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

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