaded 'Something Must Be Done' syndrome.....

Edited October 7, 2020 by Fat Controller

[Kickstart]

1 minute ago, Fat Controller said:

The dreaded 'Something Must Be Done' syndrome.....

“Won’t someone think of the children!”

 

All the best

 

Katy

[big jim]

1 minute ago, Kickstart said:

“Won’t someone think of the children!”

 

All the best

 

Katy

I was just about to put a ‘gif’ of that up too!

[ejstubbs]

15 hours ago, Pete the Elaner said:

Bike bells are another item which perplex me. Most are way too feeble to be of any use.

 

I think this is largely due to the change in the law which required a bell to be fitted at the time of purchase.  The result was (and still is) that bikes are sold with the cheapest possible piece of rubbish that can be demonstrated to produce a noise, fitted in an inconvenient place on the handlebars.  A lot of people take what they're given and never give a moment's thought to changing it for something better.

 

You can still buy the traditional ting-a-ling style of bicycle bell (Halfords is full of 'em) as well as imposing-looking brass and even bronze gong-style bells that produce a highly noticeable, if different, sound.  The bell on my eMTB is a twin-ring ting-a-ling style, mounted just inboard of the gear selector levers on the right-hand bar, and operable without having to adjust my hold on the bar grips.  Most pedestrians seem to notice it when I have occasion to use it.  The overwhelming majority of those that don't usually turn out to have a mobile phone clamped to one ear, or to be wearing headphones (something I really don't understand, but each to his own I suppose...)

 

People who do change the bell provided out-of-the-box (I have experience of building a bike up from the box it was shipped in, and it did indeed have a piece of junk already bolted to the 'bars) usually fall in to one of three camps:

1. The obsessively weigh-conscious, most likely roadies and single-speed/fixie riders, who replace the rubbish bell with a tiny titanium thing which costs a ridiculous amount of money but actually makes less noise than the cheap rubbish fitted at the time the bike was bought;
2. People who do a bit of research and source a bell that makes an adequate amount of noise to attract the attention of (potentially) wayward pedestrians** and fit it in a place where they can quickly and easily operate it while maintaining control over the bike;
3. The nuclear option, usually adopted by diehard cycle commuters and couriers, of an ear-splitting air horn.

Finally, of course, there is the "all you legally need is a means to give an audible warning of your approach* and I can shout if I need to" camp, who take the bell off and throw it away.

 

15 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

The thing that always ‘gets’ me is that when you sound your bell, any group of people walking together, chatting away, filling the whole path, will always dither about for ages, some wanting to move left, some to move right, then will randomly scatter in all directions. I now expect groups to do that, so tend to slow down, but go for the middle of the path.

 

Especially annoying when we are actually still supposed to be social distancing outdoors.  Riding (or even walking - they manage do it when you approach them in the other direction on foot as well***) between two groups on opposite sides of a 6ft wide path brings you all much closer to each other than would be the case if they could bring themselves to all move to the same side (which would also make it a whole lot easier for them to carry on their riveting private conversation, rather than having to raise their voices and speak across me as I pass between them).

 

Approaching pedestrians from behind on a shared-use path (and with no alternative space available to pass them safely) I usually aim to give a first ring of my bell when between 50 and 30 yards away, when I will also be preparing to reduce my speed if necessary.  If they respond to that (looking round and registering my presence being all that's required) then all is usually well - though I still slow down and pass with care.  If there's no detectable response then - having already started to slow down - I will ring my bell again from a bit closer.  If there is still no response then I slow down to follow them at a safe distance at their walking speed, only passing when (a) there is plenty of room i.e. no risk of them feeling "squeezed", and (b) at a speed no faster than slightly more brisk then the pace they are moving at - basically, the same speed that I would pass them at if I was on foot.  And all the time I am prepared to stop in short order if they do suddenly do something unexpected in front of me.  This is made easier by going no faster than walking pace, covering my brakes, and using platform pedals so that I can easily put either foot down if I have to come to a stop (if I was clipped in I'd have unclipped by this point anyway).  I always try to give a wave and a "thank you" as I pass (unless they've been deliberately unhelpful, in which case my acknowledgement might be tinged with a hint of irony).

 

I am similarly cautious when approaching pedestrians who are walking towards me, although in that case it is not usually necessary to use my bell (though I will if the need arises).  In that instance you also need to take in to account the fact that your closing speed is going to be a bit higher, so you actually need to start thinking about how to pass them safely rather sooner than you might do if approaching them from behind.  (I recently encountered a couple walking towards me, one of whom tucked in behind the other to leave room for me to pass - which was nice - only for the one in front to suddenly, and for no obvious reason, veer out in to the middle of the path.  Fortunately I was already going at a sensible speed and would have been able to stop, even if he hadn't suddenly realised what he'd done and tucked back in again with copious apologies, while I reassured him that everything was OK, and we all went our merry ways with no harm done.)

 

Bottom line: if everyone behaved responsibly and with consideration then there wouldn't be a problem.  And any thought of regulation or legislation should be proportional to the scale of the problem that does exist, rather than the one that people believe might exist.

 

* AFAIK this is actually still the case.

** IMO you're never likely to find a bell that is reliably likely to penetrate the glass and steel cocoon of a motor vehicle sufficiently to attract the attention of the vehicle operator.  Bells are for bicycle/pedestrian interaction.  As far as motor vehicles are concerned you quickly find that you have to look out for yourself.

*** Even before lockdown, one of my common gripes was with groups of chattering people walking towards me occupying the whole width of the pavement and not one of them making any effort to make room for me to pass without stepping in to the road.  Damnable rudeness, which I sometimes countered by simply stopping - so they had to move around me - rather than putting myself at risk in order to accommodate their lack of consideration.

[ejstubbs]

5 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

You need to read a little more closely. I was, not seriously, advocating a 100cc car, for driving on shared-use paths.

 

Ah, OK, I get what you mean now.  Thanks for clarifying.  (Not that I've ever come across any suggestion of allowing cars to have access to shared use paths - although certain individuals do occasionally seem to act as if they thought it was already the case...)

[57xx]

2 hours ago, Kickstart said:

16 year olds have been limited to 50cc since the 60s I think. At first there was no power or speed limit, but they had to have pedals by which they could be propelled. With some of them being rather quick in 1977 the limit changed to 50cc and 30mph max, but the requirement for pedals was removed. But a 16 year old could still ride the older unrestricted mopeds (with pedals) if registered before the law changed.

 

Ah yes, I remember a few friends obsessed with AP50's and Puch Maxi's for that very reason.

[Nearholmer]

27 minutes ago, ejstubbs said:

(if I was clipped in I'd have unclipped by this point anyway).

 

I use single-sided touring pedals on my bike for exactly this reason - I can ride comfortably "unclipped" on shared paths and busy urban roads, and "clipped" when on quiet rural roads and trails. https://www.wiggle.com/shimano-a530-spd-single-sided-touring-pedals 

 

The only downside of these pedals is that the clipping action is a bit fierce - even slacked-off fully, they it takes noticeable force to get un-clipped.

 

(This is a bit OT, sorry folks!)

[57xx]

19 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

 

Well, yes, in fact, if they were to be driven on shared-use paths, as e-bikes can be, then about 100cc would probably be more than adequate.

 

 

50cc is plenty

 

 

 

[Nearholmer]

All that needs is a really strong padlock on the outside of the door, and we can pen him up forever, and never have to hear him again.

[Ohmisterporter]

1 hour ago, ejstubbs said:

 

Bottom line: if everyone behaved responsibly and with consideration then there wouldn't be a problem.  

 

Let me know if it happens, l would like to see it for myself.

[Bernard Lamb]

3 hours ago, Ray Von said:

I'd be interested to see that report.  If it happens what would be the licensing requirements I wonder, similar to moped - CBT and provisional driving licence?

Presumably there will be no requirement for a license.

i would think going by what I have heard that they will most likely come under the same rules as ebikes. As is the current case in some other countries.

Put it this way. If you need a license for an escooter what about a license for driving a disability scooter. Now they can be a real menace.

Going OT. In line road use roller skates never caught on in the UK but have a niche market in France and Germany. They can be not much slower than an ebike on power. I have come across them several kms. away from any habitation in France and in Germany have known a marathon to include a section to cater for them. I have even seen then in use by shelf stackers in super markets. No power so no legality issue.

Bernard

[Hal Nail]

6 hours ago, Ray Von said:

I'd be interested to see that report.  If it happens what would be the licensing requirements I wonder, similar to moped - CBT and provisional driving licence?

I doubt there will be any requirements: The pitfalls are so obvious they clearly dont care.

 

I've just watched someone ride one along the platform flat out as a tube pulled in. When the doors opened and people got off, he was still going full tilt on the edge of the platform leaving everyone to dive out of the way.

 

Beyond moronic, that's wilfully being anti social.

[jbqfc]

cycling home tonight i came across a que of cars i passed them to find an electric scoter going down the middle of the road not letting them pass 

i cannot see the point of them i can cycle faster than they can go 

 

John 

[Phil Traxson]

7 hours ago, 57xx said:

 

50cc is plenty

 

 

 

A prat in a pavement car!

[peterfgf]

On 06/10/2020 at 12:52, TheQ said:

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/e-scooter-trials-guidance-for-users

Strange speed limit of 15.5 mph, then I realised the rounded number is 25 kilometres/hour.

Peterfgf

[TheQ]

The count last night was 3 cyclists on pavements and one scooter that was on the pavement or road as it suited him..