E-scooter rider breathalysed and banned for a year

[Foss62]

This story is from today’s Cambridge News. The rider was three times over the ‘limit’ and (although it is not completely clear from the article) probably on an ‘unofficial’ scooter.

It’s interesting because I would have thought that if he was on one of the officially permitted scooters (or any E-bike that met the regulations) I don’t think he could have been breathalysed and/or banned from driving?

[RedRob67]

If you are riding an e-scooter in a pubic place, you are subject to the same rules and legislation as the user of any other powered vehicle. If it is an unauthorised one, it will be uninsured and so liable to seizure under section 165 of the Road Traffic Act. If it is a rental one, the you are only able to ride it if you have an appropriate driving licence. Thus, the rules of drink driving, traffic lights, road instructions, etc. apply the same as if you were driving a car.

In short, riding an e-scooter while over the prescribed level of alcohol/under the influence of drugs carries the same penalties as driving a car or riding a motorbike

[ADJimbo]

My take on it was that the scooter itself, could have been used had it been under one of these schemes but his, wasn’t.

It’s a moot point however - he pleaded guilty to, and was therefore duly convicted of, failure to provide. Twelve months disqualification and £100.00 fine.

[BertBert]

ADJimbo said:

It s a moot point however - he pleaded guilty to, and was therefore duly convicted of, failure to provide. Twelve months disqualification and £100.00 fine.

Just out of curiosity what are the circumstances where you have to provide? Can a pedestrian fail to provide for example?

[RedRob67]

Authorised or not, riding an e-scooter in a public place makes the rider liable to the same rules and legislations as the operator of any other powered vehicle. If a car is uninsured and used on the public highway, it can be seized and the driver prosecuted for no insurance. Same with drink/drug driving, dangerous driving, etc.

[2 sMoKiN bArReLs]

Foss62 said:

It s interesting because I would have thought that if he was on one of the officially permitted scooters (or any E-bike that met the regulations) I don t think he could have been breathalysed and/or banned from driving?

This is a common misconception. As said, the exact same drink drive rules apply as if you were in your car.

I reckon many riders of the damn things are unaware.

[paul_c123]

BertBert said:

Just out of curiosity what are the circumstances where you have to provide? Can a pedestrian fail to provide for example?

YES

I believe the criteria is "In the course of an investigation into whether a person has committed an offence under 3A, 4 or 5 of the Road Traffic Act 1988".

If the police suspect you were driving, lose sight of you, but you take advantage of that, quickly park up and start walking away from the car, they can still stop you and ask you to provide, even though at that moment in time you are a pedestrian. Similarly they can ask 2 people, if both are walking away, because they don't know who the driver is. Of course, part of that investigation is also to establish who the driver was, if at all.

If they later cannot prove you were driving, or other events overtake it, they may well drop the charge of "failing to provide".

Of course there's much more to it than the simplistic example I've presented above.

[Groomio]

Foss62 said:

This story is from today s Cambridge News. The rider was three times over the limit and (although it is not completely clear from the article) probably on an unofficial scooter.

It s interesting because I would have thought that if he was on one of the officially permitted scooters (or any E-bike that met the regulations) I don t think he could have been breathalysed and/or banned from driving?

You omitted to say that he tried to flee from the officers.

https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-ne...

[eldar]

2 sMoKiN bArReLs said:

Foss62 said:

It s interesting because I would have thought that if he was on one of the officially permitted scooters (or any E-bike that met the regulations) I don t think he could have been breathalysed and/or banned from driving?

This is a common misconception. As said, the exact same drink drive rules apply as if you were in your car.

I reckon many riders of the damn things are unaware.

Does that apply to legal e-bikes, for which no licence is required?

[2 sMoKiN bArReLs]

eldar said:

2 sMoKiN bArReLs said:

Foss62 said:

It s interesting because I would have thought that if he was on one of the officially permitted scooters (or any E-bike that met the regulations) I don t think he could have been breathalysed and/or banned from driving?

This is a common misconception. As said, the exact same drink drive rules apply as if you were in your car.

I reckon many riders of the damn things are unaware.

Does that apply to legal e-bikes, for which no licence is required?

I was referring to the e-scooter. No idea about e-bikes

[eldar]

2 sMoKiN bArReLs said:

I was referring to the e-scooter. No idea about e-bikes

[LosingGrip]

eldar said:

Does that apply to legal e-bikes, for which no licence is required?

Ebike yes. It is just an electric motorcycle. Still need insurance, licence, MOT, helmet.

If you mean Electric Assisted Pedal Cycle (EAPC) then there is an offence of cycling under the influence of drink/drugs but no power to provide a breath test/drug wipe. It would be on the officers observations.

[Gareth79]

eldar said:

2 sMoKiN bArReLs said:

Foss62 said:

It s interesting because I would have thought that if he was on one of the officially permitted scooters (or any E-bike that met the regulations) I don t think he could have been breathalysed and/or banned from driving?

This is a common misconception. As said, the exact same drink drive rules apply as if you were in your car.

I reckon many riders of the damn things are unaware.

Does that apply to legal e-bikes, for which no licence is required?

They are a "mechanically propelled vehicle" and hence fall under s.4 Road Traffic Act, being drunk in charge, but they are *not* a "motor vehicle" so are not subject to the prescribed limits of alcohol. However since it falls under the motor vehicle sections (and not cycling), you'd get a driving ban for being found guilty.

E-scooters are low-powered mopeds, and subject to the prescribed limits of alcohol.

[Foss62]

Groomio said:

Foss62 said:

This story is from today s Cambridge News. The rider was three times over the limit and (although it is not completely clear from the article) probably on an unofficial scooter.

It s interesting because I would have thought that if he was on one of the officially permitted scooters (or any E-bike that met the regulations) I don t think he could have been breathalysed and/or banned from driving?

You omitted to say that he tried to flee from the officers.

https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-ne...

Yes - but I didn’t see that as relevant to the final charge and conviction which clearly seems to place the E Scooter (or at least an illegal one) in the motor vehicle camp. If he had done all this and ran away from his bicycle or legal E bicycle he might have been charged but it wouldn’t have been for drinking and driving.

My eyes are being opened somewhat by a lot of the comments on the thread.

[Foss62]

RedRob67 said:

If you are riding an e-scooter in a pubic place, you are subject to the same rules and legislation as the user of any other powered vehicle. If it is an unauthorised one, it will be uninsured and so liable to seizure under section 165 of the Road Traffic Act. If it is a rental one, the you are only able to ride it if you have an appropriate driving licence. Thus, the rules of drink driving, traffic lights, road instructions, etc. apply the same as if you were driving a car.

In short, riding an e-scooter while over the prescribed level of alcohol/under the influence of drugs carries the same penalties as driving a car or riding a motorbike

This is news to me. Never having hired one I assumed they would be treated the same as the E Bikes that are also for hire, and if they ever became completely legal they would again come under the bicycle legislation.

I see now that you need to show a driving licence - and be over 18 - to hire one.

I wonder if many of the people you see using illegal ones, realise the potential jeopardy they are in?

[Hugo Stiglitz]

You can be fined for being drunk in charge of a bicycle as well.

[48k]

Foss62 said:

I wonder if many of the people you see using illegal ones, realise the potential jeopardy they are in?

I highly doubt they care

[Foss62]

Hugo Stiglitz said:

You can be fined for being drunk in charge of a bicycle as well.

Yes, and as a pedestrian but that’s fairly insignificant compared to all the ramifications of losing a driving licence…

[bimsb6]

Hugo Stiglitz said:

You can be fined for being drunk in charge of a bicycle as well.

And in charge of a pram .

[Dog Star]

LosingGrip said:

Ebike yes. It is just an electric motorcycle. Still need insurance, licence, MOT, helmet.

If you mean Electric Assisted Pedal Cycle (EAPC) then there is an offence of cycling under the influence of drink/drugs but no power to provide a breath test/drug wipe. It would be on the officers observations.

Correct, which is handy as I enjoy beercycling.

I also disagree with your distinction - an epac is synonymous with ebike.

When they get hacked or you get these illegal homemade things that do not fall into the category of an ebike (epac) they become a motorcycle.