New Provisional Licence Requirements

**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

**Macy** · 26/10/2007, 10:21 AM

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.

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

Originally Posted by Macy

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

Originally Posted by Macy

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

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

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

Originally Posted by endabob1

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

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

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

Originally Posted by Billsthoughts

are you for real???? smug people like you drive me mad....

**Macy** · 26/10/2007, 11:04 AM

Originally Posted by Dodge

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

Originally Posted by Billsthoughts

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

Originally Posted by monutdfc

...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

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

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

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

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

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

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.