The way we’re travelling is changing fast – but the law isn’t keeping up

With all the talk of autonomous and electric cars, hyper loops, bi-mode trains that run under wires and then don’t, etc, the world of the transport planner is being turned upside down. What we thought we knew is no longer holding true, technology is changing all we knew, and legislation is not keeping up.

Let me illustrate through one simple example. With the advent of electric-powered cycles, what is the difference between such a cycle and a mobility scooter (or an invalid carriage as they are legally called)?

With the addition of battery power, cycles can now claim to be bi-mode (to borrow the phrase from trains). Under battery power, cycles can legally achieve speeds of up to 15.5mph and they offer a journey range typically up to 75 miles. Of course they can go faster and further under human pedal power! Battery power means that cycling is now an option for the unfit and in places with hills.

Electric power cycles can have two or increasingly three wheels, and you can have traditional seating or recumbent seating. Anyone can ride a cycle, without insurance, test or licence, although you must be over 14 to ride a battery-powered cycle. Your bike doesn’t need to be registered. Indeed, in an increasing number of towns and cities you don’t even need to own a bike to ride one. So how does this compare to mobility scooters?

Rhodri Clark wrote an interesting feature article on the uptake and use of mobility scooters (LTT21 Jul 17). This explained the legislative framework for mobility scooters, the fact that they can only be used by people over the age of 14, and only those who have a difficulty in walking, suffering from an injury, a physical disability or a medical condition that affects mobility. 

Rhodri outlined the difference between Class 2 and 3 scooters. Class 2 scooters, with a maximum speed of 4mph, can share footways and other pedestrian areas, as indeed can the class 3 scooters provided they do not exceed 4mph. Class 3 scooters can achieve speeds of up to 8mph in the carriageway and a range of up to 35 miles. They have to meet certain standards, including lights, mirrors, indicators and have a horn.  They also need to be registered with the DVLA. 

As the table below shows, it does feel like the difference between the two modes is blurred and yet the restrictions in use between the two modes couldn’t be more different. This feels like a case of legislation not keeping up with technology. 

Put simply, cyclists can now travel further, for increasingly less effort. They can be ridden in more places, at faster speeds, and with less red tape and legal restrictions than mobility scooters. This feels unfair especially since both can have the same number of wheels (if a tricycle) and you can now get recumbent bikes with seats not saddles. Indeed, in the USA it has been reported that 75 per cent of tricycle users are aged over 50.

Policy-makers and legislators need to iron out the differences, such as:

• Licencing – you have to register Class 3 mobility scooters, but not power assisted cycles, which can travel at twice the speed. In the absence of any number plate or tax disc you have to also ask how can anyone tell if a mobility scooter is registered or not?

• User capability – neither require the user to pass any capability tests (for example eyesight), and both modes rely on user common sense to self-determine if they are fit to safely use. Clarity over who can use which vehicles also needs sorting and enforcing, especially if speeds increase. Similarly the requirement for insurance needs consideration. The boundary between a cycle and mobility scooter is blurring, especially as tricycles, recumbent bicycles and delivery bikes are increasingly common. 

• Areas of use – cycles can share some areas with pedestrians. For example, pedestrianised streets (unless specifically excluded by a Traffic Regulation Order or bye-law), but generally cycles and faster mobility scooters have to share the carriageway with cars, buses and lorries. Indeed, the ACPO (now the National Police Chiefs’ Council) advice to police forces says tolerance should be shown to cyclists who break the letter of the law and ride on footways where this would allow them to avoid areas of increased risk such as complex junctions. Why are mobility scooters restricted to 4mph in shared areas when battery powered cycles can do four times that speed (and faster under human power)? Why are slower mobility scooters not allowed to use the safer bus lanes or cycle tracks when cyclists can?

• Enforcement – who checks if cyclists and mobility scooter users are physically fit to use these modes, indeed who checks if a mobility scooter user is indeed a person with an injury or disability? And does anyone enforce their safe and proper use? My observations suggest an increase in cycling without lights, typically using the footway, and the way some food delivery cyclists weave through pedestrianised areas is alarming. 

The street environment for pedestrians is now more crowded and therefore potentially less safe, as we have seen from accidents involving both cyclists and mobility scooters. Although both vehicles must give way to pedestrians, if people are not clear who can use what and where, then safety risks and conflict will increase. 

This whole area demands action at both a national and local level.

---

David Young is a director of transport planning and infrastructure design consultant SCP.