Key Takeaways
- Males aged 10‑19 account for the largest share of e‑scooter‑related casualties, with 302 injuries reported in this group.
- Six deaths were recorded in 2024, unchanged from the previous year; five involved riders and one a pedestrian.
- Evidence suggests a disproportionate number of accidents occur on privately owned e‑scooters, though official police data likely under‑count injuries.
- Safety campaigners argue that current regulations are insufficient and call for urgent legislative action.
- Carly Calland, whose 14‑year‑old son Jacob died in a 2025 e‑scooter crash, advocates mandatory helmets, a ban on passengers, and penalties for parents who allow illegal riding if private e‑scooters are legalised for public use.
- While she recognises the environmental and practical benefits of e‑scooters, Carly warns that without stricter safety measures, further fatalities are inevitable.
Overview of e‑scooter Injury Statistics and Demographic Trends
Recent analyses of emergency‑department and police reports reveal a stark gender and age imbalance among those hurt while using electric scooters. Of all recorded casualties, the single largest category comprises males aged between ten and nineteen years old, totalling 302 individuals. This figure dwarfs injury counts for other age brackets and for female riders, highlighting a particular vulnerability among adolescent boys and young men. Researchers attribute this pattern to a combination of risk‑taking behaviour, higher rates of solo riding, and frequent use of e‑scooters for short trips to school, sports venues, or social gatherings. The concentration of injuries in this demographic underscores the need for targeted safety interventions, such as age‑appropriate education campaigns and stricter enforcement of existing age limits where they exist.
Recent Fatality Numbers and Year‑to‑Year Consistency
The fatality toll associated with e‑scooter use has remained stubbornly flat in recent years. In 2024, authorities logged six deaths, a figure identical to that of 2023. Five of the deceased were riders themselves, while the remaining victim was a pedestrian struck by an e‑scooter. Although six deaths may appear modest relative to other modes of transport, the consistency of the number year‑over‑year suggests that underlying risk factors are not being mitigated. Moreover, the relatively low absolute number may mask a larger burden of non‑fatal but life‑altering injuries, such as traumatic brain injuries, fractures, and spinal trauma, which often require prolonged rehabilitation and impose significant societal costs.
Privately Owned versus Rental E‑scooters and Associated Risks
While both rental fleets and privately owned e‑scooters share the same basic technology, emerging evidence points to a disparity in safety outcomes between the two sectors. Analysts note that a significant proportion of serious collisions involve privately owned machines, which are often operated without the uniform maintenance checks, speed‑limiting software, or user‑training programmes that many rental companies implement. Private owners may also be more likely to modify their scooters—adding aftermarket parts, removing speed restrictors, or carrying passengers—in ways that increase instability and crash severity. This hypothesis, however, remains provisional because current data collection systems do not consistently differentiate between ownership types, making it difficult to quantify the exact contribution of private e‑scooters to overall injury rates.
Limitations of Police Data and the Need for Better Injury Surveillance
Law‑enforcement agencies routinely record e‑scooter incidents that result in a police report, but critics argue that these statistics capture only the tip of the iceberg. Winchcomb, a spokesperson for a road‑safety advocacy group, observes that “police statistics aren’t reflective of the number of injuries,” suggesting that many crashes—particularly those involving only minor harm or occurring off public roads—go unreported. Consequently, policy decisions based solely on police‑reported figures may underestimate the true public‑health impact of e‑scooter use. Experts recommend expanding surveillance to include emergency‑department visits, ambulance calls, and insurance claims, thereby creating a more comprehensive picture that can inform evidence‑based regulation.
Advocacy for Urgent Regulation – Perspectives from Campaigners
In light of the mounting evidence, safety campaigners are intensifying their calls for immediate regulatory reform. They argue that the current patchwork of local bylaws, which varies widely from city to city, fails to provide consistent protection for riders and pedestrians alike. Core demands include the introduction of nationwide standards for maximum speed, mandatory lighting and reflective gear, and clear rules governing where e‑scooters may be ridden (e.g., bike lanes versus sidewalks). Campaigners also stress the importance of enforcing age restrictions and implementing penalties for reckless behaviour, such as riding under the influence or performing stunts. By establishing a uniform legal framework, proponents believe that both users and authorities will have clearer expectations, reducing confusion and, ultimately, the likelihood of severe outcomes.
Personal Tragedy: The Story of Jacob Calland
The human cost of inadequate e‑scooter safety is poignantly illustrated by the case of Jacob Calland, a 14‑year‑old from Wythenshawe, Greater Manchester. In March 2025, Jacob was a passenger on an e‑scooter operated by a friend when the vehicle collided with a car. The impact produced a catastrophic head injury that proved fatal despite immediate medical attention. Jacob’s death has become a rallying point for advocates who argue that a simple preventive measure—a helmet—might have altered the outcome. His mother, Carly Calland, has spoken publicly about the loss, emphasizing that Jacob was not the rider but nevertheless suffered the full force of a crash that could have been mitigated with proper protective gear. The incident highlights how passengers, often overlooked in safety discussions, remain highly vulnerable to head trauma when e‑scooters are involved in high‑energy collisions.
Carly Calland’s Proposed Safety Measures for a Legalised Private‑Scooter Market
Carly Calland does not oppose e‑scooters per se; she acknowledges their utility for short‑distance commuting and their environmental benefits compared with petrol‑powered vehicles. However, she insists that if privately owned e‑scooters are to be legalised for broader public use, a suite of safeguards must accompany that change. Specifically, she advocates for:
- Mandatory helmet use for all riders and passengers, regardless of age or trip length.
- A strict prohibition on carrying passengers, given the added instability and increased risk of ejection during sudden maneuvers.
- Penalties for parents or guardians who knowingly permit minors to ride illegally—such as without a helmet, on prohibited roads, or after curfew—potentially ranging from fines to mandatory safety‑education courses.
Carly believes that these measures, coupled with robust enforcement, would create a culture of responsibility that mirrors the expectations placed on cyclists and motor‑vehicle operators.
Balanced View and a Warning About Future Deaths
While Carly’s proposals are grounded in personal loss, she maintains a nuanced perspective on the role of e‑scooters in modern urban mobility. She describes them as “really good for people to get to work, and they are eco‑friendly,” recognizing their potential to reduce traffic congestion and lower carbon emissions when used responsibly. Yet she issues a stark caution: if the current regulatory gap persists and safety practices remain lax, the trajectory points toward more preventable deaths. Her warning echoes the sentiments of many public‑health officials who contend that without decisive action—combining legislation, education, and engineering improvements—the modest fatality numbers seen today could rise, disproportionately affecting the very youths who already bear the greatest share of injury burden. The challenge, therefore, lies in harnessing the benefits of e‑scooter technology while firmly anchoring its use in a safety‑first framework.
