Liability....

[KTM Bike Industries UK]

Don't KTM have lawyers they can ask for clarification? i don't understand why you worry so much about ypur competitors

It does come across as if you are using the 'dongle' or S class issue as an excuse to slate your competition? Not saying you are doing this but it gives that impression. Perhaps they are using a bit of entrepreneurial spirit to provide a market for dongles but so are people in Germany and on ebay etc. There seems to be a growth market for the S pedelecs here (am I right?) and I was wondering if KTMs uK strategy was being reconsidered because of this niche market and a fear of falling behind the competition?

We do, and we've asked, and they've said don't sell them. Which is why I was asking on here, why others feel comfortable taking the risk.

Its my job to worry about everything, the law, the competition, everything. Its not that we're worried about selling volume of bikes, we're not. We sold out this year and I think we'll sell out next year. What I'm worried about is one bike sale causing my business to go bust, or one bike sale causing eBike sales in the UK to stop - both of which are very important possibilities to me.

Most of the people selling these bikes / dongles in the UK aren't our competition, they are our customers. 50cycles, and e-bikeshop.co.uk are two of the examples that people have quoted above, both of these are shops, could in theory be selling KTM, so they aren't competition.

I'm not attempting to slate the competion, I've simply asked 2 very serious questions that I was hoping for some clarification on.

For instance there are dealers selling dongles to KTM customers, without telling them its invalidating their warranties. This is a problem for everyone concerned.

 

[KTM Bike Industries UK]

But this simply isn't true Col, you cannot be certain they are to be used illegally. We have a number of members who pop their e-bikes into their motor caravans or on the back of their cars and leave the country.

Just two examples of well known personalities in here, there are many others:

Lynda uses her caravan loaded with her e-bike in this way. I know she goes to her holiday home in Spain, but retailers cannot know that, especially if the transaction is online.

EddieO does similar, loading two e-bikes into his motor caravan for many holidays abroad, and as a German speaker is often in that country where S class e-bikes can be legally used at up to 45 kph and with 500 watt ratings. He's bought e-bikes here and in Germany. So once again neither you nor any other retailer can make an assumption regarding illegal use.

That there are such legal usages of UK illegal e-bikes destroys any chance of a successful liability action in court taken against a retailer.

P.S. This also forms a reply to your last post.
.

all true, but it doesn't change the risk of liability should one of these people be involved in an accident whilst using their bike in the UK. Or are you seriously tell me that these people don't ride their bikes in the UK?

Also, if they are taking their bikes to ride abroad, they should be registered them over there, otherwise they are also breaking the law in Germany.

 

[crE]

As long as you yourself and your business are not telling people how to derestrict for road use I don't think you have anything to worry about.

 

[the_killjoy]

Just because they say it invalidates their warranty doesn't automatically make it so.

It would depend on the reason for the claim, broken frame for example? If you took the company to the small claims court for not honouring their warranty the court would make a decision as to whether the companies limitation of warranty was valid for the nature of the claim being made.

As you well know a company cannot use its warranty conditions to overrule the sale of goods act.


I seem to remember in days gone by one could buy, and maybe still can, kits to deristrict mopeds etc, I don't think anyone was ever prosecuted for selling them ~ they certainly had no off-road use.

I get the feeling we are just going round in circles and this thread has run its course.

 

[flecc]

sorry missed this post.

"Obviously the UK law states that eBikes should only be assisted to 15mph. Therefore the speed tuning kit is strictly for off road use only."

it should say.

"Obviously the UK law states that eBikes should only be assisted to 15mph. Therefore the speed tuning kit is strictly for private land use only."

Your amendment is still incomplete though Col. It should read:

"Obviously the UK law states that eBikes should only be assisted to 15mph. Therefore the speed tuning kit is strictly for use on anyone's private land only."

The point being that e-bike law does not apply on any private land, the only offence being the almost impossible one to prosecute of trespass. All a landowner can do is ask someone to desist and leave their land. They cannot take legal action for a first offence, and if taking it after a second occurrence by the same offender, they most prove that, and also that they also had adequate warning against trespass through signage etc.

That's why trespass actions are virtually unknown in the courts and why there is such a high incidence of vehicular trespass, the offenders knowing that they are almost immune.
.

 

[flecc]

all true, but it doesn't change the risk of liability should one of these people be involved in an accident whilst using their bike in the UK. Or are you seriously tell me that these people don't ride their bikes in the UK?

Also, if they are taking their bikes to ride abroad, they should be registered them over there, otherwise they are also breaking the law in Germany.

But you cannot be proven to know of any of this illegal usage Col, that is the point. Without that proof of your cognition and since the sale is entirely legal, no successful action is possible.

Such precedents as mini-motos, knives and shotguns with no liability issues have been mentioned and there are many more. And here's one appertaining to bicycles where the retailers are breaking the law and yet have still never been prosecuted for any liability:

Retailers selling bicycles by law have to supply a bell at point of sale*. It does not have to remain fitted but must be offered fitted on the bike. The great majority of retailers completely ignore that law, and we can be sure that those bicycles with no bell offered have been involved in pedestrian injury accidents and even very occasional deaths. Yet no retailer has ever been pursued at law for liability, even though the lack of an audible warning may well have contributed to or even caused the accident.

If those cycle retailers actually breaking the law are never sued in these potentially liable circumstances, you can be very sure that those acting entirely legally won't be.

* Pedal Cycles (Safety) Regulations 2003
.

 

[Wicky]

What happens when the KTM is out of warranty? - Surely it shouldn't be a problem that the owner should be able to make any modifications they want to make. inc. performance enhancements.

I know the German TUV system for motorbikes can be officious about owners fitting aftermarket mods and only specially approved and type marked items can be fitted. Is this what KTM wants to follow?

 

[KTM Bike Industries UK]

This isn't us, it's Bosch. We are just one of the brands who use Bosch drives.

If anything Bosch fails its Bosch who handle the warranty.

 

[Deleted member 4366]

There's a massive market for derestricted bikes in the Uk. Nearly everybody (but mainly men) that I speak to wants to know how to do it. Hopefully, there will be so many on the road, that somebody will allow them just like they did with 250w bikes, which are also illegal. It wouldn't surprise me if the powers that would be are well aware of what's going on, and they're monitoring the situation. It would be difficult to make a temporary trial, so this way they get all the data without putting their necks on the line. As long as there's no adverse affects, I'm sure they'll some way allow them officially in the future. Maybe we need to get more on the road to strengthen the case.

 

[Wicky]

But are Bosch concerned about motors being derestricted once the warranty period expires?
Of concern should be the parts supply chain for common component parts as you know (over two months for a rim) esp. for a still in production bike - anyway that's another topic.

 

[flecc]

There's a massive market for derestricted bikes in the Uk. Nearly everybody (but mainly men) that I speak to wants to know how to do it. Hopefully, there will be so many on the road, that somebody will allow them just like they did with 250w bikes, which are also illegal. It wouldn't surprise me if the powers that would be are well aware of what's going on, and they're monitoring the situation. It would be difficult to make a temporary trial, so this way they get all the data without putting their necks on the line. As long as there's no adverse affects, I'm sure they'll some way allow them officially in the future. Maybe we need to get more on the road to strengthen the case.

As EU members we are entitled to implement the L1e class permitting up to 45 kph and 500 watts rating. To do so means a simple regulatory change within existing vehicular laws previously adopted from the EU.

The DfT is currently opposed to doing that, but reversal is certainly easy.

However, that does mean some bureaucracy, registration, number plate and insurance. We can never have such permissions within the current unregistered pedelec class while members of the EU, unless the EU itself changes the law, which will never happen.
.

 

[KTM Bike Industries UK]

But are Bosch concerned about motors being derestricted once the warranty period expires?
Of concern should be the parts supply chain for common component parts as you know (over two months for a rim) esp. for a still in production bike - anyway that's another topic.

after the warranty expires, you're just buying parts for your bike, so I can't see why anyone from any brand would know or care really what you were doing. Its only during the warranty period that it matters because if what your doing over stresses the bike, beyond what its designed to do either by the type or riding or anything else, then there can be issues. Warranty covers manufacturing faults, not user error or crashing, or wearing out (unless its due to a manufacturing fault - all components have a natural life expectancy which is in distance not time generally).

2 months for a rim is because we're waiting for an identical part with the same stickers, if we could just supply any rim it would be a next day job. Any bike shop can supply a rim, but as KTM don't yet make rims or wheels (they are starting to in 2015), getting the exact replacement isn't straight forward.

 

[RobF]

Col,

The type of extended liability of which you appear to be concerned is a non-starter.

You could sell me an inner tube and I could strangle someone with it, do you fear murder charges from every tube you sell?

But as with most posters, your mind is made up, so don't sell S class bikes or dongles and sleep easy.

I'm afraid I see your OP more as a commercial expedient to cause fear and uncertainty in a market in which you choose not to compete.

 

[Gubbins]

I can remember when you didn't need a helmet on a motorcycle... Wind in my hair riding was way better than a helmet! I suspect that the law changes were driven by accident statistics and also suspect the same will apply with e-bikes. I think it's all a load of fuss about nothing...... Honesty, who cares? I don't understand why KTM keeps blowing this trumpet because they probably have small print somewhere absolving them of any responsibility for just about any eventuality. Then there's the *don't break the law" brigade, it's like being back at school! Hey boy, no running in the corridor! Come on guys... Get a life!

 

[KTM Bike Industries UK]

Col,

The type of extended liability of which you appear to be concerned is a non-starter.

You could sell me an inner tube and I could strangle someone with it, do you fear murder charges from every tube you sell?

But as with most posters, your mind is made up, so don't sell S class bikes or dongles and sleep easy.

I'm afraid I see your OP more as a commercial expedient to cause fear and uncertainty in a market in which you choose not to compete.

I can see why you can come to the conclusion.... but this is different, and your use of the inner tube to murder shows that you've not understood what I mean about liability.

Its not about being prosecuted for using the bike / inner tube / knife / gun illegally. Its about there being an accident and someone's (it could be the bikes owners, or any involved parties) insurance company looking for someone to take responsibility for the accident, and the use of the illegal vehicle on the road / bridalway could make people liable for the accident.

People like these guys

http://www.first4lawyers.com/personal-injury-claims/serious-injury/

have a field day.

Whether its the user, or them saying "I was sold this bike by company x, and they told me it was ok to use offroad"... or something similar. I know we're being overly cautious, but I don't want the test case to involve a KTM.

I didn't post this thread to ask all of your opinions on it or to spread fear. I was hoping one of the companies who do sell the dongles, or just straight up illegal bikes would post to say they have taken legal advice and its ok... or they haven't and they are just selling on the assumption that a lot of you have made that ..... it'll all be ok.

The reason is not because we've made the decision not to compete. We very much haven't made a final decision on it. The s class bikes are in our 2015 pricelist and dealers have ordered, but we've got a couple of months to gather all the information on this to make a informed decision, before we ship anything. This post to see what others in the industry thought and or do, was part of that information gathering process.

That was the point of it. All of you expressing your opinions is very interesting, but non of you sell these bikes or products, so aren't the people I targeted the question at.

 

[JohnCade]

Actually he's made the point several times that he's not interested in the usual legal versus illegal arguments. He says he's interested in hearing from fellow traders who do sell these bikes and dongles whether they have taken legal advice and if they are happy that they are legally covered. It's got nothing to do with the buyer at all.

This post crossed with the one above and he makes his own point better than me. I suspect that irrespective of attempts at legal sophistry here if a major accident and injuries occurred and it was worth it for the lawyers to go for them, it might well be difficult for a supplier of this kind of kit to get out of liability quite so easily.

 

[KTM Bike Industries UK]

Honesty, who cares? I don't understand why KTM keeps blowing this trumpet because they probably have small print somewhere absolving them of any responsibility for just about any eventuality.

yes, I appreciate you don't understand. So why post? If you don't care, or don't understand don't post.

Its impossible to put small print in anything to absolve responsibility for lots of things. Believe me, I've been to court 3 times about a variety of things and you can even get people to sign something and still you're not covered.

 

[flecc]

I've understood your intentions Col, but I cannot see any of the parties you wish to contribute doing so. They are after all your competitors for e-bike sales and will probably be happy for you to never enter the sales arena in question, so have little motivation to assist.

Your position is the same one they once faced, having to make their own decision. If they ever sought legal advice, it would be undoubtedly the same "don't" you received, the safest option answer lawyers always give.

Still, not my decision so 50cycles, ebikeshop etc, care to make any comment on what Col has asked:

I was hoping one of the companies who do sell the dongles, or just straight up illegal bikes would post to say they have taken legal advice and its ok... or they haven't and they are just selling on the assumption that a lot of you have made that ..... it'll all be ok.

 

[KTM Bike Industries UK]

at the moment this sector in the UK is tiny and all the brands should be working together to help our dealers make informed decisions, so that it can grow. The standard cycle industry is much more mature as a market and the brands all work together on lots of things. I don't see why this should be any different.

We're all working for the same goal, so a lack of clarity on these important issues helps no one.

 

[RobF]

Insurance could be another avenue.

Col's company may be able to get cover for a personal injury claim against them arising from the sale of an S class KTM.

It won't be straightforward, but in Lloyd's we have the best and most creative insurance market in the world, so I'm sure someone there would underwrite a policy.

http://www.lloyds.com/