Provisional License Drivers off the road from next week

Naos · 23-06-2008 02:56PM

Although I fully agree with the new legislation, the six month waiting time is a bit harsh.

Does anyone know if this can be reduced or is it an automatic six month wait inbetween tests?

techdiver · 23-06-2008 03:03PM

alanmurphy83 wrote: »

Firstly, did you receive a confirmation letter stating that they had recevied your application?

Secondly, have you tried ringing them?

Thirdly, its hard to have sympothy for you when you waited till as late as possible to arrange your test.

Fourthly the times on the web site are an average time not minimum not maximum.

I did get the confirmation. I've sent them numerous emails without reply and I have tried on a number of accessions to call them but the phones are always engaged! What more can I do?

And how are these averages calculated? Probably not by any mathematical system known to man, because there are many other people who are in the same boat as me also, so who are the winners in this waiting game? Because between application and sitting of the test the minimum time I will have been waiting is 13 weeks!

Also in today’s independent their is an article dealing with the situation in which their is a quote stating - "However he said any driver who needs a test before the law changes on June 30 will be accommodated, even at short notice." Forgive me if I'm annoyed that this isn't happening!

Spud83 · 23-06-2008 03:10PM

techdiver wrote: »

I did get the confirmation. I've sent them numerous emails without reply and I have tried on a number of accessions to call them but the phones are always engaged! What more can I do?

And how are these averages calculated? Probably not by any mathematical system known to man, because there are many other people who are in the same boat as me also, so who are the winners in this waiting game? Because between application and sitting of the test the minimum time I will have been waiting is 13 weeks!

Also in today’s independent their is an article dealing with the situation in which their is a quote stating - "However he said any driver who needs a test before the law changes on June 30 will be accommodated, even at short notice." Forgive me if I'm annoyed that this isn't happening!

Alre I would forget about trying to email them, I would however keep trying to ring them. Have never heard of their phones being constantly engaged.

I dont know how the averages are calculated I just pointed it out they aren't the minimum/maximum times. Some people get a test quicker by being put on cancellation lists etc, some people end up waiting longer(no idea why).

You haven't been accommodadted because you have not managed to contact them, again I would say you should be trying a couple of times a day if driving is that important too you.

As for the quote I believe that is in realtion to people on second provisionals who need their car for work. Note this does not mean need their car to get to work but who need their car/license to sue during work i.e salesperson, tradesman etc etc.

What license are you on?

maclad · 23-06-2008 03:13PM

alanmurphy83 wrote: »

Regarding insurance companies. As far as I am aware you are still insured for 3rd party claims. Meaning that if you are in a crash your insurance company will still pay out for any damages or injuries you cause to anyone else. They will not pay out on any damages or injuries you incur.

Just a note on this, whatever about other insurance companies Hibernian paid out when I had an accident. I am on my 1st provisional and didn't have a full licensed driver with me, I had L plates up but the windscreen was shattered and the rear window was gone ,I think the guards were looking for the L plates as they were def looking for something. Car was totalled and i'm taking delivery of a brand new one next month:D. The Guards on the scene never said anything about me only being on a provisional mind you they just seemed totally shocked that we just walked out of it. The insurance co. never once commented on the fact that I was driving unaccompanied.

techdiver · 23-06-2008 03:20PM

alanmurphy83 wrote: »

Alre I would forget about trying to email them, I would however keep trying to ring them. Have never heard of their phones being constantly engaged.

I dont know how the averages are calculated I just pointed it out they aren't the minimum/maximum times. Some people get a test quicker by being put on cancellation lists etc, some people end up waiting longer(no idea why).

You haven't been accommodadted because you have not managed to contact them, again I would say you should be trying a couple of times a day if driving is that important too you.

As for the quote I believe that is in realtion to people on second provisionals who need their car for work. Note this does not mean need their car to get to work but who need their car/license to sue during work i.e salesperson, tradesman etc etc.

What license are you on?

Regarding calling them, I have even called the RSA direct line and they couldn't even put me through because of the lines being jammed. All they say is to "keep trying", or "try later".

My annoyance is borne out by the fact that they (Gay Byrne and the RSA), are actively advertising the fact that they have got the test waiting times down to 8 - 10 weeks. It just seems a little suspect to me that no one I know that has applied for the test in any location has received their tests within that "average" time frame. I would love to see a more detailed break down of the application/waiting time per a sample of applications for a particular testing centre and do0 a calculation and consolidation of the numbers. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the numbers were not a true reflection of the actual truth.

It must be noted that the Minister and the RSA pledged to reduce the time to the above scale when announcing the new measures to come into effect. This is what leads me to believe that the figures are false. They couldn't enforce the law if they hadn't met their obligation of reducing the waiting times.

The instructor I was receiving lessons form even stated this fact and was convinced that they were massively behind the so called average time that were listed.

Too many co-incidences for me to be honest!

Abi · 23-06-2008 03:25PM

Toots85 wrote: »

+1, it's not like this new system was introduced overnight! When I booked my OH's test with SGS

How are people doing this? My sister has been trying desperately to get her test, and has been told point-blank that only the RSA decide whos files get sent to SGS for testing, and that they do not take direct calls.

DarkJager · 23-06-2008 03:32PM

techdiver wrote: »

I applied for my driving test on the 28th of April so as to have my test done in time for the end of June deadline. Since applying I have not even received a date for my test even though I applied 7 weeks ago. According to the "Pass Rates and Waiting Times", document on the RSA website it claims that the waiting time in my area is 7 weeks. Now I am no mathematician but I do believe that time has come and gone for me.
If I was to receive my test date today, there would be at least another 4 week wait to be tested! To me this seems like the RSA are deliberately falsifying their figures to meet the commitment made by the RSA/Minister of transport to have tests "On Demand", by the June 30th deadline. I am not the only one who has noticed this as my girlfriend has encountered the same scenario in a different test centre.
Has anyone else experienced this also and if so please write in and let me know, as I think the minister and the RSA are misleading the public in order to claim they have met their targets for June 30th.

Yep applied for my second test about 2 months and have heard nothing since, excluding the payment confirmation letter. I wouldn't mind too much but I had done my first test in plenty of time, and was screwed out of a pass for the most ridiculous reason ever, which even the tester could not backup when I flipped at him over the result. (Did any of you know that children and cars have now gained the absolutely amazing ability to come straight through an 8 foot brick wall into a cul de sac??? )

So anyway, the RSA screwed me out of getting the pass and now expect that I will just magically stay off the road, even though I'm waiting 2 months for a test that shouldn't even be needed? Not a fcukin chance.

Spud83 · 23-06-2008 03:34PM

techdiver wrote: »

Regarding calling them, I have even called the RSA direct line and they couldn't even put me through because of the lines being jammed. All they say is to "keep trying", or "try later".

My annoyance is borne out by the fact that they (Gay Byrne and the RSA), are actively advertising the fact that they have got the test waiting times down to 8 - 10 weeks. It just seems a little suspect to me that no one I know that has applied for the test in any location has received their tests within that "average" time frame. I would love to see a more detailed break down of the application/waiting time per a sample of applications for a particular testing centre and do0 a calculation and consolidation of the numbers. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the numbers were not a true reflection of the actual truth.

It must be noted that the Minister and the RSA pledged to reduce the time to the above scale when announcing the new measures to come into effect. This is what leads me to believe that the figures are false. They couldn't enforce the law if they hadn't met their obligation of reducing the waiting times.

The instructor I was receiving lessons form even stated this fact and was convinced that they were massively behind the so called average time that were listed.

Too many co-incidences for me to be honest!

I agree that the times may be a little suspect alright, but we are never going to get a full break down of the figures. For everyone person in your position there have been people giving out because they have been getting called too early.

For some reason there seems to be a lottery here(maybe its the difference between your file going to SGS or an RSA centre), however I still think you should continue ringing them if you need it sorted before July. I know if it was me I would have been ringing them as soon as I got the confirmation letter.

Abigayle wrote: »

How are people doing this? My sister has been trying desperately to get her test, and has been told point-blank that only the RSA decide whos files get sent to SGS for testing, and that they do not take direct calls.

You dont get to decide. The RSA send some files to SGS and others to their own test centres. When it is sent to SGS you get another letter saying to call them to arrange a test date. I'm guessing that is what happended to the poster you quoted.

pickarooney · 23-06-2008 03:39PM

Angry people cause accidents.

techdiver · 23-06-2008 03:39PM

alanmurphy83 wrote: »

I agree that the times may be a little suspect alright, but we are never going to get a full break down of the figures. For everyone person in your position there have been people giving out because they have been getting called too early.

For some reason there seems to be a lottery here(maybe its the difference between your file going to SGS or an RSA centre), however I still think you should continue ringing them if you need it sorted before July. I know if it was me I would have been ringing them as soon as I got the confirmation letter.

The reason I didn't call straight away after getting the confirmation letter was because I misguidedly trusted that this great system they have been talking about actually works.

In fairness they should really bother publishing the average waiting times when they seem to have no correlation to the actual waiting time, be that to short or too long. I’m just jaded with the way everything in this country can be done so poorly.

Deadalus · 23-06-2008 03:43PM

Everyone saying they had 9 months to apply for there test and giving out about learner drivers not taking advantage of shorter waiting times are not taking into consideration the people who have only got the provisional license in the last 3 months and who are actually not even allowed to apply for their full license until they had their provisional for six months. What are they supposed to do? why make us wait? Im better than alot of people I know at driving and yet I'm not even allowed to apply for my test

techdiver · 23-06-2008 03:51PM

Deadalus wrote: »

Everyone saying they had 9 months to apply for there test and giving out about learner drivers not taking advantage of shorter waiting times are not taking into consideration the people who have only got the provisional license in the last 3 months and who are actually not even allowed to apply for their full license until they had their provisional for six months. What are they supposed to do? why make us wait? Im better than alot of people I know at driving and yet I'm not even allowed to apply for my test

Exactly! And I love this illusion of passing the test making someone a good driver. How many fatal accidents are caused by provisional drivers anyway? Very few, I'm sure. And those of you who criticise, how many of you have availed of the driving unaccompanied rule over the years??

Spud83 · 23-06-2008 03:52PM

Deadalus wrote: »

Everyone saying they had 9 months to apply for there test and giving out about learner drivers not taking advantage of shorter waiting times are not taking into consideration the people who have only got the provisional license in the last 3 months and who are actually not even allowed to apply for their full license until they had their provisional for six months. What are they supposed to do? why make us wait? Im better than alot of people I know at driving and yet I'm not even allowed to apply for my test

Well you should check the rules regarding this first. You can apply for your test NOW. On the day of your test you must have held your learners permit for 6 months. So i would apply soon see when you get a date if its too early cancel it for a later date.

I have to say I'm not fully in agreement with the 6 month waiting time, but the idea is that people get in 6 months of experience before getting a full license. Now how can they tell that people actually used that 6 months waiting to get experience rather than sit around and not drive at all I dont know. I would say mandatory hours with an instructor would be better.

But remember that this is just first step in overhauling the testing system. Further changes will be coming after these rules have bedded in.

EDIT: How do you know you are a better driver? What qualifies you to be a judge of this.

EDIT: I drove unaccompanied for 2 months. This was before these new rules were announced and when waiting times were a lot longer. I was quoted 50+ weeks in my centre.

techdiver · 23-06-2008 04:05PM

Honestly does anyone think the driving test is in any way a decent measure of what type of driver you are??

The rules for passing and failing are a joke for one. I've never heard of carnage being caused on the road by some one not being able to reverse around a corner without clipping a kerb, or the importance of knowing hand signals when it is illegal to drive when your lights do not work.

I think it is aimed at the wrong skills. Plus I find it hilarious that you cannot sit a test without a valid NCT cert, even though the waiting time for that is crazy at the moment too. The appointment letter is not enough to sit a test even though it is satisfactory for the Gardaí!!!

It would be funny if it wasn't so serious!

I think the entire system is in need of a complete overhaul.

Deadalus · 23-06-2008 04:08PM

Fair enough i was a bit hot headed there about the whole being a better driver thing but I drive within the speed limit at all times and always keep plenty of distance between myself and the car in front of me. This can not be said for alot of drivers I know.

If most of the accidents happen in the evening and at the weekend why not put in place a restriction for those times on learner drivers. That way they can still get to and from work but are off the roads for the remander of the day. That would be fine by myself.

Spud83 · 23-06-2008 04:15PM

techdiver wrote: »

Honestly does anyone think the driving test is in any way a decent measure of what type of driver you are??

The rules for passing and failing are a joke for one. I've never heard of carnage being caused on the road by some one not being able to reverse around a corner without clipping a kerb, or the importance of knowing hand signals when it is illegal to drive when your lights do not work.

I think it is aimed at the wrong skills. Plus I find it hilarious that you cannot sit a test without a valid NCT cert, even though the waiting time for that is crazy at the moment too. The appointment letter is not enough to sit a test even though it is satisfactory for the Gardaí!!!

It would be funny if it wasn't so serious!

I think the entire system is in need of a complete overhaul.

Reversing around the corner is show you have decent control of the car and an observation test. It is not for the manovure itself.

Handsignals are a requirement I'm not sure why as you shouldn't be driving without lights but maybe so you can tell what somebody on a bike is going to be doing. Plus there are six of them, not exactly hard to learn.

No NCT means your car has not been deamed fit for the road. No NCT means your car shouldn't be on the road so obviously you shouldn't be doing a test in it. The reason Gardai let you away with the letter is because it shows you are getting the test done, texhnically they should be taking your car off the road.

Does the driving test need an overhaul yes, but I would say things like motorway driving is more important than taking hand signals out of it. But imagine they done that as well as these new rules all at the same time. People would be up in arms over it (as many already are). As I stated this is just step one in an overhaul of the whole system. Once these rules are bedded in and people are used to there will be further changes, probably including a new R plate, further restrictions on R and L drivers, prob a change to the test, maybe a mandatory number of hours with a qualified instructor etc.

It cant all be done at once, these changes need to be done gradually to bring the system up to scratch with the rest of europe. Trying to do it all at one would cause up roar. Rememeber last october when they tried to bring these laws within a few days.

Hitchhiker's Guide to... · 23-06-2008 04:17PM

techdiver wrote: »

In fairness they should really bother publishing the average waiting times when they seem to have no correlation to the actual waiting time, be that to short or too long. I’m just jaded with the way everything in this country can be done so poorly.

The thing you should be most jaded and p*ssed off with is your maths teacher. Surely they taught you what an average means? No? Standard deviations?

What you are saying is akin to saying that the average height of people in the country is 5 foot 10 inches. As i am 5.11, then the average number for height must be wrong.

For shame on your maths teacher, for shame...

valz_walsh · 23-06-2008 04:18PM

I think that there should be regular driver tests, something like like the NCT, but for drivers. Whats the point in having a perfectly working car if the person behind the wheel cant drive on a roundabout etc.

I understand that itd be a huge pain in the ass, but Id rather drive on the roads knowing that Im there with decent drivers rather than decent cars. Just because the indicators work in a car, doesnt mean that the person behind the wheel actually uses them!! Everyone else on the road is just ment to know that the driver in front is turning right!!!

Granted it wouldnt help with waiting times and all that, but you never know, it might creat jobs!!

Spud83 · 23-06-2008 04:20PM

Deadalus wrote: »

Fair enough i was a bit hot headed there about the whole being a better driver thing but I drive within the speed limit at all times and always keep plenty of distance between myself and the car in front of me. This can not be said for alot of drivers I know.

If most of the accidents happen in the evening and at the weekend why not put in place a restriction for those times on learner drivers. That way they can still get to and from work but are off the roads for the remander of the day. That would be fine by myself.

Well then you would have people who work shifts or nights giving out because it is only affecting them rather than all learner drivers.

I didn't know there was stats for the number of accidents happening at weekends and evenings. Wasn't there something saying alot happen in the morning due to people being tired not fully awake and responsive etc.

Spud83 · 23-06-2008 04:22PM

valz_walsh wrote: »

I think that there should be regular driver tests, something like like the NCT, but for drivers. Whats the point in having a perfectly working car if the person behind the wheel cant drive on a roundabout etc.

I understand that itd be a huge pain in the ass, but Id rather drive on the roads knowing that Im there with decent drivers rather than decent cars. Just because the indicators work in a car, doesnt mean that the person behind the wheel actually uses them!! Everyone else on the road is just ment to know that the driver in front is turning right!!!

Granted it wouldnt help with waiting times and all that, but you never know, it might creat jobs!!

But by reasoning these people past the test once. So they know how to drive correctly but choose not too. Nothing would stop them going to another a test and driving correctly, even is it means getting one or two pre-tests and then leaving the centre and continuing on as normal.

Stopping people like that is down to Gardai enforcement not more tests.

Me-momo · 23-06-2008 04:27PM

I was talking to a Guard friend of mine & apparently if you are caught with no L plates its a €1,000 fine & if you have no full licence driver beside you & no L plates its €2,000 , he also said if you are on your 2nd provisional its not stated in the law you must have a licenced driver so there is the loop-hole . I think if it forces people to get more lessons & take a test its good

Spud83 · 23-06-2008 04:31PM

Me-momo wrote: »

I was talking to a Guard friend of mine & apparently if you are caught with no L plates its a €1,000 fine & if you have no full licence driver beside you & no L plates its €2,000 , he also said if you are on your 2nd provisional its not stated in the law you must have a licenced driver so there is the loop-hole . I think if it forces people to get more lessons & take a test its good

Its not in the law at the moment. It will be in the law on July 1st. You are correct regarding the punishment for offenses.

keen · 23-06-2008 04:33PM

alanmurphy83 wrote: »

NCT means your car is not fit for the road. No NCT means your car shouldn't be on the road
.

No it doesn't.

I drove to the NCT test centre without an NCT cert, I left it in for the the test and the car passed first time without anything needing to be done to the car, if I had of been stopped at a checkpoint on the way I would of been done for driving a car that's unfit for the roads.

So no NCT doesn't mean your car is a heap of **** it just means you don't have that little piece of paper in your window in some cases.

techdiver · 23-06-2008 04:35PM

Roundtower2 wrote: »

The thing you should be most jaded and p*ssed off with is your maths teacher. Surely they taught you what an average means? No? Standard deviations?

What you are saying is akin to saying that the average height of people in the country is 5 foot 10 inches. As i am 5.11, then the average number for height must be wrong.

For shame on your maths teacher, for shame...

Thanks for the constructive flippant comment, it was very helpful and contributed richly to the discussion.

You knew what I was getting at. My point is that it is a useless statistic that doesn't provide any information as to the actual extent that you will be waiting.

The assurance given by the Minister and the RSA in October was that tests would be made available "On Demand", I.E. 8 - 10 weeks, form date of application. There was T&C in this statement, just an assurance. My argument is that they have not met this assurance.

ART6 · 23-06-2008 04:36PM

It's something I posted some time ago in response to a similar thread to this, so apologies for doing so again but it does seem relevant (to me at least). I tried proposing it to Martin Cullen when he was Transport Minister, and I received a lengthy reply that considered the suggestion, which was:

1. Register all driving schools, and transfer to them the responsibility for issuing certificates of competence (CoCs) that can then be exchanged for full licences.
2. Set up a driving school accreditation department (DCAD for the want of an acronym) under the Department of Transport or the RSA, and transfer all of the current testers to it.
3. Subject all driving schools to regular monitoring for professional standards, including the certification of the instructors, using the ex testers in the new DCAD.
4. Establish a set of conditions that all learner drivers must meet, and allow the driving schools to issue CoCs when they are satisfied the learner has reached the set standards.

To the best of my knowledge there are some 140 testers at the moment, but some 14,000 driving instructors. 140 testers could possibly manage driving school assessments, and the 14,000 instructors could really cut into the waiting list -- there wouldn't be one.

The 140 testers would not have their job security threatened. The driving schools would have to buck up and become much more professional. Every learner driver would have to take proper lessons, which can't be a bad thing. The system would get rid of the nonsense of a half hour test when traffic, weather conditions, or just sheer nerves might influence the outcome. The Department of Transport and the RSA would have the means of implementing safety and competence improvements simply by the issuing of regular procedural updates to the driving schools. The driving schools could also be required to provide a course during lessons on the effects and causes of accidents, including improper speed etc. Apply a bit of a frightener!

OK, the failing would be that everyone would have to register with a driving school to get a licence, so Dad wouldn't be doing the training any more. But so what? If anyone can afford a car then he (she) should be able to afford proper lessons. Driving nowadays is a complex business in cars that in performance terms are like the racing cars of not too many years ago. Whatever -- we have got to stop letting the unqualified and inexperienced loose in a tonne and a half of steel at anything up to 120 kph.

Spud83 · 23-06-2008 04:36PM

keen wrote: »

No it doesn't.

I drove to the NCT test centre without an NCT cert, I left it in for the the test and the car passed first time without anything needing to be done to the car, if I had of been stopped at a checkpoint on the way I would of been done for driving a car that's unfit for the roads.

So no NCT doesn't mean your car is a heap of **** it just means you don't have that little piece of paper in your window in some cases.

Sorry I will re-phrase.

No NCT = Your car has not been deamed fit for the road.

Predhead · 23-06-2008 04:38PM

copeyhagen wrote: »

i can honestly say i have seen a lot more dangerous driving from full licence drivers on a daily basis than learners.

There are more full licenced drivers than learners on the road.

I'm glad they're bringing this in. Now if only they'd ban those fat old Merc drivers.

valz_walsh · 23-06-2008 04:38PM

alanmurphy83 wrote: »

But by reasoning these people past the test once. So they know how to drive correctly but choose not too. Nothing would stop them going to another a test and driving correctly, even is it means getting one or two pre-tests and then leaving the centre and continuing on as normal.

Stopping people like that is down to Gardai enforcement not more tests.

I compleatly understand where your coming from, but wouldnt the thought of the possibility of a test make people try to be better drivers. I wouldnt by no means say that Im the best driver out there, but I see some people on the roads, who dont bother with an indicator, break the speed limit, weave in and out of traffic, cut in front of a driver at a junction, and get confused at a roundabout, and it drives me mad. People pick up bad habits along the way, tests could stop some of that.

In a perfect world the gardai the would catch all these bad drivers and that would be the end of it, but the gardai arent always there. So these drivers keep doing what there doing, until their in an accident.

There's also drivers out there that have licences, and never did a driving test. I dont know the in's and out's of it, but its something to do with Charlie Haughy giving them out years ago. Im only aware if this, because a woman I work with has one of these licences, and she is possibly the worst driver out there. Absolutally lethal on the road.

There are hundreds of people out there, that if they did their test now, after having the full licence for 10-15 years wouldnt have a hope in passing the test now.

DarkJager · 23-06-2008 04:40PM

alanmurphy83 wrote: »

Sorry I will re-phrase.

No NCT = Your car has not been deamed fit for the road.

I'm sorry but that is complete bullsh1t. What does a little piece of paper have to say about how suitable your car is to drive? From what I recall, the NCT can be very picky about what they fail. You don't fail the NCT neccesarily based on how worthy your car is to be on the road.

Naos · 23-06-2008 04:41PM

Well having read up on it, if you currently hold a provisonal liscence, issued prior to Oct 2007, you will be exempt from the six month wait? Is that correct?

Provisional License Drivers off the road from next week

Comments