Test passed, with restriction concerns.

Lucifer31

Hey Guys,
Had my full 'A' license test this morning in Galway, which I passed (Sweet!).
However, it got off to a tricky start in the test centre: I told the tester I would be doing the test on my Honda Vt600c (Shadow). He then asked my for my restriction certificate, and I told him it wasn't restricted, as it met the power/weight restriction criteria as detailed on the provisional. He looked at me like I had two heads. He asked if the bike had a power output of more than 25kw. I told him it did, and he said it needed to be restricted. I explained again that it didn't (I've already checked this carefully with the RSA). This went on for a couple of minutes at which stage he said he would be testing me anyway, but I got the impression he thought that I was trying to pull a fast one!
I was quite surprised that we had to have this conversation. Any thoughts?

goodlad

First of all, congrats!

If you passed and got your cert i wouldnt worry about it dude.
Though hearing that he asked for a cert does bother me, my bike is restricted but i have no cert and my test is in 4 weeks! :eek:

Paparazzo

As far as I know, there's no such thing as a restriction cert. I certainly never seen one.
According to this, you don't need one to do your test:
http://www.citizensinformation.ie/categories/travel-and-recreation/motoring-1/driving-tests/motorcycle_driving_tests_in_ireland

There are a number of things you need to do in preparation for your motorcycle driving test and a number of legal requirements you must comply with.

* It is very important check in advance that your motorcycle complies with any Kw restrictions on your provisional licence before you attend for your test. If your motorcycle does not comply with restrictions, you cannot complete the test.
* Current motor tax certificate must be displayed on your motorcycle or in your possession when you present for the test.
* The vehicle should be roadworthy and all tyres should have a minimum depth of at least 1mm - the legal thread depth limit for motorcycle tyres in Ireland. (Note vehicle tyre tread depths in Ireland are set down in law in SI 358/1991)
* Motorcycle must comply with regulations about lighting of motorcycles.
* Indicators, brake lights or mirrors are not required but if they are, they should be in perfect working order. (Brake-lights and indicators are required and will be inspected by the instructor)
* The exterior of your motorcycle should be clean.

Idleater

+1 on the congratulations on passing.

While I commend your assertion that to your belief the bike didn't require restriction, I think you were lucky for the examiner to go ahead. I'd expect them to request some clarification from superiors internally on the matter.
Whether that comes back affirmatively or not won't impact you, but may impact upcoming test takers.

On the passing aspect, post off your cert immediately as the restriction period commences when they process the new license rather than the test pass date. That month is awfully long in 2012

Interceptor

nereid wrote: »

On the passing aspect, post off your cert immediately as the restriction period commences when they process the new license rather than the test pass date. That month is awfully long in 2012

Best advice yet. A mate of mine stuck the competency cert in a drawer for nine months and was nearly sick when he found out he had inadvertently extended his restriction period.

Well done by the way!

'cptr

semantics

I posted this in another thread as well, but since wrong information is repeated so often (and leaves you uninsured) one can not repost it often enough.

I can't believe this myth is still going around.


OK, the RSA website indeed states:

"A person applying for a first-time motorcycle learner permit in category A is restricted to driving motorcycles with an engine power output not exceeding 25kW or with a power/weight ratio not exceeding 0.16kW/kg."

So, whoever wrote this had some trouble with logic.
(Remember de morgans laws?: not(a or b) = not a and not b.)
not( > 25kw or power/weight ratio exceeding 0.16kW/kg)
= <=25kw and power/weight ratio not exceeding 0.16kw/kg).

To clarify the issue and since the licence categories are the _same_ all over Europe it may help to look at other countries.
Eg., Germany, see
here (if you speak German):
http://www.fahrlehrerverband-bw.de/07-FSKl/Kl_Motorrad.htm
(Association of Motorcycle Driving Instructors)

(If you are confused by 6.25 kg/kw - that equals 0.16 kw/kg).

http://www.smfv.ch/Ausweise%20Merkblatt.html
(Swiss Association of Motorcycle Driving Instructors)

but there are thousands other sites as well.

The RSA may have trouble with logic and translating a European rule into understandable language.
The rule still applies!



So legally speaking you are riding uninsured and should not have passed your driving test. Congrats anyway, consider yourself lucky, but get your bike restricted!

Idleater

semantics wrote: »

To clarify the issue and since the licence categories are the _same_ all over Europe it may help to look at other countries.

Very valid point, and I noticed that with the EU harmonised conditions (for example wearing corrective lenses) when renewing my licence recently.

I think there are points made that the harmonisation is an EU Directive and may is up to individual countries to write the corresponding legislation to suit their own wording. This may be the issue that many have here, that the OR is ambiguous (as written in the Wikipedia entry on (English) language and boolean logic). Applying demorgans negation rules to language may not remove the understood ambiguity where it would do so in formal logic.

semantics

this misunderstanding can have serious consequences in case somebody is uninsured. Please help to eradicate this!

semantics

The way it is written it may be ambiguous on the RSA Website.
The intention is clear, and relying in court on "this is the way I understood it because it was said on the RSA website" is dangerous territory.
Especially if the rest of Europe is interpreting it as intended
(and if not it leads to obvious anomalies)

nereid wrote: »

Very valid point, and I noticed that with the EU harmonised conditions (for example wearing corrective lenses) when renewing my licence recently.

semantics

Action Plan:

1. Find EU directive
2. Find Irish legislation based on EU directive
3. Check where they deviate (if they do)
4. Notify RSA of their miss-interpretable language (if it is the case).

cantdecide

semantics wrote: »

Please help to eradicate this!

This sounds like a matter close to your heart. Any particular reason?

semantics

cantdecide wrote: »

This sounds like a matter close to your heart. Any particular reason?

Interesting question.
Should I need another reason than: this misunderstanding can destroy lifes in an accident?

No, I am not selling restrictor kits, if that is what you are after.
What is your reason to ask this question?

Idleater

semantics wrote: »

The way it is written it may be ambiguous on the RSA Website.
The intention is clear, and relying in court on "this is the way I understood it because it was said on the RSA website" is dangerous territory.
Especially if the rest of Europe is interpreting it as intended
(and if not it leads to obvious anomalies)

I agree, ignorance is no defence in court, but I believe this has never actually been tested in court either. Until someone (most likely an insurer) does so.

The wording on the RSA/Citizens information websites are only worded interpretations of the actual legal definitions written in the SI etc. If anyone wants to pursue it, one can only investigate the actual wording in the applicable SI. That is what any prosecution will refer to, not any RSA or other publicised interpretation.

Another similar example that I have a bee in my bonnet so to speak about is the amount of motor manufacturers that refer to "cheap Road Tax". Who is one to complain to? The RSA, the Government, The Gardai? no, in this case it's purely the Advertising Standards Authority. But people still refer to it as Road tax, but pay Motor tax.

My (laboured) point being, that what is interpreted as common terminology, when tested will revert to the specific legislative terminology regardless of how many sub authorities are involved.

cantdecide

semantics wrote: »

Interesting question.
Should I need another reason than: this misunderstanding can destroy lifes in an accident?

No, I am not selling restrictor kits, if that is what you are after.
What is your reason to ask this question?

It is broadly misunderstood by insurers, members of the trade, solicitors, judges etc etc The license laws here are incomplete and what's there is full of holes. The whole bloody mess is badly in need of an overhaul. I was wondering why this specific hole requires "eradication" considering it affects borderline bikes.

Even if someone wrongly believed, having been wrongly advised by an 'expert', that they were licensed/ insured and they crashed, the insurers would probably pay out. Even if they wouldn't, that's what the Uninsured Drivers Fund is for so the chances of lives being ruined is relatively low. I would say there's more chance of being biffed by an uninsured cager.

Of course, I don't condone abusing the law. My bikes were restricted when required to be.

cantdecide

Interceptor wrote: »

...A mate of mine stuck the competency cert in a drawer for nine months...

Myself and a mate were walking along with our lids once and bumped into an acquaintance of my mate. Neither knew the other was into bikes. He said "I must send off that certificate of competency- it's been in my glove box now for about two years".

Obviously myself and my mate just looked at each other and said nothing!

semantics

cantdecide wrote: »

The license laws here are incomplete and what's there is full of holes. The whole bloody mess is badly in need of an overhaul. I was wondering why this specific hole requires "eradication" considering it affects borderline bikes.

That may be the case, but at least this seems to be a hole that can be clarified. And one has to start somewhere.

Here is the EU Directive:

COUNCIL DIRECTIVE of 29 July 1991
on driving licences (91/439/EEC)
(OJ L 237, 24.8.1991, p. 1)

[URL] http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CONSLEG:1991L0439:20080718:EN:PDF[/URL]

Page 7, Article 6 1(b) states:

18 years:
— for category A; however, access to the driving of motorcycles
with a power exceeding 25 kW or a power/weight ratio exceeding 0,16 kW/kg (or motorcycles with sidecars with a
power/weight ratio exceeding 0,16 kW/kg) shall be subject to
a minimum of two years' experience on motorcycles with lower
specifications under an A licence; this requirement as to
previous experience may be waived if the candidate is at least
21 years old, subject to the candidate's passing a specific test of
skills and behaviour;


This formulation is reasonably clear.
Now - where is the Irish law?

EvilMonkey

Take it to Legal discussion if you want to talk about the differences between EU directives and Irish law.

As far as i am aware in Ireland Irish law applies, not German law, not EU directives and not what the idiot politicians that wrote the law intended it to mean.
Irish law is interpreted in English or Irish not boolean logic. When there is ambiguity in the law judges look at what other judges ruled in the past. If none exists they will make a call on how they interpret it.

So until it goes to court or is amended it is not clear.

bladespin

semantics wrote: »

I posted this in another thread as well, but since wrong information is repeated so often (and leaves you uninsured) one can not repost it often enough.

I can't believe this myth is still going around.


OK, the RSA website indeed states:

"A person applying for a first-time motorcycle learner permit in category A is restricted to driving motorcycles with an engine power output not exceeding 25kW or with a power/weight ratio not exceeding 0.16kW/kg."

So, whoever wrote this had some trouble with logic.
(Remember de morgans laws?: not(a or b) = not a and not b.)
not( > 25kw or power/weight ratio exceeding 0.16kW/kg)
= <=25kw and power/weight ratio not exceeding 0.16kw/kg).

To clarify the issue and since the licence categories are the _same_ all over Europe it may help to look at other countries.
Eg., Germany, see
here (if you speak German):
http://www.fahrlehrerverband-bw.de/07-FSKl/Kl_Motorrad.htm
(Association of Motorcycle Driving Instructors)

(If you are confused by 6.25 kg/kw - that equals 0.16 kw/kg).

http://www.smfv.ch/Ausweise%20Merkblatt.html
(Swiss Association of Motorcycle Driving Instructors)

but there are thousands other sites as well.

The RSA may have trouble with logic and translating a European rule into understandable language.
The rule still applies!



So legally speaking you are riding uninsured and should not have passed your driving test. Congrats anyway, consider yourself lucky, but get your bike restricted!

Unless I've missed something Irish law would apply here and an Irish court would look to the law description as laid down by the RSA (I'm sure they'd have trouble understanding it too).

Also, insurance companies operating in the Irish market work to Irish laws and our rules of the road, not the EU's.

Anyway as they've offered a contract of insurance based on Irish law you would indeed be fully covered, even if you weren't restricted and didn't meet he power to weight limit. They're obliged to cover the rider 3rd party though they ,ay have the right to recoup.

Lucifer31

Interesting comments there. I mentioned in my original post that I had checked the restriction requirements with the RSA. I actually rang them to clarify the situation, and what the guy told me was that my bike had to be restricted if it was over 25kw OR exceeded the power/weight ratio.

To clarify, I told him that my bike was over 25kw, but was within the 0.16kw/kg restriction limit, and asked whether that was ok (legal). He told me it was. Was he wrong?? I'm going to talk to them again. I'm not going to restrict the bike if it doesn't need to be. I'm still waiting for Quinn Direct to get back to me reference the documents I sent them on to show that the bike meets the power/weight requirements. I'll have to call them too again to see if they're satisfied or not.

EvilMonkey

Lucifer31 wrote: »

Interesting comments there. I mentioned in my original post that I had checked the restriction requirements with the RSA. I actually rang them to clarify the situation, and what the guy told me was that my bike had to be restricted if it was over 25kw OR exceeded the power/weight ratio.

To clarify, I told him that my bike was over 25kw, but was within the 0.16kw/kg restriction limit, and asked whether that was ok (legal). He told me it was. Was he wrong?? I'm going to talk to them again. I'm not going to restrict the bike if it doesn't need to be. I'm still waiting for Quinn Direct to get back to me reference the documents I sent them on to show that the bike meets the power/weight requirements. I'll have to call them too again to see if they're satisfied or not.

I would say your fine. If you do ring the RSA again get them to send that to you in writing(tell them your insurance co wont believe you or something). It would be handy to have if insurances co or guards give you any hassle.

semantics

EvilMonkey wrote: »

As far as i am aware in Ireland Irish law applies, not German law, not EU directives and not what the idiot politicians that wrote the law intended it to mean.
Irish law is interpreted in English or Irish not boolean logic. When there is ambiguity in the law judges look at what other judges ruled in the past. If none exists they will make a call on how they interpret it.
So until it goes to court or is amended it is not clear.

Correct. But at least we can figure out where the issue is.
And in fact there is an issue:
I found the Irish Law:

ROAD TRAFFIC (LICENSING OF DRIVERS) REGULATIONS, 1999.


http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1999/en/si/0352.html#partii-sec17
S.I. No. 352 of 1999.


17. A person granted a provisional licence for the first time on or after the commencement of these Regulations to drive vehicles in category A and who on obtaining a certificate of competency in that category is subsequently granted a driving licence in that category, shall, until a period of two years after the grant of the latter licence, be restricted to driving only those vehicles in the said category which have a power output not exceeding 25 kW or a power/weight ratio not exceeding 0.16 kW/kg, or in the case of vehicles in the said category with sidecars, with a power/weight ratio not exceeding 0.16 kW/kg.

I surrender. The ambiguity is indeed in the law. I suspect that someone has indeed not applied De Morgan's law correctly to the formulation in the EU directive. At least we (I) know now that the difference to the EU directive is indeed in the Irish law, and not in someones (e.g., RSA) interpretation of Irish law.

carsQhere

Does nobody google this stuff :rolleyes:

http://www.magireland.org/content/25kw-licence-facts

semantics

For completeness: The section referenced in my previous post was amended in 2004 and 2006

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2004/en/si/0705.html
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2006/en/si/0537.html#article14

However, the difference to the EU directive still remains.
I think this concludes it and all relevant material is referenced in this thread.

semantics

carsQhere wrote: »

Does nobody google this stuff :rolleyes:

http://www.magireland.org/content/25kw-licence-facts

I did not find this.
Maybe we could put this information together into the FAQ section?

Lucifer31

Guys,
Here is the response I got from the RSA earlier today in an Email, regarding the query I had:

"A person granted a provisional licence for the first time on or after 15 November 1999 to drive vehicles in category A, is during the validity of all provisional licences granted to him or her and subsequently until a period of having held a driving licence in the category for 2 years, restricted to driving only those vehicles in that category which have a power output not exceeding 25 k w or a power/weight ratio not exceeding 0.16k w/kg.



The is stated in the Road Traffic regulations S.I 537 of 2006, therefore if your motor cycle is under 0.16k w/kg restriction it is o.k.



I hope this clarifies your query,"

Looks like my bike, like I thought, does not need to be restricted. Now to get Quinn Direct to understand that too.

semantics

Lucifer31 wrote: »

Looks like my bike, like I thought, does not need to be restricted. Now to get Quinn Direct to understand that too.

Forwarding this Email from the RSA together with pointing to the

Article 14, paragraph (1) of S.I. No 537 of 2006 Road Traffic (Licensing of Drivers) Regulations 2006
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2006/en/si/0537.html#article14

should do the trick. Let us know how it goes.

Lucifer31

I rang quinn direct just there. They have confirmed that they are satisfied with the information I have supplied (relevant bike spec information from Honda), and that I am fully insured.

To recap: I am riding a Honda Vt600c (Shadow), which is over 25kW, but under the 0.16kw/kg restriction.

Bike does not need restriction. Quinn Direct now seem to understand this.
And as per my post earlier today, the RSA have also confirmed this, and I have that in Email.

Happy days.

I also updated my policy to reflect the fact that I have just passed my test, but it only made a small difference in my monthly payments.

EGOSHEA

Just out of curiosity (because I part-own a bike with sidecar but am very far away from the full licence plus two years):

Given that you can ride a bike without sidecar that's over 25kw as long as it's under 0.16kw/kg, why does it only mention the 0.16kw/kg rule in relation to bikes with sidecars? Isn't this the same requirement in practice?

EvilMonkey

EGOSHEA wrote: »

Just out of curiosity (because I part-own a bike with sidecar but am very far away from the full licence plus two years):

Given that you can ride a bike without sidecar that's over 25kw as long as it's under 0.16kw/kg, why does it only mention the 0.16kw/kg rule in relation to bikes with sidecars? Isn't this the same requirement in practice?

I would guess they don't expect a bike with sidecar to be under 25kw.

galwaytt

Lads, ye're making it waaaaaaaaay too complicated.

The Irish Law, as stated, is......

semantics wrote: »

...... shall, until a period of two years after the grant of the latter licence, be restricted to driving only those vehicles in the said category which have a power output not exceeding 25 kW or a power/weight ratio not exceeding 0.16 kW/kg..

The key is that the choice is, "not exceeding 25kW" OR "a power/weight ratio not exceeding 0.16 kW/kg". You can pick the former or the latter. No prizes for guessing which we'd all go for.

Tbh, this is an issue that should be left well-enough alone - the last thing anyone wants is having this pointed out, and then having it changed............delete the whole thread, that's what I say !

Lucifer31

I haven't found it complicated at all. Quinn Direct certainly have, along with the RSA tester the day I did my test a fortnight ago. He didn't seem to have a clue. I just wanted to be fully sure there was gonna be no crap from the insurers should I be unfortunate to have an accident, 'cos you know yourself the stunts they'd pull to get out of paying up fair and square. Anyway, all sorted out now.