Police crack down on illegally modified e-bikes but readers say its not enough
Have your say on these MetroTalk topics and more in the comments.
Good - but shouldn't the police should take it further?
I was amazed to see that police are tackling the menace of e-bikes (Metro, Tue) – but they are not going far enough.
Forces across the UK confiscated 937 e-bikes in the year to August, up from 511 in the previous 12 months.
Legally, e-bike motors must cut out at 15.5mph but they are increasingly being modified to go faster.
There is no distinction in law between an electric motor and a combustion engine.
If they can be operated without the pedals being turned, they are in effect mopeds or motorbikes and as such must be registered with the DVLA, carry visible number plates and be insured and the rider must be licensed.
They cannot be ridden in cycle lanes and absolutely not on pavements. So come on, PC Plod, nick theses regular and persistent law-breakers.
And don’t get me started on those damn scooters… George, London
METRO TALK - HAVE YOUR SAY
Let us know what you think...
Start a text with VIEWS followed by your comment, name and where you live to 65700. Standard network charge applies. Or email mail@ukmetro.co.uk Helpline for Views, Rush-Hour Crush and Good Deed Feed: 020 3615 0600.
Remember, you are more likely to be published if you provide your name and location with your
Full T&Cs here. Metro.co.uk is a member of the Independent Press Standards Organisation. Comments may be edited for reasons of legality, clarity or space.
Should riders be made to register their e-bikes or switch?
Thank you for highlighting the danger of e-bikes. These things are dangerous. Every delivery driver has a modified e-bike and I always wonder what makes them different from a moped that is regulated by law.
They need to be registered or removed. And no, I am not trying to take away the livelihood of these drivers – they must stick to normal bicycles or move to registered mopeds. Pedro, Hammersmith
To save your boozer you’ll have to go to the pub
More than 50 pubs a month on average were lost in England and Wales during the first half of this year (Metro, Mon). People moan about pubs closing but what do they expect, especially when all they do is sit at home watching Sky and updating social media while ordering a takeaway?
Get off your sofa, do some real socialising and go support your local! Paul, Birmingham
It’s happened before… It could happen again
Landlords who threaten to evict decent tenants in pure retaliation against planned ‘no-fault eviction’ laws (Metro, Mon) are despicable.
Nevertheless, housing minister Matthew Pennycook should take heed of history. In 1965, Harold Wilson’s Labour government sought to counterbalance the exploitive effects of the 1957 deregulation of tenancies with its draconian Rent Act, which resulted in decent landlords taking flight and a consequential dire shortage of housing stock due to rent controls being its key policy.
This consigned a generation to living in seedy, cash-in-hand bedsits and fuelled a homelessness crisis, bringing about the Shelter and Crisis charities, which are still needed today.
The horrific 1966 BBC docudrama, Cathy Come Home, which charted the misfortune of a family of renters resorting to life on the streets, was watched by 25 per cent of the population and shamed our nation.
Ironically, the worst landlords remained in the market because they were willing to control tenants with intimidating methods. With today’s depleted policing resources and courtroom shortages, the same is likely to happen.
Greater protection for renters is a must but Mr Pennycook should carefully balance his decision. Robert Hughes, London
Anti-social tenants could be here to stay…
The discussion about whether landlords should be required to throw out antisocial tenants (MetroTalk, Mon) raises points on both sides but ignores one serious practical hurdle.
It seems unlikely antisocial tenants will go willingly. It takes not less than six months to process an eviction. The changes being introduced to protect tenants from eviction are estimated to extend this period to 18 months.
If the government wants to protect the hapless neighbours of bad tenants by requiring landlords to evict those tenants, then its plans will require serious modification. Deborah, London