MRAQ Website - full of it....

[Diesel]

Great info, that is             

Check out what they're up to and what rides are on here......

http://www.mraqld.org/index.php/events-2.html

Cheers, Diesel

[Whizz]

An interesting letter from the MRAQ to the Transport Minister about the labeling of helmets, what is required, what is not required and what some members of the constabulary seem to think is required. 

The MRAQ is asking for feedback from riders who have had infringement notices issued based on the (incorrect) requirement to have an approval mark on a helmet. Maybe we should find out if anyone in OzSTOC is in this boat and if so let MRAQ know the circumstances.

[Biggles]

Looks like it would be a good idea to carry a copy of that letter on the bike if you are wearing an imported helmet that does not have a sticker.  Should keep you out of trouble in Queensland, anyway.

Might be worth sending a copy of that letter to the MRA in other states, or to your Transport Minister.

[Brock]

Its a right royal bucket of excretia.

As for quietly changing the law in NSW and then prosecuting users (fining). 

Ignorance of the Law may not be an excuse, however there is the "How is one to be reasonably aware of the Law"

[alans1100]

Heather and I bought our Helmets while we were living in Karratha WA and still use them over here though we will be getting new ones sometime next year.

Not once in over 30 years of riding has a police officer asked to check my helmet for compliance during any time that I have been asked to stop for a breathe test etc.

[Tackleberry]

Looks like it would be a good idea to carry a copy of that letter on the bike if you are wearing an imported helmet that does not have a sticker.  Should keep you out of trouble in Queensland, anyway.

 
Whilst the letter does state that the sticker isn't required, AS1698 paragraph 8 outlines what is required to be attached to the helmet, and believe it or not, that is inside the helmet, not the pretty sticker outside that most people believe is required.  The requirement of 1698 to have that information attached circumvents any letter that may be construed as an out to buy a helmet from overseas.



You have NO choice about this sticker/label (inside not outside), so it is irrespective what is said in the letter, this is an AUSTRALIAN Standard and therefore overrides all other legislation in each State and Territory.  The Minister is being advised by a bunch of bureaucrats that take a quick look at things, and truth be know the letter was typed by an AO2 that was given a document from some adviser and then out under the Minister's hand for signing on his way to another meeting without knowing what he signed.   

The key words are:

"shall" - no allowance for interpretation it must be done;
"permanently" - there always, not just the first few months;
"legibly" - from the latin legibilis that can be read;

I have confirmed this with people that have much more knowledge than I.  This sticker, or sewn patch, MUST be present to indicate that your helmet has passed the standards of one of only 30 (approx) people in Australia that inspect our helmets.

In Queensland:

TO(RUM-RR)Reg s270 Wearing motorbike helmets
(1) The rider of a motorbike that is moving, or is stationary but not parked, must—
(a) wear an approved motorbike helmet securely fitted and fastened on the rider’s head; and
(b) not ride with a passenger unless the passenger complies with subsection (2).

(3) In this section—
approved motorbike helmet means a helmet that complies with—
(a) AS 1698–1988; or
(b) another standard the chief executive considers is at least equal to that standard.

Therefore the outside sticker is NOT the main concern to show that the helmet complies with AS1698. This is what a lot of inexperienced officers look for and ticket people on, but the inside information is the real requirement by AS1698. 

Whether we like it or not, it is there.  I have just had to get rid of a Shoei Multitec that no longer complies because Shoei use stickers inside the chin bar, unlike other manufacturers that sew in the information, and they come off quickly once you upset the corners. 

[Brock]

(a) AS 1698–1988

This is one of the sticking points Tack, The standard is now AS/NZS 1968/2006, IE 1988 no longer applies as its been superceded

[Tackleberry]

As per subection 2(b) Brock.  This is why they include the provision to allow it to the read in conjunction with the latest versions at all times so that legislation isn't being changed every five minutes, when they change a standard that applies to only one section in a piece of legislation. 

You know yourself that this piece of legislation could refer to somewhere around 150-200 standards, several of which could change in a year therefore requiring a re-write of the legislation several times a year if such wasn't included.  And then if one such section was overlooked, a loophole that could be exploited by the less scrupulous in our communities. 

The only thing that peeves me as a person that enforces the legislation is that we were told in 1998 that the new Transport Operation (Road Use Management) Act and Regulations were NATIONAL road rules, which is bollocks.  Every State and Territory had their own little piece added, or taken out when they introduced the laws. 

[Brock]

The whole standards thing, is riddled with cross references, which makes it almost impossible for the ordinary guy in the street to understand. The States and their interpretations also can ( like NSW) make it impossible for an out of state visitor to comply with laws that they had no idea existed, nor had any reasonable way to find out.

The actual sticker bit is a problem, as  the old Standards Aust mob no longer issue 5 tick stickers( not sure if they exist or not) . The SAI Global 5 tick sticker is different. SAI also certify the process and procedures, not the product. With the procedures, the SAI Auditors certify that you are following your procedures, not that the procedure is correct. (I deal with this all the time ) So are the stickers on helmets actually worth anything????

In the end, just be nice to mr Plod, as if nothing else, if your attitude is bad and the Officer knows anything about helmets, he will get you for that.

I will be interested in poppy Daves input...

[Biggles]

Thanks for the comprehensive analysis Tackle.
Looks like you paid attention at the Academy law lectures!   

[alans1100]

(a) AS 1698–1988

This is one of the sticking points Tack, The standard is now AS/NZS 1968/2006, IE 1988 no longer applies as its been superceded

The 1998 standard may have been superceded but still applies but any helmet made from 2006 should comply with the new standard. That's how I would understand it to be otherwise we'd all have to buy new helmets anytime a new standard is bought in.

[Brock]

Except in NSW, it seems where they changed the law and made it retrospective from (I think it was) Jul 2012. There al helmets must comply with their new rules, making most of them instantly non compliant.

[STeveo]

Anybody got a link to the new NSW rules site?

 

[Whizz]

After many long years of dealing with the Defence Department on the question of Standards, I think you will find that in all but an exceptionally small number of cases an upgraded version of a standard, ie a move from 1998 to 2006 will incorporate all of the 1968 version, and will actually say this in the Foreword to the newer version so unless the Standard has changed completely, i.e it is a different number, then stuff tested to a previous version will still be covered. You can SUPERSEDE a Standard by up-issuing it, but that doesn't automatically make it defunct, to do that you would have to WITHDRAW the Standard.