PSB sticker helmet

[contrarian]

Originally posted by Strong Eagle@March 30, 2007 11:11 pm

Well, it seems to me that there needs to be a bit more research. The regulations posted earlier say that it is illegal for a shop to sell a helmet that is not approved.

 

Thus, if 219 is selling Arai's without a PSB sticker it means one of two things:

 

a) They are illegally selling helmets... hard to believe considering that they have been around for a while, are associated with the store around the corner and are well known, or

 

b) The helmet is approved but not tested. Perhaps an Arai or a Shoei is automatically on the approved list because of brand and its Snell designation. Perhaps only helmets without DOT or Snell actually need to be tested in order to be approved.

 

Anyone know where to get a list of "approved" helmets?

Any helmet trader knows the law and the rules - all helmets must be approved as required under s74 of the Road Traffic Act. Some traders choose to ignore it. Buyers choose not to report them to the authorities. The police won't go around actively looking for traders dealing in non-approved helmets unless someone informs them. So this trade carries on because it saves money for both the seller and the buyer.

 

Helmets aren't approved by model. They're batch tested and the approval is given after the destructive tests on a sample from the batch. Even if the same model has passed before, the trader needs to send the new batch of imports for testing and approval.

[Arcfire]

Originally posted by contrarian@April 01, 2007 01:57 am

Any helmet trader knows the law and the rules - all helmets must be approved as required under s74 of the Road Traffic Act. Some traders choose to ignore it. Buyers choose not to report them to the authorities. The police won't go around actively looking for traders dealing in non-approved helmets unless someone informs them. So this trade carries on because it saves money for both the seller and the buyer.

 

Helmets aren't approved by model. They're batch tested and the approval is given after the destructive tests on a sample from the batch. Even if the same model has passed before, the trader needs to send the new batch of imports for testing and approval.

Hmm, it might seem that the seller and buyers both benefit in the short run but in the long run only the seller benefits from this. In any situation where the user meets with an accident, he/she may not be able to claim for injuries due to the helmet not being approved. He/she may lose out/incur huge bills due to the injuries while only saving on a few dollars.

[Strong Eagle]

Originally posted by Arcfire@April 02, 2007 06:21 pm

Hmm, it might seem that the seller and buyers both benefit in the short run but in the long run only the seller benefits from this. In any situation where the user meets with an accident, he/she may not be able to claim for injuries due to the helmet not being approved. He/she may lose out/incur huge bills due to the injuries while only saving on a few dollars.

Perhaps so... but if that were the reason an insurance company refused to pay I believe that a good lawyer could shoot 'em up. Prove up that a Arai or Shoei caused problems... "approval" would be a joke.

[fantom]

Originally posted by Strong Eagle@April 02, 2007 09:16 pm

Perhaps so... but if that were the reason an insurance company refused to pay I believe that a good lawyer could shoot 'em up. Prove up that a Arai or Shoei caused problems... "approval" would be a joke.

in this case, the insurance companies can taichi to the lta/tp regulations and it's illegal to ride without psb sticker. then u will have to employ a very good senior lawyer to challenge tp/lta regulations shall not apply to arai/shoei. but i wonder do judges ever heard of those helmet brands, i do think they know what is PSB stickers.

 

prepare tons of legal fee as the insurance companies and govt sectors have time to drag the case long enough to dry up ur bank accounts before u can get ur compensations.

[Arcfire]

Originally posted by fantom@April 03, 2007 10:32 am

in this case, the insurance companies can taichi to the lta/tp regulations and it's illegal to ride without psb sticker. then u will have to employ a very good senior lawyer to challenge tp/lta regulations shall not apply to arai/shoei. but i wonder do judges ever heard of those helmet brands, i do think they know what is PSB stickers.

 

prepare tons of legal fee as the insurance companies and govt sectors have time to drag the case long enough to dry up ur bank accounts before u can get ur compensations.

Hmmm.... in that case.... hu's in for reporting them?

 

Haha..... short pain better than long pain. Either we'll cripple the helmet business in SG or we'll be able to get helmets with the dumb approval sticker.

[warrior.c.o.n.p]

Originally posted by ha_pig@March 28, 2007 10:26 pm

hi all, just wan 2 find out izzit a must 2 have a psb sticker??

 

any bro out there got ever kanna fine becoz of this??

 

thanks... :smile:

Snell approval wuld b much more better.

[contrarian]

Originally posted by Strong Eagle@April 02, 2007 09:16 pm

Perhaps so... but if that were the reason an insurance company refused to pay I believe that a good lawyer could shoot 'em up. Prove up that a Arai or Shoei caused problems... "approval" would be a joke.

it would appear to me that the only valid reason for an insurer to contest a claim for non-approved helmets would be that the helmet failed, thus the helmet user suffered head injuries.

 

the basis for contest - contributory negligence on the part of the helmet user for using a helmet that is not approved. contributory neglience usually results in an apportionment for damages, for example one side takes 80% of the blame and the other 20% in an accident. it's rare to see 100% liability on one party in any type of contested accident.

 

this is obviously quite different from what most of our fellow forumers think - that insurers can decline to pay a claim for for using an unapproved helmet for no reason other than it's not approved. i disagree.

 

as to whose opinion is right, i leave readers to research or believe as they wish.

[sikonesis]

Originally posted by Strong Eagle@March 30, 2007 11:11 pm

b) The helmet is approved but not tested. Perhaps an Arai or a Shoei is automatically on the approved list because of brand and its Snell designation. Perhaps only helmets without DOT or Snell actually need to be tested in order to be approved.

 

Anyone know where to get a list of "approved" helmets?

 

this would make sense, if it was actually being done. since snell is a dedicated helmet

safety lobby. much more efficient to test those not already approved by snell, than to

make them illegal.

 

besides, i think that a TPman would think twice before deciding to fine you for wearing a

non-stickered arai. although law enforcement is his duty, it should be tempered with logic.

 

anyway, 2 links:

snell approved helmets

dot vs snell testing

 

not sure about psb testing standards though.

[Guest ViciousKitty74]

Originally posted by sikonesis@April 08, 2007 06:19 am

although law enforcement is his duty, it should be tempered with logic.

And the logic is?

 

To go against his duty?

 

 

 

 

 

:lol:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

the better phrase should be, his understanding and compassion for his fellow riders.

[Arcfire]

Originally posted by contrarian@April 06, 2007 04:48 pm

it would appear to me that the only valid reason for an insurer to contest a claim for non-approved helmets would be that the helmet failed, thus the helmet user suffered head injuries.

 

the basis for contest - contributory negligence on the part of the helmet user for using a helmet that is not approved. contributory neglience usually results in an apportionment for damages, for example one side takes 80% of the blame and the other 20% in an accident. it's rare to see 100% liability on one party in any type of contested accident.

 

this is obviously quite different from what most of our fellow forumers think - that insurers can decline to pay a claim for for using an unapproved helmet for no reason other than it's not approved. i disagree.

 

as to whose opinion is right, i leave readers to research or believe as they wish.

Geez... i'm confused.... So do insurers have the right to refuse claims for injuries arising from using a non-approved helmet?

[sikonesis]

the logic would be that a helmet that has cleared snell testing would surely exceed

psb requirements. and that slapping a fine on someone for wearing a non-psb approved

arai in the context of ensuring his safety would then border on ridiculousness.

[Raptor]

Originally posted by Arcfire@April 08, 2007 07:27 pm

Geez... i'm confused.... So do insurers have the right to refuse claims for injuries arising from using a non-approved helmet?

Then the insurers must state in the policy that PSB approved helmets must be worn, or else the coverage is voided.

 

And what helmet to wear on your head really depends on how much you value your head. You PAY for quality. You PAY for protection.

 

In the unfortunate event of a crash, having a PSB sticker DOES NOT mean you have better protection, in fact you could be worse off.

 

$10 head wear $10 helmet can lor.

 

PS - I dun wear PSB approved helmets and am willing to pay the fine simply becoz my head cost more than the fine.

[jkaiser]

how shops sell non-approved helmets is quite simple. Slap on a "for export only" sign

[Guest ViciousKitty74]

Then its a matter of unethical merchants?

[sikonesis]

imho, demand for quality equipment and archaic laws created the situation.

'unethical' merchants meeting the demand are just a consequence.

[contrarian]

If the buying stops, the supplies will too!

[Arcfire]

Originally posted by Raptor@April 08, 2007 10:53 pm

Then the insurers must state in the policy that PSB approved helmets must be worn, or else the coverage is voided.

 

And what helmet to wear on your head really depends on how much you value your head. You PAY for quality. You PAY for protection.

 

In the unfortunate event of a crash, having a PSB sticker DOES NOT mean you have better protection, in fact you could be worse off.

 

$10 head wear $10 helmet can lor.

 

PS - I dun wear PSB approved helmets and am willing to pay the fine simply becoz my head cost more than the fine.

The question at hand is not whether a pricier helmet will offer more protection or not but rather in the event of an accident, will the insurance cover for injuries arising from using the non-approved helmet(so...... is there such a clause in the contracts?)

 

So in the event of an accident, you get similar head injuries wearing a approved nova, and a non-approved arai. Which one gets the compensation?

[jkaiser]

Originally posted by Arcfire@April 09, 2007 04:15 pm

The question at hand is not whether a pricier helmet will offer more protection or not but rather in the event of an accident, will the insurance cover for injuries arising from using the non-approved helmet(so...... is there such a clause in the contracts?)

 

So in the event of an accident, you get similar head injuries wearing a approved nova, and a non-approved arai. Which one gets the compensation?

yea that's the problem precisely! then again if i have a non-approved arai, i think i think i have higher survivor chance than nova..heh..

 

used to use a non-approved mhr flip up..now i got a approved n102... so yea, best of both worlds

[Raptor]

Originally posted by Arcfire@April 09, 2007 04:15 pm

The question at hand is not whether a pricier helmet will offer more protection or not but rather in the event of an accident, will the insurance cover for injuries arising from using the non-approved helmet(so...... is there such a clause in the contracts?)

 

So in the event of an accident, you get similar head injuries wearing a approved nova, and a non-approved arai. Which one gets the compensation?

Then to be fair to us riders, there must be a clause in the insurance specifically calling out the requirements that the insured rider must wear PSB approved helmets or else the coverage is voided.

 

The authorities then must also ban the sales of all non-PSB approved helmets.

 

The bottomline of this all is..... it is a money making scam by some agencies, that's all.

 

Frankly, do you think the interest and safety of the rider is taken into consideration? Look at this issue deeper. Its all about money.

 

The problem is, in the case of an unfortunate event whereby the quality of construction of the helmet in question is tested, I rather be unable to claim and be alive still then to be dead to have the right to claim compensation.

[jkaiser]

Originally posted by Raptor@April 10, 2007 05:33 am

Then to be fair to us riders, there must be a clause in the insurance specifically calling out the requirements that the insured rider must wear PSB approved helmets or else the coverage is voided.

 

The authorities then must also ban the sales of all non-PSB approved helmets.

 

The bottomline of this all is..... it is a money making scam by some agencies, that's all.

 

Frankly, do you think the interest and safety of the rider is taken into consideration? Look at this issue deeper. Its all about money.

 

The problem is, in the case of an unfortunate event whereby the quality of construction of the helmet in question is tested, I rather be unable to claim and be alive still then to be dead to have the right to claim compensation.

i not sure bout insurance company part.. bue like i said for shops, they cover butts by selling for export only. Not sure if they are supposed to tell buyer that it can't be used in singapore.

 

Frankly no point banning it in singapore..2 things may happen

1. companies like shoei simply pull out, sg is not a big market

2. ppl will ship from overseas

[Arcfire]

Yeah i agree that its a money making scam.... Riders will always get the short end of the stick.

 

But the clause would be more for claims made against the insured rather than the insured himself unless it was a comprehensive insurance.

 

I agree its better to be alive than 6 feet under but the crux of the issue has yet to be resolved. Mabbe with the creation of the motorcycling association, they can look into this issue since it involves safety aspects of riding as well.

[contrarian]

Originally posted by Raptor@April 10, 2007 05:33 am

The authorities then must also ban the sales of all non-PSB approved helmets.

 

The bottomline of this all is..... it is a money making scam by some agencies, that's all.

 

Frankly, do you think the interest and safety of the rider is taken into consideration? Look at this issue deeper. Its all about money.

It's already the law to say that helmets must be approved for use here, and that it's against the law to use or sell helmets that aren't approved. The TP has also said that if you inform them of any seller that is selling non-approved helmets, they will investigate and take action.

 

The PSB standard is basic enough to tell you that if it's approved, the helmet is likely to survive the same types of impact as the test. This is not much different from the electrical plugs sold in Singapore - they must be PSB batch tested and approved for reasons of public safety.

 

Is it about safety? Yes. PSB will refuse to approve any helmets that are not using D-rings as the chipstrap mechanism. Ask the TP how many riders die from helmet failure (using non-approved helmets) or helmets have come off the head (not strapped or using non-approved helmets) - they will tell you about the mortality in Singapore from these reasons alone.

[jkaiser]

Originally posted by contrarian@April 10, 2007 09:38 pm

It's already the law to say that helmets must be approved for use here, and that it's against the law to use or sell helmets that aren't approved. The TP has also said that if you inform them of any seller that is selling non-approved helmets, they will investigate and take action.

 

The PSB standard is basic enough to tell you that if it's approved, the helmet is likely to survive the same types of impact as the test. This is not much different from the electrical plugs sold in Singapore - they must be PSB batch tested and approved for reasons of public safety.

 

Is it about safety? Yes. PSB will refuse to approve any helmets that are not using D-rings as the chipstrap mechanism. Ask the TP how many riders die from helmet failure (using non-approved helmets) or helmets have come off the head (not strapped or using non-approved helmets) - they will tell you about the mortality in Singapore from these reasons alone.

wrt to D rings, i think i'm comfortable with my clip, metal to metal contact. I'm ok with D rings, only gripe is that it's hard to wear with gloves on. I wun be surprised if the helmets drop off cos the ppl using plastic clips, or misuse D rings

 

Let's have an informal poll here. Let's say Shoei doesnt get their helmet tested (which they don't now), and govt bans all sale here. Would you import from overseas, n risk getting caught by TP?

 

My take, if i like and can afford shoei, i will still go for it.. as ppl on sbf always like to say, how much your helmet costs is how much you value your head.

[Raptor]

Originally posted by contrarian@April 10, 2007 09:38 pm

It's already the law to say that helmets must be approved for use here, and that it's against the law to use or sell helmets that aren't approved. The TP has also said that if you inform them of any seller that is selling non-approved helmets, they will investigate and take action.

 

The PSB standard is basic enough to tell you that if it's approved, the helmet is likely to survive the same types of impact as the test. This is not much different from the electrical plugs sold in Singapore - they must be PSB batch tested and approved for reasons of public safety.

 

Is it about safety? Yes. PSB will refuse to approve any helmets that are not using D-rings as the chipstrap mechanism. Ask the TP how many riders die from helmet failure (using non-approved helmets) or helmets have come off the head (not strapped or using non-approved helmets) - they will tell you about the mortality in Singapore from these reasons alone.

 

The Snell Foundation has been around for 50 years, since 1957. Experience comes with time. A subject matter expert is not made overnight. And the Snell Foundation deals with nothing but headgear protection. You don't see their stickers on other household items... do you??

 

How long has PSB been around? They seem to be subject matter experts for just about everything. Basically a Jack of all trades and a master on none.

 

I just wonder what kind of stringent tests does PSB set for helmets to meet their requirements before they stick on their cheap and good tin foil (read as easily faded, peeled off) sticker? So no class.

 

And why would TPs stop you from wearing a Snell but non-PSB approved helmet?

Think deeply and read between the lines. Don't just tell me their purpose when they stop you.... read the intent behind.

 

See attached link for more info on the Snell Foundation. Expand your knowledge and mind then decide for yourself.

 

Having said all this, yes, I know its against the law to wear a Snell but non-PSB approved helmet. Let me use an analogy to explain myself. It is against the law to kill someone, but it is not against the law if I kill someone in self defense when he is going to kill me. I wear a Snell approved helmet in self defense. Just my 2 centavos worth.

 

Ride safe Bros!!

 

http://www.smf.org/faqs.html#13

[Tourer]

Conclusion? Get a helmet that is both SNELL and PSB approved.