New drivers to display novice ‘N’ plates from next month

slimjimmc

CiniO wrote: »

Unfortunately I disagree.
By saying "First driving licence" they mean the first driving licence in any category.
So if you get your car (cat. licence now from next month, you will have to display N plates for 2 years.
But if you get your motorbike (cat. A) or truck (cat. C) or bud (cat. D) etc. few years later, you won't need to display any N plates on those vehicles.
Obligation to display N plates applies only to first driving licence which you obtain, no matter which category it will be. No obligation then if you obtain another category.

I take your point and the wording "a first driving licence" could be interpreted either way but I don't agree with the underlined. I contend that "first" refers to the first licence in that class in order to differentiate between a renewed licence. If you are new to a class then imo you are a novice in that class, and imo that's how the law will be interpreted. I guess we'll just have to wait until cases start hitting the courts to be certain either way.

3. (1) For the purposes of this Act, a person who is the holder of a first driving licence is a novice driver for the period of 2 years from the date of its issue.

68 lost souls

From my reading of it if you have a car licence you will not have I wear an N plate when you get an A licence.

It works in other countries so it should happen hear. I never drove unaccompanied on m L plate.

Reducing the diving on our own fine from €1000 to points and a small fine should mean it will be enforced more now. I'm guessing part of why it was never enforced before was because the fine was too harsh so now it is more reasonable to hand out punishments.

cerastes

NIMAN wrote: »

I still don't see the problem, the new rules are perfectly acceptable and logical. The date's ireleevant, everything has to start on a certain date!

Are we looking for relaxed rules for something that has the potential to be lethal. I am all for strict rules for L and N drivers, its perfectly normal, all other countries do it, why do we want looser laws in this country?

The idea of a L driver driving on their own could only ever be seen as acceptable in Ireland. I learned to drive in NI, and the idea that I would have been allowed out on the roads myself as an L Driver would have scared the life out of me. Until you are trained and found to be capable of driving, you shouldn't be allowed to drive a half tonne of metal around at speed.

I agree that people should have formal training, although Im inclined to believe here its a load of pencil whipping just to get the boxes checked and it an be easy to manipulate this for profit.
Besides, I cant understand how you were scared? and drove? you're saying you were scared driving?. I would be concerned about someone like that on the road at all as they are distracted from driving itself, but I dont think the measure of ability should be based on the lowest common denominator, more each based on their own ability.
I'm not criticising you, but if I or someone else could show the ability to pass a certain competency level in driving, I dont believe I should be forced to complete a dogmatic process but could leap to the level where training is needed or where experience is lacking.

djimi wrote: »

Because in Ireland we see driving as a god given right. Look at all the excuses we have for it; I need my car for work so I should be able to drive without a license, the pub is too far away so I should be able to have a few pints and drive home etc.

Ok, I consider training to be necessary, but this just points to another failing, that people actually do need transport and in places (and even Dublin) this is or can be just woeful, so those that can manage give up on public transport and getting a car is more or less essential.

No Pants wrote: »

I'd limit the number of learner permits that can be applied for. The first and second permits are valid for two years each. The third then lasts for one more year. I'd cap it at that. If you haven't managed to pass a test by then, driving isn't for you.

having a larff right? how is that right, fair, sensible?

djimi wrote: »

I say that because I have been through it and know what a joke the system was and still is. The driving test when I took mine (about 13 years ago) was an absolute piss take; fill out a form to get a provisional license (which you could legally drive unaccompanied on your second and subsequent provisional), potter around town with a tester for half an hour, do a hill start, reverse around a corner, dont do anything stupid and away you went with your license. And sure if you failed what harm; you could still drive perfectly legal on a provisional license until you bothered to take it again. I left the driver education system with an understanding of the bare minimum basics of driving (ie how to get from A to B without causing an accident), but thats about it.

In fairness, there was a common perception that many a tester would fail someone on their first test no matter what they did. I did as well or better on my first test as I did on the second, but didnt pass it till the second time around, the only difference was the tester, the biggest hindrance to getting your licence was they didnt seem to pass many a person first time around in years gone by anyway (quotas?).
As for the highlighted bit, well thats all the test ever was I consider, its just an intro, not that you can drive F1, its a minimum entry level requirement, if you want to be better or become an expert you need to go further, in either how you learn from each driving experience to getting further training, I havent taken any additional training but how I looked at my own errors and was willling to accept them and consider each of us is fallible makes me think its constant learning makes me think at least a little that Im a better driver than those that just scrape and are happy with the minimum standard however barely of getting from A-B.

Joe 90 wrote: »

Mind you, I only found out long after I did the test at home, the guy who tested me had the reputation of failing everyone on their first test.

This was known certain testers would fail you regardless of how the test went.

Francie Barrett wrote: »

It's fair enough that they're clamping down on new drivers, but what about all the other maniacs on the road?

What really needs to happen is mandatory 2 year retests.

goway out of that :pac:, that would be some money making scheme
Maybe mandatory retesting if you've commited some serious fault or series of faults, but juts for the sake of it??? so everyone shoudl be retested just because? what? some people are crap drivers and always will be? No.

Brian wrote: »

Just because there are L plates on a car doesn't mean the person inside is a learner driver.

I had been told they are meant to be removed, I dont have a link for this in any legislation, if anyone does?

djimi wrote: »

Mandatory restesting period I support. Not every 2 years though; more like once every 10 years. I see no issues with ensuring that people keep their standards high.

How about only if its required, otherwise it'll be turned into a moneygarnering scheme.

guernica wrote: »

Is it? Surely not if you live in the city.

well a potential 45 minute wait on dublin bus (which was the reason I gave up on dublin bus, and that was the last time I was ever on a bus here) followed by a 45 minute journey, say 15-20 minutes to get to the next stop and bus leave and another 40 minute journey out to destination and possibly a slightly less time on the journey back, no surely yes, its possible so a 20-40 minute journey each way depending on traffic or about 4 hours on buses, yes even possible if you live in the? city, and no chance whatsoever if you work outside normal hours.

I agree with N plates, but I dont believe in penalising people with certain severe restrictions before they have made an error, I do think there should be some restrictions and that they should change from year1 to 2 and from year 2 to becoming unrestricted.

None of it'll matter if it wont even be policed, so it makes it seem like its a matter of just going through the motions.

The_Honeybadger

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

In the UK, it does as it is an offense to leave the L plates up when a non "l" driver is driving.
We should do the same over here.

We have two cars in my house, both have L plates on as my wife is learning and is insured in both cars. It wouldn't be practical to take them off every time I sit into the car to drive. She never drives unaccompanied and hopes to pass the test later in the year.

To the people saying they see lots of L plated cars with just the driver inside bear in mind it could be a fully licenced driver using a car that somebody also uses to learn in.

I must say peoples attitudes to L drivers can be appalling. We drive a 20km commute to work every morning, most of the way has a 80kmh limit and my wife goes along somewhere between 70-80kmh. The amount of lunatics we encounter every morning is frightening, tailgating, overtaking coming into corners etc. Nobody seems to want to give the L driver a break and let them learn, she is usually in bits by the time we get to work and is finding it extremely difficult.

No Pants

cerastes wrote: »

I dont think the measure of ability should be based on the lowest common denominator, more each based on their own ability.
...if I or someone else could show the ability to pass a certain competency level in driving

having a larff right? how is that right, fair, sensible?

Is that not a contradiction? You say that everyone should be tested based on their own ability, yet is not being able to basic what is agreed to be a pretty basic test inside of five years not a measure of that? It doesn't have to be three licences, you can make it five or whatever. But there should be a cut off point where the decision is finally made that you just can't drive. Driving is not a right, no matter what people living in the far end of Ballygobackwards might think. It's fair if it applies to everyone.

I really can't see what the problem is with getting unlicenced and incompetent drivers off the roads and I don't understand why everyone is against it.

NIMAN

Cerastes

When I said I would have been scared, I meant if I got into a car for the 1st time ever, with no tuition, on my own and went out on to main roads. Because in Ireland that was acceptable and happened.

In NI, the first 12 - 20 times you are ever on a road in a car you are generally accompanied by a trained driving instructor, and not on your own. Perhaps some peoples parents might have taken them out for a few lessons first, but there would never have been a case of someone being able to just head out driving on their own having never done it before.

I find that incredible.

For the record, I was a confident driver, and always have been. Never had any nerves on the road. I was just saying if my Dad had handed me the keys to his car and said "batter away there son, head out a drive" when I was 17, then I would have been scared.

djimi

No Pants wrote: »

Is that not a contradiction? You say that everyone should be tested based on their own ability, yet is not being able to basic what is agreed to be a pretty basic test inside of five years not a measure of that? It doesn't have to be three licences, you can make it five or whatever. But there should be a cut off point where the decision is finally made that you just can't drive. Driving is not a right, no matter what people living in the far end of Ballygobackwards might think. It's fair if it applies to everyone.

I really can't see what the problem is with getting unlicenced and incompetent drivers off the roads and I don't understand why everyone is against it.

I don't believe that you can or should restrict somebodies ability to learn to drive, however I do believe that after a certain number of fails you should no longer be able to drive on public roads in a private car, and should only be allowed drive under instruction in a school car.

Dublin Red Devil

I can't see this being enforced around the country. Plenty of laws are in the books but never really enforced. Common sense prevails

NIMAN

You can't enforce a lot of laws, but doesn't stop you having them.

The fear of being caught is meant to change people's actions.

djimi

NIMAN wrote: »

You can't enforce a lot of laws, but doesn't stop you having them.

The fear of being caught is meant to change people's actions.

The problem here is that there is no fear of being caught. I know full well that I could drive a car across the country and back ten times without tax, insurance, NCT, not wearing a seatbelt, on the phone etc, and so long as I dont encounter a speed camera there is almost no chance of me being done for anything. Even the speed vans arent effective in that we all know by now the handful of spots in our local area where they will be parked.

No Pants

djimi wrote: »

I don't believe that you can or should restrict somebodies ability to learn to drive, however I do believe that after a certain number of fails you should no longer be able to drive on public roads in a private car, and should only be allowed drive under instruction in a school car.

That sounds like a reasonable compromise.

TimeToShine

mickeyk wrote: »

I must say peoples attitudes to L drivers can be appalling. We drive a 20km commute to work every morning, most of the way has a 80kmh limit and my wife goes along somewhere between 70-80kmh. The amount of lunatics we encounter every morning is frightening, tailgating, overtaking coming into corners etc. Nobody seems to want to give the L driver a break and let them learn, she is usually in bits by the time we get to work and is finding it extremely difficult.

lol.

Do you not realize people have to be at work at that hour? If she wants to practice she has all hours of the day that aren't between 8 and 9. I certainly wouldn't be happy pottering along at 70km/h at 20 to 9 and I can see why others aren't as well. If anything, I think people in this country are very conservative and generous to L plate drivers. We're dickheads to each other alright but always give L plates a safe enough distance.

No Pants

TimeToShine wrote: »

I certainly wouldn't be happy pottering along at 70km/h at 20 to 9

In an 80km/h limit?

Cleveland Hot Pocket

TimeToShine wrote: »

lol.

Do you not realize people have to be at work at that hour? If she wants to practice she has all hours of the day that aren't between 8 and 9. I certainly wouldn't be happy pottering along at 70km/h at 20 to 9 and I can see why others aren't as well. If anything, I think people in this country are very conservative and generous to L plate drivers. We're dickheads to each other alright but always give L plates a safe enough distance.

+1
On most 80kmh road (likes of Dual Carriageways and good national roads) 80 is too slow. Anything less than 80 unless there are mitigating weather conditions or lack of visibility is not acceptable.

Why can't she practice/learn at the weekends, or another quieter time, when people aren't driving to/from work

djimi

More annoying even than L drivers on the road in rush hour is driving school cars. There is one that I encounter on the way into work every so often, who for some reason seems to enjoy throwing proper novice drivers (ie at the level who can barely take off from traffic lights) into rush hour traffic, to the major annoyance of the other road users.

I want to say that it would be an idea to ban learners off the road at certain peak times, but I know full well its probably never going to be workable. And I suppose they need to learn in busy traffic as well as on quiet roads.

Cleveland Hot Pocket

djimi wrote: »

More annoying even than L drivers on the road in rush hour is driving school cars. There is one that I encounter on the way into work every so often, who for some reason seems to enjoy throwing proper novice drivers (ie at the level who can barely take off from traffic lights) into rush hour traffic, to the major annoyance of the other road users.

I want to say that it would be an idea to ban learners off the road at certain peak times, but I know full well its probably never going to be workable. And I suppose they need to learn in busy traffic as well as on quiet roads.

I think the best learning progression is gradually move from industrial estates off peak to quiet roads to busier roads.

djimi

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

I think the best learning progression is gradually move from industrial estates off peak to quiet roads to busier roads.

Yup. And I have no issues whatsoever with learners on the road who are capable of driving properly/confidently. It is however massively annoying to be stuck behind a driving school car that cannot properly operate a clutch at 8.20 in the morning :mad:

BuffyBot

blue note wrote: »

I agree, but what am to do differently when I see one? I just don't really see the purpose of having them displayed.

Do what we all should do, all the time in an ideal world: be considerate.
Appreciate that as a new driver they may not have the same experience navigating the roads and dealing with weather/traffic/junctions/hazards.

No Pants

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

+1
On most 80kmh road (likes of Dual Carriageways and good national roads) 80 is too slow. Anything less than 80 unless there are mitigating weather conditions or lack of visibility is not acceptable.

Why can't she practice/learn at the weekends, or another quieter time, when people aren't driving to/from work

Or why can't people leave for work five minutes earlier and don't take their stress into the car with them?

Jesus.

djimi wrote: »

I have taken further driving education myself since passing the test.

But have you been retested? According to you your first test was a joke so you can take all the "further driving education" you want but how are we to know you're up to the job if you've not been given a test up to your own requirements?

djimi wrote: »

Yes.

I'm sure that having been told you passed your test, instead of being delighted, you were disgusted at the standard of the test you'd just had and told the instructor so.... :rolleyes:

djimi wrote: »

There you go again with that frankly absurd attitude that motorists and motoring enthusiasts should want less enforcement. I enjoy driving and want the standard on our roads to be as high as possible. Its impossible to enjoy driving fully when we share the roads with people who do not know how to use roundabouts, multi-lane carraigeways etc. I want the roads to be safer places for all of us, and if that means more enforcement of the laws then great. Its not a hard concept to understand.

Therein lies the problem. You believe the roads are there for your enjoyment because you're a "car guy". They're not. They're there for hard-pressed mothers and fathers and hard-working people to go about their daily lives and get by as best they can. The last thing on people's minds (those with a life anyway) is worrying about whether or not their next-door neighbour put their front tyre across a white line one morning or sneakily ringing the Guards and ratting on everyone they suspect might have done X, Y or Z.

That busy-body, cowardly type of individual who no doubt has no friends or any kind of a life to speak of, should be shunned by everyone who comes across them because they are the worst type of characters in our society. Bitter and self righteous.

Pull up the ladder after yourselves there boys...

same ol sh1te

When are they going to bring in re-tests every 10 yrs for over 40s? I see plenty on the roads who can't drive

jimgoose

Jesus. wrote: »

...Therein lies the problem. You believe the roads are there for your enjoyment because you're a "car guy". They're not. They're there for hard-pressed mothers and fathers and hard-working people to go about their daily lives and get by as best they can.

Therein lies the problem. This notion that second-rate slapdash is good enough because people are mothers/fathers/employed/unemployed/tall/short/freckled/whatever.

Jesus. wrote: »

The last thing on people's minds (those with a life anyway) is worrying about whether or not their next-door neighbour put their front tyre across a white line one morning or sneakily ringing the Guards and ratting on everyone they suspect might have done X, Y or Z.

That busy-body, cowardly type of individual who no doubt has no friends or any kind of a life to speak of, should be shunned by everyone who comes across them because they are the worst type of characters in our society. Bitter and self righteous.

Pull up the ladder after yourselves there boys...

I think you just might be of a pole-vaulting to conclusions there. :pac:

frozenfrozen

fcuk this.. I'm on a provisional. My first. 4 lessons in on the mandatory ones, and the 6 months before being able to take the test is over in september. So no matter what, I'll have to have these novice plates up for two years? What's the point of these 12 lessons I'm paying out the hole for if by the end of it, I'll just be a novice? I never drive without a fully licensed person in the car with me. I'll have a full licence, I'll be paying 2 grand for my insurance, and the car will be taxed and nct'd, that's a lot more than a lot of the drivers I see every day.

If the standard they're teaching to in the mandatory lessons is 'novice' I can't imagine what rating they would give to all the people texting, not indicating, going too slow, not doing any maintenance on their car, bald tyres, etc. Oh that's right they don't have to have novice plates and they get cheap as **** insurance!

This is just another thing that's going to **** me over, and it won't affect the people who currently drive on their own on L plates. Stuff like this would just encourage you to break the law. Get **** all in return for paying for lessons which will make me a novice, pay huge insurance to subsidise other young people who are idiots and don't drive carefully. And I'll have to look like a tool driving around with a big N plate on my car, because if I don't you can be sure the normal looking young guy driving with all the other legal bits and pieces would be pulled and fined for not having it, whereas the group of scumbags flying around in the bora with some boo offa her lad would be left off

djimi

Jesus. wrote: »

But have you been retested? According to you your first test was a joke so you can take all the "further driving education" you want but how are we to know you're up to the job if you've not been given a test up to your own requirements?

Retested to what standard? Unless you know of a higher level of driving test in this country I think it would be rather a fruitless exercise to retake the same test again, dont you?

Jesus. wrote: »

I'm sure that having been told you passed your test, instead of being delighted, you were disgusted at the standard of the test you'd just had and told the instructor so.... :rolleyes:

If you had asked me at the time was the test comprehensive enough I would have said no. Just like Im saying now.

Jesus. wrote: »

Therein lies the problem. You believe the roads are there for your enjoyment because you're a "car guy". They're not. They're there for hard-pressed mothers and fathers and hard-working people to go about their daily lives and get by as best they can. The last thing on people's minds (those with a life anyway) is worrying about whether or not their next-door neighbour put their front tyre across a white line one morning or sneakily ringing the Guards and ratting on everyone they suspect might have done X, Y or Z.

That busy-body, cowardly type of individual who no doubt has no friends or any kind of a life to speak of, should be shunned by everyone who comes across them because they are the worst type of characters in our society. Bitter and self righteous.

Pull up the ladder after yourselves there boys...

Read what I said again and stop looking to twist it to suit your agenda. I want to be able to enjoy safer roads and be able to drive knowing that the people I share a road with are at a competant standard. I want to be able to take a roundabout safe in the knowledge that the person in the lane beside me is not going to drive into the side of my when they take the exit in the wrong lane (something that I am very fearful of currently as I have experienced it numerous times). Id like to be able to drive down the Naas dual carraigeway at the speed limit in the driving lane and not have to constantly cross two lanes to overtake the moron who is driving in the middle lane 25km/h under the speed limit. Thats all I ask, and I dont think that too much to ask from any of us.

Cleveland Hot Pocket

No Pants wrote: »

Or why can't people leave for work five minutes earlier and don't take their stress into the car with them?

Or you know, just keep learners off the road until they are competent?
1 learner vs potentially 10's-100's of competent drivers, I wonder who should be inconvenienced!

obezyana

I don't get the L drivers bashing on this forum. I would bet anything that a lot of fully licensed drivers are just as bad as L drivers so why the hatred towards someone starting off. It's a load of bull**** the notion that just because you have a pink licence makes you better than some one with a green one.

Every single person that has a full licence should be tested every 10/12 yrs to see how competent they are.

Iv seen some stupid driving on the M9 when I was driving it everyday and these are the supposed qualified drivers...........it's more the attitude of hey I have my pink piece of paper I can drive where ever I want however I want. Then you have people learning to drive which we all had to do they are the ones getting slated which is not fair.

There seems to be a sense of ignorance with drivers in this country because as soon as one gets his/her licence they round up on those who don't.

We need to stop teaching religion in school free up those resources to teach kids how to drive and maybe then driving standards might improve. The very notion that a simple driving test and a pink piece of paper qualifies one to drive anywhere they want is madness and the very notion that one can't drive just because they have L plates is laughable.

mossieh

Just to point out, a lot of unaccompanied drivers with L-plates up aren't learners but their children/partners etc are.

obezyana

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

Or you know, just keep learners off the road until they are competent?
1 learner vs potentially 10's-100's of competent drivers, I wonder who should be inconvenienced!

I seem to remember reading a thread about you acting the bollox on the road...... So how does that make you a competent driver? Your kinda being a hypocrite there. But oh wait it's ok because you can drive better than a L driver as you have a pink licence. FFS some people really do have double standards.

Jesus.

jimgoose wrote: »

Therein lies the problem. This notion that second-rate slapdash is good enough because people are mothers/fathers/employed/unemployed/tall/short/freckled/whatever.

No Goose, not second-rate or slapdash. Competent, which despite all the ranting and raving on here, most Irish drivers are. Yes there could be improvements, particularly in the education of people on Motorway lane discipline and things like tailgating. I'm all for that but there's a difference between treating people with respect and educating them, acknowledging that none of us are perfect on the road (including you Dimj believe it or not ) and denouncing all and sundry, trying to make it extremely difficult for new drivers to get on the road and being constantly annoyed and enraged at every meaningless little tit bit you see on the road. And worse still, the barely concealed glee when someone hears of a fellow Motorist being done for some innocuous little indiscretion. I maintain that the righteous ones are as guilty as anyone in their everyday lives but wouldn't say as much on here.

People have to live in the real World, not by adhering to a black and white little rule book 100% of the time and thankfully the majority of our Police force recognise this and police accordingly without trying to hunt down everyone for Mickey Mouse stuff that has no real relevance.

jimgoose wrote: »

I think you just might be of a pole-vaulting to conclusions there. :pac:

Nope. Some posters have openly admitted to ringing the Police regularly to squeal on their fellow citizens because they thought they might be about to commit a motoring offence. I know if it was me I'd handle such situations differently and to be fair, I know the majority of decent people would likewise.

Anyway, that's me out of this Forum for a while because the Mods might have had enough of my own ranting at this stage and act accordingly themselves!

djimi

obezyana wrote: »

It's a load of bull**** the notion that just because you have a pink licence makes you better than some one with a green one.

One might not be better than the other, but one has at least proven that they meet the minimum standard of competancy.

obezyana wrote: »

Every single person that has a full licence should be tested every 10/12 yrs to see how competent they are.

Agreed.

obezyana wrote: »

Iv seen some stupid driving on the M9 when I was driving it everyday and these are the supposed qualified drivers...........it's more the attitude of hey I have my pink piece of paper I can drive where ever I want however I want. Then you have people learning to drive which we all had to do they are the ones getting slated which is not fair.

There are good drivers and there are bad drivers. Just reinforces your point above about retesting really.

obezyana wrote: »

There seems to be a sense of ignorance with drivers in this country because as soon as soon as one gets his/her licence they round up on those who don't.

A lot of the grievances you hear about learners are genuine to be fair. For instance, they should not be driving around unaccompanied and its a disgrace that we have a police force who have no interest in enforcing this law. Its also a royal pain in the ass when you are stuck behind a driving school car and a driver who is not competant enough to be in traffic at half 8 in the morning when youre trying to get to work; I dont care if you have the patience of a saint, thats going to annoy you eventually!

Then there are people who are just jerks, and who show no patience and see L plates as a target for abuse. These people exist in all walks of life, and are most likely as bad off the road as they are on it. Such is life unfortuately.

obezyana wrote: »

We need to stop teaching religion in school free up those resources to teach kids how to drive and maybe then driving standards might improve. The very notion that a simple driving test and a pink piece of paper qualifies one to drive anywhere they want is madness and the very notion that one can't drive just because they have L plates is laughable.

Agreed, it would be a much more productive use of school time and quite frankly I have no idea why we dont have drivers ed in schools over here.