Driving test has become a lot easier

buckfast4me

Is it just me, or does anyone else think this is the case. Everyone I know who has done it lately has passed first time (Know personally about 8 people since november last year) Myself included, and I wouldn't even say I'm that good a driver. My girlfriend was only driving a few months and she passed first time. Are they making it easier to clear the backlog?

Glenman

This is possible I suppose.
I also think that people are a lot better prepared than they used to be as well. The June deadline is fast approaching and people want to pass it before then and are therefore preparing well and getting a good few lessons. I think that if you prepare well you will more than likely pass it unless you are unlucky on the day.
Up to now a lot of people were sitting the test just to be able to get another provisional.

wil

buckfast4me wrote: »

Is it just me, or does anyone else think this is the case. Everyone I know who has done it lately has passed first time (Know personally about 8 people since november last year) Myself included, and I wouldn't even say I'm that good a driver. My girlfriend was only driving a few months and she passed first time. Are they making it easier to clear the backlog?

Officially they will deny it of course, but internal directions are probably along the lines of - we have a backlog to clear so you know what to do.
Will it have any real effect on the quality of drivers on our roads - probably not - they were driving around unrestricted for years regardless, so now they get a licence and well drive around unrestricted with slight regard of ability.

death1234567

buckfast4me wrote: »

Are they making it easier to clear the backlog?

Yes. What did you expect? Its the civil service after all.

stovelid

I did a normal test and one with a contractor. The former acted like <SNIP> for the whole test; the latter was friendly and relaxed.

This can have a big affect on the day.

Royale with Cheese

I did mine last summer and passed just about, one more fail and i would failed the test. I reckon I definitely would have failed had I done it a year previously. Of course they're going to make it at least a little easier to clear the backlog. They can't actually enforce the accompanied driver rule if there are hundreds of thousands of people not being able to drive because this country is too inept to arrange a driving test without a 10 month waiting list.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Wishbone Ash

Glenman wrote: »

people are a lot better prepared than they used to be as well

I would tend to agree.

A lot of my work colleagues are in the younger age bracket. Over the years, many have had to do the driving test but it is only in recent months that I see them bringing the ROTR to work, studying it and asking questions.

During the past 20 years, many had a cavalier attitude towards the test. That seems to have changed.

wil

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

I would tend to agree.

A lot of my work colleagues are in the younger age bracket. Over the years, many have had to do the driving test but it is only in recent months that I see them bringing the ROTR to work, studying it and asking questions.

During the past 20 years, many had a cavalier attitude towards the test. That seems to have changed.

I am a little more sceptical. It takes a lot longer than 6 months to change the attitudes of generations and availability of ready cash (as some earlier posts might indicate).
Most are being forced to consider opening their books by the scare possibilities of not being able to drive to work. But I havent seen any particular increase in the number of learning cars on the road. That is the real indicator. People still spend all their money on getting new cars, but a tiny fraction on passing the test. How many do more than 10* real lessons? (*about a quarter of the average number of real lessons required to pass in the UK)

Further confirmation
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=55680116&postcount=7

cazzy

I think its definitely seems that its got easier to pass. Quite a few people I know have sat the test in the last month or two and all but one have passed first time. This would never have been the case a few years ago. I can only imagine that the testers are under great pressure to reduce the waiting list and therefore may be closing their eyes for part of the test !!! I could be completely wrong - its just based on how many people I know that seem to be passing.

bluefirefly

i think it has become easier. But would think they would still fail you if you do something REALLY wrong ,like hit the kerb or driving dangerously per say.

I knew two people on work that failed their test just a month before i sit mine. One has a full license in china,and have been driving for ages. He failed because his reaction for hazard(a car drove in front of him on a roundabout,and he braked) The other guy only had 3 lessons and drove for about 4 months,he drove in front of a car on a roundabout got a grade 3,then when he do the Reverse around the corner he hit the kerb..so the tester told him to go back to the centre!!(prob less than 10mins driving..)

and i passed mine.had 15 lessons in total and was driving for about 10months.
But i think it come to luck as well. Because no one drove in front of me, no cyclist, nothing parked where they're not suppose to park at.

oh and i do think more people are getting lessons. Because i see lots of new driving schools around And before my tests most driving schools were fully booked.

oh and the guy that had a full license in china did a cancellation test.and passed.....did his test WITHOUT an L-plate!!

Julesie

I can't see what the motivation for the contractor testers would be for clearing the backlog any quicker. Surely if the backlog is gone so is their job.

Holsten

I think it has alot to do with luck aswell.

You could drive perfectly and have some stupid unlucky thing happen to give you a grade 3.

I passed my test. I know I wouldn't have put in half the effort into passing, only for the June deadline.
Nothing so clarifys the mind as the threat of imminent execution.

bigpinkelephant

The thing I don't get is why people were so happy to trundle along from one provisional to the next before. Now fair enough there are plenty of people who had not applied for a test because they didn't feel ready. But I am talking about the people who just didn't bother. Why not apply for a full licence? It's an achievement, it proves you have some level of competency as a driver, and it lowers your insurance costs. What's not to like?

bigpinkelephant

bigpinkelephant wrote: »

The thing I don't get is why people were so happy to trundle along from one provisional to the next before. Now fair enough there are plenty of people who had not applied for a test because they didn't feel ready. But I am talking about the people who just didn't bother. Why not apply for a full licence? It's an achievement, it proves you have some level of competency as a driver, and it lowers your insurance costs. What's not to like?

Because we are lazy, the difference to insurance is very little 60 euro in my case and I for one don't see it as an achievement.

Wishbone Ash

bigpinkelephant wrote: »

and it lowers your insurance costs

It may lower insurance costs in younger drivers but it won't make any difference for those a bit older. A 40 year old on a provisional will pay the same as a 40 year old on a full licence - (all else being equal).

bigpinkelephant

Moonbaby wrote: »

I for one don't see it as an achievement.

Why not?

Petrolium Hat

death1234567 wrote: »

Yes. What did you expect? Its the civil service after all.

Correction it's the public service, civil service is something different. Look it up if your confused. On the topic, I'm sure they are told officially the standard has to stay the same, but an awful lot of "borderline" people are let through the net. As people as saying it's the same folks on the road, jsut with slightly cheaper insurance to pay.

John Mason

Well according to my instructor, the Ballymun Test Centre (contractor), are really easy going and have a much higher pass rate then the Finglas Centre, who are supposedly really harsh.

which is great for me, as i have my test in finglas :(

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

bigpinkelephant

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I would be for the "achievement" part anyway- I will be very proud of myself if I pass my test. Firstly, because 8 months ago I had only applied for my theory test (which I rescheduled twice because I wasn't prepared!) and had no interest at all in cars, driving or anything to do with them. I only applied for my provisional because I had to- I was looking for a job and had to turn down a couple because they were inaccessible without either getting a car or moving house.

I only started getting lessons 6 months ago also, which is another reason I want to pass first time- most people I know were driving years before they passed.

Also when I was in college I always had some sort of goal- exams etc- but nothing now, so this is something to aim for!

ztoical

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I certainly don't care about the achievement thats for sure. I've no interest in driving but after moving from New York with fantastic 24 hour public transport to just outside Kilkenny I'd no choice but to learn. I need to get to Dublin, Galway and Cork for work and usually have to carry alot of framed art work with me - I have tired to take public transport as much as I can but its become a nightmare - Dublin is the only one theres direct bus/train connections to and they are always late. To get anywhere else I have to take several buses and sit for hours waiting for connections. Normally I'm a big support of public transport but when the bus from Kilkenny to Thurles, which is a 30 - 35 min drive, takes an hour and 30mins you just get pissed off. I'd like to pass my test alright just to have it out of the way.

Wishbone Ash

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

And not forgetting that a person with a full licence may drive unaccompanied and that any job that involves driving usually requires the employee to have a full licence in the relevant category.

wil

Moonbaby wrote: »

Because we are lazy, the difference to insurance is very little 60 euro in my case and I for one don't see it as an achievement.

Thats very sad, very typical of so many Irish drivers but ultimately very sad.

To answer bigpinkelephants question more as I see it, it is not so much that people are particularly any more lazy here than anywhere else (dont be so critical of yourself Moonbaby), it is more of the case that the system allowed people to do just that, drive unrestricted regardless of ability or qualification. Why would you bother to do a test for something that made little or no difference to the outcome.
Whereas in other countries you did the test in order to be allowed to drive, here you did the test to get a piece of paper of little value. It made no difference to anybody whether they got it or not, they could still drive to (or even for) work in the morning.
I know people in other countries who failed 10 or more tests and have no other option but to cycle to work, or be driven by their wives. Thats where a licence means something, a licence can mean getting a job, vital for your career, essential for your daily life.
When I passed my test (not here) it was one of the best feelings of acheivement. Colleagues still learning had to be driven or accompanied to work, I had freedom.
That is why you felt no sense of acheivement, because until now an Irish licence wasnt worth the paper it was written on and I for one will hang on to my "valued" foreign licence as long as I am legally allowed to.

bluefirefly

wil wrote: »

it is more of the case that the system allowed people to do just that, drive unrestricted regardless of ability or qualification. Why would you bother to do a test for something that made little or no difference to the outcome.
Whereas in other countries you did the test in order to be allowed to drive, here you did the test to get a piece of paper of little value. It made no difference to anybody whether they got it or not, they could still drive to (or even for) work in the morning.
.

i agree. Its not the people thats the main problem, its the rules. In most countries, one cannot drive on the road before they get a full license.
In Hong Kong people go to driving schools beforehand. And they would usually be really big, and have a large ground in a private place where everythings is built like the "real" road. So you get use to it and then bring you out on the roads. I think this way is safer.But i'd say the cost is very high too because one woule need loads of lessons as you cant drive on the your own and practice like you could do here.
And in France you could only apply the driving test of your Instuctor thinks you're ready for the test.

I still think the learner permit isnt a good idea. Because its almost the same rule as a provisional license(part from need to be accompanied for 2nd) ,if the gardai arent going to enforce that(which of course i dont know will they) its just going to be the same.

The fact that Insurance company allows a person that is on First provisional to buy insurance as the only named driver isnt very appropriate too. Fair enough you probably do have someone to sit beside you..but all the time?And they dont ask do your parents or partner have a full license..

Anyway.. my point being...the system should change.But please no prompt decisions where everyone's going to complain!

joey54

In the past number of weeks I know of a number of people who have passed their tests here and to be honest their standard of driving would not be up to a level where they should be in the car on their own, let alone have their full license!

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that everyone who passes their test in one of these centres is not a good driver, but I do feel that the standard you need to obtain in order to pass is not as high as RSA test centres.

For example, over the last 3 weeks I know 5 people who have sat their driving test in the Baldoyle and Ballymun SGS centres and passed.
I would only deem one of these drivers safe on the road.
The others fail to use their mirrors, indicate and most of all take huge risks in the car.
I.e. they have very poor judgement and regularly pull out in front of other cars causing other drivers to brake suddenly.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I feel that these private test centres need to be monitored more closely to ensure that the standard of safety on our roads is not compromised for the sake of clearing the back log of tests.

Sorry for the ramble but I'm actually worried about their poor standard of driving on display at the moment.

Joey

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

masseyno9

I passed my test on thurs morning in an SGS centre, having failed in an RSA centre a couple of months ago. I honestly thought i'd failed in ths SGS centre on thursday, but having said that I did a much better test in january in the RSA centre, which i did fail.

I have a feeling that SGS may have been told to speed up the clearing of the backlog, to reflect well on the government (or whoever is in charge) who promised to reform ths sytem. Just a thought though.

Nov2006

Joey54 are you a driving instructor? Just that I think it is hard to judge other peoples driving unless you travel with them over a long period. I seriously doubt that most SGS testing centres are being lenient to get through the backlog. If anything I think in the past the RSA test centres have been too hard.
Maybe the SGS testers and happier people cos from what I have heard and read on this board some of the RSA testers are grumpy people who tend to make the driver more nervous.

If you are right in what you say about SGS centres then that is pretty harmful to our already dangerous roads. Have my test tomorrow at an SGS so will let you know if I think they are lenient or not.!

Red Alert

I definitely found the SGS route challenging but fair. People who sit the test in SGS centres in general have been on the waiting list for a bit and have had the opportunity to change their test centre or time. I'm sure there's some connection there for a start, and in fact this was mentioned in some report a while back as a factor. Allowing time/date/centre changes allow people to schedule their preparation a lot better.

Another thing too is that all the SGS testers have been trained in the relatively recent past and are probably quite consistent with respect to each other - you're unlikely to have an exceptionally mean or generous marker. Also you're going to have a relatively consistent route and level of difficulty. I definitely had one easy RSA marker and another hard RSA marker in two tests which I failed.

I would imagine though that it has more to do with the candidates than anything else.

Wishbone Ash

Threads merged.

Yellow Snow

I passed in SGS Newbridge a few weeks back (first time). I had a clean sheet at the end of the test! I thought I made one or two silly mistakes during the test so it was a huge surprise not to get a single fault and it had me convinced that SGS go really easy on people.

BUT.... I was uber prepared for it though. Had been driving 4-5 hours a day for the guts of a year (drive a lot for work) and found a brilliant instructor to kick out my bad habits. I HAD to pass before the changes come in in June and I think a lot of people are in the same boat. I was one of the people who panicked and applied over the bank holiday weekend when the Government decided to scare the sh!t out of provisional drivers.

Most of the people passing now applied around the same time so I think the higher pass rate has less to do with the test being easier and more to do with the fact that a hell of a lot of provisional drivers took their fingers out and finally started to A) actually apply for their test and took it seriously by getting lessons and being well prepared.

My instructor said he has never been so busy with new clients. He's turning people away at the moment. So maybe the Governments scaremongering tactics actually did work and we will have a new batch of better drivers passing their tests and making the roads a whole lot safer to be on! It's either that or maybe I'm just better than Michael Schumacher (Joke, my real learning starts now.... )

NiSmO

This post has been deleted.

Wishbone Ash

Thread merged.

kerry4sam

Do SGS and RSA use the same routes when conducting the tests? or have they their own separate route?

Chakar

I hope I get a fair tester when I take my test after reading this thread. That's all I'm saying.

Moonbeam

Out of the 6 people I know that did their driving tests this year 5 passed, 3 were people sitting it for the first time,3 had sat it a few times.
The new drivers are safe but in experienced and went the correct route with lessons and things and deserved to pass but whether they would under the old regime I dunno.
One of the ones who sat if before is a grand driver and no idea why he failed previously,the one that failed did no prep for the test at all.
The pass rate definately appear to have gone up.
I only know of one case where someone passed that really should not be on the roads.

squishywishy

Nov2006 wrote: »

I seriously doubt that most SGS testing centres are being lenient to get through the backlog. If anything I think in the past the RSA test centres have been too hard.
Maybe the SGS testers and happier people cos from what I have heard and read on this board some of the RSA testers are grumpy people who tend to make the driver more nervous.

Couldnt agree with you more!! I failed an RSA test in February because the tester turned me into a nervous wreck by triple checking my age, complaining about the way my provisional had been made, not allowing me a nano second to think about my technical checks, road signs etc and making me stop and restart my reverse around the corner cos HE wasnt ready.

On tuesday i had an SGS test and passed with a near clean sheet, ive only had two lessons since my previous test and i drove the exact same as on my first test. SGS tester was full of compliments and told me im an excellent driver. From the very start i was at ease and felt totally in control. He even explained where and when id picked up the faults i had, which is more than the RSA would do when i had failed and needed to know how.

To me it seems some RSA testers enjoy failing people and that is very wrong. SGS have done a great job and deserve praise.

Id gladly sit another SGS test as its a fair shot which is all anybody wants.

LDriver

wil wrote: »

Will it have any real effect on the quality of drivers on our roads - .

Doubt it there will still be 'full licence' holders who bought their licences during the amnesty, never did a test and do not know where their indicators are........
LDriver

Wishbone Ash

LDriver wrote: »

Doubt it there will still be 'full licence' holders who bought their licences during the amnesty, never did a test and do not know where their indicators are........
LDriver

But those drivers are statistically the safest drivers on our roads while young male drivers, who know it all, are statistically the most dangerous.

LDriver

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

But those drivers are statistically the safest drivers on our roads while young male drivers, who know it all, are statistically the most dangerous.

How can they be safer when they driver without care? what is the difference betwen them and someone driving for years [not the young know alls] who did not buy the licence at the amnesty. Such people never did a test and i would challenge them to do the theory and practical test

Wishbone Ash

LDriver wrote: »

How can they be safer when they driver without care?

Have you ever heard of insurance claim statistics?

Middle age drivers make the least amount of claims hence the low cost of insurance.

Young male drivers make the most amount of claims hence their high cost of insurance.

Are you seriously suggesting that those who make the least amount of claims are statistically more dangerous that those who make the most claims?

Wishbone Ash

LDriver wrote: »

who did not buy the licence at the amnesty

....You also appear to be confusing the 'amnesty' licence holders with the pre-test era licence holders.

LDriver

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

....You also appear to be confusing the 'amnesty' licence holders with the pre-test era licence holders.

No I mean the people who did not do a test but upgraded to full during amnesty. By what qualification are they full licence holders? The bought the licence as money was the only thing necesary during the amnesty

LDriver

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Are you seriously suggesting that those who make the least amount of claims are statistically more dangerous that those who make the most claims?

No I am simply saying thereis no difference between a driver who is driving for years who did not pass a test and someone who bought a licence during the amnesty. My point is not about stats but simply that the amnesty drivers are not full licence holders by the standard required of LDrivers today - in that they did not pass a test

Wishbone Ash

LDriver wrote: »

No I mean the people who did not do a test but upgraded to full during amnesty

The people driving prior to 1964 didn't do a test either.

LDriver wrote:

The bought the licence as money was the only thing necesary during the amnesty

Are you familiar with the amnesty - it doesn't appear so!

Wishbone Ash

LDriver wrote: »

My point is not about stats but simply that the amnesty drivers are not full licence holders by the standard required of LDrivers today - in that they did not pass a test

Neither did the pre 1964 motorists! Why are you continually referring to the amnesty. Many more people obtained their licence pre 1964 than during the amnesty.

gaeilgegrinds

Without a doubt easier. Know nobody who has failed recently & some are appalling drivers. Doing the rest of us an injustice.

bigpinkelephant

This is all music to my ears, I have my test with SGS on the 26th... I better pass!!! I have had 4 extra lessons so far and am due 2 more and a pre-test on the day!!!

LDriver

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Why are you continually referring to the amnesty.

Because I am fed up of so called full licence holders some of whom are only full licence in name, including the pre 1964 one com plain about how 'they' when they pass their easier test they will not be 'real' full licence drivers and are not as good as them or as safe on the road as them

You are right i do not know much about amnesty only that the people who got their licences then are not full licence holders by definition of the test which they use to compare other road users with them. ditto pre 1964 drivers

The only test forthem was if they had money for the licence so they have no right to complain about LDrivers.