Nighty night for newly-qualified drivers?

Confused.com's Owe Carter wonders if banning young and newly-qualified drivers from driving at night would really be the right way forward.

So researchers from Cardiff University believe that newly-qualified young drivers should be banned from driving at night, and also prevented from carrying passengers of a similar age. The rationale is to reduce accidents, and it is claimed that some 200 lives a year would be saved.

This isn’t unprecedented, as similar schemes exist in the antipodes, and over in some parts of the States.

These proposals have been met with a mixed reception, including within the car insurance industry. Swiftcover, for example, have welcomed the proposals. They point to research from road-safety charity Brake, which says that “young men under the age of 21 are ten times more likely to die on the road than other motorists and account for a third of dangerous driving convictions”. As such, Swiftcover conclude that reducing the amount of time youngsters spend on the road will also decrease the number of accidents and the cost of premiums accordingly. If only life were so simple!

insurethebox, on the other hand, say “recent proposals to ban newly qualified young drivers from night-time motoring and carrying passengers of a similar age misses the point… The focus, in our view, should be on education rather than penalties.”

Let’s be honest – we all know who’s being targeted here: chiefly young male drivers who hoon about with no sense of their own mortality - or their mates’ mortality for that matter. We probably all know someone who has had an accident due to this type of recklessness, and many of us will know of someone who’s died in this way. But is a UK-wide ban on night-time driving the correct response?

Not all young drivers are irresponsible. I question the sense in restricting the freedom of many young adults, some of them requiring their cars for their jobs and livelihood.

Confused.com’s motor team believes insurance providers may be able to step in and help alleviate the problem by offering young drivers discounted premiums if they are willing to not drive at night. Such an approach would offer incentive, rather than censure. Recent advances in GPS tracking have allowed insurance providers to fit devices to vehicles and analyse how the car is being driven, when it is being driven, where it is being driven and for how long – an approach championed by insurethebox, for one. Potentially this allows providers to gain valuable insight that wouldn’t have been available on a car insurance application form, and would allow them to price insurance for young people more fairly, based on their individual risk.

Speaking of valuable insight, what of the issue of young drivers gaining experience themselves? Knowing how to deal with adverse conditions comes with practice – practice that banning night-time driving would effectively deny. There is an undeniable circularity in claiming that inexperience of dealing with unfavourable conditions should be countered with... er... limiting further experience. If we’re going down this route, perhaps we should ban young people from driving in fog.

The research claims that around 200 deaths and 1,700 injuries would be avoided on an annual basis. But I don’t think it’s as straightforward as that. If more drivers on our roads are effectively undertrained, then it’s not possible to guarantee that injuries and deaths won’t be caused elsewhere.

Reckless drivers who are inclined to speed, get tanked up and drive or show off to their mates (or all three) will do so regardless of preventative measures. There are already harsh penalties for dangerous driving, with young drivers being allowed only six points before they are banned, and minor infractions impacting heavily on their already sky-high premiums. It seems extreme to punish the majority for the actions of a relative few – particularly as there are alternatives available in terms of education and technology.

Feel free to let me know your thoughts by commenting below.

Comments

[E Carpenter]

The idea strikes me as pretty academic anyway. My son (21, doesn't drink,very serious) has just passed his test and the cheapest quote even the comparison sites could give me was 1500 - so it will be a long time before he's actually able to get behind the wheel ... How do these boy racers manage to get on the road?

[Maria Poindestre]

My son is 18 past his test first time with only 3 minor points and is a sensible responsible driver. The cheapest insurance I could get for him was just over 2500.00. He is not a boy racer or a speed freak but is having to pay the price for those that are. There must be some way to just penelise those that have the accidents. Maybe by bring in a clause that Hikes up the premium to beyond affordable if an accident occurs in the first year.

[Stanley Naylor.]

I am a rtired Driving Instructor both on cars and coaches with 69 years of experience. Banning night driving on all teenagers is not the answer, they have to gain experience one way or another. Hiking up premiums if involved in an accident in the first year, as mentioned by someone else, seems like a good idea, and could be an incentive to drive safely. But further education would help.

[Otto]

My son is 17 and a more responsible young man you will never meet. I don;t agree with the night driving restriction, my son is employed in agriculture and sets off for work as early as 03:30 in the summer. I think insurance companies should have an indemnity in the youngsters first couple of years insurance, say they charge £1500 for the first 12months, if no accidents are recorded then 2/3rds of this will be rebated, or put towards the 2nd years insurance.

[A Motorist]

Why not just make this part of driving lessons/test? Like i think they have to in Germany.

[J Pearson]

Just another ridiculous notion by idiots trying to get recognition by the stupidity route, rather than looking at the real world we live in.
At some stage new drivers would have to become accustomed to night driving, what makes Cardiff Uni think that recently qualified older drivers would be more responsible upon passing their tests and be able to drive better at night than young drivers would be ?

[Rafe]

I agree with many of the posts above, including the fallacy that older = better. Older newly passed drivers (and trust me there are many myself included @ 41) will have issues with eyesight and possibly hearing too. As someone also posted what are newly passed driver supposed to do in winter? It gets dark before many get home, what are the police going to do? See a young driver with a P plate after dark stuck in traffic somewhere and tell him to get out of the car and walk home?

Even though I have not been a driver I have LONG thought the best way to reduce road deaths is to make every single person retake a test at least every 5 years, less if possible.

My father is a perfect example - 66 years old "I've been driving since I was 17 son and you don't even have a licence so shut up" who doesn't think twice of doing 100+ on the motorway despite needing glasses and regularly seems to think the white lines are the bits you drive along instead of the black bits in between.

Removal (failure = 1 retake and a short ban upon further failure) or retraining of these drivers would be a big step towards reducing road deaths.

I also think more insurance companies should give cheaper insurance for people with the advanced licence, as not all do.