New Drivers ban after 11pm !
 

Imagine not being allowed to drive after 11pm or only being able to carry certain passengers. Well that could become reality for new drivers if a road safety campaign is successful.

Young drivers hit the headlines again this month after a new campaign was launched asking the government to radically overhaul the learn-to-drive system.

Road safety charity Brake is appealing to MPs to make some serious changes to the current scheme, which gives new drivers a full licence after the driving test is passed, from the age of 17.

According to Brake, a revamp of the way driving licences are issued would cut the number of road deaths in the UK by giving motorists better training. In the last ten years alone, there have been 8,109 young lives lost in road accidents.

The insurance industry is supporting the campaign in the hope that reducing road deaths will bring down risk and cut the cost of car insurance for everyone, especially young people and new drivers. In 2010, the Transport Select Committee agreed that better driver training was key to cutting the cost of motor insurance in the long-term.

Nick Starling, director of general insurance and health at the Association of British Insurers, said: “The current learning to drive regime is failing young people, as there is much more to driving than simply passing the driving test.

“Too many youngsters get behind the wheel ill-equipped for unsupervised driving. This is why we have long advocated structured learning to help young drivers build up their driving skills gradually and safely, and graduated licensing for newly qualified drivers.”
What Brake want to see is a “graduated driving licence” , which would compel new drivers to undergo a minimum learning period of one year before taking a driving test. Once passed, the novice driver would be allowed to drive unsupervised but would have restrictions on their licence for a minimum of two years.

Other key components include:

Restrictions on the time of day that young drivers can drive
Giving young drivers a lower alcohol limit
Restricting them from carrying young passengers
Banning motorway driving in the first year after the test
A second driving test at the end of the two-year period to help ensure safe driving on all types of roads.
Brake is adding weight to its campaign by enlisting the help of families with first-hand experience of road tragedies.

Bereaved father Tony Davison is fully supporting the call for a new driving system. “My 18-year-old son was killed by a young driver who took risks and paid the ultimate price, along with my son,” he said.

“I’m proud to support Brake in calling for the introduction of graduated driver licensing to help keep young people safe on the road, and reduce the number of families, like ourselves, who have to experience the untold grief of a police officer knocking on their door to deliver the news that their loved one has been killed on the road.”

The Brake campaign also coincides with the start of the UN Decade of Action for Road Safety – a worldwide bid to cut the number of road deaths.

Julie Townsend, Brake’s campaigns director, said: “Young drivers and their behaviour hold the key to the future extent of carnage on roads. These crashes account for a quarter of all road deaths and serious injuries. There is compelling evidence that graduated driver licencing would reduce these appalling casualties, and help protect young people from the biggest danger they face.”

Brake will be working with the Government to try and implement the proposals and get the graduated licence in place. Similar systems already operate in Hong Kong, New Zealand and some states in America.

I agree in principle with some of the things but Brake is one of those do good, all speed is evil groups that pluck at heartstrings and use emotional blackmail for their own ends.

I think its a good idea to a point, the second test after two years is crap if held along side all other restrictions, if you've passed you've passed simple.

But if they are made law they should only be done so along side realistic insurance premium drops for new young drivers!

I can't see that happening though, they will be made to jump through hoops and still get raped on insurance fees.

They do it in oz iirc.

I would hazzard a guess that motorway driving is not a big issue with young drivers?

Most young people I see in crashes are pure and simple driving to fast for the road conditions. Then when it goes wrong, unable to control the car and spunking it.

I thought before (sure there was a floor in it lol) about a rev limiter on the car when they pass, basically they cant go above say 3 or 4k revs meaning they can pull away but have to build up speed rather than hammer it away. That with a 1.1l limit on engine size should mean they will find it harder to get the car up to silly speeds in built up areas etc.

I think the main flaw is that there is no real way to enforce it, as well as the fact that many young drivers will start off driving their parents car. I know my dad would've told me to do one if he had to limit his car so I could drive, haha.

my cousin has just passed his test doing mechanics at college and works nights in mcdonalds how would he get home when he finishes at 6 am ?

i dont agree with the idea, although cirtain parts are fair points.

i would say that driving at night should be part of the test curiculum as the first time i drove at night i was completely unprepared for it. Also there should be an outright "no" on drinking and driving for the first year, any amount is to much when you should be 100% concentrating on the road ahead. all of the above seem reasonable to me and i started driving 3 months ago...

Restricting motorway driving doesn't seem necessary, speaking as a young driver. As roads go, motorways are really safe. Not driving on them would mean using more dangerous roads and feeling the need to drive quickly to make up for 'lost' time.

I can understand the argument for restriction on passengers though, when you read about young lads dying in car crashes, they're never alone in the car.
Would pose a problem for me though, playing in a band up and down the country, I'm always driving on the motorway after 11pm with other young guys in the car.

Theres so many flaws in these proposals it's unreal,and not set up for the real world.a time restriction is simply stupid,imagine your mum/dad/sister/brother gets ill in the house at 1am and you rush them to hospital,do you then get banned?
The work elements been mentioned above,I work shifts and so do the apprentices with me sometimes to boost their wages and gain valuable experience,imagine being told that they can't do it?
Take your missus out for a nice meal etc and then have to rush back incase you end up being banned or points/fined etc.
Speed/power restrictions seem more sensible and are easily enforced via satellite technology etc,but motorway restrictions are again ridiculous,a guy I know lives 20 miles from his work which takes 20-25 mins down the motorway but more like an hour,90 minutes,that's 70 minutes more carbon emissions and wastage of planet resources(which seems to be flavour of the month!!!).
I wanted to drive literally from the minute I knew what a car was,every birthday I thought "I'm one year closer to passing my test!!!",as soon as I spent 7 weeks driving at 29mph,I passed and after my old man being a complete wanker made every excuse he could to stop me driving his car,the car he promised me after I passed my test and even stopped me from buying my own.
I was furious,but when I did eventually get to drive on my own for the first time it was amazing!!!I got to go all the places I never could before,got to put petrol in(43p a litre in 93!!!),go to a mc Donalds drive through etc.I didn't get in until about 2am that night,I must have put a tenner in that old Saab,about £3,000,000 at today's prices and I was hooked,and have been to cars ever since and in 18years of driving I've NEVER had a fault accident (touch wood!!).
I personally feel no-one should ever be denied these priviledges,fuck knows youngsters pay for it,£1000 for a car,£2500 to insure it,£40-50 a week roughly in fuel,say another £50 pw week on tax,repairs and so on and I make that about £8000 in the first year of driving!!!!

Why JUST the young, I think compulsory re testing from the age of say 60 would make the roads much safer, they need to be taught to drive, not how to pass a test.
I think there should be a pwr for the first two years, and limit of 1 passenger under a certain age, unless parents are present etc.
I also think night time driving should be taught, motorway can't be due to location in a lot of places, Norfolk for example has NO motorways, but dual carriageways would do imo, same thing just with right turns.
I know I was not prepared for night driving, even though my metro had 8 spotlights, it actually slowed the poor little 1.0 a series down with them all on ha ha!!
tabetha

it would be much simpler to just get all drivers to be required to drive for 2 years on a provisional license before they are tested than all this bollocks that will be impossible to enforce

when you think about it it's the simplest solution and requires someone else in the car that has held their license for more than 3 years to be "responsible" for the driver or else they can be done as well

so how many parents are going to babysit their son driving to and from work at 2am?

that dosent work either dojj,

i think the license should be subtley changed to include night driving, and there should be a minimum time of lessons before you can take your test.

They do stuff like that here in Ireland.

once you get your provisional license, After written exams
* you have to have a full license driver with you at all times.
* Not allowed Driver after 10pm
* have to log 25 hours with a Full licenced driver
* Have to finish 12 lessons with a certified instructor
* have to hold provisional license for 6 months,

All that before you can even apply to do test for Full licence.
its only quite new these laws too. 12 lessons at 50 euro a pop. 600 euro before you can do the test.

Glade i did my test years ago now.

And after you pass your test, you cant be a full licence passenger for another learner for 2 year

I agree with some of it, but its OTT

60 you say what a load of tosh im just getting into my stride with this driving lark, now able to handle 800bhp & get away with it ;-).
Lets see how you feel about your ability at 59 & im sure you will ask for a rethink. Think 60-65 are the safest drivers according to the stats.

11pm is fine by me, my daughter will be having a car soon enough and I'd be happy with that!

I disagree, I am classed as a young driver (Under 25) had my license since 17 and never had one accident, I think the current system is fine as it is.

As to driving with one passenger why? If your immature and stupid enough to drive wreaklessly, and let someone else in the car influence your driving, then you have to accept you are going to pay the consequences at some point and thats your own fault, I really don't see how passengers come into it!


Completly ill thought threw rules imo, I really don't think the time of day comes into the equasion at all nor the lower alcohol limit, they should be looking closer to the lad who got killed and giving the driver who did so every punishment possible, rather than fixing something that isn't broken ime.

Martin

Re-test at 65 is fine by me, the older generation are a fookin menace on the roads in my oppinion, take my grandad and my great uncle for example both in there mid 70s, one cant see fook all and the other can barely turn his head yet both of them insist on carrying on driving/causing other road users havoc, pulling out on people, driving at half the national speed limits etc sorry to sound harsh but full medicals and retests every 5 years after 65 is the way to go with this

As for young drivers - YES something needs to be done as the majority of young LADS are also a menace (I certainly was when I was 17 10 years ago) 1.0 max engine size and only one passenger allowed in car with them in 1st year of driving could be a good start :top:

Limited passengers will make a big difference as they will only get chance to kill 2 people insted of a car full which is unfortunately so often the case :cry: im only 27 myself but imo something needs to be done NOW

I personally think the drivers should be screened (I know thats not really possible)

As I say ive had a car full of mates over the years, and have been in others cars, so clearly there are others out there that "Stand out from the crowd" it just annoys me when we are stereo typed, I could say the same about older drivers, the amount of accidents I have seen on motorways alone for example that are caused by excess speed, incorrect distance being maintained, the drivers of which arn't youngsters and really should know better, at the end of the day it won't effect me but I know how I would feel if I had those restrictions imposed, and once those 2 years are up can you honestly tell me that the driver isn't going to do what they would of had they had passengers etc 2 years earlier? I think not.

Martin

Yep I agree, my niece was the only survivor out of 5 of them (albeit v badly hurt) in a Clio, new driver 1am in the morning. I did consider getting my Daughter a smart car so there would be no back seat passengers (boys!!) to egg her on!

I'm 60, drove cars from the 1960's in the days before all the safety features, abs, esp, airbags, even seat belts in most cars etc etc etc. The brakes in those days were marginal, the steering vague and the skinny cross ply tyres had the grip in the wet of Bambi on ice.
I managed to avoid accidents, but then there were very few young drivers about, you had to have relatively well off parents to have a car, in fact to have a car in the family. Most young folks had motorbikes and scooters and over a two year period from when I was 16 I had 3 friends killed on two wheels. I learned car control the hard way on public roads and watching from the co-drivers seat in a rally CooperS, I've got an MSA competition licence and regularly compete in club events so my driving skills, reactions and concentration are not in question.
When my lad passed his test about 7 years ago, he did pass plus, to get the insurance down, it dropped nearly 50%, for him. I also paid for a skid pan course and a defensive driving course, hence he had the opportunity to learn how to drive in most conditions within the limits of the car. Result up until now he has been accident free, with the exception of one where someone ran into him, oh and it isn't through lack of driving he does 20,000+ miles per year. So I come down on the side of better driver training and would willingly have done the extra courses if they had been available in my day.
Better to wait a year or so for a full licence than spend an eternity buried in a wooden box.

Oh and a PS........... when I was 19 and passed my test I thought I was the dogs bollocks behind the wheel, my dad who was then in his 50's, who had been a RAF high speed driving instructor, said " right now you have passed your test I'll teach you to drive" He took me to a disused airfield and proceeded to do things with a car I didn't believe possible, that blew the wind straight out of my sails...........

To the folks saying 'no more than 1.0 engine size', have you seen insurance premiums for young guys? Price takes care of that.

:clap: :clap:

A friends son, a new driver, has been trying to insure a 1.25 Fiesta he bought for £800, the quotes he has got are from around £4.5k to £6k.

Personally I believe there should just be a seperate test for motorways

too many people think that a driving license is a right, it's not, it's a privilege, and the sooner it becomes more difficult to obtain one and takes effort of more than a few days in some cases when they fast track you through the test, the better for everyone out there on the roads

I'm 16, ive currently got a 50cc and obviously i can see where they're coming from. but to be honest i think that this isn't going to help a vast amount, the simple fact is new drivers think they're the dogs danglies and without that arrogance being removed just as many new drivers are going too make a mess... :)

Oh yeaa and i think everybody should have to have a moped for a year... it teaches you an unbelievable amount of spacial awareness and general road practice, after all if you dont learn you'll end up under a lorry :)

Remember that this should apply to new drivers of any age, I know that with the younger guys there is a tendancy for the testosterone and adrenalin to kick in at times, but it is the lack of driving experience that often causes the problem. I was T boned about three years ago by a driver with a six month old full licence, driving straight out of a side road onto an A road. Now sterotypically most would expect a teenage driver..............not this time it was a 43 year old female agency nurse, she had never needed to drive until she changed employer the year before.

It is all too easy to look at this matter with ideas, all young drivers are bad/ all older drivers are bad, it just isn't like that there are very good drivers in both age brackets, also very bad ones. But it is difficult to argue with the statistics regarding the accident records of younger driver as a group. My father in law voluntarily gave up driving a couple of years back aged 85, his reason? he was involved in a minor accident for which he was proven not to be to blame, but he said if his reactions had been a split second quicker he might have been able to have prevented it.

i agree with the minimum engine size the time idea is utter stupidity due to night workers etc and the idea two people in the car at a time is stupid if theres a group of 5 mates going out that meens 3 cars they have to use hence this causes a 3 car race would be safer all in one car limited to 1.0 for the first two years and a no alchol ban full stop for any driver should be enforced i think

Some elements of it are a good idea.

Should be 2 stage test. Standard part 1 as per now but with added detail on the basic maintenance including being forced to change a wheel safely. Too many daft bints (and an increasing number of EMO/fag boys) are seemingly incapable of basic essential maintenance.

then a second stage test to include motorway driving, country lanes, night driving and an IAM style approach to hazard perception.

While waiting to pass the stage 2 test, new drivers CAN drive on motorways but under supervision of a fully qualified driver in same way learners can be supervised.

after stage 1 test and for 2 years the following restrictions should be in place:

no social, domestic and pleasure driving 11pm - 5am. New drivers who work can be forced to carry round a letter from employer and/or 7 day producer if its not on you.

and before people jump on the "but what if i want to watch late film etc" then tough you use another form of transport...... the road statistics show that driving after 11pm is a serious risk factor for young drivers.

restriction number 2. no more than 1 passenger. again, regardless of pansy "its my rights" "its not convienient" bollocks, statistics from insurers and accidents again show the more in the car the more risk. If having only one passenger is too inconvenient then get on a fucking bus :cry:

restriction number 3. a cruising ban like in many estates and retail parks. Usually its 2 or more vehicles travelling together or similar used as the restriction. Again if you cant travel in tango with mate, you cant race him. if your both going to shops etc is it really a hardship for one person to wait a couple of minutes before setting off so he doesnt travel in convoy?

Restrictions would be lifted 2 years from passing stage 1 test subject to having also passed the stage 2 test.

TBH, I completely disagree. Unless you cap power massively to restrict top speed, even a 1.1 will go fast enough to cause issues. Difficulty is, whilst young people WILL drive fast, a 1.1 doesnt have the brakes or suspension to cope!

bigger, moderately fast cars are safer, thats a fact, the issue is driver training and awareness.

IMO the biggest change that needs to be made is the test

Dont see how they can ever enforce a time restriction on young drivers, what happens if they get stuck in traffic or similar?
Just some stupid "action group" spouting shite as usual, wont ever happen.

but, to be fair, that's probably chip :cry:

What sort of age are they talking about exactly? 17 to? I get where they are coming from 100%, but its not really fare for younger people that work, say for example my sister works in a pub, sometimes she does'nt finish untill gone 1am, how is she meant to get home. She has no intrest in learning to drive at the minute but I'm sure there are people out there that do work late. Also there is the sport of road rallying which relies on young talent to help keep it going and is a great introduction int the world of rallying, how are people meant to get involved with motorsport event if they can't compete at even the most grass roots of all sports.

I think people are looking at this in the wrong way.
As some have said i think its wrong to stereo type YOUNG DRIVERS.
Its not just young drivers that cause accidents its IN EXPERIENCED DRIVERS!!!
I remember passing my test (11 years ago) when i passed i was then told now you can learn to drive !!!!!
Everytime you drive your car you learn something new and will continue to do so untill you die.
I spend half my life driving and i drive fast cars, lets say a crash happens me at 29 in say a cosworth and 48 year old man in a 1.1 fiesta.
Now lets say i do the equivilant of 100 miles a day travelling in my 11 years of driving and the 48 year old man has been driving for 30 years travelling 2 miles per day his whole life.
Who has more driving experience ?
But who do you think would automatically be blamed for the crash??
All hyperthetical of course!
The above is stereotyping and i think its wrong.
Although i do agree that there are some things that need changing to help NEW drivers.

oriurbo, no it really is largely about youth, as its youths that show off and use cars in courting rituals etc, irrelevant of experience you tend not to find a first time driver of 45 years old doing the same thing.

its not that young people cant gain the required skills to drive well, its that so many of them choos to deliberately drive badly

look at the insurance price of a new driver at 45 and a new driver at 18, and you will see their statistics very strongly back this up!

Yes and No
I understand what you are saying but its not all young drivers and i still feel it comes down to experience.
99% of us on here are so because we love fast cars etc and if your man enough you should be able to admit that you and your mates drove bad sometimes when you was young, i can, i did, i was wrong !!!, but not all young drivers are like us and love to drive cars fast some drive as they have to get to work etc.
Some young drivers are very sensible so why should everyone be punished just because lets say the other 50% drive like idiots.
Its a subject that you can never make everyone happy.
But these are just my opinions.

Thats already how it works for insurance, you can make laws or set prices for an individual.

Personally I probably occasionally still drive in a more irresponsible manner now despite being knocking on for 40 than a lot of people did in their teens, but thats the exception rather than the rule.

In the majority of cases of truely appauling driving on the road showing off to mates or birds etc, its young drivers at fault.
The only thing changing now is that its increasingly not just young males AFAIK!