L drivers, cars taken

splinter65

Charles Babbage wrote: »

The solution is to prohibit the use of such symbols by persons who are not learners and stop every car with only one driver and an L plate.

But what’s your reasoning behind prohibiting drivers who are not learners or newly qualified from using the symbols? I can’t understand how a sign in another car window affects your driving in any way. Can you explain it?

Isambard

i'd have thought it simple. If only learners use L plates then you know for sure the driver is a learner and can react accordingly. If all and sundry display them there's a danger people will disregard the L plates entirely, with the thinking "he's probably not a learner".

dennyk

brightspark wrote: »

You are effectively suggesting privatising the driving test.

Given how people feel the NCT is compromised by it's private nature (both passing substandard cars and failing acceptable cars have been reported), just why would privatising lead to a better system? (apart from increasing the amount of testers)

I wasn't advocating privatising the test, just pointing out that it'd be one of the two possibilities in that scenario, the other being placing the entire training process itself under the RSA (e.g. no more private ADIs conducting the mandatory lessons). Privatisation would definitely have downsides, and as I noted, it'd require significant regulation and oversight to ensure that evaluations are conducted fairly.

I do think that adding an evaluation component to the EDT in lieu of a standalone driving test could improve things in general, though, whether it's run privately or publicly. Instructors/testers would be spending more time with each student and be better able to truly evaluate their abilities over the course of several hours of lessons and training rather than a single 20-minute drive, and students wouldn't have to deal with "test nerves" and the pressure of having to wait for weeks or months to take a single pass-or-fail test where one mistake could mean waiting yet another few months to try again.

creedp

Isambard wrote: »

i'd have thought it simple. If only learners use L plates then you know for sure the driver is a learner and can react accordingly. If all and sundry display them there's a danger people will disregard the L plates entirely, with the thinking "he's probably not a learner".

I never treat a car sporting 'L' plate any different to any other car as it doesn't seem to make any difference to the standard of driving. As for the 'N' plate, personally no idea of the benefits of this Plate. IMO its just another means to annoy drivers who have done what is takes to be a 'safe' drive, i.e. pass the test.

Isambard

creedp wrote: »

I never treat a car sporting 'L' plate any different to any other car as it doesn't seem to make any difference to the standard of driving. As for the 'N' plate, personally no idea of the benefits of this Plate. IMO its just another means to annoy drivers who have done what is takes to be a 'safe' drive, i.e. pass the test.

but that's the point of the L plate. So that you know it's a learner and have a little more patience, give them just a little more room.

I agree re N plates though. You can either drive or you can't

splinter65

Isambard wrote: »

i'd have thought it simple. If only learners use L plates then you know for sure the driver is a learner and can react accordingly. If all and sundry display them there's a danger people will disregard the L plates entirely, with the thinking "he's probably not a learner".

I don’t agree at all. If you’re driving lawfully and with consideration for all other road users then you give the car with the L plate time and your patience as is advised in the Rules of the Road and you’ve still not explained why cars with L/N plates being driven by, let’s be clear, mammy and daddy, are some kind of a nuisance or hazard.

Isambard

i didn't say they were a nuisance. I was trying to get over that using L plates on a car when not necessary erodes their value.

Whatever you may think, there's clearly a value to having warning that the car in front has a learner driver at the wheel. Same as there 's a value to having beacon on a slow moving JCB or any other device that allows you to spot a potential hazzard, such as indicators or brake lights.

dennyk

splinter65 wrote: »

I don’t agree at all. If you’re driving lawfully and with consideration for all other road users then you give the car with the L plate time and your patience as is advised in the Rules of the Road

If you're a proper driver practicing good defensive driving, then you should be treating every other driver on the road with consideration and patience, and you should also be expecting any and/or all of them to **** up in the worst possible way at any given moment and adjusting your own driving to account for that possibility, regardless of what stickers or placards they might or might not be displaying.

Posy

creedp wrote: »

As for the 'N' plate, personally no idea of the benefits of this Plate. IMO its just another means to annoy drivers who have done what is takes to be a 'safe' drive, i.e. pass the test.

3 months ago, I managed to drive slowly around Finglas for 20 minutes without making any terrible mistake. I haven't driven since, I'm not confident on dual carriageways, still a bit frightened of roundabouts and I've never driven on a motorway.
I definitely want an N plate to differentiate myself from someone with years driving experience under their belt! :pac:

creedp

Posy wrote: »

3 months ago, I managed to drive slowly around Finglas for 20 minutes without making any terrible mistake. I haven't driven since, I'm not confident on dual carriageways, still a bit frightened of roundabouts and I've never driven on a motorway.
I definitely want an N plate to differentiate myself from someone with years driving experience under their belt! :pac:

Says it all about the test then!!

J_R

Quote:
Originally Posted by J_R View Post
Hi,

When I was an instructor and if I did not know why my pupil was failing the test I would be very worried. It would mean that I did not know the driving test syllabus or simply put, the difference between safe and potentially dangerous driving.

My advice would be to try and find a good instructor, take a lesson or two and you could well change your opinion of the driving test.

Good luck/

Maurice Yeltsin wrote: »

Thankfully it's a monkey many years removed from my back but there's plenty of reasons one can drive perfect with an instructor yet fail in the test. Nerves, difference of opinion between the tester and instructor on correct driving (would could be not understanding the rules on either end) and the tester being a kunt, simply..

HI.

The point I was trying to make was a driving instructor should know WHY their pupil failed
the test.

If an instructor properly prepares a pupil for the test, that pupil will know exactly what is required to pass the test. If they fail, the pupil themselves should know and understand why they failed. If do not understand why, then their instructor should be able to explain, that is after they explain to him what they did or did not do in the test.

If it is still a mystery to both, then the test candidate quite simply was not at test standard and the test syllabus is a mystery to the driving instructor.

splinter65

dennyk wrote: »

If you're a proper driver practicing good defensive driving, then you should be treating every other driver on the road with consideration and patience, and you should also be expecting any and/or all of them to **** up in the worst possible way at any given moment and adjusting your own driving to account for that possibility, regardless of what stickers or placards they might or might not be displaying.

Yes. This is what I’m trying to say.

swarlb

Isambard wrote: »

but that's the point of the L plate. So that you know it's a learner and have a little more patience, give them just a little more room.

I agree re N plates though. You can either drive or you can't

As an aside, when you pass a 'test' and get a licence to race cars on a track, you are still obliged to display a novice plate to show racers that you are a 'novice'... Being able to drive or not is not the issue, it's a display of experience.

Ruraldweller56

I always try to make sure that when I've made the decision to crash into someone that they don't have an N or L sticker on their car. Same as when I see baby on board.

I'll always make reasoned decision and weigh up who I'm going to crash into and if I see any of those things I'll rule it out.

swarlb

Ruraldweller56 wrote: »

I always try to make sure that when I've made the decision to crash into someone that they don't have an N or L sticker on their car. Same as when I see baby on board.

I'll always make reasoned decision and weigh up who I'm going to crash into and if I see any of those things I'll rule it out.

Seriously.... you make a decision 'to crash into someone' !! and then 'rule it out' if you decide not to !!!

Henry Ford III

SCOOP 64 wrote: »

id say most who drive unaccompanied take them down now, slim chance of getting caught unless you drive like a idiot or car defect , brake lights etc or no tax/ insurance on car.

Anyone who deliberately drives without qualification and solo deserves to be caught and punished.