Boy Racer On L Plates Car Confiscated.

I hope it lasts longer than the usual kneejerk reaction from the higher officers. Nice to see it happening though, always warms my cold cold heart!

I reckon the accompanying driver rule should be enforced thoroughly, the accompanying driver might be able to stem the moments of utter stupidity that can be so prevalent in all of us when we were learning to drive.

Green Hornet wrote: »

The guards in New Ross confiscated a boy racers car last night because he was on L plates without a qualified driver in the car.

I suspect its as a consequence of the terrible accident in New Ross last weekend. A passanger was killed when 2 boy racers were racing each other on the back road and one clipped the other causing the car to flip.

lol

i love how people can tell who a boy racer is

kbannon wrote: »

Can the gardai confiscate a car because the driver isn't abiding by the new licencing rules?

Correct me if i'm wrong, but i remember reading somewhere that they would not be confiscating cars as the Gardaí would not have the resources to store them.

Give them a driving ban for 4 years and a 5k fine..
That should give them something to think about

Yeah, we need a link here, OP. Otherwise it didn't happen. I'll leave this open for a day or so...

Gardai cannot seize a car if learner driver is unaccompanied, if the driver is drunk and we cannot seize a car for no NCT either. A car can only be seized under traffic laws for no insurance or no tax or if it is defective. A vehicle can also be seized if it was used in crime, if items in the car are believed to be stolen etc.

Hanley wrote: »

There is absolutely NO way of knowing why it was confiscated unlesss you were talking to the Garda who did it.

What about if someone was talking to the lad it was taken from ?

FruitLover wrote: »

It's the guy in the Glanza with the bodykit.

Some glanza's cost money, and alot of the drivers pay high insurance premiums for those cars.

It's the fella who drives like he owns a ferrari in the white 92 ex-taxi corrolla with over a million on the clock, the biggest, most ugly and cheapest wheels they can find, "toyota" written on the windscreen, speed stripes and a back box that makes it sound like a tractor.
They are the boy racers of our generation:D

Green Hornet wrote: »

The guards in New Ross confiscated a boy racers car last night because he was on L plates without a qualified driver in the car.

I suspect its as a consequence of the terrible accident in New Ross last weekend. A passanger was killed when 2 boy racers were racing each other on the back road and one clipped the other causing the car to flip.

How do you know this? A friend told you?

This is like when the smoking ban came in, remember all those threads about people getting caught smoking and having to pay the 3000 euro fine.

TheNog wrote: »

Gardai cannot seize a car if learner driver is unaccompanied, if the driver is drunk and we cannot seize a car for no NCT either. A car can only be seized under traffic laws for no insurance or no tax or if it is defective. A vehicle can also be seized if it was used in crime, if items in the car are believed to be stolen etc.

A car can be siezed for not having An NCT.

Good to hear them towing that car away, regardless if it was because he was a boyracer or not...One less inconsiderate driver of the road thank god.

mthd wrote: »

We just need to copy the UK's rules imo. Insurance is void if there is no accompanying driver. That'll learn em!

No ****ing way.

Consider the following scenario:

L-driver with no accompanying causes accident...causing horrific injuries to another road-user. Why should the victim be faced with either :

a) Having their own insurance to foot the bill
or
b) No insurance footing the bill.

I would suggest the Swiss approach. Insurance is still valid for third-party-claims, but the insurance company can then claim between 40% and 70% of any pay-out back from the driver. This is enforced by law, to the extend that the driver is required to materialise any and all available assets and if that is insufficient is entitled to nothing more than subsistence earnings until such times as the debt is repaid.

If that means losing their car, their house, their lifes savings, and living off less than what the Dole would give them until such times as the debt is repaid, then thats what they do.

That will learn them.

Oh - and its off-topic...but drunk-drivers get the same treatment.

Green Hornet wrote: »

The guards in New Ross confiscated a boy racers car last night because he was on L plates without a qualified driver in the car.

A car cannot be seized if the driver is unaccompanied or if there is no L plates displayed or both. There is no section of the traffic laws that empower gardai to seize a car under these situations. However the garda should not allow a person to continue to drive because the garda would be implicated in allowing that person to break the law. The only reasonable solutions is either have that person leave the car on the roadside or bring it to the station to be picked up later by the owner or a person with a full licence.

I'm all on for factual reports but in this case I dont see anything wrong with a little scaremongering.
Maybe if storys like this start to get around then those little scumbags might actually think about how they behave. They might actually start to think twice about driving in circles around housing estates all night if they are afraid of getting their car taken off them and having to walk home to mammy and daddy.

af666x wrote: »

But hey - you'd make a great tabloid journalist!

Or the Indo...

Either way, this is the same old debate about Boy Racers. I'm of the firm belief that if we shot them all or sent them to work in labour camps the problem would disappear soon enough.

/tongue in cheek.

Green Hornet wrote: »

Okay. Talked to the guys from New Ross this morning.

Point 1. It was a young male driver in a Glanza.
Point 2. It was not just down to L plates. He was not properly taxed or insured either.

ah the old 1.3 on log book trick, the amount of young lads insured in them as 1.3 starlets is a joke, the gardai should be stopping and checking them all!

draffodx wrote: »

ah the old 1.3 on log book trick, the amount of young lads insured in them as 1.3 starlets is a joke, the gardai should be stopping and checking them all!

Ye thats true! Everyone I heard off who had one when they were 17 always said " just insure it as a 1.3, No one is gonna know like "

Either if your an old Biddy at 10kmh with L plates or boyracer with L plates the same practice of punishment should be implemented.

SteveC wrote: »

Anyone know if the unaccopmanied drivers are just sent on their way after a checkpoint or do they have to wait for someone to 'collect' them?

Depends entirely on the location of the detected offence. TheNog is correct in his interpretation of the Road Traffic Act. Cars cannot be seized except where they are suspected of being involved in a crime or where they are not insured or taxed. You can make sure they don't drive unaccompanied, I hope it might knock some sense into them through the sheer inconvenience and bollicking they get when caught.

In the case of VRT evasion. I'm not too clear on it but I assume its possible to seize a car for non-payment of VRT within a reasonable time-frame.

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Just as an aside. Can a cop order an illegal L plater to stop driving on the spot and make his/her own way to their destination?

Yes a learner driver can be ordered to park the car and make their own way or have a full licensed driver collect them and their car.

SteveC wrote: »

The car can also be siezed under VRT legislation in the Finance act.

AFAIK, it can also be 'removed' if it's deemed to be parked illegally / dangerously or causing an obstruction.

True on all counts but rarely happens. For VRT a car can be seized but Customs are notified and if the car is not worth much they will not bother towing it away to their compound. It is then left to the guard who seized it to get rid of it one way or another. Most guards don't want the hassle of it cos it is just hassle. However if the car was worth 30-100 grand customs would be down in a flash.

Seizing car dangerously parked are again rarely towed away. It is usually handier and quicker to contact the owner to have it moved rather than wait for a tow truck. Same for causing an obstruction but it would depends on what the car is obstructing. Different matter if the car is obstructing any emergency services vehicle.

Slig wrote: »

it is up to the discression of the Guard as to whether they allow you to drive after being stopped.

True discretion can be used but technically a learner driver should not let on their way of at all possible. If the car cannot be parked in a safe manner near the checkpoint it would be better to send them home bound.

SteveC wrote: »

I've often wondered about that.

Anyone know if the unaccopmanied drivers are just sent on their way after a checkpoint or do they have to wait for someone to 'collect' them?

Same as above