From today (22 Dec), unaccompanied learner drivers can have their cars taken off them

highgiant1985

Gardatopped car to discover a learner driver driving unaccompanied.

Car seized under Section 41 Clancy Amendment.

https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/1079352344410812417

This is the first case I've seen where this has been enforced.

AndrewJRenko

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

That's just the health costs. It doesn't include the costs of road infrastructure, or enforcement (Gardai/Courts) or road safety (RSA, Dept Transport) and more. When are motorists going to start paying their way?

You’re like a broken record spouting the same nonsense on every car related thread and it’s really is that, 100% nonsense. Car owners pay over and above for their cars and do not get the roads they should for the money they pay. Any decent road has a toll despite us drivers funding the roads over and over.

martyc5674

Jackson Young Sandpaper wrote: »

You’re like a broken record spouting the same nonsense on every car related thread and it’s really is that, 100% nonsense. Car owners pay over and above for their cars and do not get the roads they should for the money they pay. Any decent road has a toll despite us drivers funding the roads over and over.

Car owners are not paying enough for the damage they are doing, in 20 years time we will be telling our kids of how we drove ICE cars/vans trucks around the same shared space we call our city’s, and they will look at us like we have 2 heads.
Much the same as the current generation of kids can’t believe people smoked at home/work pubs trains etc etc.
It’s progress but some people just don’t see it that way.

martyc5674

bazz26 wrote: »

So explain how a car like the Nissan Leaf which claims to have zero emissions still pays motor tax then? Can you also explain how most diesel cars have lower motor tax rates than petrol cars if it's a penalty on the impact on air quality? Motor tax has been around for decades in one shape or form, well before the current batch of trendy part time conservationists ever googled their concerns about the environment. It's a vehicle ownership taxation and has nothing to do with saving the trees or the whales despite those idiots in the Green Party claiming the opposite.

Also the last time I checked the motorist was a taxpayer too and a fairly lucrative one for consecutive Governments in this country. They pay VRT, VAT on the price of the car they own, they also pay excise duty and more VAT on fuel. Reading some of the nonsense and google top trump links posted here you would swear motorists were just take, take and more take. It's far from the truth.

I won’t do your research for you.
But I’ll steer you a little, only a third of our electricity is from renewable sources... the rest fossil, therefore unless your charging your Nissan Leaf in another country then 2 thirds of your charge is from fossil fuels.

Yes car tax/VRT has always been a great tax source but that model has changed In an effort to reduce GHGs, I don’t agree it’s the right way, all it has done is filled the country with dirty diesels. The jury is still out which is worse but in my view neither should be near our city centres.
Ireland will face massive fines if we dont(we won’t) meet our 2020 commitments and we will all pay those fines through taxation no doubt

I don’t think it should be about whether motorists pay enough or not, yes we pay a lot for car ownership privileges. But it doesn’t cover the health or environmental impacts they are having.
We have to look past the monetary cost.

StereoSound

It's a fantastic new rule that should have been enforced years ago, Learners driving on their own wobbling about like a headless chicken without confident control of their vehicle around others. Of course the bloody car should be taken of them!

Full of excuses, "But I have to bring the kids to school", " I cant have someone with me 100% of the time, it's impossible", "I have to get to work because the bus does not run early enough", " It's not my fault there is a back log in the driving test", "The car is due the NCT, no one else can bring it up for me", " I have been driving for years already and have not crashed yet", I'm only going down to get some milk", "My car is taxed and insured, I should be allowed to drive my car!", " My dog is sick, his balls hit the floor".

corks finest

StereoSound wrote: »

It's a fantastic new rule that should have been enforced years ago, Learners driving on their own wobbling about like a headless chicken without confident control of their vehicle around others. Of course the bloody car should be taken of them!

Full of excuses, "But I have to bring the kids to school", " I cant have someone with me 100% of the time, it's impossible", "I have to get to work because the bus does not run early enough", " It's not my fault there is a back log in the driving test", "The car is due the NCT, no one else can bring it up for me", " I have been driving for years already and have not crashed yet", I'm only going down to get some milk", "My car is taxed and insured, I should be allowed to drive my car!", " My dog is sick, his balls hit the floor".

No excuses

bazz26

martyc5674 wrote: »

I won’t do your research for you.
But I’ll steer you a little, only a third of our electricity is from renewable sources... the rest fossil, therefore unless your charging your Nissan Leaf in another country then 2 thirds of your charge is from fossil fuels.

I don't own a Nissan Leaf or have any desire to own one so don't need the lesson. As I said motor tax has been around for donkey years, it's a vehicle ownership tax no matter how the wording or justification of it changes over time. Even if we had 100% renewal electricity here to charge the Leaf, you would still be paying motor tax as the owner of a motorised vehicle.

martyc5674 wrote: »

Yes car tax/VRT has always been a great tax source but that model has changed In an effort to reduce GHGs, I don’t agree it’s the right way, all it has done is filled the country with dirty diesels. The jury is still out which is worse but in my view neither should be near our city centres.
Ireland will face massive fines if we dont(we won’t) meet our 2020 commitments and we will all pay those fines through taxation no doubt

So taking cars off the road won't solve anything in that respect. Yes it might stop us paying pollution fines but all it means is that the Exchequer will have to make up the shortfall in lost tax revenue from vehicles through another form of taxation ie PAYE and indirect taxation.

Also its very fashionable these days to blame the car owner for us not meeting our pollution commitments while our agricultural industry's carbon footprint continues to continues to grow:
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/science/ireland-s-agriculture-emissions-are-hurtling-in-the-wrong-direction-1.3583142

martyc5674 wrote: »

I don’t think it should be about whether motorists pay enough or not, yes we pay a lot for car ownership privileges. But it doesn’t cover the health or environmental impacts they are having.
We have to look past the monetary cost.

That's very easy to say but the reality is we have very poor public transport infrastructure especially outside of urban areas. Consecutive governments have underinvested in public transport and when they have it has been generally poorly invested. Give people viable alternatives and they will gradually move away from the reliance on the car but until then the car is very much a necessity for a lot of people.

martyc5674

bazz26 wrote: »

I don't own a Nissan Leaf or have any desire to own one so don't need the lesson. As I said motor tax has been around for donkey years, it's a vehicle ownership tax no matter how the wording or justification of it changes over time. Even if we had 100% renewal electricity here to charge the Leaf, you would still be paying motor tax as the owner of a motorised vehicle.



So taking cars off the road won't solve anything in that respect. Yes it might stop us paying pollution fines but all it means is that the Exchequer will have to make up the shortfall in lost tax revenue from vehicles through another form of taxation ie PAYE and indirect taxation.

Also its very fashionable these days to blame the car owner for us not meeting our pollution commitments while our agricultural industry's carbon footprint continues to continues to grow:
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/science/ireland-s-agriculture-emissions-are-hurtling-in-the-wrong-direction-1.3583142



That's very easy to say but the reality is we have very poor public transport infrastructure especially outside of urban areas. Consecutive governments have underinvested in public transport and when they have it has been generally poorly invested. Give people viable alternatives and they will gradually move away from the reliance on the car but until then the car is very much a necessity for a lot of people.

Sorry if I implied you had a Nissan Leaf... that wasn’t the intention but you get the point.
I understand agriculture is responsible for a third of our GHGs and it’s the trickiest one to solve... but we’re not talking about that here. Transport, heat and agriculture are pretty much a third each last time I looked.
I agree infrastructure is terrible in this country but so are people’s attitudes, people don’t believe that better cycling infrastructure for example will have any impact... I do however.
I believe that city’s are being built car centric and have been since the 50s, if you build a city designed for cars... guess what?... people will fill it with cars. Build it for pedestrians and cyclists people will walk/cycle use public transport.
But to go back on topic... I am delighted that this legislation is in place. It will be a slow start to better drivers and hopefully safer drivers on the road. People might start to feel just that little bit safer walking and cycling, and that’s got to be a good thing.

Charles Babbage

it would be nice to think that the Gardai might loiter around some posh schools and third level institutions in January where they might nab a few chancers. Once the impression is given that this is possible, there will be a lot less of it. Unfortunately, I don't think they will bother.

appledrop

V8 Interceptor wrote: »

Fair enough. It had to happen.

But I hope there's not too much happy clapping given that I presume a large amount of people posting here did just that back in the day.

I agree. Back in day when I was waiting for driving test 13mths wait. Of course you should be accompanied but years ago people certainly were not.

swarlb

bazz26 wrote: »

I don't own a Nissan Leaf or have any desire to own one so don't need the lesson. As I said motor tax has been around for donkey years, it's a vehicle ownership tax no matter how the wording or justification of it changes over time. Even if we had 100% renewal electricity here to charge the Leaf, you would still be paying motor tax as the owner of a motorised vehicle.



So taking cars off the road won't solve anything in that respect. Yes it might stop us paying pollution fines but all it means is that the Exchequer will have to make up the shortfall in lost tax revenue from vehicles through another form of taxation ie PAYE and indirect taxation.

Also its very fashionable these days to blame the car owner for us not meeting our pollution commitments while our agricultural industry's carbon footprint continues to continues to grow:
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/science/ireland-s-agriculture-emissions-are-hurtling-in-the-wrong-direction-1.3583142



That's very easy to say but the reality is we have very poor public transport infrastructure especially outside of urban areas. Consecutive governments have underinvested in public transport and when they have it has been generally poorly invested. Give people viable alternatives and they will gradually move away from the reliance on the car but until then the car is very much a necessity for a lot of people.

Can a Nissan Leaf be taken off an unaccompanied driver, or does it have to be a petrol... or diesel ??? What if the car is not taxed... do they take the car twice, or just double the fine..
I'm beginning to wonder what is the point of this thread.

salmocab

appledrop wrote: »

I agree. Back in day when I was waiting for driving test 13mths wait. Of course you should be accompanied but years ago people certainly were not.

Well no plenty of us here certainly drove unaccompanied but we shouldn’t let the mistakes of the past be continued, I drove for a few months unaccompanied and with hindsight I certainly shouldn’t have I was not ready for it. I know plenty of older men who regularly drank and drove but I doubt too many people outside of the voices in Danny Healy Rae’s head think it’s a good idea now.

Peoples circumstances should never be an excuse for driving unaccompanied, driving needs to be seen as a privilege earned not a birthright.

What about Learner drivers driving without L plates?

biko

Deleted User wrote: »

What about Learner drivers driving without L plates?

That is not related to the article, you can find penalty points for that here
http://www.rsa.ie/Documents/Licensed%20Drivers/Penalty%20Points%20Offences%2017%20April%202016.pdf

bazz26

swarlb wrote: »

Can a Nissan Leaf be taken off an unaccompanied driver, or does it have to be a petrol... or diesel ??? What if the car is not taxed... do they take the car twice, or just double the fine..
I'm beginning to wonder what is the point of this thread.

I wasn't the one who dragged this thread off topic. Do try and keep up.

AndrewJRenko

Charles Babbage wrote: »

it would be nice to think that the Gardai might loiter around some posh schools and third level institutions in January where they might nab a few chancers. Once the impression is given that this is possible, there will be a lot less of it. Unfortunately, I don't think they will bother.

It would be even nicer to think they would hang around all those large suburban pubs with busy car parks at night.

AndrewJRenko

bazz26 wrote: »

So taking cars off the road won't solve anything in that respect. Yes it might stop us paying pollution fines but all it means is that the Exchequer will have to make up the shortfall in lost tax revenue from vehicles through another form of taxation ie PAYE and indirect taxation.

Also its very fashionable these days to blame the car owner for us not meeting our pollution commitments while our agricultural industry's carbon footprint continues to continues to grow:
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/science/ireland-s-agriculture-emissions-are-hurtling-in-the-wrong-direction-1.3583142

While the EVs are certainly not the magic bullet solution, you are missing out one important issue - the health benefits that arise from not having petrol or diesel engines operating in public places. These benefits are significant. We have about 1500 premature deaths each year due to poor air quality.

bazz26 wrote: »

That's very easy to say but the reality is we have very poor public transport infrastructure especially outside of urban areas. Consecutive governments have underinvested in public transport and when they have it has been generally poorly invested. Give people viable alternatives and they will gradually move away from the reliance on the car but until then the car is very much a necessity for a lot of people.

While there is some truth in this, you're also missing one important feature here - how we subsidise, facilitate and support a car-centric culture. We continue to allow 'ribbon development' housing, forcing people into cars for pretty much every single movement outside their house. We continue to allow vehicles to take vast amounts of public space for storage. We continue to provide vast amounts of Garda and Court resources to policing car use, at no direct charge to the motorist.



Let motorists actually start paying their way for the true costs of motoring, and we'll see how attractive the alternatives look.

Jackson Young Sandpaper wrote: »

You’re like a broken record spouting the same nonsense on every car related thread and it’s really is that, 100% nonsense. Car owners pay over and above for their cars and do not get the roads they should for the money they pay. Any decent road has a toll despite us drivers funding the roads over and over.

As long as you continue to ignore the real costs of motoring on society, some of which are outlined above, your claim that motorists pay 'over and above' has no credibility.

bazz26 wrote: »

Tyres and brakes? lol. Yet no mention of carbon emissions from the agricultural industry here.

lol? Where's the joke?
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/sep/11/polluting-effect-wear-brakes-tyres-pollutionwatch


I thought methane was the problem with the agricultural industry, rather than carbon - and it certainly is a big problem, but is it really relevant here?

bazz26 wrote: »

No it wasn't. If anything the current crop of diesel cars are cleaner than they were 10 years ago.

Are you going by the claimed emission rates that were largely fraudulent, or the real ones? And yes, while diesel technology is improving, it's still a terrible pollutant.


https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/diesel-cars-air-pollution-emissions-which-tests-nitrogen-oxides-nox-a8496121.html

bazz26 wrote: »

Reality is that vehicle ownership in Ireland always has been expensive from a taxation perspective. To claim we don't pay enough is simply untrue.

It maybe expensive, but you seem to be ignoring the cost side - the vast subsidies to motorists provided by the State. When are motorists going to start paying for the space used for storage, for the Garda/Courts/RSA used to regulate and the real health impacts?

bazz26 wrote: »

Not everyone lives/works or drives in Dublin so you need to think outside the goldfish bowl. Also what about what we pay on other services? What about the money we spend on the public health system on the likes of smokers, alcoholics, drug abusers? Should be stop doing that? After all that money and resources might be better spent elsewhere.

I didn't mention Dublin at all, and I'm not really getting the point of the rest of this.

selectamatic wrote: »

Maybe.

But then again https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_of_the_Big_Wind

I don't think there were many tdi's tipping about in Ireland in 1839 yet there was still plenty of wind.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.independent.ie/life/remembering-the-great-irish-blizzard-of-february-1947-34482677.html
Plenty of snow too back before the glory days of diesel..

My point was about the frequency of extreme weather events - 7 days lost in one calendar year. Do we really need to have the whole climate change debate here?

Tazzimus wrote: »

So 18 years of high motor tax, plus tax on fuel isn't paying my way, along with God knows what else that I'm not aware of being shafted on for driving something bigger than a 1 litre?
Motorists are a huge income source for government.

Your 18 years of tax are matched by 18 years of public space used for storage, 18 years of health effects from your polluting engine, 18 years of Courts/Gardai/RSA required to regulate you. Motorists are a huge drain on the State, and they need to start paying their way.

Tazzimus wrote: »

Gardai, courts, dept transport etc are not car exclusive, so everyone pays for them, and rightly so seeing as we all use them at some stage

Let's just imagine that with a stroke of a technological wand, we all got self-driving cars tomorrow, which behaved perfectly and didn't hit people or each other. Just imagine how much resources would be freed up for the Gardai, the Courts, the RSA, Dept Transport if we didn't have to spend all that time trying to get motorists to stop killing themselves and other people?

pablo128

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

While the EVs are certainly not the magic bullet solution, you are missing out one important issue - the health benefits that arise from not having petrol or diesel engines operating in public places. These benefits are significant. We have about 1500 premature deaths each year due to poor air quality.




While there is some truth in this, you're also missing one important feature here - how we subsidise, facilitate and support a car-centric culture. We continue to allow 'ribbon development' housing, forcing people into cars for pretty much every single movement outside their house. We continue to allow vehicles to take vast amounts of public space for storage. We continue to provide vast amounts of Garda and Court resources to policing car use, at no direct charge to the motorist.



Let motorists actually start paying their way for the true costs of motoring, and we'll see how attractive the alternatives look.




As long as you continue to ignore the real costs of motoring on society, some of which are outlined above, your claim that motorists pay 'over and above' has no credibility.




lol? Where's the joke?
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/sep/11/polluting-effect-wear-brakes-tyres-pollutionwatch


I thought methane was the problem with the agricultural industry, rather than carbon - and it certainly is a big problem, but is it really relevant here?



Are you going by the claimed emission rates that were largely fraudulent, or the real ones? And yes, while diesel technology is improving, it's still a terrible pollutant.


https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/diesel-cars-air-pollution-emissions-which-tests-nitrogen-oxides-nox-a8496121.html




It maybe expensive, but you seem to be ignoring the cost side - the vast subsidies to motorists provided by the State. When are motorists going to start paying for the space used for storage, for the Garda/Courts/RSA used to regulate and the real health impacts?





I didn't mention Dublin at all, and I'm not really getting the point of the rest of this.




My point was about the frequency of extreme weather events - 7 days lost in one calendar year. Do we really need to have the whole climate change debate here?



Your 18 years of tax are matched by 18 years of public space used for storage, 18 years of health effects from your polluting engine, 18 years of Courts/Gardai/RSA required to regulate you. Motorists are a huge drain on the State, and they need to start paying their way.








Let's just imagine that with a stroke of a technological wand, we all got self-driving cars tomorrow, which behaved perfectly and didn't hit people or each other. Just imagine how much resources would be freed up for the Gardai, the Courts, the RSA, Dept Transport if we didn't have to spend all that time trying to get motorists to stop killing themselves and other people?

You are aware this is the 'Learning To Drive' forum? Tax, emissions, and other associated bollox belongs in another forum.

AndrewJRenko

pablo128 wrote: »

You are aware this is the 'Learning To Drive' forum? Tax, emissions, and other associated bollox belongs in another forum.

I didn't bring up these topics. I just brought a little bit of reality to other's comments on 'poor martyr motorist' trope.

swarlb

bazz26 wrote: »

I wasn't the one who dragged this thread off topic. Do try and keep up.

You did actually, with your consistent posts that have little to do with a forum titled 'Learning to Drive'.

eagle eye

highdef wrote:

There's no excuse for those people who are provisionally licensed for years. If someone continues to fail their divers test time after time over a matter of years, then it should be a case that the person is simply unable to grasp the ability to drive properly. It's those people that are on provisional licences for those extended period of time that will hopefully get the full impact of the new laws applied to them.

There are many cases if competent drivers continually failing tests due to being nervous at tests.
I personally know two people who failed the driving test numerous times before passing and were excellent drivers all along. One of them took four years and the other six years to finally pass the test.

salmocab

eagle eye wrote: »

There are many cases if competent drivers continually failing tests due to being nervous at tests.
I personally know two people who failed the driving test numerous times before passing and were excellent drivers all along. One of them took four years and the other six years to finally pass the test.

But that’s your opinion not fact. They failed their tests so failed to show they were competent drivers. It’s a far from perfect system to be fair but their experience is irrelevant.

biko

The next few posts must be about the article.

Isambard

<not about the article>

salmocab

<not about the article>

caldew

After reading the comments over the last couple of days, I think the point of this law is being missed.


https://youtu.be/Utqk0DHZzYc


People are dying unnecessarily.

swarlb

caldew wrote: »

After reading the comments over the last couple of days, I think the point of this law is being missed.


https://youtu.be/Utqk0DHZzYc


People are dying unnecessarily.

I'll probably be lynched for this, but would it not be an idea to limit the speed of cars, in general.
The max allowed on our roads is 120kph anyway, so it seems pointless having a car that exceeds this limit.
I remember years ago in the USA the max speed limit was 55mph, introduced as a fuel saving measure I think.

Esel

swarlb wrote: »

I'll probably be lynched for this, but would it not be an idea to limit the speed of cars, in general.

The max allowed on our roads is 120kph anyway, so it seems pointless having a car that exceeds this limit.

You could still do 120 km/h in a 30/50/60/80/100 zone...

Dravokivich

swarlb wrote: »

I'll probably be lynched for this, but would it not be an idea to limit the speed of cars, in general.
The max allowed on our roads is 120kph anyway, so it seems pointless having a car that exceeds this limit.
I remember years ago in the USA the max speed limit was 55mph, introduced as a fuel saving measure I think.

There may come a time when it's better to accelerate to avoid something, having a system in place on all vehicles to restrict them, will not just limit the vehicles, but also the options available to drivers.

swarlb

Esel wrote: »

You could still do 120 km/h in a 30/50/60/80/100 zone...

I'm well aware of that, and so should anyone who exceeds those limits. However as I mentioned the max limit allowed is 120kph, so why have cars capable of exceeding that limit.
The other choice would be to limit cars to the minimum speed allowed, say 15kph. Instantly solving any possible attempt at 'speeding'.
I can see this being introduced at some stage as 'black box' technology is advanced.
Busses and trucks are already speed limited, although judging from some you see on the road they seems to circumvent the procedure.
It should be simple enough to link GPS with posted speed limits in cities and onboard technology in cars to automatically reduce speed when approaching speed zones.