What happens if L Drivers are caught unaccompanied

Other than the magical powers of being legal or not legal on the road. And allowing other drivers to stay well clear. Pointless? Only if you care less about those things.
 
I wonder if people who have such a cavalier attitude to L plates also treat other road regulations with equal disdain, whether it is insurance, NCT, Tax, drink driving, mobile phone usage etc.
 
rmelly said:
is good enough, but hasn't? Given that waiting lists have fallen drastically, what's their excuse for not having a full licence?
Click to expand...


Waiting lists have unfortunately not fallen drastically.
I applied for the test in Dublin in early January, and took the test in mid May, a waiting period of just over 4 months. Reapplied the day after failing the test. Still waiting to get a response about a test appointment, and read over the weekend that those on second provisionals are being prioritised. Believe me, I would love to be able to take the test asap and get my full licence, but it is just not facilitated sufficiently.
 
There are many good drivers with provisional licences. There are equally many holders of full licences who are appalling drivers. Since the law cannot provide for degress of good driving among the licensed population, the only thing which serves to visibly identify to the driving public ( and the authorities) those not fully licensed to drive unaccompanied is the L plate. Any provisional license holder not displaying an L plate or being accompanied by a qualified driver of at least 2 years standing is breaking the law. No ifs, buts or ands about it. To what extent that law will be policed remains to be seen...especially following the answers on this thread.
 
I think they should have addressed the waiting lists better before introducing this.

The Guards should be able to spot people of any licence type driving like a muppet and pull them. But theres so little presence and thus enforcement, that people can pretty drive as they want.
 
crazyhorse said:
Believe me, I would love to be able to take the test asap and get my full licence, but it is just not facilitated sufficiently.
Click to expand...

Not being smart, but you failed within last 2 months - what makes you think you'd pass if you sat it tomorrow?

I think they should have addressed the waiting lists better before introducing this.
Click to expand...

They have - average waiting time between 6 and 14 weeks depending on the centre, and plenty of people are still not turning up. This means someone has the opportunity to do at least 3 tests in space of a year. When I applied I was waiting almost a year.
 
rmelly said:
Not being smart, but you failed within last 2 months - what makes you think you'd pass if you sat it tomorrow?

Taking lessons and practicing in the interim, I failed by one fault. The tester himself even told me to reapply asap before I had the chance to pick up bad habits....


They have - average waiting time between 6 and 14 weeks depending on the centre, and plenty of people are still not turning up. This means someone has the opportunity to do at least 3 tests in space of a year. When I applied I was waiting almost a year.
Click to expand...


Unfortunately I am not one of these "someones"
The test itself is fundamentally flawed, incorporating items such as reversing around the corner(manouevre I am highly unlikely to ever use again other than in a test situation). How to parallel park, how to drive on a motorway etc would be much more beneficial. I cannot understand that having never driven on a motorway as a learner driver that suddenly, by passing a test which does not incorporate this, I am automatically qualified to do so.
 
You reverse around a corner a lot more than you realise, almost everytime you reverse out of a parking space or driveway for starters.
 
I think everyone accepts the test is far from ideal. Mainly its too easy and too subjective. That said its just a line in the sand you have to cross.
 
uiop said:
Some faults earned in this test have little bearing upon safety such as faulting someone for revving slightly too much on a hill start or when moving off. Revving creates a safeguard against a cut out of the engine. Its better to over rev than under rev. Im sure someone will disagree with me and bite my head off for daring to have a view such as this . So what if it damages a car , thats the owner of the cars problem. Skills such as observation and anticipation on the road are most important imo.
Click to expand...

You don't fail a test for over-revving, however being able to properly judge the clutch bite point is a bare minimal skill I'd expect in a driver - if you can't then other road users run the risk of you rolling back into them when attempting a hillstart, or the driver cutting out on startup or moving off from lights etc - as such it can be a safety issue.

Its better to over rev than under rev.
Click to expand...

I'd have said it's best to get it right. Why settle for second best?
 
If someone is over revving slightly no one would even notice. Probably 99% of drivers do this. It most be pretty excessive for someone else to notice.
 
Alastairdick's comments are wonderful ! In fairness to L drivers they are entitled to learn how to drive. I certainly would prefer to be behind an L driver than behind a driver that suffers from Road Rage. How else are they supposed to learn how to drive. There are speed limits out there and there is little point in roaring and shouting and blaming learners. Tell me I suppose you were a natural and have never made a mistake whilst driving. 'Let he without Sin cast the first stone'
 
I'm confused. Is the road rage driver in front or behind. If in front, are they then not also the L driver. If the problem is the speed limit, the driver must be holding up those behind? and on the M50? So an L driver on the M50 holding up other drivers is that the problem mercman?

;)
 
Yes I agree wholeheartedly that some L drivers can be a right pain, but everybody is entitled to practice and learn. It's the only way that drivers will get the feel of the road and traffic. But to cast aspersions against all learners is a little rich don't you think.
 
L drivers are responsible for 25% of road accidents, the balance caused by ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top