1-1-2016 Today's Change in the Law.

[Ruadh495]

I think it's exactly what the 2005 guidelines flecc has linked to are saying. They define an EAPC class by power output, speed, weight and number of wheels (the last two removed in 2015) and go to that that a vehicle shall be a motorcycle if it falls outside those requirements by reason of power output or speed (weight, wheels) but not method of power control.

They note separately that some EAPCs may be subject to type approval if not exempt due to a set of requirements including the words "if the cyclist stops pedalling". They go on to note that the "relevant authorities" are unlikely to act and that the relevant authorities are trading standards and the action is to prevent sale (not the highway authority / police prosecuting users).

If it falls within the EAPC category it is not considered a motorcycle in the UK, regardless of its type approval status. It may be an EAPC which requires type approval and is being used without. This is still illegal, but in a different way. Penalties have yet to be decided.

Yes, I do think there is a difference between EPAC and EAPC. EPAC refers to a machine which is exempt from type approval under 2002/24/EC and/or 168/2013. This may not have a throttle. EAPC is a UK category meeting the requirements of the EAPC Regulations 1983 as amended 2015. This may have a throttle. It is EAPC which is treated as a pedal cycle under the UK Road Traffic Act. Since April 2015 all EPACs have also been EAPCs, before this many were motorcycles because of their power output. Some EAPCs (ones with throttles) are not EPACs and so require type approval, but are still treated as pedal cycles under the RTA.

 

[Ruadh495]

But I am sure they are waiting for the courts to sort it out. That's how English law works. If the first ebiker they attempt to prosecute is wealthy and can fight we may get a favourable result, if not an unfavourable precedent will be set.

 

[flecc]

But I am sure they are waiting for the courts to sort it out. That's how English law works. If the first ebiker they attempt to prosecute is wealthy and can fight we may get a favourable result, if not an unfavourable precedent will be set.

Basically you maintain that the EAPC regulations are what matters in the UK, and the DfT's notices appear to support that. However, when called upon to support that view, they did the reverse and backed 168/2013 as the law on usage.

In brief, in 2012 a traffic officer attempted to prosecute an e-biker for using a 250 watt machine, since the EAPC regulations only permitted 200 watts rating. With assistance from me, BEBA, (British Electric Bike Association) argued that that 168/2013's 250 watts was acceptable in UK by reason of the EU primacy in this area.

Frustrated by this, the officer appealed to his force for help and they approached the DfT for clarification. The DfT ruled in favour of 168/2013 and against the EAPC regulations for this usage so the prosecution didn't go ahead.

There's the problem, no matter how we interpret the position, the DfT acts in contradictory ways according to the circumstances. It seems expediency rules, as their odd ruling on type approval for throttles shows.
.

 

[Kudoscycles]

This article in Bike Europe seems to suggest that the EU are favourable to pedelecs having throttles up to 25kph(15,5 mph)
Unsolved problems
The details of the type-approval have been elaborated by the European Commission and laid down in 4 separate Regulations. They deal with environmental and propulsion performance, vehicle construction, functional safety and with administrative requirements. Whereas the framework Regulation is difficult to change, these Regulations can be quite easily modified. That is why the Commission is continuously talking to the Members States and the stakeholders in the Motorcycle Working Group on necessary corrections, amendments, etc.

In that framework, there are still quite a few issues on the agenda for electric bicycles. One of which is the categorization of electric bikes that have a so-called throttle. The Member States have asked for clear guidelines. It seems that the Commission is willing to exclude pedal assisted bikes with throttles up to 25 km/h – 250 W. All other throttle operated bikes would come under L1e-A and require type-approval. A second, very important issue is the categorization of so-called speed pedelecs that do not comply with factor 4 (ratio of auxiliary propulsion power and actual pedal power). In the Regulation on vehicle safety requirements, there is a mention of “cycles designed to pedal” including a reference to factor 4. The question is whether the s0-called speed pedelecs that do not comply with factor 4 can be type-approved as L1e-B, whilst falling outside the scope of the mention on cycles designed to pedal. The Commission has not yet given a final opinion on this.

Published by Jack Oortwijn on 5 Jan 2016

What do we think of that,perhaps someone will decipher the complete article,it seems the absolute opposite of what the Dft are proposing?
KudosDave

 

[Ruadh495]

And then the government demonstrated that they consider EAPC1983 to still have force by amending it, which wouldn't be necessary if it were simply overruled by 168/2013...

I'd suggest they dropped a prosecution which could have got them in hot water with the EU, since they were clearly in breach of both 2012/24/EC and 168/2013 by not having already amended EAPC1983. Had the prosecution gone ahead a court could have found the rider in breach of UK law, but also found the law itself to be illegal under EU law. So they avoided the issue by dropping the prosecution. As you say, expediency.

How would you, and BEBA, react to an attempted prosecution of an e-biker for using a throttle equipped EAPC today? Given the amount of doubt in how the law applies it wouldn't be inconsistent to argue that EAPC is the relevant legislation. Wouldn't change the fact that an offence had been committed (168/2013 remains law), but that would be a one of "no type approval" rather than an RTA offence of "no insurance, no license etc" since these are not required for the EAPC category.

 

[flecc]

How would you, and BEBA, react to an attempted prosecution of an e-biker for using a throttle equipped EAPC today? Given the amount of doubt in how the law applies it wouldn't be inconsistent to argue that EAPC is the relevant legislation. Wouldn't change the fact that an offence had been committed (168/2013 remains law), but that would be a one of "no type approval" rather than an RTA offence of "no insurance, no license etc" since these are not required for the EAPC category.

Of course this is hypothetical until January 2018 when we will know if there is a UK type approval method for EAPC's.

I think that until then an appeal to the DfT to intervene to block a prosecution woudl be successful, expediency again to avoid the impossible situation of there being no possible method of type approval.
.

 

[Ruadh495]

Of course this is hypothetical until January 2018 when we will know if there is a UK type approval method for EAPC's.

I think that until then an appeal to the DfT to intervene to block a prosecution woudl be successful, expediency again to avoid the impossible situation of there being no possible method of type approval.
.

I'm sure it would, but that "defence" does assume that the vehicle is still classed as EAPC and benefits from an EAPC's Road Traffic Act exemptions.

I suspect there is no such offence as "using without type approval". It hasn't been necessary, motor vehicles require type approval to be registered and there is an offence of "using unregistered". Now for the first time we have a class (EAPC with a throttle) which requires type approval but is exempt from registration. This may mean the UK is still in breach of 168/2013 by permitting such vehicles to be placed in service, but it's not something an individual can be prosecuted for.

Sales are another matter. There are offences relating to selling an article which requires type approval and is not so approved. These could also apply to sales of used vehicles.

Which brings me back where I started. An individual can not be prosecuted (not quite the same is "it's legal" but near enough in the UK) for using a self-built vehicle which conforms to EAPC1983 amended 2015 but which is not exempt from 168/2013, or a 168/2013 exempt vehicle which has been modified so that it is no longer exempt, but still conforming to EAPC1983 (that just means a 250W pedelec with a throttle, since that's the only difference).

However, an individual can be prosecuted for selling such a vehicle, or offering it for sale.

So you can build it and ride it under EAPC, but not sell it without type approval.

That would accord with the guidance the DfT have been providing.

The DfT can also deal with this quite simply: Both 168/2013 and 2012/24/EC explicitly do not regulate single vehicle approvals. So all they need to do is to state officially that U.K. SVA arrangements for vehicles conforming to the EAPC Regulations consist of self-certification by the constructor. This certification to take the form of a plate or label stating the constructor's name, the wattage and the maximum assisted speed (sound familiar?). Anyone think they might actually do that?

 

[flecc]

The DfT can also deal with this quite simply: Both 168/2013 and 2012/24/EC explicitly do not regulate single vehicle approvals. So all they need to do is to state officially that U.K. SVA arrangements for vehicles conforming to the EAPC Regulations consist of self-certification by the constructor. This certification to take the form of a plate or label stating the constructor's name, the wattage and the maximum assisted speed (sound familiar?). Anyone think they might actually do that?

I doubt they would, this opinion based of the fact that they advise use of current SVA for single vehicles in their latest advice notices.

I think that by 2018 they may have put in place a suitable VCA SVA class for EAPCs.
.

 

[Ruadh495]

I doubt they would, this opinion based of the fact that they advise use of current SVA for single vehicles in their latest advice notices.

I think that by 2018 they may have put in place a suitable VCA SVA class for EAPCs.
.

I don't think they would either, but legally they could.

They would also have to put in place some consequences for not obtaining and a system for identifying vehicles, probably by requiring registration. Then they won't be able to resist adding licensing, insurance, helmets...

It appears from Kudoscycles' post above that the EU may prempt all of that, presumably by striking the reference to power being removed when pedalling stops from exemption h of 168/2013.

 

[flecc]

It appears from Kudoscycles' post above that the EU may prempt all of that, presumably by striking the reference to power being removed when pedalling stops from exemption h of 168/2013.

This whole matter of throttles is under discussion in the EU in relation to L1e-A, but from the links previously posted by shemozzle there are interestas arguing against them being allowed, even on that class.

We'll probably have to be patient to see what way the the issue goes, but we know the European Commission isn't very tolerant in these issues. For example, the EU Parliament recently made the very sensible recommendation that EAPC/EPAC power limits be dispensed with and left to designers, the grounds being that the 25kph/15.5mph restriction was adequate,

The Commission rejected it.
.

 

[Kudoscycles]

So what's the considered view....can we fit 15,5 mph throttles?
KudosDave

 

[Kudoscycles]

Of course this is hypothetical until January 2018 when we will know if there is a UK type approval method for EAPC's.

I think that until then an appeal to the DfT to intervene to block a prosecution woudl be successful, expediency again to avoid the impossible situation of there being no possible method of type approval.
.

Sorry flecc.....where did you get the type approval date of January 2018 from? Apologies if it is in the middle of this thread.
Thanks
KudosDave

 

[craiggor]

Sorry flecc.....where did you get the type approval date of January 2018 from? Apologies if it is in the middle of this thread.
Thanks
KudosDave

 

[flecc]

Sorry flecc.....where did you get the type approval date of January 2018 from? Apologies if it is in the middle of this thread.
Thanks
KudosDave

No problem Dave:

December 2015 Guidance on European Type Approval for certain Electrically Assisted Pedal Cycles (EAPC)

Section 3.2

Requirements of European type approval for vehicles sold after
1 Jan 2018.

From 1 Jan 2018 all EAPC which are of the “twist and go” type will need a full type approval to 168/2013. This encompasses a long list of requirements, on lighting, brakes, and so on, although in many cases “bicycle” CEN standards are accepted and low speed vehicles are exempt from some
requirements.

Link to this document
.

 

[flecc]

I suspect there is no such offence as "using without type approval". It hasn't been necessary, motor vehicles require type approval to be registered and there is an offence of "using unregistered". Now for the first time we have a class (EAPC with a throttle) which requires type approval but is exempt from registration. This may mean the UK is still in breach of 168/2013 by permitting such vehicles to be placed in service, but it's not something an individual can be prosecuted for.

There is one intended:

What are the penalties for not having type approval?

The relevant domestic regulations are in draft form and will be subject to a short consultation in due course. Currently a range of fines are envisaged as penalties, depending on the severity and
persistence of the offence. After modification following any comments received, the regulations will be published and enter into force immediately.

This extract from December 2015 Guidance on European Type Approval for certain Electrically Assisted Pedal Cycles (EAPC), section 4.

Link to Document.
.

 

[Kudoscycles]

If the type approval is not compulsory until 1 January 2018 and currently there is no mechanism to achieve that type approval I cannot see how penalties can be applied if the cause of those penalties is a non existent type approval.
I had to read my statement back to myself to ensure it made sense of a senseless situation.
KudosDave

 

[flecc]

If the type approval is not compulsory until 1 January 2018 and currently there is no mechanism to achieve that type approval I cannot see how penalties can be applied if the cause of those penalties is a non existent type approval.
I had to read my statement back to myself to ensure it made sense of a senseless situation.
KudosDave

That's why I'm maintaining that throttles are ok on non-type approved new e-bikes until January 2018. Using one is an offence, but all the authorities can do is wag an admonitory finger at offenders.

A bit like the Japanese seat belt law, where offenders must appear in court and be found guilty, but there is no penalty.
.

 

[Ruadh495]

That's why I'm maintaining that throttles are ok on non-type approved new e-bikes until January 2018. Using one is an offence, but all the authorities can do is wag an admonitory finger at offenders.

A bit like the Japanese seat belt law, where offenders must appear in court and be found guilty, but there is no penalty.
.

I don't think they can even do that at moment. Until an actual offence is put on the statute book (this might happen by 2018?) there's nothing to be charged with.

Worth noting (particularly for KudosDave), that this is for private individuals using a non-compliant EAPC; the situation is likely to be very different for a trader selling such an item.

It's also worth noting that 2016-2017 bikes will not be "grandfathered". You will almost certainly get away with using it now, but in 2018?

What I think we have clarified is that a requirement for type approval alone does not appear to disqualify a vehicle from the UK EAPC category. It will still be treated as a pedal cycle under UK road traffic legislation if it's rated power is 250W or less and it does not assist beyond 15.5mph.

The offence in question would be one relating to the use of a pedal cycle and we should expect both the penalties and likelihood of prosecution to reflect that.

 

[flecc]

Worth noting (particularly for KudosDave), that this is for private individuals using a non-compliant EAPC; the situation is likely to be very different for a trader selling such an item.

But of course there is no law against selling non-compliant vehicles, so long as they are not claimed to be compliant.
.

 

[Ruadh495]

But of course there is no law against selling non-compliant vehicles, so long as they are not claimed to be compliant.
.

Are there no trade regulations requiring that items are appropriately marked and meet standards? It would probably be a matter of EN15194 and CE marking rather than the type approval requirement as such.

Possibly not, actually, since if it's either EN15194 or type approval and there is no type approval route, then sale may be legal as well.

Enforcement would be a matter for trading standards, rather than the DfT which is why we don't see it their documents.