Electric Scooters (Bird, Lime, etc)

The way I interpret it is that this is a controlled way of testing the use of the devices and making temporary provisions in law until such time that the Gov can best work out how the privately-owned vehicles can be sensibly legislated for.

Anyone know how rentals get charged battery wise ?

And yes agree with @Ordog
Hopefully the majority ride safely and we can embrace the new and eco friendly technology

In relation to insurance I read this as the provider will sort that out. “1) E-scooters in trials need to be covered by a motor vehicle insurance policy - it is understood rental operators will ensure a policy is in place that covers users of the vehicles.” In which case if you’ve a driver’s licence you’re good to go.

They hire people to plug them in at their home and charge them and then drop them back on the street when done.


I think insurance is the main reason. Rental companies must ensure each scooter is insured - much harder to police if individuals are responsible for insuring themselves, especially as these scooters do not have registration plates.

That’s a good point.

I’m sure that alternative insurance models may also work.

In reference to motor vehicles (cars, say), in the UK a car is usually insured on its registration number with named people permitted to drive. ( There are variances and exceptions to this but that’s typically how it works in the UK )

In Europe, I understand the model is different. It’s normally the car being insured for anyone to drive provided they have the permission of the owner.

E-Scooters, whilst classified as motor vehicles, don’t conform to Construction & Use Regs as they don’t have number plates.

It’s feasible, perhaps, that in the future people might take out insurance to insure them to drive any e-scooter. That way, the driver is insured without tying them to a particular machine (without a registration number). That arrangement might be easier to check that drivers are properly insured.

I’m not suggesting that will happen, just theorising one way that might work.

I rarely read the daily mail if at all but it popped up earlier ( too Tory and sensationalist for me )

They blow out of proportion the two people in the world who have been sadly killed . What about the pedestrians, cyclists , drivers who get killed each day ?

I wonder what are the requirements to operate such a rental business. Can you run a company, buy a scooter & insurance as the company, then rent it to yourself?


Does anyone know if there’s a list of councils yet who are participating?

I saw a figure earlier . Think it’s about 40 or 50

This bit got me:

“We were hoping that speeds would be limited, ideally to as close to walking as possible”

at which point you are better off using a kick scooter (not exactly legally clear either)…


These pressure groups tend to only see one side… which is their purpose I guess… but it does lead to statements like that.

Finally. I’ve found one that the police have seized.

Technically, they could’ve done the driver for any or all of these:

  • driving whilst using mobile phone
  • careless driving
  • driving otherwise than in accordance with a licence

Perhaps. I definitely recall someone successfully appealing a conviction for using a mobile phone while driving some months ago.

They were stopped because they were filming the scene of an accident as they were driving past. The appeal succeeded because they weren’t using the phone as a communication device.

Edit: Found a link.

Yes. That was R v Barreto.

It’s a bit complex and exploits a loophole in the law as written. Not the first person to get off on this technicality. Tax-evading serial law-breaking comedian, Jimmy Carr, also got off on a similar technicality.

It all comes down to the interactive communication element of the device.

Coming back to that scooter seizure, if driver is using a messaging app, SnapChat, that’s your interactive communication and therefore R v Barreto does not apply. The driver is then in line for six points and £200 fine for using mobile phone.

I read the quoted tweet as “recording for their Snapchat.” It’s not a platform I’m familiar with, so I guess live streaming a video would be interactive communication.


The way I understand snapchat to work is the taking photos, typing messages and sending them to another over a data connection would be interactive communication.

I don’t know the exact circs of that police tweet and sometimes coppers talk in a strange way :man_shrugging:t2:

Barely any information given. He could have been doing anything silly ( swerving around and going the wrong way ) which they may have decided not to include

What does “ recording for their snap chat “ even mean ? If they’re recording themselves on a scooter then that is dangerous

I’ve heard from family members that in their cities they are very common. I live in a small town so I wouldn’t know how popular they are

As Ordog said. Regulate them and then they will be a great Eco friendly alternative To public transport

The government are putting £2 billion into alternative transport including widening paths and cycle lanes however that probably only applies to busy cities

It’s not dangerous. It’s careless. These words have specific meanings:

Dangerous driving is a standard of driving that falls far below that of a careful and competent driver.

Careless driving is a standard of driving that falls below that of a careful and competent driver.

Although I agree with you, it is probably dangerous as well. :+1: