One in 12 cyclists who took part in a cycling insurance company’s recent road safety survey claimed that they now believe illegal e-motorbike riders pose a greater threat to them than motorists in the UK.
The poll, commissioned by bike insurance specialist Cycleplan, surveyed 500 ‘regular’ cyclists among its policy holders, and found that eight per cent of respondents “fear” illegal e-motorbikes – often erroneously branded as e-bikes by the public and press – more than any other vehicle on the roads.
Under UK law, it is legal to ride electrically assisted pedal cycles (EAPCs), which are restricted to a maximum continuous rated power output of 250 watts and a cut-off assist speed of 15.5mph, on the roads. Riders of these compliant e-bikes do not need to register or insure their bicycle, which must also have pedals to propel it.
However, the increasing use of illegally modified high-powered bikes, which can easily exceed the 15.5mph legal limit – and therefore are legally classified as electric motorcycles – and cheap conversion kits have led to growing concerns about dangerous riding and the sharp rise in fires caused by cheaply made, poor-quality batteries which fail to comply with UK fire safety standards.
These electric motorbikes require a licence, registration, Vehicle Excise Duty, and the rider to wear an approved motorcycle helmet.
According to Cycleplan, a number of their respondents highlighted what they regarded as the erratic riding of these illegal e-motorbike riders – which they believe is harming the reputation of legal e-bikes and their owners.
“The biggest problem is dark dressed, no lights, electric bikes doing very high speeds at junctions,” one of the cyclists surveyed said. “You’re far more likely to see a car and can predict how they move.”
Meanwhile, another wrote: “The amount for times I’ve seen modified e-bike users almost hit something in the last year is very unhelpful for all cyclists who use an electric bicycle properly.”
Elsewhere in Cycleplan’s survey, just 18 per cent of respondents said they feel safe cycling on UK roads in 2026, a sharp drop from the 27 per cent who reported that they felt safe as part of the company’s most recent poll, in 2023. One respondent highlighted by the insurer claimed that they are “literally too scared to cycle now”.
Meanwhile, 40 per cent of those surveyed reported that they had been involved in a crash or collision, or a near miss, in 2025, once again up on the 33 per cent who said the same three years ago.
“The drop in how safe cyclists feel on the road is both striking and concerning,” Cycleplan’s CEO Alan Thomas said in a statement following the survey’s publication.
“However, perhaps most notable is that some riders now see other cyclists, or at least illegally modified e-bikes, as part of the problem. That suggests enforcement around e-bike speed limits hasn’t kept pace with adoption.
“Often, the issue isn’t just speed, but how unpredictable modified e-bikes can feel – particularly on cycle lanes and pavements designed for slower road users. Our research suggests the traditional cars-versus-cyclists narrative may no longer tell the full story of where riders feel most at risk.”
Last year, we reported that the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Cycling and Walking (APPGCW) warned that the government’s failure to tackle the unsafe and illegal use of e-motorbikes threatens to irrevocably damage the reputation of the UK’s legal e-bike industry, as well as undermine its efforts to promote cycling and active travel as a whole.
A report published by the cross-party group of MPs and peers also called for stricter laws to prevent online retailers from selling potentially dangerous electric bikes and conversion kits, including closing a loophole which enables sellers to list illegal e-motorbikes under the pretence that they should only be used off-road.
The group has urged the government to give the police new powers to seize unsafe “fake” e-bikes and introduce a scrappage scheme, to be funded by food delivery companies, for dangerous bikes used by their couriers.
Focusing on the gig economy, and its widespread use of high-powered, illegal e-motorbikes, the APPGCW said couriers should be given wider guaranteed rights and protections, while their employers should be required to carry out safety and compliance checks on their bikes.
During the APPGCW’s inquiry, the group was able to “easily” find e-bikes capable of 40mph speeds being sold by major online retailers and marketed “for city commutes”, as well as a 2,000-watt bike with a throttle pictured being used on city streets – both of which are illegal.
Another search on Amazon found an unsafe charger with an unfused clover leaf plug and multiple charging cables supplied, both of which are considered a fire risk by experts, the group said.
Shortly before the APPGCW published its report last summer, Labour MP Tom Hayes also called on the government to introduce stricter e-bike and e-scooter laws, arguing that the current “situation is unsafe” and that “battery safety, speeding, and enforcement” needs to be addressed “before more people are hurt”.
In 2024, the CEO of folding bike manufacturer Brompton called for a crackdown on “poor quality” e-bike batteries before public perception “snowballs into a world of fear” around e-bikes in general.
As part of their 2025 report, the APPGCW noted that stories about illegal e-bikes – including last year’s BBC Panorama special, which was widely criticised for its failure to properly distinguish between legitimate electric bikes and their illegal counterparts – have led to confusion for the public, as well as landlords, insurers, and transport operators.
A study by the Electric Bike Alliance found that only 63 per cent of people aged 25 to 34 – the demographic mostly likely to purchase an e-bike – indicated they would be able to determine if an e-bike was road-legal, and nearly one in four current e-bike owners felt unable to distinguish between road-legal e-bike products and non-legal, potentially hazardous aftermarket alternatives.
This confusion has therefore helped instigate a rise in blanket bans on e-bikes in some workplaces and travel networks, while cyclists with legal e-bikes have been refused insurance, affecting legitimate users as well as disabled people who rely on electric bikes to get around.
Cycling campaigners have long pointed out the danger in incorrectly calling these electric motorbikes ‘e-bikes’, with incidents involving high-power vehicles often wrongly attributed to legal EAPCs by the public and press.
In September, for example, the BBC was forced to amend its coverage of a collision in Scotland which it claimed involved the rider of an e-bike, a vehicle that was in fact an electric motorbike, following complaints from readers.
And last year, in an interview with road.cc, Active Travel England commissioner Chris Boardman joined the chorus calling for government action to crack down on the sale of illegal e-motorbikes and dangerous batteries.
“In a sense these are all great problems to have,” Boardman said. “Because suddenly you’re swamped in them because of popularity. So, I’d much rather be coming in that direction. But because it’s happened really quickly, we haven’t kept up.
“Some of it is a trading standards problem, that we have got illegal and non-certified products coming into our market and people have said that they will buy batteries, chargers, bikes online if it’s cheaper, and they don’t mind if it’s non-brand.
“There’s a lot of risks associated with that, so I think there’s a government aspect to this, to legislate and properly police trading standards, so those products that are illegal don’t reach our market.
“Lithium battery fires are horrendous, and they make headlines – but there are 50,000 fires that the fire brigade attend each year at the moment, and lithium batteries of e-bikes are responsible for 0.07 per cent, so it’s a tiny fraction, but it will grow with popularity,” Boardman notes.
“And if you’ve ever seen a lithium fire, it is pretty horrific. You cannot put them out, you just have to wait until it’s spent. So, we need education around that.
“The simplest way around it is to go to a reputable bike shop and you buy a brand that you recognise. But when it comes to the difference between an e-bike and an e-motorbike, over half of people are saying ‘I don’t know what you’re talking about’. In its simplest terms, any bike which has an engine that cuts out at 15 miles an hour and you have to pedal is a pedal-assisted bike.
“If you see somebody who’s not pedalling and they’re going over 15 miles an hour, that’s an e-motorbike and if it hasn’t got a registration on it and the driver hasn’t got a licence, then it’s illegal.
“And we’re seeing a lot of that in delivery riders, the gig economy, and they just want the cheapest thing they can get, or they gaffer tape extra batteries to the bike. They just need to work and that’s the problem. I think that they need to address it.”
However, Boardman also warned against diverting too much attention to e-bikes – like in Cycleplan’s survey – when, statistically, other road safety issues are much more pressing.
“We shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that 99.5 per cent of the deaths and serious injuries on our roads are caused by people in motor vehicles, so it is not a massive problem and that context is really important,” he said.
86 thoughts on ““You’re far more likely to see a car and predict how they move”: One in 12 cyclists fear illegal e-bikes more than motorists, new survey claims – as just 18% say they feel safe on UK roads”
Quote:
Including yourselves, in the top photo caption, the headline and at several other places in the article!
Or have they pulled it off
Or have they pulled it off BBC Panorama ?
“e-bike” is not a legally
“e-bike” is not a legally defined term, it is no more specifically an EAPC than it is is an electrically powerered moped or motorbike.
It is the same as “bike”, that can mean a pedal cycle (including EAPCs) or moped or motorcycle. Unlike the rider where “biker” is normally accepted as a motorbike rider & cyclist a pedal cycle rider. This is UK usage, the US may differ.
In fairness
In fairness
The only section where there’s some slightly careless uses is during the round up of various reports:
…the APPGCW noted that stories about illegal e-bikes…
…they would be able to determine if an e-bike was road-legal…
These look like they’re probably a case of ‘quoting without quoting’ – slightly rephrasing what someone else wrote without correcting their terminology.
So on the whole, your complaint seems a little hypercritical (even by my standards!).
mdavidford wrote:
It doesn’t though, it talks about people “fearing illegal ebikes”. Illegal ebikes are not ebikes but illegal electric motorbikes. The writer actually correct this in the first paragraph: “One in 12 cyclists who took part in a cycling insurance company’s recent road safety survey claimed that they now believe illegal e-motorbike riders pose a greater threat…”
Seems like missing the point
Seems like missing the point slightly. If you ask them what they fear, they will probably say ‘illegal ebikes’. The fact that such things don’t exist is irrelevant. If I say that I fear unicorns, the fact that there are no unicorns, and my fear is rooted in a nasty encounter I had with a horse eating an ice cream doesn’t mean I don’t fear unicorns.
Ah, this is the pedantry we
Ah, this is the pedantry we want to see!
mdavidford wrote:
But if I was going to write an article about your fear of unicorns I wouldn’t go along with you in describing the horse as a unicorn, I’d call it a horse. My point was that in an article that clearly makes the point that “illegal e-motorbikes [are] often erroneously branded as e-bikes by the public and press” the writer should probably be extra careful not to fall into that error themselves, as in: “During the APPGCW’s inquiry, the group was able to “easily” find e-bikes capable of 40mph speeds being sold by major online retailers” – clearly by the criteria established in the previous quote that should say “the group was able to “easily” find illegal e-motorbikes.”
I think I covered both of
I think I covered both of those – it’s slightly careless, but, despite not being in quote marks, both are essentially quoting other people – so they’re not ‘making the same mistake’; they’re presenting someone else’s mistake in an unclear way.
I’m not saying it couldn’t be better – just that the implication that they’ve done no better than the people they’re criticising is a little unfair, especially when you read the article as a whole, rather than those elements out of context. Overall, it’s quite clear on the distinction between legal EAPCs, those that were legal but have been modified in a way that means they no longer are, and machines that were always electric motorbikes to start with.
I certainly agree things
I certainly agree things would be a lot clearer, and better for law-abiding cyclists, if the media collectively agreed to use “ebike” as strictly synonymous with a lawful EAPC, and “electric motorbike”/”e-motorbike” for everything else.
But unfortunately I have to agree with ChrisA – the current state is that “ebike” is widely used to refer to both lawful EAPCs and electric motorbikes, and there is no reason why it could strictly be considered “wrong” to do so. This Gov page uses “electric bike” to refer to both legal EAPCs and electric motorbikes.
Final point of pedantry: (most?) electric motorbikes are not inherently “illegal electric motorbikes” – they are electric motorbikes being illegally used on public roads. You can legally ride an electric motorbike on public roads if it is taxed, insured, registered etc., or you can also legally ride one on private land (with the landowner’s permission).
OnYerBike wrote:
… probably less common than riding unicorns!
My local bike shop (the owner
My local bike shop (the owner, for pedants) was extolling their electric motorbike a couple of years ago. So more common than unicorns in my experience.
Gosh!
Gosh!
But did you see them actually riding it? ?
Hmm.
Hmm.
He was standing next to it in the shop (it was a motorbike, no pedals(!)) when discussing it, but I didn’t see it ridden.?
Are you saying it was a unicorn?
ChrisA wrote:
Are you saying it was a gnarwhal? https://jonesbikes.com/jones-gnarwal-carbon/
Definately no horn. Well,
Definately no horn. Well, being a motorbike it obviously had a ?, but nothing pointy.
OnYerBike wrote:
That is certainly true, but if you’re going to write an article saying that “illegal e-motorbikes [are] often erroneously branded as e-bikes by the public and press” it’s probably best to try to avoid making that error yourself.
Rendel Harris wrote:
I liked this bit, which makes almost the opposite mistake:
“Cycling campaigners have long pointed out the danger in incorrectly calling these electric motorbikes ‘e-bikes’, with incidents involving high-power vehicles often wrongly attributed to legal EAPCs by the public and press.”
I’d be amazed if they can find an example of the press “wrongly attributing an incident to a legal EAPC” (as opposed to just using a generic term).
Most of the dubious “e-bikes”
Most of the dubious “e-bikes” that I see are best described as e-mopeds being ridden illegally, or illegal EAPCs, not motorbikes.
ChrisA wrote:
Just to further muddy the already murky semantic waters, the OED describes a moped as “a small motorcycle”, i.e. a motorbike.
I stand corrected.
I stand corrected. Historically, they were under 50cc, limited to 28mph & had pedals. You need to be 16 to ride one. Apparently the requirement for pedals was dropped some time ago.
But(!) motorbikes aren’t fitted with pedals (only foot pegs), at least not for a very, very long time.
I stopped making the
I stopped making the distinction a get years ago. I now regard all ebikes as threats to my wife and 2-year old granddaughter and most are a threat to me. Even what I expect are legit ebikes are often ridden illegally on pavements, wrong way in bike lanes or on roads and the riders lack skill or peripheral vision (that includes friends of mine who have ebikes)
Your use of generalisation
Your use of generalisation would make the cyclist-hating motor fraternity proud.
I just wish they’d stay off
I just wish they’d stay off the cycle paths.
But, what’s the point in stricter laws when the ones we have aren’t enforced?
A friend of mine was hit by
A friend of mine was hit by one of those a few weeks ago on the Thames Path. He suffered facial fractures and a shattered knee. Cycle paths everywhere are full of those guys from the tatty delivery bikes all the way up to the high powered ones popular among phone thieves. It’s completely normalized now.
You can’t just try and stay away from traffic to be safe.
I feel safer on the road to
I feel safer on the road to be honest.
Agreed, in SE London
Agreed, in SE London
Thames Path has been very bad
Thames Path has been very bad for years. Even pedal bikes ridden furiously into blind corners with no consideration for child or low mobility person or other cyclist coming other way. Foot tunnels have been mayhem for 20 years
This is a fundamentally
This is a fundamentally erroneous question – if they are on these electric motorcycles, then they ARE motorists.
The most common issue I see
The most common issue I see in the e-bike discussion is this sort of thing… admittedly this news story is about the UK, but we must be cognizant of the fact that “motorist”, “bicycle”, “e-bike” and so on are terms that vary depending on the local law. What the UK considers an electric motorcycle is a type of bicycle in the majority of the world, and increasingly, online conversations matter more than local laws (or at least cause more strife).
I was in Beaulieu Motor
I was in Beaulieu Motor Museum the summer before last and they’ve got some early motorcycles there. They’re not much more than a heavy bike with a motor and fuel tank attached.
You can actually buy a petrol engine that attaches to a mountain bike and turns it into a motorbike. What’s the actual difference between that and using a battery powered motor?
Noise and fumes !
Noise and fumes !
Hirsute wrote:
Is this in reference to the machines in question, or the contents of this comments section?
Putting aside the other valid
Putting aside the other valid issues people have raised, honestly the survey has the stench of London-centrism all over it. Yes yes, lots of people live there, but many more people don’t – up here beyond the wall I think I’ve seen one illegal emotorbike in the last year, whereas I’ve been almost killed by car drivers three times in that timeframe and deliberately put in danger by them so many times I can’t even recall them all. I can imagine that if you’re a fairly new utility cyclist using London’s growing network of infrastructure then having some goober on one of these e-scrambler things buzz past you at speed probably feels a bit wooly…but honestly that sounds like the same kind of sentiment you see from peds all the time about how they’re “terrified” of bicycles passing them at slightly above jogging speed on shared paths, ie a complete misperception of the actual danger.
How many people have actually been put in a life-threatening situation by these things? A few no doubt, but compared to cars…? Seems like Cycleplan are happy to let themselves be used to muddy the water by The Other Side to generate an eyecatching marketing headline – something to bear in mind next time you’re renewing your insurance.
Well, I’m not terrified
Well, I’m not terrified exactly, but I’ve been buzzed by them several times around north Edinburgh, which isn’t great. And just before Christmas had a handful of hilarious “let’s play chicken” encounters.
I don’t think they’d stop and enquire after my wellbeing if they ran into me (by miscalculation or design). I’d guess some are ridden by the yoof who haven’t yet got the use of ICE motorbikes (or found them unlocked…). Why? Through seeing some “one-leg standing on the saddle” wheelies pulled weaving down the road – more skills that me… There have been injuries and at least one death from the scrambler / possibly nicked motorbike crew (over a decade or so TBF).
At least with the ICE motorbikes you can hear them from some distance. Does marginally reduce the startle factor.
I think most (who ignore me) are probably just busy delivering… I don’t know what, but suspect it’s more valuable than a takeaway.
Plenty of them around
Plenty of them around Aberdeen, too.
ICE or electric motorcycles
ICE or electric motorcycles are no use to them… too difficult to jump on and off pavements and go whatever direction you want
E6toSE3 wrote:
Perhaps you are a bit old to remember “Kick start”? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kick_Start_(TV_series)
I’m not a great fan of everything electric, and I’m sure in parts these are highly salient. I’m sorry you’re finding things terrifying now – it does seem London has changed quite a bit in relatively short time (a couple of decades).
BUT perhaps also a measure of things being more worrying with age / as one realises that one is neither as robust as before nor can one shrug off minor harms or injury? I do notice I sometimes find “yoof” more concerning than some time back. And I’m not sure it’s the yoof changing…?
OTOH despite hearing some complaints in NL people older than me there don’t seem to be declaring it is going to the dogs… with vastly more cycling (all kinds) than the UK. Indeed – don’t take it on trust – you can go and watch hours of soothing videos from their busy urban environments…
How is it different there? Obviously lots of differences, but better infra for BOTH cyclists and pedestrians (at the expense of driver infra in places) would see to be a key one. If the offering for cyclists doing the “right thing” is good enough then it turns out the vast majority of people stick to it. And society will usually back police when dealing with the remaining scoff-laws. Humans are the same lazy, sometimes rule- breaking people there…
Of course – in London there may be a transition occurring (to a bit more cycling) – and unfortunately those always seem to be accompanied by “people working it out for themselves”. I can just hold out the Dutch example as a better place (still imperfect) we will hopefully reach.
I’ve seen them terrorizing
I’ve seen them terrorizing kids, pedestrians and other users on the Bristol to Bath railway path, in Road.cc’s back yard.
The sad thing is that this could – will – damage the image of ‘proper’ e-bikes, and reduce the real benefits that they could bring. We need to start referring to the illegal sh17boxes as something different – “e-moto” or something
I’m not in London, but here
I’m not in London, but here in Southampton they are absolutely everywhere.
The difference between the pedestrian and their perception of the standard bike passing too close and the cyclist and the electric bike passing too close is that the electric bike is far heavier and travels much faster and can do considerably more damage.
I think I’m a fairly considerate cyclist around pedestrians. I ring my bell from a good distance, slow down when I get close, and pass with a friendly wave and a thank you. I see a lot of pedestrians on a particular cycle route I take often, which is a shared route that runs along a national speed limit road on the other side of Southampton Water, but I also see a number of electric motorcycles on it – and they charge towards me at speeds of over 30mph, either with no lights or a very bright light, and they never slow down or make enough space to pass comfortably. It’s an entirely different order of dangerous than even an inconsiderate cyclist.
SecretSam wrote:
I ride a ‘proper’ ebike as SecretSam puts it, but I ride it as bensynnock describes. Nobody has ever called me out because I’m riding an e-bike and they’ve heard dreadful things about them.
I just don’t think in reality people are conflating the behaviour of (1) terrorising youths who would, back in the day, have had ICE scramblers; or (2) delivery riders ignoring the rules to maximise deliveries; with EAPC riders.
Not just youths or delivery
Not just youths or delivery riders riding recklessly. Now, in London at least, it’s middle-aged men and women, even with children on seats on handlebars!
Good grief – you must live in
Good grief – you must live in some kind of bicycle dystopia.
Perhaps they’re in the same
Perhaps they’re in the same place where a certain wheelchair-using poster was getting run over by a peloton of cyclists every week?
Yes, there were so many, he’d
Yes, there were so many, he’d lost count of the number of wheelchair-toppling, lycra-clad terror-cyclists careering along the pavements.
Exactly describes my
Exactly describes my experience
Living in SE London, it’s
Living in SE London, it’s difficult to convey the full horror of ebike and related machinery, also otherwise legit pedal cycles on pavements. Narrow misses are a nearly daily occurrence for me. I’m a very fit 70, my wife is far less mobile, our older friends are terrified for good reason, I’m scared when with 2-year old granddaughter. Given the massive uptake of bike type travel in London compared with rest of UK, it’s fair to say London experience is different but affects huge numbers of pedestrians and legit riders every day.
Netherlands also finding ebike behaviour is wrecking their previously idyllic bike world
E6toSE3 wrote:
Living in SE London, it’s difficult to convey the absolute bollocks this is and has been every single time you’ve posted it.
Oh dear! Dimwit Lying
Oh dear! Dimwit Lying Saturation Troll is back.
It might not all be e-bikes
It might not all be e-bikes but there is indeed a constant stream of bollocks
on the pavements in SE London
I can only see one actually
I can only see one actually on the pavement and most of the rest seem to be on the Thames Path, somewhere around the Woolwich/Erith area if I’m not mistaken. Still illegal of course but not swarming the pavements as claimed by our SE London correspondent.
Looks like the world hasn’t
Looks like the world hasn’t changed much – hard to tell exactly but the majority of these look like the usual run of “illegal use of scrambler bikes, mopeds etc” (in Edinburgh you can sometimes add quad bikes). Which is nothing new (still unwelcome though).
Question would be is there more of this overall with electric motorbikes, and has this changed usage patterns / danger?
The food delivery riders (on cycle infra) are a relatively new thing under the sun. But none of those pictured appear to be. Dunno about London but in Edinburgh those folks usually seem keen not to draw attention to themselves. Or more likely simply don’t have the spare cash to spend on the higher powered bikes and then worry about it getting trashed or stolen. Most of them seem to rent – and most of those machines appear to be almost- EAPCs (perhaps just with throttles which aren’t being legally used).
It seems the police have not been very interested in this kind of activity for as long as I can recall – long before electric motorbikes. Barring the odd crackdown on eg. moped-equipped phone thieves, or incidentally when they’re busting drug dealers who may been making use of them.
Owners and riders of
Owners and riders of illegally modified e-bikes, or IMeBs, shall be specifically targeted by the police and traffic warders as they break the traffic rules and cause immediate danger to other road users. Each seized IMeB shall be destroyed.
Tempting but pedantically
Tempting but pedantically repeating what others posted
a) what is an illegally modified e-bike (not a thing in law AFAICS) and
b) under what law would police be doing so? Perhaps annoyingly the only illegal action is riding an electric thing which isn’t an EAPC (or escooter which is part of a trial scheme, or mobility vehicle …) on the road * , or footway, or cycle lane. Plus on the tiny minority of cycle *paths* which are actually part of the “carriageway”. Plus any ones via eg. Sustrans – depending on byelaws.
So if you’re selling it or own it or just stood next to it, no foul in the UK currently.
* unless you’ve complied with all the regs to ride it as essentially a moped, which i grant probably only applies to a handful of people in the UK.
If it doesn’t meet the
If it doesn’t meet the criteria for being a legal E-bike – no throttle (with exceptions for older bikes), max 250w, max speed before assist stops of 15.5mph etc, then it’s a motorcycle – and if it’s not insured, MOT, taxed etc then it’s illegal. Whether it’s modified or built in a factory makes no difference. The same law that deals with untaxed, uninsured etc motor vehicles can deal with the electric variety.
I don’t know why this is difficult.
bensynnock wrote:
Agree that some of that is simple. Difficult because there’s money involved?
But perhaps you’ve also made the error that I used to and many continue to – the “illegal” only arises when someone rides it on a road / footway (having not complied with the conditions to do so as eg. a moped or new type-approved thing). Before that it’s just an object and no laws are broken AFAICS. (Except perhaps if people are mis-selling stuff).
I would like to see if we can tighten the law a bit. Around advertising and sale would be a start although people tell me that is tricky. But at least the enforcement of existing rules (and maybe confiscate the things although I don’t know the legal basis here).
But it seems there is zero political interest…
And pretty much zero police
And pretty much zero police interest, at least here in Surrey.
Two of the scariest incidents
Two of the scariest incidents I’ve encountered as a cyclist involved motorbikes, the type called scooters, although that term can now be confusing with the introduction of escooters. In the first, I was riding along a quiet road when the scooter heading in the opposite direction saw me and crossed to my side, heading straight at me. He did veer back to his side of the road before the situation became an actual game of chicken. The second, I was pulling away from lights when a scooter rider came past me as close as he dared, kicking out at me with his left leg, looking back at me and filming the incident on his phone.
In those days, such idiots needed a decent amount of money for a bike, CBT, etc. Illegal, unregistered e-motorbikes have removed this barrier. From what I’ve seen, almost everyone riding such a motorbike who isn’t a delivery rider has exactly the same cavalier disregard for others’ safety. Until the police treat them exactly the same as any other unlicenced motorist on an unregistered vehicle, this will only get worse.
Liked the comment, hate the
Liked the comment, hate the fact it’s true to my experience
OK so I sit on the safer end
OK so I sit on the safer end of illegality … I bought my first E-Bike before I was aware of the 15(.5?) assisted limit. I hadn’t cycled much for a couple of years but prior to that I’d happily peddled my lightweight tourer at speeds in excess of that. The E-Bike is much harder to peddle unassisted even on slight inclines and 15mph seems so nanny-state. So I found out how to make the illegal adjustment to allow assisted pedalling up to 20mph, a speed I’d ridden safely at for years. And that on a bike with wheel rim brakes rather than hydraulic disks. There are lots of issues I agree that need addressing around illegality but am I the only cyclist that finds 15mph unacceptable?
What you consider acceptable
What you consider acceptable and why?
15.5mph is plenty IMO, obviously in the US “but this one goes up to 20mph”.
Why? I have some thought to what happens when everyone gets one. (A bit of a stretch of the imagination in the UK, but I’m optimistic). Or rather – will having more speedy machines facilitate or hinder mass cycling / nicer places?
But perhaps other people are less of a worry for you though, if you’ve already ditched some rules that you can’t be doing with?
A motorbike is always an option if you want power + faster. You can probably bolt a wattbike or peloton to it if you really want exercise at the same time.
Or if it’s just “faster with less effort” you want then pony up for CF bikes or go full velomobile. (Swings and roundabouts with those though, if it’s lumpy you’ll be going quite slow uphill! Some folks even add (legal) power assist for that, but then you’ve also added weight that you only use part of the time to an already heavy item…)
Motorbike, whether petrol or
Motorbike, whether petrol or electric is not an alternative. They can’t jump on and off pavements or swerve through red lights and cars and legit cyclists going through the green lights
Roymondo wrote:
A better solution may have been to use the EAPC legally until you regained your former fitness and then get back on a push bike and travel as fast as you like.
We (cyclists) can’t pick and choose what laws we are going to abide by and expect others (motorists) not to do the same thing.
I think there was another
I think there was another thread where this was debated at length, viz “the assistance should let me ride as fast as I used to under my own steam”. I appreciate (from personal experience) it’s frustrating not being as fast as before, but I don’t think the speed of an erstwhile club cyclist is an appropriate benchmark to apply to the wide range of EAPC users.
Bungle_52 wrote:
To be fair, motorists do seem to have latitude in choosing which laws to abide by. Often the police will even make up excuses for the drivers..
Often the police will even
Often the police will even make up excuses for the drivers..
That’s no longer necessary in the Trump post-truth world where the advanced forces like Lancashire don’t bother with any of that stuff and simply ignore most offences. I’ve shown the indisputable red light offences, the unbroken single and double white line offences, the handheld mobile phone offences, the MOT offences etc. Lancashire Constabulary don’t make up excuses any more, they just refuse to respond and the doomed PCC just says that’s ‘an operational decision of the police’. It’s the police who make traffic law in the UK- they only apply it to people they don’t like. Only today I sent a video to UpRide of a gross double white line offence, which will undoubtedly be ignored but will appear on here.
A very few motorists ignore
A very few motorists ignore speed limits nowadays. I assisted with a speed gun programme in SE London. Eye evidence and stats show SE London drivers are far better than is generally assumed. Ebikes, escooters, and many pedal cycles now jump on and off pavements at all sorts of speeds and expect pedestrians to jump out of their way
E6toSE3 wrote:
80% of motorists admit that they ignore 20mph limits and 54% admit they ignore 30mph limits, with 43% admitting they ignore motorway limits. There are over thirty million motorists in the UK, 80% of 30,000,000 ≠ “a very few”.
It would seem that the
It would seem that the principle of the law is simple:
Beyond 15.5 mph/250W the weight and power of the machine means that the rules for motorcycles become applicable.
Therefore cyclists are welcome to have a motorised bicycle that doesn’t require any kind of licence, training, documentation or registration so long as it meets the EAPC rules.
If they want more power then they must comply with the established rules for motorcycles.
The line has to be drawn somewhere and a recent discussion in parliament to raise the limit to 500W was rejected.
But noone seems aware that
But noone seems aware that laws and Highway Code about bike type machines exist. There’s been a near total collapse in such awareness, except from a few of us old enough to have known Tufty Club and Green Cross Code or passed the driving test
My dad owns a bike shop and
My dad owns a bike shop and every time someone comes in wanting to buy a new cheap e-bike he makes them test ride an expensive one after they complain about the weight of the cheap one. If you really want an e-bike get an expensive legal one and it will feel like your riding a normal bike at high speeds and just be easier to accelerate and go up hills. If you want to go faster than 15mph instead of breaking the law to do so you can just get the bike registered, get insurance for it and wear a motorbike helmet (this only works if you have a motorbike license) and because it’s now classed as an electric motorbike you are fully legal because it’s registered and insured.
No. But many ebike riders do
No. But many ebike riders do find it unacceptable so they ride on pavements at 20 to 30+, even more mph on pavements because legit ebikes and pedal cycles are clogging up the bike lanes and cars adhering to 20 moh limits are too slow. You can feel the blast if wind as they go past and watch them undertaking cars
“Clogging up the bike lanes”?
“Clogging up the bike lanes”? Interesting choice of phrasing. If they’re riding at 30mph on pavements, then both the machine and their riding are clearly illegal, no? And the police should be doing something about it.
Not just ebikes. Also
Not just ebikes. Also escooters and something I noticed for first time on Thursday, then saw two together, today – emonobikes. All doing 20 to 30+ moh on pedestrian only pavements or shared ped-bike pavements. Just dodged a couple on Thursday – silent, fast, reckless, heavy, ridden by large men. Terrifying for my less sprightly, same age (70) wife, and me when out with 2-year old granddaughter.
Dutch friends say same thing destroying their once idyllic bike culture.
Today, all but one bike of any kind that I saw was on pedestrian pavements, even when an excellent bike lane between pavement and car lane. Bikes ignore Highway Code priority requirements. I’m thinking of carrying walking poles to threaten them back. In evenings (1 hour walk home from work), I already wear my bike reflective bands on wrists and ankles plus a red rear light on my head and carry a front light.
Will try out my new Lezyne Radar rear & front light combo on my bikes tomorrow
Emonobikes? Surely it’s
Emonobikes? Surely it’s either a mono or a bike?
May they meant to to write
May they meant to write ’emobikes’ – they’re a menace – can’t see where they’re going due to the fringes.
Yet again Chav’s dictating
Yet again Chav’s dictating attitudes to cyclists!
All the while disguising the utter incompetance of trading standards at stopping this crap even reaching the country!!!!!!!
If this kit isnt available to buy then the problem wouldnt exist.. jesus its not dificult!!
Deanord wrote:
Nor’s grammar or not being bigoted, but here you are
Deanord wrote:
Trying to stop the import of legal equipment (for use on private land) because they are being used illegally on public roads is just back to front. If the police aren’t sufficiently motivated to enforce the traffic laws, then why do you think that trading standards would be motivated? It’s just moving the problem around without actually addressing it.
Banning the sale of e-motorbikes is pointless as it’s trivial to fit a motor onto a bike frame (e.g. ghetto conversions), so would you want trading standards to prevent motors being sold? Washing Machines? Bikes? Copper wire?
When you consider that ICE-motorbikes are also available to buy in off-road configurations which are almost exactly the same situation – legal to use on private land and illegal to use on the roads.
The answer as we all know is to get the police to do their jobs. Increased traffic police would solve a number of problems including this one, though personally, I think drivers still present the most danger. I’ve only heard of a couple of e-motorbike related deaths.
I think it’s both … anyone
I think it’s both … anyone can fit dodgy electrics in their house and save cash on an electrician, or sell cowboy toasters, but we still have standards and don’t just give up because otherwise we’ll have to police wire sales.
Most people are creatures of habit. If it’s on sale at a “reputable high street store” (*cough* CurrysPCWorld) they’re much more likely to get it than off the dark web. (Also would be “astonished” when stopped for using one illegally no doubt).
I agree that our online shopping behaviour has changed things. But perhaps how we might regulate / police that is its own topic?
Without “address both” it’s more like allowing the illegal drugs to be sold and just trying to stop people using. Although that’s not the best analogy as I also agree it’s easy to get overexcited about e-things when eg. of course illegal ICE motorbike use hasn’t gone away.
But I do think the e- things (other than EAPCs) are overall not helpful if we’re on a (very slow) journey towards getting the benefits of cycling as a normal mainstream transport option.
chrisonabike wrote:
The issue is that e-motorbikes and private e-scooters aren’t illegal. They may well be useful for people working on farms or race tracks amongst other places, so preventing their sale seems like a strange way to approach a problem that has always existed.
hawkinspeter wrote:
We’ve discussed this previously – if you’re fine with such toys that appear to be universally misused that’s one thing. (And again I agree we still have misuse of scrambler bikes – but I would suggest that nobody is under the illusion – or self- deception – that is all legit, unlike “is just a bike innit?”).
But I’m not seeing why you apparently believe that lots of farmers, festival organiser and race track users (is this a thing?) are driving in to urban electrical goods stores to get their essential yet underpowered (relative to eg. quad bikes) vehicles?
chrisonabike wrote:
Yes, their popularity is down to how cheap and useful they are along with the very lax state of traffic enforcement. I just think that trying to stop the import is just adding more laws when our current laws are barely enforced. If traffic policing is prioritised, then that also addresses issues such as cloned license plates, distracted driving, lack of tax etc. Maybe once that’s done, we should look at banning the really problematic products, but I suspect that it wouldn’t be necessary because people wouldn’t want to buy a bike that’s likely to get taken away by the coppers.
Of course, this is all hypothetical.
What’s more likely is that the narrative of “dangerous cyclists” will be pushed by the MSM and then steps will be taken to prevent people cycling as the “minor” issue of legal vs illegal e-bikes will be ignored by the frenzied mobs.
hawkinspeter wrote:
I have only anecdata but I think you could add “way cheaper than motorbike and needs no fiddly licence, tax, insurance, helmet” at the head of that. I certainly don’t think all users have other criminal acts as their main use case but the attraction of “get a motorbike and attract no attention” has an attraction for the somewhat dodgy or at least those who feel that merely adhering to all the laws is for those much richer.
Yes, but while the presence of police keeps many honest folks honest, I am increasingly dubious that we can indeed just police it better. Or at least not in the usual way – I think some of your previous ideas to leverage tech have promise.
That’s because i suspect:
a) many crashes are “sporadic” – otherwise lawful drivers just going haywire / making terrible blunders / taking bizarre decisions because humans. I don’t think policing touches that. I guess this point hinges on the rates of this, the number of drivers, the extent that people consider they aren’t good drivers / worry about the law vs. the damage done by the undoubted serial offenders.
b) because mass motoring there’s continued pressure not to make this exclusive wording against improving driver standards (“right to drive” isn’t it). So I suspect there’s a *lot* of marginally competent drivers just waiting for the “wrong circumstances”. More so as driving is a club: we train / test once per lifetime.
c) This would be trying to get police to promote cultural change. Not unheard of but hard (without a great deal of policing, which creates huge push-back when there are so many motorists). Plus the police are at least as motor-dependent as the rest of us!
I just think that trying to
I just think that trying to stop the import is just adding more laws when our current laws are
barely enforcednot enforced at all due to police hopeless ineptitude, idleness and a determination to prove that they are the ones who make law in the UKImmediately across the road from WU13 RYT as shown below, at the Old Garstang Police Station, dedicated offender HN21 VXB turned up this afternoon. This was first identified in April 25 as ‘No VED since 1.4.24’, but I couldn’t report that, of course because neither the police nor DVLA are interested even though he has a Facebook page which shows the vehicle in the photo section. Then it was spotted again and reported to the police August 25 because of ‘No MOT since July 25’, but the report was ignored, of course. That’s going to PC 706 Mike Duff for him to ignore as well.
PS For architecture and social history lovers: it’s the Old Garstang Police House on the left, and the Old Police Station on the right
The answer as we all know is
The answer as we all know is to get the police to do their jobs
WU13 RYT
However, they’re not going to do that, even if someone else does most of it for them. This vehicle, no MOT since 5.9.25, was first reported to Lancashire police on 17.10.25. I happen to know where the owner lives, and I pass his house almost every day- the vehicle was away for several days over Christmas, but there on New Year’s Day. The Garstang Neighbourhood Policing Team recently put out their own email address along with an appeal for people to inform them of offences. Just for a laugh, I duly informed PC 706 Mike Duff of Garstang Police Station on 11th January about this case and BF64 TGE (the case I have often mentioned with no VED for 4 years which I have been reporting to DVLA since May 22). As expected, he replied on 12th January that VED is nothing to do with the police, but MOT is a police matter. He said he was going there the same day- the house is immediately opposite Old Garstang Police Station, about 3 minutes away by bike. The car is still out most of most working days, back in the evenings. You can see for yourself the result of this diligent police activity.