View Full Version : New Provisional Licence Requirements
What thinks ye of the new law that learner drivers, even those on 2nd
provisional, now need to be accompanied by a person who has held a
full licence for 2 years!
kingdom hoop
25/10/2007, 7:46 PM
Proper order really, the tightening of a silly loophole. Anything that precipitates learners getting off their asses and learning to drive semi-properly has to be good. It's hard to know in the first place why you were allowed drive on your own without a check as to your aptitiude. I've no sympathy for any whingers saying they have to wait months for their test and now can't go to work/the match/the mistress. You shouldn't be driving before passing the test unless it is for training purposes, this is just a necessary means of constricting, in number and freedom, the ludicrous number of provisional drivers on the road.
I guess the two year thing relates to the passenger being of a reasonably legitimate standard of motoring erudition to make their presence beneficial for the driver.
progress
25/10/2007, 10:36 PM
to be fair,its a joke in regards to the second provisional.the rules are there already.you cant just change them like that and penalise people.this will affect thousands of people.it has been stated that you can drive on your own on your second provisional but now you will be committing an offence-nonsense.this is giving out mixed signals.the second provisional holders should be exempt as a change should only affect people the new on the road. As for the comments above,just because you have a full licence,that does not mean you can actually drive properly because you done a test 15 years ago,give me a break.i have been driving long enough to see some bad drivers and they are mostly full license holders that dont have a clue.this is going to cause problems.As you mention the two year experience for the passenger as well this is nonsense, as the longer you drive, the more bad habits you have.there will have to be a rethink.my license currently states i can drive unattended till the expiry date,surely this would hold up in a court of law in my opinion
onceahoop
25/10/2007, 10:52 PM
Will they enforce it though. Constantly see L- drivers on motorways :eek: causing all sorts of problems. Hogging the outside lane at 50 mph, almost stopping at merging traffic, they're a disaster. Driving too slow can also be as dangerous as driving too fast
progress
25/10/2007, 11:08 PM
Q: I am currently on a second (provisional licence) learner permit for driving a car, and was not required to be accompanied heretofore with this (provisional licence) learner permit. Must I now be accompanied?
A: Yes, you must be accompanied at all times when driving with a (provisional licence) learner permit for a car.
a load of boll-ox
It was stupid allowing unqualified drivers drive unaccompanied anyway, and it's not like this hasn't been flagged for years now - sure it was the reasoning behind the privatisation of the testing. People have had their chance to pass or not at this stage.
For most, this is just a change to enforcement of the current laws, not actually a change. Learners have always been banned from Motorways, and there's clear signs at the start of them, yet the radio is full of learners giving out about not being able to drive them to work. No wonder they can't bloody pass a test, if they can't read a sign :rolleyes: (and just to note, motorways are only motorways when there is an alternative non motorway route.)
Bottom line, it's always been a ridiculous situation anyway, although they chould've stated a year or 18 months ago this is what would happen. But that was before an election...
People have had their chance to pass or not at this stage.
I'm 7 months waiting for my chance at the moment.
Billsthoughts
26/10/2007, 8:03 AM
Im on my 4th or 5th provisional licence....(was called for test the day after I went to australia and the day before I returned:rolleyes:) so does this apply to me???
have to say its a load of balls....basically have a load of people with cars now that they cant drive. what the hell is Gay Byrne on about males from 18 - 26 suffer from a disease of being "male 18-26"....I mean is Joe Duffy taoiseach or what? :mad:
Im on my 4th or 5th provisional licence....(was called for test the day after I went to australia and the day before I returned:rolleyes:) so does this apply to me???
As far as I kow it affects everyone not on a full licence.
And if you have a full licence, you have to have it for 2 years
before you can act as an accompanied driver!
Im on my 4th or 5th provisional licence....(was called for test the day after I went to australia and the day before I returned:rolleyes:) so does this apply to me???
According to Dempsey on Newstalk just a few minutes ago it doesn't apply to you - you shouldn't have been driving anyway. So detached from reality... lets give him a pay rise!
I should add the caveat that I learnt to drive in the UK, where they've always enforced the provisional licence, so perhaps I just don't get the concept of driving around unlicenced.
The only thing I can see this achieving is creating more of a backlog with
people applying for tests and also flood every HR department in the country
with requests for a letter to help get a cancellation appointment!
Billsthoughts
26/10/2007, 8:21 AM
According to Dempsey on Newstalk just a few minutes ago it doesn't apply to you - you shouldn't have been driving anyway. So detached from reality... lets give him a pay rise!
I should add the caveat that I learnt to drive in the UK, where they've always enforced the provisional licence, so perhaps I just don't get the concept of driving around unlicenced.
well I always wanted to go away so it didnt seem much point in applying for a test 1 1/2 years - 2 years in advance if I didnt know if I would be here. then when I did apply I ended up going away a year and a half later(:rolleyes:) so it does or doesnt apply to me? I can see the logic of it but there should have been some sort of period of grace for drivers on their second provisional onwards. and Gay Byrne is still a ****ing ****.
OneRedArmy
26/10/2007, 8:36 AM
Hopefully the end to a ridiculous situtation which certainly contributes significantly to the high road death rate.
But as usual handled in a cack handed manner by Govt.
monutdfc
26/10/2007, 8:41 AM
what the hell is Gay Byrne on about males from 18 - 26 suffer from a disease of being "male 18-26"....I mean is Joe Duffy taoiseach or what? :mad:
Actually, he has a point. If you look at mortality tables for males there is what is known as the "accident hump" between the ages of 18-22; this feature is not present in female mortality tables. (Due, among other things, to testosterone, risk taking and trying to impress women.) It is not solely explained by road accidents but that is a major contributor - so not exactly a 'disease' as such, but in a way analgous to a disease.
(I can get a link to mortality tables if you need.)
It seems a bit ridiculous to bring this in almost literally overnight. It does need to be done though, probably better if it was phased in.
Accident rates for young drivers are higher than for older drivers, and accident rates for drivers on a provisional licence are higher than those for drivers on a full licence.
(Can probably get a link for this too if people don't believe me.)
passinginterest
26/10/2007, 8:47 AM
Hopefully the end to a ridiculous situtation which certainly contributes significantly to the high road death rate.
Just out of curiosity is there any figures to actually back this up?
To be honest I don't think changing the regulation will stop people driving unacompanied anyway. I've just gone onto my third provisional, having failed my test for the third time. Twice it was justified, the third time was a joke. The second and third times were within a few months of each other, the second time I made one stupid mistake due to nerves and recieved an automatic fail, I was dissapointed but could understand it. Other than the red mark I had passed easily.
The third time I wasn't nervous, I knew my stuff, I've done numerous pre-tests with qualified instructors who found no faults. I can and do drive safely. I was stunned when I was told I had failed. Anyone familiar with the test knows there's 3 fault grades, the first are insignificant and you can't fail, the second more significant, you can have a max of nine, the third is automatic fail.
On this test I had zero minor faults, but, somehow picked up 11 in the second category. Comparing it to my test a few months before, none of the marks were in the same categories, yet my driving was the same, I was just less nervous. I can't understand how you can have eleven mid level faults without having a single minor one? I also fail to understand how you can make mistakes in completely different areas within a few months. Also how on three pre-tests none of the faults she failed me on were ever raised.
Yes I'm bitter.
monutdfc
26/10/2007, 9:02 AM
Just out of curiosity is there any figures to actually back this up?
Yes there are. I'm at work so cannot surf the net all day, but I'll try and source them later.
passinginterest
26/10/2007, 9:13 AM
Aside from my bitter rant, I think if regulations like this are introduced there should be proper structure in place beforehand, eg. waiting lists no longer than 4 weeks and consistency in the testing process. Also a better appeal procedure than currently exists (or doesn't really exist at all if you look into it a bit).
My first test was back in 2000 so can't remember the waiting time, for the first one this year I was waiting about 10 months and for the second one it was 4 months. I need to reapply again now and I'd imagine 3 months wait at best, probably more seeing as there is bound to be a rush.
Billsthoughts
26/10/2007, 9:34 AM
just to confirm yes it applies to whatever provisional you are on.
second was just thinking now if you are not accompanied by a full licensed driver of two years when you go up to do your test is that then an automatic fail?
And if you have a full licence, you have to have it for 2 years before you can act as an accompanied driver!
This is the bit that grates me. They're basically saying somebody is a responsible and capable driver, but not good enough to help learners. Which is obviously patent ********. Unless they're saying someone who passes their test isn't a capable driver?
The other major problem I have is the speed, in which it happens. Someone on their 2nd provisional who's been driving on their own for the past year, shouldn't really be expected to find a driver wtih 2 years full license in order to drive
As for me, on my first provisional, not in the age bracket. Have no problem with the no motorway rule or the previous "must have licensed driver at all times" rule
second was just thinking now if you are not accompanied by a full licensed driver of two years when you go up to do your test is that then an automatic fail?
It's illegal but not a fail ... unless the instructor see's you ;)
Not sure but if you fail it is illegal for you to drive home unaccompanied.
(but I think this was always the case anyway!)
passinginterest
26/10/2007, 9:43 AM
This whole thing makes me angry. I think it's madness that we need to learn to drive on public roads. I think lessons should be part of leaving cert, and should be carried out on private grounds. I don't have a problem with tackling the issue of dangerous drivers, I do have a problem with criminalising and persecuring thousands of people who have apllied for tests, paid for lessons, waited months etc. At least 12 months grace should be given to existing provisional licence holders, with the new regulations applied to new applicants. It should also be postponed until the waiting list is down to 8 weeks max (I'd argue for 4).
Anyone else notice that the driving test website seems to be down this morning?
Massive waiting lists here we come!
Dodge
26/10/2007, 10:14 AM
Just noticed that. LOL
Any grace period should be the maximum waiting time as of now. If we went for a standard 12months, we'd have the same thing then.
How are you supposed to judge whether someone is competent for driving on public roads by testing them on private grounds? Part of what differentiates drivers is how they respond to the unexpected, their observational skills, driving at the right speed for the right conditions.
It seems pretty clear that the Government are going with "it's only effecting second provisional licence holders" line, totally ignoring the lack of enforcement of other licences thus far.
passing interest - you're first test was in 2000? I'm sorry, but even with a 10/12 month wait you've really had 7/8 chances to pass the test. This is the case in point as to why they needed to do something!
Billsthoughts
26/10/2007, 10:21 AM
sure my brother (courier) cant actually legally work from Monday.:confused:
badly thought out joke.
Dodge
26/10/2007, 10:33 AM
Just talking to a friend of mine in the same boat. He's a sales rep.
anto1208
26/10/2007, 10:41 AM
While i think it will help it still doesnt change the fact that even if you pass the test it doesnt mean you are a good driver, big difference between driving around a housing estate safely at 25 mph in a micra and doing 70 on a wet misty motorway in a subaru . Or even doing 60 on a country road .
What we need is a proper training scheme where people are trained/tested in a few different sections
1. Theory ( rules, driver courtasy,maintainence etc )
2. driving at 30 ( parking, hill starts etc .)
3. Advanced driving ( driving on ice , wet roads, controlling skids etc )
4. driving at 60 (over taking, staying a proper distance behind cars etc)
5. moterway driving .
passinginterest
26/10/2007, 10:48 AM
passing interest - you're first test was in 2000? I'm sorry, but even with a 10/12 month wait you've really had 7/8 chances to pass the test. This is the case in point as to why they needed to do something!
I should have been more clear, got licence at 17, drove for the two years, nearly always accompanied, did the test in that period, made a complete balls of it and deservedly failed.
I then moved to Dublin, let licence expire and didn't get second provisional and start driving again until late 2005. I applied for test immediately, drove unaccompanied, legally, did my test after 10 months wait and 3 lessons/pre tests, which I admit picked up on a few things and improved my driving dramatically. Was extremely nervous during test and made two bad judgement calls which resulted in a fail.
Again I applied fairly quickly for another test, waited four months for a date, had two more pre-tests, was assured my driving was excellent. Was failed for pretty much random reasons, especially when compared to previous test and all advice given by instructors.
About a week later my second provisional expired. I'm now on my third, I don't drive al that often any more and I haven't gotten around to re applying for the test again (mainly due to the fact that I hardly use the car). Now I have to apply, as I fully intended anyway, but, will face a massive wait time and the possibility that I'll face another completely unpredictable tester. It just doesn't seem fair.
I can understand targeting the people on 5+ licences who couldn't be bothered doing a test, but I feel it's unfair on others.
endabob1
26/10/2007, 10:50 AM
Lets he honest here it's about time they did something about this, allowing unqualified drivers on the road, on their own was a recepie for disaster. It is the reason Insurance is so rediculously high in Ireland.
On the flip side, considering the number of drivers falling in to this category is so huge and considering the already massive backlogs in tests I don't understand why it wasn't phased in, an idea would have been to give a year for any drivers on their 3rd provisional or more First preference for tests, then a year for drivers on their 2nd ilcence before full implementation.
Couple that with more examiners being hired and you might just have a chance of getting it done properly.
OneRedArmy
26/10/2007, 10:50 AM
I can't believe employers would give someone a job requiring them to drive without a full license? Madness.They are opening themselves up to all sorts of claims.
Any adverts I've seen for sales reps etc. specifically state "full license".
I also love that people are trying to claim that a test doesn't really prove anything!! Only in Ireland.
Probably should have been a 12 month grace period but in fairness it was mentioned at least 3 years ago that this was on the cards.
Driving is a privilege, not a right.
passinginterest
26/10/2007, 10:51 AM
How are you supposed to judge whether someone is competent for driving on public roads by testing them on private grounds? Part of what differentiates drivers is how they respond to the unexpected, their observational skills, driving at the right speed for the right conditions.
Just on that point I wasn't advocating testing on private grounds, just proper instruction and safety training, as part of a leaving cert module in schools. The learner permit would basically be the same as what's being introduced.
Dodge
26/10/2007, 10:55 AM
I can't believe employers would give someone a job requiring them to drive without a full license? Madness.They are opening themselves up to all sorts of claims.
Liek what? Their car insurance would cover all that I could think of
I also love that people are trying to claim that a test doesn't really prove anything!! Only in Ireland.
Its the state that is claiming this by saying that the "accompanying" driver must have their license for 2 full years
It is the reason Insurance is so rediculously high in Ireland
Will the insurance company refund monies for those who situation has now changed?
Billsthoughts
26/10/2007, 10:57 AM
I can't believe employers would give someone a job requiring them to drive without a full license? Madness.They are opening themselves up to all sorts of claims.
Any adverts I've seen for sales reps etc. specifically state "full license".
I also love that people are trying to claim that a test doesn't really prove anything!! Only in Ireland.
Probably should have been a 12 month grace period but in fairness it was mentioned at least 3 years ago that this was on the cards.
Driving is a privilege, not a right.
are you for real???? smug people like you drive me mad....
Dodge
26/10/2007, 10:58 AM
are you for real???? smug people like you drive me mad....:D:D
:o
Its the state that is claiming this by saying that the "accompanying" driver must have their license for 2 full years
iirc it's 5 years in the Britain, not sure on the north. I believe the thinking is that you've to have the x years experience to teach someone. It's supposed to be in there for getting instruction, not for simply getting around the law.
OneRedArmy
26/10/2007, 11:09 AM
are you for real???? smug people like you drive me mad....Maybe its because I'm from the North where you have to pass a test to drive on your own.
I find the situation, along with the general standard of driving, absolutely ridiculous.
I did my test when I was 17, failed it, took 6 more lessons, then passed it 3 months later.
If someone fails a test multiple times maybe its a hint they shouldn't be driving.
John83
26/10/2007, 11:12 AM
...If you look at mortality tables for males there is what is known as the "accident hump" between the ages of 18-22...
Yes, matched nicely by the "insurance hump" between the ages of 17-25.
Dodge
26/10/2007, 11:19 AM
I did my test when I was 17, failed it, took 6 more lessons, then passed it 3 months later.
If it was only 3 months here....
Billsthoughts
26/10/2007, 11:21 AM
If someone fails a test multiple times maybe its a hint they shouldn't be driving.
well when your british government brings in some laws that greatly inconveniance you; you can comment on them then.
passinginterest
26/10/2007, 11:23 AM
If someone fails a test multiple times maybe its a hint they shouldn't be driving.
Or a hint that the system is a farce? With little or no consistency from one test centre to another, SGS testers have a higher pass rate than the government centres, centres around the country have wildly varying pass rates, testers behave completely differently, and I could go on.
OneRedArmy
26/10/2007, 11:46 AM
well when your british government brings in some laws that greatly inconveniance you; you can comment on them then.
I live and pay my taxes here now and get to experience the poor driving standards daily so I reckon I deserve a view.
Dodge
26/10/2007, 12:12 PM
I live and pay my taxes here now and get to experience the poor driving standards daily so I reckon I deserve a view.
Do you think people who were working legally today should be unemployed on Tuesday as a result of this?
I have absolutely no problem with this law being enforced. I have a huge problem with the timeframes involved
Eire06
26/10/2007, 12:24 PM
Question:
If someone driving unaccompanied with a provisional Licence crashes into someone else, are the covered by their insurance even though they are not abiding to the conditions of their licences?
I don't think they are!
Dodge
26/10/2007, 12:31 PM
Question:
If someone driving unaccompanied with a provisional Licence crashes into someone else, are the covered by their insurance even though they are not abiding to the conditions of their licences?
yes they are (insurance federation guy was on radio this morning). He then said he'd expect that driver to be prosecuted for breaking the law
According to Dempsey, the law will come in next week, then it's up to the Gardaí as to how they enforce it, suggesting a possible 2-3 month period of introduction. This makes more sense.
Schumi
26/10/2007, 12:42 PM
it's up to the Gardaí as to how they enforce it, suggesting a possible 2-3 month period of introduction.That suggests nothing being done to me.
Dodge
26/10/2007, 12:48 PM
Who put that ****ing poll up?
Ask if people agree that it should be implemented with one working days notice?
The previous situation was ludicrous so change is welcomed.
I predict more people will just take down their L plates & take their chances that not stopped by the Gardai.
Who put that ****ing poll up?
Ask if people agree that it should be implemented with one working days notice?
Poll covers that.
Dodge
26/10/2007, 12:56 PM
Poll covers that.
No it doesn't. I'm in favour of new requirements BUT not in the way announced by government
Billsthoughts
26/10/2007, 12:59 PM
No it doesn't. I'm in favour of new requirements BUT not in the way announced by government
agree with Dodge...
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.