Buying a helmet from on-line USA - is it safe for my head

[Aushiker]

So there you go - you can get fined $51 in the ACT for wearing a helmet without an AS sticker.

Going by your posting you can get fined for not wearing an approved helmet, not one with or without a sticker. A helmet could loose its sticker but still be approved.

Regards
Andrew

[coolrider]

If in an accident, I don't think you would have an issue with contributory negligence merely because you were breaking a minor law at the time of the accident.

[Birdman]

Wasn't it stated somewhere earlier in the thread

If a helmet does not have a sticker in it (AS2036-1996) it isn't an approved one - it doesn't matter if it used to have one or not.

Mitch.

[Birdman]

If in an accident, I don't think you would have an issue with contributory negligence merely because you were breaking a minor law at the time of the accident.

You may not be covered by insurance for personal harm if you aren't wearing the appropriate approved safety gear.

I don't think it is the size of the law that matters i think its the fact a law is being broken.

Mitch.

[sogood]

In practice, I'd think it would be really bad PR if an insurance company used this sticker excuse to get out of a claim. Just wait for the press.

[Aushiker]

Wasn't it stated somewhere earlier in the thread

If a helmet does not have a sticker in it (AS2036-1996) it isn't an approved one - it doesn't matter if it used to have one or not.

Mitch.

It might have been stated, however, think about it for a moment. The appropriate authority tests Brand X Model Y helmet and approves it. The sicker is then attached. Somewhere down the line the sticker comes off. The Brand X Model Y helmet is would still approved (assuming no change in the design, no change in the approval decision) UNLESS the legislation clearly states that for a helmet to pass the approval process it must have a sticker attached.

I would suspect that the sticker is an indication of approval status and maybe required to be applied to approved helmets to show same but is not a requirement to gain certification, if that makes sense.

Regards
Andrew

[tallywhacker]

So what should I do?

Option 1. Order the Atmos from a US on line store for $200 AUD including shipping.
Option 2. Purchase the Atmos from an Australian store for $350.

The extra $150 gets me a red sticker, but it may be legally problematic if I'm in an accident.

If anyone knows where in Australia I could get the helmet for a more reasonable price than $350 I would like to know. But I feel like a chump paying $150 extra for the same product.

um, buy a dfferent helmet ?

[MJF]

Going by your posting you can get fined for not wearing an approved helmet, not one with or without a sticker. A helmet could loose its sticker but still be approved.

But the definition of an approved helmet is one 'marked' with the AS sticker. Being realistic, there is no chance the police are going to pull you over and fine you for a missing sticker - they would be too busy fining all of those gits who don't wear helmets at all. The only real implication is contributory negligence, and it's not much of an issue.

[Birdman]

It is a very political argument we have got ourselves into here isnt it...

I say do what you want...the decision is entirely yours.

Mitch.

[Aushiker]

But the definition of an approved helmet is one 'marked' with the AS sticker.

Do you have a link for that?

You stated early "Approved helmets are marked with an Australian Standard Approved Notification (either red or black)" which is not the same as saying a definition of an approved helmet is one marked with sticker. This later statements suggest any helmet marked with a sticker would be approved which does not sound right at all.

For what it is worth, according to Bicycle Victoria, "By law, Victorians must wear a helmet that has been approved to Australian Standards. The picture (left) shows what the Australian Standards logo looks like. To see if a helmet meets the Australian Standards, check for this label inside the helmet."

Does anyone know of online source of the standard? SAI-Global want to charge for it.

Regards
Andrew

[Aushiker]

And for those in SA:

"Helmets are extremely important in reducing the serious injuries inflicted on cyclists by motor vehicles. All cyclists and passengers must wear a helmet approved by Standards Australia (labelled AS2063). Your helmet must always be correctly positioned and securely fastened. Choosing a bicycle helmet requires care. Fit and comfort should be placed ahead of price or visual appearance." Source.

Regards
Andrew

[europa]

Harking back to my motorcycle instructor days, you'll find that an 'approved helmet' is one wearing the sticker. The proof of approval is not all the engineering tests you can throw at the thing, it's the presence of that sticker. If that sticker falls off, the helmet is no longer approved. This might sound a bit petty, but you'll find 'approved instruments' and the like all through legislature. The idea is that something undergoes an approval process to earn that sticker (or whatever) and therefore, the sticker is statutory evidence that the product has undergone that process. If the sticker is removed, what else has been done to that helmet? Therefore, the absence of the sticker means the unit is no longer approved and therefore, illegal.

This used to come a lot with motorbike helmets. People wanted to paint their own helmet and many liked to claim they didn't like the 'look' of the sticker. Their arguement was that what harm does a coat of paint do? Well, some paints react with some shells and weaken them - proven science. Professional helmet repainters have been given approval to reapply the sticker.

Richard

[Aushiker]

Harking back to my motorcycle instructor days, you'll find that an 'approved helmet' is one wearing the sticker.

With the greatest respect that does fit with the statements made by the SA gov or Bicycle Victoria or at least one quote early nor is it logical nor does it fit with your own argument. Painting the helmet may change the structure of the helmet and thus nullifier its "approval" because it is no longer in the form approved, however, taking the sticker off or covering it in itself does not modified the tested helmets structure or design.

I think we are mixing the concept of approval, which is the outcome of the testing process to determine compliance with AS2063 and certification of same, i.e., the application of a sticker which states that the helmet meets the standards.

For example, from Bicycle Victoria, "To see if a helmet meets the Australian Standards, check for this label inside the helmet."


Regards
Andrew

[sogood]

When I read one of the web pages posted earlier. Helmet models are approved and then then certified by the sticker. So it would appear that if one sticks to the letter, a helmet needs to be approved as well as being certified... Whatever that means. Probably only has practical implication in a court fight.

[europa]

Methinks you're missing the point I was making - you need that sticker. As for statements from various authorities, my natural cynicism rises very quickly to the surface there.

Base story - if you are wearing a helmet without that standards sticker, you're asking for trouble. Your choice.

Like Tally said, buy a different helmet and be done with it.

Richard

[sogood]

Huh? Did you miss a word or letter in that sentence?

[europa]

Huh? Did you miss a word or letter in that sentence?

Fixed. I removed your quote of me in case someone else quoted you with the result that this gets even more confusing tha it already is **whew**

Richard

[Aushiker]

Base story - if you are wearing a helmet without that standards sticker, you're asking for trouble. Your choice.

Yes. It does appear in at least two states, including yours, that it is illegal to wear a helmet which does not meet the Australian standard.

Regards
Andrew

Edited to fix my lousy typing.

[inaminit]

Well for my 2 cents worth...I'd rather pay a few bucks more and buy one here in aus with the relevant sticker attached.

Should I ever have a serious accident (touch wood) I recon I'd rather be recovering from the injuries without having to also worry that a potential claim may be knocked on the head (pardon the pun) due to a technicality.

[MJF]

NSW RTA page detailing bicycle helmet requirements is here.

[coolrider]

If in an accident, I don't think you would have an issue with contributory negligence merely because you were breaking a minor law at the time of the accident.

You may not be covered by insurance for personal harm if you aren't wearing the appropriate approved safety gear.

I don't think it is the size of the law that matters i think its the fact a law is being broken.

Mitch.

I am not sure about the meaining of 'insurance' as used in this thread, which might be causing me to go off on a wrong tangent. Apologies if this is the case. Anyway, I am only referring to situations where you have a claim to compensation because you have suffered injury when someone else is at fault. In that situation, merely breaking a law at the time of injury would not on its own be enough to screw up your claim.

The precedant is from Henwood v Municipal Tramways Trust (SA).

[stryker84]

All other factors being equal, sure a helmet from the States will be exactly the same as one purchased here, but it WILL be missing the Australian Standards sticker. This will not affect ride performance, nor the protection in accident, but it WILL cause you grief should you have the misfortune to be involved in an accident for which you need to claim health insurance. Or even if not that, if you need to claim the cost of a new helmet after a crash. $200 IS quite a sum...

All helmets sold in Australia for cycling carry the Standards Certified Product sticker. If you've seen the Australian Standards sticker, it has in block letters DO NOT REMOVE. If it's removed, the helmet is NOT certified as meeting Australian Standards, even if for all practical purposes it's exactly the same as with a sticker.

[sogood]

All other factors being equal, sure a helmet from the States will be exactly the same as one purchased here, but it WILL be missing the Australian Standards sticker. This will not affect ride performance, nor the protection in accident, but it WILL cause you grief should you have the misfortune to be involved in an accident for which you need to claim health insurance. Or even if not that, if you need to claim the cost of a new helmet after a crash. $200 IS quite a sum...

Has there been such a hypothetical case contested in the court system?

At the end of the day, buying mail order will always carry a risk. It's the buyer's call.

[Birdman]

All other factors being equal, sure a helmet from the States will be exactly the same as one purchased here, but it WILL be missing the Australian Standards sticker. This will not affect ride performance, nor the protection in accident, but it WILL cause you grief should you have the misfortune to be involved in an accident for which you need to claim health insurance. Or even if not that, if you need to claim the cost of a new helmet after a crash. $200 IS quite a sum...

All helmets sold in Australia for cycling carry the Standards Certified Product sticker. If you've seen the Australian Standards sticker, it has in block letters DO NOT REMOVE. If it's removed, the helmet is NOT certified as meeting Australian Standards, even if for all practical purposes it's exactly the same as with a sticker.

Which i think some of the guys here are still argueing about.

I see someone has said the helmet is originally approved and that just because the sticker is removed it is no longer Certified. Obviously this must be so otherwise helmet painters wouldnt need the authority to replace the stickers themselves.

Mitch.

[mikesbytes]

The sticker doesn't fall off, in fact its quite hard to get it off