Driving on Provisional License

Gleeful

reduceditem wrote: »

No big deal!....I'm only teasing.


Just warning you that some people might glory in telling you where you might have gone wrong.

I'll take their glory, thanks. Where I went wrong was that I didn't apply enough acceleration when I brought the clutch up............

cajef

Gleeful wrote: »

I'll take their glory, thanks. Where I went wrong was that I didn't apply enough acceleration when I brought the clutch up............

Sounds like you were unfamiliar with the car, had you driven it before?

wba31

Gleeful wrote: »

Off-topic-but-sort-of-on-topic:

I passed my driving test yesterday! Got insured on my boyfriends car, took it out for a spin....stalled at traffic lights cause I'm not used to such a powerful car and someone drove up my @rse

Of all the bad luck!!!!

congrats on passing your test! hope you are ok following the shunt!

cajef

reduceditem wrote: »

but I do have plenty of experience with cars and with helping people regarding insurance, car purchases and selling, license applications, etc.

I assume you mean licence applications:p, and you quote the following

reduceditem wrote: »

But in my experience it's not uncommon for people on a provisional to be confused over their driving rights.

If you have been advising people about provisional licence applications you should have been able to tell them the necessary facts.

As someone that has been involved in driver training, all the people I have known on a provisional licence have been fully aware that they must be accompanied by a someone that has a full licence and they should be displaying L plates.

Maybe they do not also know that the person has to have held a full licence for over three years and be over twenty-one years old, but they can hardly claim to be confused about the law and driving unaccompanied especially when they have a test coming up.

cardinalbiggles

Gleeful wrote: »

Off-topic-but-sort-of-on-topic:

I passed my driving test yesterday! Got insured on my boyfriends car, took it out for a spin....stalled at traffic lights cause I'm not used to such a powerful car and someone drove up my @rse

Of all the bad luck!!!!

Just remember that its not your fault if someone runs in the back of you! unlike the original posting on this thread

Dont let it put you off, we all stall cars from time to time the thing is to not let it stress you out.

DirectDebacle

Gleeful wrote: »

Off-topic-but-sort-of-on-topic:

I passed my driving test yesterday! Got insured on my boyfriends car, took it out for a spin....stalled at traffic lights cause I'm not used to such a powerful car and someone drove up my @rse

Of all the bad luck!!!!

Was this yesterday by any chance? If so was the other driver an unaccompanied learner, unsure if she had permission or insurance to drive the.......:D

fivetide

Gleeful wrote: »

I'll take their glory, thanks. Where I went wrong was that I didn't apply enough acceleration when I brought the clutch up............

That''ll do it in any car, doesn't matter if it has a bit more shove (although i suspect you were being over cautious because of the worry.)

Also shows why people should be looking where they are going and not wondering about the radio. Sorry this goon has ruined your accident record already!

5t.

AnythingButChardonnay

In the grand scheme of things this is not the worst crime of the century. I've watched Road Wars where the dregs of society take cars, drive like idiots, and get little more than a slap of the wrist (that is if the CPS even bother to produce evidence!!). A different category altogether from Mrs OP, who had at least made some effort to be almost legal. But of course it's much easier for the CPS to go after people like the OP than it is for them to go after the people who stick two fingers up to the law constantly, and who get away with it.

I also do not approve of the idea that the car is either Twocked or driven with the owner's permission (in which case both parties get punished). How many of us, if we took our mums' cars out for a spin without her knowing, would expect her to say anything other than "yes I gave my permission" if she knew what would happen to us if she said otherwise? And then she'd be booked too. Wrong. Where does to right not to incriminate yourself come in?

While I detest illegal drivers and the OP's attitude leaves a lot to be desired, I think it is quite reasonable that he seeks advice, just as we all would if we found ourselves in a similar position. Of course Mrs OP deserves punishing, but surely not the maximum penalty available?

DavidHayton

wba31 wrote: »

There are mistakes - going over the speed limit having not noticed at limit change, accidentally not seeing someone and pulling out on them, getting in the wrong lane. most of these are accidental if they are really mistakes. in that you are saying that the Mrs op accidentally got in the car and drove off knowing she had no licence. i believe a driving test is booked for march? so ignorance to the law cant pass im afraid, otherwise the test would never have been booked really would it?

I can see where you (and many others) are coming from. I got mighty annoyed when I came back to my car in Tesco's car park to find a scrape and a smashed door mirror and no note on the windscreen. For a couple of hours I would have gladly flogged the culprit if I had caught them!

However, back to the original posting. I do think that this is a mistake of the it-seemed-like-a-good-idea-at-time type. Like when I drove my car home ... and then to the garage ... when my brakes were pulling (a bit) to the left (I just drove "more carefully"). I knew that I was breaking the law but I carried on because it seemed like a good idea at the time. Nobody was hurt and I got away with it. Afterwards I shuddered at the stupid risk that I was taking and have never done anything similar since. I would be surprised if others are "without sin" in this regard. If they are, then they can cast the first stones ...

In the case that we are discussing, no body else should suffer any loss. The OP's insurers are likely to pay 3rd party damages under the RTA and then claim back the costs from the OP who, as long as he has assets, will have little choice but to pay up. So we won't have to worry about uninsured losses either.

The real problem are the no income - no job - no assets types that even when they are caught, won't pay and keep doing it. Realistically there isn't a lot that we can do about them.

Best wishes to all
david

tbourner

DavidHayton wrote: »

The real problem are the no income - no job - no assets types that even when they are caught, won't pay and keep doing it. Realistically there isn't a lot that we can do about them.

We could shoot them? That would stop them re-offending.