License revoked...

Aren't I lucky?  Not.  Here's the situation, I have had my license (passed the theory and practical) for just under two years.  The problem is (unbeknownst to me) that all new licensed drivers are on a two year probation.  IF they accrue 6 points within those two years, the license is revoked!  Then I "get" to take the theory and the practical ALL over again!  Well, I don't get to, I must take them.  Has anyone EVER been unlucky enough to be in this situation?  Is there a way out other than going through the retest hassle?  Not looking forward to doing those idiotic tests again.  Thanks for any input.

The problem is (unbeknownst to me) that all new licensed drivers are on a two year probation.  IF they accrue 6 points within those two years, the license is revoked!

Yes, that is true - my driving instructor told me about it, so I was very very careful my first two years driving on the full licence. Well I'm always careful - lol!

I don't think there's any way around it, unfortunately. I'm sorry. 

Man, I wished my instructor had told me!  I had NO idea about this.  I think it was designed to keep the younger folks in line.  The ridiculous part is the speed cam got me going 5 over in a 30mph zone.  Twice.  I blame myself for not exactly noting which exact one got me the first time.  But I wasn't exactly breaking the sound barrier there.  This is definitely a case where the bureaucracy is frozen in a unyielding position, and it can't or more likely won't listen to reason.  At the end of the day it appears they are more concerned about their revenue than common sense.

Hi,

Yes, as you've found out in the worst way, your license is suspended like this for the offences within the first two years. I guess you could contest the speeding offences if you wish to, and you'd need to take legal advice and hire the lawyers etc to argue your case. If you lose, which is most likely, then you'll need to pay the court costs on top of the fines and the time/money you'll need for your re-test. It's also likely that your insurance premiums will rise in subsequent years as you'll have that on your record.

Whilst I can understand your view that 35mph in a 30 isn't breaking the speed barrier as you put it, but the line has to be drawn somewhere and your speed was in excess of that line - a car at 35mph and hitting someone is the same if it's a teenager driving or a mature 55 year old driving. There is of course the usual aspect of this being a big cash cow for the police/government - which it is, but that's how it is.

I'd say put it down to experience and take the re-test...

Cheers, DtM! West London & Slough UK!

At the end of the day it appears they are more concerned about their revenue than common sense.

Sorry to sound harsh, but there are speed limits for reasons. You broke the rules not just once, but twice and now you have to pay the price. If you had come here and took responsibility instead of blaming it on bureaucracy, I might have some sympathy for you but to expect special treatment because you were "only" going 5mph over or because you're older is ludicrous. 5 mph over the speed limit in a 70 zone is one thing, but 5 mph over in a 30 zone is very different.   

I do appreciate everyone's input here, it definitely got me what I was after, and that was information.  Now having said that - I can take harsh, bring it on. I just can't take stupid.  The law was put into place in order to "check" the "youngins" who have a propensity to speed unnecessarily.  I'm sure you've seen the "overtakers" on the A roads.  Here in Norfolk, along the A-47, there have been numerous lives taken because someone just HAD to pass the "slow" driver ahead of them, I'm guessing the over takers were going 75+  My going 5 mph above a 30 mph limit pales in comparison.  I haven't had an accident that has been MY fault in over 30+ years.  The fact that the bureaucracy created the act for young people and will not even consider a "waiver" for the older folks IS ridiculous - considering that is why they initiated the act in the first place - to throttle down the young folks.   

Unless you are privy to information that the rest of us are unaware of, you are making an assumption that this rule is only for young people. You may have been driving in the US for decades prior to moving here, but that does not make you an experienced UK driver.

I wonder if you were on the other end of this argument how you would feel. If an newly licensed UK driver was breaking the speed limit by "only" 5 mph and hit your car or your pet or (god forbid) a family member.

The law isn't stupid. The law is designed to identify new drivers who repeatedly break the rules and require retraining. In my profession if I made two serious errors in a short period of time, I would require retraining too. Seriously, step back from your frustration and listen to what you are asking us to sympathise with.

The law was put into place in order to "check" the "youngins" who have a propensity to speed unnecessarily. 

Actually, I think the law was put into place to stop new drivers from speeding unnecessarily. And you are a new driver. Sorry, but I have to agree with Courtney. Speed limits are signposted clearly and speed cameras aren't exactly hard to spot, so really you can't blame anyone but yourself.

I was caught out once during my two-year probation period and the thought of having to re-take the test terrified me! Talk about being scared straight! Even now, almost 10 years later, I don't break the speed limit. It's just not worth it.

I cannot understand why you expect a 'waiver' for older drivers that speed?  If you cause an accident or hurt/kill someone, what does it matter how old you are? If you are doing something, after 30 years of driving experience, that normally young, immature and/or inexperience drivers typically do, well then, shame on you. To do it twice in less than two years - well, it seems that not only the young folks need to be "throttled down".

I'm studying for my driving licence now (passed the theory and have taken just two lessons now) and I vividly remember reading the two year probation bit somewhere in the DSA official materials or on their website.    

As chary said, it's there for new drivers, not young drivers.  Someone (American or otherwise) might have a long driving history in another country, but that does not mean they meet the UK driving licence requirements.  There are new laws to learn and follow and if a new driver doesn't pass the two year probation period, they should be ready to learn the material properly and prove it by passing the tests.

Sorry you are caught in the situation, but it's the same rule for all new drivers, regardless of age or experience.

I'm studying for my driving licence now (passed the theory and have taken just two lessons now) and I vividly remember reading the two year probation bit somewhere in the DSA official materials or on their website.    

I seem to remember this too, although in my case it was quite a long time ago so I can't recall exactly where it was - but perhaps in the materials you get either when you get your provisional license or your 'real' license?

I don't want it to sound as though I have no sympathy for the OP. The driving test is neither easy nor inexpensive, and it's a real nightmare to have to go through that twice. You have every right to have a good whinge about it! Just don't play the blame game. 

Look, the LAST thing I am looking for is sympathy  - don't know WHAT made you think I was going that direction.  When you disagree with a law, it's an opinion - no more, no less - not seeking sympathy.  As far as the tests are concerned, they're a joke.  I believe I got (1) wrong answer on the theory portion (first try) and the practical was equally easy.  Chalk it up to a good memory I guess.  I'm just not too happy about the time wasted going through it all over again, not to mention the money pissed out of the window.  Again, save your sympathy for someone else - I'm sure they could use it more than I.

OK. I take it back. I have no sympathy for you whatsoever. 

OK. I take it back. I have no sympathy for you whatsoever. 

 

The thing is you're discounting your offenses because of not being a speed demon when going 35, but driving just a few miles over a 30 mph speed limit is a far more serious offense than driving faster on a motorway. Speed limits in populated areas of the UK are set at 30 for a specific reason. It is not arbitrary.

Did you know that:

" Government research about speeding has shown that:
-at 40mph, 85% of people hit by vehicles die, compared to 20% at 30mph (at 20mph it is just 5%).
-an average family car travelling at 35mph will need an extra 21 feet (six metres) to stop, compared to one travelling at 30mph, no matter how good the driver is.
-the force of the impact on a cyclist or pedestrian is increased by a third when hit at 35mph, rather than 30mph.
-for each 1mph reduction in average speed, it has been estimated that accident frequency is reduced by 5%."

My sister was hit by a car going 35-40 in a 30 zone while she and I were crossing the street together (at a zebra crossing no less) to catch our school bus. The driver had been licensed for less than five years and just didn't see us, even though we were in plain sight. Thankfully my sister defied the odds and survived, but it was incredibly traumatic for all of us for years. I actually battled PTSD symptoms for years after that and struggled to cross roads and didn't drive until I was 18. I know others who witnessed the accident who had similar experiences as I did even though they weren't injured physically.

So it's good that we have permission to not feel sympathy. I was inclined to feel some for you as I also had one speed camera violation during my probation period, but I had read the literature the DVLA provided and was scared to death and very careful-no violations since. Yes, we all have the odd goof up, but the law is NOT arbitrarily designed as a cash cow to punish teenagers. It's designed to save lives, and you just weren't attentive enough despite your "good memory."

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2