A cyclist has been fined after he attached a petrol engine to his bike to help him get up steep hills.
Lee Middleton, 37, admitted to using a motor vehicle without insurance, driving a vehicle without a licence and riding a motorcycle on a road without protective headgear at Teesside Magistrates' Court on Thursday.
Teeside Live report that Middleton was stopped by police officers on January 11 after hearing a 'loud pitched engine noise'.
Middleton had fitted the bike with a small petrol engine to help him manage the steep gradients in his local area.
However, he was told that his modifications meant the bike was now classed as a motor vehicle and therefore required a licence, insurance and a helmet.
An engine powered by a petrol tank was moving the rear wheel, justices were told.
Paul Dixon, mitigating, said Middleton 'has some difficulties' getting up and down a steep hill on his bike, and the engine was designed to assist him when he was caught by an officer in Errington Street.
He said: "The engine is such a small engine it assists a little bit going up hills but would not take you to any great speed.
"The offence was committed out of ignorance of the law."
Magistrates sentenced Middleton, of Brotton, to a £120 fine, £34 victim surcharge and £85 costs - a total of £239.
He was also handed eight penalty points.
Add new comment
41 comments
I also am unsympathetic to this pseudo-cyclist, and also deplore the reluctance of the courts to apply penalty points to offences against/ injuries to cyclists.
Whilst I don't have too much sympathy in the fact he did turn it into an illeagl motor vehicle, 8 penalty points?!!?! People who have caused serious injuries with their "legal" motor vehicles don't even get that in majority of cases.
Without going to the extraordinary lengths of looking it up, it is Sunday, I reckon that's more than most drivers get for injuring/killing a cyclist.
He comitted multiple offences, using a potentially dangerous vehicle which was in no way fit-for-purpose, and should he have injured someone then he had no insurance to pay compensation. Eight penalty points was the minimum he should have got.
It's similar for electric scooters which have been getting a lot of press lately, people seem to be accepting of their use but they're unregulated, uninsured, and their users appear to be ignorant of even the most basic rules of the road or pavement. Until there's a clamp -down on their illegal use it's only a matter of time until someone gets seriously injured and with no hope of any compensation.
This driver took out a cyclist and only got 5 points. It is the high point count compared to actual serious injury which we are comparing.
The law is a funny thing, it's subject to a set of rules. If you transgress three rules (driving without a licence, not registering your vehicle, and driving without insurance for instance) then there's a prescribed tariff. If you kill or maim someone on the road then you're subject to a separate tariff depending on whether you're guilty of dangerous driving or driving without due care. If you're also driving without a licence, insurance, registration, or a dangerously modified vehicle then the points would add up. The number of points on your licence is just one of the potential tariffs, and I don't think that killing someone should solely rely on points, so the two cases are not comparable.
I dont think people are questioning that its wrong to clamp down on these kinds of bike conversions, though I think they are far more common than this one case might suggest, Ive certainly seen one on the roads and I believe they are easily capable of speeds in excess of 40mph, some of the ebike mods apparently can push over 50mph.
what we are questioning is there are plenty of examples where a driver has killed someone through their actions on the road, often lied about their role in it and the worse they get is a driving ban & some community service for their trouble.
if we are in the clamp down on the things that are dangerous & illegal on the road, why are drivers literally getting away with murder ?
I suspect because it's not literally murder, in that there is rarely any possibility of proving intent to kill. And unfortunately, there seems to be a prevailing attitude that "oh well, accidents happen".
Whereas you can't fit a petrol engine to your bike by accident (AFAIK) or argue that "it came out of nowhere".
I did; but the sun was in my eyes, so I got away with it.
Absolutely, but there is criminal negligence, and Scotland has the excellent legal notion of culpable homicide.
Suppose instead of building his own motorbike he had stolen one. Everything else the same - helmet, insurance, licence, but now with theft added to the charge sheet. There must be examples out there, I'm betting they got away more lightly.
Pages