6 minute read
Proposed Anti-Tampering Legislation
from Open House Issue 99
by TheNABD
PROPOSED
ANTI-TAMPERING LEGISLATION
On 28th September 2021, the Department for Transport (DfT) published a consultation paper entitled; ‘Future of Transport Regulatory Review Consultation’.
Much of the content, as one might expect, related to the environmental concerns relating to transport and the advent and growth of autonomous vehicles. However, one section in particular was a cause for grave concern as far as the NABD and other motorcycle rider’s-rights groups and that was the section entitled, ‘Tackling Tampering’. Though the thrust of this section appeared to be aimed at preventing people from tampering with the control systems of autonomous vehicle, it was so broadly worded that any resulting legislation could be used to make it illegal to modify or adapt motorcycles, trikes and/or any other vehicle. The consultation document can be seen in full at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/ uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/ file/1033151/future-of-transport-regulatory-reviewmodernising-vehicle-standards-print-version.pdf (Or you could just put ‘‘Future of Transport Regulatory Review Consultation’ into Google and follow your nose). NABD Chairman, Rick Hulse, provided the official response of the NABD in a fifteen-page report on behalf of the NABD Trustees.
As it is a very detailed document, we only have room in the Open House for an extremely abridged version of Rick’s report but you can read the whole of it on the NABD website at www.nabd.org.uk/dftresponse/ After providing the NABD’s credentials and outlining our general concerns with content of the consultation the report went on to explain our specific concerns in greater detail from age 5...
CONCERNS:
In respect of the control adaptations currently being used by people with disabilities on motorcycles, sidecar outfits, trikes and quads, each of them could be construed as ‘tampering’ with existing control systems. Similarly, the conversion of a motorcycle to a trike, which is a very common adaptation utilised by motorcyclists with disabilities, involves ‘tampering’ with control systems, power transmission and suspension systems. Even the limited range of factory production trikes that are available generally require further adaptation to make them suitable for many disabilities. Motorcycle/Sidecar outfits also often require the further adaptation of control systems to make them suitable for use by people with disabilities and, in the case of the innovative ride-from-thewheelchair sidecar outfits, every control system of the motorcycle has to be ‘tampered’ with. Even some quite straight-forward aspects of commonly used, successful and indispensable adaptations could very easily be construed as contravening the proposed restriction on “removing, reducing the effectiveness of, or rendering inoperative a system, part or component for a vehicle” as described on page 11 of the consultation document, particularly where that system is no longer required due to the nature of the adaptation or where it has been replaced with a non-standard alternative.
A commonplace example of this would be the bypassing of the safety interlock switch that prevents motorcycle gears being engaged while the side-stand is down. When a motorcycle is converted to a trike, the side-stand becomes redundant and the safety interlock switch is shorted-out to allow the side-stand to be removed.
It is often the case that adaptations are carried-out on motorcycles prior to the point of sale. This allows the disabled person to purchase the machine with a VAT rating of 0% due to it being specifically adapted to suit a disability. Motorcycle, trike and quad manufacturers and/or suppliers may
be less willing to supply pre-adapted machines in this way if there is a risk of them being prosecuted under the proposed legislation to create “a specific offence for allowing for use or providing a vehicle or NRMM that has had the operations described in the previous 2 points performed on it”, as described on page 11 of the consultation document. This issue could be further exacerbated by “a new power to require economic operators to provide information, where a service/product they have supplied amounts to or enables ‘tampering’ with a vehicle or NRMM – this would apply in any of the above senses and include requirements to provide relevant information on the quantities of products sold or modified”, as also described on page 11 of the consultation document.
A number of commonly-used motorcycle adaptations have been developed into offthe-shelf items, which has greatly reduced the cost of many adaptations while also providing recognisable, reliable, high-quality, easily installed adaptation kits to solve issues relating to a broad range of disabilities. It is doubtful that any of these kits would have been developed if there had been pre-existing legislation of “a specific offence for supplying, installing and/or advertising, a ‘tampering product’ for a vehicle or NRMM – this would apply where a principal effect of the product is to bypass, defeat, reduce the effectiveness of or render inoperative a system, part or component (the product may be a physical part or component, hardware and/or software)” as described on page 11 of the consultation document. If such legislation were to be enacted in the future, it could make the supply of these kits unlawful and stifle the future development of other standardised adaptation kits as improved technology becomes available. Greater detail of specific types of commonplace motorcycle adaptations can be found in the ‘Motorcycle/Vehicle Adaptation’ section of this report. See the NABD website for the ‘Motorcycle/Vehicle Adaptation’ section of the report and a section which briefly addressed issues relating to the customisation of motorcycles and trikes.
SUMMARY:
The Trustees of the National Association for Bikers with a Disability (NABD) have very serious concerns about the nature of the new legislation being proposed in the ‘Future of Transport Regulatory Review Consultation - Modernising Vehicle Standards’ published by the Department for Transport in September 2021. While we understand that this consultation document would appear to be primarily focusing on issues relating to automated/autonomous vehicles in the future, we have very real concerns that some of the proposed anti-tampering legislation could have a direct negative impact on the freedom of motorcyclists with disabilities to have manually-controlled machines specifically adapted to suit their needs. We also have some concerns that the proposed anti-tampering legislation does not address the fact that, even where autonomous/automated vehicles of the future are concerned, it is very likely that some adaptations may still be required to make vehicles suitable and/or accessible for people with disabilities. We have detailed, within this response to the consultation document, many examples of vehicle adaptations that are commonly required by people with disabilities that could be very negatively affected, or even outlawed, by some of the legislation proposed in the consultation document. Surely it must be better for all concerned, if any proposed legislation is carefully and diligently designed to address only the very specific issues that it is intended to control?
If the proposed legislation is intended to prevent people from tampering with the autonomous control systems used in autonomous vehicles in the future, surely it can be specifically worded to that effect with any ambiguity removed to prevent that legislation affecting unintended targets such as the rights and needs of people with disabilities, or the freedom of expression of individual motorcyclists and/or car drivers?
The Trustees of the NABD are happy to consult further on these issues or any other issues that may have a bearing on the rights and needs of motorcyclists with disabilities.
Rick Hulse (November 19th 2021)
