But beyond the headlines lies a less obvious consequence. The legal status of an e-bike can determine not only who is responsible when a collision occurs, but whether an injured person has any realistic route to compensation.
This is because some modified e-bikes are not considered e-bikes in law. When a collision happens, that distinction can determine whether an injured person is able to recover compensation. Greater public education and clearer guidance around e-bike modifications are needed to ensure riders understand the legal and financial risks involved.
The issue is becoming more relevant as e-bike use grows across Scotland. Earlier this year, the Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety warned ministers that illegal e-bikes presented a growing risk to pedestrians, cyclists and other road users. Indeed, Police Scotland's own figures estimate that collisions involving e-bikes are increasing2, and concerns continue to grow about the rise of high-powered modified bikes capable of travelling at speeds well beyond the legal limits.
Under current regulations, electrically assisted pedal cycles (EAPCs) are generally treated in the same way as conventional bicycles. Riders do not need a driving licence, vehicle registration or mandatory insurance.
That position changes if a bike no longer meets the legal requirements for an EAPC. A machine fitted with a more powerful motor or modified to exceed permitted speed limits may instead be classified as a motor vehicle, bringing with it additional legal obligations relating to registration, licensing and insurance.
The distinction can become particularly significant following a collision.
Since cyclists are not generally required to hold insurance, individuals injured in incidents involving conventional bicycles can face practical challenges when seeking compensation, particularly where the rider has limited means to meet any claim.
However, the position may be very different if a modified e-bike is legally classified as a motor vehicle. In those circumstances, an injured person may be able to pursue a claim through the Motor Insurers' Bureau (MIB), the organisation that compensates victims of uninsured or untraced drivers.
The result is a somewhat unusual legal situation: an illegally modified e-bike rider may be treated in law not as a cyclist, but as the driver of an uninsured motor vehicle. The consequence of this for riders is that criminal charges may be brought against either them or their parents, if they allowed a minor to use the e-bike. For claimants, this distinction may open up routes to compensation that would not ordinarily be available following a collision involving a conventional bicycle.
At the same time, the increasing prevalence of illegal e-bikes is prompting debate about who should ultimately bear the cost of such claims. The MIB has long argued that compensation costs should not fall on the wider motoring community through its levy-funded scheme, and that clearer insurance requirements may be needed as the market continues to evolve.
The debate is likely to intensify as e-bikes become an increasingly common feature of Scotland's roads and cycle paths. But as their popularity grows, so too does the need for a clearer understanding of where the law draws the line between a bicycle and a motor vehicle.
Greater public education, clearer regulation and consistent enforcement would help ensure riders understand the consequences of modifying their bikes, while also protecting pedestrians and other road users. Crucially, it would provide greater certainty for those seeking compensation after a collision.
Without a better understanding of these distinctions, Scotland risks creating a growing gap between how these vehicles are used in practice and how they are treated in law - with potentially serious consequences for everyone involved when collisions occur.
This article was first published by The Herald.
(1) - skynews
