“E-bikes are not illegal”: BBC hit with more complaints about “misleading and damaging” Panorama e-bike episode, as cycle shop owner says: “Finding a wolf in sheep’s clothing should not be a reason to attack sheep”

Almost two weeks since the BBC aired its controversial, Adrian Chiles-fronted Panorama episode on e-bikes, the complaints keep flooding into the broadcaster, after the owner of an e-bike shop branded the programme “troubling” and “misleading”, with the potential to “unfairly influence public opinion and undermine the efforts of responsible retailers who prioritise safety, respectful riding, and adherence to the law”.

A formal complaint lodged to the BBC this week by Ray Wookey, the owner of Energise E-Bikes in the south London town of Coulsdon, claimed the programme offered a “negative portrayal” of electric bikes by showing “very few legitimate e-bikes shown on-screen” – instead focusing on illegally modified or unregistered ‘e-motorbikes’.

Wookey argued that the use of the phrase “illegal e-bikes” is “misleading and damaging”, and has the effect of cementing in the public’s mind that all e-bikes are illegal, and that the general “imbalance” evident in the episode has the potential to “hurt trustworthy electric bike businesses”.

He also noted that while focusing on road safety issues – such as the relationship between e-bike riders and pedestrians – is important, it “should not involve the misrepresentation of an important and fast-growing sector” capable of promoting a safe, healthy, and environmentally-friendly form of transport.

> “Chaos could be coming our way” – Adrian Chiles asks whether e-bikes are “a new menace in need of tighter regulation” on BBC Panorama

Last week, the BBC found itself on the receiving end of a furious backlash from cycling groups after it aired the Panorama episode, ‘E-Bikes: The Battle For Our Streets’, hosted by Adrian Chiles, which saw the former One Show host ask whether electric bikes are “a new menace in need of tighter regulation”.

The episode’s prolonged focus on modified e-bikes – which exceed the maximum 250 watts and 15.5mph cut-off speed for electrically assisted pedal cycles (EAPCs) permitted under UK law to ride on public roads – and the failure to consistently and fully distinguish between these machines proved controversial, however, provoking some strong criticism from cycling campaigners and bike industry groups.

“Panorama confuses legal with illegally modified e-bikes and ignores their benefits compared to the UK’s car use,” the London Cycling Campaign said in response to the episode, which many cyclists criticised for its conflation of the criminality, dangerous riding, and battery fires associated with illegally modified two-wheeled electric vehicles with legal e-bikes.

“If we switched lots of cars for e-bikes in the UK we’d see health, crime, road danger, and climate benefits, not the tabloid, crime-ridden, apocalyptic vision Panorama paints,” the group said.

Referring to the programme’s attempt to discover whether e-bike use is linked to dangerous riding and criminality, Alex Bowden, in his review for road.cc’s sister site e-biketips, said: “Clearly there are specific issues which nebulous questioning and imprecise categorisation won’t do much to resolve.

“Maybe we’re biased but ‘What can we do about e-bikes?’ and ‘What can we do about illegal e-bikes?’ are not to us the same question.”

> Bicycle Association formally complains to BBC over Adrian Chiles’ e-bike Panorama “misrepresentation”, claiming episode “unjustifiably damaged” legal e-bike industry

Meanwhile, the Bicycle Association (BA), the trade organisation representing 140 cycling companies in the UK, and the Association of Cycle Traders both lodged formal complaints with the BBC concerning Panorama’s coverage of e-bikes.

The Bicycle Association’s technical and policy director Peter Eland called on the BBC to “remove ‘E-bikes’ from the episode title and instead reference what the group terms ‘illegal e-motorbikes’,” and in future programming on the subject to “make it fully clear and properly inform the public that e-bikes and illegal e-motorbikes are two entirely separate categories”.

He also urged the broadcaster more generally to “provide proper balance when addressing contentious transport issues, including featuring representation by responsible organisations in the sector”.

According to the association, the Panorama episode “repeatedly conflates the safety and social issues surrounding the use of illegal e-motorbikes with ‘e-bikes’ and fails to make it clear that these issues are overwhelmingly not caused by (road legal) e-bikes.”

This “misrepresentation”, the BA claimed, failed to properly inform the public of the current laws on e-bikes in the UK and has “unjustifiably damaged” the electric bike sector.

Jonathan Harrison, the director of the Association for Cycle Traders, also criticised the “division” the episode “tried to sow” and asked: “Does the hysteria match the actual harm caused?”

> Is the cycling industry storm finally over? Why there may be fewer “disaster stories” in 2025 + Where did Adrian Chiles’ e-bike doc go wrong?

And now, independent bike shop owners are adding their voice to the industry’s chorus of disapproval, as Energise founder Ray Wookey lodged his own formal complaint and called on the BBC to “provide a more balance perspective” on the safety issues surrounding e-bikes in the future.

“While the programme intended to raise awareness about safety issues, I found the lack of representation from reputable and legitimate e-bike retailers troubling and potentially misleading,” the Croydon-based retailer, who has sold e-bikes to the Metropolitan Police during his 15 years in business, said in the complaint, titled ‘E-bikes are not illegal’.

“Naturally, the safety of road users is the most important thing, but highlighting danger should not involve the misrepresentation of an important and fast-growing sector.

“Up and down the UK, there are reputable retailers of electric bikes, many of which are independent, locally owned small businesses. Each of these establishments helps to increase the amount of healthy, eco-friendly travel in their communities through the sale of safe and legal products.

“By not including interviews with credible e-bike retailers or industry experts – and instead speaking to a so-called ‘e-bike collector’ – the programme failed to present balanced information. Such imbalance can unfairly influence public opinion and undermine the efforts of responsible retailers who prioritise safety, respectful riding, and adherence to the law.”

> Adrian Chiles' Panorama episode on e-bikes is poorly researched scaremongering that isn't worthy of your attention

The complaint continued: “The negative portrayal of e-bikes without input from legitimate retailers may harm the industry, potentially affecting small businesses and employees reliant on this growing market. 

“You may also like to consider that the majority of two-wheeled vehicles featured in the episode were in fact not e-bikes at all, but ‘unregistered e-motorbikes’ which have been mis-labelled as ‘e-bikes’, firstly by unscrupulous retailers and secondly by the programme itself.

“There were very few legitimate e-bikes shown on-screen, which again is an imbalance that will hurt trustworthy electric bike businesses.

“Repeated use of the phrase ‘illegal e-bikes’ is misleading and damaging. Using this phrasing, or similar, could persuade members of the public that all e-bikes are illegal, when in fact the problem is ‘unregistered e-mopeds’.

“Finding a wolf in sheep’s clothing should not be a reason to attack sheep. Call a wolf, a wolf, and call an unregistered e-motorbikes, an unregistered e-motorbikes.

“I kindly request that you consider these points and take steps to address the imbalance in future reporting. Providing a more balanced perspective, including input from reputable e-bike retailers, and using accurate language, will ensure a fair and informative presentation of the topic.”