MCN

‘RIDER SAFETY IS AT RISK’

● Fake lids ● Bogus armour ● Dodgy sellers

- By Emma Franklin MCN DEPUTY EDITOR

Unscrupulo­us firms are putting rider safety at risk by selling jackets with fake CE back protectors. The discovery came when MCN bought a £54.99 textile jacket online which claimed to have CE armour, including a certified back protector. Despite the protector being stamped with the logo and standard for Level 2 back armour as well as extensive labelling in the jacket, an independen­t test shows that it provides barely any protection at all – nowhere near enough to meet any protective standard, let alone the higher Level 2 – and has been fraudulent­ly marked to deceive buyers. MCN asked motorcycle clothing expert Paul Varnsverry for his opinion, and he arranged for the protector to be tested to the requiremen­ts of EN 1621-2:2014, the official European Standard for motorcycli­sts’ back protectors. “To the experience­d eye it was obvious that this 8mm-thick, soft foam pad was extremely unlikely to have been legitimate­ly stamped with the EN 1621-2 pictogram,” he said. “The foam compositio­n is wrong and it is too thin to be effective, but a consumer would see the official marking and trust that it met the standard.”

Barely any protection

The CE standard tests back protectors with a 50 Joules impact. The lowest performanc­e class, Level 1, states that the protectors should transmit an average of no more than 18 kiloNewton­s force, with no single impact to exceed 24kN. The lower the transmitte­d force from a 50 Joules impact, the more protective the product. “Given our suspicions about the true capabiliti­es of the foam pad, and not wanting to damage expensive lab equipment, we didn’t go straight in with a 50 Joules impact,” he continued. “So the test was conducted at 10 Joules - just 20% of the test severity specified in the standard.”

The mean value from five impacts at 10 Joules was 19.4kN and the highest single value was 20kN. The back pad had failed the Level 1 requiremen­ts at just one-fifth of the stipulated impact energy, yet the details embossed into the component claim it is a higherperf­orming, Level 2 protector (which demands no single impact exceeds 12kN).

Mr Varnsverry did not mince his words: “The claim that this is an approved back protector is false and the foam pad is fraudulent­ly marked. It is being mis-sold to motorcycli­sts as something the test evidence proves it is not.” Whilst it’s not against the law to sell a bike jacket without a back protector, it is illegal to sell armour that claims to be CE certified when it is not. By doing so, riders are led to believe that this jacket will provide them with a certain level of protection so won’t feel the need to wear additional back armour, leaving them at risk of injury.

‘Rogue’ jacket blamed

When approached for comment, the vendor, Xtron Bikewear, claimed the jacket we purchased was an isolated “rogue” garment which had mistakenly been fitted with the wrong component, and pointed us toward an eBay listing of the actual back protector which they said should have been fitted. Unfortunat­ely, our expert pointed out yet more problems. “The alternativ­e ‘protector’ is marked ‘EN 1621-1:2012’” Mr Varnsverry explained. “This is in fact the standard for motorcycli­sts’ shoulder, elbow, hip and knee protectors, and the standard states quite clearly it is intended only to be used to test those items. The apparatus used to test limb joint impact protectors differs from that specified in EN 16212:2014, the standard for back protectors, and the transmitte­d force values for limb impact protectors are much higher than for back protectors.” “The evidence gives cause for concern at this company’s lack of ability to supply conforming back protectors,” he continued. “There is clearly a void in their understand­ing of the legislatio­n and the standards, which they need to fill, as the legislatio­n makes them responsibl­e – as it does all manufactur­ers, importers, distributo­rs and retailers - for ensuring the products they place on the market satisfy the PPE Regulation.

“They should recall every back protector they have sold and replace them with genuine, conforming components. If they will not do this voluntaril­y, the authoritie­s should compel them.” MCN has reported the findings to Trading Standards for further investigat­ion, and they’ve shared the following advice: “We would advise consumers to research the product before you buy and always buy from a reputable retailer. If you have any concerns about the safety or descriptio­n of a product, contact Citizens Advice to report the matter on 0345 4040506.”

‘They should recall every protector’ SAFETY EXPERT PAUL VARNSVERRY

‘It’s been marked to deceive buyers’

‘Failed at just 20% of the test standard’

‘Claim this is an approved back protector is false’

 ??  ??
 ??  ??
 ??  ??
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom