European Commission Announces Proposal For eMTBs to Require Third Party Insurance
With potentially wide-ranging consequences on the emerging and ever-growing e-bike market, today the European Commission proposed that pedelec e-bikes (that enhance pedal input by the rider with an electric motor) will require third-party liability insurance, similar to motor vehicles.
The initiative is a blanket cover-all that puts e-bikes in the same category as motor vehicles, requiring them to have third-party insurance.
The European Cyclists' Federation, who are pro e-bike, said in a press release:
![Kieran Page has been involved in a community eMTB project in Peille France with positive outcomes.]()
Although the European Commission's decision has yet to be passed into law, as and when it does it could mean that eMTBers will require insurance when out on the trails.
It also remains to be seen how The European Commission intends to police compulsory e-bike insurance – will e-bikes require number plates and licenses? Will we be seeing police officers on the trails at eMTB hotspots across Europe?
The initiative is a blanket cover-all that puts e-bikes in the same category as motor vehicles, requiring them to have third-party insurance.
The European Cyclists' Federation, who are pro e-bike, said in a press release:
 | The European Commission (EC) has today released its proposal to amend the Motor Vehicle Insurance Directive (MID), which would mean that pedelec users without third-party liability insurance would be riding illegally. “If today's proposal becomes a law, third party liability insurance will be required that would discourage millions of European citizens to use pedelec, undermine the efforts and investments of several member states and the European Union to promote sustainable mobility” – states Adam Bodor advocacy director of the European Cyclists` Federation. The EC proposal clarifies the scope of the directive as to which vehicles are mandated to carry third party motor vehicle insurance. This clarification was necessary to avoid the confusion as to which vehicles, and on what geographical area (road, private land, etc.) would qualify for a vehicle coming under this directive. Unfortunately, the EC proposal published today includes even the (light) power assisted bicycles – pedelecs – under this directive. In fact, in an explanatory introduction to the proposal, the European Commission claims that power-assisted bicycles should already currently have full motor vehicle insurance (not transport, bicycle, personal or household insurance but full motor vehicle insurance). With this text, the European Commission is trying to criminalize power-assisted bicycle users, almost all of whom have some kind of other insurance, and has effectively banned pedelec use without insurance usually reserved for motor vehicles. |
Although the European Commission's decision has yet to be passed into law, as and when it does it could mean that eMTBers will require insurance when out on the trails.
It also remains to be seen how The European Commission intends to police compulsory e-bike insurance – will e-bikes require number plates and licenses? Will we be seeing police officers on the trails at eMTB hotspots across Europe?
Author Info:
Must Read This Week
Sign Up for the Pinkbike Newsletter - All the Biggest, Most Interesting Stories in your Inbox
PB Newsletter Signup
And most you will support this shit as well won't you, that is until they come for you too...
This cannot be said about about someone who was riding a granny bike for most of his/ hers life, or has never really been riding a bicycle regularly. Many E-bikers in Sweden should not be allowed to ride faster than 15km/h. They have no fkng clue what they are doing when riding those bikes, like someone who can barely drive a car. They will sooner use a ring bell than handlebar and brake levers. To top that, traffic rules and green-leftie environmentalist bullshit creates a sense of entitlement among cyclists in my Town. They shit on everyone, drivers and pedestrians, they have no respect to pedestrians. I am more worried about kids walking onto a cycling path than road.
Finally we get the pseudo health aspect. If you are fat or crooked, you won't get better by riding E-bike. Pay to play, like every other motorsport does.
So I welcome this law with open arms.
>No human without basic fitness can take a road bike above 20km/h for prolongued period of time.
20km on road bike is easy for pretty much anyone
>Or do you use "I make you feel better about yourself" computer?
what?
20km/+ on road bike is breeze
(I could post a lnk if I could be bothered to trawl about a months worth my face book posts but, fk that)
How f*cking slow were you going dude? That's why you think 20mph is fast...
Bullshit aside... you really need to see this from a broader perspective.
I am a Canadian living in Germany. Mainland Europe is very far removed as far as culture (yep, even from merry old England) and thought process goes. I witness people on e-bikes daily, not only on trails but also on the street. They have ABSOLUTELY no idea what that boost gives them, and they ARE dangerous.
At a trail center where people are getting shuttled (or in this case e-shuttlin'), or where we're talking about people that actually have learned bike control, I completely agree that we shouldn't worry about it and that a measure like this is unnecessary. The problem here is that it's the nature of such an article to mention no user groups or existing problems (or problem groups) and the fact is, Europe is pretty f*cking big.
E-Bike mountain bikers have never bothered me.. sure, I wish they'd give me a tow and because I'm so fat I get a little jealous. The fact of the matter is that the majority (your personal majority doesn't count!) are unskilled (and usually helmetless!) people, who have little to no experience.
I can ride my trailbike flat out on pavement at around 25 km/h (28/10, don't care if yer faster, I'm a fatty). A comparison with a road bike is apples and oranges and also most skinny tired death machines are equipped with disc brakes and better shifting than ever before.
Fact is... this "movement" is dangerous for all user groups. Those who purchase E-bikes and those who are surrounded by them. I'm not trying to dismiss your argument, but try to see it from a different point of view.
im using samsung gps app + gps watch
So in London recently, there was a high profile national news saga about a road cyclist who killed a pedestrian. Actually he was a commuter on a single brake time trial bike-but regardless, he was riding fast and could not stop.
So....if you have to have insurance for an ebike, why not a road bike...and then why not me on an mtb on shared trails....this is all too ‘Daily Mail’ for me. It has ‘precident’ written all over it.
Oh and as an aside, for a fact, the UK police wont be enforcing this. I cant see ebikes on any police priority list. You dont even see police where I live any more. So dont think that this will be enforced as it might be in the US.
Secondly, @ssteve: The UK will still be in Europe, even after it leaves the European Union... That's just being pedantic though.
Also as much as I don't like any type of mandatory insurance. I think it is a good idea for every cyclist to have some cover E-bike or not. A £35 a year British cycling member ship is hardly going to stop someone riding. In saying that when I am back home in NZ I won't have insurance as NZ has a much better health and accident system than anywhere else making it unnecessary.
The road bike argument is idiotic. It points at reckless riding, not at use of road bikes. And reckless riding in E-bike case is an a*shole doing 40+ on hacked bike on a crowded bike path and i’ve seen more than one.
Why e-bikes not all bikes? You look at it for what it is today, but in few years there will be more and more e-bikes that no longer look like granny bikes with giant hubs and weird water bottles. They will be covered up from elements with canopies with cargo compartments, possibly two seaters, 40-60kg things. That’s a lot of kinetic energy when it goes at 25km/h. The development of cargo bikes points this way. There are more and more velopeds in my town already. The only reason lightweight motorized two wheelers have pedals is avoiding registration and insurance. The line has to be drawn at some point. The way we move ourselves evolves, machines evolve, our bodies stay as fragile and number of collisions will just grow.
Good speed is 20mph - 32kph
impressive is 25mph - 40kph
tour level is 30mph - 48kph
super short sprints are 40mph - 64kph
If the speed issue is integral to your argument then use the speeds that 80% of roadies do please and not this dawdling along admiring the tulips speed that you are talking about
@nojzilla : Yes you're absolutely correct about that one. There is indeed a strong increase of older cyclists getting killed in e-bike crashes. It therefore actually strikes me how there seem to be quite a few on pinkbike who claim e-bikes should be banned from trails except for the elderly, disabled etc. If transition was relatively short after getting disabled etc I'd say it wouldn't cause so much trouble. The thing with the relatively recent introduction of e-bikes (as with any relatively new means of mobility, really) is that it suddenly enforces people to do something they haven't been doing for a long time and who may no longer have the reflexes, judgement and skills to keep up with that. Elderly people may have ridden their bikes at 15km/h or something and suddenly go twice as fast. It is a tricky topic indeed, right up there whether older people should drive a car. Losing skill, strength and abilities must be a frustrating experience. I understand that they're going to grab the means that gives them some mobility to maintain their social circle and independence. So I'm not comfortable telling them that they shouldn't. What they should be made more aware of are the risks. From then on it is just like us mountainbikers, up to them to accept the risk and do it or leave it. Silly thing is of course, if a distance is too long, the groceries are too heavy to walk or ride a regular bike, they'd either take public transport or the car. Which implies more sitting, more rapid loss of abilities. Riding a bike with a small nudge from the motor would actually be a good way to retain some mobility and keep those joints, heart and lungs going.
Said that, most people I see riding these bikes aren't the elderly. People just need to get to work, get the kids to school etc. People need to be on time but don't like to build in a big buffer in case there is that strong headwind or whatever. An e-bike gives them that reliabilty. 25km/h, they can count on it. Good stuff for the working class, more reliable than a car that can get stuck in a traffic jam. "reason" tells me I'd be better off getting one too. Quite simply because I don't believe the health advantage of my unassisted bike is so much bigger than it would be on one with a motor. Quite simply because long steady seated pedaling in Z3 isn't all that great. This is also the main reason why pretty much all my mountainbike riding is standing up, there is no point doing any more work in that zone. So yeah, if a motor would help me get through that more quickly/easily I'd have more left in the legs to go for another more explosive blast in the evening. Now I'm not going to get one quite simply because I think they're too expensive and I've got decent bikes already. But "reason" actually tells me that healthy people with a proper training plan are actually better off with an e-bike. To actually have some proper explosive days without blowing half their energy on the endurance stuff.
As for mentality, it may be different in Sweden, I don't know. I think mentality here is fine. Nearly every adult has a driving licence and everyone rides bikes in traffic, so we understand each others point of view. Teens and drunken students on bikes may be the most tricky ones as they may not seen traffic from behind a low windscreen but are already so old and fearless to not worry too much about cars knowing that the drivers worry for them. But that's a small subgroup. If a truck needs to do a difficult move, you give him space and gestures whether everything is clear. If you're driving a car in the city, you accept that you're the slower one and should keep the bicycle lane clear. Works fine most of the time. Now of course we do have proper room for bicycles here to actually ride at a proper speed. For instance in Germany I see two way bicycle lanes combined with a footpath that may be 120cm wide in total. No way you're going to get away riding 25km/h over there! To get an idea of what a bicycle lane is here, get to duckduckgo and type "bicycle lane holland !im". Unless it is really busy, you can easily ride at 25km/h and have a good view on what's around you, have room to brake in time etc. What doesn't work is getting on a road racers to only look ahead or down or even worse, ride with your road racing buddies in a "fan" taking the full width of the road. But really someone on an e-bike, upright, at 25km/h. Shouldn't be an issue.
E beiks ride on the trails, with hickers , bicycles and occasional horses going low speed.
Moreover they are ridden by people with poor skills and judgment.
E beiks should have insurance and they will. As they are a motorozed veichle.
Just hope they will not extend it to mtb as well.
Anyhoo, have a great weekend.
Troll.
Blanket statement about the types of people that buy ebikes that is completely wrong. E bikes are expensive, predominantly experienced riders buy them. I'm getting one, Sam Pilgrim rides one, everyone i've seen on one is an experienced rider, you're talking utter garbage.
E bikes off road are only faster uphill, getting back up the hill is what they are for, end of. What happens if YOU hit a hiker whilst out on the trail doing 40mph downhill on your unassisted bike? They die but it's fine because you're not on an e bike? You clueless f*ckwit, are you and Waki related?
E bikes shouldn't require insurance because they are still a bicycle, but if they do i hope they DO extend it to all bicycles, because the rider should be just as accountable when an accident happens, it doesn't matter what type of bike you are on, it's the rider that would be at fault, not the bike.
People like you, those with a complete inability to think things through properly, are the ruination of everything.
ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/initiatives/com-2018-336_en#initiative-details
It applies to motorized vehicles in traffic. It doesn't apply to mountainbike trails. So whatever impact you assume these have on trails and whether these should be insured, you can have your thoughts about that but it doesn't quite fit here. Luckily there have been enough PB articles where you can moan about just that. So if you feel like, go there and have a blast. Obviously the PB suggestion about police on the trails doesn't make sense either, but again that's Pinkbike.
Due to the recent availability of relatively compact and powerful rechargeable batteries, we're seeing more means of electrical (assisted) vehicles on the road. Segways, motorized skateboards etc. And bicycles with pedal assist indeed. So the proposal here implies that these vehicles need insurance to be on the road. Not so much to discourage their use, but just to compensate the victim if they happen to cause an accident and the rider isn't able to cough up. Obviously the EU is aware that this may discourage people who (intend to) replace their daily car drive to work by an e-bike ride. Cities have constantly been investing in improving bicycle safety (assisted or not) so chasing these people back into their cars would be a setback. Countries do have the possibility to bear the costs of a potential claim in case the rider isn't able to do that. I quote:
“
As part of the public consultation various associations representing the electric bike industry argued that requiring third party liability insurance could undermine the uptake of ebikes. But the current Directive already provides 37 Member States with the power to exempt them from motor third party liability insurance. If Member States were to exempt them in this way, the national guarantee funds would bear the costs of reimbursing victims of accidents caused by these new types of vehicles.
”
Which actually is a likely scenario. As mentioned, most people riding these bikes typically use these to get to work etc. So they have a job, hence money if they really need to pay. Or they already have voluntary insurance. The few claims a country would have to pay are negligible compared to the savings on infrastructure if you don't need to accommodate for all these extra cars or provide public transport. Most accidents with these bikes however are with elderly who suddenly jump on one and with the judgement based on riding at 15km/h, suddenly travel at 25km/h. Mostly they injure themselves, so that wouldn't be something covered under such a insurance anyway (they've got health insurance for that).
And yes this exempt would be limited to regular e-bikes (up to 25km/h assist) and not include Segways etc. Quite simply because these officially don't have a place in traffic. It is probably different in the US and Canada. Here in Europe (or at least in The Netherlands and probably also in Denmark, Germany etc) we have three types of traffic, each with their own place and rules. There's motors, cars etc. Then there are bicycles defined as vehicles with at least two wheels, not powered etc. Unpowered vehicles which do not fit their definition of a bicycle automatically end up in the pedestrian category. Because an unassisted bicycle can usually be pedaled (by a regular, non athletic person) between 15km/h and 25km/h or so, it has been decided that mopeds up to 25km/h and bicycles with pedal assist up to 25km/h fit in there just fine. Other powered stuff that doesn't qualify (Segway etc) ends up on the sidewalk if speed is walking pace (and is qualified as toy) or is simply illegal. And of course the other way around, people who travel on unpowered vehicles but feel their speed is more suited to the bicycle lane (in-line skates, longboards etc) are usually condoned over there. though officially they still belong on the sidewalk.
And this is where this whole discussion started. Even though road racing bicycles officially qualify as bicycle, their speed and limited control don't belong on the bicycle lane in dense traffic. Whereas most modern e-bikes for commuting (limited to 25km/h assist) are equipped with powerful brakes and an upright and controllable geometry (making them more than fit to engage in dense traffic along with regular bicycles), race bikes are designed for a race situation, to sacrifice control and circumferential view for speed and efficiency. So even though I understand the EU needs to draw a line somewhere, the way it was drawn is odd and ineffective. Sure you can injure someone when crashing into them at 25km/h. That's why we don't ride bicycles on the sidewalk! I can injure someone just as badly when riding inline skates at that pace though. Or simply taking a sprint (running, though I'd most likely be tackled anyway because someone would think I must surely have stolen something). And at the end of the day, you can't prevent everything nor should you insure for everything. 25km/h is a speed a decent runner should be able to sprint, especially when going down a hill. If he slides out or get's tackled by a root or something, he'll fall. And it is going to hurt. And he might get injured. Climbing equipment in playgrounds is designed so that kids are not likely to hang themselves (having their head stuck into something when they loose balance) or getting a finger or limb stuck somewhere. And there is a more or less safe fall zone. It can still hurt if they fall all the way and they can get injured. It is acceptable really. There is a point where they need to develop that judgement. Sorry, you'll never have your perfect nanny state.
Once they introduce this insurance on e-bikes it will be next to impossible to get rid of it later. They got their foot in the door and pray that there is no next step.
I am for some kind of a law that would make e-bike owners more conscious of possible consequences of an accident. I would also make them pay 50% more at bikeparks if I could :-D
1. They will always be in the minority, on or off road.
2. The novice cyclists, those most prone to mistakes, will be the least likely to pay e-bike money for a bike.
3. Experienced cyclist who flout the rules and cause problems on the road are already very much here, usually wearing lycra and have no brakes.
Those statements are the truth as most people know it, your statement about making e-bikers SPECIFICALLY liable is a wild shot in the dark at people and a problem you've never actually encountered, and it seems you just haven't thought it through properly, what good would this actually do that applying the same legislation to all cyclists wouldn't do just as well? Or badly? Would you be 'for' that too? Or shall we try and resist the ever tightening noose of legislation on EVERYTHING?
1) ~25% of bikes I see on my commute are e-bikes and I feel like soon they will not be a minority.
2) I only see total noobs and old people on ebikes, with 100% of their weight on the saddle, with no helmet etc.
3) Not the case here as well.
We obviously live in two different environments. Hence I would remind you that the article is about a proposal and not a concrete law. E-bikes are motorized vehicles and should be treated like motorized vehicles. I have thoroughly thought it through after seeing firsthand how dangerous people on ebikes are on average. Is extrapolation your hobby? Discussing legislation on everything is pointless.
For those of you who would like to learn something about the future:
velove.se
solarbike.com.au/electric-christiania-cargo-bike-february-2017
electricbikereview.com/virtue-cycles/pedalist
bikerumor.com/2017/02/17/podride-wild-enclosed-3-4-wheeled-e-bike-looks-like-micro-car
paradoxproductions.site/enclosed-bicycle-car
greenash.net.au/thoughts/2005/04/in-search-of-an-all-weather-bike
velomobilemedia.com/velomobile.htm
I have observed nearly every single one of these in Gothenburg. If anyone watches that and thinks there is no problem coming from closing your eyes and ears shouting lalaalalallala! and putting it on MAMILs then think twice. Killing yourself is always an option
I'm just back from a 3hr eMtb ride. I basically rode the equivalent distance/height of a Scottish Enduro event. (23miles and 5000ft) after work for the fourth time this week and I'll probably do a similar ride again tomorrow I'd bet a lot of the eBike haters here don't even ride that sort of distance/elevation once a month.
Before I had an eMtb I used to ride over 100miles most weeks (mixture of road/mtb and a little BMX). I still love riding my roadbike and normal mtbs but ride them a lot less now because the ratio of climbing to descending just doesn't seem so worth it anymore.
anti-cycling twats have been trying to tax cyclists for ever. Any dumbasses cyclist who agrees with this is more naive than I can even comprehend.
BTW most people do NOT have any private insurance....
I bet you lot who live in fear of incompetent e-cyclists are fun on the trails, what do you do when it starts to go downhill, get off and walk?
ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/initiatives/com-2018-336_en
I advise getting as stoned as possible and writing reels of nonsense, or just saying applying off-road legislation would be near impossible so forget that bit.
I don’t have an ebike, been on one that had a motorbike rear wheel and boxer front, to be fair it was a beast of a thing, not my type of thing at all but kind of heavy enough for insurance ! but I’m less keen on insurance companies
I also think that each and every rider should have to complete a cbt (compulsory basic training) of sorts so they are aware of the laws of the road and bridleways. Car drivers should also be made to do this same course to make them more aware of cyclist and how to deal with them on the road.
Education is key on both sides.
Finally yes i know you will always get the dickheads that are impatient
Secondly, until the member states write this into their local law it won't apply anyway (let's skim over the fact that the lazy UK government always chose to just automatically legislate this kind of stuff whereas many other countries - France is a good example - take all the opt outs they see fit).
Finally, even if this nonsense does make it all the way to law, it's only going to apply to the public highway surely. So, pretty shitty but not a direct impact on the actual off road activities of the eMTB. Sure anyone riding their eMTB to the trail head is affected but this seems to be more focussed on the commuter style ebike.
Personally I see this going nowhere as it's almost impossible to enforce and makes little sense overall.
Skim over it at your peril... These are the kinds of unsexy facts that get so easily buried under the lies spouted by those with big gobs and hollow intellects/nefarious motivations.
an insurance is fair for fast ebike speed over 25km/h. but for the other come on this just Bullsh*t .
And whatever happend who will check this the cops doesn't have time to check terrorist or driver without liscense or insurance.... Will they have time to run after cyclist to check this.
They have much better stuff to do.
I think that to use a road for any form of transport you should have 3rd part cover as default (horse and road bikes included). last year a cyclist hit and killed a women in London, as he only had a back peddle braking system and she didn't look.Insurance is there to cover "accidents" and they do seem to happen when you add people and speed.
Further more Helmets should be required by Law when on road or off road.
PS. I don't want a E-bike or a road bike.
more details found here www.britishcycling.org.uk/membership
If for nothing more than not having to worry too much about any court actions brought against you, for what ever cycle related reasons.
I wouldn't ride without it. Example: Pedestrian walks out in front of you and you hit them, say they break an arm or leg or worse, how would you prove that it was not your fault, that you was riding appropriately, in control and with due care and attention. In this age of no win no fee, you could soon find yourself with a summons to county court. At least with insurance, if this happens you have legal cover, that alone could be very costly, you also have liability insurance to cover any compensation awards. That £35 has just saved you several thousand. No brainer really.
I have experience of Ebike riders at a number of trail centers, on one occasion i was physically forced (shoulder barged with no warning, no shouts of rider or any kind of trail courtesy) of the trail by a family (husband, wife and son) on an assent only to catch them up on on the next descent and let my feelings be known only to be told that i shouldn't have been in the way! Luckily, i have mellowed with age and was satisfied with ripping the wires out of the guys control unit. I got fed up of waiting for them to return to the carpark.
I class myself a competent rider, if this had been my wife they collided with things could have been a lot different for all concerned.
I have been overtaken by ebikes riders on ascents only to find them in a heap or wrapped around a tree near the top of the first descent.
I have also half killed myself chasing the b@@@@ around the forest trying to stay with them.
I believe education is the key, they should have some form of training before they can use the bikes in public, a green card if you like. No card, no ride... but this would be impossible to police. They certainly need to learn trail etiquette.
I have nothing against Ebikes at all, i envisage i will own one in the future, as i get older and my legs don't work so well.
Were it to pass for E-bikes then I seriously doubt much time would go by till the idea of ALL bikes would rear it's ugly head, and pass too.
Cycling in any form is pretty much the ONLY form of transport left on the planet that is still free, aside from actually buying the bike itself, you can do it once you've mastered the skill of riding at any age, and progress to lots of other forms of it however you like, whenever you like, without any law or registration preventing you from doing so at any point.
Right now as the law stands, if you don't process the skills, or equipment to ride properly wherever you might be, and you not careful enough when riding, to then hit some poor sod that was minding there own, well, chances are your going to a claims court, to have the beejuz sued out of you, your going to take a seriously nasty hit to your bank balance, weather your insured or not, cos someone, somewhere wants paying, and not just the poor so and so you hit.
If being required to insure and register your bike was to become law,(I'm unsure how you could do one without the other?) that would then open up the gates for your sorry ass to not only pay via fines, but be looking at the prospect of a prison sentence too, again irrespective of being insured or not, as you can then be found in a court to be "riding without due care and attention" or guilty of "dangerous riding" amongst many, many other new charges that would have to be drawn up for when a bicycle rider fk'ed up, all due to having a resister of bikes and there owners, as registering makes you then "liable".
Methinks that might take a lot of the fun out of riding for a fair few folk in the EU, don't whoop to soon if your a brexit fan just yet either, as you can bet your house on the idea catching on all over the world if it happens there, unless you happen to have a very green pro eco friendly government in power, (that said, even they might go for it, as it would be making tax/income) not too many of those around right now.
Most governments really LOVE the idea of making more money from any avenue they can find it, even more so here in the UK!
I want to know why ebikes need insurance and bicycles don't... But i don't want to ask in case it prompts a conversation about bicycles
www.pinterest.com/pin/446349013041923402
I have seen those fast ebikes (the 45km/h version) had also a license plate.
Time to wake up guys.
The proposal for amendment is @ ec.europa.eu/info/publications/180524-proposal-motor-insurance_en and clearly states the following: "During the public consultation a number of associations representing the electric bicycles industry called for an exclusion of such vehicles in the Directive itself, arguing that requiring third party liability insurance could undermine the uptake of electric bicycles. This is not considered necessary in light of the power of Member States to exempt electric bicycles or any other new electric motor vehicles. In that case, the national guarantee funds would bear the costs of reimbursing victims of accidents caused by these new types of vehicles" This means that if a certain state choses to not pass any laws regarding mandatory insurance for emtbs the state will reinburse the victims of accidents caused by emtbs. Guess what states will take that risk?
Never go full Farage.
As for ebike insurance , I think all road using vehicles should have insurance but not off-road ! The sustained speed argument is nonsense , I’ve never seen an ebiker go as fast as a decent dh rider , they just go abit faster uphill !
Huh a new form of Pinkbike troll, pro E-bike zealot, who would have thought...
Electric cars, and even low CO2 petrol cars don't pay it. Why would a Bike need to pay it? Do you pay Pavement Tax for walking to the shop?
Road maintenance is taken from your council tax.
Mixing with regular non motorised forest an trail users, even commuting.. Accidents are enevitable
Any body know if a BC licence will cover third party for Ebikes?
Sorry, had to entertain myself, no hard feelings