Got caught speeding with a provisional

contentking · 13-10-2009 12:26AM #1

Hi Lads,

Just back from a "quick" nip to the shops :rolleyes:

Anywho, Got pulled over for doing 61 in a 50 zone. have to produce my license in the next 10 days, the guard said I will have 2 points, but what else will happen to me with me being on a provisional license and no other person in the car?

Melion · 13-10-2009 12:38AM

Nothing if you produce it in 10 days. The guard you produce the licence to wont know that you were on your own in the car.

YraggarY · 13-10-2009 12:55AM

I assumed that the Garda writes in his/her notebook at the time of the offence how many occupants there were in the car when stopped, no? Thought this would help to stop drivers without provisional licenses from "forgetting them at home", and just producing it at the station, thus getting around having no L-Plates / fully qualified driver accompanying them? Again, purely conjecture on my part, but perhaps one of the AGS members here on Boards could clarify?

- G

cyclopath2001 · 13-10-2009 07:02AM

Melion wrote: »

Nothing if you produce it in 10 days. The guard you produce the licence to wont know that you were on your own in the car.

This gives me an idea for improving the law: apply penalty points to the accompanying driver too. And if the provisional-holder can't get someone to take those points, then double points and fine for the provisional.

Education should start early.

rugbyman · 13-10-2009 07:22AM

Melion wrote: »

Nothing if you produce it in 10 days. The guard you produce the licence to wont know that you were on your own in the car.

Nice one Melion. Am an avid boardser and cannot get over how many pernickety, self righteous sorts inhabit the threads. Oh, you are breaking the law etc, types
Regards, Rugbyman

EPM · 13-10-2009 07:37AM

rugbyman wrote: »

Nice one Melion. Am an avid boardser and cannot get over how many pernickety, self righteous sorts inhabit the threads. Oh, you are breaking the law etc, types
Regards, Rugbyman

Well to be fair an inexperienced driver getting points for speeding while driving alone

People have every right to tell them they are breaking the law. It's this combination that leads to deaths on our roads

trad · 13-10-2009 07:39AM

From penalty points.ie

Q. What happens if I am stopped and a number of penalty point offences are detected?
Will I receive penalty points for each one? No. Using the scenario from the previous answer it should be borne in mind that the same driver in that scenario could have committed a speeding offence also and have been uninsured. The no-insurance offence is not a fixed charge offence so if convicted in court for driving without insurance and 5 penalty points are imposed then that being the highest number of penalty points attaching to any of the multiple offences involved would be the total number of penalty points endorsed on that drivers licence record on this occasion. The fixed charge for every individual offence, or a fine in court for every individual convicted offence, would apply however.

So the good news is you will only get 2 points.

Absurdum · 13-10-2009 08:05AM

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

This gives me an idea for improving the law: apply penalty points to the accompanying driver too.

stupid idea

qz · 13-10-2009 08:31AM

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

This gives me an idea for improving the law: apply penalty points to the accompanying driver too.

Did a LOL. Don't be so daft.

contentking · 13-10-2009 09:33AM

Just back for the garda station, they just took my license and put it in the system, then I was on my way.

galwaytt · 13-10-2009 02:39PM

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

This gives me an idea for improving the law: apply penalty points to the accompanying driver too. And if the provisional-holder can't get someone to take those points, then double points and fine for the provisional.

Education should start early.

What utter rubbish.

The age of majority is stated quite clearly on the statute books as-is, and there the matter ends. You are not your brother's keeper.

Why not give points to parents of minor's who break the RTA on bicycles ? Now that would be enforceable.

event · 13-10-2009 03:20PM

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

This gives me an idea for improving the law: apply penalty points to the accompanying driver too. And if the provisional-holder can't get someone to take those points, then double points and fine for the provisional.

Education should start early.

what are you supposed to do if the driver starts speeding, physically stop him

this is a ludicrous idea

markpb · 13-10-2009 03:21PM

qz wrote: »

Did a LOL. Don't be so daft.

Why? Do you know what the idea of an accompanying driver is?

Gregor Samsa · 13-10-2009 03:24PM

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

This gives me an idea for improving the law: apply penalty points to the accompanying driver too. And if the provisional-holder can't get someone to take those points, then double points and fine for the provisional.

Education should start early.

How does giving penalty points to someone who isn't driving improve the law in any way?

Gregor Samsa · 13-10-2009 03:25PM

markpb wrote: »

Why? Do you know what the idea of an accompanying driver is?

Well, it's not to take legal responsibility for the actions of the learner driver, that's for sure.

Whitewater-AGS · 13-10-2009 04:33PM

Melion wrote: »

Nothing if you produce it in 10 days. The guard you produce the licence to wont know that you were on your own in the car.

Actually I wouldn't be suprised if you get a summons for driving unaccompanied and non display of L plates if you had none up.

The Garda who stopped you will check to see if you produced your DL within ten day and when he does it will show you produced a provisional DL.

brandon_flowers · 13-10-2009 04:45PM

Whitewater-AGS wrote: »

Actually I wouldn't be suprised if you get a summons for driving unaccompanied and non display of L plates if you had none up.

The Garda who stopped you will check to see if you produced your DL within ten day and when he does it will show you produced a provisional DL.

The Garda won't check it, it is done automatically through the Pulse system. He puts a request in that a license must be shown against said offence commited eg speeding and it is handled by administrators after that. I know because they ****ed it up and I had to go to court to get it settled.

daveharnett · 13-10-2009 05:17PM

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

This gives me an idea for improving the law: apply penalty points to the accompanying driver too. And if the provisional-holder can't get someone to take those points, then double points and fine for the provisional.

I had a clever response all worked out, but I just can't be bothered.

If you really want to discuss it, perhaps you should make a new thread rather than hijacking the OP's one?

That way, I can see that you are the OP and I can ignore it.

Whitewater-AGS · 13-10-2009 06:07PM

brandon_flowers wrote: »

The Garda won't check it, it is done automatically through the Pulse system. He puts a request in that a license must be shown against said offence commited eg speeding and it is handled by administrators after that. I know because they ****ed it up and I had to go to court to get it settled.

And being a Garda I always check myself and thats how I know, so as i said dont be suprised if you get a summons

jaffa20 · 13-10-2009 06:16PM

Hmm, i've always wondered if that would work when i was on a learner permit. It wouldn't be the same guard that takes the license in the station so unless there's a request for "full license only", how can they do anything?

anyway, how do they even catch learner drivers? i've never been asked once to produce a license at a checkpoint. All they check is tax and insurance. If you don't have your L plates up, they don't bother.

blackbetty69 · 13-10-2009 06:28PM

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

This gives me an idea for improving the law: apply penalty points to the accompanying driver too. And if the provisional-holder can't get someone to take those points, then double points and fine for the provisional.

Education should start early.

Are you for real? you actually think this would help? sure every1 would be put off the road then.. wouldnt like to see you in charge, your a crazy crazy person

cyclopath2001 · 13-10-2009 06:39PM

blackbetty69 wrote: »

Are you for real? you actually think this would help? sure every1 would be put off the road then.. wouldnt like to see you in charge, your a crazy crazy person

No: only people who break the law repeatedly would be put off the road. Most people would consider that a good thing.

The idea is to make sure that drivers take their civic responsibilities very seriously and develop a mature attitude towards their social and legal obligations. An accompanying driver can play an important role in the formation of a good driver, and the possibility of complicity in road traffic offences would focus that person's mind on influencing his/her protege.

Hooch · 13-10-2009 06:41PM

jaffa20 wrote: »

Hmm, i've always wondered if that would work when i was on a learner permit. It wouldn't be the same guard that takes the license in the station so unless there's a request for "full license only", how can they do anything?

When you produce your licence at a station of your choice within ten days, the public officer takes your licence and inputs the details on PULSE. It includes the drivers details, DOB, address, licence number, batch number, start/expiry date, catagory held and......shock horror :eek:......two little boxes for full or provisional licence. It also includes date and place stopped.

jaffa20 · 13-10-2009 06:44PM

nice guy always wrote: »

When you produce your licence at a station of your choice within ten days, the public officer takes your licence and inputs the details on PULSE. It includes the drivers details, DOB, address, licence number, batch number, start/expiry date, catagory held and......shock horror :eek:......two little boxes for full or provisional licence. It also includes date and place stopped.

thanks.. but that doesn't answer the question. do they check with the original guard who caught them speeding that they had their L plates displayed or if they were accompanied at that time?

Hooch · 13-10-2009 06:52PM

jaffa20 wrote: »

thanks.. but that doesn't answer the question. do they check with the original guard who caught them speeding that they had their L plates displayed or if they were accompanied at that time?

No, it depends on the member who stopped you. Its up to him/her to do so. I personally check my demands once a month to see if people produce. If they have failed to, I then issue summons them. If they have produced then I take each case on its merits.

(I always ask when making the demand if the licence is full or provisional......if they lie....well you get the idea)

hamlet1 · 13-10-2009 06:58PM

i think it is daft that a learner driver who has maybe six months experience isn't allowed to drive on their own.

Gran Hermano · 13-10-2009 07:03PM

hamlet1 wrote: »

i think it is daft that a learner driver who has maybe six months experience isn't allowed to drive on their own.

Daft? Sorry but I disagree 100%. How do you define and measure six months experience? As bad as the Irish system is for educating and testing drivers we have to have some test of competency before unleashing unaccompanied drivers on the roads.

cyclopath2001 · 13-10-2009 07:06PM

hamlet1 wrote: »

i think it is daft that a learner driver who has maybe six months experience isn't allowed to drive on their own.

How would you measure the 6 months experience? Some kind of test, maybe?

Wossack · 13-10-2009 07:07PM

hamlet1 wrote: »

i think it is daft that a learner driver who has maybe six months experience isn't allowed to drive on their own.

wheres the thumbs down button

highlydebased · 13-10-2009 07:12PM

hamlet1 wrote: »

i think it is daft that a learner driver who has maybe six months experience isn't allowed to drive on their own.

You could be driving for 6 months and be a crap driver too, so its not a good idea generally! The accompanied driver is for a reason, not just to annoy you..!

R.O.R · 13-10-2009 07:22PM

hamlet1 wrote: »

i think it is daft that a learner driver who has maybe six months experience isn't allowed to drive on their own.

:rolleyes:

I think it's totally ridiculous that some people think it's OK to get behind the wheel of a car without having passed a fairly basic test of competency, without having an experienced person beside them to teach them how to drive properly.

cyclopath2001 · 13-10-2009 07:26PM

R.O.R wrote: »

I think it's totally ridiculous that some people think it's OK to get behind the wheel of a car without having passed a fairly basic test of competency, without having an experienced person beside them to teach them how to drive properly.

Saw one today in Clontarf, ISM branded car - .the car was parked fully on the footptah, all four wheels.

polyfusion · 13-10-2009 07:34PM

galwaytt wrote: »

What utter rubbish.

The age of majority is stated quite clearly on the statute books as-is, and there the matter ends. You are not your brother's keeper.

Why not give points to parents of minor's who break the RTA on bicycles ? Now that would be enforceable.

WTF is the RTA??

Anyway, the poster you rubbished had a valid point, and it was reinforced a couple of times since. Why bother having in the ROTR that a learner driver needs an accompanying full licence driver at all? I thought the idea behind it was that the accompanying driver would be there to guide the learner to improve their driving habits. If they are not fulfilling this position, then they should be penalised (appropriately) as well. If they don't have influence over the learner, then they shouldn't be accompanying them.

Accomplices to murder can be prosecuted; an extreme example you may say, but a reckless driver has been known to kill. I'd say a high percentage of accompanying drivers are family members - I'd be pretty disgusted with myself if my son (or daughter) was responsible for killing another person through their recklessness.

Gregor Samsa · 13-10-2009 08:21PM

polyfusion wrote: »

WTF is the RTA??

Road Traffic Act - the actual laws that the "Rules of the Road" are based on. The ROTR are "for reference only" (see inside the back cover of the latest edition). The RTA is the actual law - you're not done for breaking the ROTR, you're done for breaking the RTA.

As for you analogy to accessory to murder, it's a poor one. To be an accessory in any crime, one has to assist or encourage the perpetrator in the commission of a crime (not just be present), and know that the perpetrator intended to commit a crime. Neither of these apply to accompanying drivers in the normal course of events.

An accompanying driver is in no way responsible for the actions of the learner driver, no more than a driving instructor is. And this should not change. Say the learner starts to break the speed limit, what is the accompanying driver to do? How are they to assert their responsibility for the driver's actions? Would it be enough to say "Well, I told him to slow down" as a defense? For responsibility to be bestowed on someone, there needs to be a mechanism by which that authority can be asserted, and I can't think of a way to do that in the setting of two adult citizens sitting in a moving car.

I don't think you or cyclopath2001 have thought this through, but in fairness to cyclopath2001, he has his own agenda that's well known on this board.

Theanswers · 13-10-2009 10:28PM

You will get your 2 points. However you wont hear from the guards again in reguard to your licence.
Your in the clear.
Anyways i've yet to hear of someone to be done for driving without a full driver. Done it for a year myself

Now on my full licence for nearly 7 months. Drove as much on the provisional as i do on my full.

rugbyman · 13-10-2009 10:34PM

EPM wrote: »

Well to be fair an inexperienced driver getting points for speeding while driving alone People have every right to tell them they are breaking the law. It's this combination that leads to deaths on our roads

point taken,
Rugbyman

-Chris- · 13-10-2009 11:32PM

Theanswers wrote: »

You will get your 2 points. However you wont hear from the guards again in reguard to your licence.
Your in the clear.

OP, I'd be more likely to listen to the active Gardai who've posted here for your information than someone who feels they have all Theanswers.

Maybe you'll get away with it, but if the Garda is thorough then you'll get caught. All you can do is wait...

cyclopath2001 · 14-10-2009 06:57AM

phutyle wrote: »

Road Traffic Act - the actual laws that the "Rules of the Road" are based on.

You forgot to mention the statutory instruments.

phutyle wrote: »

An accompanying driver is in no way responsible for the actions of the learner driver,And this should not change.

Other than the practicality of it, you don't say why it's not a good idea for an accompanying driver to accept some responsibility for the driver he is supervising.

phutyle wrote: »

For responsibility to be bestowed on someone, there needs to be a mechanism by which that authority can be asserted, and I can't think of a way to do that in the setting of two adult citizens sitting in a moving car.

This really suggests that the accompanying driver is unable to fulfil the responsibility and that the driver should not be on the road.

phutyle wrote: »

I don't think you or cyclopath2001 have thought this through,

Yours is just a knee-jerk reaction of 'keep things the way they are'.

phutyle wrote: »

but in fairness to cyclopath2001, he has his own agenda that's well known on this board.

Yes: road safety, law and order, it's a pity that so many people on the road don't share these ideals.

Maruney · 14-10-2009 08:14AM

"...but if the Garda is thorough"

Looks like you will be fine then.

Gregor Samsa · 14-10-2009 08:23AM

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

You forgot to mention the statutory instruments.

The poster asked what RTA stood for. Not SI.

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Other than the practicality of it, you don't say why it's not a good idea for an accompanying driver to accept some responsibility for the driver he is supervising.

Well, the impracticality of it is a good enough reason for starters. What's the point in making inherently impractical laws?

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

This really suggests that the accompanying driver is unable to fulfil the responsibility and that the driver should not be on the road.

No, it suggests that no driver would be able to fulfil the responsibility, and that therefore claiming that the driver has the responsibility is meaningless.

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Yours is just a knee-jerk reaction of 'keep things the way they are'.

And yours is a knee-jerk reaction of 'lets blame the wrong person'.

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Yes: road safety, law and order, it's a pity that so many people on the road don't share these ideals.

Very noble, but it often appears that your agenda goes deeper than that.

And of course, you haven't actually answered any of the questions that have been raised in criticism of the idea.

markpb · 14-10-2009 08:50AM

phutyle wrote: »

Well, it's not to take legal responsibility for the actions of the learner driver, that's for sure.

Yes, it is. The accompanying driver is there to teach and supervise the learner. That's why they're not allowed (by law) to be asleep or drunk while accompanying. What exactly do you think the point of an accompanying driver is?

phutyle wrote: »

Say the learner starts to break the speed limit, what is the accompanying driver to do? How are they to assert their responsibility for the driver's actions? Would it be enough to say "Well, I told him to slow down" as a defence?

Their authority comes from the fact that if they get out of the car, they learner won't be allowed to drive anymore.

Saruman · 14-10-2009 08:55AM

Without reading all the posts (just first couple of pages), I thought it was an offence in itself to not have your drivers license on you at all times when driving a car?

Gregor Samsa · 14-10-2009 09:37AM

markpb wrote: »

Yes, it is. The accompanying driver is there to teach and supervise the learner. That's why they're not allowed (by law) to be asleep or drunk while accompanying. What exactly do you think the point of an accompanying driver is?.

Teaching and supervising a learner driver and taking legal responsibility for their actions are two very different things.

markpb wrote: »

Their authority comes from the fact that if they get out of the car, they learner won't be allowed to drive anymore.

Try doing that at speed.

Drummerboy08 · 14-10-2009 09:41AM

Saruman wrote: »

Without reading all the posts (just first couple of pages), I thought it was an offence in itself to not have your drivers license on you at all times when driving a car?

I thought so too.

Hooch · 14-10-2009 09:50AM

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

I thought so too.

It is. A stand alone summmons.

Drummerboy08 · 14-10-2009 09:59AM

nice guy always wrote: »

It is. A stand alone summmons.

So technically, the OP could be done for not have his licence with him, driving unaccompanied on a provisional, and speeding?

Obviously I know he wouldn't be prosecuted for them all*, but I presume a judge would take all of these into account when it gets that far.

*Or would he?

Hooch · 14-10-2009 10:15AM

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

So technically, the OP could be done for not have his licence with him, driving unaccompanied on a provisional, and speeding?

Obviously I know he wouldn't be prosecuted for them all*, but I presume a judge would take all of these into account when it gets that far.

*Or would he?

Normal course of action is a judge will convict on all five. Speeding wil get a fine, No licence at roadside will get a fine, unaccompained will get a fine, no L plates will be taken into account and failure to produce will be TIA.

Normaly the speeding offence would suffice. Unless the O/P was acting the ass. Then (s)he is looking at court

cyclopath2001 · 14-10-2009 01:30PM

phutyle wrote: »

Well, the impracticality of it is a good enough reason for starters. What's the point in making inherently impractical laws?

It is of course, quite practical. If an accompanying driver does not want responsibility, he/she does not enter the car and will probably tell friends and family members that the provisional driver is a law-breaking idiot. If the provisional driver drives unaccompanied, the points for any offence should be double. That's quite practical, a small change to the rules. Hopefully, a bit of peer and family pressure will encourage the learner to conform to the law.

'Not practical' is an excuse trotted out for all kinds of law-breaking, such as exceeding the speed limit, illegal and obstructive parking, failing to stop on amber and unlawful overtaking.

phutyle wrote: »

And yours is a knee-jerk reaction of 'lets blame the wrong person'.

The concept of a provisional driver is that the driver is not fully capable of taking all of the responsibility of driving alone. That's why a reponsible/qualified driver accompanies him/her. It's only fair that blame should be shared. In this case, I wonder of the OP had sufficient motivation to drive within the law. A potential banning after one or two escapades would focus his/her mind.

phutyle wrote: »

but it often appears that your agenda goes deeper than that.

pish.

Absurdum · 15-10-2009 09:13AM

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

'Not practical' is an excuse trotted out for all kinds of law-breaking

especially by cyclists

polyfusion · 15-10-2009 09:28AM

Absurdum wrote: »

especially by cyclists

I'm a cyclist (as well as a motorist and motorcyclist). Are you saying I break the rules of the road when I cycle on them? How do you know that I do? I dont! I've seen the results of cyclists acting the dickhead and I know better.

General assumptions like yours are not helpful at all. How would you feel if I said that I think anyone who fails to use punctuation should be shot in the head?

Anan1 · 15-10-2009 09:40AM

Absurdum wrote: »

especially by cyclists

Let's argue the issues, not the people making them.:)

Got caught speeding with a provisional

Comments