You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Don't worry, this has got nothing to do with any other recent threads on bike lights.
It's something I've wondered for a while, then that thread about police officers getting injured at work and the way insurance companies will always try to get out of paying brought it up again.
I can remember the old 6v "tin can" lights, Ever Ready or Pifco I think, usually mounted on a bracket half way up the fork leg.
They were next to useless, but I'm fairly sure they used to carry a British Standards Kite Mark.
As far as I know, none of the modern type of LED front lights carries a BSI or CE marking.
Is there a legal standard ?
If a cyclist got hit by a car at night, could the car drivers insurance company get out of paying because the bike didn't have CE approved lights ?
All motor vehicle bulbs, lights, reflectors and lenses are CE marked, as are reflective jackets for road workers.
Is there no similar standard for bike lights ?
On a similar subject, I remember being told by a bike shop owner, years ago in the days of 1.5v bulbs and D cells, that he wasn't allowed to sell rechargeable batteries in a bike shop, because of the way they went flat.
Standard batteries faded away over an hour or so, rechargeables went from bright to flat within minutes, supposedly catching cyclists by surprise and leaving them with no lights.
There was nothing to stop me going next door to the model shop to buy rechargeable batteries and putting them in my lights myself, but he wasn't allowed to sell them to me.
Is that true ? And if so, does that law still stand ? How does that affect modern rechargeable Lithium Ion batteries ?
Don't worry - if you haven't got reflectors on your pedals the insurance company will be able to get out of it anyway.
Is that an urban myth, or can someone quote case history to prove it ?
I've heard of people getting reduced damages for not wearing a helmet or hi-viz, but not for having no pedal reflectors.
Don't worry, this has got nothing to do with any other recent threads on bike lights.
*Leaves thread out of disappointment*
They have to conform to BS6102/3 or an EU equivalent. CE is something different, the EU equivalent is ISO somethingorother.
I've heard of people getting reduced damages for not wearing a helmet or hi-viz, but not for having no pedal reflectors.
surely not for not wearing hi-viz - if you have decent lights that should be enough - cars don't have to be high viz FFS
Hi-viz buys you nothing if you are trying to negotiate somewhere like Oxford Street, 'cos everything is bright.
I was led to believe (many years ago) that the front light had to be no more than 2.4w. The board that decided this contained a head guy from everready, who didn't have a light more powerful than 2.4w... It was never proven though.
I think that the lights are supposed to some side aspect, which most of the high power lights fail on anyway
60At night your cycle MUST have white front and red rear lights lit. It MUST also be fitted with a red rear reflector (and amber pedal reflectors, if manufactured after 1/10/85). White front reflectors and spoke reflectors will also help you to be seen. Flashing lights are permitted but it is recommended that cyclists who are riding in areas without street lighting use a steady front lamp.
Law RVLR regs 13, 18 & 24
Regs here ENJOY- they dont answer your questions so dont bother
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1989/1796/contents/made
Where can I buy pedal reflectors for spds, I don't want to be caught out now. 😕
Time ones definetly come with then - or used to the cheap Aliums
Don't spds come with pedal reflectors? The shimano ones I bought did.
raised on another forum it was found instead of pedal reflectors if using spds overshoes or reflectives front and rear on your feet are acceptable., not sure how they are british standard though and red/white light.
I have trouble deciphering legalese, but I think this means that if you've got filament lamps, they have to be the right ones.
Does anyone still use filament lamps though ?
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1989/1796/regulation/14/made
(2) Where any pedal cycle manufactured on or after 1st October 1990 is equipped with any lamp that is required by any Schedule to these Regulations to be marked with a British Standard mark, no filament lamp other than a filament lamp marked with the marking indicated in the British Standard specification for Filament Lamps for Cycles published by the British Standards Institution under the reference 6873: 1988 namely “B.S. 6873” shall be fitted to any such lamp.
And here's the bit on pedal reflectors.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1989/1796/schedule/20/made
Which is the "leading edge and trailing edge" on an Egg Beater ?
yes, clipless pedals require a change in the legislation unless not roadlegal in lighting up time 😕
As I understood it the standard for solid front lights is pitifully old and there are hardly any lights that meet it - and probably the same for solid rear ones.
However flashing lights are OK, so even if you run solid lights it would be best to have some flashers to be 'legal'.
Multiple low-intensity, but bright, flashers are the way forward anyway - a solid front light has no 'movement' so it less likely to be noticed, or more likely to be ignored - see http://www.londoncyclist.co.uk/raf-pilot-teach-cyclists/
Plus if you have a couple of flashers on the front you can splay them out so giving better side visibility.
Rear lights should be chosen for side visibility anyway.
Who uses a 'filament' light on their bike anymore so that legislation doesn't apply to 99% of lights?
There is no current UK legislation that is actually applied to the lights themselves other than the fact you must have front and rear lights at night.
Germany is a different story - front lights have to be of an approved type on the road with a cut off beam (a bit like car dipped beams) so as not to dazzle oncoming traffic.
Ahhh!! That was the other bit that was supposed to be linked in to the everready board member myth thing. They didn't make an led light, so they all had to be filament bulbs. Probably a myth though
I had this very same arguemnt with a Automotive Electrical Engineer here at work the other day - he disagreed with me that a Magic Shine-a-like front light was "legal". so out came the old BS6102/3
... we came to the conclusion that the regs' are poorly written, outdated, and open to a lot of interpretation.
I.M.O:
With the mega bright bike lights that are out there now (and the mega Bright car LED running lamps too) Legislation needs to be brought up to date sharpish, and these lamps (Lensing Tech')made to a defined spec ' with a "beam pattern" ... which would make them more useful to us cyclists, as the light would be used, and not simply thrown out the front in all directions ! Plus you wouldn't dazzle oncoming traffic if used on the road, and correctly mounted / angled.
Basically what almost all modern lights rely on is the principle that if they're legal in one EU state they're legal in all EU states.
Who uses a 'filament' light on their bike anymore
Me ! I have a couple of sets of HID lights (and too many LED sets to count).... they have filament.
Basically what almost all modern lights rely on is the principle that if they're legal in one EU state they're legal in all EU states.
Although I seriously doubt that any of the "copycat" Chinese made lights that lots of us use are LEGAL anywhere! lol
Those 1989 regulations have been amended several times, the current version doesn't refer to filaments.
The CTC have a useful page about this: http://www.ctc.org.uk/cyclists-library/regulations/lighting-regulations
The suggestion that any lamp on a bicycle might cause undue dazzle or discomfort to other users of the road would have been laughable a few years ago, but not any more. It is not only illegal but doesn't actually improve your safety, should the person driving a heavy motor vehicle towards you be temporarily blinded by your headlamp! So please don't let it do that.
So all those uber bright mtb lights are illegal on the road...
pedal reflectors are a real problem though - who uses them and who uses pedals that can accept them?
yep plastic inserts which turn your light dependable double sided clipless pedals into big heavy chunky fragile single sided pedals.Don't spds come with pedal reflectors? The shimano ones I bought did
Regs need sorting out or they need to decide on common sense approach, ie if my bike is festooned with lights but I don't have a hi-viz vest (which isn't stipulated anywhere afaik) or reflectors then I'm still legit riding at night
Regs need sorting out or they need to decide on common sense approach, ie if my bike is festooned with lights but I don't have a hi-viz vest (which isn't stipulated anywhere afaik) or reflectors then I'm still legit riding at night
so what are you saying - that hi-viz vest should be in the regs, or reflectors shouldn't ??
My spd shoes have reflective backing, is that good enough?
What I do know is that two people cycling side by side on a dark country road with top-quality helmet and bar lights scares drivers coming the other way into believing that some vast agricultural vehicle is coming at them 🙂
saying it should be clarified and updatedso what are you saying - that hi-viz vest should be in the regs, or reflectors shouldn't ??
Pretty sure I've heard of lack of hi viz being considered for reduced damages (but would probably struggle to find a link) it definitely seems to be trotted out with as much regularity as whether or not a cyclist was wearing a helmet when they were mowed down. This "not in the rules but might be a factor in blame" is worrying, obviously I'd prefer not to [b]have[/b] to wear hiviz everytime I venture out at night, but they should either make it a requirement or STFU about it.
Reflectors, hmm how much use are they? wheel ones are a nice idea while we don't have side lights but they aren't a legal requirement (i think, not sure now). Rear and front are a bit redundant if you have lights (which you should) pedal ones are a PITA for clipless, will shoe/ankle reflectors do instead?
Pedal Reflectors are Amber most reflectives on clothing are white.
I've not trawled through the legals, but guess there will be some loophole saying that anything on the pedal area has to be Amber.
Same on HGVs, Sprinters etc where the side running lights are amber ?
yep, I've got some ankle ones that're dayglo yellow, would they do? Close but no cigar I'd guess.Pedal Reflectors are Amber most reflectives on clothing are white.
BS 6103 is the active British standard, it has had Amendments apparently in 2003 and 2011 but not a full revision since 1986...
Where can I buy pedal reflectors for spds, I don't want to be caught out now.
Good question.
Shimano supply clip in reflectors to be allow a rider to be compliant but no bugger ever uses them.
I do wonder in an appropriate rear facing reflective panel on the heel of a riders shoe would be acceptable as while it doesn't strictly meet requirements of the standard, it would in effect perform the same function, perhaps even better. than a pedal reflector.
Meeting the letter of the law or the spirit? discuss....
Thanks, CraigW, I should have guessed CTC would have covered it.
It still doesn't answer the original question though and only hints at insurance claims in the last paragraph.
Fortunately our Police seem hardly more concerned by legal niceties than lamp manufacturers. Since it became theoretically legal to ride a bike with just flashing lights on it, they're nowadays no more likely to quibble its legal status than one equipped with steady lights – unless they're rather dim (the lights that is) or involved in an accident. Then it's possible that someone might look a bit closer.
Is it like the cycling on a footpath thing, where everyone's waiting for a test case.
Are we all putting ourselves at risk of reduced damages due to contributory negligence because the law hasn't kept up with technology and we are not using some crappy old kite marked tin can light alongside our super duper new LED ones ?
read the CTC link Craigw provided above. it tells everything you need to know.
edit - directed at the two previous posters to cookeaa
[i]Rear and front are a bit redundant if you have lights[/i]
Thats the point though isn't it...Redundancy in case your lights fail. Same as cars needing red reflectors when the rest of the light lenses are smoked/clear.
pedal reflectors are a real problem though - who uses them and who uses pedals that can accept them?
Found [url= http://www.bike-discount.de/shop/a72853/xt-pedals-pd-t700.html?lg=en&cr=GBP&cn=gb&gclid=CIrMz7eskLYCFc3HtAod8VEABg ]these[/url] a few weeks ago - as with most things cycling other European countries seem much better set up than here.
Sure I read somewhere that hi-viz is needed in France at night or poor visibility. Not certain on that though.
I've heard of people getting reduced damages for not wearing a helmet or hi-viz
Sorry but that's bollocks. There's no example of anyone having their damages reduced for either of these things.
Insurers may try and run them as an argument, that's not the same thing as them being established law (unlike wearing a seat belt).
It's not for lack of trying by a judge though.
http://www.brachers.co.uk/news/item/cycle-helmets-and-the-law-or-lack-of-it
Sorry but that's bollocks. There's no example of anyone having their damages reduced for either of these things.
It's certainly been used before, there was one definite example where a judge ruled 25% contributory negligence from the cyclist for not wearing a helmet.
I can't find the case at the moment though but it's a very dangerous precedent.
There are quite a few lights that meet the German StZVO standards. eg Busch and Muller, Supernova or Philips. So they should be fine under the UK regulations.
Germany is a different story - front lights have to be of an approved type on the road with a cut off beam (a bit like car dipped beams) so as not to dazzle oncoming traffic.
I'd quite like that rule to be brought in here. On the road, ultra-bright bike lights, are distracting for other users. Its one thing being seen, but dazzling a car driver is dangerous.
I've got some upgraded Hope V2s which I always turn down to low on lit roads. I've just also got an Exposure Revo. Its bloody brilliant, stupidliy bright but it has no switch at all, so I've dazzled lots of people with it already. 🙁
It seems that helmets and hi-viz are routinely used as leverage by defendant solicitors, as in "settle before trial for less money, or we'll raise the fact that your client was bare-headed in court".
That's not the same as binding law though and a solicitor with a good grasp of this should be able to tell them to get knotted.
http://www.cyclistsdefencefund.org.uk/cycle-helmets-and-contributory-negligence/recent-cases
[i]I'd quite like that rule to be brought in here. On the road, ultra-bright bike lights, are distracting for other users. Its one thing being seen, but dazzling a car driver is dangerous.[/i]
It is illegal to dazzle another road user, be you driving a car with the main beam switched to high, or you are using a high powered, bike light. Whatever the light source, its illegal to dazzle another road user.
The "Big Bang" by Busch and Muller has an additional lense for on-road use, in Germany, which generates the typical dipped beam pattern of a car head lamp.
though presumably points the light in the wrong direction for UK use?
The B&M light I've got isn't focused to one particular side but it's got a very sharp cutoff at riders' and drivers' eye level. With my Hope Vision 4 focused about 20m in front of me I can see the tops of the trees I'm riding past, with the B&M I can just see the road.
The German StVZO regs are very good and the most stringent in the world AFAIK - all my lights are German and they're much better for the road than any UK light - and I doubt you'd run into any trouble convincing a UK court that such a setup is legal. The only tricky bit is pedal reflectors. When using clipless pedals I use reflective tape - but it's white.
"[i]It's certainly been used before, there was one definite example where a judge ruled 25% contributory negligence from the cyclist for not wearing a helmet. I can't find the case at the moment though but it's a very dangerous precedent.[/i]"
Wasn't that the one where the chap was on an organised (and, IIRC, competitive) company event and refused the helmet he was asked to wear, then himself caused a crash and sued the company? (Or something like that.) - If so I *think* the contributory negligence bit was due to his refusal to heed their specific advice rather than for simply not wearing a helmet per se.
But even if contributory negligence has not managed to actually reduce damages, there is precedent of the consideration that it (in the eyes of the law) does so, which is the Smith v Finch case:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/outrage-at-ruling-on-helmets-for-cyclists-1645736.html
http://www.cyclistsdefencefund.org.uk/smith-v-finch-jorgensen-v-moore-reviews-cases-involving-cycle-helmets-and-contributory-negligence
http://www.access-legal.co.uk/legal-news/cycle-helmets-a-legal-update-lu-3863.htm
So, there is a clear risk of damages being reduced for not wearing a helmet even in a non-fault incident. I think it's massively misguided, but there you go.
"[i]though presumably points the light in the wrong direction for UK use?[/i]"
As MrAgreeable says, they send the light down to the road (and send more light to longer ranges) but they're laterally symmetrical.
I think we need maximum power or beam shape controls. I am a total transportation cycling advocate, yet even I [let-alone car drivers] am fed-up with being blinded by 1000 Lumen LED lights with no beam control on bikes....
Even when I use an Aldi LED as a head torch [where the ??*? is my Hope 1 hiding in the flat?] I look away when I pass a car so I don't blind them.
There's more detailed commentary on Smith v Finch here:
Obiter dicta remarks are not considered binding law, they might be persuasive under the right circumstances.
It's scary to hear that many claimants are now accepting reductions to settlements for not wearing a helmet, even though there's no binding law on the subject.
At te risk of turning this thread into another helmet debate, leading Counsel's opinion on the legal need to wear bicycle helmets can be found [url= http://www.2tg.co.uk/assets/docs/article_documents/cycle_helmets_a_duty_to_wear_-_7_3_12.pdf ]here (PDF).[/url].
Echoing [b]Bez[/b]'s comment, I use German-approved dynamo lights, and would argue that heel reflectors on either shoes or overshoes would cover the pedal reflector requirement.
The Pedal reflectors - have reflective panels on heel of one pair of shoes and have wrapped the end of the cranks in reflective tape.