I think the argument here is out of negligence on Lime’s part as they aren’t the manufacturer, they rent these to people. Like why does the bike even work if not part of an ‘active ride’? Surely it should be locked down and the electric motor shouldn’t work, making sure that you can be more certain that you always have the details of the renter for insurance reasons exactly for this kind of incident.

There are a lot of things that I think need more regulation for these things, I nearly had somebody hit me the other day on a pedestrian crossing and had similar situations with hired electric scooters in the past. Things like:

• powered riding should not be possible if the renter (having provided ID etc.) is not present - some kind of phone proximity or re-verification after a period of inactivity
• the excessive weight and speed of these bikes is really dangerous given how often they are used by inexperienced riders who ride on the pavement with pedestrians and not on the roads. Being hit by an idiot on a rented pedal bike is one thing, this is quite another thing
• a speed/power limit is already activated in certain areas, they should also detect (by front facing camera or something) if the bike is being ridden off the road, to reduce the impact of collisions

I can’t blame her for trying to go after Lime, what else is she meant to do seeing as the kid disappeared? She suffered really quite awful injuries. Had Lime had mechanisms in place to prevent unauthorised riders or limit speed and power then this wouldnt have happened. Yes we can blame lack of regulation but I don’t think that should absolve them of their responsibilities.