New legislation concerning learner drivers

boardsuser1

What are people's opinions on this article?

Is it right to seize a car from a driver who is driving unaccompanied?

Do people believe Noel Clancy is right considering the impact an unaccompanied learner driver had on his family?

https://www.rte.ie/news/2017/1011/911530-unaccompanied-drivers/

spurious

No point having a law that is not enforced, in my opinion.

LirW

It's called learner for a reason. That person is learning how to drive. There is a timespan when people learn to drive where they think they are good at it and have the routine when in reality they don't and that leads to overestimating their own skills.
If you're a learner, do the test, simple.

Alanstrainor

Learner drivers should not be driving unaccompanied full stop. If there is more stringent laws brought in to combat this then I would welcome it. Fines for parents/car owners who allow their car to be driven by unaccompanied drivers is interesting, and I suppose it makes sense. Obviously enforcement of any changes to law is critical.

boardsuser1

Section 41 of the road traffic act will need to be amended to seize the vehicles.

I see no mention of it as yet.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2006/act/23/enacted/en/print#sec19

I love Sean nos

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

Is it right to seize a car from a driver who is driving unaccompanied?

Yes.

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

Do people believe Noel Clancy is right considering the impact an unaccompanied learner driver had on his family?

Yes.

Mf310

LirW wrote:

It's called learner for a reason. That person is learning how to drive. There is a timespan when people learn to drive where they think they are good at it and have the routine when in reality they don't and that leads to overestimating their own skills. If you're a learner, do the test, simple.

Ya it would be no bother to do the test but firstly you cant apply for a test until 6 months after you got your provisional and then you have another at least 3 4 month wait for a test ..... there have been many other accidents the majority not caused by L drivers .. this one is being publicised because it was an L driver ... it couldve just as easily been an experienced qualified driver that caused the accident ... really you dont hear of many L driver accidents

spookwoman

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

What are people's opinions on this article?

Is it right to seize a car from a driver who is driving unaccompanied?

Do people believe Noel Clancy is right considering the impact an unaccompanied learner driver had on his family?

https://www.rte.ie/news/2017/1011/911530-unaccompanied-drivers/

Yes on both counts. Like drink driving if you kill someone I think it should be classed as murder. No one force you to drink to the point of over the limit and get into a car, just like no one forcing a learner to get into a car and drive unaccompanied.

Rubberchikken

When it was first brought up that a licenced driver had to accompany a learner there was whinging and whining Irish style. How was the kid going to get to college if msmmy had to accompany him and so on.
The mistake the Gardai made then was not stomping down on this from the start.

What's the point in making laws and then not enforcing them?
Also those who draw up these laws - are they really competent? Are they really capable of thinking through all the nutty gritty of what's needed?
We've seen too many laws that show gaping loopholes when brought to everyone's attention.

I think if the owner of the car allows someone with a learners permit to drive their car then they should be punished along with the learner. There's no excuse.

Del2005

Mf310 wrote: »

Ya it would be no bother to do the test but firstly you cant apply for a test until 6 months after you got your provisional and then you have another at least 3 4 month wait for a test ..... there have been many other accidents the majority not caused by L drivers .. this one is being publicised because it was an L driver ... it couldve just as easily been an experienced qualified driver that caused the accident ... really you dont hear of many L driver accidents

You can apply before the 6 months are up, you just can't sit till you had the permit 6 months and complete EBT.

Del2005

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

Section 41 of the road traffic act will need to be amended to seize the vehicles.

I see no mention of it as yet.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2006/act/23/enacted/en/print#sec19

A car can be lifted for no insurance and driving unaccompanied means that you are driving outside the conditions of your permit and therefore aren't insured.


I never understand why this country has to constantly make up new laws for one's we already ignore. If we just enforce our current laws most problems can be resolved but no the politician has to get a photo call announcing a great new law which will be ignored, like the one it's taking over from.

Mf310

Del2005 wrote:

You can apply before the 6 months are up, you just can't sit till you had the permit 6 months and complete EBT.

Yes you can apply but you wont be considered for the waiting until your 6 months are up

boardsuser1

Del2005 wrote: »

A car can be lifted for no insurance and driving unaccompanied means that you are driving outside the conditions of your permit and therefore aren't insured.


I never understand why this country has to constantly make up new laws for one's we already ignore. If we just enforce our current laws most problems can be resolved but no the politician has to get a photo call announcing a great new law which will be ignored, like the one it's taking over from.

You are correct, technically at least.

Third parties are still covered, that’s where the whole insured/not insured issue needs sorting once and for all.

Gardai are still allowing drivers through checkpoints unaccompanied.

Then you have learners with no L plates displayed driving around.

Some might criticise me for this, but is it time to ask every driver to show their licence/permit at a checkpoint even if the discs in the window are in order?

It is a legal requirement to carry them after all.

If I was stopped with no digi card,CPC card or licence I doubt my truck would move another inch.

I love Sean nos

Mf310 wrote: »

Ya it would be no bother to do the test but firstly you cant apply for a test until 6 months after you got your provisional

Wrong.

Mf310 wrote: »

and then you have another at least 3 4 month wait for a test

Is being an adult difficult for you? If that's how long it takes to get your licence, that's how long it takes. It doesn't give you an excuse to cut corners.

I've ignored the rest of your post as it had nothing to do with the OP and was just whining about life is hard or something.

murphthesmurf

I do a lot of driving around the midlands and the number of unaccompanied learners is shocking, some are blatantly learners as they haven't a clue. I dropped my son at football once, there was a lady dropping her son off. She had L plates in the windows, she barely had even the basics of clutch control etc. Engine roaring as she went back and forth, back and forth, bouncing off kerbs trying to turn around.
I have a lot of respect for the Gards, but when it comes to things like this they really are lacking. It is not all that difficult to tell whether someone with L plates is in fact an unaccompanied learner or just someone else using the car from their driving. The condition of a lot of vehicles too is another matter. I see vehicles on the road which could not conceivably have an NCT due to their condition driving around care free.
We have speed traps set up around the country to catch people 10kph over the limit, yet knowingly allow people without even a licence drive around without any fear of being caught. It makes no sense.

boardsuser1

murphthesmurf wrote: »

I do a lot of driving around the midlands and the number of unaccompanied learners is shocking, some are blatantly learners as they haven't a clue. I dropped my son at football once, there was a lady dropping her son off. She had L plates in the windows, she barely had even the basics of clutch control etc. Engine roaring as she went back and forth, back and forth, bouncing off kerbs trying to turn around.
I have a lot of respect for the Gards, but when it comes to things like this they really are lacking. It is not all that difficult to tell whether someone with L plates is in fact an unaccompanied learner or just someone else using the car from their driving. The condition of a lot of vehicles too is another matter. I see vehicles on the road which could not conceivably have an NCT due to their condition driving around care free.
We have speed traps set up around the country to catch people 10kph over the limit, yet knowingly allow people without even a licence drive around without any fear of being caught. It makes no sense.

Seems like a countrywide issue that you’ve explained.

Some traffic corps Gardai take it very seriously though.

Anyone looking in here from Limerick would know who Robocop is, and I don’t mean the film.

LirW

I passed a checkpoint in Dublin recently, I'm driving with L-Plates since my partner is a Learner.
They took that very seriously and checked my license and wanted to know if I'm on the policy.
The problem in rural areas is that there aren't any checkpoints ever. I could probably do the school runs and local drives easily without insurance or NCT, the change that you'd get caught is very low.
Not that I'd do, my car is up to date, road safety is no joke.

YellowSheep

I always found this whole L Driver issue ridiculous. My son drove his car to his driver test, FAILED, and drive himself home. There is something wrong with this picture.

BobMc

Yes, and yes, was witness to a child being knocked down by an unaccompanied L driver, but its down to enforcement,
eventually if they ever get their act together I'd hope ANPR will help alot with both uninsured and unlicensed etc.

I love Sean nos

YellowSheep wrote: »

I always found this whole L Driver issue ridiculous. My son drove his car to his driver test, FAILED, and drive himself home. There is something wrong with this picture.

Yes. Your son broke the law unless he took his driving test before June 2008.

spookwoman

murphthesmurf wrote: »

I do a lot of driving around the midlands and the number of unaccompanied learners is shocking, some are blatantly learners as they haven't a clue. I dropped my son at football once, there was a lady dropping her son off. She had L plates in the windows, she barely had even the basics of clutch control etc. Engine roaring as she went back and forth, back and forth, bouncing off kerbs trying to turn around.
I have a lot of respect for the Gards, but when it comes to things like this they really are lacking. It is not all that difficult to tell whether someone with L plates is in fact an unaccompanied learner or just someone else using the car from their driving. The condition of a lot of vehicles too is another matter. I see vehicles on the road which could not conceivably have an NCT due to their condition driving around care free.
We have speed traps set up around the country to catch people 10kph over the limit, yet knowingly allow people without even a licence drive around without any fear of being caught. It makes no sense.

Just sit outside a school in the morning and evening to see the amount of unaccompanied Learners and cars with no tax, nct etc.

boardsuser1

spookwoman wrote: »

Just sit outside a school in the morning and evening to see the amount of unaccompanied Learners and cars with no tax, nct etc.

Just back from the local school run, they are out in their droves as it is the change over time for the local Garda station.

murphthesmurf

spookwoman wrote: »

Just sit outside a school in the morning and evening to see the amount of unaccompanied Learners and cars with no tax, nct etc.

This is true, mothers seem to be the worse offenders. Which is surprising to me as I would always expect mothers to be the most responsible. I don't understand how someone can put the most important thing in the world i.e. their children into the car with them when they don't even have a licence. I was on a supermarket car park only 2 days ago, when I got out my car the tyres on the car next to me immediately caught my attention. They were bald, barely any tread left on them at all. What really got me was that it wasn't some young kids car who'd been spinning the wheels impressing the girls, but a 7 seater people carrier complete with child seats! How could a mother or father do that.

greyc

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

You are correct, technically at least.

Some might criticise me for this, but is it time to ask every driver to show their licence/permit at a checkpoint even if the discs in the window are in order?

It is a legal requirement to carry them after all.

If I was stopped with no digi card,CPC card or licence I doubt my truck would move another inch.

Surely it must be possible for Insurance Companies to issue a different colour disc to learner drivers, maybe with red lettering, in that way it would stand out at any checkpoint, so removing L plates would be pointless. It might be a bit of an inconvenience if the car was being shared with a full licence driver, but at least it might cut down on unaccompanied driving.

boardsuser1

greyc wrote: »

Surely it must be possible for Insurance Companies to issue a different colour disc to learner drivers, maybe with red lettering, in that way it would stand out at any checkpoint, so removing L plates would be pointless. It might be a bit of an inconvenience if the car was being shared with a full licence driver, but at least it might cut down on unaccompanied driving.

All jokes aside i never thought of that.

What i seeing here with the neighbours who don't even have a licence is they are scanning the same disc and printing it to suit whichever vehicle it is they drive,i know for a fact they aren't insured as their car was burned out in an arson attack 2 years ago and she admitted to it but then tried retracting what she said.

It is these kind of people who would be an issue.

But in the genuine cases of people who do obey the law and have everything a different coloured disc may work.

The NCT discs have has more different colours than the rainbow over the years for example.

Mandatory black boxes would cause uproar for learner drivers and may well be seen by many as unjust.

LirW

I doubt that this will happen because learners don't hold their own insurance in plenty of cases and many others have others on their policy.
I'm holding a full licence but drive a car with a plate (and no, there is no legal requirement to take the L plate down when you're driving with a full licence). For us it was cheaper him getting insurance on a learners permit than for me with a Full EU.
Honestly there needs to be done more from the side of the guards, than doctor around with different colours and the like. It's their job.
If people wanna drive, they'll do, no matter what.

wicklapaul

I think it's all about the €€€€€, I've been driving 30 odd years, so I hadn't to do any of this 12 lessons crap, you just got your licence and drove your car, with your L plate up, which I never put up,
Most young people need their car for getting to and from work, especially in the country side, no buses or trains here to hop on,how am I supposed to get my son to work in his own car when I'm in work also, accompanied driver just bull, I think we should ban all drivers that can't keep up with the road speed limits, nothing worse than coming up behind 10 cars all stuck behind a driving Miss Daisy doing 50km on a 80km road,
Leave the young drivers alone, most of the comments seems to be from people who don't have teenagers that need their cars to get to work,

Sleeper12

A car can be a weapon in the wrong hands. Letting a learner driver take your car unaccompanied is the same as letting a child play with a loaded gun imo

LirW

wicklapaul wrote: »

I think it's all about the €€€€€, I've been driving 30 odd years, so I hadn't to do any of this 12 lessons crap, you just got your licence and drove your car, with your L plate up, which I never put up,
Most young people need their car for getting to and from work, especially in the country side, no buses or trains here to hop on,how am I supposed to get my son to work in his own car when I'm in work also, accompanied driver just bull, I think we should ban all drivers that can't keep up with the road speed limits, nothing worse than coming up behind 10 cars all stuck behind a driving Miss Daisy doing 50km on a 80km road,
Leave the young drivers alone, most of the comments seems to be from people who don't have teenagers that need their cars to get to work,

Bite the bullet, do the licence like any other young person too. I'm not even old but my father was almost killed by a young drunk driver and I do take this very seriously. You're not allowed to perform a surgery on your own as a doctor in training, why should a learner be allowed to drive their car alone?

I love Sean nos

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

Mandatory black boxes would cause uproar for learner drivers and may well be seen by many as unjust.

The law won't be needed for that. Eventually it'll become a condition of motor insurance policies.

murphthesmurf

wicklapaul wrote: »

I think it's all about the €€€€€, I've been driving 30 odd years, so I hadn't to do any of this 12 lessons crap, you just got your licence and drove your car, with your L plate up, which I never put up,
Most young people need their car for getting to and from work, especially in the country side, no buses or trains here to hop on,how am I supposed to get my son to work in his own car when I'm in work also, accompanied driver just bull, I think we should ban all drivers that can't keep up with the road speed limits, nothing worse than coming up behind 10 cars all stuck behind a driving Miss Daisy doing 50km on a 80km road,
Leave the young drivers alone, most of the comments seems to be from people who don't have teenagers that need their cars to get to work,

I agree with you that it is difficult for people in rural areas getting around as the public transport is diabolical. I also agree with the slow drivers (although banning them may be a bit harsh). But it still doesn't mean you should be able to just hop in a car and go for it whether you can drive or not. Where do you draw the line, when does the learner become 'good enough' to go on the road? From the 1st day? Do you just buy a car and hope for the best? Or should you get a bit of experience first? How much experience, and who decides when you've had enough and your 'good enough'?
This is where a driving test comes in handy, if you pass then it indicates that you've got the hang of controlling a car and you understand the laws of the road. That's why it was introduced.
We need to raise the standard of driving, we can't do that with people like you who just decide for themselves when they're good enough.
If you are teaching your sun to drive thats fine, for the basics. But he needs some time with an instructor to make sure he isn't picking up your bad habits. 12 lessons is too much though, but 5 minimum I'd say.

Sue Pa Key Pa

greyc wrote:

Surely it must be possible for Insurance Companies to issue a different colour disc to learner drivers, maybe with red lettering, in that way it would stand out at any checkpoint, so removing L plates would be pointless. It might be a bit of an inconvenience if the car was being shared with a full licence driver, but at least it might cut down on unaccompanied driving.

An insurance disc only proves there is a policy on the car and doesn't refer to any driver. It is a totally outdated practice and ANPR should see the end of it when fully rolled out

Del2005

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

You are correct, technically at least.

Third parties are still covered, that’s where there whole insured/not insured issue needs sorting once and for all.

Gardai are still allowing drivers through checkpoints unaccompanied.

Then you have learners with no L plates displayed driving around.

Some might criticise me for this, but is it time to ask every driver to show their licence/permit at a checkpoint even if the discs in the window are in order?

It is a legal requirement to carry them after all.

If I was stopped with no digi card,CPC card or licence I doubt my truck would move another inch.

If a person has no licence 3rd parties are still covered but their car can be lifted as they have no insurance, the exact same thing for learners driving unaccompanied. So one person without a licence will get their car lifted at a checkpoint but someone ignoring the conditions of their permit is OK!

That's because the Gardaì aren't doing their job, they should be as strict with learners.

Del2005

greyc wrote: »

Surely it must be possible for Insurance Companies to issue a different colour disc to learner drivers, maybe with red lettering, in that way it would stand out at any checkpoint, so removing L plates would be pointless. It might be a bit of an inconvenience if the car was being shared with a full licence driver, but at least it might cut down on unaccompanied driving.

No need for a different coloured insurance disc the legally required document you are carrying will stand out at a checkpoint.

I love Sean nos

wicklapaul wrote: »

I've been driving 30 odd years, so I hadn't to do any of this 12 lessons crap, you just got your licence and drove your car, with your L plate up, which I never put up

Ah, that sounds like a brilliant idea!

Del2005

wicklapaul wrote: »

I think it's all about the €€€€€, I've been driving 30 odd years, so I hadn't to do any of this 12 lessons crap, you just got your licence and drove your car, with your L plate up, which I never put up,
Most young people need their car for getting to and from work, especially in the country side, no buses or trains here to hop on,how am I supposed to get my son to work in his own car when I'm in work also, accompanied driver just bull, I think we should ban all drivers that can't keep up with the road speed limits, nothing worse than coming up behind 10 cars all stuck behind a driving Miss Daisy doing 50km on a 80km road,
Leave the young drivers alone, most of the comments seems to be from people who don't have teenagers that need their cars to get to work,

How do young people in the UK, Germany or the vast majority of other countries get to work? They absolutely can't drive until they pass their test and in Germany it's several grand.

While slow drivers are annoying the queues behind them are usually due to the following drivers not passing or not leaving enough space for others to pass. There are also plenty of vehicles on the road which can't reach the posted limit should they be banned?

murphthesmurf

Del2005 wrote: »

No need for a different coloured insurance disc the legally required document you are carrying will stand out at a checkpoint.

Thinking out loud here, a hypothetical question.
If I drove into the back of an unaccompanied learner driver in a moment of uselessness, so as the accident is completely my fault. Could the unaccompanied learner claim from my insurance? As they are technically not insured. Could I just tell my insurance not to pay as they were unlawfully on the road and have no insurance? In theory is this the case? Most likely in reality my insurance will just crumble and pay out rather than fight it i suspect.

Charles Babbage

As usual though they do this in bits and pieces.
- L plates should be only permitted when a learner is driving.
- Gardai should stop any car with L plates and only one driver, €100 for misusing L plates or seize car if learner driving
- insurance companies should clearly notify Gardai of vehicles insured for L drivers, any such vehicle should be queried at a checkpoint
- double penalties if L driver carrying minors in vehicle
- delays in getting tests should be sorted, these pay for themselves

Sue Pa Key Pa

murphthesmurf wrote:

Thinking out loud here, a hypothetical question. If I drove into the back of an unaccompanied learner driver in a moment of uselessness, so as the accident is completely my fault. Could the unaccompanied learner claim from my insurance? As they are technically not insured. Could I just tell my insurance not to pay as they were unlawfully on the road and have no insurance? In theory is this the case? Most likely in reality my insurance will just crumble and pay out rather than fight it i suspect.

If you cause an accident, you must compensate the other party and rightly so. However, the unaccompanied driver should face the law for their wrongdoing

murphthesmurf

Sue Pa Key Pa wrote: »

If you cause an accident, you must compensate the other party and rightly so. However, the unaccompanied driver should face the law for their wrongdoing

But my thinking is that when an accident like i mentioned happens the claim is handled by the 2 insurance companies. However the learner, when driving alone, was not covered by their insurance. I'm curious how the insurance companies would handle it.

Sue Pa Key Pa

murphthesmurf wrote:

But my thinking is that when an accident like i mentioned happens the claim is handled by the 2 insurance companies. However the learner, when driving alone, was not covered by their insurance. I'm curious how the insurance companies would handle it.

The person who causes the accident pays. It would be the same if you rear ended a drunk driver correctly stopped at traffic lights

junglejim1

This situation is like the old joke about asking to be served in a pub before opening time "sure you might as well have a pint while your waiting"

"Well officer I,m driving unaccompanied while I'm waiting for my test"

Trouble is it ain't funny.

Del2005

murphthesmurf wrote: »

But my thinking is that when an accident like i mentioned happens the claim is handled by the 2 insurance companies. However the learner, when driving alone, was not covered by their insurance. I'm curious how the insurance companies would handle it.

The person driving alone doesn't need insurance if you rear end then them. If it's a 50 50 crash then their insurance will still pay you and yours them, but the bit that doesn't happen is that the insurance company should sue the unaccompanied driver for the money they paid you.

If insurance started closing the loop we'd have the uninsured driver problem solved along with the unaccompanied learners, by hitting them in the pocket.

Sue Pa Key Pa

Del2005 wrote:

If insurance started closing the loop we'd have the uninsured driver problem solved along with the unaccompanied learners, by hitting them in the pocket.

So, having paid out a claim, you think an insurer should waste more money suing a student or low paid worker to try and recover 10s of thousands? Dealing with law breakers is not the function of insurers, it rests with the Gardai and the Courts. We have the appropriate laws, they are just not detected or enforced.

Del2005

Sue Pa Key Pa wrote: »

So, having paid out a claim, you think an insurer should waste more money suing a student or low paid worker to try and recover 10s of thousands? Dealing with law breakers is not the function of insurers, it rests with the Gardai and the Courts. We have the appropriate laws, they are just not detected or enforced.

They aren't dealing with law breakers they are dealing with people who voided a contract, they are entitled to get the money back. The Gardai and courts are for the offence of driving outside the terms of the permit/licence.

Sue Pa Key Pa

Del2005 wrote:

They aren't dealing with law breakers they are dealing with people who voided a contract, they are entitled to get the money back. The Gardai and courts are for the offence of driving outside the terms of the permit/licence.

Driving without a qualified driver has not voided the contract, it makes it voidable should the insurer decide to exercise it's right to do so. It is not automatic. Of course they could pursue their outlay through the courts but there is usually little chance of getting any return. I need my opinion the car should be seized, sold and any proceeds to offset the claim

boardsuser1

Sue Pa Key Pa wrote: »

Driving without a qualified driver has not voided the contract, it makes it voidable should the insurer decide to exercise it's right to do so. It is not automatic. Of course they could pursue their outlay through the courts but there is usually little chance of getting any return. I need my opinion the car should be seized, sold and any proceeds to offset the claim

I agree with you on that.

Trying to deal with 'Johnny and Mikey' though who buy €100 bangers,crash them and flout the law completely and are back on the road in something else within an hour is another area that is a struggle to tackle.

wicklapaul

Ah all the young country people should stay at home on the dole, save up for 12 lessons and 4000 for insurance and then the car, I don't agree with drunk drivers or drugs, it's all about the money,
And maybe banning slow drivers is a bit harsh, give them the same penalty as first time drivers, unless you're drawing the pension, as older people have some excuse for driving slow, I know lots of people that still have a provisional licence, in their 40s, but when the are stopped they are never asked to show their licence,
Young people just need a break, especially if you had to work for everything, as in not mammy and daddy paid for it, sure there is boy racers in their first year who think they are an F1 driver, who think they own the roads,
Better than miss daisy or Mr.
If everyone stuck to the speed limits all would be better on the road,
Just my opinion, but as they say options are like ass holes every one has 1,

wicklapaul

Del2005 wrote:

While slow drivers are annoying the queues behind them are usually due to the following drivers not passing or not leaving enough space for others to pass. There are also plenty of vehicles on the road which can't reach the posted limit should they be banned?

Give them points on their licence, I heard years ago the were thinking about making it law if you have 4 or more cars behind you, you had to pull in to let them all go bye, now that's a law I'd be all for,
People take more risk in passing when agatated , that causes accidents,

murphthesmurf

wicklapaul wrote: »

Ah all the young country people should stay at home on the dole, save up for 12 lessons and 4000 for insurance and then the car,

But like I asked someone else who said the same thing. Who decides when the youngster is good enough to go out on their own? Should they just go out with their dad a few times? How many hours should they be accompanied before they are good enough? That is what a driving licence is for, you are tested to see if you are good enough to go out on your own. If we don't need to bother with it then who will make the decision?
I agree insurance for young people is extortionate, and 12 paid lessons is harsh. But to just let the mother and father decide when a youngster is good enough is madness.

I love Sean nos

wicklapaul wrote: »

how am I supposed to get my son to work in his own car when I'm in work also

Ask your responsible adult, since both you and your son seem incapable of managing your lives.