Thanks to high gas prices, the big German newspaper “Bild” reported a few weeks ago that sales of bicycles and e-bikes have risen by a staggering 50%. While the bike dealers and leasing companies we know haven’t been able to confirm a sales increase of that magnitude, business has been going really well for them over the past three months.
I don’t want to rain on the current parade given the ongoing challenges, but I do want to urgently draw attention to the fact that European legislation seems to be tightening the noose around us. The GPSR has now been in effect for over a year. Yet this important EU regulation remains largely unknown in the industry and is therefore rarely implemented properly – often with serious consequences.
At the very latest when one learns of the multi-million-dollar settlement reached last year between British lawyers and a bicycle manufacturer’s insurance company, one should immediately push forward with the implementation of the GPSR.
A cyclist was riding his gravel bike when the carbon fork failed on a grassy downhill section. The result: paraplegia for the cyclist and a 5.3-million-euro compensation in damages to be paid by the manufacturer or its insurer.
The attorneys proceeded very shrewdly: They did not rely solely on a single point, such as the reportedly thinner wall thickness of the fork shaft. In addition to this defect, which presumably arose during production, they cited insufficient or inappropriate testing criteria, inadequate technical documentation, and exaggerated marketing claims.
As a result, the lawyers have outlined a blueprint for how other attorneys can successfully take action against manufacturers in similar cases, including throughout the EU and thus, for example, in Austria, France, Germany or the Netherlands.
Simply meeting EN and ISO standards is not enough
Gravel bikes fall somewhere between racing bikes and mountain bikes – and that’s precisely where the challenge lies: there are currently no specific testing standards for gravel bikes. Standards generally define only minimum requirements and sometimes lag behind real-world practices by decades. The revised ISO standard published in mid-2023 remains silent not only on gravel and cyclocross bikes, but also on the different categories of mountain bikes.
In addition, certain bicycle components and areas are not tested at all, even though safety-critical failures have been proven to occur there.
The topics of “maximum permissible total weight” and trailer use are as well not explicitly addressed in the standards.
It quickly becomes clear that safety cannot be identified or verified through EN/ISO certifications – and certainly not those from Asia – nor through a close visual inspection or a few rigorous test drives by the company’s founder.
Dangerous half-knowledge shouldn't become expensive
Are you and your team “well-versed” in EU regulations and directives? Is the legal jungle an open book to you? Do DIN, EN, UCI, and ISO standards and requirements all mean the same thing to you? Can you make COC, BOM, and DOC align?
If you have even one question mark right now, then it’s time for a workshop about „Product Safety and Liability, GPSR, CE Marking“, for you and your team.
Comprehensive technical documentation – A CE sticker alone is not enough
Do your CE labels, your declaration of conformity and your user manual comply with the applicable standards and laws? Is your product categorization consistent with these requirements? Is your marketing team overstepping the mark?
Lawyers in the UK have skillfully navigated this very set of requirements and successfully undermined the manufacturer there as well.
Fortunately, these are areas of expertise that can be handled by bicycle related technical documentation-specialists.
Danger identified, danger eliminated – Risk Assessment
The most relevant key principles in the legislation of the European Union and its implementation across all member states is the explicit requirement that all products placed on the market must meet a uniformly high standard of safety for various target groups.
A “Risk Assessment” is therefore obligatory to identify and avoid potential pitfalls as early as the development stage, ultimately bringing a product to market that is unambiguously compliant.
Fully-assembled bicycles have to be tested
Some brands go for a complete bike test report according to the applicable EN or ISO standard at a specialized certification company. One challenge is that every single bike should pass all testing, even if minor changes are made, such as a suspension instead of a rigid fork. A big cost effort.
Other brands go for frame, fork and component testing to a usage fitting higher level. This is the correct way, no doubt about that, but sometimes they forget to do the obligatory complete bike testing according to the standards and above.
Get Your Business Partners Up to Speed
In most cases the contact to customers is the independent bicycle dealer (IBD). This bears the risk of a missing link in your liability protection. A seminar should be aimed for bicycle dealers – from management and sales staff to workshop personnel. It has to equip your retail partners with essential knowledge on liability for defects and product safety and explains what really matters what may and may not be installed on bikes, E-bikes 25 and 45.
Bicycle brands, manufacturers, and importers are well advised to thoroughly address regulatory requirements, the interplay between marketing and testing criteria, and the expectations of new buyer demographics, and to implement adequate defensive measures.
Don't lose your pleasure in selling and riding bikes but make sure that bicycle users are safe – and start right away to secure your own liability protection.
