Commission de sécurité des consommateurs

 HAVING REGARD TO the Consumer Code and specifically Articles L. 224-1, L. 224-4, R. 224  4 and R. 224-7 to R. 224-12

 

HAVING REGARD TO petition no. 05-087

 Dr B., a paediatrician at the Dax General Hospital Centre, petitioned the CSC in a 25 August 2005 email, in these terms, “As a hospital paediatrician, during the summer I have - too often - seen children hospitalised because they were riding quad-bikes. I would like to find a way of informing the public of the hazard due to an inappropriate use of the vehicles or due to their use by underage children. Can you help me?”

Quad-bikes are engine-powered all-terrain vehicles combining car and moped features. The vehicle has four identical size wheels with wide tyres, including two directional front-wheels. Quad-bikes have handlebars that support the controls, a motorbike-type saddle, and wide footrests. A hand lever is used for throttle control unlike motorcycles that have twist-grip throttles. Easing thumb pressure on the lever stops the quad-bike. Driving a quad-bike is more like driving a car than a moped. When a quad-bike is stopped, it “reassures” the driver because it is “free-standing”. However, when it starts to move, this is no longer the case. Uphill and downhill driving, climbing obstacles or negotiating turns may easily overturn the vehicle or eject the driver from the seat. Handling a quad-bike means taking the usual precautionary measures and requires driving skills that are not easily acquired without preparation or initiation for an adult; this is even truer for a 4 or 6 year-old child who does not necessarily have the required strength, skills and control. Because of their design, quad-bikes demand special driving skills, especially when negotiating turns, due to the lack of a differential (the wheels turn at the same speed), an action that must be compensated for by shifting body weight.  This warrants the use of a big saddle.^[1] The fear that inexpert hands may drive a vehicle with unpredictable reactions has even led some manufacturers to recommend that a quad-bike should never be lent to somebody who has not attended a driving course or has not driven a quad-bike within the past year.

On 13 September 2000, the CSC issued a recommendation on quad-bike safety after the fatal accident of a child who had been a passenger on a quad-bike. The Commission recommended the drafting of a special quad-bike standard and listed several recommendations to professionals and quad-bike drivers.

 

2.      ACCIDENTOLOGY

Processing the 1999 to 2002 statistics in the Enquête Permanente sur les Accidents de la vie Courante (EPAC, permanent study on home and leisure injuries) produced a list of 64 quad-bike accidents – out of the 180,000 accidents in the database, all accident causes taken together – resulting in hospitalisation in the emergency rooms of the eight hospitals that had volunteered to take part in the study.

Most victims were men (55 out of 64), ranging from 15 to 40 years of age (37 patients were in the 15 to 40 age group, 15 were under 15, and 12 were over 40). Four children under 6 were reported. 51 accidents were caused by falls. The main lesions were contusions (31 cases) and fractures (16 cases). Every body part had sustained injuries, i.e., 19 torso lesions, 17 upper limb lesions, 14 lower limb lesions and 9 head lesions. For the 3 other victims, several body parts were injured. For one of the injured admitted to the ER, the clinical consequences were unknown. Twenty-one victims were examined, treated and sent home, 29 were treated and later received follow-up medical care, 13 were hospitalised (12 people for less than 8 days and 1 for 20).

In addition, during the second quarter in 2004, the Direction générale de la concurrence, de la consommation et de la répression des fraudes (DGCCRF, General Directorate for Competition Policy, Consumer Affairs and Fraud Control) conducted survey of quad-bike rental terms and reported, “42 accidents since 2002, including 6 fatal accidents. In one accident, 2 young women were killed on a six-wheel farm quad-bike that was too heavy to be driven by a young woman, especially over rough terrain. Non-fatal accidents cause various trauma (brain haemorrhage, broken ankles, arms, wrists, shoulders and ribs).

For instance, in August 2005, an eight year-old boy driving a quad-bike crashed into a tree and died on the spot, in Cuzances (Lot département). His eleven year-old sister sitting behind him on the vehicle was injured. Several months earlier, two young Morbihan residents who had left for a quad-bike excursion along the wild coast of Quiberon fell to their deaths from a 10-metre high cliff.

In the survey, the DGCCRF poses the problem of quad-bike driving, “The very design of quad-bikes requires professional guidance to learn how to handle the vehicle. Driving a quad-bike demands adjustment time and special beginner courses. Users should be informed of the risks incurred by using a vehicle with a fixed drive shaft (without differential) and of the short wheelbase of the vehicle driving over rough terrain. Therefore, the quality of the supervision that should be set up is very important. Quad-bike rental professionals are all very aware of this issue (…).”

There are different types of quad-bikes:

−      Sports& racing quad-bikes

−    Utility quad-bikes for farming that have technical attachments for carrying or trailing farm machines and equipment

−      Leisure quad-bikes including quad-bikes for children.

Since the Commission’s recommendation, the quad-bike market has changed. The market of off-road quad-bikes, which was booming in the early 2000’s, is falling, except on the rental market where they account for about 40% of the vehicles that are used.

The road legal quad-bike market amounted to 40,000 sold vehicles in 2005, mainly Korean (KYMCO), Chinese (LINAI) or North American (BRP) quad-bikes. The market is rising steadily, i.e., 25,000 units in 2003 and 39,000 in 2004. MSA now has a 40% market share in this niche with the sale of its KYMCO model, i.e., 15,000 KYMCO quad-bikes sold in 2005.

 

Off-road quad-bikes, the focus of Japanese manufacturers YAMAHA and SUZUKI, amount to about 10,000 vehicles sold in 2005.
 

There is no accurate estimate of the number of children’s quad-bikes sold every year. By crosschecking the data, it can be estimated that the product is still not widespread. For instance, the sale of SUZUKI off-road quad-bikes amounts to about 2,000 units, including 10% for children. YAMAHA markets two types of off-road quad-bikes for children (the RAPTOR 50cm³ for children 6 and older, the RAPTOR 80cm³ for children 12 and older 12). Raptor50 cm³ sales reached 125 vehicles in 2005.

 

At the request of the CSC, in October and November 2005, the LNE (Laboratoire National de métrologie et d’Essais, national testing and metrology laboratory) conducted a census of children’s quad-bikes with large retailers, specialised stores, motorbike and scooter dealers in Paris and the Paris region. Websites selling quad-bikes were also consulted. When surveyors made direct contact with sales personnel, the latter were asked whether they sold children’s quad-bikes and if they were on display. If age had to be specified, the surveyor mentioned 5, 10 or 14 years of age.

The study highlights the following:

−      The information with driving advice and the usual precautions posted at the quad-bike display (self-stick labels with a pictogram showing that passenger transport is prohibited, with a reminder of the minimum age requirement, and so on, on the vehicle) are very succinct or even inexistent, if not exclusively in English (in violation of the Act of 4 August 1994 on the use of the French language).

−      Several sales people implied that quad-bikes can be “tuned” to increase speed

−      Numerous sales people straightforwardly offer ‘forbidden’ quad-bikes to underage children or suggest that an adult ride the quad-bike with a child

−      Although most of the surveyed quad-bikes list 6 as the minimum driving age, a ROXON 41.5cm³, two-stroke engine quad-bike is on sale as a vehicle for children 4 and older. 

 

Quad-bike weight ranges from 70kg to 150kg, i.e., much heavier that a child’s moped, a factor that does have consequences if the vehicle topples onto the child.

The sales price of the quad-bikes on display ranged from €450.00 to nearly €3,000.00.

As a general rule, with the sale of a new quad-bike, the dealer delivers a brochure called the “Owner’s manual” tailored to each model, which includes numerous instructions and safety warnings (precautionary driving advice, minimum age requirements, adult supervision, if need be, no passenger transportation, no road driving, mandatory helmet, protective eyewear, gloves, boots and full-body clothing), besides the vehicle specifications, operating and maintenance instructions.

Driving conditions for off-road quad-bikes are described very succinctly. The ban on driving on public roadways is not always listed as absolutely forbidden. For instance, a warning sheet drafted by SUZUKI says, “If you cannot avoid going on a public road, you must concentrate seriously on your driving because you may collide with other vehicles.”

The LNE ran lab tests on the stability of three vehicles. Stability assessment is a complex operation because of the interaction between the vehicle’s intrinsic stability and the driver’s position, which have to adjust to changing environmental conditions. The maximum angle of ascent before overturn was measured at the front, at the back, and on each side of the quad-bike. A 64kg weight was attached to the centre of the saddle. A non-skid tilt-ramp with enough swing to trigger an overturn in every position was used. The ramp was gradually tilted until a front wheel lifted off the surface. Wheel lift-off was established when a metal strip, which has been placed under the wheel, could be removed with a 10N effort applied parallel to the ramp.

The intrinsic instability of the vehicles could not be conclusively determined based on the test results (the values are in degrees).

The tests (the full report can be found in Appendix 1) included static observations and dynamic measurements taken on the Jean‑Pierre Beltoise track at Trappes (Yvelines), with a 1.70m tall pilot weighing 65kg driving in cold wet weather: tyre scrub measurements taken on a 3.76m radius circle at 20 km/h (about 7 seconds 10) on dry and wet asphalt, overturn measurements on side slopes, measurements of remote kill-switch range, assessment of stopping distance after remote engine switch-off when the quad-bike is at full speed with no braking action.

The results of the most significant measurements are listed below.

SUZUKI:             22 km/h

DINLI:                         35 km/h

YAZUKA:             50 km/h

Furthermore, on some models the engines can be tuned to increase speed. This operation may require technical skills for certain models (gutting the exhaust or reboring the engine cylinder) unless it can be done with a simple gesture such as turning a screw on the twist-grip throttle handle.

SUZUKI (speed: 22 km/h):             3.20m

                                                3.15m               Average: 3.23m

                                                3.35.m

DINLI (speed: 35 km/h):            5.46m

5.44m                      Average: 5.60m

                                                5.90m

YAZUKA (speed: 50 km/h):            27.0m

                                                28.0m               Average: 27.66m

                                                28.0m

During the test, the pilot’s shoelace got caught in the blade of the engine-cooling fan of the DINLI -bike.

During the test with the same vehicle, the pilot had to ease the breaks to prevent the quad-bike from overturning (rear wheels blocked).

 

SUZUKI decided not to supply the remote kill-switch after studying the problem. Actually, when the SUZUKI representative was heard, he said that he was not in favour of using a remote kill-switch that would enable an adult to remotely shut off the quad-bike engine. Engine shut-off when the quad-bike is in a tricky position (driving up a slope or around a turn) may, according to him, unseat the driver by removing the dynamic effect. Instead of the remote kill-switch, SUZUKI children’s quad-bikes have a short engine shut-off lead. If the child loses control of the quad-bike, an adult can shut the engine off by pulling on the lead. 

The YAMAHA representatives also had considerable reservations about a remote kill-switch as a replacement or a supplement to the lead.

Stopping a fast-moving vehicle may cause accidents. This has occurred in the past with a car anti-theft device that could remotely shut off the engine of a stolen car.

Furthermore, YAMAHA representatives also felt that engine shut-off when the quad-bike is climbing a slope or negotiating a turn may unseat the driver by removing the dynamic effect.

On the other hand, for the Chairman of the Union des quadeurs de France (the association of quad-bike riders of France) and for some other manufacturers, the lead that lets a parent hold the quad-bike when the child is beginning to ride, is inefficient even at low speeds because of the vehicle’s weight and power. On the other hand, according to them, the remote kill-switch is a very efficient device because it shuts the engine off in case of serious and immediate danger, as when a child is driving toward a precipice or an obstacle. 

The measurements taken at the BELTOISE track show that the positive and negative effects of using the remote kill-switch are variable, depending on the situation. 

·         On an uphill slope, the quad-bike will roll backwards without overturning and can be stopped by braking. On the other hand, there is a risk of a backward overturn if a sharp pull on the throttle lever revs up the engine. That is why a company such as MSA has installed two buttons on the remote kill-switch. One shuts of the quad-bike engine in case of danger, the other starts the quad-bike up again. Indeed, once the engine is shut off, the child instinctively pulls hard on the hand lever causing the vehicle to lurch forward at top speed.

·         On a slide slope, engine shut-off may take the rider off guard, causing a change of the rider’s position on the vehicle. Now on a quad-bike, rider’s incorrect action and/or position may cause a risk of overturn.

·         The stopping distance after engine shut-off when the quad-bike is at top speed, with no braking action, will not guarantee that the quad-bike can actually be stopped before it runs into an immediate hazard (precipice, obstacle). For instance, when the engines on the two-quad bikes with a remote kill-switch were shut off as the vehicles were moving at top speed, the vehicle keep moving in freewheel over a distance that was too long to avoid the immediate hazards.

 

−      DINLI (remote kill-switch with a 90m range)

Vehicle in freewheel for about 37m

−      YAZUKA  (remote kill-switch with a 40m range)

Vehicle in freewheel for about 58 metres

Aside from the general safety obligation in Article L. 221-1 of the Consumer Code, which applies to quad-bikes as products or services (rental, for instance), sports & leisure quad-bikes, including quad-bikes for children, are not governed by any regulations or special standard.

1 – Quad-bike Manufacture

Japanese and North American manufacturers comply with the technical requirements in the specifications established in 1990 with the Specialty Vehicle Institute of America (SVIA) and under aegis of American National Standards Institute (ANSI).

The document is called ANSI-SVIA-1-1990. A standardisation process, which we will examine further on, was developed based on this document.

·         Utility Quad-bikes

According to the Standing Committee set up by Directive 89/392/EEC of 14 June 1989, amended by Directive 98/37/EC of 22 June 1998 and by Directive 2006/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May on machinery (called the Machinery Directive), utility quad-bikes fall under the scope of the said Directive.

In Annex I on “essential health and safety requirements relating to the design and construction of machinery”, the Directive stipulates that the manufacturer must “ensure that a risk assessment is carried out in order to determine the health and safety requirements which apply to the machinery.” The CE conformity marking must be affixed on the machinery, which is then deemed compliant with the safety requirements of the Directive.

Therefore, quad-bike manufacturers must do the following,

−      Carry out or have carried out a risk assessment

−      Implement the technical rules in Appendix I of Article R. 233-84 of the Labour Code to reduce and eliminate risks at the outset of machinery design

−      Establish a conformity statement and keep a technical file listing the technical procedures that were performed to implement the technical rules applicable to their product

−      Affix the CE conformity marking

Sports & leisure quad-bikes do not fall under the Machinery Directive and, therefore, do not have the CE conformity marking.

However, the said quad-bikes must comply with the same approach to safety as utility vehicles, so the rapporteur deemed it was relevant to check if the said quad-bikes were compliant with the requirements of the Machinery Directive. Furthermore, the DGCCRF has explained to the CSC that it suggested to the Secrétariat Général aux Affaires Européennes (SGAE, Secretariat General for European Affairs) that it should ask the European Commission about the application of the Machinery Directive to this type of product.

Several areas of vehicle non-compliance with the provisions of Directive 89/37/EC in effect since the end of 2005 were found when the three quad-bikes were tested. The main areas are listed below.

SUZUKI LT-A50:

-          Faulty control system

-          Fire hazard

-          Noise incurred hazards

-          Hazard warnings

-          Markings and additional markings

-          Instructions and vibratory level

-          Vehicle motion stopping

-          Lighting – warning

-          Prevention of risks due to moving parts and moving transmission parts

-          Hazards incurred by extreme temperatures

-          Noise incurred hazards

-          Markings and additional markings

-          Instructions and vibratory levels

-          Start-up/moving

-          Vehicle motion stopping

-          Battery incurred hazards

-          Lighting – warning

-          Prevention of risks due to moving parts and moving transmission parts

-          Hazards incurred by extreme temperatures

-          Fire hazards

-          Markings and additional markings

-          Instructions and vibratory level

-          Start-up/moving

-          Vehicle motion stopping

-          Storage battery incurred hazards

-          Lighting / warning

a.                            The Lack of Safety Rules

Quad-bikes for children, as for other off-road quad-bikes, are not subject to road compliance so they are not registered and cannot be driven on public traffic roads. As they are not subject to the provisions of the Highway Code, there are no regulatory requirements on driver’s age, vehicle power and speed, prior driver training or even on the use of personal protective equipment, and specifically a compliant helmet.

b.                            Prohibiting Quad-bikes from Driving off the Public Roads

On the other hand, Act no. 91-2 of 3 January 1991 on ground vehicle traffic in wilderness areas and amending the Code of Municipalities for the preservation of wilderness areas with regards to the development of all-terrain engine-powered ground vehicles is applicable to quad-bikes. Every engine-powered ground vehicle falls within the scope of the Act.

Article I of the 1991 Act lays down the principle of the general prohibition forbidding engine-powered vehicles from driving off the roads scheduled in the State’s Public Road Domain and off private roads for engine-powered vehicles, which are open to public traffic. In other words, engine-powered vehicles are forbidden to drive off public roads, whether the said roads are public or private. Therefore, driving a quad-bike on a forest trail that is not open to public traffic is forbidden in principle.

However, several exceptions to the principle exist, specifically,

−      When a vehicle is used for the purposes of professional research, operating or maintenance of the wilderness areas

−      When the vehicle is used by landowners or their dependents for private purposes

The Act requires a prior authorisation before terrains can be opened to the practice of motor sports (L. 442-1 of the Urban Planning Code), and to similar events and races.

As the law now stands, the result of this body of legislation is that quad-bikes, in principle, can only drive within the boundaries of private properties. Thus, they must be trailed to reach the said locations, which is sometimes not easy for users to do nor well understood by them, especially when then distance separating the two private areas is short (for instance, the shed where the quad-bike is parked and its driving field). In Quebec, a 1996 Act on off-road vehicles forbids quad-bike driving on public paths but tolerates their driving a 500-metre route to reach certain facilities.

 

c.                            The Case of Sports Events

The terms governing the use of quad-bikes for sports purposes (category, power, number of vehicles admitted to the event, participant age requirement, quality of the supervisory staff) are defined in the legislation on the traffic and organisation of motorcycle and motocross events under the aegis of the Fédération Française de Motocyclisme (FFM, French federation of motorcycling), appended to the standards special to motocross. The Federation is the only approved body allowed to organise quad-bike races and championships.

Membership of an FFM affiliated club is a prerequisite for participating in a quad-bike event. 

 7 .  – THE PROJECT FOR A QUAD-BIKE STANDARD

Following the CSC Recommendation of 13 September 2000, the standardisation work on quad-bikes began on 2 October 2001, and is still ongoing in 2006.

The standard has several loopholes.

A – The assessment of a child’s ability to drive a quad-bike

Paragraph 4.1.2. of the draft standard stipulates that the pictogram indicating the minimum driving age should correspond to the category of the relevant quad-bike. Therefore, a Y 6 quad-bike should have a pictogram indicating that the quad-bike must not be used by a child under 6, a Y 12 quad-bike must have a pictogram indicating that it must not be used by a child under 12. 

All the professionals that were heard, and specifically the FFM representatives, agree that 6 is a suitable age^[2] to start using a quad-bike. However, this statement is not supported by any expertise on the psychomotor development of the child.

According to Dr. Jean POUILLARD, a Member of the Commission, a child is not a “miniature adult”, “The child is vulnerable and is at higher risk due to its size, field of view, hearing abilities, impulsiveness, and difficulty in synthesizing the information required for its safety.”

Some manufacturers, such as YAMAHA, feel that parents are capable of assessing children’s fitness to drive a quad-bike. In a brochure called “Parents, children and quad-bikes” given to all buyers of children’s quad-bikes, YAMAHA tenders advice to parents on several points. Examples of the questions they advise persons supervising the child to ask themselves or the six year-old child can be found below.

In any case, the draft standard provides for the delivery of Advice and a Guide to user practice and equipment. However, the standard does not have any specifications for children’s quad-bikes enabling adults to assess quad-bike riding ability according to the minimum age required by the manufacturer nor does it have specific advice on quad-bike driving, especially for “handling a quad-bike for the first time” or for driving over rough terrain.

B – The draft standard does not take into account the child’s morphology and the risk of injuries or burns due to vehicle configuration.

The standard does not set any requirements pertaining to the ergonomics inherent to a child’s morphology or vulnerability to the injuries or burns that may be caused by the vehicle (see the reports of non-compliance with the requirements of the above-mentioned Machinery Directive). 

·         Ergonomics

−      No definition of the pressure to bear on the throttle lever to accelerate, on the simultaneous pressure to bear on the brake lever to brake, on the pressure to bear on the engine shut-off switch to stop the vehicle in case of emergency, all operations which should conform with a child’s reasonably predictable strength.

·         Vehicle Configuration

−      Accessible cutting edges and drive mechanisms (chains) on the vehicle, putting the feet and other body parts at risk of crushing or shearing

−      Lack of control system reliability

−      No off position on the fuel valve

−      Extreme temperatures (accessible exhaust pipe, fuel supply system placed near engine cylinder head) on vehicle parts

C – No speed limit

The 2003 version of the draft standard set a maximum speed limit for children’s quad-bikes and required the set-up of a provision to lower speed.

During the test conducted according to 6.2, after dismantling the removable speed limit devices or after tuning the adjustable speed limit devices so as to enable quad-bikes to reach their maximum speed, the speed of category Y 6 quad-bikes should be equal to or less than 24 km/h and the speed of category Y 12 quad-bikes should be equal to or less than 48 km/h.”

The targeted goal is described in Appendix C (informative):

In other words, parents or the child were provided with the option of tuning a Y 6 quad-bike so that it could attain speeds of up to 24 km/h, with the assurance that no tuning whatsoever could make the vehicle go faster than the said limit.

It should be pointed out that there are safety devices that can stop the quad-bike in case of danger. For instance, paragraph 6.1.4 of the draft standard recommends that, “quad-bikes should be equipped with an engine shut-off switch mounted on the left side of the handlebar, which can be thumb-operated without taking the hand off the handlebar.” This is a safety guarantee whatever the speed of the vehicle.

Two issues can be raised at this point, viz., maximum speed level is or is not excessive, and the option of increasing or lowering speed.

Maximum speed is much higher than the speed of a sit-astride electric toy, such as a “toy” quad-bike for a six year-old. Standard NF EN 1078-1 on toy safety stipulates that a sit-astride electric toy must not exceed 8 km/h.

Furthermore, the lack of available studies to determine a child’s required abilities and skills for handling a given maximum speed means that current speeds adopted by the manufacturers or the standard recommended speeds cannot be validated.

On the issue of the option of being able to lower or increase speed within the 24-km/h limit, the educational benefit of gradually increasing vehicle speed for young children, thus facilitating their learning process, is understandable. But showing a child that vehicle speed can be upgraded may also be considered as presenting the risk of trivialising an action punishable by law, and, admittedly, bad reflexes acquired during childhood have a greater chance of being perpetuated into adulthood.

Whereas it would be advisable for the European Commission to clarify the legal framework applicable to sports & leisure quad-bikes, including quad-bikes for children, by indicating whether it is Directive 2001/95/EC on General Product Safety or Directive 2006/42/EC on machinery called the Machinery Directive that apply to quad-bikes, knowing that the latter applies to similar products, viz., utility quad-bikes and mini-motorbikes;

Whereas both of the abovementioned Directives lay down the same general safety obligation according to which manufacturers can only market safe products;

Whereas the LNE’s (Laboratory National de Métrologie et d’Essais, national metrology and testing laboratory) test of three quad-bikes for children, which are sold on the French market, showed several areas of non-compliance with the provisions of the Machinery Directive, areas that may jeopardise user safety;

Whereas road behaviour tests of the quad-bikes run by a professional pilot have shown that some quad-bikes were not appropriate for the relevant young consumer group, due to their high speed combined with insufficient braking performance;

Whereas driving a quad-bike may be hazardous, especially because driver is too young or inexperienced;

Whereas the Fédération française de motocyclisme (FFM), which organises quad-bike driving instructors, believes that 6 is the minimum age requirement for driving a quad-bike, taking into account that, in this case, the child must be supervised by professionals when driving a quad-bike;

Whereas the said minimum driving age is based on no specific study;

Whereas there are no available studies on the maximum speeds the most appropriate for children’s abilities and skills, depending on their age group;

Whereas, at this time, the draft standard NF S 52-500 on quad-bikes is insufficient in terms of safety requirements, especially concerning quad-bike design and manufacture, and specifically the quad-bikes for children;

Whereas, regardless of age, a child’s size, strength, coordination, visual perception, ability to reason and make appropriate decisions should imperatively be taken into account by parents or the persons supervising a child driving a quad-bike;

Whereas any purchase of a quad-bike for children should systematically include the delivery of standardised instructions, advising parents on the accurate assessment of the child’s ability to drive a quad-bike;

Whereas equipment sellers and renters must provide appropriate and relevant information, specifically to beginners, on the special features and hazards of quad-bike riding;

Whereas it is important to issue a reminder that unregistered and unlicensed quad-bikes must not drive on public roadways, even occasionally.

After having heard Mr. P. H., MSA representative, in session. 

−                       The standardisation authorities

In compliance with the provisions of the Machinery Directive or of the Directive on General Product Safety, depending on the European Commission’s answer on which Directive is relevant, should complete the provisions of the French draft standard NF S 52-500 on quad-bikes, and specifically on the following points:

·         Define the safety requirements for quad-bike design and manufacture, as the simple reference to ANSI/SVIA specifications, a non-standard document, is insufficient.

·         Define the specific safety requirements for children’s quad-bikes and specifically.

−      Based on studies conducted by independent experts, determine the maximum quad-bike speed the most suited to children’s abilities and skills according to their age, and study the advantage of speed modulation for learning purposes;

 

And specifically:

*            The pressure to bear on the controls (brakes, lever, engine shut-off) according to a child’s reasonably predictable strength

*            Prohibit cutting edges and drive mechanisms (accessible chains putting the feet or other body parts at risk of crushing or shearing)

*            Control system reliability

*            Off position on the vehicle fuel valve

*            Extreme temperature limit (accessible exhaust pipe, fuel supply system near engine cylinder head)

·         Assess the timeliness of having a speedometer to ensure that rider takes vehicle speed into account more fully.

·         Specifically define the individual protective equipment required for risk-free quad-bike driving.

·         Define the content of the instructions delivered to any purchaser of a quad-bike for children, which can help parents assess the physical ability and motor skills of their children for controlling this type of vehicle.

 

−                                          Manufacturers and Dealers

Without waiting for the publication of the quad-bike standard, and in compliance with the provisions of the Machinery Directive or the Directive on General Product Safety, according to the European Commission’s answer on which Directive is relevant:

·         Should design quad-bikes whose features and ergonomics are compatible with children’s actual and predictable abilities, as the Consumer Safety Commission, considering the design of the vehicles sold on the market, can only emit the most extreme reservations about quad-bike driving by very young children, without supervision.

·         Should take all measures to avoid any risk of injury from touching machine parts or high or very low temperature equipment.

·         Provide instructions and pictograms in French for quad-bike use, including special advice on children’s use of quad-bikes  (specifically a questionnaire so that parents can assess their child’s ability to drive a quad-bike), and the addresses of the driver training organisations.

·         Clearly indicate in the instructions that off-road quad-bikes can only be driven on private terrains and never on public roadways, even occasionally.

·         Promote the set-up of seller and renter training courses so that they provide appropriate advice on quad-bike driving by children.

−                                          Parents or the supervising adult of the children driving a quad-bike

·         Should not only trust the minimum requirement age for quad-bike driving listed by the product manufacturer but chiefly make sure, in practice, that the child does actually have the abilities and skills to drive a quad-bike.

·         Should demand, at time of new or used quad-biked purchase, all the documents pertaining to the vehicle (owner’s manual, instructions, etc.).

·         Should enrol their child beforehand in a quad-bike driving course and, preferably, have the child practice the activity at supervised facilities.

·         Should drive the quad-bike only on private terrains, should never carry passengers, unless special manufacturer specifications so provide, should not allow the quad-bike to be driven at night or when visibility is poor. 

·         Should have the child wear the following individual protective equipment at least, i.e., compliant helmet for children, gloves, protective eyewear, high shoes, non-snag clothing to avoid it getting caught in the spinning parts of the vehicle.