Why high‑powered e‑scooters are a legal minefield for Ontario insurers

Electric kick scooters used to be novelty toys. Now, many of them are battery‑powered missiles, capable of hitting over 50 km/h, mixing with traffic, and generating injury claims that resemble motorcycle losses.

What hasn’t kept up is the industry’s understanding of how Ontario’s insurance laws apply. Riders, brokers, and insurers assume they’re “just scooters” and not “automobiles.” The law assumes otherwise.

Three issues are now converging across auto claims files:

1. Are injured riders barred from suing under s.267.6 of the Insurance Act?
2. Are injured riders entitled to accident benefits?
3. Are riders caught by the s.31 exclusions in the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule (SABS)?

These all turn on one question: Is the e‑scooter a motor vehicle requiring insurance?

Statutory framework

Under s.2 of the Compulsory Automobile Insurance Act (CAIA), motor vehicles operating on Ontario highways must be insured. The Highway Traffic Act (HTA) defines “motor vehicle” to include any vehicle “propelled or driven otherwise than by muscular power.”

Because e‑scooters use electric motors, they fall within this definition by default. And, because the HTA defines “highway” broadly to include most public roads and sidewalks, many e-scooter riders are unknowingly operating motor vehicles within the meaning of the legislation.

Why does this classification matter?

Part VI of the Insurance Act defines “automobile” to include a motor vehicle required to be insured under any act. If an e‑scooter is a motor vehicle under the CAIA, it automatically becomes an automobile for insurance purposes.

Recognizing the surge in e‑scooter usage, Ontario enacted a regulation in 2019 under the HTA named Pilot Project–Electric Kick‑Scooters (Pilot Project). Its purpose is to evaluate the use and operation of electric kick-scooters. The key provision in the Pilot Project is:

1. (2) An electric kick‑scooter is deemed not to be a motor vehicle under the act.

This provision establishes a narrow exception. When operated on highways, an e-scooter is not classified as a motor vehicle and does not require insurance pursuant to the CAIA. Additionally, since the CAIA does not mandate insurance for these e-scooters, they are not considered “automobiles” under the Insurance Act.

Why innovative customer experience will define the future of personal auto insurance Image

Insights Paid Content

Why innovative customer experience will define the future of personal auto insurance

Technology is helping insurers reimagine how they support personal auto customers — and it starts the moment a collision is reported, say experts at Accident Support Services International.

By 

Sponsor Image

That said, not all e‑scooters fall within the Pilot Project’s protection. The Pilot Project applies only to e-scooters that have an electric motor not exceeding 500 watts and a maximum speed of 24 km/h. Many modern e-scooters Ontario consumers buy exceed both limits. Once they do, the exemption disappears and the device reverts to the HTA’s definition of motor vehicle. When driven on public roads, the motor vehicle must be insured under an auto policy.

Tort bar and vicarious liability

The legal consequences of operating an uninsured motor vehicle on Ontario highways can be severe. Section 267.6(1) of the Insurance Act says an owner or lessee who operates their uninsured automobile on a highway cannot sue for bodily injury.

This issue has significant implications. Many owners genuinely think their e-scooters do not need auto insurance, which is true only if their vehicles are covered by the Pilot Project. However, if someone owns an e-scooter that exceeds the Pilot Project’s limits and gets injured while riding it uninsured, they have been operating an uninsured automobile, and any tort claim will be prohibited.

Further, without the Pilot Project’s protection, owners of powerful e-scooters involved in accidents would be subject to the vicarious liability provisions under s.192 of the HTA.

Under this law, vehicle owners are vicariously liable for damages caused by someone else operating their motor vehicle or streetcar on a highway (unless the vehicle was taken without consent). This is intended to ensure careful lending of an owner’s vehicle to protect the public.

And so, once an e-scooter exceeds the Pilot Project limits, its owner carries statutory responsibility for its use and operation, resulting in a bar on tort rights and exposure to vicarious liability.

Accident benefits: coverage for “automobile” accidents

Serious injuries to both e-scooter riders and pedestrians are a major concern, especially when these vehicles exceed 500 watts and 24 km/h. If high-powered e-scooters are classified as “automobiles,” claims exposure for catastrophic and optional accident benefits can be very high.

The threshold coverage question under the SABS is whether there was an incident in which the use or operation of an “automobile” directly caused an impairment. If an e-scooter collides with a car, there is usually no debate that an automobile directly caused injuries. But, if the e-scooter is the only vehicle in the incident, entitlement turns on whether the device itself was an “automobile.” Recall e-scooters subject to the Pilot Project are not automobiles. No accident benefits entitlement flows from a single‑vehicle incident involving these e-scooters.

However, if the e-scooter exceeds the Pilot Project’s limits, it is a motor vehicle requiring insurance and, therefore, is an automobile. In these cases, claimants would be entitled to accident benefits under the policy, subject to any applicable exclusions.

Accident benefits: Section 31 exclusions

Section 31(1)(a)(i) of the SABS bars several specified benefits if claimants knew or ought to have known they were operating an uninsured automobile. Owners of high‑powered scooters often acknowledge they knew the device was uninsured, usually because they never imagined it required insurance.

Non‑owners may stand on different footing. It may be difficult to prove that a casual rider knew or ought to have known the scooter required insurance. If the exclusion doesn’t apply, the claimant would be entitled to more benefits.

The path forward

Ontario’s insurance framework was never designed for powerful and speedy e-scooters. And yet, they are now common on our roads. Until the law evolves, insurers, brokers, and claims teams must recognize the risks these devices create and respond with a more technical, specification-driven approach.

Strigberger Law shares how insurance professionals can advise their clients. For example, e-scooter claims handlers should always:

• Request the e-scooter’s specifications immediately (wattage, speed, weight, design).
• Compare those specs to the Pilot Project criteria.
• Determine whether the scooter required insurance under the CAIA.
• Assess the tort bar, vicarious liability, and accident benefits implications early.

Brokers, for their part, should proactively review clients’ e-scooter use and explain when insurance is required. Many owners unknowingly expose themselves to uninsured-automobile consequences. The reality is, many owners and riders are, without realizing it, operating uninsured automobiles.