What is the $15000 fine for ab1557 violation?
Posted by InfluenceEfficient77@reddit | ebikes | View on Reddit | 11 comments
I'm reading this bill (which has like 95% yes votes so far)
https://fastdemocracy.com/bill-search/ca/2025-2026/bills/CAB00036197/
It's fucking insane, $15000 fines???!
Is this a fine for the manufacturer or for the user?
Does this mean we all need to buy pre 2027 ebikes now?
TaxiBait@reddit
Gonna get killed for this, but the reason people hate e-bikes is because the most noticeable part of this community are idiot kids on what are basically unlicensed motorcycles. This bill is a reaction to them, or the person going 45mph on the bike path. It sucks but it is also much closer to what they have in Europe, and they seem to have made it work.
InfluenceEfficient77@reddit (OP)
They don't have idiot kids in Europe. I mean they still do have a lot of issues with underage drinking but most of the time kids follow the law
Limiting bikes already limited to 20 down to 16 isn't really going to change what does kids are doing illegally in California
California actually has a lot of hills and very s* biking infrastructure
dianas_pool_boy@reddit
Biggest problem for me is moving the 20mph down to 16 mph and from 750 watts of power to 250 watts of peak power. I think 1,000 is too much imo but 750 was the right call at 1 horsepower.
Existing law defines an electric bicycle as a bicycle equipped with fully operable pedals and an electric motor that does not exceed 750 watts of power. Existing law classifies electric bicycles into 3 classes with different restrictions. Existing law defines a "class 1 electric bicycle" as a bicycle equipped with a motor that provides assistance only when the rider is pedaling, that is not capable of exclusively propelling the bicycle, and that ceases to provide assistance when the bicycle reaches the speed of 20 miles per hour. Existing defines a "class 2 electric bicycle" as a bicycle equipped with a motor that may be used exclusively to propel the bicycle and that is not capable of providing assistance when the bicycle reaches the speed of 20 miles per hour. Existing law defines a "class 3 electric bicycle" as a bicycle equipped with a speedometer and a motor that, in pertinent part, provides assistance only when the rider is pedaling and that ceases to provide assistance when the bicycle reaches the speed of 28 miles per hour. A violation of the Vehicle Code is a crime.
This bill would instead define a class 1 electric bicycle as a bicycle equipped with a motor that provides assistance only when the rider is pedaling, that is not capable of exclusively propelling the bicycle, and that ceases to provide assistance when the bicycle reaches the speed of 16 miles per hour. The bill would define a class 2 electric bicycle as a bicycle equipped with a motor that may be used exclusively to propel the bicycle, and that is not capable of providing assistance when the bicycle reaches the speed of 16 miles per hour. The bill would provide that, notwithstanding these definitions, an electric bicycle manufactured prior to January 1, 2027, that was equipped with a motor that is not capable of exceeding 750 watts of continuous power and otherwise met the legal requirements for the relevant class at the time of manufacture shall retain its classification.
This bill would authorize a cargo electric bicycle to be equipped with an electric motor with a maximum continuously rated power of 750 watts. The bill would define a cargo electric bicycle as an electric bicycle that is built with a reinforced frame and integrated rack or platform designed to transport goods or additional persons.
This bill would prohibit a manufacturer from equipping, and a retailer from offering for sale or advertising, any device labeled as an electric bicycle with a motor that is capable of exceeding 750 watts of peak power. The bill would also prohibit a manufacturer from equipping, and a retailer from offering for sale or advertising, any device labeled as a class 1 or class 2 electric bicycle with a motor that is capable of exceeding 250 watts of continuous power or that is capable of providing assistance to reach speeds greater than 16 miles per hour. The bill would make a violation of these provisions punishable by a civil penalty not to exceed $15,000 for a first violation and not to exceed $50,000 for each subsequent violation, upon an action brought by the Attorney General, a city attorney, a county counsel, or a district attorney. The bill would specify that a violation of this provision is not a criminal offense.
Existing law prohibits a person under 16 years of age from operating a class 3 electric bicycle, and authorizes a peace officer to remove the electric bicycle being operated by the person. Existing law requires an agency to release a seized electric bicycle to the owner, violator, or their agent after a minimum of 48 hours if certain conditions are met, including that the costs of removal, seizure, and storage have been paid. Existing law authorizes an agency to require, as a condition of release of an electric bicycle removed under this provision, proof that the violator has completed an electric bicycle safety and training program or a related local bicycle safety course, as described.
This bill would prohibit a person under 16 years of age from operating an electric bicycle with a motor that is capable of exceeding 250 watts of continuous power, and would authorize a peace officer to remove the electric bicycle that is being operated by the person. The bill would authorize an agency to require proof that the violator has completed an electric bicycle safety and training program or a related local bicycle safety course, as described, as a condition of release of the electric bicycle. Because a violation of this prohibition would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified re
InfluenceEfficient77@reddit (OP)
So to summarize, it would just make it far more exclusive and costly for everyone.
It's no surprise for me because the city's struggling with funding public transportation and the tech companies want you to be reliant on their taxi self-driving services their taxi self-driving services
Fair-Discipline-1005@reddit
Jesus,15000???
Cargobiker530@reddit
Ebikes are destroying oil & automobile use faster than electric cars are so the oil companies, car companies, & Spandex Freds on carbon fiber road bikes have teamed up to destroy the ebike market.
SadisticPawz@reddit
Destroying the future.
JazzHandsFan@reddit
It looks like the fines are for the manufacturer/retailer.
InfluenceEfficient77@reddit (OP)
Do you think those will affect the kits and the motors sold online? Stock up on hub drives now?
JazzHandsFan@reddit
A kit or motor isn't an e-bike, so I'm guessing no.
0hden@reddit
It's kinda like they're continuing to make life difficult for poor people AND make vehicles they can't track as easily difficult to use