E-bike and E-scooter - ongoing issues and discussion (merged posts)

[whole diary]

[Marlburian]

I have a friend who cycles around London and has moaned about being cut up by e-scooters in cycle lanes. Recently she bought her husband, in his mid-40s, one because he has a health condition that deters him from using public transport. On an early ride he came off quite nastily when he lost his balance when signalling a turn. (This is the main reason for my posting - an e-scooterist actually signalling  ?)  His wife was behind him on her bike and together they went to a nearby pharmacy for him to be patched up.

[Bmblbzzz]

Voi hire scooters have flashing indicators and yes, some riders at least do use them. But as with car drivers, some use them the wrong direction and more don't cancel them (I don't think they have self-cancelling, I'm not sure they even have a tell-tale for the rider).

[Surrey 455]

Will Paris ban shared e-scooters? The deputy mayor of Paris is not a fan

For those who ride them, they can prove incredibly useful; when the subway is packed or the buses are stuck in rush-hour traffic, they can be the last-minute option that miraculously gets them to work and to appointments on time.

But for many, the devices are a scourge that can clutter pavements, end up at the bottom of a river, or worse, cause deadly accidents.

This month, the deputy mayor of Paris, David Belliard called shared e-scooters “very cumbersome, accident-prone and anti-environmental” and his Green party even called for them to be banned from the city when the operators’ contract expires in February 2023.

Now these operators – Dott, TIER and Lime – are fighting back and joining forces to make the case that the 15,000 e-scooters they manage are not to blame for all the evils in the city.

The article continues showing steps taken to avoid bikes being dumped in the Seine and how to stop two riding at once.

[Bmblbzzz]

Operators say that 96 per cent of the devices are now parked where they should be – and not getting in the way of pedestrians by lying haphazardly on pavements.

That’s mostly because geo-tracking software now prevents users from ending their ride on the app unless they are inside one of the city’s 2,500 dedicated parking areas.

In parallel, a special patrol tours Paris every day to reposition those that aren’t or have fallen over.

If this geofencing for parking actually works, can it be brought across the Channel please? And extended to cars too.

[Bmblbzzz]

A Harris Interactive survey commissioned by Dott, Tier and Lime earlier this year found that if e-scooters were banned in Paris, 35 per cent of users said they would replace their trips with a personal car or would use a ride-hailing app like Uber.

Would these riders walk more? Not necessarily, say operators, noting that the average e-scooter ride in Paris is 3.2 km – which would take over an hour to cover on foot.

They present e-scooters more as a way to relieve public transport during the morning and evening rush hours.

The claim is often made that e-scooters take people off public transport and to an extent from walking rather than out of cars. These figures would seem to roughly support that. But they're also looking at it the other way; not "where did scooter riders come from?" but "now they are here, where would they go if we got rid of them?"

[froome]

Operators say that 96 per cent of the devices are now parked where they should be – and not getting in the way of pedestrians by lying haphazardly on pavements.

That’s mostly because geo-tracking software now prevents users from ending their ride on the app unless they are inside one of the city’s 2,500 dedicated parking areas.

In parallel, a special patrol tours Paris every day to reposition those that aren’t or have fallen over.

If this geofencing for parking actually works, can it be brought across the Channel please? And extended to cars too.

My impression, here in Bath, is that parking e-scooters on pavements in a way that is hazardous to pedestrians has got a lot worse recently. I have come across many haphazardly left in the middle of narrow pavements, and sometimes also just around blind corners, which force many pedestrians into the road. 

[froome]

A Harris Interactive survey commissioned by Dott, Tier and Lime earlier this year found that if e-scooters were banned in Paris, 35 per cent of users said they would replace their trips with a personal car or would use a ride-hailing app like Uber.

Would these riders walk more? Not necessarily, say operators, noting that the average e-scooter ride in Paris is 3.2 km – which would take over an hour to cover on foot.

They present e-scooters more as a way to relieve public transport during the morning and evening rush hours.

The claim is often made that e-scooters take people off public transport and to an extent from walking rather than out of cars. These figures would seem to roughly support that. But they're also looking at it the other way; not "where did scooter riders come from?" but "now they are here, where would they go if we got rid of them?"

I very much doubt whether e-scooters have any noticeable effect on car usage. Most users I know are not car owners, and many of their decisions to use a scooter are spur of the moment decisions made because they come across one available while walking.

[Bmblbzzz]

You have to download an app before you can hire one, which is the kind of thing you're likely to do over wifi rather than on mobile data, ie at home (or school, work, etc) rather than in the street. But most of their users here in Bristol do seem to be students, who probably don't own cars. Though I do see more middle-aged people on them now than used to be the case.

[ChrisB]

You can download an app directly through 4G networks, most likely to nbe found in town centres with scooters. It really doesn't need to be via wifi (which in any case, can be found in many shops & cafes if really needed)

[Bmblbzzz]

The operators must have information on how many journeys are one-offs versus repeat riders, but do they make it public? It would be interesting as well as useful for transport planners. It would also be interesting to see how the ratio varied from place to place and what factors might influence it (such as availability of public transport, car ownership, road infrastructure for non-motorised users, etc). Certainly I see various e-scooters marked by Voi as being on long-term hire, including some which the long-term hirers have personalised in various (cosmetic) ways.

[ChrisB]

I would expect the contract/licence given to these operators (more so if it’s a trial) to include ridership figures. Try a FOI^▸ (Freedom of Information) request on the council?

[Marlburian]

illegal escooterist sues council

On reading the headline, my first reaction was that the woman might have a case, whether or not she was using the machine illegally. But then I read: '“Because it was dark I couldn’t see the hole,” she said.'

Which surely raises the question of what lights, if any, she had on her escooter. I think that some are sold with a tiny rear light and that it should be possible to fix a lamp on the front. How visible was she to other road users and pedestrians?

(She better not try riding down my road: in places two inches of the surface have worn away.)

[ChrisB]

Tat link isn’t working for me?

[TonyK]

illegal escooterist sues council

On reading the headline, my first reaction was that the woman might have a case, whether or not she was using the machine illegally. But then I read: '“Because it was dark I couldn’t see the hole,” she said.'

Which surely raises the question of what lights, if any, she had on her escooter. I think that some are sold with a tiny rear light and that it should be possible to fix a lamp on the front. How visible was she to other road users and pedestrians?

(She better not try riding down my road: in places two inches of the surface have worn away.)

Councils and homeowners still have a duty of care to wrongdoers, which is why one of our fellow poster's ring of concealed landmines could get him in trouble.

The legal defence of volenti non fit injuria means that no-one doing something wrong entirely voluntarily is going to get very far in court. To use this defence, the defendant (council here) would have to show that the claimant knew the existence and degree of any risk to her ill-chosen escapade, and expressly or implicitly accepted that risk and waived the right to damages. It isn't easy to prove both elements. The council would otherwise have to go for contributory negligence instead, which is only a partial defence. The court could find her 100% negligent and give her nowt.

I smell an ambulance chaser here, working on a contingency fee, and hoping to establish a precedent. If she loses, I can't see it going to appeal. If she wins, the council or its insurers might want to appeal to try to make sure nobody else comes cap in broken hand. If it happens a lot, someone will have to think about making some law on the subject.

[Marlburian]

Tat link isn’t working for me?

In which case it would really be a tat link. I've just clicked on it in my post and also on the one in Tony's quote and they both work for me. Google "Giovanna Drago Barnet escooter".