I had an accident... AGAIN!!!!
- Thread starter cwah
- Start date
Other than the previously mentioned 'Perverting the course of justice' and the maximum sentence of 'life imprisonment', then yes, you would indeed be laughing. But probably not sleeping too well.
Sorry to hear about your accident, if your bike is legal or not it does not excuse the drivers behaviour, I could never live in such an horrendous place like London where people have no regard for anyone but themselves.
Last edited:
Exactly. It's the same bunch of whinging old women, as usual.
Cwah should temporarily strip the e-gubbins off and pursue the driver through the courts - there's nobody knows it was an electric bike, far less an 'illegal' one.
<two fingers up to the grannies and schoolmarms>
The above post has a rather unpleasant stench of hypocrisy about it. Nobody on either side of this discussion has said that cwah is totally to blame or that the other driver is blameless because the bike was illegal. All that we are saying is that if cwah truthfully reports the circumstances under which the accident occurred, he may find himself being prosecuted because he too was breaking the law at the time. This is a fact which appears to be acknowledged by you because you are advising cwah to remove the offending components from his bike, post accident.
The thing that I find most unpleasant about you and others of your ilk is your outrage at the ilegal actions of the car driver, and I do agree he should have stopped and assisted cwah, not passed him in the way that he did. In other words, we, the cyclists wanted him to behave properly and face the consequences of his action. Quite right too, I agree entirely. On the other hand, there are elements on here who would rather spirit the bike away and in the secluded isolation of their homes strip away anything that may disclose the the true story. Twist and alter the circumstances in order to favour their own agenda. Then, having removed evidence of an offence from his bike, they want him to make false and fraudulent claims against the other driver via the courts. In other words, lie on oath, pervert the course of justice, commit perjury and make false statements. Yes, cwah could do this and depending on your character and moral standing, some may find it easy. Should he? Personally I think not because its wrong and without wanting to sound aloof, it just isn't in my nature to act in this way. I don't like it, that's all, there is nothing wrong in that.
In view of the above, all I am saying is that if cwah wants to pursue a claim or prosecution, fine go ahead, do it, he has a right to do so. But, he needs to be aware that he too may face consequences, however small the chance of his ilegal bike being discovered is, there is a chance. You and others acknowledge this in your vile recommendations posted above. Stripping the bike post accident in order to artificially maximise the consequences for the driver is, my view, appalling behaviour and I'm surprised that you and others like you are prepared to publicly disclose your true characters in this way. There is nothing wrong in cwah wanting the other driver brought to book, but please, do it truthfully.
I really don't like the way some people are thinking here. It's plainly wrong.
Last edited:
If your conscience allows it, then yes, you could do that. It would be rather like a drunk driver running away from an accident scene and being found in the pub chucking drinks down their throat to claim they weren't drunk at the time of the accident (which doesn't work now, with back counting).
If that's your intention (and ignoring the host of other charges that might result from such a course of action) then it would be best if you built your ebike discreetly and never discussed it or its capabilities with anyone, especially not on an open internet forum (bearing in mind that forum software logs IP addresses, so no one is ever truly anonymous when using them). The key to the success of the "let's falsify the evidence of wrongdoing" strategy would be the need for absolute discretion at all times.
It's interesting to read some of the more extreme comments about law breaking, or perverting the course of justice, and its acceptability to some. Perhaps those that view it as acceptable also believe that it's acceptable for motorists to drive faster then the speed limit outside their house, or for the drunk driver/rider who runs into their son/daughter/partner/parent to be able to use a trick to avoid prosecution. Where do these people draw the line as to the degree of law breaking that's acceptable?
My personal view is that I have no problem with my ebikes being illegal. Should the worst happen and I get caught, then I'll just accept whatever consequences arise. However, I'm not going to increase my chances of getting caught by doing something that draws attention, such as trying to pursue a claim in the event of an accident, though. Neither am I prepared to raise the stakes by massively increasingly the charges that could be brought against me by attempting to pervert the course of justice. A fine or other modest penalty for infringing the regulations is one thing, risking a lengthy prison sentence is, to me, unacceptable. As always, YMMV.
Last edited:
That's actually a very good point.
Several years ago I was working (as an expert witness) for an insurance company that were handling a personal injury claim following an aircraft accident. The insurers asked me to independently assess the accident cause and determine the extent of their clients probable culpability. The evidence from the Air Accident Investigation Branch was ambiguous, with several factors (unusual ground level wind conditions, possible engine power reduction, pilot error) being given.
I initially concluded that they were right, there was no way to determine whether the accident was the fault of the pilot (so increasing the insurers liability) or was caused by something the pilot couldn't reasonably have foreseen (he claimed to his insurer that he'd never flown from the accident strip before).
Whilst writing the report for the insurers, I was contacted by an anonymous caller who suggested I look at a particular flying club forum. I did so, and found several posts by the pilot, where he'd boasted about flying from the accident location (which was a difficult strip to take off from) and had had several near-miss take offs, because of the ground level turbulence under some wind conditions.
Needless to say the insurers weren't happy when I presented this additional evidence to them, as it increased the pay out they had to make to the injured passenger. They passed my report on to the CAA, who then took disciplinary action against the pilot (they suspended his licence, I believe, but could easily have fined him for endangering an aircraft, a serious offence).
I suspect that now insurers and the authorities are far more savvy about the internet than they were then, so we have to assume that anything on an open forum may be read by the authorities at some time.
More likely than you think. I have been invoved in other issues where it obvious the local authority have been reading forums based on what they know.
There's now been a lot of very articulate posts on this thread, covering the many aspects of the problem.
It's a sad illustration of the very unsatisfactory position that many of us find ourselves in regarding legal compliance in our efforts to use electric assistance on our bikes.
After my own recent very naive "fully road legal" claims I can now see how stupid and ponderous the law is on the subject. Even when we attempt to abide well within the spirit of the current regulations (max power, max speed, weight, pedal assistance only etc), we still don't have the official EN type approval plates that only some ready made "official" bikes have.
So, without a practical and economic way for compliant bikes to obtain this official "type approval" standing, we are now outside of the law and it's protection, as Cwah's unfortunate accident appears to illustrate.
I'm quite new to this forum, but I can see that the problem keeps coming up, and our only hope so far seems to be that the Police will always use their commonsense and not use the full potential weight of the law unless the breach deserves it, like the increasing number of youtube clips showing stupidly dangerous riding at high speeds on public roads and footpaths.
It's a sad illustration of the very unsatisfactory position that many of us find ourselves in regarding legal compliance in our efforts to use electric assistance on our bikes.
After my own recent very naive "fully road legal" claims I can now see how stupid and ponderous the law is on the subject. Even when we attempt to abide well within the spirit of the current regulations (max power, max speed, weight, pedal assistance only etc), we still don't have the official EN type approval plates that only some ready made "official" bikes have.
So, without a practical and economic way for compliant bikes to obtain this official "type approval" standing, we are now outside of the law and it's protection, as Cwah's unfortunate accident appears to illustrate.
I'm quite new to this forum, but I can see that the problem keeps coming up, and our only hope so far seems to be that the Police will always use their commonsense and not use the full potential weight of the law unless the breach deserves it, like the increasing number of youtube clips showing stupidly dangerous riding at high speeds on public roads and footpaths.
Last edited:
I don't think it would make me sleep to unsoundly
But you are perfectly ok about going to court and lying under oath? You are fine with the concept of altering the circumstances of the collision by stripping any illegal components off the bike post accident?
What a sickening little man you are.
Edit
I'm glad that I caught your initial response to the idea of lying under oath. I see that in the time it took me to type a response, you withdrew it and replaced it with something about EBay. Well I caught it for all to see. You disgust me.
Last edited:
A very good summing up of the situation indeed.
It's perhaps worth putting this into perspective by noting that this is far from being the only case where the law is, in practice, somewhat unworkable. Having got a bit fed up with the growing regulatory paraphernalia (and cost) surrounding flying I took to making boats for fun. Believe it or not if I dare to sell, or even give away for nothing, a small boat that I build then I'm breaking the law (unless I keep it for five years after having first used it on the water and can provide evidence to that effect). Needless to say this is another bit of law that was created by the influence of big boat building companies who clearly wished to limit competition and make it prohibitively expensive for small competitors from starting up a business.
I strongly suspect that there are now many other areas where regulation effectively prevents many DIY or hobby type activities, even if they are only for an individual's own pleasure, rather than undertaken for profit. It's a sad reflection of the way we have allowed successive governments to increase levels of regulation without properly thinking through the consequences.
As pointed out before, it only takes a short phone call to prove that such a plate is fake. Such a tactic may fool a casual passer by, but in the event of an accident you can be certain that someone is going to check the authenticity of the Type Approval. Again, as already mentioned, doing this would hike the offence up from being a relatively minor road traffic one, that would most probably only attract a small fine, to a criminal charge where you may well face imprisonment and would get a criminal record if convicted.
The law is supposed to exist for the benefit of the common man. People are paid obscene amounts of money to formulate these laws, and yet they are patently failing in their duty. I came across a similar situation a few years ago when I was in business. I was wondering what would happen if I became too ill to work, so I made enquiries At the DHSS. At the time they told me I would not be entitled to any benefits if I had more than a certain sum in savings, I think it was £20,000. I would have to live on these savings until I had less than £20,000 left. I then asked what would happen if I decided to spend the excess at £2,000 a week. I was told that I would then be prosecuted for "Capital Despersal" . So I then asked how much money I could legally spend each week. The reply was "I can not give you that information because it is a State Secret"
From the photo it appears only the stays have snapped these are easily replaced at reasonable cost:My brompton rear rack is broken now:
I'm fine but he did some damage to my Brompton. What should I do, and what can I do?
http://brilliantbikes.co.uk/50-brompton-rear-carrier-bits
Last edited:
It wasn't just that one post, it was that combined with your earlier, more calculating recommendation, that cwah should strip his bike of any evidence of wrongdoing on his part prior to taking further action against the driver. It is this type of mindset which I find most abhorrent.
I don't believe it was a joke, more a glimpse of the real personality.
The problem here is that we are (at least some of us) carefully analysing the laws that apply to electric bikes, the challenges of complying with them and the implications of failing to comply with them, without looking at the broader context of our everyday lives.
The law (in general) is imperfect. Everyone breaks the law, without exception, even those who try their best to be law abiding. One cannot exist without breaking laws; there are many that we may be unaware of and break unwittingly, and there are also many that we break because we are either confident that we are not going to be caught or because we are momentarily distracted, or perhaps careless . Some law breaking is obvious, some far less so, just as some law breaking is more serious than other forms of law breaking. Often people attempt to justify their own law breaking, when challenged, by claiming they only broke it by a little bit.
With specific regard to electric bikes, even if you own a legal one, with the appropriate documentation, the chances are that you will, at some time, break the law whilst riding it. You may not even notice that you've done so, as there are a plethora of laws that apply to cycles being used on our roads and cycle paths and few will be fully aware of all of them.
The only question here is to ask yourself what degree of penalty you are prepared to accept if you break the law and then try to ensure that any laws you break fall within that maximum acceptable penalty should you be unfortunate enough to be prosecuted.
Related Articles
-
MTF Enterprises announces acquisition of EMU Electric Bikes- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Wisper 806T folding bike wins Which? ‘Best Buy’- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Sustrans calls for protected cycle lanes- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Amazon launch their first UK e-cargo micromobility hub- Started by: Pedelecs
