Confused about restriction

lashmaster

Hi guys
I'm thinkin about buying a bike after a 20 year break, yeah hittin the 50 mark soon. I had a Honda Deauville in mind[dont actually have bike yet] and so rang CN for quotation. 597 Euros was me quote for a Provisional License and no mention of Restriction.
So now I'm wondering if there is any need to go down the restriction route, or as I intend doing my test asap, is the examiner goin to check this?

Regards

murphaph

The tester won't give a toss so long as the bike is over 125cc (for a cat A test). It's up to you if you restrict or not. The Guards are a bit of a joke compared to the PSNI etc. when it comes to actually enforcing this sort of road traffic legislation so it comes down to this:
If you do have an accident, CN or the other insurer may check for your restriction and may attempt to bail on your policy as legally, you do not hold a licence or have held a licence for the category of vehicle being driven. I'm sure many many bikers who are supposed to restrict do not do so. Currently my bike doesn't need restriction but my restriction period has 2 years to run and if I get a big bike, I'll have to think about restriction then, I may skip on it.

MunsterCycling

Deauvilles are under the power to weight ratio so they don't need to be restricted, well they are with fuel and oil in them...

Plus if you haven't had a licence do they allow you get the A or do you have to go A+ 1st or is it that they restrict you for the 1st 2 years?

MC

Oryx

Soz double posting

Oryx

Ive heard of testers and gardai asking for evidence that a bike is restricted, or that it is below the PW ratio. To get the ratio you need the power output in Kw divided by the weight in Kg. Should be below 0.16. Get a weighbridge cert and a dyno printout and blind them with science.

MunsterCycling wrote:

Deauvilles are under the power to weight ratio so they don't need to be restricted, well they are with fuel and oil in them...

It has yet to be established here whether weight means dry, kerb, or with rider.:rolleyes: We go on kerb, for consistency.

Idleater

KatieK wrote:

Ive heard of testers and gardai asking for evidence that a bike is restricted, or that it is below the PW ratio.

I have a new FR SV and there is no actual (paper) cert given. It is "contained" in the serial numbers apparently. The insurance companies can look this up with the manufacturer.

I am also not 100% sure that the Deuville is learner legal (in non FR guise)...

236kg (dry) 48.3kw (@8000rpm) =~ 0.2045 p/w

Oryx

nereid wrote:

I have a new FR SV and there is no actual (paper) cert given. It is "contained" in the serial numbers apparently. The insurance companies can look this up with the manufacturer.

I am also not 100% sure that the Deuville is learner legal (in non FR guise)...

236kg (dry) 48.3kw (@8000rpm) =~ 0.2045 p/w

For Suzuki's the model code has a U in it when FR. As in GSF600UK6...

Yeah just checked the given kerb weight of a 03 deauville, 243kg and according to your power output def is not below the PW limit.

MunsterCycling

New deauville is 257kg kerb weight > but this works out at 0.1879 so maybe there not, but it was a Guard that told me, thats why they use them as majority of the guys on bikes have no civilian licence so they give them these as they are easy to ride.

MC

lashmaster

Thanks for the info guys.I can see there may be problems in the event of an accident as regards insurance.Looks like the deauville is not going to meet learner driver requirements so may opt for something else and play safe.

Steffano2002

lashmaster wrote:

Thanks for the info guys.I can see there may be problems in the event of an accident as regards insurance.Looks like the deauville is not going to meet learner driver requirements so may opt for something else and play safe.

Or just get the Deauville and restrict it. That's what I'm doing with my Bandit 600. Gutted about it but if I have an accident I don't want CN to turn around and tell me: "sorry mate, you're on your own!"...

Idleater

lashmaster wrote:

Looks like the deauville is not going to meet learner driver requirements so may opt for something else and play safe.

If you are "set" on the Deuville, I would enquire from Honda if they can come in Factory Rectricted form.

If not, there are plenty of others that are similar but do come Factory Restricted. The Suzuki VStrom 650 for one. Have a look here and the ones marked with (A) can be got Factory Restricted.

Cant find the FR listing for the other makes.

L.

sutty

When I was doing my driving test Yesterday. There was a lad before me doing his test on a Deuville. So ether it was restricted or it met the power to waight with Oil, coolant and fuel in it. I would ask a bike dealer. I know you can drive a unrestricted gold wing on a prov.

murphaph

The tester cannot ask for proof of restriction. He just checks the tax disc to make sure she's over 125cc (for the A test) and you sign a declaration about insurance etc.

Oryx

murphaph wrote:

The tester cannot ask for proof of restriction. He just checks the tax disc to make sure she's over 125cc (for the A test) and you sign a declaration about insurance etc.

Ive been told by bikers I know that they were asked.
Others got thru without any question. And the gardai do ask, Ive heard of loads of cases where people have been stopped and asked to produce certs.

a_ominous

It's a few years since I did my test, but I had to sign a form which IIRC was a declaration that I was insured and I was riding legally ie bike did not exceed 25kW (33BHP) and PW <=0.16kW/kg.

Also know of a guy who bought a new Deauville as first bike. Shop told him it was learner legal. I don't believe it the Deauville is: PW is close at 0.18 as others have said, but power is about 55BHP. Like most road traffic laws, it's not enforced.

hmboards

a_ominous wrote:

It's a few years since I did my test, but I had to sign a form which IIRC was a declaration that I was insured and I was riding legally ie bike did not exceed 25kW (33BHP) and PW <=0.16kW/kg.

Also know of a guy who bought a new Deauville as first bike. Shop told him it was learner legal. I don't believe it the Deauville is: PW is close at 0.18 as others have said, but power is about 55BHP. Like most road traffic laws, it's not enforced.

You only have to meet one of the requirements in Ireland - power to not exceed 25kW **or** PW<=0.16kW/kg. In the UK you have to meet both requirements.

The Honda Ireland importers confirmed by email to my bike instructor that the Deauville was below 0.16kW/kg. This was the old model, not sure about the new one ...

conorgriff

hmboards wrote:

You only have to meet one of the requirements in Ireland - power to not exceed 25kW **or** PW<=0.16kW/kg. In the UK you have to meet both requirements.

Yeah if you click here you can see where it says OR in the legislation

MunsterCycling

Yippe so I was correct after all

Idleater

MunsterCycling wrote:

Yippe so I was correct after all

But it is greater than 25kw and it is also greater than .16kw/kg.

I think the weight that is counted is the dry weight of the bike otherwise you could have a legal bike on a full tank of fuel and an illegal one when you hit reserve.

I would not be surprised if honda do a FR version of the bike though.
The equiv smallish beamers come FR dont they? F650 et al???

L.

MunsterCycling

Its up to Honda to decide that one, they submit the details on the OTR weight of the bike and surely they fill the tank too, but yeah it exceeds by my and others calculations the 0.16 rule but if Honda says its ok then the authorities go with that, where do they take new bikes to measure them in this country? Never heard of it being done. Can't ride a bike dry so don't think that would count as the kerb weight.

On a side note, was having that very discussion about this with a friend today about the full tank empty tank business.

We couldn't figure that one out though.

murphaph

nereid wrote:

The equiv smallish beamers come FR dont they? F650 et al???

L.

The F650 is deffo available in FR format.

Katie, I'm sure the odd Guard has stopped the odd bike and asked for a restriction cert, but it's certainly not taken as seriously as in the UK. If a bike was close to the P/W ratio then I'd say you'd be fine just telling the guard that and being let on your way. The tester otoh cannot refuse to test you without a cert of restriction. The declaration takes care of all that business. Sure they don't even check for insurance with the bike test!

On a related note, if you had a bike that developed say 60HP and was just over the P/W ratio, surely it'd make sense to only restrict it ever so slightly to say 59HP, so as to meet the ratio, while leaving you the bulk of the power, rather than restricting down to 33HP. I wonder is that actually done or do shops insist on a 'standard' restriction which limits the HP to 33.

Q_Ball

been looking at a hornet 250. From what i see when unrestricted it comes in at 29.2kW and 151kg dry which is 0.193

Do insurance companies acknowledge restrictor kits? I've heard somewhere or off someone that they only acknowledge FR's.

Idleater

Q_Ball wrote:

been looking at a hornet 250. From what i see when unrestricted it comes in at 29.2kW and 151kg dry which is 0.193

Do insurance companies acknowledge restrictor kits? I've heard somewhere or off someone that they only acknowledge FR's.

Both insurance companies acknowledge all types of restriction - for licencing purposes. For policy premium purposes, AON only acknowledge FR bikes. Dealer "restricted" bikes just recieve the full price premium and your licence deals with the actual washers in the carbs.

Ring both companies for a quote on any bike before you buy.

L.

a_ominous

hmboards wrote:

You only have to meet one of the requirements in Ireland - power to not exceed 25kW **or** PW<=0.16kW/kg. In the UK you have to meet both requirements.

The Honda Ireland importers confirmed by email to my bike instructor that the Deauville was below 0.16kW/kg. This was the old model, not sure about the new one ...

The restriction clause is always a hot topic. Partially because the government's own documentation is inconsistent on the subject. My driving licence shows 3 different categories under A:

• A1 - <=125cc, 11kW
• A - <= 25kW, 0.16 kW/kg
• A - (no qualifiers)

Compare this with B category which is for <= 3500 kG and 8 passengers.

We should be able to do tests on something like a Deauville; it's not too much bike for a newbie to learn on, but no DAS here. Yet another fook-up by the government.

a_ominous

I probably should have done this before my post above. I did a check on the Government Statute website
and found this act:
S.I. No. 352 of 1999, ROAD TRAFFIC (LICENSING OF DRIVERS) REGULATIONS, 1999
Part 2, section 17 "Motorcycle engine size restriction."
as Transport's site tends to have more interpretation of the law than quoting actual legislation.

It does indeed state:
"power output not exceeding 25 kW OR (my emphasis) a power/weight ratio not exceeding 0.16 kW/kg"

Wonder who did the maths in Honda Ireland, because their figures are fudged a bit from widely published data. Did they take rider's weight into account (before or after lunch, etc.)?

Hotblack Desiato

KatieK wrote:

And the gardai do ask, Ive heard of loads of cases where people have been stopped and asked to produce certs.

The Gardai do not have legal powers to ask for proof of restriction.

Actually, there is no proof of restriction, because the so-called "restriction cert" is just a letter on bike shop headed notepaper (or a convincing photoshop job) claiming that restrictors were fitted, but which may or may not actually have been fitted, and which may or may not have been removed later.

There is no official document to prove restriction even for factory restricted bikes.

The Gardai do not have the legal power to put a bike on a dyno etc. to prove power output, there are only 2 -3 bike dynos in the country, dynos vary wildly anyway and there is no legal definition of how the weight is supposed to be measured.

So the law's a complete ass, but it doesn't really matter as restriction doesn't reduce accidents even in countries which do attempt to enforce the law. EU bureaucratic stupidity at its best.

The only reason to comply with it is so that your insurance company can't bail out on you.

Oryx

ninja900 wrote:

The Gardai do not have legal powers to ask for proof of restriction.

Actually, there is no proof of restriction, because the so-called "restriction cert" is just a letter on bike shop headed notepaper (or a convincing photoshop job) claiming that restrictors were fitted, but which may or may not actually have been fitted, and which may or may not have been removed later.

There is no official document to prove restriction even for factory restricted bikes.

The Gardai do not have the legal power to put a bike on a dyno etc. to prove power output, there are only 2 -3 bike dynos in the country, dynos vary wildly anyway and there is no legal definition of how the weight is supposed to be measured.

So the law's a complete ass, but it doesn't really matter as restriction doesn't reduce accidents even in countries which do attempt to enforce the law. EU bureaucratic stupidity at its best.

The only reason to comply with it is so that your insurance company can't bail out on you.

In one of the cases Im aware of, the impression I got was that the gardai were on the guys case anyway. I cant go into details but he had a guard call to his house as a follow up. He had to get his bike weighed/dyno'ed to put an end to it. So it may not be in their remit, but they are doing it.

And I agree, the law is an ass.

And Hondas PW calculations always make me scratch my head.:)

Hotblack Desiato

KatieK wrote:

He had to get his bike weighed/dyno'ed to put an end to it.

He should have told them to either charge him with an offence (with no evidence) or eff off.
The Gardai do not have the power to request anyone to do this.
They have specific powers to force you to produce insurance, licence, tax, but anything else it's up to them to prove you're guilty, not for you to prove you're innocent.
Did the Gardai pay for the dyno run, fuel used inc. travel to and from? What if the engine grenaded on the dyno?
It's all very suspect and bears a lot of urban legend hallmarks tbh (if it's not one, it should be!)

Edit: Unless the Gardai is present at the dyno run checking frame nos. etc. (And what about dyno calibration?) it's useless as evidence anyway.
The guy was legal, so why were the Gardai harassing him anyway?

murphaph

I'm not gonna bother with restriction. If I lived up north or whatever I would, but not here. If I have a major smash and CN try to bail on me, they'll also have to prove the HP output of the bike at the wheel, and if the bike is fcuked then they'll do well to dyno it Just belt the sh!te out of the engine with a sledge and that'll put an end to any feckin dyno.

Like ninja says though, calibration issues etc. No two dynos will be the same. It's all way too muddy for CN (RSA) to bail on you if you ask me. The law allows a PW ratio which is a clear error in the legislation, all other EU countries require both the HP AND P/W qualifications to be met :rolleyes: This loophole means it always comes down to weight and as the law doesn't specify what weight, you could claim laden and add your own bodyweight to the calculation. If it's tight, eat a few donuts and you'll sail through the court case

Law's an ass. Take advantage of this silliness until (if ever) it's challenged n court and a precedent is set. MAG are rightly against this blanket restriction which has had no effect on safety figures anyway.

Oryx

ninja900 wrote:

He should have told them to either charge him with an offence (with no evidence) or eff off.
The Gardai do not have the power to request anyone to do this.
They have specific powers to force you to produce insurance, licence, tax, but anything else it's up to them to prove you're guilty, not for you to prove you're innocent.
Did the Gardai pay for the dyno run, fuel used inc. travel to and from? What if the engine grenaded on the dyno?
It's all very suspect and bears a lot of urban legend hallmarks tbh (if it's not one, it should be!)

Edit: Unless the Gardai is present at the dyno run checking frame nos. etc. (And what about dyno calibration?) it's useless as evidence anyway.
The guy was legal, so why were the Gardai harassing him anyway?

Spoke to the guy himself. I think there was something personal going on. Local guard, ongoing stuff etc. But tis real

Hotblack Desiato

Sigh - just another corrupt Garda abusing his powers... Wasn't there a (female, FG I think) TD a few years ago who made the mistake of making a complaint against a garda, so of course the whole local station decided to make her life a misery and stop her car practically every time she left her home. Eventually they got her on a blown taillight bulb. When did you ever hear of someone being taken to court over a blown bulb?

MunsterCycling

Then she should of told them she was on her way to the Dail. Case closed.

Idleater

The only problem with the whole Factory Restriction/Restriction malarky is if you have a reduced premium because they take whatever restriction into account and then you swap it out and drive unrestricted, then they may pursue you. They will probably cover you 3rd party but anything else they may contest and perhaps if they can show it, pursue you against the 3rd party monies.

The ways of checking for restriction do not require a dyno run for a crashed motorcycle, they could just check the carbs for the washers or check the ECU.

These are unlikely to be damaged and or lost beyond recognition in an accident and very easy to organise (the search) because the vehicles involved would be in the hands of Gardai/Insurers.

L.

Hotblack Desiato

MunsterCycling wrote:

Then she should of told them she was on her way to the Dail. Case closed.

Nice try but I believe that only works with arrestable offences, not ones where you get a summons later.
Also, the Dail does have very long holidays...

Hotblack Desiato

nereid wrote:

The only problem with the whole Factory Restriction/Restriction malarky is if you have a reduced premium because they take whatever restriction into account and then you swap it out and drive unrestricted, then they may pursue you.

This is why factory restriction is so hard / uneconomic to remove (usually cheaper to sell on and buy a full power bike) and why you don't get a reduced premium on aftermarket restrictors.

The ways of checking for restriction do not require a dyno run for a crashed motorcycle, they could just check the carbs for the washers or check the ECU.

Your insurers could do that, yes.
The Gardai can't because removing a restrictor is not an offence. Riding on a restricted licence on a bike breaking the power/weight ratio is, so to convict you they must produce evidence of the power the bike was producing at the time you were riding it. The cannot do this with a crashed bike, case closed.

Let's say you had a 50hp bike with a misfire or a worn out engine and was within the power to weight ratio as a result of this. The bike would be illegal in perfect running order but with a knackered engine you're legal. Absence of a restrictor does not mean the law was broken.

murphaph

nereid wrote:

The only problem with the whole Factory Restriction/Restriction malarky is if you have a reduced premium because they take whatever restriction into account and then you swap it out and drive unrestricted, then they may pursue you. They will probably cover you 3rd party but anything else they may contest and perhaps if they can show it, pursue you against the 3rd party monies.

The ways of checking for restriction do not require a dyno run for a crashed motorcycle, they could just check the carbs for the washers or check the ECU.

These are unlikely to be damaged and or lost beyond recognition in an accident and very easy to organise (the search) because the vehicles involved would be in the hands of Gardai/Insurers.

L.

But this thread is about aftermarket restriction, which isn't accepted by either insurer as a qualifier for a premium reduction and because FR is built into the bike's core and too expensive to bother removing, there's no real point here.

Your insurance premium will only be based on a restriction if it's FR and nobody would go to the bother of removing it. FR bikes have their own inherent value as they are 'learner legal'.

So again, I'd repeat that the insurer would have to prve that you didn't have a licence to ride the bike you were on and to do so would have to dyno the bike and even then, you could claim laden weight etc. They'll just pay up, probably even pay comp policies too I reckon.

Idleater

murphaph wrote:

But this thread is about aftermarket restriction, which isn't accepted by either insurer as a qualifier for a premium reduction...
...
...
So again, I'd repeat that the insurer would have to prve that you didn't have a licence to ride the bike you were on and to do so would have to dyno the bike and even then, you could claim laden weight etc. They'll just pay up, probably even pay comp policies too I reckon.

Yeah, sorry about that. I agree with you on the after market "Restriction" especially since the insurers don't take account of it, it seems to be a purely legislitave "on paper" stipulation that has not been entirely thought through.

This is probably because those drafting legislation do not communicate with bikers, bike organisations (eg MAG/RoSPA) and even the Gardai. What they seem to do is transcode UK legislation into Irish Legislation because they (correctly) presume they are similar enough to apply to the small percentage of the population that is affected by this legislation.

L.

Hotblack Desiato

Well like every other EU country it's copied from the EU directive (albeit with a typo!)

The UK has L-plates for bikes, short waiting lists for tests, and only allows provisional licence holders to ride 125s so there's a huge incentive there to pass your test asap. They also have Direct Access which gets you straight onto an unrestricted licence, if you choose to do it (training course required.)

We have ridiculous waiting times for the test, along with a good number of riders who just can't be ar5ed passing it anyway (I have met riders 10+ years on a provisional who just can't be bothered), and, of course, no direct access, so the proportion of riders affected by restriction is much higher and they are affected by it for a much longer time.

murphaph

Yes, it's that all important typo in the legislation. I wonder, if the typo is in irish legislation, then I hold a valid irish, and hence EU licence to ride whatever I like (practically) so I wonder if you were from NI, where they don't have direct access, would it not make sense to get yourself an irish licence,then ride about NI on your 60HP bike with impunity. Afterall, you would hold an EU licence to do so. I know that the comparison will be made with minimum age of drivers (for example a 17 yo from here with a full B licence can't drive in a country with a minimum age of 18) but I don't think that's quite the same. You couldn't be prosecuted under NI legislation wrt and Irish licence, and the irish legislation is defective so you can't be prosecuted under that.

MojoMaker

It's not a typo in the legislation - wishful thinking;)

It states clearly in the legislation you can't exceed one condition (33bhp) OR the other (0.16). The use of OR with two negative conditions means both must be satisfied. So basically the 25kw/33bhp rule must always be applied.

Here's an email below that I received from the department of the Environment (driver licensing section) explaining for the record the exact application of the law...

Feel free to email or call Evelyn Tuffy for confirmation anytime btw. This information is a matter of public record.

---

---

Original Message

---

From: "Evelyn Tuffy"
To: xxxx_xxxxxxxxx@ireland.com
Subject: Fwd: RE: Driver licencing question.
Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2005 16:45:14 +0100


Dave,

I wish to confirm that motorcyclists driving on a restricted category A
licence must comply with both conditions i.e. engine power output must
not exceed 25kw and power/weight ratio must not exceed 0.16kw/kg.

Regards,

Evelyn Tuffy
Driver Licensing Section

**********************************************************************
Is faoi run agus chun usaide an te no an aonan ata luaite leis, a
sheoltar an riomhphost seo agus aon comhad ata nasctha leis. Ma
bhfuair tu an riomhphost seo tri earraid, dean teagmhail le
bhainisteoir an chorais.

Deimhnitear leis an bhfo-nota seo freisin go bhfuil an
teachtaireacht riomhphoist seo scuabtha le bogearrai frithviorais
chun viorais riomhaire a aimsiu.

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom
they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please
notify the system manager.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept
by anti-virus software for the presence of computer viruses.
**********************************************************************

From: Department of Transport <info@transport.ie>
To: 'xxxx xxxxxxxxx' <xxxx_xxxxxxxxx@ireland.com>
Subject: RE: Driver licencing question.
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 15:33:16 +0100


I wish to acknowledge receipt of your query, I am forwarding it on to Driver Licensing

---

Original Message

---

From: xxxx xxxxxxxxx [mailto:xxxx_xxxxxxxxx@ireland.com]
Sent: 31 August 2005 12:47
To: Department of Transport
Subject: Driver licencing question.


Hi there,

I have a query that I'm hoping you can help with. I am the administrator of an Irish motorcycle website (www.biker.ie) with several hundred members. I regularly receive questions from members regarding exact clarification concerning the new (since 1999) restricted 'A' motorcycle licence. Specifically I have members asking about the ambiguity surrounding the requirement to abide by a restriction of 25kw and/or a bike with a power-to-weight ratio less than 0.16kw/kg.

The ambiguity arises where members think they can breach the 25kw restriction as long as their motorcycles fall under a p/w ratio of less than 0.16kw/kg. This would allow a rider to operate a considerably more powerful bike (>25kw) as long as the bike was suitably heavy.

It is my understanding that the restriction rule (badly written as it is) should be interpreted as having to comply with both restrictions - it is not an either/or situation - i.e. bike must be less than 25kw and p/w ratio must be less than 0.16. Not bike CAN be over 25kw as long as p/w ratio is not broken. To my knowledge the same law is in effect across the EU and is interpreted everywhere else as both conditions need to be satisifed.

For myself, and the large biking community I represent can you definitively state for the record exactly which way the restricted 'A' licence requirement should be applied. This would greatly benefit our members and the motorcycling community at large and would significantly reduce the risk of any of our members unwittingly falling foul of the law in this regard.

Many thanks,
Dave.


************************************************************

The information in this email is confidential and may be

legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee.

Access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised.


If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure,

copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to

be taken in reliance on it is prohibited and may be

unlawful.

***********************************************************

murphaph

I don't know mojo, I accept that driver licencing believe that the law covers it, but a judge has never presided over a test case of this law. Here it is in full;

17. A person granted a provisional licence for the first time on or after the commencement of these Regulations to drive vehicles in category A and who on obtaining a certificate of competency in that category is subsequently granted a driving licence in that category, shall, until a period of two years after the grant of the latter licence, be restricted to driving only those vehicles in the said category which have a power output not exceeding 25 kW or a power/weight ratio not exceeding 0.16 kW/kg, or in the case of vehicles in the said category with sidecars, with a power/weight ratio not exceeding 0.16 kW/kg. (my emphasis)

Surely it should use and 'and' instead of an 'or'. My legalese isn't as good as my english though. There's a 'legal' forum on boards somewhere isn't there?

a_ominous

I believe the reason for the OP's confusion (and everyone else's, including me!) is that Irish motorcycle licencing law is supposed to be the same other EU member countries.
But the wording in the Irish Statute use "or" as the conjunction in the clause between power and power/weight.

The meaning of "and" and "or" does not change in statues from normal meaning.

As murphaph said, a test case should clarify the situation. Or lobby your local TD to get the wording of the law changed.

Simplest thing for anyone to do is to stick to the spirit of the law, 25kW and PW <= 0.16 kW/kg, for provisional and restriction period.

MojoMaker

The key to the explanation lies in the use of the double negative, manifested in the use of the words "must not"....here's a simple analogy....

Scenario A: Use of positive language
You can comply with condition 1 or condition 2 (one of the conditions must be satisfied)

Scenario B: Use of negative language
You can't break condition A or condition B (both conditions must be satisfied)

The wording of the legislation here is very definitely a scenario B. Use of a double negative automatically turns an OR statement into an AND statement (for the geeks among you that, like me, studied logic ).

The trouble arises when 90% of the population reads the statement literally and not logically. As a solicitor a test case of this nature would be thrown out of court. The judge is not going to make allowances for a member of the public's failure to grasp basic English. The conditions that are printed on Irish licences are the same across the EU (without adaption) as they follow a standard EU template. Ireland is the only country where the common man chooses to interpret the law "differently" - having said that, without DAS we are inclined to clutch at straws sometimes.

murphaph

I'd like to see the UK SI on this matter. That'd be interesting because the DVLA website uses an 'and' where we have an 'or', however this is an interpretation of their law, not the actual legislation.

Hotblack Desiato

MojoMaker wrote:

Scenario A: Use of positive language
You can comply with condition 1 or condition 2 (one of the conditions must be satisfied)

Actually, that IS how the legislation is worded.

You can be under 25kW OR under PTW 0.16kW/kg

That's not a double negative.

Suggesting otherwise is logically incorrect and MAG Ireland have legal advice to support this. I've been explaining this to people since 1999 and if I had a euro for every person convinced in the same way you are, I'd be in petrol money for a good while.

Scenario B: Use of negative language
You can't break condition A or condition B (both conditions must be satisfied)

That's not how it's worded.

shall... be restricted to driving only those vehicles in the said category which have a power output not exceeding 25 kW or a power/weight ratio not exceeding 0.16 kW/kg

Basically: Shall drive vehicles <=25kw or <=0.16kW/kg

It's NOT this:

Shall NOT drive vehicles >25kW or >0.16kW/kg

If it was the second one above, then you would be correct, but it's not.

I'm not the least bit surprised Dept. Environment got it wrong, after all they made the cock-up in the legislation in the first place (wtf is she doing replying with an ireland.com email address anyway!?!?)

Department of Transport wrote:

http://www.transport.ie/roads/licensing/faqs/index.asp?lang=ENG&loc=1838

Q. Please explain the category A (motorcycle) restriction?
A. Anyone granted a first provisional licence in category A on or after December 17, 1999 is restricted to driving motorcycles with an engine power output not exceeding 25kw or a power/weight ratio not exceeding 0.16kw/kg. This restriction applies for the duration of all provisional licences and for two years after taking out a full licence (not two years from date of test).

I don't see how this paragraph could be at all open to interpretation. It's clearly, absolutely, 100% OR.

Sigh. Perhaps we can put the correct interpretation in a prominent sticky and make disagreeing with it a bannable offence

murphaph

Yep, I see it as a simple A OR B, not a NOT A OR B I have a degree in electronic engineering too

"you must comply with" is the same as "you are restricted to". They are both 'positive' statements. As Ninja states, the legislation does not state "you must not drive greater than 25kW etc." It in fact states what you must do, ie, a positive set of statements.

MojoMaker

No skin off my nose boys, I guess the rest of Europe is wrong too. Fair enough. One law for them, another for us.

Btw, since you brought it up, Mr Finnegan from MAG is well aware exactly how the law stands on this. Ever wonder why they don't openly challenge it eh?

murphaph

MojoMaker wrote:

No skin off my nose boys, I guess the rest of Europe is wrong too. Fair enough. One law for them, another for us.

Why would you suppose the rest of Europe is wrong? The EU directive was just that, a directive. It was and is not a law. Making laws to comply with the directive is up to the individual member states. We just seem to have written it poorly. That's why I'd like to see the UK's take on this.

As for MAG not challenging it, well, why would they? It currently works in the bikers' favour.

Slaanesh

Interesting discussion guys.

I got my full license last december. On the license, in the unrestricted section I have the full 10 years.

They can't even issue licenses correctly, I believe another person on boards had the same thing happen. I wonder where I stand legally with this.

Dr Pepper

What's the point in obeying a law that cannot be interpreted clearly even if you have degrees in english, boolean algebra and law?

I'm happy enough to interpret the law as it suits me in this case since it is so ridiculously unclear!

Has anyone here ever even heard of anyone who has been prosecuted/penalised or refused an insurance claim for driving a bike that was outside the restriction requirements of their licence?? (And I'm not talking about your 3rd cousin, twice removed's girlfriend's uncle's barber ... An actual case!)

Hotblack Desiato

MojoMaker wrote:

No skin off my nose boys

Okey doke as Bill Herlihy would say

Mr Finnegan from MAG is well aware exactly how the law stands on this. Ever wonder why they don't openly challenge it eh?

Herb Finnegan passed away last year, RIP.
As murphaph said, MAG never challenged it as it works in riders' favour at the moment. Lack of direct access is a bummer but the government is (a) dead set against it and (b) can't make one test system work never mind two.