N drivers, where can drive

rafapietrzyk

Hello i have some questions i get my full licence now i drive before 4 years nearly on L plates i know shock! hehe but forget. My questions is if i have N plates can use motorway? and driving everywhere in Ireland?
And my second question is can i drive outside Ireland? Northern Ireland?, England or european Country? Or is only valid in Ireland? after two years what happen? i must do another test or only remove my plate from car windows? Thanks for any answer!

Jesus.

This Country has brought in some daft laws but this "N" plate thing takes the fu*king biscuit

rafapietrzyk

Jesus hehe ok but if possible can you explain for my questions is very important for me thank you very much!

ShaunieVW

You have full use of our roads now!

rafapietrzyk

ShaunieVW wrote: »

You have full use of our roads now!

Heheh really? outside Ireland as well?

Spook_ie

All here, if not these are the people to ask
http://www.rsa.ie/RSA/Licensed-Drivers/Driving-licence/Novice-Plates-Introduction/

CiniO

rafapietrzyk wrote: »

Heheh really? outside Ireland as well?

Of course. You can drive anywhere you wish.
All over Ireland.
All over EU.
And in all countries that accept Irish driving licence, which probably would be most countries in the world.
No restrictions.

And when you are abroad, you don't need to use "N" plate, unless law of the country you are driving in, require something for drivers who held driving licence for short period.

rafapietrzyk

CiniO wrote: »

Of course. You can drive anywhere you wish.
All over Ireland.
All over EU.
And in all countries that accept Irish driving licence, which probably would be most countries in the world.
No restrictions.

And when you are abroad, you don't need to use "N" plate, unless law of the country you are driving in, require something for drivers who held driving licence for short period.

WHOOOO!!! that the job MAN!! Ireland is my now hehehe thank you for answers!

Zoney

Yeh, not an actual restricted licence, you've the normal full one. Just a requirement here to have the n plates up for the first two years. Not entirely sure of the rationale, maybe just get people used to the idea and have an actual restricted licence in future?

CiniO

Zoney wrote: »

Not entirely sure of the rationale, maybe just get people used to the idea and have an actual restricted licence in future?

What about that N plates are there to warn other drivers that they are dealing with someone unexperienced, who is more likely to make mistakes on the road?
IMO good idea.

ba_barabus

CiniO wrote: »

What about that N plates are there to warn other drivers that they are dealing with someone unexperienced, who is more likely to make mistakes on the road?
IMO good idea.

Agree 100%

I give more time now and space when I see an N Plate. I've experience of it in the UK and I think it's a great idea.

slimjimmc

Zoney wrote: »

Yeh, not an actual restricted licence, you've the normal full one. Just a requirement here to have the n plates up for the first two years. Not entirely sure of the rationale, maybe just get people used to the idea and have an actual restricted licence in future?

Although the licence is a full licence with no speed or travel restrictions there's a bit more to it than just a sign. Novice drivers are limited to a max of 7 penalty points, have a lower alcohol limit and can't act as an accompanying driver for a learner (2 yr rule).
I think one of the ideas put about at the time was that the novice phase will help instill an awareness among the newly qualified that they've still got a lot of learning to do and are still quite vulnerable.

Jesus.

CiniO wrote: »

What about that N plates are there to warn other drivers that they are dealing with someone unexperienced, who is more likely to make mistakes on the road? IMO good idea.

ba_barabus wrote: »

Agree 100% I give more time now and space when I see an N Plate. I've experience of it in the UK and I think it's a great idea.

Funny how it always seems to be a good idea by folk that have their licence and never had to put these stupid plates up :rolleyes:

thesimpsons

Jesus. wrote: »

Funny how it always seems to be a good idea by folk that have their licence and never had to put these stupid plates up :rolleyes:

I have full licence over 20 years ago in another country and had to use them when I first got my licence. What's the problem with them ? just put it up and drive.

SureYWouldntYa

Something really bugs me about the N plates. I've me license since December, but can't really afford a car or insurance yet so it'll be a good 2/3 years before I'll be on the road again. I won't have gotten any more experience on the road, but the N plates won't have to be put up. The whole thing is a sham

Alanstrainor

SureYWouldntYa wrote: »

Something really bugs me about the N plates. I've me license since December, but can't really afford a car or insurance yet so it'll be a good 2/3 years before I'll be on the road again. I won't have gotten any more experience on the road, but the N plates won't have to be put up. The whole thing is a sham

Not much of a sham really, you just happen to be an edge case. The system does make sense for the majority of newly qualified drivers.

Mechanic365

CiniO wrote: »

What about that N plates are there to warn other drivers that they are dealing with someone unexperienced, who is more likely to make mistakes on the road?
IMO good idea.

So your saying that the guy that is often younger, recently spent over 400 quid on getting 12+ MANDATORY driving lessons and passed a driving test whom may have held a learner permit for anything over 6months is more likely to cause an accident than the guy that did a completely different test maybe 40+ years ago that involved driving around a village in a cortina and not doing any lessons or test since that to PROVE that they can still drive safely!

I mean like the guy with the n plate has made an effort and has his training fresh in his mind, has probably had to get a full licence for work wheather it be a driving job or just getting to work, had to fork out ridiculous amounts of money to instructors, the rsa, insurance companies and the tax man when old Harry in his cortina probably gets insureance for 200euro and hasn't thought about re-training himself once!

In case you didn't know if you fail the test you don't get a full licence! So maybe you can keep away from the L plates instead

CiniO

Mechanic365 wrote: »

So your saying that the guy that is often younger, recently spent over 400 quid on getting 12+ MANDATORY driving lessons and passed a driving test whom may have held a learner permit for anything over 6months is more likely to cause an accident than the guy that did a completely different test maybe 40+ years ago that involved driving around a village in a cortina and not doing any lessons or test since that to PROVE that they can still drive safely!

Pretty much yes, that's what I'm saying.
And it's not particularly about causing accident, but in general. Unexperienced driver car do some stupid things on the road. The more experience you get, the more likely you are to react correctly in most situations and foresee what might happen.

I mean like the guy with the n plate has made an effort and has his training fresh in his mind, has probably had to get a full licence for work wheather it be a driving job or just getting to work, had to fork out ridiculous amounts of money to instructors, the rsa, insurance companies and the tax man when old Harry in his cortina probably gets insureance for 200euro and hasn't thought about re-training himself once!

Well 12 driving lessons with instructor, and some practice on your own is not really plenty. IMO it's way too little to learn to drive properly. IMO it should be at least 30 hours with an instructor.
But it still doesn't change a fact, that right after passing your test, you are most likely very unexperiences driver, and having N plate is a good idea.

In case you didn't know if you fail the test you don't get a full licence! So maybe you can keep away from the L plates instead

I don't really get what you mean here.

Mechanic365

CiniO wrote: »

.....but in general. Unexperienced driver car do some stupid things on the road....

Thats completely true.... for those that DONT have their test and lessons done, in fairness you do learn properly now with the lessons things about turning properly, pedestrians speed etc.
You won't pass a test if you can't drive safely, not properly ok but safe

CiniO wrote: »

The more experience you get, the more likely you are to react correctly in most situations and foresee what might happen

I agree 100% but hardly anybody takes it seriously enough to actually better themselves in this country anyway, everyone just takes it for granted the older they get.

What I'm trying to point out is there is nothing to show if a non novice driver is capable of driving properly since the testing procedure and you are legal to drive even if you did your test a hundred years ago. There's nothing to say you were driving for the whole 100 or just 2 years, you just renewed your license!

But there is evidence to show that a Novice driver has had recent training and had to pass a TEST in the last 2years or less

Then you've got the learner, all they did was a theory test, only thing to go by with them is their should be an experienced driver with them

I'm not trying to make enemies here but highlighting this typical stereotyping of drivers and the huge gaps in the system

We give out about old drivers as much as young drivers

challengemaster

Mechanic365 wrote: »

So your saying that the guy that is often younger, recently spent over 400 quid on getting 12+ MANDATORY driving lessons and passed a driving test whom may have held a learner permit for anything over 6months is more likely to cause an accident than the guy that did a completely different test maybe 40+ years ago that involved driving around a village in a cortina and not doing any lessons or test since that to PROVE that they can still drive safely!

I'd wager the majority of people taking driving tests are young drivers. It also nicely coincides with the fact that the majority of accidents can be attributed to that age group*. Most crashes are due to driver error which is also linked to inexperience.

Whether you like it or not - inexperienced drivers are a bigger risk than experienced drivers.


* an age group I also fall into, before you jump down my throat

In case you didn't know if you fail the test you don't get a full licence! So maybe you can keep away from the L plates instead

Mechanic365 wrote: »

Thats completely true.... for those that DONT have their test and lessons done

Both groups of drivers need to be given space, that's the point. Someone who passed their test does not make them a perfectly flawless driver, incapable of making errors. To think that is nothing short of stupidity. Most people make mistakes DURING their test.

The N plate gives other drivers an indication that the driver isn't very experienced. Similar to how you wouldn't sit bumper to bumper behind an L plate car on a hill, drivers will be aware to give N-plates extra space and extra time for moving off/etc.

Mechanic365

challengemaster wrote: »

The N plate gives other drivers an indication that the driver isn't very experienced. Similar to how you wouldn't sit bumper to bumper behind an L plate car on a hill, drivers will be aware to give N-plates extra space and extra time for moving off/etc.

Agreed challengemaster experienced drivers are less likely to cause accidents, annoyingly the insurers think this by a factor of about times 12 or 13 but anyway

What is annoying me is now they've singled out this minority of people with an N plate and everyone has taken on this perception of them, ok but everyone else is supposedly grand then

Let's say I know of at least 10 lads whom had driving convictions and are back on the road, can't tell them apart from other drivers. 3 of those guys in particular hit other cars causing fatalities, ok accidents but 2 of those guys were illegally over the speed limit
So once they have been off the road for so long they're grand ya? No special plates or ways of telling them apart from everyone else

Anyways look I've been venting anger a bit lately, I've seen some drivers getting away with dangerous driving and having got warnings, penalty points and fines still create havoc for the honest motorist trying to get from a to b and they have to encounter these people with no warning

Rant over

Mechanic365

challengemaster wrote: »

* an age group I also fall into, before you jump down my throat

I hear ya, it's sickening me. Insurance companies have them by the balls and don't take into account I've been driving work vehicles from 13years old

Gavin "shels"

On the topic, I'm just wondering what's the lower drink level for 'N' plate drivers? And in layman terms, is it half a pint?

CiniO

Gavin shels wrote: »

On the topic, I'm just wondering what's the lower drink level for 'N' plate drivers? And in layman terms, is it half a pint?

Lowed drink limit is 20mg of alcohol per 100ml of blood.
Standard limit is 50mg.

Half pint could easily be over the lower limit if some cases.

ABajaninCork

Gavin shels wrote: »

On the topic, I'm just wondering what's the lower drink level for 'N' plate drivers? And in layman terms, is it half a pint?

Here's a radical idea. How about not drinking at all? Novice drivers need all their concentration to drive and gain experience on the road. Drinking should not be part of that.

If you must drink, then leave the car at home. Have a nominated driver, get a cab or use Shanks Pony!!

Gavin "shels"

ABajaninCork wrote: »

Here's a radical idea. How about not drinking at all? Novice drivers need all their concentration to drive and gain experience on the road. Drinking should not be part of that.

If you must drink, then leave the car at home. Have a nominated driver, get a cab or use Shanks Pony!!

Was expecting a response like this sooner...

Just in the off chance I decided to have a drink, on Christmas Eve I had a pint and drove 2 hours later and was weary at that. Just what to be safe from a legal point of view!

ABajaninCork

Not being funny, but if you expected a response like mine, why on earth did you put up the question?

You have to decide what's more important - having a drink or keeping your licence having spent time and money in getting it?? FFS It's not rocket science! If you want to drink - fine. Get someone else to drive, get a bus/cab or walk.

Not drinking whilst socialising isn't going to kill you. Drinking and driving is far more likely to do that.

CiniO

ABajaninCork wrote: »

Not being funny, but if you expected a response like mine, why on earth did you put up the question?

He put up the question because he expected an answer - not only like yours.

You have to decide what's more important - having a drink or keeping your licence having spent time and money in getting it?? FFS It's not rocket science! If you want to drink - fine. Get someone else to drive, get a bus/cab or walk.

Not drinking whilst socialising isn't going to kill you. Drinking and driving is far more likely to do that.

Well instead of following some saint rule, it's better to actually know what you are doing.

F.e. with 50mg limit I would drink a pint and drive 2 hours later. But with lower 20mg limit I'd rather not, even though that chances I would over it are slim as I'm 15 stone weight. But to be on safe side, no point in chancing.
On the other hand, there's no way you could be over 50mg limit 2 hours after drinking a pint (of average <5% beer).

Just follow some reasonable logic and don't take chances.

ABajaninCork

What a nonsense response. Sorry, but that's bullcr*p. I'm no saint. But I'm also not foolish enough to risk my licence because I want to drink with my mates.

For example. I had the best part of two bottles of wine with my friend this evening. But I'm not stupid enough to drive tomorrow morning. Or even the afternoon come to that. I prefer to put up with the inconvenience of not using my car for a few hours so that I can have a drink if I want.

Do without the drink for a few hours if you want to drive. Or do without the car if you drink. Simple.

CiniO

ABajaninCork wrote: »

What a nonsense response. Sorry, but that's bullcr*p. I'm no saint. But I'm also not foolish enough to risk my licence because I want to drink with my mates.

For example. I had the best part of two bottles of wine with my friend this evening. But I'm not stupid enough to drive tomorrow morning. Or even the afternoon come to that. I prefer to put up with the inconvenience of not using my car for a few hours so that I can have a drink if I want.

Do without the drink for a few hours if you want to drive. Or do without the car if you drink. Simple.

Nononsense here.
Did I say anything about risking a licence by driving over the limit?

Take your example - you said you had best part of two bottles of wine with your friend. You are not going to drive tomorrow morning and afternoon. So I assume you will feel that you are OK to drive tomorrow evening, and most likely you are right.

And that's the whole story - you judged yourself that you will be under the limit tomorrow evening.

If I drink a pint now, I'll be perfectly sure I'm under the legal limit in 2 hours.
In fact most likely I'm under the limit right away after drinking as one pint is not going to put me over the limit, but as I don't like to take the risk, I'd wait those 2 hours.

You are saying - you drink so don't drive, but it's all a question of time when you will be ready to drive.