Driving licence - absolute farce of a system and 83,000 waiting

Shefwedfan

Jim Gazebo wrote: »

I'm disagreeing with you here, it's been done to death, but we hold back our young people too much. The amount of people my age who can't drive, or even move out of home is astonishing. I'm 25!!!

Not disagreeing that law was there and being enforced now, disagreeing about the rightly so part.

I moved out of home when I was 17, 2 weeks after the leaving cert and never returned.



I had my drivers license by 19. Now I had got some practise at home but I made sure I got my own lessons etc

I done all while that while doing 3 years of college, having a job and paying rent

I didn't buy my first car till I left college and was working but I had my full license at that stage

Complaining because YOU can move out of home and YOU can't get a drivers licenses is nobody fault but your own....

no.8

Tbh if a waiting time of 10-12 weeks is quoted and in reality it is a 26 week wait then yes.... There is something wrong with the system.

I'll agree in that moaning is rampant but so is the acceptance of mediocrity

Jim Gazebo

Look, I'll admit every system is different and they all have benefits, including ours, there are absolutely benefits to ours but there are a lot of flaws too. I think this system in particular is now too hard on the learner. It just means there are less learners out there imo. On top of the frustrations of the waiting time and the archaic test itself, it's surely easy to understand how young people get upset about it.

MascotDec85

Jim Gazebo wrote: »

Look, I'll admit every system is different and they all have benefits, including ours, there are absolutely benefits to ours but there are a lot of flaws too. I think this system in particular is now too hard on the learner. It just means there are less learners out there imo. On top of the frustrations of the waiting time and the archaic test itself, it's surely easy to understand how young people get upset about it.

There definitely aren’t less learners out there

Dravokivich

Jim Gazebo wrote: »

Look, I'll admit every system is different and they all have benefits, including ours, there are absolutely benefits to ours but there are a lot of flaws too. I think this system in particular is now too hard on the learner. It just means there are less learners out there imo. On top of the frustrations of the waiting time and the archaic test itself, it's surely easy to understand how young people get upset about it.

Young people get upset when their porridge is too hot. And again when it's too cold. I was 33 when I passed on third attempt and wasn't too worried about it either way. How someone feels about the system shouldn't be a concern. If people are going to worry over how to get lessons, how to get time, how to pass the test. They aren't really in a position to do it. We can only hold their hand's while crossing the road. Driving on it, is no place for that.

jimgoose

Jim Gazebo wrote: »

...On top of the frustrations of the waiting time and the archaic test itself, it's surely easy to understand how young people get upset about it.

I wouldn't say the test is archaic, aside from the strange absence of motorway stuff. That particular corner of it needs an overhaul.

Dravokivich

jimgoose wrote: »

I wouldn't say the test is archaic, aside from the strange absence of motorway stuff. That particular corner of it needs an overhaul.

We don't need motorway testing. It's no different than driving on a dual carriageway.

jimgoose

Dravokivich wrote: »

We don't need motorway testing. It's no different than driving on a dual carriageway.

Aside from the higher speeds, limited access, ban on pulling over, and probably a couple of more things that I'm not thinking of right now. Learner permit holders are barred from motorways in all circumstances and thus become fully licensed without any experience of them. This needs to change.

Dravokivich

jimgoose wrote: »

Aside from the higher speeds, limited access, ban on pulling over, and probably a couple of more things that I'm not thinking of right now. Learner permit holders are barred from motorways in all circumstances and thus become fully licensed without any experience of them. This needs to change.

They can drive on dual carriageways. A motorway really isn't anything different. It's just designed to have junctions that don't interrupt the flow of traffic on the highway.

jimgoose

Dravokivich wrote: »

They can drive on dual carriageways. A motorway really isn't anything different. It's just designed to have junctions that don't interrupt the flow of traffic on the highway.

I would argue that the higher speed limit on a motorway is a fairly serious
difference, at any rate. And yes, I know that certain HQDCs have 120k limits, at least in part, but they're not that common.

Dravokivich

jimgoose wrote: »

I would argue that the higher speed limit on a motorway is a fairly serious
difference, at any rate. And yes, I know that certain HQDCs have 120k limits, at least in part, but they're not that common.

And there's a motorway around the corner from me with a speed limit of 80. You can't just pick and choose these things. If motorway driving is a requirement, then there are going to be huge regions of the country that can't hold a test centre, as they'll be too far away. Most of the time tests take place, will also be likely to be during a time of congested traffic. They'll likely not get to any great speed as they'll be going down the slip, maybe merging on, then preparing to come off (or if available, staying in an auxilary lane).

It being called a "driving test" is a bit of a misnomer. The examiner is more concerned with risk assessment, and perception. If you can't drive, that's going to be an issue. But if you can drive and you've no ability to assess what's happening around you, it'll be a failure also. That's why it's called a "Certificate of Competence" when one passes.

jimgoose

Dravokivich wrote: »

And there's a motorway around the corner from me with a speed limit of 80. You can't just pick and choose these things. If motorway driving is a requirement, then there are going to be huge regions of the country that can't hold a test centre, as they'll be too far away. Most of the time tests take place, will also be likely to be during a time of congested traffic. They'll likely not get to any great speed as they'll be going down the slip, maybe merging on, then preparing to come off (or if available, staying in an auxilary lane).

It being called a "driving test" is a bit of a misnomer. The examiner is more concerned with risk assessment, and perception. If you can't drive, that's going to be an issue. But if you can drive and you've no ability to assess what's happening around you, it'll be a failure also. That's why it's called a "Certificate of Competence" when one passes.

Fair points about motorways. I would just say that if you've no ability to assess what's happening around you, then you can't drive!

Dravokivich

jimgoose wrote: »

Fair points about motorways. I would just say that you've no ability to assess what's happening around you, then you can't drive!

Yeah. Sure I tell my kid, regardless of the car moving or not. Once the engine is on, I'm driving.

jimgoose

Dravokivich wrote: »

Yeah. Sure I tell my kid, regardless of the car moving or not. Once the engine is on, I'm driving.

I would say you start driving before the car is in sight, Grasshopper.

?Cee?view

Jim Gazebo wrote: »

Just because someone else has an even worse system does not mean ours is fine then.

I think the point is that the German system is better, not worse.

Amirani

jimgoose wrote: »

I wouldn't say the test is archaic, aside from the strange absence of motorway stuff. That particular corner of it needs an overhaul.

I think if your driving fundamentals are good then motorway driving is just a natural progression and shouldn't pose a challenge to a competent driver. I'd argue that if a newly qualified driver isn't capable of safely driving on a motorway, then our driving test isn't testing core driving skills well enough. I don't think that this is the case though.

You should be well aware of all the rules regarding stopping/merging/safe distance etc. from your theory and practical test.

jimgoose

Amirani wrote: »

I think if your driving fundamentals are good then motorway driving is just a natural progression and shouldn't pose a challenge to a competent driver. I'd argue that if a newly qualified driver isn't capable of safely driving on a motorway, then our driving test isn't testing core driving skills well enough. I don't think that this is the case though.

You should be well aware of all the rules regarding stopping/merging/safe distance etc. from your theory and practical test.

Well alright, I'll accept that.

Jim Gazebo

Amirani wrote: »

I think if your driving fundamentals are good then motorway driving is just a natural progression and shouldn't pose a challenge to a competent driver. I'd argue that if a newly qualified driver isn't capable of safely driving on a motorway, then our driving test isn't testing core driving skills well enough. I don't think that this is the case though.

You should be well aware of all the rules regarding stopping/merging/safe distance etc. from your theory and practical test.

I agree with this but reversing around a corner? When does anyone do that in real life, honestly?

MascotDec85

Jim Gazebo wrote: »

I agree with this but reversing around a corner? When does anyone do that in real life, honestly?

Whenever reversing into/out of a parking space, into or out of a driveway, around the side of the house etc etc. it’s the principle of demonstrating you can control the speed of the car whilst avoiding an obstacle and observing safely.

Dravokivich

Jim Gazebo wrote: »

I agree with this but reversing around a corner? When does anyone do that in real life, honestly?

It just so happens, I do it every day.

jimgoose

Jim Gazebo wrote: »

I agree with this but reversing around a corner? When does anyone do that in real life, honestly?

I do it a fair bit, yes - to the left and right. Because I can, properly and safely, with an artic if necessary!

witchgirl26

Jim Gazebo wrote: »

I agree with this but reversing around a corner? When does anyone do that in real life, honestly?

Every single day when I reverse my car into parking spaces. I would have thought similarly to you when I was originally practising it. As, to be fair, it's rare I reverse around a corner on a road in a housing estate like you generally practice on. But the skill set is the same for reverse parking.

Shefwedfan

Jim Gazebo wrote: »

I agree with this but reversing around a corner? When does anyone do that in real life, honestly?

It is not something most people will use day to day but it is a quick way to test the learner on a few of the basics of driving a car....

Jim Gazebo

So why don't they just get you to reverse into the space so at the test centre!? They mark you down if there's a van at the other end of the estate and you reverse around!

jimgoose

Jim Gazebo wrote: »

So why don't they just get you to reverse into the space so at the test centre!? They mark you down if there's a van at the other end of the estate and you reverse around!

Because to do so would miss the point - you need to be able to perform the manoeuvre competently on the public road while dealing with any extant traffic.

Shefwedfan

Jim Gazebo wrote: »

So why don't they just get you to reverse into the space so at the test centre!? They mark you down if there's a van at the other end of the estate and you reverse around!

To be honest most car's park themselves these days so I don't see why anyone would want that to be part of the test, all I have to do is push a button and let go of steering...oh yeah push the accelerator


Hardly a difficult test is it?

Henry Ford III

Rubbish. The majority don't.

Pretzill

Jim Gazebo wrote: »

I agree with this but reversing around a corner? When does anyone do that in real life, honestly?

I live in a road just wide enough for one vehicle - if you meet another car coming the other way and at certain points in the road you have to reverse competently (sometimes fora good distance) around bends and avoiding a ditch on either side - so yep reversing round a corner is very necessary.

professore

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Just as well you dont live in a country that actually takes driving seriously.

My mother is German and had to go through their expensive and time consuming system.

People in Ireland really think we're unique for some reason.

I did my test in Belgium which is modelled on the German system. My daughter is doing it here. I can assure you our current system is more expensive, time consuming, RANDOMLY UNFAIR and harder to pass than the Belgian system.

We have spent the guts of €10k already between insurance, tests and lessons.

She just was refused a test because the passenger door was "too stiff" when opening - on a car with a fresh NCT and which 3 previous testers had no issue with the same door. It is a little bit stiff from the outside, and is perfectly fine from the inside but a kid can open it no problem.

This is her 4th attempt,

• 1st was a fail for hitting a kerb, other than that she had 3 minor infractions and would have passed - I have no issue with this
• 2nd there didn't seem to be any obvious things and were vague stuff like "driving too slow up to a roundabout" ... she doesn't drive too slow, or too fast !!! - total BS and he was just making his quota.
• 3rd attempt the brake light blew just before the test and another no test. Again no issue, just pure bad luck and the tester even gave us some time to get a new bulb ... was impossible in 5 minutes.
• This last one was a pure joke. Probably looking for a brown envelope.

Also the 12 lessons thing, they do the 12 lessons and *THEN* they announce that you need MORE lessons to "prepare you for the test". Pure money racket.

To cap it all off, the waiting times are a disgrace. If you have a non test like attempt 2 or 4 you end up waiting ages for the next one. This is a huge drag on our economy.

We will have to hire a driving test car for the test now, at an extra €120 even though there is NOTHING wrong with the car we have ... and wait 6 months again for another test, pay exorbitant insurance for her still.

Another friend of ours whose daughter passed first time and a week later drove out from a side street in front of an oncoming car and had a nasty accident. Lucky she wasn't killed. So the test doesn't test if you are a safe driver, just that you tick whatever boxes the tester thinks is the "proper" way to drive in their opinion.

Surely the emphasis should be on SAFE DRIVING ... but no, you have to be like a boy racer going up to roundabouts and away from the traffic lights.

Isambard

jimgoose wrote: »

Aside from the higher speeds, limited access, ban on pulling over, and probably a couple of more things that I'm not thinking of right now. Learner permit holders are barred from motorways in all circumstances and thus become fully licensed without any experience of them. This needs to change.

it doesn't need to change and it isn't out of step with other eu countries who have far busier roads. Learners need to demonstrate they can control a car before the real job of getting experience starts, and that includes motorway driving

Captain Chaos

I see some N drivers around lately who I have no idea how they passed at all.

Poor/wrong road positions, wrong indicator use, failing to make progress, all very visible issues.

professore

Captain Chaos wrote: »

I see some N drivers around lately who I have no idea how they passed at all.

Poor/wrong road positions, wrong indicator use, failing to make progress, all very visible issues.

Saw one this morning and they were edging out into a junction with traffic lights - green for them ... looking like they wanted to go left but no indicator .... bizarre.

professore

professore wrote: »

I

This is her 4th attempt,

• 1st was a fail for hitting a kerb, other than that she had 3 minor infractions and would have passed - I have no issue with this
• 2nd there didn't seem to be any obvious things and were vague stuff like "driving too slow up to a roundabout" ... she doesn't drive too slow, or too fast !!! - total BS and he was just making his quota.
• 3rd attempt the brake light blew just before the test and another no test. Again no issue, just pure bad luck and the tester even gave us some time to get a new bulb ... was impossible in 5 minutes.
• This last one was a pure joke. Probably looking for a brown envelope.

Another friend of ours whose daughter passed first time

Were you in the car with your daughter on 2? And in 3 it seems the tester went above and beyond to accomodate, yet you accuse him of seeking the bribe?

And if it is all so bad, how did your friend get pass first time?

Driving is an important skill that most people want to have. it should be available through school or the VEC, with a trial street grid created off the public roads and cars supplied for the use.

Captain Chaos

Captain Chaos wrote: »

I see some N drivers around lately who I have no idea how they passed at all.

Poor/wrong road positions, wrong indicator use, failing to make progress, all very visible issues.

The problem is like the NCT. You only need to be right for 40 minutes.

Hoboo

professore wrote: »

We have spent the guts of €10k already between insurance, tests and lessons.

10k on lessons and tests? Insurance was what, 3k? 7 grand on lessons and tests is a warning. Some people are best getting a bus.

professore

Deleted User wrote: »

Were you in the car with your daughter on 2?

Of course not.

And in 3 it seems the tester went above and beyond to accomodate, yet you accuse him of seeking the bribe?

I didn't accuse 3 of anything. 3 was fine and I said so. It was 4.

And if it is all so bad, how did your friend get pass first time?

Totally Inconsistent standards. I failed in Belgium, knew why and was told how to improve. I then passed and knew why. Here you can drive perfectly safely, fail and still have no clue how to pass the next time - or no real idea what you did wrong.

professore

Hoboo wrote: »

10k on lessons and tests? Insurance was what, 3k? 7 grand on lessons and tests is a warning. Some people are best getting a bus.

Insurance for going on 3 years at 3 grand a pop + lessons + 2 actual tests and 2 non tests, only one of which was genuine. 4-5 months waiting between each test.

We actually follow the law, she doesn't drive without one of us present, which is a huge pain in the ass but we have no issue with it.

Have you used the bus service lately in Cork? Totally unreliable for getting anywhere on time. Buses don't show up, are late etc. Big campaign including contacting Shane Ross who doesn't want to know.

caldew

You are accusing the testers of having quotas and also looking for bribes. Maybe a more positive and truthful attitude would help your daughter prepare for her next test.

12 lessons were never intended to be enough to pass the test. That's less than 12 hours of practice to drive anywhere in Europe!!!!

Plumbthedepths

professore wrote:

Totally Inconsistent standards. I failed in Belgium, knew why and was told how to improve. I then passed and knew why. Here you can drive perfectly safely, fail and still have no clue how to pass the next time - or no real idea what you did wrong.

If only the tester provided you with some sheet of paper at the end showing your mistakes.......

ayux4rj6zql2ph

Sick of hearing this sh1te about quota's/bribes. Bribes don't exist, quota's don't exist, the RSA testers aren't emplyees of the NCT where it was proven bribes were taken. They are ordinary human beings with jobs to do. I was briefly acquainted with one driver tester last year in a personal capacity, he was the nicest person you could meet, but refused to speak about his job in his personal time and rightly so. Any time i've heard of someone fail it has been for good reason.

Look at the guy in Cork who has failed 17 times, is it his fault of all the different testers nationwide who came to Cork just to test him alone are the problem? I know who i'd put my money on.

ayux4rj6zql2ph

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

If only the tester provided you with some sheet of paper at the end showing your mistakes.......

The driving test feed back report? I got one every time and since 2013 also had a more detailed result emailed to me.

gct

It's not a fair test and the system needs overhauling. I went with my daughter to her test. She had a pretest along the route and the instructor was very happy with her driving. I waited in the waiting room while she was out. Other people left after her and returned before her. She was out at least 40 minutes while others were out 20 minutes and she was brought on a different route. This shows the test is unfair. Surely with all these mandatory lessons the pass rates should be 80% or more. Are the testers doing their jobs properly? Are the instructors doing their jobs properly? People shouldn't have to discuss what tactics will keep the testers happy! You should not be more likely to pass if the examiner sees you being dropped off in the instructors car! Surely the fact that pass rates are different in different centres shows the test is completely unfair.

Plumbthedepths

professore wrote:

Totally Inconsistent standards. I failed in Belgium, knew why and was told how to improve. I then passed and knew why. Here you can drive perfectly safely, fail and still have no clue how to pass the next time - or no real idea what you did wrong.

Natalie Aggressive Dirt wrote:

The driving test feed back report? I got one every time and since 2013 also had a more detailed result emailed to me.

Something doesn't add up so.

Hoboo

professore wrote: »

Insurance for going on 3 years at 3 grand a pop + lessons + 2 actual tests and 2 non tests, only one of which was genuine. 4-5 months waiting between each test.

We actually follow the law, she doesn't drive without one of us present, which is a huge pain in the ass but we have no issue with it.

I'm not sensing much urgency to learn/practice when you're dishing out free insurance every year at 3k a pop but thats up to you. I appreciate its much harder having to be present all the time to practice, but 3 years is an awful long time. You're getting a report from a qualified instructor after each test, and taking the word of an unqualified driver as to how they think the test went......4 times, same result, something's amiss.

?Cee?view

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

If only the tester provided you with some sheet of paper at the end showing your mistakes.......

...and maybe talked through that sheet after the test

Plumbthedepths

?Cee?view wrote:

...and maybe talked through that sheet after the test

Why? it's assumed the potential driver can read . If they can't get someone to read it for them sorted.

?Cee?view

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Why? it's assumed the potential driver can read . If they can't get someone to read it for them sorted.

You miss my point. The tester provides the sheet and will talk through issues arising from it.

ayux4rj6zql2ph

?Cee?view wrote: »

...and maybe talked through that sheet after the test

I got all that on my most recent test and the one before it in 2015.

Plumbthedepths

?Cee?view wrote:

You miss my point. The tester provides the sheet and will talk through issues arising from it.

I'm not missing your point, I think it is unnecessary. If the candidate needs a talk through discuss with whom they took lessons from.