Mandatory license and insurance for mobility scooters

[Auburngal]

The thread of elderly people and driving has spurred this thread.

Mobility scooters have provided freedom for those who can’t walk far.

But I think based on my experiences of seeing mobility scooter users in my work, other shops and where I live, there should be a license and insurance.

I believe many didn’t drive a car prior so I have no concept of control and speed. Either their disability/health conditions or with women, their late husband did the driving and she never drove at all.

Some drive at the max speed in shops - it’s only 4mph is max speed inside and in busy areas. My colleague got run over by a mobility scooter user. She was caught by her work fleece which was fully unzipped as she was crouching to fill a shelf. She was dragged about 5m and shouting by at least 5 people didn’t do anything as the guy was deaf. She had massive bruises on her legs.

A few months ago I was topping up the bananas and a lady crashed into the back of my legs. No apologies.

About 7 years ago a man on his mobility scooter missed the corner and collided into the end of the aisle where we had promotional bottles of wine. About 30 bottles were smashed and he carried on.

There is an issue with many mobility scooters users oblivious to their actions and attitude problems.

I believe that sanctions of dangerous use of mobility scooters should be the same as using a car. Mobility scooters are not classed as vehicles in law.

There have been people who have died after being hit by mobility scooters like here www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-65383596.amp

Has anyone got any recommendations for where to get insurance for this? DH has just got one and we finally can now go out again. I hadn't given insurance a thought.

Yes. As long as we have them for cyclists, E-scooters etc. as well 🙂

In most countries personal liability insurance is mandatory or at least socially very much expected. I hated it at first, but it makes so much sense. Mobility scooters, red wine on your friend's new sofa, your kid dropping their mate's phone, so many things you see on MN would just go through the insurance, no fuss or bad feeling.

Oh do fuck off. Ive been rammed into my prams way more than a disabled person doing their shopping.

Jesus. Give people a break. Accidents happen walking into someone too.

… which are lighter and less likely to cause harm.

It doesn’t have to be all or nothing, starting with the most potentially dangerous one seems to make sense, doesn’t it?

Insurance is usually through household insurance. Personal liability, then the scooter is specifically named because it is over the valuable items threshold. Breakdown / puncture assistance is also a thing.

I'm against license and insurance. Most people with have liability insurance anyway. Even if they don't they are liable for damages so you could sue them for any damage (small claims court or higher). The hard bit is getting their name and address and witnesses. Scooters are usually used locally though, and the hire ones in seaside resorts or tourist attraction places have identifier numbers for this reason.

We don't need more laws, we need enforcement of the ones we have.

I think they should be fitted with sensors that will automatically break if getting too close to something, and have to be manually over-ridden at a speed of 0.5mph (eg if the person needs to get right up to their chair or bed).

I was going to say the same, the ones who drive down the middle of the road do my head in. I appreciate pavements are shit but it is neither safe nor sensible to drive them on the road.

I got driven into by a mobility scooter. I was stopped waiting to cross at a junction and they just drove straight into the back of me. Luckily I was only bruised but it wasn't pleasant. I think they just need to be sensibly speed limited.

You don't need a licence to use a bike and they can cause horrible injuries to pedestrians too

Yep, we should all stay quietly at home where we can't inconvenience anyone or remind the able bodied that this might be them one day.

I don't use a mobility scooter yet. But I'll think it fair to be tested, licensed and insured when every other pavement user does too. Cyclists bombing past on shared paths, commuters pushing past at the station, scooter riders weaving in and out, dog owners with their beasties on trip wires across the path, and most of all the huge number of pedestrian phone zombies who no longer look where they're going.

As someone with mobility issues, my journey to work on city paths feels like a daily assault course with peril on every corner. I am dreading having to use a scooter but maybe I should look forward to the day I become the peril again.

How fast does a pram travel? How heavy are they?

There seem to be, in this area, an increasing number of mobility scooters ridden/driven by people who are not elderly, but have mobility difficulties for other reasons.

I'm not sure what your point is?

Younger people have disabilities too….

It's a ridiculous idea.

It's yet more red tape for an almost nonexistent problem. You'd end up with a system where most older people (and some younger ones) would lose their independence because insurers would make rates unaffordable.

Another example of hatred towards those who use means of mobility other than cars, where at least 25% of those who hold a licence are unfit to do so. See also the anti-cyclist threads.

Having regulations as to materials, speed, behaviour etc I support as I would for scooters, cycles and other small means of mobility. Though it would be secondary to those I would introduce or change for cars, such as you having to pass a driving test in an SUV before you can drive one.

Surely there are bigger fish to fry? I had a mobility scooter when I had a foot operation and it was so painfully slow (slower than walking pace) I rarely used it. I gave up when it couldn't get up my street, which is on a hill, and I got stranded until DH got home.

I don't think the licence and insurance requirements should be anywhere near as rigorous as for cars, and I agree that putting barriers in the way for disabled people is inappropriate. Unfortunate as the accidents described on this thread are, they aren't fatal and don't have the same capacity for causing multiple deaths as cars do.

i have a friend whose son has multiple disabilities and who has a mini mobility scooter at the age of 6. I don't want any legislation to take away that child's independence and freedom.

But I'd support a lower level of licencing if the admin wasn't too onerous on state budgets.

4mph is too fast for a mobility scooter speed. I'm not a fast runner but my jogging speed is about 4mph. A fit man with long legs can certainly manage a brisk walk at 4mph but more normal walking speeds are more like 2.5-3 mph.

I would propose that there should be a licence for vehicles with a maximum speed of 2.5mph but that everyone of any age is presumed to qualify instantly and can just have it on application (like dog licences used to be pre 1988) but if you are deemed responsible for causing a serious incident a court can remove it or impose restrictions/order that you undergo additional training. No court would totally ban a disabled person from using their mobility aid but could order a person to pass a competence test within 3 months or be held in contempt of court, and could order for an even lower speed limiter device to be fitted.

A medium level licence could also be possible for other motorised vehicles with speed limiters fitted set to between 3mph and 14 mph which does require a more comprehensive test and licencing system and these vehicles should not be allowed inside shops. They are vehicles not mobility aids and anyone who loses their car licence should not be allowed to drive these, but the test should be easier to pass than a driving test. This would cover higher powered mobility scooters, electric scooters and electric bikes. Minimum age of 12 to use them and insurance and licence plate mandatory.

No licencing for unmotorised vehicles like foot scooters or bicycles without motors fitted. There have been many many threads on how utterly stupid and unworkable any such scheme would be and I can't be arsed to type out all the reasons again. But any user of such things should always give priority to pedestrians and shouldn't be on pavements unless they are officially "shared use" combined cycle paths or the rider is under 12.

YABU. While I understand the sentiment, mobility scooters are the only way elderly people can get around. It's akin to instituting a licence and insurance to walk. It's authoritarian jack boot nonsense. I'd like mandatory licence and insurance for every lycra-clad cyclist, however.

That’s what I said. They are younger people with disabilities.

Cyclists go faster. Tackle them first then I'll listen to your proposal to cap the freedom of the disabled.

A family member was knocked down and run over, ending up pinned against a wall underneath a mobility scooter driven by someone without a clue of how to safely operate it. Their injuries required time off work and exacerbated their own medical condition. They later got some compensation, not from the driver of the scooter, who apparently couldn't be held liabile for their actions, but from the supplier of the scooter who had failed to ensure the driver understood how to operate it.

I agree that more needs to be done to ensure the safety of both users of scooters and members of the public. The suitability of the mobility aid to the user should be regularly assessed by medical professionals. If there's any doubt about their ability/capacity to safely operate a scooter then they should not be permitted to use one, and alternatives considered.

Quite fast if rolling down hill and quite heavy if one rams into you it can knock you over

🤣

Insurance only becomes unaffordable if the insurance companies have to pay out on legitimate claims.

If there is a genuine danger that insurance on mobility scooters would become unaffordable, that suggests that there would be many successful claims, suggesting in term that there is a real problem.