New Provisional Licence Requirements

**Ash** · 25/10/2007, 6:18 PM

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

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

**Macy** · 26/10/2007, 6:55 AM

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

(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...

**Ash** · 26/10/2007, 7:57 AM

Originally Posted by Macy

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

) 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?

**Ash** · 26/10/2007, 8:10 AM

Originally Posted by Billsthoughts

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

) 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!

**Macy** · 26/10/2007, 8:11 AM

Originally Posted by Billsthoughts

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

) 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.

**Ash** · 26/10/2007, 8:13 AM

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

Originally Posted by Macy

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(

) 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

Originally Posted by Billsthoughts

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?

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

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

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

Originally Posted by passinginterest

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?

**Dodge** · 26/10/2007, 9:38 AM

Originally Posted by Ash

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

**Ash** · 26/10/2007, 9:38 AM

Originally Posted by Billsthoughts

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!)