You learn something new everyday!

L-M

Coming home in the car tonight (I had a few pints in me, i was a passenger to a provisional driver). Gardai pulled us over anyway and asked for the drivers licence. Anyway, when they had his, they asked where was the full licence driver. The driver, out of complete nerves, said it was me, he then asked for my licence and i told him it was at home.(He asked was i drinking, i said i was). Then he went on to explain that he could arrest me for drink driving as i was in control of the car, and also in the event of a crash, both of us could of the brethalyzed.

Excuse me for my ignorance, something i did not know,(i'm also believing them as there were four of them in the car). Just a warning to any of those full licence, drunk passengers, to prov licence drivers:rolleyes:

EPM

good lesson to know. I would guess the rule would be pretty stringent alright though

Guy:Incognito

AFAIKyou have to be capable of driving the car should the need arise. Obviously being drunk means you could'nt, so yopu dont qualify.

L-M

EPM wrote: »

good lesson to know. I would guess the rule would be pretty stringent alright though

The thing i'm wondering is are you automatically the "controller of the car" once you have a full licence, or do you have to admit to it first.

F-Stop

Jesus. I thought everyone knew this. Think about it. A person on a learner permit is not allowed drive unless there is a competent licence holder with two years experience accompanying them. Competent includes being awake, sober, sane, etc. No wonder there are so many bad drivers out there.

L-M

F-Stop wrote: »

No wonder there are so many bad drivers out there.

Sorry?

F-Stop

Limerick man wrote: »

The thing i'm wondering is are you automatically the "controller of the car" once you have a full licence, or do you have to admit to it first.

That should be decided before you start driving. You don't get to choose who is least drunk after the Gardai stop you.

jimmycrackcorm

I would have asked the guard how a passenger is expected to be in control of a car. How does being capable of driving the car come into the situation?

F-Stop

Limerick man wrote: »

Sorry?

People who don't bother to know and understand the rules before they get behind the wheel (or be responsible for the person behind the wheel).

L-M

F-Stop wrote: »

People who don't bother to know and understand the rules before they get behind the wheel (or be responsible for the person behind the wheel).

What a load of horse ****. I've done the theory test twice for two different type's of vehicles, i know my rules of the road.

Yah, one driver doesn't full comprehend one rule, yah, we're all ****e drivers.:rolleyes:

F-Stop

Limerick man wrote: »

What a load of horse ****. I've done the theory test twice for two different type's of vehicles, i know my rules of the road.

Yah, one driver doesn't full comprehend one rule, yah, we're all ****e drivers.:rolleyes:

Well no you don't if, as the thread is titled, "you learn something new everyday". This was made explicit with the change from 'provisional' to 'learner permit'.

L-M

F-Stop wrote: »

Well no you don't if, as the thread is titled, "you learn something new everyday". This was made explicit with the change from 'provisional' to 'learner permit'.

Can we plan a meeting? I'll bring my rules of the road book, i'll see if you get everyone of the 800 odd questions right.

F-Stop

Limerick man wrote: »

Can we plan a meeting? I'll bring my rules of the road book, i'll see if you get everyone of the 800 odd questions right.

I'm not going to get into a row with you Limerick Man, I like reading your posts, I like your contribution here. It just seems bizarre that someone doesn't know that the person who is responsible for a learner driver needs to be sober. I have nothing against having a few drinks, though I would never drive after a few, nor think I was qualified to be the guidance for a learner driver while drunk. Let's see how you feel about this in the morning.

RichyX

F-Stop wrote: »

People who don't bother to know and understand the rules before they get behind the wheel (or be responsible for the person behind the wheel).

I suspect a lot of people weren't aware of the particulars of this law, myself included.
I guess I'm just another bad driver then :rolleyes:

unkel

F-Stop wrote: »

People who don't bother to know and understand the rules before they get behind the wheel (or be responsible for the person behind the wheel).

Ok so those rules were very clear to you then. Have you any link?

L-M

F-Stop wrote: »

I'm not going to get into a row with you Limerick Man, I like reading your posts, I like your contribution here. It just seems bizarre that someone doesn't know that the person who is responsible for a learner driver needs to be sober. I have nothing against having a few drinks, though I would never drive after a few, nor think I was qualified to be the guidance for a learner driver while drunk. Let's see how you feel about this in the morning.

Yah, in the morning? Lol, I was drinking, i'm not drunk.. I did not say i was the full licence driver, the driver of the car just nervously said it was me. And then i was asked for my full licence. I wasn't claiming to be responsible, what i was concerned about was the fact that I was automatically assumed to be the "controller of the car".

I never have, nor never will, nor ever condone, or bea driver of a car after I have drank, or the driver of the car has drank.

F-Stop

RichyX wrote: »

I suspect a lot of people weren't aware of the particulars of this law, myself included.
I guess I'm just another bad driver then :rolleyes:

You could be, I wouldn't know. It does seem that passing the test does not qualify you as a competent driver. Knowing the rules and abiding by them within reason does - that seems to be the consensus on this board. So, if you don't know the proper use of fog lights or the overtaking lane on the motorway does that make you a bad driver? I suspect a lot of people aren't aware of them... :rolleyes:

unkel

F-Stop wrote: »

It just seems bizarre that someone doesn't know that the person who is responsible for a learner driver needs to be sober.

The only thing that seems bizarre to me is that an incompetent driver is legally allowed to drive a car in this country. Not having a go at you, F-Stop, by the way.

There's only one way to solve this problem. Phase out mickey mouse licenses and only let people drive a car when they are fully qualified to do so. Just like in the rest of the world (apart from Britain and West-Britain)

/sorry for rant

F-Stop

Limerick man wrote: »

I never have, nor never will, nor ever condone, or bea driver of a car after I have drank, or the driver of the car has drank.

Fair enough, and I wasn't suggesting you were. I understand that. Sh1t, I need to go have a glass of wine. I was just a bit surprised that this came up the way it did.

L-M

F-Stop wrote: »

Fair enough, and I wasn't suggesting you were. I understand that. Sh1t, I need to go have a glass of wine. I was just a bit surprised that this came up the way it did.

Lol, we'll end out fisty cuffs:D.

I'd like to see other peoples opinions on this. Also from a few gardai that are on boards.

F-Stop

unkel wrote: »

The only thing that seems bizarre to me is that an incompetent driver is legally allowed to drive a car in this country. Not having a go at you, F-Stop, by the way.

There's only one way to solve this problem. Phase out mickey mouse licenses and only let people drive a car when they are fully qualified to do so. Just like in the rest of the world (apart from Britain and West-Britain)

/sorry for rant

I agree with you. The current learner licensing and testing is a joke. Though, that is a different topic.

carchaeologist

:D

unkel

ROFL

copacetic

I thought this was well known also, it was all over the press for a couple of weeks when they made they were cracking down on learners being on their own in cars I think?

F-Stop

unkel wrote: »

Ok so those rules were very clear to you then. Have you any link?

Well, I know this site isn't gospel. And I'll point to number 4 - be in a fit state to drive

unkel

F-Stop wrote: »

Well, I know this site isn't gospel. And I'll point to number 4 - be in a fit state to drive

Cool

I didn't ask for much and we all know the ROR are not law but to point to a boards thread is a winner

Heroditas

copacetic wrote: »

I thought this was well known also, it was all over the press for a couple of weeks when they made they were cracking down on learners being on their own in cars I think?

That's what I thought too. I've just asked herself and she's agreed with me, i.e. a provisional driver must be accompanied by a fully qualified driver with a minimum of two years of a full licence and the accompanying driver can not be under the influence.

I'm sure this was announced a lot when the new laws were brought in last year.

Whether it makes sense or not means not a jot, but it's now the law I thought.
Apologies if wrong though

F-Stop

congo_90

So does this mean when my mate collects me from a night out (prov driver) I cannot under any circumstances sit in his car to get a lift home simply because I have a full licence?
What if I declared myself as not accompanying driver? Would the gards let ya be then?

That sounds wrong somehow.
I knew of this law but I thought it only applied if you were going to be the accompanying driver of said vehicle and not a passenger if that makes sense.

TheNog

I just been through the Road Traffic books and I cannot find anything that says an accompanied person can be arrested for Drunk Driving or anything related to that.

How sad am I for doing that on a Sunday morning? Dont answer that


Even if ye could arrest someone for that, isnt it better to have a drunk accompanying the provisional driver rather than the drunk driving himself? Lesser of 2 evils me thinks

mdebets

I can't understand how someone could think it would be ok to be the accompanying full licensed driver and be drunk.
What do you the full licensed driver is there for? To give the learner driver some entertainment in case the radio stops working?
No, he should supervise the learner driver and teach him how to drive? How could he do it if he were drunk?

L-M

congo_90 wrote: »

So does this mean when my mate collects me from a night out (prov driver) I cannot under any circumstances sit in his car to get a lift home simply because I have a full licence?
What if I declared myself as not accompanying driver? Would the gards let ya be then?

This is the question i'm asking!
You see people are missing my point. I'm not stupid, i know i'd have to be sober.

@The Nog Thanks!!

eringobragh

Surely the Learner Permit Holder would be deemed unaccompanied if the Full Licenced driver was drunk???

TestTransmission

Limerick man wrote: »

This is the question i'm asking!
You see people are missing my point. I'm not stupid, i know i'd have to be sober.

@The Nog Thanks!!

Actually,thats a good question,if Im in a car with a learner driver,does that automatically lay some legal responsibilty on me to be the accompanying full licence holder, do you get a choice?

Bluefoam

jackncoke wrote: »

Actually,thats a good question,if Im in a car with a learner driver,does that automatically lay some legal responsibilty on me to be the accompanying full licence holder, do you get a choice?

The learner should not be driving without an accompanying license holder - if you are not willing to take that responsibility you should not get into the car - unless there is someone in the car who is deemed to be the accompanying license holder...

green-blood

I may have missed this somehow, but exaclty how did the provisional driver get the car TO the pub to collect you....

assumption time

On their own... so can we drop the "learned something new" line, you were already taking advantage of the provisional driver, and they had already flouted the law.... oh yes pedantic post of the day award for me :-)

galwaytt

eringobragh wrote: »

Surely the Learner Permit Holder would be deemed unaccompanied if the Full Licenced driver was drunk???

...you would think - but, unless it's written in law that the 'accompanying' driver must be sober, then it's moot.

Take to the extreme. Permit holder in drivers seat, sober. Father (incl 2 pints), with full licence, is in pass seat. 2 brothers in rear seat, both full licence holders - 1 drunk, 1 sober.

So, Dad is an unknown quantity.........he might fail the blow-in-the- bag test.......or not. So, does the baton now go to one of the brothers ? And if it does, who decides, and who decides which one ?

So today's quiz is........" Will the Real Accompanying Driver Please Stand Up "


yes, it's Sunday.........I'm going out on the H-D for a few hours....looking at this with the sun out is nuts.....

snowman707

"While there are no current restrictions on the alcohol consumption of accompanying drivers, Conor Faughnan of the AA said the "clear gist" of the new regulation was that the learner was in a position to get a lesson at all times when behind the wheel.

"That can't happen if the accompanying driver is not sober," he said.

Speaking to The Irish Times yesterday, the chief executive of the Road Safety Authority, Noel Brett, said he believed it was now time "to move on and implement" a full graduated driver licensing system.

The Road Safety Authority is to publish a leaflet offering advice to accompanying drivers."

I don't think it would stand up in court, a good solicitor would do a lot in the present scenario

DubTony

jackncoke wrote: »

Actually,thats a good question,if Im in a car with a learner driver,does that automatically lay some legal responsibilty on me to be the accompanying full licence holder, do you get a choice?

The learner shouldn't be driving the car at all, unless he is accompanied by a qualified driver. It would seem to me that a L driver couldn't leave his house in the car unless the passenger was with him for no other purpose than to be the accompanying qualified driver. If the passenger isn't the accompanying qualified driver the journey should never happen.

Right, if the full license passenger is drunk and can't help provisonal driver.. shouldn't it be counted as provisional driver on his own and take the 1000euro fine?

DubTony

DubTony wrote: »

The learner shouldn't be driving the car at all, unless he is accompanied by a qualified driver. It would seem to me that a L driver couldn't leave his house in the car unless the passenger was with him for no other purpose than to be the accompanying qualified driver. If the passenger isn't the accompanying qualified driver the journey should never happen.

right now, back to the real world where is does happen. more useful debate no?

is there a legal responsibility on the full license driver once he is in the car? how far can this stretch in the event of a crash etc.?

i didn't know any of this to be honest

Thoie

As the licensed driver, do I need to be able to physically drive the car?

Let's say I have a broken leg (or something randomly, temporarily wrong with me that isn't affecting my brain or senses, but would make driving awkward). Am I then unfit to be the licensed driver for a learner? I can still unhelpfully scream "ZOMG, we're all going to die" and grab the wheel. More helpfully, I can say things like "You're approaching your left turn, you should be indicating by now" or "You want to be in the right hand lane coming up here, so start checking your mirrors and do ".

if the learner driver basically has a panic attack and can't drive, can the full license driver take over or will he definately not be insured?

TestTransmission

Deleted User wrote: »

if the learner driver basically has a panic attack and can't drive, can the full license driver take over or will he definately not be insured?[/QUOTE

Insurance is insurance,he can only drive it if his policy entitled him to do so I assume

sounds like a no-win situation.. no insurance to drive so once in the car, no choice but to stay in car taking on the legal consequences of being there.

-Chris-

Strikes me that these laws/guidelines haven't been thought out at all, and if they have, they haven't been explained in anywhere enough detail to be of use to anyone.

The system, as it's being described in this thread, is a grey area nightmare!

peasant

The spirit of the law is clear:

There is no more "provisional licence" it is now a learners permit ...permitting you to learn how to drive under the supervision of an experienced driver only.

The execution of the law, faced with the long standing tradition of nobody really giving two flying effs, however leaves a lot to be desired.

Kat1170

Do you honestly think that if the Guard could have done you for drink driving (??) he wouldn't have. When's the last time anyone heard a Guard say 'Ah sure drunk as you are I'll let you off as you didnt know the law' :rolleyes:

L1011

Don't you need your licence two years to accompany a learner anyway, L-M

L-M

Kat1170 wrote: »

Do you honestly think that if the Guard could have done you for drink driving (??) he wouldn't have. When's the last time anyone heard a Guard say 'Ah sure drunk as you are I'll let you off as you didnt know the law' :rolleyes:

Er.. I've seen a few people been let go with a warning for various things. Well heard of it anyway.

Feck off MYOB:P

Top Dog

green-blood wrote: »

I may have missed this somehow, but exaclty how did the provisional driver get the car TO the pub to collect you....

assumption time

On their own... so can we drop the "learned something new" line, you were already taking advantage of the provisional driver, and they had already flouted the law.... oh yes pedantic post of the day award for me :-)

Maybe the driver with the learners permit was a passenger on the way to the pub, where the full licenced driver had a few beers and then the learner drove home as the designated sober driver. So they never drove unaccompanied.

Maybe the driver with the learners permit drove there with the full licenced driver accompanying them. At the pub the learner has 7up while the other has a few beers. Same driver on the way home, but full licence driver now has alcohol taken. Again no driving unaccompanied.

Assumption can be a dangerous thing