Novice Drivers.

Packrat

dj jarvis wrote: »

yes , it has been changed , i was entitled to an A provisional , but becasue i let my old one lapse , they wipe the slate clean , so i have to start from scratch AGAIN , i would not mind having to sit the test , no problem with that , but to make a person do it from scratch and then wear that feckin N jacket , they can funk right off

that is why the guy who is doing the IBT training said he has had LOADS of 40/50 year old who got caught out as i did , because the RSA did not do the decent thing and inform bike drivers by email by the up coming changes , a simple courtesy.
not everyone seen the ad in the papers , and not all of us hang around licence offices , seeing the licence lapsed.

some would say they did not inform the relevant people so the could fleece them under the new regime , i am tending to think this way myself judging by the amount of bike driver caught out

if it was just me , i would put it down to being an ill informed biker , but the amount is actually staggering , i know in my circle 4 people who have got caught the same

good time to start an IBT training ctr

So lets get this right:
About 23-25 years ago you got a provisional licence for a bike and drove on that ever since without having to do a test, ever even read the rules of the road or f**k all. You then left this provisional licence lapse for 5 years and 2 months, and are now bitching about having to comply with the same laws the rest of us had to?

About the same time, I got a provisional for a car, paid for lessons, paid for a test, proved that I was a competent driver and knew the rules of the road, then paid for a licence, and renewed it as needed. I also subsequently did all the above for buses as well.

Then you tell us that 'most' bikers did the same thing - ie drove unqualified and hence uninsured fot the last two decades?
No wonder many bikers display no knowledge or regard for the rules of the road - they have been living in a parallel universe to the rest of us.

After all that, you have the gall to complain about the standard of driving by car drivers!!

There are no words....

Shenshen

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

If that was happening when he was on his own in the car then it's because he shouldn't have been wearing L plates.

If there are two people in a car with L plates then I'll make allowances , anyone who doesn't deserves penalty points.

Pet hate of mine. If there is only one person then I expect them to be driving perfectly, exactly as if they were doing the test because that's an L plate means you are self certifying when not under instruction. In the UK you would get done for driving on L plates if you had a full license.

Er... what?
We had the L stickers on as we were using the car for me to learn how to drive. He was also using the car to get to and from work, and sometimes he would be driving with me as passenger.
How are we supposed to take them off every time I wasn't the one driving? That doesn't make any sense.

Shenshen

Manc Red wrote: »

I'm pretty sure you can't. You need a qualified driver sitting on with you to go to and from the test center.

Nope... my former manager needed some 12 or 13 attempts at the test before they passed her (desperation on the part of the tester, I assume, as she still drives like and executioner's assistant), she drove there and back by herself every single time.

shane7218

I would be putting N plates on some of the "experienced" drivers that seem to think that they own the road. If the person passed the test then they are a fully qualified driver like everyone else. All this will cause is the person that has an N plate will be blamed in an accident.

Shenshen

Candie wrote: »

There is a difference between competence and experience.

I remember my driving instructor telling me that until you've done 100k as a driver, you're inexperienced. It's a simple truth that the more you do something, the better you get at it.

You can be a competent newly qualified driver, but until you gain experience, you're still a novice.

A friend of my brother used to say he'd never be in the car with a driver who hadn't at least had one accident, because they wouldn't have the experience of how to deal with it. And just to make sure he got the experience, he got into 2 accidents the first year he had his license.

Yes, experience is vital. But personally, I prefer a cautious driver with common sense, even if they've only passed their test yesterday, over someone who has years of experience but a stupid or bad attitude.

Berserker

Candie wrote: »

There is a difference between competence and experience.

I remember my driving instructor telling me that until you've done 100k as a driver, you're inexperienced. It's a simple truth that the more you do something, the better you get at it.

You can be a competent newly qualified driver, but until you gain experience, you're still a novice.

100% agree with you Candie. Ideally, the 'N' plate would be distance based, as opposed to time and you would have to drive 100K before you get it removed but the facility to do that isn't available, so you have to use time to measure experience.

I would also like to see mandatory lessons for 'N' drivers in relation to motorway driving but that isn't going to happen.

jiltloop

No Pants wrote: »

Money maker how?

You can be guaranteed that the insurance companies will love this. Another way to load premiums by not giving the usual discount after the test is passed.

Xios

kneemos wrote: »

What would you do differently if you saw an N plate?

As a motorcyclist, I'd most certainly take extra-time to assess thir driving capabilities and be more careful around them. The additional indication that they are inexperienced means I can identify hazards faster.

An 'N' plate to me will indicate 'this driver could change lanes without looking' or 'Hit the brakes way too hard for the object in front' kinda deal.

Now i'll know just to be more careful around em.

Cuddlesworth

Shenshen wrote: »

A friend of my brother used to say he'd never be in the car with a driver who hadn't at least had one accident, because they wouldn't have the experience of how to deal with it. And just to make sure he got the experience, he got into 2 accidents the first year he had his license.

Yes, experience is vital. But personally, I prefer a cautious driver with common sense, even if they've only passed their test yesterday, over someone who has years of experience but a stupid or bad attitude.

That's the stupidest thing I've heard all year. Advanced driver is primarily about one thing. Avoiding situations that can cause accidents.

danrua01

Xios wrote: »

An 'N' plate to me will indicate 'this driver could change lanes without looking' or 'Hit the brakes way too hard for the object in front' kinda deal.

Now i'll know just to be more careful around em.

I would think that more experienced drivers are more likely to "change lanes without looking or hit the brakes way too hard", after years of complacency, whereas drivers who have just passed their test would likely be more cautious.

Shenshen

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

That's the stupidest thing I've heard all year. Advanced driver is primarily about one thing. Avoiding situations that can cause accidents.

I'm not defending it, I'm simply pointing out that attitude in my view is far, far more important than experience. And no L or N plate will ever show you if the driver in front of you has common sense or not.

Xios

Xios wrote: »

An 'N' plate to me will indicate 'this driver could change lanes without looking' or 'Hit the brakes way too hard for the object in front' kinda deal.

Now i'll know just to be more careful around em.

All drivers could do that, and you should be prepared for them to, look out for tell tale signs like wobbling over to the lane edge, etc. Pretend they're all out to kill you through malice or incompetence and you'll be ok :P

Shenshen

danrua01 wrote: »

I would think that more experienced drivers are more likely to "change lanes without looking or hit the brakes way too hard", after years of complacency, whereas drivers who have just passed their test would likely be more cautious.

I've been criticised by a so-called "experienced" driver for indicating when changing lanes... was told it was unnecessary and he felt it would just confuse other road users.

Babooshka

Berserker wrote: »

100% agree with you Candie. Ideally, the 'N' plate would be distance based, as opposed to time and you would have to drive 100K before you get it removed but the facility to do that isn't available, so you have to use time to measure experience.

I would also like to see mandatory lessons for 'N' drivers in relation to motorway driving but that isn't going to happen.

And what about the stupid pr*cks who passed their test 35 years ago who don't know how to use a roundabout or most other rules of the road? Most newly passed drivers are safer than a lot of idiots driving years. Anyone I see using the wrong indicators on a roundabout or generally acting the tool are either young gimps who are the same out of a car as in one, or older people who are not new to the roads but never knew what the rules properly were because of more lax times in the past when they were given a licence.

A good example is when I was driving into a right turn lane last Saturday in torrential rain, I was at the front so I slowed on approach into the turning lane, I had indicated, some impatient and dangerous driver behind me decides to move into the turning lane (at the hatching before it was legal to do it) while accelerating behind me and therefore beginning to cut me off or cause an accident in the process of speeding up to turn around a corner....should this A hole not have to wear a D for dick plate on their car? She was no spring chicken and I would say she passed her test 30 od years or more ago....there's no accounting for some pr*cks on the road so I think it's unfair to brand all new experienced drivers with a big Nob plate, it won't change the behaviour of the idiots who never knew the rules of the road in the first place. Everyone should be tested on their knowledge of the roads based on individual skill, but that ain't gonna happen either. Driving on a motorway is one of the easiest things you can do when driving. Navigating roundabouts, narrow roads, kids, pedestrians and sharp bends takes skill.

Xios

bluewolf wrote: »

All drivers could do that, and you should be prepared for them to, look out for tell tale signs like wobbling over to the lane edge, etc. Pretend they're all out to kill you through malice or incompetence and you'll be ok :P

I'm absolutely aware of that, but this is just an extra indicator on top of the rest.

Xios

danrua01 wrote: »

I would think that more experienced drivers are more likely to "change lanes without looking or hit the brakes way too hard", after years of complacency, whereas drivers who have just passed their test would likely be more cautious.

That's flawed thinking. More experienced drivers seem to act in a more predictable manner. Even the twats that just float between lanes are easy to read, but some new drivers tend to be very jittery and unpredictable.

You can predict what a car is going to do while watching their 'posturing', I call it that, but its basically their road position, how stable they are in their lane, are they inching out of that intersection, which way are the wheels pointed, where they are looking etc.

If any of this is or even feels 'off', I just wait in their field of vision, slow down, be more cautious and way for an opportunity to get past them or a safe distance behind.

Berserker

Babooshka wrote: »

And what about the stupid pr*cks who passed their test 35 years ago who don't know how to use a roundabout or most other rules of the road?

As I said on another thread, those people should be made sit their test. I totally agree that some of the drivers who got those free licences are dangerous. The worst part is when they get the hump with you, thinking that you are in the wrong. Roundabouts are a completely disaster. Some people just drive over the smaller ones.

Xios

Berserker wrote: »

. The worst part is when they get the hump with you, thinking that you are in the wrong. Roundabouts are a completely disaster. Some people just drive over the smaller ones.

I'm under the impression that the painted roundabouts are there to indicate that the rules of the roundabout apply there, not for people to actually imagine it's a real obstacle....

after all, it's just a road marking.

dj jarvis

No Pants wrote: »

That's not what you said last month.

tut tut , you should ACTUALLY read the full thread next time you try and assassinate me :rolleyes:

the five years is the time you have after your licence has been issued before it elapses , mine was 5 years and 2 months , so ergo it was 2 months out of date.

smart arse - little to be doing with yourself eh lad :eek:

LordSutch

Pherekydes wrote: »

Isn't it an 'R'?

Yeah, I thought so too :cool:

dj jarvis

Packrat wrote: »

So lets get this right:
About 23-25 years ago you got a provisional licence for a bike and drove on that ever since without having to do a test, ever even read the rules of the road or f**k all. You then left this provisional licence lapse for 5 years and 2 months, and are now bitching about having to comply with the same laws the rest of us had to?

About the same time, I got a provisional for a car, paid for lessons, paid for a test, proved that I was a competent driver and knew the rules of the road, then paid for a licence, and renewed it as needed. I also subsequently did all the above for buses as well.

Then you tell us that 'most' bikers did the same thing - ie drove unqualified and hence uninsured fot the last two decades?
No wonder many bikers display no knowledge or regard for the rules of the road - they have been living in a parallel universe to the rest of us.

After all that, you have the gall to complain about the standard of driving by car drivers!!

There are no words....

again , making up ****e to suit your verbal diarrhea

i did sit 3 tests , failed 1 due to my own fault , failed one due to the radio equip being useless and not being able to hear the tester , and the third time it rained so heavy , the roads around the testing center were flooded ,

and whos bitching about having to sit a test ?? i said it was a cash scam , and i was not into wearing a ****ty yellow jacket, i also said i HAVE NO PROBLEM SITTING THE TEST
all this i have already posted in the thread , try reading it **** nuts

and where did i say or insinuate i drove un insured for two decades ?
i was insured , you see if you learned how to read part your obvious red mist , you would have seen i quoted " the insurance company dont care " and they did not , once you had a valid provisional licence , they would insure you .
so where is the problem ???

so everything you have been ****ing on about is factually incorrect , and you come across as you dont understand English.

all the CORRECT info is on this thread , learn how to read you ****
and i dare you report me , as your post breaks many of the charter rules :rolleyes:

Banned

No Pants

dj jarvis wrote: »

assassinate me

Assassinate? If your own words don't accurately describe the situation, whose fault is that?

AudreyHepburn

Xios wrote: »

I'm under the impression that the painted roundabouts are there to indicate that the rules of the roundabout apply there, not for people to actually imagine it's a real obstacle....

after all, it's just a road marking.

According to my driving instructor you are supposed to treat all mini roundabouts, even the small painted ones, as normal roundabouts. The same rules apply and the same procedures should be followed.

You're not supposed to drive over them, you treat them like they are an obstacle.

Capt'n Midnight

Xios wrote: »

You can predict what a car is going to do while watching their 'posturing',
....
If any of this is or even feels 'off', I just wait in their field of vision, slow down, be more cautious and way for an opportunity to get past them or a safe distance behind.

This is what I do when there is a Yaris in front of me

thelad95

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

You're not supposed to drive over them, you treat them like they are an obstacle.

Whether you drive over them or not is irrelevant as long as you give way to traffic on your right which a lot of idiots don't seem to comprehend.