Is it bad if you get caught driving by yourself on your 1st provisional?

cormie

Imposter wrote:

I'm guessing you're talking in miles here? If so you do realise there are no 75 zones? Similarly learner drivers shouldn't be on the motorways which are the only 70 'zones'!

If germany is anything like Austria there is no real waiting times. If you've passed your theory test and your instructor thinks you're good enough you are scheduled for the next tests in your town (I lived in a small town and they had tests once a week, larger towns would be every day). If you fail the instructors usually will get you to do 10 more sessions (45 mins each, 20 compulsary before 1st test) and then you'll sit the next test if the instrustor thinks you'll pass.

Regarding the German system, well it's obviously much better run and yes, the road users are most probably allot safer and informed. With our system if they are going to be keeping provisionals on an average one year waiting list, then you have to expect that these drivers will want to get as much practice within that year.

In most cases it will be their first year, where they will be paying ridiculous amounts for insurance and want to get the most out of that insurance. To avoid paying such insurance again for the second year, and coming years, they will want to pass their test. If they fail, they can't re take it within a few weeks. It will take another year. If I was to only drive in the company of a fully licensed driver for the past year, I doubt I would have the opportunity to drive even 1 thousand miles. This means less experience, less chance of passing a test I've been in a 1 year queue for. If i fail, I'll go back to the end of that queue.

I'd be all for the German system, it sounds much better, you have the opportunity to get a full license within about 10 weeks from the first time you start driving, the insurance is much cheaper and of course, the roads much safer. I'm just adapting to my environment and countries system.


Now regarding the 75 Zone, if you read your "make the change" leaflet, or whatever it was called, that you should have got through your letterbox, you will see 120km=75m. I wonder if I had a full license would I have ignored it :rolleyes: Maybe your one of the people I'm referring to doing 70 in the overtaking 75 lane on the motorways?

Imposter

cormie wrote:

Now regarding the 75 Zone, if you read your "make the change" leaflet, or whatever it was called, that you should have got through your letterbox, you will see 120km=75m. I wonder if I had a full license would I have ignored it :rolleyes: Maybe your one of the people I'm referring to doing 70 in the overtaking 75 lane on the motorways?

I live in Austria so I never got the leaflet
Now that I think about it I do remember hearing about the limit rising to 120, so sorry about that. But then again you shouldn't be there in the first place (driving at least)!

Seth Brundle

PlayaFlow wrote:

30-6 Shooter , youre absolutley right word for word . way to big of a deal is made of all this crap. U either can drive or u cant , who gives a crap bout L-plates and all prov , just apply for your full and and hope u get it just to shut evryone up.

hmm, 30-6 zooms past a junction @ 80mph where gardai are trying to exit. A potentially fatal accident narrowly avoided? - I think so!
Then PlayaFlow comes on here praising this and then states that 30-6 should apply and hope to pass the test.
Am I right in thinking there si something wrong with the logic here?

cormie

Imposter wrote:

I live in Austria so I never got the leaflet
Now that I think about it I do remember hearing about the limit rising to 120, so sorry about that.

No problem

But then again you shouldn't be there in the first place (driving at least)!

By law yes, but I've explained my reasons I think this shouldn't be the case. It shouldnt be as black and white as if it's against the law, you shouldn't do it.

Bri

cormie wrote:

Oh, that was me too I thought you were talking about the stopping to pick my friend up one... which as I said, once I realised it was wrong, I stopped doing it and met the guy at the different point suggested to me. So Bri, I respect everyones oppinions, the more I get the better, so don't abandon the forums for the likes of my previous questions. I'm only trying to make myself safer so if and when we do cross paths, I wont crash into you :rolleyes: Edit: regarding the overtaking, I realise the dangers involved and even though I'm very cautious about getting into the same situation.

Your progressive learning points out exatly why 1st time provisionals shouldn't drive on their own, even if they think they're safe. It's my belief that the law should be fully enforced and I for one am glad I stuck to it with hindsight.

By the by, I knew of someone who wrote their application unclearly, got a 1st prov. with a typo and got it corrected = 2nd licence with no need for a fully licensed driver in the car.

vector

I've been waiting for a test for 7.5 months for the test and still waiting, I carry the "Thank you for your application" letter from last year in the glovebox when driving on my own.

jhegarty

cormie wrote:

Regarding the German system, well it's obviously much better run and yes, the road users are most probably allot safer and informed. With our system if they are going to be keeping provisionals on an average one year waiting list, then you have to expect that these drivers will want to get as much practice within that year.

In most cases it will be their first year, where they will be paying ridiculous amounts for insurance and want to get the most out of that insurance. To avoid paying such insurance again for the second year, and coming years, they will want to pass their test. If they fail, they can't re take it within a few weeks. It will take another year. If I was to only drive in the company of a fully licensed driver for the past year, I doubt I would have the opportunity to drive even 1 thousand miles. This means less experience, less chance of passing a test I've been in a 1 year queue for. If i fail, I'll go back to the end of that queue.

I'd be all for the German system, it sounds much better, you have the opportunity to get a full license within about 10 weeks from the first time you start driving, the insurance is much cheaper and of course, the roads much safer. I'm just adapting to my environment and countries system.


Now regarding the 75 Zone, if you read your "make the change" leaflet, or whatever it was called, that you should have got through your letterbox, you will see 120km=75m. I wonder if I had a full license would I have ignored it :rolleyes: Maybe your one of the people I'm referring to doing 70 in the overtaking 75 lane on the motorways?

i second that...

halkar

Cormie, with your 20k miles theory, I should get my full license on post with some Amazon.co vouchers thrown in I have been driving over 30k a year for the past 10 years plus thousands of miles of driving abroad (I have full license from no EU for 15 years) with no claims. I never took my L plate off and does not look like it will be coming down anytime soon either Anyway I am waiting for test again and if i fail again I will take the tester to Wicklow mountains
Drive safe, don't be an @ss hole, respect others and you be fine. There are more dangerous drivers with full license than on provisionals.

vector

If I may make an aside...

If you don't want to attract the attention of the gardai then drive an "invisible" car

Start driving a
Dark coloured, Ford Modeo 04-D, no hubcaps

cormie

halkar wrote:

Cormie, with your 20k miles theory, I should get my full license on post with some Amazon.co vouchers thrown in I have been driving over 30k a year for the past 10 years plus thousands of miles of driving abroad (I have full license from no EU for 15 years) with no claims. I never took my L plate off and does not look like it will be coming down anytime soon either Anyway I am waiting for test again and if i fail again I will take the tester to Wicklow mountains
Drive safe, don't be an @ss hole, respect others and you be fine. There are more dangerous drivers with full license than on provisionals.

Are you saying you do or don't have a full license? 10 years is quite a long time for you not to have passed your test :eek: There are some people who just can't adapt to it I suppose. It's the same with everything, there will always be someone who can't adapt to it. I even know some fully licensed drivers who didn't know your supposed to indicate coming onto a round-about (if your taking the 4th exit for example).

Bri, that typo story is crazy! That's another messed up part of the rules really though, it's ok for someone to drive alone just because they are on their second provisional license. So in theory, your friend was considered to be safe enough to drive alone in the eyes of the law, even though she may have only been on the roads for a month, not even. It's also saying your a safer driver when on your 2nd provisional as to when your on your 3rd. Obviously, the majority of people on their 3rd have failed the test at least once. But when they are on their 2nd provisional, through the eyes of the law, they are seen safer to be driving on their own than somebody who has passed their IAM ignition test

jozi

I think its a privelege to have a provisional so you can gain experience driving for your test, but dont go about abusing it ie: not having a experienced driver!
I do wish the gards would stop them drivers with "L" plates i hardly ever see them with even a second person in the car.
Got stuck behind someone the other day, "L" plate doing 15mph (or less) on a quiet road, decides to turn left at a junction, stops in the middle of the road (not giving me room to pull up beside her to turn right) nearlly conks out on a road slightly sloping down.
I know she was prob practising but how much quality practise could she have had driving on her own??
As a side note, i only had a provisional so i could take lessons, wasnt insured on any car, cost me some money but i got quallity practise with an instructor and passed my test. I'm not from Ireland and my taughts on driving have always been to take lessons to pass the test and not drive for 2 years with a provisonal and then apply for another. A lot of my mates from back home now drive and their level of skill/experience is much higher than my mates in ireland who drive.
Not that there's much point having a rant here, people are still going to drive without experienced drivers

Seth Brundle

vector wrote:

I've been waiting for a test for 7.5 months for the test and still waiting, I carry the "Thank you for your application" letter from last year in the glovebox when driving on my own.

Why carry the letter around with you? I don't think this can represent a qualified driver!

Boggle

I'd have to empathise with cormie - I also drove for years on a provisional purely for the reasons that I considered the testing a joke and saw little merit at the time in it.

However, I would have to disagree with the ...

If its there....its been there from the beggining!!! is what i always say!

...sentiments being expressed by some posters. You're not born a good driver - you learn how to drive by (often bad) experience. If anyone with 3+ years experience is trying to say that they were the same driver when they started then they are either a danger or deluded. By the same logic I find it hard hard to believe that someone who is driving on a first provisional (less than 2 years) has had enough experience to be let drive unsupervised...

And since when does 20K under your belt qualify you as a safe or a good driver? Granted it's better than the poxy test but don't kid yourself... you could still be an accident waiting to happen. (Don't take this as a personal dig - I just reckon that people take time to become truly safe drivers. I would also consider myself to still have plenty of things to learn and I'm drivin those same 20K with the last 7.5 years)

Boggle

By the same logic I find it hard hard to believe that someone who is driving on a first provisional (less than 2 years) has had enough experience to be let drive unsupervised...

Actually what I should have said was that anyone under 2 years driving shouldn't be let drive unsupervised unless they have proven themselves a capable driver. Note: our present system doesn't do that but it is the best we've got for now.

LFCFan

bonzai bob wrote:

Would all the so called ''competent'' fully licensed drivers get off their high ****in horse! The majority of muppets on the road I come across are so called ''competent'' fully licensed drivers:rolleyes:

Just because a car doesn't have L plates doesn't mean they are Fully Licensed drivers. I drove for my first year without L plates and only put them on for the test. To be honest I just never thought about it. Everytime I thought of getting them I forgot again.

I'd been driving since I was around 7 with my Uncle who used to bring me to the beach on quiet days and used to always let me change the gears when he was driving. By the time I got my first car I was well able to drive. I only had 1 pre test lesson and passed first time. I've driven for 6 years now without so much as a scratch. Despite all this though, I feel I am always learning and always trying to improve my driving. Once you start thinking you're a great driver you can get over confident and end up in a ditch!

cormie

You never stop learning, but there is a point you can reach which will determine wether you or competent or not to drive alone.

As I said, I've only been driving for a year myself, I feel I am safe and competent. Boggle, in your oppinion, is passing the provisional Ignition test proving myself a capable driver?

I think the waiting list is ridiculous yes, especially considering the first Ignition test I took, I failed due to nerves and mainly driving a different car, I had the repeat 2 weeks later and passed. The same could happen for my full test, fail the first time and pass 2 weeks on. I feel confident after passing Ignition though so I believe I will pass the first time.

I really want that full license. For the reason of being officially noted as a safe driver in the eyes of the law and also to be able to drive without restrictions, such as motorways, abroad etc.

Alun

Just as a matter of interest, it seems that despite the long waiting times for tests there seems to be no shortage of supposedly trained examiners to take people on these Ignition courses and the like, almost at the drop of a hat. So, what's happening? Are these people official driving test examiners doing a bit of moonlighting on the side? If not, and if they're suitably qualified, why could they not be press-ganged into service at the test centres to get the waiting lists down?

breadmonkey

I've been driving on my own for a couple of months now (2nd provisional). I know I still have a lot to learn but I definitely wouldn't consider myself a danger to others on the road. In fact, I'm far more courteous than some arseholes I've come across.

comanche

Alun wrote:

Just as a matter of interest, it seems that despite the long waiting times for tests there seems to be no shortage of supposedly trained examiners to take people on these Ignition courses and the like, almost at the drop of a hat. So, what's happening? Are these people official driving test examiners doing a bit of moonlighting on the side? If not, and if they're suitably qualified, why could they not be press-ganged into service at the test centres to get the waiting lists down?

The Ignitation guys are from the Institute of Advanced Motorist. They are driving instructors most the time. Seems like they do the Igntion course a day or two a week to fill up the hours.

But I have to say its a good idea. The test needs to change. In my opinion the order of things should be

1. Driver Theory Test
2. Driver Education
3. Driver Education Test
4. Supervised Driving varying conditions, Towns, N-Roads, R-Roads, Day and Night, continual until driver reckons person can move on
5. Provisional Licence (speed and hours limited)
6. Actual Test.

All testers should have to be trained (and retrained after periods)

Funkstard

My my this has sparked off a right little debate.

I thought you had to be 18 to sit the driving test? And regards to the igniton test, my friend passed that and is now legally driving by himself on his 1st provisional. How much does it cost?

Also, someone said If I were to crash driving by myself, I'd be insured on a 3rd party cover but not a fully comp? Surely that can't be true? (My insurance is comprehensive)

Alun

And regards to the igniton test, my friend passed that and is now legally driving by himself on his 1st provisional.

Oh no he isn't! It's just a way of getting cheaper insurance.

From the Hibernian web site ...

What is provisional ignition?
Provisional ignition is a one-hour driving assessment for anyone who has a provisional licence. It allows successful drivers to pay reduced premiums, while waiting to sit their driving test.

seamus

Funkstard wrote:

I thought you had to be 18 to sit the driving test?

Nope

And regards to the igniton test, my friend passed that and is now legally driving by himself on his 1st provisional.

Wrong. Ignition has nothing to do with licensing/law and vice-versa.

Also, someone said If I were to crash driving by myself, I'd be insured on a 3rd party cover but not a fully comp? Surely that can't be true?

It's possible, but not necessarily true in all cases. You'll have to check your policy. By law, insurance companies cannot renege on their contract of insurance in the event of a third party claim, *except* if you declared false particulars at the time of signing the contract (i.e. if the contract isn't legally binding).
However, they can specify clauses saying that you're not covered comprehensively under certain situations. You'd have to verify with your insurer that you are still covered comprehensively while driving unaccompanied.

Fully comprehensive insurance isn't necessary under Irish law, therefore isn't subject to the same rules and protections that Third Party insurance is.

cormie

Alun wrote:

Oh no he isn't! It's just a way of getting cheaper insurance.

From the Hibernian web site ...

and Tesco...
I was never told anything about being able to drive alone once I passed

Funkstard

Well then he did some other test where he is allowed to drive by himself. He must have, because the car's in his name and he's the only one insured on it

cormie

maybe it was the full test?

The car is mine, In my name, I'm the only one insured on it, named driver etc. Nothing to do with anyone else but me. I passed Ignition and didn't hear anything about being allowed drive alone. I didn't research it, but I didn't hear anything about it.

let's hope it's true?!?!

Alun

Funkstard wrote:

Well then he did some other test where he is allowed to drive by himself. He must have, because the car's in his name and he's the only one insured on it

He might think he did, but, sorry, that's complete and utter garbage. The only test you can take that legally entitles you to drive alone is called .......... the driving test! Whether he's insured or not is entirely irrelevant in this regard.

Funkstard

Yeh I doubt the insurance company would have insured him as the sole driver of the car if he didn't do this test

Alun

Funkstard wrote:

Yeh I doubt the insurance company would have insured him as the sole driver of the car if he didn't do this test

Listen, you can get insurance as the sole driver of a car whether you've passed the driving test or not. That does not give you permission to break the law by driving unaccompanied, nor does taking any kind of Ignition course.

An insurance company may, of course, demand that you take the course in order to qualify for insurance as the sole driver, but that's purely between you and the insurance company again that doesn't give you carte blanche to break the law.

Where do people get this kind of crap from?

cormie

My first year of insurance was with Quinn Direct the policy holder, my own car, my own everything.

When I went to Hibernian a year later to renew my insurance, I was told I must pass the Ignition in order to get insurance with them.

You can drive your own car with your own policy.
Some companies require you to pass the Ignition test.

I'm unaware that if you pass the Ignition test you're allowed drive alone, I doubt it's true though.

Funkstard

**** sorry I wasn't thinking right. Driving by yourself on a provisional obviously isn't a big deal so

Alun

Can I have some of whatever you're on?

peasant

Slightly OT ...but related

Two years ago we thought it would be a good idea for my wife to learn to drive. So we got her an old 205 to practice and got insurance for her. Now get this ...my wife ...zero driving experience ...no clue about cars, traffic etc ...first provisional licence ...one and only named driver on that 205 ..paid 1/3 (!!!!) of my insurance cost on a slightly bigger (my) car. And I've got 3 full licences (car, bike , HGV) the first one since '83, no accident since '90, eight years no claims in Ireland and a few hundred thousand driven Kilometers under my belt.
And I pay three times as much as her ???

Just goes to show that insurances haven't got the first clue of what they're doing ...certainly I would't take their word on whether or not it is legal to drive on your own on a provisional license

MrPudding

cormie wrote:

It shouldnt be as black and white as if it's against the law, you shouldn't do it.

OK so let me see if I am reading this correctly. You disagree with the whole having to sit a test thing to be allowed to drive on you own. You believe that you are a decent enough driver. Fair enough. So, because you think that you are a good enough driver the law should be ignored?

Lets assume for the moment that are are a decent driver, your passing of the ignition test says that this is likely the case. Does the fact that you are a decent driver mean that everyone that has not sat the test is a decent driver? No? Well then how do we differentiate between the good drivers that haven't sat a test and the bad drivers that haven't sat a test? Should we have a pre test test? If you pass it you can drive on your own before you do the proper test.:rolleyes:

I am sorry but sometimes there can't be a gray area. This law is not about punishing drivers that think they are good but can't be arsed / can't wait / to do a test or what ever reason. It is beacuse, whether you like it or not, there should be a test of competence to decide if someone is fit to drive a car on public roads. I know the test is sh1t, the wait is too long and all that other stuff but that is kind of irrelevent. It is the law and it should be adhered to.


MrP

cormie

Of course there should be another kind of test (that had a weeks waiting list lets say) to determine if your safe to drive solo or not. The problem is the waiting times etc.

If there was a pre-test, then the law would be enforced harder and those who haven't passed the pre-test would more than likely be prosecuted. And rightly so as they would have the opportunity to prove themselves worthy of driving solo on a weekly basis.

This would be fair and I would be far more likely to adhere to the law then.


However, the reason there are so many people let away with this is because the waiting times are ridiculous, the Gardai know ths. And maybe it's just the person with a heart under the uniform that thinks, why bother, this guy has a crappy little car that he's probably paying a whack of insurance for to simply get from a-b, I don't want to haunt him with penalty points when there is a very good chance he is well capable of driving this car alone.

The law is a guideline for those without morals or common sense. Personally, and I'm sure this is the case with allot of people, I wouldn't drive alone unless I feel safe doing so.

Alun

cormie wrote:

Of course there should be another kind of test (that had a weeks waiting list lets say) to determine if your safe to drive solo or not.

And how exactly would that be any different to the current driving test? And by what miracle would it suddenly become possible to make this test have a week's waiting list, when the real driving test has the waiting times it does?

Believe it or not, the current driving test is designed to test just that, i.e. whether you're safe to drive solo or not. What did you think it was for excatly?

cormie

Well in the same way there is the ignition test (with a weeks waiting list) there could be some kind of pre-test.

The full test is not just to see if your safe driving solo.

vector

Alun wrote:

...the current driving test is designed to test just that, i.e. whether you're safe to drive solo or not. What did you think it was for excatly?

Well since you posed the rhetorical question...

IMHO the test is simply a means to
-in the short term (1 year) save money on car insurance, like EUR -300
-in the long term (3 years) allow me to drive abroad, when I emigrate because I can't afford a house here

Imposter

lol @ cormie.
What better example would someone need if they wanted to scrap provisional licences completely!

cormie

Well the system we have now is obviously in shambles.

I'm not suggesting scrap provisional licenses, I'm suggesting have different grades of licenses.

MrPudding

cormie wrote:

.........I wouldn't drive alone unless I feel safe doing so.

What qualifies you to decide what is safe? You may feel safe, that does not mean that you are.

By the way, I was joking about the pre test test. Are you actually serious when you suggest it is a good idea? We already have a test to decide if you are OK to drive solo. It is called "the driving test."

MrP

MrPudding

cormie wrote:

Well the system we have now is obviously in shambles.

No excuse.

cormie wrote:

I'm not suggesting scrap provisional licenses, I'm suggesting have different grades of licenses.

Like what? How about full, provisional & really provisional?

MrP

sci0x

I was so unlucky. It was like my 2nd time driving on the road with my 1st prov and i got caught. I had a trailer in the back, no L plates or nothing and he let me off. I got caught a couple of weeks after that on Tralee road. Left me off as well

cormie

I'm only making suggestions here, as we all know, the current system has its flaws. I think 3 grades could work though.

Theory and car knowledge (oil checking etc test)
1-Must be accompanied at all times, must not drive on motorway etc

Theory and car knowledge test 2, driving test
2-Allowed to drive solo, not on motorways/abroad

Theory and car knowledge test 3, final driving test
3-All restrictions lifted. Full license granted.


This way people would be more inclined to get proper lessons, learn the rules of the road properly and be more likely to pass test 2. This would then mean more people would pass test 3 which would probably free up allot of waiting lists etc. If it was enforced properly of course.



About feeling safe, there is a certain point as to which you believe you are capable of have the responsibility to drive solo.

bonzai bob

can someone please provide links that prove provisional drivers are the worst on the roads? i'm not saying we're all good drivers, i'm saying that not all fully licenced drivers are good drivers.

MrPudding

cormie wrote:

I'm only making suggestions here, as we all know, the current system has its flaws. I think 3 grades could work though.

What makes you think people would not ignore the new system?

cormie wrote:

Theory and car knowledge (oil checking etc test)
1-Must be accompanied at all times, must not drive on motorway etc

Theory and car knowledge test 2, driving test
2-Allowed to drive solo, not on motorways/abroad

Theory and car knowledge test 3, final driving test
3-All restrictions lifted. Full license granted.


This way people would be more inclined to get proper lessons, learn the rules of the road properly and be more likely to pass test 2. This would then mean more people would pass test 3 which would probably free up allot of waiting lists etc. If it was enforced properly of course.

If we can't even get one test organised what makes you think we can magically sort 2 out.

cormie wrote:

About feeling safe, there is a certain point as to which you believe you are capable of have the responsibility to drive solo.

You may very well believe it, my point is you are not qualified to make that determination. There is a system in place for that. It is called the driving test. I have met many people who thought they were safe, yet they keep failing a driving test and when you get in a car with them it woul dput the fear of God into you.

MrP

cormie

What makes you think people would not ignore the new system?

Because it would be heavily inforced and rightly so, if somebody was caught driving alone without passing test 2, they would receive high points high fine, and garda wouldn't let anyone away with it because they are obviously a big danger. You can't really say the same for everyone on provisionals today

If we can't even get one test organised what makes you think we can magically sort 2 out.

Because it should make people cop on more and dedicate more time to it, ask around, allot of people who take the theory test don't even read the book :rolleyes: With this new system, people are going to want to be able to drive solo and not risk huge amount of points/fine (where it's only tiny for provisionals today) and they will learn what they have to and get proper lessons too. There would be much more of an emphasis to do so anyway.

You may very well believe it, my point is you are not qualified to make that determination. There is a system in place for that. It is called the driving test. I have met many people who thought they were safe, yet they keep failing a driving test and when you get in a car with them it woul dput the fear of God into you.

MrP

In the eyes of the law I'm not qualified to make that determination, yes

edmund_f

i vote we get the insurance companies to sort out the bill for the driving tests. Introduce a decent test, akin to the German test (almost like getting your private pilots license). The insurance companies are making enough money off us, and are the first to point to bad driver training (second to boy racers of course) as causing high preimums.

If this is such a big deal, why not just sort it, other countries have done it, it is not as if we are trying to invent the wheel here. The only excuse i can see for the delays in getting these problems fixed is too many people are making too much money.

MrPudding

bonzai bob wrote:

can someone please provide links that prove provisional drivers are the worst on the roads? i'm not saying we're all good drivers, i'm saying that not all fully licenced drivers are good drivers.

No-one is saying that fully licensed drivers are all good. It is quite obvious that they are not. The fact remains that there has to be a method of deciding whether or not a person is fit to drive a car on public roads.

Do you suggest that we have a free for all? Personally I think it is worth inconveniencing what ever provisional drivers that think they are good enough at driving to keep the ones that aren’t off the road.

I appreciate that the current test is a joke. A joke for what it tests and how long you have to wait. But, it is all there is. Inconveniencing proficient drivers that have not sat the test yet (for whatever reason) is not the purpose of the driving unaccompanied law, it is just a side effect.

I know 3 people personally that say they are good and safe drivers, 2 of them have failed the test several times and the other hasn’t done one as he does not see the point.

In an ideal world we would have an amazing public transport system that would mean everyone could get wherever they want with no inconvenience. In this world we would also have a comprehensive driver education programme that starts in school by teaching children how to be safe road users, Initially as pedestrian and cyclists and eventually as motorists. This would be followed up by a comprehensive test, with little or no waiting, that would actually test skills and ensure that people that pass know what they are doing. Finally you would need to recertify or be removed from the road. But hey, we live in a far from ideal world so we will just have to deal with what we have.

MrP

Boggle

@Cormie: I can't honestly make that judgement as I have never seen the hib prov test. It doesn't constitute a national test and definitely does not permit you to legally drive on your own but who knows, it may be a better test than the national one.

You may very well believe it, my point is you are not qualified to make that determination. There is a system in place for that. It is called the driving test. I have met many people who thought they were safe, yet they keep failing a driving test and when you get in a car with them it woul dput the fear of God into you.

And the worst driver I know, passed his test first time. It is understandable that people are doubtful of the current system...

can someone please provide links that prove provisional drivers are the worst on the roads? i'm not saying we're all good drivers, i'm saying that not all fully licenced drivers are good drivers.

Don't think it existes in any legitimate format. The gards don't even have this figure for road fatalities and the insurance co's only show you the data they want you to see... (they protect their core data vigorously)

Capt'n Midnight

cormie wrote:

Of course there should be another kind of test (that had a weeks waiting list lets say) to determine if your safe to drive solo or not. The problem is the waiting times etc.

If there was a pre-test, then the law would be enforced harder and those who haven't passed the pre-test would more than likely be prosecuted.

FFS - you are describing the driving test,

Our test is easy compared to most other EU countries and you want something even easier - lets look at our nearest neighbour then - If you pass your test up north, for the first year you MUST display R letters aren't allowed on motorways or even drive above 50Mph (80Kpm) - and I think that is a bloody brilliant idea, not to let people go flat out till they get some experiance.

Politicians might say it would not be possible to set more test centres but NCT tests take about the same time and cost the same amount as a driving test, and about 1/3rd of the cars on the roads are tested every year and you have to do a retest within two weeks. If there was a political will to do it the same could be done for driver testing.

If they were to enforce current laws on unaccomanied drivers it would relieve a lot of traffic congestion in the cities and would benefit everyone apart from those driving illegally. I would argue that my premiums are high because insurance companies here are paying out claims despite stating on the back of the policy that the driver must hold a valid license for the vehicle, and a provisional license is not valid on motorways...

Personally I'd like spot checks on the M50 perhaps at the toll bridge and anyone not qualified to drive on it to be told park the car and start walking.

Arguing about the merits of untested drivers is a complete waste of time, the problem is that the maximum waiting time is over one month.

Don't hold your breath the last time any govt did anything about driving test times was the amnesty back in 1979...