Inquest calls for gardai to be able to seize lone L drivers cars

lollsangel

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/inquest-says-garda%25C3%25AD-should-be-able-to-seize-lone-learner-driver-cars-1.2976936&ved=0ahUKEwjRucn295LSAhVLB8AKHa7uA30QqOcBCBkwAA&usg=AFQjCNE9eCBrlFf6WilB9gc78bfxquGfFw&sig2=Kf-OFJIPRAUDss4FbYq-sw

Cant ever see them seizing cars from L drivers though. Cant help but think there would be a lot of cars off the road. Its often surprising whose on a provisional

b_mac2

Good call if they do bring in laws to enable Gardaí to seize cars, from people who essentially have no licence.

bazz26

Laws are all great but utterly useless without enforcement.

Charlie19

I'd hate to be starting off driving in this day and age.

If I thought all these rules were put in place to prevent accidents and make the roads safer, I could get on board but I really feel that its just another way of making a quick buck.

Eric Cartman

Insurance shouldn't cover provisional drivers alone, it should be the same penalty as no insurance.

Atlantic Dawn

If it was to be enforced they would need a holding area 10 times the size of Croke Park to put them all in, it's not going to happen.

rex-x

Charlie19 wrote: »

I'd hate to be starting off driving in this day and age.

If I thought all these rules were put in place to prevent accidents and make the roads safer, I could get on board but I really feel that its just another way of making a quick buck.

Id agree if it was anything other than this. If someone is going to drive alone with no licence then they should have the car lifted really.... its not going to generate much cash to be fair.

robtri

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Insurance shouldn't cover provisional drivers alone, it should be the same penalty as no insurance.

so who do you proposes pays for the accidents they are deemed to be held liable for??

Charlie19

Charlie19 wrote: »

I'd hate to be starting off driving in this day and age.

If I thought all these rules were put in place to prevent accidents and make the roads safer, I could get on board but I really feel that its just another way of making a quick buck.

How does seizing a car from unqualified driver make a buck?

Eric Cartman

robtri wrote: »

so who do you proposes pays for the accidents they are deemed to be held liable for??

if you are found lying to your insurance company they still pay 3rd party claims but pursue you afterwards by themselves, same model to use.

bucketybuck

Charlie19 wrote: »

I'd hate to be starting off driving in this day and age.

If I thought all these rules were put in place to prevent accidents and make the roads safer, I could get on board but I really feel that its just another way of making a quick buck.

Its utterly insane that this country allows people who have not passed their driving test and unlicensed drivers to drive on their roads. It should be so incredibly obvious that unlicensed drivers be prosecuted and prevented from driving that its really a stretch to label it as a way of making a "quick buck".

Charlie19

Deleted User wrote: »

How does seizing a car from unqualified driver make a buck?

Holding and release fees from the pound.

dudara

Charlie19 wrote: »

I'd hate to be starting off driving in this day and age.

If I thought all these rules were put in place to prevent accidents and make the roads safer, I could get on board but I really feel that its just another way of making a quick buck.

I really can't agree. L-plate drivers have not passed a test of competence. It's an astounding feat of brass balls to think that you can drive unaccompanied without passing your test

(And I will put my hands up and say that many many years ago I did drive unaccompanied as an L-plate driver. In hindsight, the acceptance of this in our society was incredibly stupid)

Spanish Eyes

I'm sure you all know by now that the unaccompanied learner driver in the inquest case is a next door neighbour of those that drowned in the accident.

Not that it makes any difference to the tragic outcome, but OMG.

And of course enforcement is the key here. More likely in urban areas I reckon.

RIP to the two ladies who died in horrible circumstances.

Grolschevik

The most recent Road Traffic Act makes it illegal for a car owner to knowingly allow a learner to drive the car unaccompanied.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2016/act/21/section/39/enacted/en/html#sec39

Eric Cartman

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

I'm sure you all know by now that the unaccompanied learner driver in the inquest case is a next door neighbour of those that drowned in the accident.

Not that it makes any difference to the tragic outcome, but OMG.

And of course enforcement is the key here. More likely in urban areas I reckon.

RIP to the two ladies who died in horrible circumstances.

In rural areas people who don't even have a licence bomb round. Sure even look at our own garda twitter thread. Its all rural donegal people being caught with no licence / nothing in the window or both.

lollsangel

I think theres many older drivers (ie driving years and years) that are driving around so long on a provisional and picked up such dirty habits that it would be near impossible for them to pass the test. I wouldnt like to sit it now.

On saying that i do think we need to enforce the motor laws a bit better not just speed and a full window

Samuel T. Cogley

The problem in Ireland is Dublin and the rest of the country - okay maybe three roads in Cork to. It has to be realised that if you're from Ballygobackwards co. Kerry with one bus a month you're fecked.

We should adopt a policy of a graduated driving test. You do a theory you can drive accompanied. You do a stage I test you can drive at certain times with certain restrictions, you do a stage II test and you can drive anywhere but the motorway and finally a stage III test for motorway driving, or something of that nature. All this should start at 14 or 15.

Personally I don't understand why we're so ready to point to the Brit's and go well what they do please. I also think we've a reasonable system in place now with FCPN. There are plenty of dickheads out there with a full license that are liable to kill someone. That judgement was another complete failure to realise that a 3-year suspended sentance sends out the wrong message. This is about the only area that stiff sentences will hit home. 5 years would have been a much better option.

corks finest

Yes,great idea,will stop a lot ,but not all, Gardai need to enforce current laws ie stopping unaccompanied L drivers, before they contemplate taking cars,as a parent,I'm outside schools daily,never,ever once has a guard even stopped the parking on paths etc,bus lanes etc, outside schools,so if they WONT ,(not can't)enforce laws,then more kids will be hurt/killed by unresponible ppl

Isambard

the point of not being permitted to drive unaccompanied is an attempt to ensure all drivers strive to reach an acceptable standard rather than just chancing it for their entire driving careers. I'd guess there are thousands of middle aged drivers on provisionals who have never taken a test and who drive on their own all the time. Time for a purge

PaulK_CCI

Isambard wrote: »

Time for a purge

What about the amnesty driving license holders? You'd reckon they should all be made to do the test again now the backlog for doing a test has long since cleared :angel:
From the Irish Examiner, Friday, January 04, 2008

.....As environment minister in 1979, Mr Barrett was facing a huge backlog of people waiting to sit their driving test. In order to cut the backlog, he announced that all those on second or subsequent provisional licences could obtain a full licence without sitting a test. 
The amnesty was short-lived, but tens of thousands of provisional licence-holders benefited. The amnesty is regarded as one of the worst policies in recent political history. 

marketty

Here's a mad idea.
Lower the age you can start learning to drive to 16. From 16-17 you can only drive with a registered instructor and you are still not allowed own a car. Get the 12 mandatory lessons done and plenty of practice. If we actually cared about road safety we could put this on the TY/LC curriculum as an optional subject and subsidise the lessons. The uptake would be enormous.

Then at 17 you can drive accompanied as is presently the case.

Hopefully by 18 you have passed the test, N plates on and off you go.

I suggest this because at the moment kids finish school and head off to college or work at 17/18 and suddenly need to be able to drive if public transport is not available. So many of them end up chancing it till they get the test done. I did it myself.

It's fairly hypocritical of any of us 30+ yr olds to give young provisional drivers grief when our generation drove unaccompanied for years, and the current system does nothing to help young people get on the road legitimately, it just pounces on them if they break the rules.

In rural Ireland most 17/18 year olds will drive unaccompanied to get to college/work as there is no alternative, it's either that or sit at home on the dole or emigrate

beer enigma

Eric Cartman wrote: »

if you are found lying to your insurance company they still pay 3rd party claims but pursue you afterwards by themselves, same model to use.

Back in the Quinn Direct days, they took a decision to stop paying the accidental damage part of a comp policy where a learner driver was found to be unaccompanied, only paying for 3rd party damages, but it got challenged in the courts and they lost so had to revert to covering AD.

slave1

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

If it was to be enforced they would need a holding area 10 times the size of Croke Park to put them all in, it's not going to happen.

I learned to drive in the UK, I was stopped multiple times when my L plate was displayed and they checked the passenger for their Full Licence.
It can be done, it should be done

job seeker

It's sad to read the article that someone else's stupidity claimed the lives of two other road users. It's scary to think that we share our public roads with such lunatics. I'd welcome such laws if it prevents such accidents/deaths in the future.

duffman3833

I can see where a lot more stricter suggestions could help but also that its near impossible for learners nowadays to get any experience before they sit their test. My other half recently passed her test and i found it near impossible for her to progress and learn with the little time i could be with her driving. She done well over 10 lessons but found that the only way to learn was to get out there.
I think if we are going to get more strict on learners, it should be that you cant get a car or get insured on a car unless you have done all mandatory lessons. This means before you get out on the road without an instructor you should be well up to date and the instructor should sign off if your ready or not. In regards having a fully licensed driver all the time, it more of a 50/50 issue for me. Its grand if you have someone to be with you in car or if you in a town with public transport is available, but myself living in the country i can see how unfair this is on many others.

FrancieBrady

duffman3833 wrote: »

I can see where a lot more stricter suggestions could help but also that its near impossible for learners nowadays to get any experience before they sit their test. My other half recently passed her test and i found it near impossible for her to progress and learn with the little time i could be with her driving. She done well over 10 lessons but found that the only way to learn was to get out there.
I think if we are going to get more strict on learners, it should be that you cant get a car or get insured on a car unless you have done all mandatory lessons. This means before you get out on the road without an instructor you should be well up to date and the instructor should sign off if your ready or not. In regards having a fully licensed driver all the time, it more of a 50/50 issue for me. Its grand if you have someone to be with you in car or if you in a town with public transport is available, but myself living in the country i can see how unfair this is on many others.

It's an arbitrary regulation to just tick a 'pretence' box. It pretends to be a way to ensure safer driving. In reality it is of limited use.

Cee-Jay-Cee

lollsangel wrote: »

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/inquest-says-garda%25C3%25AD-should-be-able-to-seize-lone-learner-driver-cars-1.2976936&ved=0ahUKEwjRucn295LSAhVLB8AKHa7uA30QqOcBCBkwAA&usg=AFQjCNE9eCBrlFf6WilB9gc78bfxquGfFw&sig2=Kf-OFJIPRAUDss4FbYq-sw

Cant ever see them seizing cars from L drivers though. Cant help but think there would be a lot of cars off the road. Its often surprising whose on a provisional

In theory it's a good idea but in reality when considering how the irish have engrossed themselves in the compensation culture it would mean the state being sued everytime some useless turd who had their car taken off them and then tripped while walking home would sue the state and with our idiotic judiciary they'd get thousands everytime.

boardsuser1

In relation to an earlier comment and those driving around alone on learner permits, 2 guys i know of, their dad is on a provisional licence since 1988 to this day.

His wife on a provisional licence in 1997, her first, obtained in late 1995 and she was also involved in a fatal accident with a motorbike, no prosecution there despite one being dead and one with multiple injuries including amputation.

I should note that the lady is now fully qualified but does not supervise the husband.
The country's road safety laws are decades behind those of the UK, who the Irish government tend to copy with many law reforms.

Samuel T. Cogley

KC161 wrote: »

In relation to an earlier comment and those driving around alone on learner permits, 2 guys i know of, their dad is on a provisional licence since 1988 to this day.

His wife on a provisional licence in 1997, her first, obtained in late 1995 and she was also involved in a fatal accident with a motorbike, no prosecution there despite one being dead and one with multiple injuries including amputation.

I should note that the lady is now fully qualified but does not supervise the husband.
The country's road safety laws are decades behind those of the UK, who the Irish government tend to copy with many law reforms.

Our laws aren't a million miles off. Enforcement on the other hand...

boardsuser1

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Our laws aren't a million miles off. Enforcement on the other hand...

The enforcement here is decades behind the North even.

I hope they do change the law to seize vehicles in this instance but you also have 'young johnny' down the road driving around with no L plates on a learner permit.

Would it be back to link art licences with the registration numbers for A.N.P.R purposes?

That in itself is also years behind.

newacc2015

marketty wrote: »

In rural Ireland most 17/18 year olds will drive unaccompanied to get to college/work as there is no alternative, it's either that or sit at home on the dole or emigrate

The state needs to stop the construction of new homes in areas without decent public transport. There is sizeable minority who think there should be two sets of traffic laws. One for the residents of cities and another for people for rural dwellers ie drink driving laws should be relaxed in the countryside according to some people. The state should not allow the construction of home where they aren't on a decent bus route. This is the norm elsewhere in Europe.

bladespin

Driver's ed with the test while at school would go a long way here.

bucketybuck

job seeker wrote: »

It's sad to read the article that someone else's stupidity claimed the lives of two other road users. It's scary to think that we share our public roads with such lunatics.

Whats scary is the total lack of understanding and respect these stupid, stupid idiots have for the potentially dangerous equipment they are allowed to operate.

Its a piece of equipment that weighs over a tonne and can hit speeds measuring hundreds of km/ph, and its being operated by some vapid little twat with no concept of the damage it could do never mind any certification of competence. There is more oversight to driving a forklift in a warehouse than there is to hurtling down a road at 120 km/h, how does that make sense?

The vast majority of people do not understand anything to do with vehicles and you can see it in the way they drive, the way they choose their cars, their attitude to maintaining their cars, their attitude to other vehicles. Its endemic and its this willful ignorance and lack of respect that is the root cause of so many deaths and problems.

Two people are dead because this country had no problem with a little moron driving a vehicle she had no respect for, that fact that she was allowed to drive a car at all says as much about our culture as it does her, and it says nothing good about her.

jackofalltrades

marketty wrote: »

It's fairly hypocritical of any of us 30+ yr olds to give young provisional drivers grief when our generation drove unaccompanied for years, and the current system does nothing to help young people get on the road legitimately, it just pounces on them if they break the rules.

Is it hypocritical though.
If you started driving today you could do you first test in 6 months time.
For a retest would have you wait another 3 months.

For our generation it was a wait of a year or more to get their first test.
My local centre reached 63 weeks at one stage.
Fail that test and you're waiting another year.

In rural Ireland most 17/18 year olds will drive unaccompanied to get to college/work as there is no alternative, it's either that or sit at home on the dole or emigrate

They still have the option of cycling, getting a motorbike or moving house.

Pete Moss

jackofalltrades wrote: »

For our generation it was a wait of a year or more to get their first test.
My local centre reached 63 weeks at one stage.
Fail that test and you're waiting another year.

But, you could still drive unaccompanied, so the impact of failing had little effect on road safety as it didn't keep unaccompanied provisional drivers off the road.

grogi

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

If it was to be enforced they would need a holding area 10 times the size of Croke Park to put them all in, it's not going to happen.

All needs to happen is to a few cars being seized and news spreading.

marketty

jackofalltrades wrote:

Is it hypocritical though. If you started driving today you could do you first test in 6 months time. For a retest would have you wait another 3 months.

jackofalltrades wrote:

For our generation it was a wait of a year or more to get their first test. My local centre reached 63 weeks at one stage. Fail that test and you're waiting another year.

jackofalltrades wrote:

They still have the option of cycling, getting a motorbike or moving house.

You're taking me up wrong, read the rest of my post. I don't think that driving unaccompanied is OK, but I think it should be acknowledged that the state has a role to play in educating and facilitating young drivers so we can solve this problem properly, rather than our usual 'all stick and no carrot' approach

scamalert

simple approach to get rid of provisional license would solve this stupid issue,whats the point for people to pass theory test and bum around with provisional license which basically never expires.Its not rocket science to implement theory and driving mandatory and do straight test to get full license.

experience is gained trough driving,but one person getting his test done in some rural town with few streets and comparing that to driving in Dublin or Cork etc is like day and night,not to mention motorways,some are easy two lanes and just stick to what you learned in theory,and smth like hitting m50 with 4 lanes multiple exits/traffic and that crap can only be learned trough hard experience doing it many times,not just reading from paper.

Since if person is a tosser,it will hardly change how they drive,cracking down on more checkpoints or seizing more cars wont eradicate issue.Unless law changes to ban provisional to get license taken away for few years,people will continue with risking it.

honda boi

Get a motorbike or cycle.
The amount of people I've heard about giving out about insurance,tax and other stuff.
I've told them to get a motorbike but no they,d rather drive around with nothing on the car!!
I used to commute to work on my motorbike before my accident and it costs f all ,and you can be fully legal on a provisional licence!!
The funniest excuse is they can't because of the weather/rain! Buy some poxy rain gear!
But no they,d rather drive illegally

duffman3833

honda boi wrote: »

Get a motorbike or cycle.

Thing about that is people don't like motor bikes or are afraid of been knocked down.

Motorbikes also require a (driving) test, tax/insurance etc. though so they're not quite a free alternative.

honda boi

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Motorbikes also require a (driving) test, tax/insurance etc. though so they're not quite a free alternative.

Still works out cheaper getting fully legal on a bike then getting insurance on a car with a provisional.

jackofalltrades

duffman3833 wrote: »

Thing about that is people don't like motor bikes or are afraid of been knocked down.

Which is fine, but they can't claim that there's no alternative.

scamalert

jackofalltrades wrote: »

Which is fine, but they can't claim that there's no alternative.

well its a ****ty alternative,first one is limited to what 50cc scooter,given amount of rain which is like 300 days a year,road conditions which are **** in most parts of the country,specially rural,your lucky in most cases for two cars to pass each other without need to slow down or stop.Distance is another major factor,cycling is ok for like 5miles both ways,but then again same issues like with a motorbike.

so them alternatives,as to move,get a bike or scooter usually are useless offerings.

Isambard

how about passing the test as an alternative? worked for me

Reventon93

I'd say I'm in the minority here that never drove on a provisional without being supervised. Was drilled into me that I could loose my licence and worse, on top of not being insured. The guilt trips :eek:

Worked with people and had cousins that drove unaccompanied on provisonals regularly. It was only when I started driving on own, when I got my full licence, that I realised just how little the law is really enforced. It's actually quite scary considering some are actually dangerous as they don't know the basics. But on the other hand, driving is the only way you're going to get that.

Anyway that's not really the point. I think this is definitely one of those grey areas that everyone is always going to have a differing opinion. I agree that it should be a lot stricter on drivers and that incorporating it into school would be really beneficial.

I'd personally like to see a practical element where you're given a basic explanation about parts and how they work. It wasn't really till I had my own car that I got really interested in mechanics. It helped me understand just how much of a machine it is and that it's not full proof.

andekwarhola

Charlie19 wrote: »

I'd hate to be starting off driving in this day and age.

If I thought all these rules were put in place to prevent accidents and make the roads safer, I could get on board but I really feel that its just another way of making a quick buck.

This oppressive money making tyranny is hardly all powerful if you can overthrow it by sitting a driving test and passing.

You know, like all the other countries.

sjb25

Isambard wrote: »

how about passing the test as an alternative? worked for me

Exactly iv paid for and passed my class B C and D tests so that's 3 separate Rsa driving tests iv also done a 3 week advanced driving course with another test at the end for work yet it seems loads of people just think they should be aloud pay for a liecence and work away on the roads!! Not as if the driving tests are that hard anyway and In fairness my father in law says I still can't drive properly

honda boi

scamalert wrote: »

well its a ****ty alternative,first one is limited to what 50cc scooter,given amount of rain which is like 300 days a year,road conditions which are **** in most parts of the country,specially rural,your lucky in most cases for two cars to pass each other without need to slow down or stop.Distance is another major factor,cycling is ok for like 5miles both ways,but then again same issues like with a motorbike.

so them alternatives,as to move,get a bike or scooter usually are useless offerings.

Its still an alternative. So that excuse of 'hey there's no other way to do it so f**k it I'll do it' isn't right.
I did it, ye starting of it can be ****ty but hey you gotta start somewhere!
I wanted a skyline to go to work when I started.
You use whatever you can afford to legally.

Cows Go µ

Reventon93 wrote: »

I'd say I'm in the minority here that never drove on a provisional without being supervised. Was drilled into me that I could loose my licence and worse, on top of not being insured. The guilt trips :eek:

I was the same but that was probably because I grew up in Northern Ireland and it just wasn't done. I think I only drove by myself once and that was only a mile down the road to pick up my dad from the pub as he didn't want to walk home in the rain. And that utterly terrified me. My poor mother was dragged to Cork and back twice a day every time I had to go to work so that I could practice.