Learner Drivers/ Riders

spen666

I see a lot of motorcycle couriers working, but only riding on L Plates.

wonder what the forum think about people being able to earn a living driving a motor vehicle yet not to have passed the test for that vehicle.

any comments

gtvlusso

Looks like a bit of a loophole.....

I am not sure, but I think you can ride up to a 125cc motorbike on L plates if you have a full car licence and have completed CBT.

I think CBT has to be renewed every 3 years.

In my day it was ride motorbike on "L" plates with provisional licence until you passed your test - can't quite remember as it was so long ago that I passed my motorbike test, before I had a full car licence.

Anyway - back on point;

I see an awful lot of "scooters" being ridden quite badly with no "L" plates - suggests either people are not bothering with licences and so on or are riding on a car driving licence only.

The whole motorbike/scooter licencing seems to be a fiasco and quite messy.

EKE_38BPM

If you passed your car driving test before 1991 you can ride up to a 50cc motorbike.
A CBT can be taken by anyone over 16 and allows you to ride a motorbike of up to 125 cc on L plates for two years. You can keep retaking your CBT every two years.
If you want to ride a bigger bike there are other tests that have to be passed.

A CBT doesn't allow you to use motorways or carry passengers.

This is all off the top of my head but should be pretty fresh as I did my CBT about three weeks ago. I also passed my driving test before 1991 and rode a 50 for about a year.

I think its a bit off that an 'older' adult (30+) can keep repeating their CBT but for a younger adult (16-21ish) it opens up avenues of employment that older adults have generally grown out of. I am primarily thinking of pizza delivery jobs.

I still find it hard to believe that I'm a few months away from having 20 years experience as a driver.

t4tomo

In the good old days you could ride a 125cc on your car licence (something tells me it was for upto 2 years too before having to a bike test) with no requirement for CBT or anything - just hop on and go.

I had one for summer transport to jobs whilst at Uni, although I had ridden off road for a good while previous so knew what I was doing on one.

_Brun_

I think Spen's point was specifically about being employed without having a full licence.

Personally I've always thought it a bit weird, particularly when it's not hard to imagine them being under pressure to make deliveries on time. They do ride like little sh!ts a lot of the time, not that that distinguishes them from plenty of other scooter riders.

cee

I had never thought about it before this...

It does sound on the face of it that you shouldn't be able to drive a vehicle in a professional capacity, without having passed the test.

That said, it is within the terms of the licence (assuming CBT and L Plates etc)...

but I suppose that if there can be a "Not For Hire or Reward" clause on the minibuses licence category, then it would be easy to add for other vee-hickle types too....

veronese68

I think it's wrong. Presumably the employers have worked out that it's cheaper to pay the extra insurance to employ learners than it would be to pay the higher wages a full licence holder would ask for.
A friend of mine has passed his IAM motorcycle test and did a stint working for British Gas working as a courier delivering parts to engineers so keepng them on the job, rather than out fetching bits. They would only employ people that had passed the IAM test. That's a far more responsible attitude.

mouth

Unfortunately, as stated above the rider, assuming he/she has completed their CBT is suitably 'qualified' to earn a living. At least having completed the CBT they have taken part in some sort of training, where as an older chap such as myself may ride a 50cc scooter with no 'L' plates or legal requirement for formal training.

On the other hand, ever met a cycle courier -who by definition of being over the age of 11 is legally expected to be a road user - who had some training and a license allowing him to earn a living?

spen666

Mouth wrote:

Unfortunately, as stated above the rider, assuming he/she has completed their CBT is suitably 'qualified' to earn a living. At least having completed the CBT they have taken part in some sort of training, where as an older chap such as myself may ride a 50cc scooter with no 'L' plates or legal requirement for formal training.

On the other hand, ever met a cycle courier -who by definition of being over the age of 11 is legally expected to be a road user - who had some training and a license allowing him to earn a living?

Why bother having a full test if CBT is sufficient to "suitably qualify" someone to ride a bike for a living?

Why not extend this to HGV,PCV etc and let them all drive on provisional licences?

SimonAH

Was a time when all pizza delivery hairdryers had an L on the back - but I could have sworn that this loophole was closed because of the horrendous casualty rates and you were not now allowed to ride professionally without a full licence??

I could of course be completely wrong (or the legislation repealed) but that would have been in the mid 90s if memory serves?

veronese68

They still have L plates around here. I despise pizza delivery scooters. I once had a word with one of them for riding like a twonk and he laughed at me and told me I wouldn't even know hw to ride a proper bike. Says he on a scooter, I've had a full motorcycle licence for over 20 years ffs. I had to leave it as I was close to losing my rag already and would have dragged him off the scooter if the conversation had carried on.

spen666

SimonAH wrote:

Was a time when all pizza delivery hairdryers had an L on the back - but I could have sworn that this loophole was closed because of the horrendous casualty rates and you were not now allowed to ride professionally without a full licence??

I could have course be completely wrong (or the legislation repealed) but that would have been in the mid 90s if memory serves?

I think what happened was the police started prosecuting the drivers/ riders for no insurance as they were insured for social, domestic and pleasure use only. They were not covered for carrying goods.

Certainly this is what they did on Tyneside.

The cost of insurance to carry goods for these people often exceeded the cost of their wages, especially for car drivers

mouth

spen666 wrote:

Mouth wrote:

Unfortunately, as stated above the rider, assuming he/she has completed their CBT is suitably 'qualified' to earn a living. At least having completed the CBT they have taken part in some sort of training, where as an older chap such as myself may ride a 50cc scooter with no 'L' plates or legal requirement for formal training.

On the other hand, ever met a cycle courier -who by definition of being over the age of 11 is legally expected to be a road user - who had some training and a license allowing him to earn a living?

Why bother having a full test if CBT is sufficient to "suitably qualify" someone to ride a bike for a living?

Why not extend this to HGV,PCV etc and let them all drive on provisional licences?

Doesn't qualify them to ride a bike for a living. Qualifies them for a light motorcycle. Being a little pedantic here I know, but I repeat my question: How much formal training have you had as a road user on a pedal bike? Cyclists have no legal requirement to undergo formal training, provide either 3rd party or liability insurance or indeed have the roadworthiness of their 'vehicle' assessed. At least as a cyclist or indeed car driver you can normally hear the hairdryer coming. What warning do you give on your bike? I bet you removed the bell that was legally required to be fitted once you left the LBS??

My personal view on anybody earning a living on their 'L' plates is that it shouldn't be allowed just for the record. I was a general store manager with a large franchised takeaway for a number of years and basically led the campaign with my line manager to lose the mopeds form the fleet.

Sirius631

spen666 wrote:

I see a lot of motorcycle couriers working, but only riding on L Plates.

wonder what the forum think about people being able to earn a living driving a motor vehicle yet not to have passed the test for that vehicle.

any comments

You stay away from my pizza delivery!

optimisticbiker

Veronese68 wrote:

I think it's wrong. Presumably the employers have worked out that it's cheaper to pay the extra insurance to employ learners than it would be to pay the higher wages a full licence holder would ask for.
....

You are presupposing that they are insured...

A 'rider' (I use the term loosely) from a well known national pizza chain who shall remain nameless but often associated with 'falling over like a stack of .....' rode into the back of my wife's mini cooper leaving a small scuff of blue paint. He could have stopped if he'd not been so close behind and the sad little brakes on the hairdryer just weren't up to the job. Anyway, I went into said shop and complained to the manager and asked for their insurance details.... after getting the run around for 20min or so someone from head office called my mobile and asked me to get an estimate for the repair and send it to them direct. I said I'd rather have their insurance details... after a bit of to and fro on this it was half admitted that due to an 'office oversight' it may have been that this particular bike/rider wasn't actually insured as they couldn't locate the relevant paperwork, but so as not to inconvenience me they would deal with it directly...

I did report said rider to the police but heard nothing since. As to the scuff, it came off with a bit of rubbing and there was no actual damage. I wanted to put in a claim anyway but Mrs OB wouldnt let me. She's just too honest sometimes :roll:

Drysuitdiver

does that mean cycle couriers should be licensed and tested.

pull pin releases handle and lobs grenade into the friday night chatter

Confusedboy

It may be that the couriers are self-employed and the company that provides them is sub-contracting the work out to them. Not any sort of legal expert, but I imagine this shifts the onus onto the individual courier rather than whoever is paying him to ensure he is licenced/insured to perform his job.

mouth

Confusedboy wrote:

It may be that the couriers are self-employed and the company that provides them is sub-contracting the work out to them. Not any sort of legal expert, but I imagine this shifts the onus onto the individual courier rather than whoever is paying him to ensure he is licenced/insured to perform his job.

Legally it is ALWAYS up to the driver to ensure that they are fully insured and licensed to drive a vehicle, regardless of whether they're working for hire or reward or not.

As previously mentioned I ran a pizza delivery store for a number of years and understand a little about the insurance bits. The company/employer offers a supplementary insurance which works alongside the rider/drivers own insurance, offering third party only cover to the employee at a cost of £xxxxxxx per week/year. Some of the franchisees pass this on to the employee, some don't. This applies to both cars and mopeds that are privately owned. Company owned vehicles (such as one with company livery all over it) are generally insured on a different policy providing full business cover, offering the vehicle owner (the company in this instance) fully comprehensive insurance.

The company is also generally responsible for having in place a system of due dilligence where they enforce daily vehicle checks (brake lights/wipers working properly etc) and also for ensuring the driver has their own insurance and license still in place at any given time through a series of both systematic and random checks. Some companies will also offer advanced driver training and regular driving assessments.

I would imagine that the courier firms have something similar in place, as do taxi companies.

My personal view is still that someone riding on an 'L' plate shouldn;t be allowed to work for hire or reward.