Pure Electric Scooter - no response from vendor

Alderbank

LightFlare said:

born_again said:

With the trials, rider is supposed to have a driving licence.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/e-scooter-trials-guidance-for-users

They are also “supposed” to only be ridden on the road. 

Roads and cycle lanes as well.

Even in trial areas you can only use the approved hire machines, not privately owned ones.

Aylesbury_Duck

LightFlare said:

Problem is with the scooters they don’t stick to the roads and I would have a good guess that most of the riders don’t meet driving licence requirements 

As a pedestrian in the city, I am at significantly higher risk of being hit by a scooter on the pavement than a car

That sounds intuitively true (especially read literally, i.e. being hit by a car on the pavement), but I wonder if it is true, and if the net risk from cars is higher?  i.e. even if the accidents per mile for scooters is higher than for cars, accidents from cars are likely to carry greater injury and risk of death.

That doesn't excuse them being ridden illegally of course.

Alderbank

LightFlare said:

born_again said:

With the trials, rider is supposed to have a driving licence.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/e-scooter-trials-guidance-for-users

I dont have an issue with the concept - purely with the implementation and policing 

In California everyone, old and young, rides on them.

I've hired them myself a few times (I'm 75) on holiday in Los Angeles. Floating along on the wide, well maintained, sunny sidewalks of Venice Beach and Santa Monica is delightful.

Bouncing over our potholes in the cold and rain, less appealing.

TELLIT01

Unless and until the laws regarding the use of e-scooters are enforced they will continue to be a danger to pedestrians.  I've seen privately owned e-scooters ridden past our local police station with two people on board.  I don't know how many laws that breaks!  The police need to have a purge on the use of privately owned e-scooters being used on the roads and pavements.  The should do the same as is done with uninsured cars, impound them and crush if proof of insurance isn't provided within 14 days.  As insurance cannot be proven every last one needs to be destroyed.

TELLIT01

Alderbank said:

LightFlare said:

born_again said:

With the trials, rider is supposed to have a driving licence.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/e-scooter-trials-guidance-for-users

I dont have an issue with the concept - purely with the implementation and policing 

In California everyone, old and young, rides on them.

I've hired them myself a few times (I'm 75) on holiday in Los Angeles. Floating along on the wide, well maintained, sunny sidewalks of Venice Beach and Santa Monica is delightful.

Bouncing over our potholes in the cold and rain, less appealing.

We're not in the USA.  They can carry guns there too and I don't want that over here either.

born_again

LightFlare said:

born_again said:

With the trials, rider is supposed to have a driving licence.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/e-scooter-trials-guidance-for-users

“Supposed” being the appropriate phrase

They are also “supposed” to only be ridden on the road. 

I dont have an issue with the concept - purely with the implementation and policing 

Lets rephrase that..

You must have the category Q entitlement on your driving licence to use an e-scooter. A full or provisional UK licence for categories AM, A or B includes entitlement for category Q. If you have one of these licences, you can use an e-scooter.

My bad wording. 
& guessing you did not read the link 🤦‍♀️

Okell

I'm a pedestrian, a cyclist and a motorist.

As a pedestrian I feel the greatest risk of injury (or even death) comes from e-scooters ridden illegally on the pavement, followed by adult cyclists on the pavement.  I don't think cars pose any special risk to pedestrians reasonably aware of their surroundings.

The problem with e-scooters on the pavement is that they're invariably being ridden at or near their maximum speed, and you can't hear them approaching behind you.  I don't know whether they carry bells or not, but even if they don't, I don't understand why the riders can't call out a warning.

The same can be said about adult cyclists except in my experience they tend to approach more slowly - but still as silently - as e-scooter riders.  I thought all cycles had to have a bell but it's obvious riders don't know how to use them or how to open their mouths.

The city I live in has had a trial of e-scooters for the last two or three years.  It's quite obvious that the vast majority of them are being ridden illegally  - either because they're on the pavement or because the rider is obviously not old enough to have a driving licence.  (I assume a parent has hired it for them or it's been hired on a parent's licence).

Funnily enough, I think the fact that the trial for-hire scooters can legally be ridden on the road is ridiculous - espacially at night.  They have a single rear light about two inches in diameter and set about 6 inches above road level.  If you've got poor quality street lighting added to a bit of traffic they're almost impossible to see.

They should all be scrapped whether for hire or private.

(They might make sense in Los Angeles but nobody walks anywhere in LA do they)

And don't get me started on shared pedestrian and cycle paths.  Or dog walkers with extendable leads...

Vectis

cryan846 said:

Thanks to all who commented. Very happy to report I got a call from the supplier today and are sending out a new scooter due to the photo evidence I sent to show the handlebar had snapped. 

So, you're just ignoring the fact that what your son is doing is illegal? You're apparently 'very happy' with that?

And, you're helping him by buying the scooter for him. Would you buy a car for him if he was going to be driving it illegally because he was 'commuting to work' and 'public transport was poor'? Explain the difference please, as both would be illegal.

What's he going to do if he injures someone riding the scooter illegally or causes an accident, damages a car or other vehicle? I doubt if he's got any insurance, as what he's doing is illegal, and I doubt if he has the thousands of pounds to pay for repairs to a vehicle or the millions for personal injury claims, has he?

I don't understand either why MSE allows topics which give advice on illegal activities. Even if you term it as a 'consumer rights' issue, people are still being asked for advice on something which is illegal to use here in the UK.

TELLIT01

The consumer rights issue element of this topic is entirely valid, as is possession of an e-scooter.  The failure of the handlebars and use on public roads are totally different matters.