Learner Driver Convictions.

JP Liz

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/1400-drivers-caught-breaking-lplate-ban-1611657.html

SOME 1,400 learner drivers were caught driving without L-plates or unaccompanied by an experienced driver in just eight weeks after new restrictions on provisional drivers were introduced.

Gardai stopped the drivers within two months of the law banning people on learner permits from driving alone coming into force last July.
Drivers flouting the ban face being hit with fines for the offence -- and could receive fines of up to €1,000 or jail terms of up to three years for a second offence. Their insurance could also be invalidated if they crash, safety bosses warned.

The new learner permit system came into force on July 1 last and yesterday chief executive of the Road Safety Authority, Noel Brett, told the Dail Transport Committee that hundreds of people had been stopped.
"The vast majority of young drivers are very serious and committed," he said. "There is a cohort outside that. They are the minority.
"It is an offence to drive without L-plates or unaccompanied. In the eight weeks after the law changed, 1,400 drivers were detected. Young people, particularly men, remain most at risk." Gardai have insisted that the new laws were being implemented, but have not released figures on the number of drivers stopped. The learner permit system replaced the provisional licence, and gardai said the changes would be policed in a common sense manner which would include advice and cautions to motorists caught driving unaccompanied.

Insurance sources said last night that while injured parties would be covered in a crash, some insurance companies might not cover learners who drove unaccompanied.

Meanwhile, Mr Brett also said that road collisions cost the taxpayer almost €1.4bn a year. A fatal crash cost €2.9m, a serious collision €386,000, while a minor smash incurred a bill of €38,000. Last night the AA called on the Government to improve the system for scrapping end-of-life vehicles to end the practice of "cheap old bangers" being sold.

MOD EDIT: Sorry Liz, i just edited your threads title, as i felt it was a bit misleading. Cheers, Al.

jhegarty

JP Liz wrote: »

Their insurance could also be invalidated if they crash, safety bosses warned.

It's really getting on my nerves that they are still spreading that line , even after the insurance companies came out and clarified the situation.

TwoShedsJackson

Topic's a bit misleading, no-one's been jailed, and very likely no-one will be unless they were a serial offender that the cops caught constantly.

In time these laws will come to seem sensible in much the same way the smoking ban in pubs has - I'm assuming you're just pi$$ed off at it because it affects you directly?

andrewh5

jhegarty wrote: »

It's really getting on my nerves that they are still spreading that line , even after the insurance companies came out and clarified the situation.

In the UK insurance is invalidated by law if you drive unaccompanied.We need that here too. UK police also seize cars driven unaccompanied.

No MOT (like NCT) - car seized.
No Tax - car seized.
No Insurance - car seized.
Driving unaccompanied - car seized.

We are far too soft here with motoring law breakers.

cooperla

andrewh5 wrote: »

In the UK insurance is invalidated by law if you drive unaccompanied.We need that here too. UK police also seize cars driven unaccompanied.

No MOT (like NCT) - car seized.
No Tax - car seized.
No Insurance - car seized.
Driving unaccompanied - car seized.

We are far too soft here with motoring law breakers.

I agree with you. If people know that this will happen than there will be a greater level of compliance I think.

I'm guessing the Garda can seize the car for most or all of the above offences though? I had one mate who had his car seized because his tax was out (by a couple months). I wonder if there is any particular reasons they don't do it here more often.

jhegarty

andrewh5 wrote: »

In the UK insurance is invalidated by law if you drive unaccompanied.We need that here too.

That's the last thing we need here.

I don't want to be paying for a new car because an unaccompanied learner hits me.

brian076

Not 100% sure what happens in the UK but from what I hear it's likely that if you're in an accident here the Ins Co. will cover 3rd party damage, but not damage to your own car if you have comp ins.

Alanstrainor

brian076 wrote: »

Not 100% sure what happens in the UK but from what I hear it's likely that if you're in an accident here the Ins Co. will cover 3rd party damage, but not damage to your own car if you have comp ins.

There is a lot of misinformation about insurance and breaking the law, ie driving unaccomp. As Brian noted, third party claims would be covered if an unaccompanied driver were to be involved in an accident, that's ultimately the whole point of insurance. However, if your policy was fully comp, this element may not pay out to you if you're involved in an accident, furthermore, your insurance company can, and would pursue you through the courts for any damage they had to pay out to the third party.
There was a spokesperson from the RSA shortly after the new "laws" were introduced explaining the fact that you would be covered in an accident.
If this weren't true, it could be said that anyone breaking the law, ie by speeding, breaking a traffic light, failing to stop at a stop sign etc etc wouldn't have insurance, and i'm sure you can imagine what havoc that would cause.

timmywex

The majority of the time the gardai dont seize the cars is cause its too bloody damm awkward, even finding space for them and all the paperwork!

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

TwoShedsJackson

jhegarty wrote: »

That's the last thing we need here.

I don't want to be paying for a new car because an unaccompanied learner hits me.

The insurance company here will cover the damage that the learner does to you but they have the right to refuse to cover the damage to their own car, and could technically pursue them for the payout they have to make to you.

Whether they'd do that or not is up to the company at the time.

Cabaal

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Getting and maintaining a car is expensive we all know this, I bought my first car last March and I made sure to buy one with decent safety features such as airbags in various places.

If somebody is dumb enough to buy a deathtrap then leave them off imho

by8auj6csd3ioq

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/1400-drivers-caught-breaking-lplate-ban-1611657.html

pickles_17

Well, I haven't been caught yet....................(maybe its because i'm not driving?)

Our man in Havana

Loads of inaccuarate stuff in that article.

Their insurance could also be invalidated if they crash, safety bosses warned.

Untrue, more RSA rubbish.

Yakult

Bond-007 wrote: »

Loads of inaccuarate stuff in that article.

Untrue, more RSA rubbish.

Was just about to say that.

Even the guards said it to me when they would stop me at a check point. Of course if I said different up to the station for me :rolleyes:

Guy:Incognito

pickles_17 wrote: »

Well, I haven't been caught yet....................(maybe its because i'm not driving?)

You'd want to be incredibly unlucky to be caught driving on Lplates when not driving alright.

Dartz

And thus, the RSA continues to justify it's funding by annoying the hell out of everyon,e and going after easy targets with punitive laws to make it appear like they are doing their job. It's far easier to create the impression that you're working, than to actually work.

/conspiratory cynicism.

Berty

Quote:

Insurance sources said last night that while injured parties would be covered in a crash, some insurance companies might not cover learners who drove unaccompanied.

The key word here is SOME. Some Insurances will cover the injured party, whether that be a wall, car, house, public item(telephone pole, railway bridge) etc etc but will not insure the car or the person who was driving it.

There are soo many policies with soo many insurance companies and brokers it would be individually decided who is covered and who is not. The point they are trying to make I guess is that if you are in contact with a learner driver who is driving unacompanied(or without L-plates) then fear not you will be covered but they may not be.


Also, Who and what are "Safety boss's"?

Guy:Incognito

Dartz wrote: »

And thus, the RSA continues to justify it's funding by annoying the hell out of everyon,e and going after easy targets with punitive laws to make it appear like they are doing their job. It's far easier to create the impression that you're working, than to actually work.

/conspiratory cynicism.

I take it your view is the same in that you think every country that doesnt let people go straight out and drive without any sort of test is imposing punative laws?


There really is no case for allowing people on the road unsupervised and with no trainign.

Jumpy

Bond-007 wrote: »

Loads of inaccuarate stuff in that article.

Untrue, more RSA rubbish.

Oooh someone didnt read the whole article.


edit: Berty beat me to it.

Jumpy

Also is it possible for people who are discussing this to put an "L-Plater" or "Full" after their post?

That way we can see if people are only arguing for or against for their own interests.

"Full"

eringobragh

Dartz wrote: »

And thus, the RSA continues to justify it's funding by annoying the hell out of everyon,e and going after easy targets with punitive laws to make it appear like they are doing their job. It's far easier to create the impression that you're working, than to actually work.
.

Come on! easy targets?? :rolleyes: Maybe they just want to get us up to speed with the rest of Europe. It was lunacy from day 1 letting people who never completed training or a test out on their own.

edit: "full"

gino85

i find it annoying that the RSA are bring in these laws against learner drivers but are not doing much to help them, they could add a class to the leaving cert to teach teenagers to drive properly in a controlled area and also help them get thier learner permits, its costs a small fortune to eventually get your full liecence in this country



''full''

Paulw

gino85 wrote: »

i find it annoying that the RSA are bring in these laws against learner drivers but are not doing much to help them, they could add a class to the leaving cert to teach teenagers to drive properly in a controlled area and also help them get thier learner permits, its costs a small fortune to eventually get your full liecence in this country

The RSA don't bring in laws, the govt do. Besides, the law only changed how it effected those on their 2nd provisional license. Otherwise, the Gardai were just told to enforce the law that was already there.

It doesn't cost a fortune to learn how to drive, and pass a test, I guess it depends on how quickly you learn and how good your driving is. There are plenty of driving schools out there.

"full"

gino85

Paulw wrote: »

The RSA don't bring in laws, the govt do. Besides, the law only changed how it effected those on their 2nd provisional license. Otherwise, the Gardai were just told to enforce the law that was already there.

It doesn't cost a fortune to learn how to drive, and pass a test, I guess it depends on how quickly you learn and how good your driving is. There are plenty of driving schools out there.

"full"

i thought the government brought them in on the advice of the RSA?

also its close to €30-35 per leason with a driving instructer + the price of the learner permist test and price of the driving test, i know it doesnt sound alot but some people need upwards of 10 leasons to help them

L1011

Costs a small fortune to get a full licence? Since when?

Theory test: 35.60
passport photos: 5.00
learner permit: 15.00
lessons: I did 5 hrs @ 40.00 = 200.00
driving test: 38.00
full licence: 25.00

I make that about 340 euros - thats a small fortune? I use that in petrol a month...

Yakult

The war begins.

Tbh Im just curious to see will these 1,400 prov. drivers be prosicuted. They seem to be all talk right now.

Paulw

gino85 wrote: »

i thought the government brought them in on the advice of the RSA?

also its close to €30-35 per leason with a driving instructer + the price of the learner permist test and price of the driving test, i know it doesnt sound alot but some people need upwards of 10 leasons to help them

Yes, the govt changed the law on the advice of the RSA, to bring in to line all learning permits. The change of law only effected those on a 2nd provisional license. Otherwise, the law has always been that L plates must be displayed and the learner driver must be accompanied by someone with a full license.

Like MYOB, I had 5 lessons, and passed my test first time (only last year actually). I certainly didn't feel like it cost a fortune.

If you can afford to drive (tax, insurance, car, petrol), then you can certainly afford a few lessons and a test.

sammy657

I agree with having to have a test to drive on a road thats pretty obvious, but what i dont agree with is the fact that in some places in ireland there aint even no bus service and a taxi is like 20 euro to the nearest village. That is what has to be sorted by the goverment. In the uk you can get a bus everywhere even in villages but here not a train not a bus some places not even a taxi its stupid and just asking for people to drive on a provisional dont anyone agree?

Wishbone Ash

Cabaal wrote: »

If somebody is dumb enough to buy a deathtrap then leave them off imho

I think most people would be concerned about the damage the driver may cause to other innocent people rather than what they do to themselves.

timmywex

1400 out of the few houndred thousand that are learner drivers is pathetic imo.

Shows this law isnt really being inforced, if the person is stopped and is an arrogant d**k, then theyll be done for it, or if the car is a shed or something, most learners arent stopped, and when they are nothing is said

daveharnett

sammy657 wrote: »

I agree with having to have a test to drive on a road thats pretty obvious, but what i dont agree with is the fact that in some places in ireland there aint even no bus service and a taxi is like 20 euro to the nearest village. That is what has to be sorted by the goverment. In the uk you can get a bus everywhere even in villages but here not a train not a bus some places not even a taxi its stupid and just asking for people to drive on a provisional dont anyone agree?

So the gardai shouldn't enforce motoring law until ballygobackwards has a bus service?
The fact that being able to drive is convenient is not an argument.

sammy657

No what im saying is the goverment should do more to encourage people who are on provisional to use busses untill they have a full licence. But as you see they dont so it encourages people on provisionals to drive even to the local shop to get food for an evening so they can survive. Its good they have the learner law sure every other country has its just to people who depend on a car who cant use it now and have no bus service or have to pay 20 euro for a taxi like people in parts of kerry galway mayo etc. They should have a reliable transport system too like the rest of the world

eringobragh

sammy657 wrote: »

No what im saying is the goverment should do more to encourage people who are on provisional to use busses untill they have a full licence. But as you see they dont so it encourages people on provisionals to drive even to the local shop to get food for an evening so they can survive. Its good they have the learner law sure every other country has its just to people who depend on a car who cant use it now and have no bus service or have to pay 20 euro for a taxi like people in parts of kerry galway mayo etc. They should have a reliable transport system too like the rest of the world

Tell them to get a Bicycle / Moped / Motorbike / Tractor. I'm pretty sure there's other countries with inadequate public transport in rural region, I doubt many would flout this law in these countries. Some Mary White Luncacy scheme ain't the answer. :pac:

but43r

I agree about the public transport- they should sort that out.
I disagree with the 6 month waiting time before you can take your driving test, they should of got more driving inspectors instead of bringing this thing out. The whole enforcement thing will only be good for the road users because the amount of loonatics on roads in Ireland is a joke.

"full"

hayyman

How come you have to have a full licence for two years before you can supervise a learner but you can drive a taxi the next day if u pass the p.s.v test .

Seth Brundle

gino85 wrote: »

i find it annoying that the RSA are bring in these laws against learner drivers but are not doing much to help them, they could add a class to the leaving cert to teach teenagers to drive properly in a controlled area and also help them get thier learner permits, its costs a small fortune to eventually get your full liecence in this country

Should the RSA do the test for you as well? Get a grip FFS!

gino85 wrote: »

also its close to €30-35 per leason with a driving instructer + the price of the learner permist test and price of the driving test, i know it doesnt sound alot but some people need upwards of 10 leasons to help them

Aaw - maybe you should live in Germany for a while!
Driving is a privilege, not a right - don't forget that!

timmywex wrote: »

1400 out of the few houndred thousand that are learner drivers is pathetic imo.

Shows this law isnt really being inforced, if the person is stopped and is an arrogant d**k, then theyll be done for it, or if the car is a shed or something, most learners arent stopped, and when they are nothing is said

1400 drivers were brought to court. It did say that the gardai are using a common sense approach and many are being warned, etc.

Seth Brundle

hayyman wrote: »

How come you have to have a full licence for two years before you can supervise a learner but you can drive a taxi the next day if u pass the p.s.v test .

Driving someone is different from teaching them!

dardevle

Jumpy wrote: »

Also is it possible for people who are discussing this to put an "L-Plater" or "Full" after their post?

That way we can see if people are only arguing for or against for their own interests.

"Full"

maybe those that have "full" could also say if they adhered to
these laws while learning.
.

"full" (after 5 years provisonal) rural family man...needs must!

eringobragh

dardevle wrote: »

maybe those that have "full" could also say if they adhered to
these laws while learning.
.

"full" (after 5 years provisonal) rural family man...needs must!

I did anyway & like MYOB I got mine within the 6 months..I was on my second provisional as I got the first one for ID (before the days of ages cards :P)

shqipshume

I have to reapply for my full driving licence this week
I took it once(failed by four fricken things) One yes was a mistake i acknowledged,But other ones i was def coherent enough on but not in his eyes
He did say i was excellent driver though :cool:Only six months driving three lessons.
So this time fingers crossed i will sail thru

I think they should let it go till end of summer and then enforce it with vigilance

but43r

Im from Latvia originally an even though wages there are up to 10 times lower it costs about €500 on average to get a full license so the €340 would not be an issue here. You would not even think of driving on your own with provisional license there cos you WOULD be fined straight away (up to €700 which is a lot if you take wage difference in to consideration)
Insurance premiums might go down because of that as well...

Seth Brundle

Thread moved into the LTD forum!

Wishbone Ash

kbannon wrote: »

Thread moved into the LTD forum!

And merged with an existing thread here.

Learning to Drive Charter applies now folks!

Busi_Girl08

I will away a barrage of abuse over this, but I agree with the new laws.

I am a Learner driver, just got my permit in December, have had only one go in the car so far, in a private car park, and I plan to start professional lessons soon.

I know already that I am going to be a nervous driver, for the first few months anyway.

My dad has told me repeatedly that he won't let me drive on my own, even just to run down to the shops (I can't anyway atm, till the insurance is sorted).

Sure you can all talk, and say that "Oh why shouldn't I be allowed drive, I'm a great driver. I can drive as good as the next licensed driver".

What are you going to say when your inexperience leads you to a car crash and possible loss of life??

Loads of friends of mine are driving around unaccompanied, and some even boast about taking off their L plates so they can take friends for a night out.

Sure, it's convenient and stuff, but what bloody right do you have to have the same privilages as a fully licensed driver, who has more experience than you, and has PROVEN to be perfectly capable to drive because they passed the bloody test??!!


Is it really worth it? Are people so eager to get on the roads fully that they insist on jumping the gun in the stupidest, dangerous way??!!

Some people need to grow up, for God's sake!:mad::mad:

Cabaal

Busi_Girl08 I'd have to agree, started driving mid-March 2008, got my full license in August 2008 after to agree that the law is the best thing going its just a shame its not being inforced as much as it should be.

The new ideas that are currently being run are also good tbh and I hope atleast some of them make it into law, the idea in the end lads is to make our roads safer and I don't see how anyone could be against that.

Posy

It's grand for those who have a partner/parent to accompany them practicing test routes, etc.. but someone like me (with no car and not knowing anyone who can drive) learning to drive is costing a small fortune, plus the chances of me passing a test when I've only been having 1 lesson every week or two is reduced a lot.

Also- the two year rule confuses me; I could pass a test and be able to legally drive by myself but not sit in the car with a learner.

Seth Brundle

Caderyn wrote: »

It's grand for those who have a partner/parent to accompany them practicing test routes, etc.. but someone like me (with no car and not knowing anyone who can drive) learning to drive is costing a small fortune, plus the chances of me passing a test when I've only been having 1 lesson every week or two is reduced a lot.

The system is designed to increase the atrocious driving standards in this country. This in turn should help save lives. You are choosing to take lessons more infrequently. If there was a great need to drive then I would wager that you would be getting more lessons! Have you even applied for your test?

Caderyn wrote: »

Also- the two year rule confuses me; I could pass a test and be able to legally drive by myself but not sit in the car with a learner.

You can sit in the car with a learner. You are deemed to be inexperienced and therefore not in a position to teach them how to drive. In fairness, its a fairly sensible approach to achieve reasonable national driving standards.

by8auj6csd3ioq

Jumpy wrote: »

Also is it possible for people who are discussing this to put an "L-Plater" or "Full" after their post?

That way we can see if people are only arguing for or against for their own interests.

"Full"

Full

ec18

kbannon wrote: »

The system is designed to increase the atrocious driving standards in this country. This in turn should help save lives. You are choosing to take lessons more infrequently. If there was a great need to drive then I would wager that you would be getting more lessons! Have you even applied for your test?

That's a bit unfair. Instructors will tell you that if you have your own car or access to a car outside of lessons you will pass your test quicker. Have you thought that at 40 a pop he might only be able to afford one a week? During the summer I was the same. I could have had a car to practice in but at 1100 for insurance plus lesson costs. It just got too expensive so I had to give it up for a while.