Riding a motorbike without lights

[Taita]

Hello

I crunched my bike a few weeks ago and it is just about rideable now I've replaced the front frame.

However, I don't have working front lights or indicators, or mirrors. Is it legally rideable (being sensible aside).

There aren't any sharp bits poking out, and I have brake lights and rear indicators.

[DIW35]

I was always led to believe that if they are fitted, they have to work. Don't know what the position would be if you removed the bits at the front, but still had lights at the rear.

[wolf1]

To be able to ride without lights it has to have a passed a daylight only mot. Other than that you can be stopped and prosecuted.

[bobthepsycho]

ROAD VEHICLES LIGHTING REGULATIONS 1989
4. Exemptions - General
3) Nothing in these Regulations shall require any lamp or reflector to be fitted between sunrise and sunset to :-

(a) a vehicle not fitted with any front or rear position lamp,

(4) Without prejudice to regulation 16, for the purposes of these Regulations a lamp shall not be treated as being a lamp if it is :-

(a) so painted over or masked that it is not capable of being immediately used or readily put to use; or

(b) an electric lamp which is not provided with any system of wiring by means of which that lamp is, or can readily be, connected with a source of electricity.


So as long as you disable the rear position lamp, you can use the bike without a front light.

HTH

[Taita]

So a bit of tape over the rear light / brake light?

But its REALLY hard to judge speed without persons lights in front of you... Hence all the insurance scams where you disable them and get rear ended

[Hooli]

Taita said:

So a bit of tape over the rear light / brake light?

But its REALLY hard to judge speed without persons lights in front of you... Hence all the insurance scams where you disable them and get rear ended

i think the meaning is, disable the tail light but leave the brakelight working. pull the fuse basicly should do, the tail light is then disabled.

[evo stu]

no the brakelight must be disabled and covered over

complete madness if you ask me but uts the law

[Brett928S2]

Hi

Disable the brake light and it wont matter much what happens as Darwins law will get you.....

The first car you brake in front of will rear end you, could you get a relative to post here and let us know please

All the best Brett

[Taita]

fking hell. I'll go to work as usual, only without a headlight.

[Taita]

bump, I'd rather be 100% rather than risk a bumraping.

[bimsb6]

these rule apply to enable vehicles which were not fitted with lighting from new i.e veteran cars to still be allowed to use the road ,they do however still apply to newer vehicles .i have a tt600 enduro
which is on a daytime only mot ,basically all that is required is a rear reflector.

[TallPaul]

As far as getting a "daylight" MOT is concerned, the bike must have no lights what so ever, or they must be masked so as to be totally inoperable. No brake light, nothing. However, I'm not so sure that the bike will be compliant with the Constructions & Use regulations.
Just because something is able to pass an MOT, it doesnt automatically make it road legal!!

[bimsb6]

TallPaul said:

As far as getting a "daylight" MOT is concerned, the bike must have no lights what so ever, or they must be masked so as to be totally inoperable. No brake light, nothing. However, I'm not so sure that the bike will be compliant with the Constructions & Use regulations.
Just because something is able to pass an MOT, it doesnt automatically make it road legal!!

so what would be illegal ?

[Shredder 100]

What's wrong with good old hand signals?

[jackofall84]

I believe if you tape up the switches that counts as them being disabled/not fitted. Many moons ago I went in for an MOT with a bike that had no indicators. I didn't realise but the bike did have them originally as there was a switch for them on the handlebars. The MOT tester just put some insulation tape over the switch and passed it.

[14]

Shredder 100 said:

What's wrong with good old hand signals?

You just replied to a thread that’s nearly 12 and a half years old. I’m sure the OP has got the problem sorted by now.

[4rephill]

14 said:

Shredder 100 said:

What's wrong with good old hand signals?

You just replied to a thread that’s nearly 12 and a half years old. I’m sure the OP has got the problem sorted by now.

Shredder 100 is still using "good old hand signals" - Give him a break!

He's probably only just got his dial-up modem working!

[dibblecorse]

As long as you get an MOT done with no lights, they will issue a standard MOT with advisories as there is no such thing as a daytime MOT, its just the term that such MOTs have been labelled and then informed your insurers of the modifications then you are good to go, don't tell the insurers and get involved in a bump and you will get your backside handed to you.

[GC8]

Possible, I think, because C&U laws do not require lights on motorcycles. As above, there is no such things as a 'daylight MOT', which VOSA and DVSA have repeatedly pointed out for years: it is an MOT with not fitted / not tested advisories.