Exemption: DENIED.

[samgab]

I work shift work, and my shift schedule has recently changed.
So now, 6 nights of every fortnight, I finish work either just after 10pm or just before 5am.
I'm on my restricted, and have never had a motorcycle crash or ticket (where I was the rider, pillion not counted). I'm now 31yo, and relatively responsible.
I got together all of the information required by the LTSA, or NZTA as it's called now:

Map of my route home from work.
Exact times/days I would need to travel home (13Kms distance) outside correct hours.
Letter from me explaining the job I do (111 emergency callcentre) and why the job requires such shift hours.
Explanation of the reason I can't catch a bus (none run between my house and work in those hours).
Letter from my Boss (Police inspector) corroborating my letter.


In short, everything required to apply for an exemption.

Paid the $22.20 to put in the application.

4 weeks later, yesterday, received a reply from Helen Scoon of the Transport Registry Centre:
Declined.
Exemptions are not granted for reasons of convenience.
The conditions of the class 6 restricted licence are not unreasonable or inappropriate in my particular case, it seems.

I have to say this seems fairly ridiculous.
I can ride safely at 10pm or 5am, and can ride just as safely at 11pm, or 4am.

Helen goes on to suggest that I take an approved driving course to reduce the time on my Restricted, and wait until I can go for my full.
Trouble is, my shift work hours also make attending the Street Talk courses impossible, as they clash with my shifts, and I can't get time off, the lead time for applications for leave is over 6 Months at work.

Which brings me to another point, which I'll raise in a subsequent post to keep it separate from this rant...

[xwhatsit]

Do you have a car license? This seems to count against it in these cases (i.e. you could drive, you're not only able to use your bike).

[fireliv]

That is absolutly pathetic!!!:oi-grr:

Can you appeal the decision as such? Get it reviewed by someone else? How long till u can get your full?

I have heard of people getting an exemption for riding bikes out of there limit all the time, but you are just asking to go to work so whats the prob.

[discotex]

Sometimes it's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission.

I'd just risk it and hope that if you get pulled over outside hours the cop is understanding.

[samgab]

In the letter from Helen of the Transport Registry Centre, it is suggested that I peruse the <a href="http://www.landtransport.govt.nz/factsheets/66.html">(enclosed) "Factsheet 66"</a> to see which approved courses exist to reduce the time spent on the Restricted licence.
I'm 31 as mentioned above, so in my case that would be from 6 to 3 Months.
The two approved courses are Street Talk and Defensive Driving.
I read the weblinks provided on the factsheet, and there is no Defensive Driving course specific to Motorbikes. A defensive driving course is a defensive driving course, as long as it is provided by an approved agency, such as PassRite.
Also, there is no mention anywhere on any of their fact sheets or web pages to indicate that these Defensive Driving course certificates ever expire.
So I have already done a Defensive driving course, when I was going for my CAR licence, back in 1994.
So I rang the NZTA to see if I can use that certificate in the case of reducing my class 6 wait time as well.
"Oh no", says the guy who answers the phone....
"There are special defensive driving courses just for motorbikes."
"According to your fact sheet 66", I reply, "There is just the one kind of defensive driving course for both class 1 and 6."
"Let me check... Oh yes, you're right"
"Well, can you please direct me to the website link that specifies the life span of the qualifications from these courses, and when the certificates from them expire?"
"Hold on, let me check..."
***Hold music for 10 minutes***
"They don't expire, I don't think"
"Great, so I can use my defensive driving certificate I got for my car licence to reduce the time for my motorbike licence too?"
"No, I don't think so"
"Why not?"
"When did that certificate get issued?"
"June, 1994."
"No, I don't think you can use that. Driving rules have changed a lot since then."
"But the principles of driving defensively haven't, and you just told me they don't expire."
***Insert circular reasoning of this nature for a few minutes here***
Eventually the guy says:
"Well, just bring it in to the AA when you apply for your full licence, and they'll fax it down to us to see if it's okay."
"But I'd prefer not to go all the way out there, pay the fees, book the test, have the certificate faxed, only to be told (inevitably) that it's not acceptable and I'll have to wait another 3 Months before I can sit my full: Can't I just fax the certificate straight to you and get a definite answer first?"
"Oh no, it'll be much easier to just bring it in on the day..."
etc.

So I have no idea if my 1994 defensive driving cert will count. I'm guessing probably not. The street talk course is nearly $200, and the hours it's run preclude me from attending.
The guy I spoke to seems to think it will be easier for me to ride all the way out to the AA, queue up for about an hour (no jokes, I queued for well over an hour last time I went in to hand over my forms that I'd already filled in online, but had to hand in in person.), wait for them to fax the forms through, only to be told to go away and come back in 3 Months or do a fresh course!!
Very frustrating, to say the least.
Phew. Rant out.

[ital916]

You have a particularly important job as well mate, that helen scoon lady is a twat, trust me I got the denied letter too and I had like six corroborating letters. Some dick will write in an be like, i need to get to uni and I have to ride 50kms and get an exemption. You should lodge a complaint.

[hedcase07]

Funnily enough i had mine declined last week by the same person for the same reason and i have the same problem with work times and being able to attend a driving course as im in shift work too lol. bad time to be applying maybe lmao, not too worried tho as 1 month to go till i can legally ride and crash lmao..

[samgab]

Do you have a car license? This seems to count against it in these cases (i.e. you could drive, you're not only able to use your bike).

Yes, you're right, that was probably the main thing.
I do have a car licence.
There are various reasons why it's better not to drive, but end of the day, when push comes to shove, I can drive in to work.
That, more than anything, was probably what made them decide it was merely a convenience thing.

I still think it's pathetic.
I've been driving, almost every day for over 16 years. In all that time, I've had one minor ding. I've only ever had one speeding ticket, and that was about 13 years ago. I have no points on my licence. I drive regularly very late at night or very early in the morning, and I'm both familiar with travelling during those hours, and am not new to riding, I'm a comfortable and - in my own opinion - fairly competent rider. What I mean is, I don't struggle to keep my balance, or work out how to work the clutch or the gear levers or the brakes. I don't have to think over who is supposed to give way to whom or who has right of way at any given intersection.

I'd say it's MUCH MORE dangerous riding in rush hour, or into sun strike (or, as is often the case; both at the same time), than at 4am when the roads are quiet.

[mattian]

It seems utterly absurd. Are the roads considered more dangerous during those prohibited hours for learners and restricted licence holders? and, if thats the reason....... then why? In my humble opinion there is much less traffic on the roads making it (probably) a little safer for the less experienced rider.

[Jantar]

Ohhh FAIR GO

[samgab]

That is absolutly pathetic!!!:oi-grr:

Can you appeal the decision as such? Get it reviewed by someone else? How long till u can get your full?

I have heard of people getting an exemption for riding bikes out of there limit all the time, but you are just asking to go to work so whats the prob.


You have a particularly important job as well mate, that helen scoon lady is a twat, trust me I got the denied letter too and I had like six corroborating letters. Some dick will write in an be like, i need to get to uni and I have to ride 50kms and get an exemption. You should lodge a complaint.

I can appeal to have the decision reviewed, but that would mean applying in writing to the District Court.
I don't know if this means paying yet more money, but I've had my restricted for 3 Months already, so if my 1994 defensive driving cert still applies I can sign up to sit my full pretty much straight away; and therefore I don't know if it's worth the hassle of appealing. By the time the appeal is over I could have already had my full for a while, I'm guessing.
And they're probably counting on me thinking that.
$22.20 for a letter saying "NO" thank you :)
I honestly didn't expect to get declined, after reading about these people who apply for exemptions for all sorts of things and have them approved, like bigger capacity bikes and what-not.
I wouldn't even have bothered applying for the exemption if my work shifts hadn't changed. I'm happy to comply with all the other rules and regulations of the restricted licence - I'm not in a rush for a bigger capacity bike. Because of where I work, I have to be careful to abide by the law, so just have to suck it in and leave the bike in the garage.
Use up unnecessary petrol, emissions, carpark.

[RocKai]

it's the Law it's not a Consumer Product lol. Good try.

[Okey Dokey]

I guess you could just go ahead and ride your bike without the exemption and hope that you don't attract the attention of the police.

And if you did get pulled up, perhaps the cop would be lenient...

It is frustrating for you.

[hedcase07]

i believe that for a dd cert to be eligable it has to be sat after gaining your restricted licence but i may be wrong.

[jrandom]

If you're commuting very late at night and/or early in the morning, why this desire to take the bike rather than the car? In the absence of rush hour traffic, four wheels will get you there just as quickly as two, and you don't have to get rained on or change in and out of your riding gear, etc.

Contrary to popular learner-licence opinion, nobody is secretly watching and handing out Biker Awesomeness Tokens just because you use a motorcycle to get to work.

Denying the exemption seems pretty reasonable to me.

[CookMySock]

Exemptions are not granted for reasons of convenience.Actually, I am a little puzzled about WHAT they WILL do an exemption FOR. It seems now days all they will do is allow you to ride something based on the Australian LAMS list.

More along those lines, it baffles me WHY they would give out exemptions AT ALL really. LOTS of motorcyclists are causing themselves horrific injuries, and the statistics are getting worse and worse, and there is no money in the ACC coffers to PAY for it.

A year ago, I asked for an exemption to ride a 650 on my learners license. They GAVE it to me.. :rolleyes: So I go crash the fucker at high speed don't I.. :rolleyes: How I didn't hurt myself real badly, or worse, baffles hell out of me.

I can't see this exemption business lasting, especially with this latest ACC blowout.

If it were me mate, I would just ride to work. Just ride carefully-carefully commuting-styles, and when you get stopped give the occifer the droopy-lip and tell him the car broke down and you couldna get to work.

Gee, who wants to ride a bike home at 4am in the middle of winter anway? Its gunna be fucken cold, and a bit of ice around too.. nasty..

Steve

[hedcase07]

Actually, I am a little puzzled about WHAT they WILL do an exemption FOR. It seems now days all they will do is allow you to ride something based on the Australian LAMS list.

More along those lines, it baffles me WHY they would give out exemptions AT ALL really. LOTS of motorcyclists are causing themselves horrific injuries, and the statistics are getting worse and worse, and there is no money in the ACC coffers to PAY for it.

A year ago, I asked for an exemption to ride a 650 on my learners license. They GAVE it to me.. :rolleyes: So I go crash the fucker at high speed don't I.. :rolleyes: How I didn't hurt myself real badly, or worse, baffles hell out of me.

I can't see this exemption business lasting, especially with this latest ACC blowout.

If it were me mate, I would just ride to work. Just ride carefully-carefully commuting-styles, and when you get stopped give the occifer the droopy-lip and tell him the car broke down and you couldna get to work.

Gee, who wants to ride a bike home at 4am in the middle of winter anway? Its gunna be fucken cold, and a bit of ice around too.. nasty..

Steve


I would like to know what bullshit :devil2:you baffeld them with to get an exemption for a 650 on your learners?

[want-a-harley]

Is there another country in the world with as much beurocracy as NZ? If so, is there one where the majority of individuals are so against it. Is it a hangover from colonialism?

[rosie631]

Sometimes it's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission.

I'd just risk it and hope that if you get pulled over outside hours the cop is understanding.

I agree. Helen Skoon - sounds like a total bitch

[Jantar]

Maybe things have changed. A browse through the NZTA website shows:


Are there any exemptions to the conditions that apply to the restricted licence?
You can apply for an exemption through a driver licensing agent if you can prove the restrictions are unreasonable in your case, and that safety will not be compromised if an exemption is granted. There is a non-refundable application fee of $22.50.

But when I searched the Land Transport (Driver Licensing) Rule 1999, I find that ALL references to exemptions have been deleted.

[MuzzyBee]

So I have no idea if my 1994 defensive driving cert will count. I'm guessing probably not. The street talk course is nearly $200, and the hours it's run preclude me from attending.
The guy I spoke to seems to think it will be easier for me to ride all the way out to the AA, queue up for about an hour (no jokes, I queued for well over an hour last time I went in to hand over my forms that I'd already filled in online, but had to hand in in person.), wait for them to fax the forms through, only to be told to go away and come back in 3 Months or do a fresh course!!
Very frustrating, to say the least.
Phew. Rant out.
I worked for one of the approved agencies a few years ago.
If you used the defensive driving certificate for your car licence as stupid as it may seem you have to do the course again because in LTNZ logic the certificate has already been used for one class of licence.
Also, if you are doing the defensive driving course for a motorcycle you *should* be sitting the 1 hour practical on your bike and this has to be offered by the agency. I say should, as the whoever you go to, shouldn't let you do the practical in a car if you already hold your full.. but I'm not saying that won't happen!

[fireliv]

Funnily enough i had mine declined last week by the same person for the same reason and i have the same problem with work times and being able to attend a driving course as im in shift work too lol. bad time to be applying maybe lmao, not too worried tho as 1 month to go till i can legally ride and crash lmao..

Hmmm but aint you riding a 600cc bike anyways?? I mean whats an exemption if you riding outside your cc limit anyways....... unless you got an exemption for that

[rwh]

If you used the defensive driving certificate for your car licence as stupid as it may seem you have to do the course again because in LTNZ logic the certificate has already been used for one class of licence.

I'd definitely appeal that one - I noticed that they tore part of my cert off and kept it, but I've seen nothing in the regulations about a cert being 'used up' - it just says you can get a speedup if you get one.


Also, if you are doing the defensive driving course for a motorcycle you *should* be sitting the 1 hour practical on your bike and this has to be offered by the agency. I say should, as the whoever you go to, shouldn't let you do the practical in a car if you already hold your full.. but I'm not saying that won't happen!

I was given no choice; the practical had to be done in a car, and I had to provide it. Too bad if I'd had no car licence.

Richard

[retro asian]

Take a quick flight to Rarotonga.
Apparently they have a "scooter around the carpark" test which gives you a full licence, that can be used back here :niceone:

[samgab]

Take a quick flight to Rarotonga.
Apparently they have a "scooter around the carpark" test which gives you a full licence, that can be used back here :niceone:

Yeah, I've got my full Raro motorbike licence, it was cool. I sat on the scooter, rode around the 1 cop car in the carpark, and back to the guy, who issued the full licence on the spot. Trouble is, it was issued in 1998, and I think it was only valid for 1 Month :(
Cool licence though, they look a bit like the McLovin' licence.

[samgab]

I'd definitely appeal that one - I noticed that they tore part of my cert off and kept it, but I've seen nothing in the regulations about a cert being 'used up' - it just says you can get a speedup if you get one.
Richard

Yeah, it seems so crazy. It's not like the principles you learn wear off after you've used it once?!
My cert still has the tear off bit attached to it :)
Ahh, whatever, I'll mosey along to the AA and try for it, and report back on the result...
I'll be interested to hear what the inspector has to say about it all too, he's kept asking me over the past 4 WEEKS it took them to reply if my exemption has turned up yet.

[DELLORTO]

This is a classic case of the nanny state! F**k 'em ride to work any way. The laws were originally there to protect people, not milk them and control the minutae of their lives, I think that these chicken sh*t laws belittle the important ones, like "do unto others". I ride what I like, when I like, but treat other road users with respect.

[rwh]

Yeah, it seems so crazy. It's not like the principles you learn wear off after you've used it once?!
My cert still has the tear off bit attached to it :)
Ahh, whatever, I'll mosey along to the AA and try for it, and report back on the result...

Your 1994 one? No, I don't think that's going to work. As someone said, I think it has to be done since you got your restricted - I'm pretty sure that bit is in the rules.

Richard

[Conquiztador]

At 17 my oldest got a Exemption to ride a 400cc. He was on his Restricted. It lasted until 2 weeks after he could sit his Full (6 months early as he was able to get his full if he did the defensive corse).

He also worked night and got an exemption to ride to and from work.

The difference here was:
- He had no other way of travelling
- When he was able to get full it expired.

I personally consider that fair. The logic here was: "OK, so you have no other way to travel until you have your full, so we give you a expemption. But as soon as you can get your full (when you do a defensive thgingy) we pull it. Son, if you really want this, you will get it.

To try the: "But I cant get of work, my mother has the car, my cat is sick" shit is not really part of it. Either you sort your shit or you walk. Simple.

[scumdog]

This is a classic case of the nanny state! F**k 'em ride to work any way. The laws were originally there to protect people, not milk them and control the minutae of their lives, I think that these chicken sh*t laws belittle the important ones, like "do unto others". I ride what I like, when I like, but treat other road users with respect.

Hopefully you and another of similar ilk never meet head-on wrapped in you own smug superiorority...

[BigB]

my wife got an excemption when she was doing shift work. She had a car liecence but I was the one using it 90% of the time. I say appeal, it was a hassle to get but made all the difference. She was about the same age as you at the time.

cheers

B

[Clockwork]

Hopefully you and another of similar ilk never meet head-on wrapped in you own smug superiorority...

That's unlikely to happen, I don't think I live in the same area.

[Ixion]

Your 1994 one? No, I don't think that's going to work. As someone said, I think it has to be done since you got your restricted - I'm pretty sure that bit is in the rules.

Richard


Only for under 25s. Over 25, the DDC can have been done anytime. Your 1994 certificate is still valid, there is no expiry in law. But you may have to argue, a lot. LTSA have a help desk for the tester people (a different one to the general public one). Tell them to ring that and speak to a senior person. Incidentally the bit about "The perforated part's been torn off so it's no longer valid" has no legal standing either. That is just an administrative convenience for LTSA and has no legal standing. In fact, the law does not even require you *have* a certificate, you just have to be able to prove you've done a course.

[rwh]

Only for under 25s. Over 25, the DDC can have been done anytime.

Interesting, I hadn't spotted that. The wording does suggest that it has to have been done since you turned 25, though.

If you're under 25 years old and you successfully complete an approved course, ...(Factsheet 45 (http://www.landtransport.govt.nz/factsheets/45.html))

Richard

[YLWDUC]

Interesting, I hadn't spotted that. The wording does suggest that it has to have been done since you turned 25, though.
(Factsheet 45 (http://www.landtransport.govt.nz/factsheets/45.html))Richard

They want you to think that it must be done after you have sat your motorcycle licence, but of course, the Defensive Driving course is a 100% theory course that covers hazards, safe driving/riding attitudes etc.

When I applied to sit my full licence after 3 months, being over 25 and having completed the DDC (in 1995!) They said I'd have to apply for an exemption, so I did. Wrote how I've been a safe driver and rider, holding my learners M/Cycle for 3 years etc and the merits of the DDC and how they also apply to motorcycles. They eventually approved it, so this should mean the same for all those who go out and sit their motorcycle licenses after their drivers licenses.

[samgab]

They want you to think that it must be done after you have sat your motorcycle licence, but of course, the Defensive Driving course is a 100% theory course that covers hazards, safe driving/riding attitudes etc.

When I applied to sit my full licence after 3 months, being over 25 and having completed the DDC (in 1995!) They said I'd have to apply for an exemption, so I did. Wrote how I've been a safe driver and rider, holding my learners M/Cycle for 3 years etc and the merits of the DDC and how they also apply to motorcycles. They eventually approved it, so this should mean the same for all those who go out and sit their motorcycle licenses after their drivers licenses.

That sounds like a precedent has already been set, in your case.
You were in almost the same situation as me.
I had my class 6 learners for 6 years, before getting into riding properly.
I did my DDC in 1994.
I hope I don't have to apply for an exemption again, just a waste of another $22.50. Maybe I should get on the phone and give this Helen a call direct...

I cannot find anything in writing from an official source, or in legalese, that specifies an expiry time of the qualifications of a DDC.
When the plebs you get manning a counter or a phone say "no that can't be done" it's just because they don't know, and come up with an answer off the top of their head. The difficult part is fighting through all of that small-minded ignorance to get to the root of the matter: You're saying no, but where is that in writing, in the law or in your instructions that specify that is the answer?
If the fact sheet stated "The DDC must have been completed no more than [insert time frame] prior to sitting the full licence test" -- I'd accept that.

Oh, and by the way, <a href="http://www.aa.co.nz/motoring/licensingandtraining/ddc/DefensiveDrivingCourse/Pages/DefensiveDrivingCourseFAQ.aspx">DDC courses now include a practical section</a>

[Forest]

Yes, you're right, that was probably the main thing.
I do have a car licence.
There are various reasons why it's better not to drive, but end of the day, when push comes to shove, I can drive in to work.
That, more than anything, was probably what made them decide it was merely a convenience thing.

I know it sucks to be denied the exemption, but I have to side with the LTSA lady.

The licensing exemptions were intended to reduce cases of genuine hardship. If you have a car license and access to a car, then you don't meet the necessary criteria.

[samgab]

Only for under 25s. Over 25, the DDC can have been done anytime. Your 1994 certificate is still valid, there is no expiry in law. But you may have to argue, a lot. LTSA have a help desk for the tester people (a different one to the general public one). Tell them to ring that and speak to a senior person. Incidentally the bit about "The perforated part's been torn off so it's no longer valid" has no legal standing either. That is just an administrative convenience for LTSA and has no legal standing. In fact, the law does not even require you *have* a certificate, you just have to be able to prove you've done a course.

Thanks for that info Ixion.
I hate the whole "you have to argue for it" part.
Things should not be so obtuse. Either it's valid, or it isn't, and that should be clearly specified somewhere.
<hr>
Part of the trouble is these AA centres trying to do everything these days. You have the same people at the counter trying to handle all kinds of enquiries, from IRD, to maps, to insurance, to licensing, etc.
Two negative results of this:

The queues are insane.
It's difficult to find someone who is informed and competent to help

[xwhatsit]

That sounds like a precedent has already been set, in your case.
You were in almost the same situation as me.
There's no `precedents' or anything. It's not a legal case, there's no objective rules governing what is valid reasons for an exemption or not. The law is, you ride 250cc, no pillion, not after 10pm. There's a panel of people (not dickheads either, they're a small team of very reasonable and knowledgeable people) who assess each case individually on its own merits to see if it's reasonable for you to have an exemption to the law.

You have no cause to expect an exemption just because you think you're exceptional. They're not dummies. They know you've got a car licence. They're not there to cater to your whims to play with your new toy. They're there to enforce road safety, and at the end of the day you're a new rider with little experience. You can drive a car, so what's the great emergency? What's this terrible hardship of yours?

Now I think the 10pm curfew is a damn silly thing with no relation to road safety, personally. A good half of my kilometres would have been covered outside my licence conditions in this respect.

Nevertheless what's with this attitude of entitlement you have?

[Ixion]

Thanks for that info Ixion.
I hate the whole "you have to argue for it" part.
Things should not be so obtuse. Either it's valid, or it isn't, and that should be clearly specified somewhere.
<hr>
Part of the trouble is these AA centres trying to do everything these days. You have the same people at the counter trying to handle all kinds of enquiries, from IRD, to maps, to insurance, to licensing, etc.
Two negative results of this:

The queues are insane.
It's difficult to find someone who is informed and competent to help



It is. Land Transport Rule (Driver Licensing) 1999.

Problem is that most LTSA staff have no understanding of the law, and prefer to make it up as they go along. Then get shitty if you point out that that is not actually what the law says.

[Ixion]

Interesting, I hadn't spotted that. The wording does suggest that it has to have been done since you turned 25, though.
(Factsheet 45 (http://www.landtransport.govt.nz/factsheets/45.html))

Richard


Yes. I have never been quite sure of the situation where the DDC is taken when under 25, but applied after 25.

[YLWDUC]

Oh, and by the way, <a href="http://www.aa.co.nz/motoring/licensingandtraining/ddc/DefensiveDrivingCourse/Pages/DefensiveDrivingCourseFAQ.aspx">DDC courses now include a practical section</a>

That's interesting, does this mean that once on your motorcycle licence you need to sit a Defensive Driving pratical course, or the approved course mentioned on Factsheet 28? Does it even exist? And will they answer my email?

[CookMySock]

The licensing exemptions were intended to reduce cases of genuine hardship.Mine wasn't. I just asked for it and they gave it to me. The only hardship would have been not riding the new bike.

My guess is the ACC blowout has changed the exemption rules. Who has had a serious accident while on a GDLS exemption? I did. :Oops: I didn't hurt myself though - nine lives all used up in one hit.

Steve

[Ragingrob]

If you're over 25 you should be able to use your past defensive driving course certificate absolutely fine. That's what I've been told by LTSA twice now.

[malfunconz]

man it was easier in my day , lets all time warp back to the seventies .

[Jiminy]

I was given no choice; the practical had to be done in a car, and I had to provide it. Too bad if I'd had no car licence.

The guy who run the course checked for me if I could do it on the motorbike with Andrew from Roadsafe, but at the time it wasn't allowed, so I had to do it in a car (he nicely provided one).


I guess you could just go ahead and ride your bike without the exemption and hope that you don't attract the attention of the police.

And if you did get pulled up, perhaps the cop would be lenient...

However, that would likely void any 3rd party insurance if you have one.

[samgab]

However, that would likely void any 3rd party insurance if you have one.

Also, it would be illegal.
Plus, I have full insurance.

[rickstv]

Seems to me that you can appeal on the grounds that your partner requires the car during the day.
Rick

[NOMIS]

I work shift work, and my shift schedule has recently changed.
So now, 6 nights of every fortnight, I finish work either just after 10pm or just before 5am.
I'm on my restricted, and have never had a motorcycle crash or ticket (where I was the rider, pillion not counted). I'm now 31yo, and relatively responsible.
I got together all of the information required by the LTSA, or NZTA as it's called now:

Map of my route home from work.
Exact times/days I would need to travel home (13Kms distance) outside correct hours.
Letter from me explaining the job I do (111 emergency callcentre) and why the job requires such shift hours.
Explanation of the reason I can't catch a bus (none run between my house and work in those hours).
Letter from my Boss (Police inspector) corroborating my letter.


In short, everything required to apply for an exemption.

Paid the $22.20 to put in the application.

4 weeks later, yesterday, received a reply from Helen Scoon of the Transport Registry Centre:
Declined.
Exemptions are not granted for reasons of convenience.
The conditions of the class 6 restricted licence are not unreasonable or inappropriate in my particular case, it seems.

I have to say this seems fairly ridiculous.
I can ride safely at 10pm or 5am, and can ride just as safely at 11pm, or 4am.

Helen goes on to suggest that I take an approved driving course to reduce the time on my Restricted, and wait until I can go for my full.
Trouble is, my shift work hours also make attending the Street Talk courses impossible, as they clash with my shifts, and I can't get time off, the lead time for applications for leave is over 6 Months at work.

Which brings me to another point, which I'll raise in a subsequent post to keep it separate from this rant...


HELEN - ugh that name should not be in a position to make decisions - she also denied me to because of a drink driving charge when i was 16 - not convicted in court because i had been breath tested 3 times that night 5 mins before booze bus one and passed. had a ticket for no wof to proove it and cops stuck up for me - 1 heineken but still shows on my lisence

[CookMySock]

she also denied me to because of a drink driving charge when i was 16Not surprising - whether you were convicted of it is unimportant. At 16 you shouldn't have been drinking ANY alcohol and riding afterwards. They only exempt people with utterly clean records - squids, petrolheads, pissheads et al need not apply.

Steve

[NOMIS]

Not surprising - whether you were convicted of it is unimportant. At 16 you shouldn't have been drinking ANY alcohol and riding afterwards. They only exempt people with utterly clean records - squids, petrolheads, pissheads et al need not apply.

Steve

that was 6 years ago - I dont drink at all now (maybe one or 2 every month or so) Nad I was driving not riding - i would have my full at the time I applied if I was riding back then :S.

Another thing they stuffed up is , I still got demerit points for it at time of being tested and again in court, I tried to get this reversed but courts say taalk to ltsa ltsa say talk to curts went on with this for about 3 week's - gave up in the end - 100 demerits for 1 drink driving charge I wasnt convicted of they came and took my lisence 3 weeks later - Something even Helen Couldn't explain. idiot government agencies...

[CookMySock]

Ok. I apologise! ;)

I wouldn't worry about the demerits. Actually, they are somewhat of an ace up your sleeve if it ever come to them taking your license because of them, you could tell them to "get bent - talk to the judge." They will KNOW they are on shakey ground legally at that point, and then you have their head on a platter which is nice for a change. Dum de dooo! Oops pig has egg on face again, oh well.

Steve

[Okey Dokey]

Also, it would be illegal.
Plus, I have full insurance.

Well, then you have to accept their ruling that you can't have an exemption just because it would be convenient for you.

[SPman]

I sat on the scooter, rode around the 1 cop car in the carpark, and back to the guy, who issued the full licence on the spot. .
That's basically all I did for my NZ full license

...mind you, it was in '67.........:rolleyes:

[rosie631]

That's basically all I did for my NZ full license

...mind you, it was in '67.........:rolleyes:

LOL. Or maybe round the block. On a Honda stepthru and then could ride anything you wanted. That was in 1980

[CookMySock]

That's basically all I did for my NZ full license ...mind you, it was in '67.........:rolleyes:Hehe, I just did a ten minute trip around town for my full license, and that was last month, LOL. No U turn, no open road, no hill start, just about 4 blocks of back street puttering and that was it. :apint:

Steve

[Ixion]

That's basically all I did for my NZ full license

...mind you, it was in '67.........:rolleyes:


Hehe, I just did a ten minute trip around town for my full license, and that was last month, LOL. No U turn, no open road, no hill start, just about 4 blocks of back street puttering and that was it. :apint:

Steve

In Edgecumbe it is still 1967

[scumdog]

that was 6 years ago - I dont drink at all now (maybe one or 2 every month or so) Nad I was driving not riding - i would have my full at the time I applied if I was riding back then :S.

Another thing they stuffed up is , I still got demerit points for it at time of being tested and again in court, I tried to get this reversed but courts say taalk to ltsa ltsa say talk to curts went on with this for about 3 week's - gave up in the end - 100 demerits for 1 drink driving charge I wasnt convicted of they came and took my lisence 3 weeks later - Something even Helen Couldn't explain. idiot government agencies...

Sooo... lemme see, you have and EBA coviction AND demerits??

And you expect an exemption?

Mwahahahah...

Sorry shag, not a good look.

Unless you're a politician

[McJim]

I remember speaking to Gremlin who successfuly applied for an exemption.

The crux of it is to prove that you will in fact be SAFER due to the exemption - if you can prove that beyond all reasonable doubt all should be sweet :2thumbsup:. If you spend too long talking about what a pain in the arse having restrictions placed on you is they will deny your application.

welcome to the real world.

[NOMIS]

Sooo... lemme see, you have and EBA coviction AND demerits??

And you expect an exemption?

Mwahahahah...

Sorry shag, not a good look.

Unless you're a politician

Errrm read again - was found not guilty = no conviction or disqual (mandatory isnt it?) your a cop you should know the law buddy


And i got given 50 demerits for drink driving the night i got done, went to court I was not guilty then i got a extra 50 from the LSTA - READ MATE READ!!!!! sheesh

so ended up with 100 demerits for something I was found not guilty on and let off with no disqual and when I started getting a letter from some prick from baycorp coming to my home to collect my liscense i was thinking WTF!!!! and after 3weeks of discussions with the great government agencies our country has in place as usual got me know where.

Oh and I wonder what happend to the guy selling drugs in the city i witnessed today while at work - probally nothing....... even though I told police as it was happening.

[NOMIS]

I wonder who the copper was that told Constable Andrew i was talking about him on here..... that was a interesting waste of my time at court... Expensive to for seomthn again felt not guilty for.. usual police error hope my brother can do a better job

[Dean]

Samgab, honestly land and transport wouldnt find your reasoning worth an exemption. Its not their problem its just yours mate, if your job requires riding out of hours then its up to you to find another job that fits in with your riding times. If its a big problem alot of alterations can be made to stay in your riding curfew, also there is nothing wrong with getting your car licence. My brothers exemption has been accepted, he weighs about 180 kg and has a medical problem where he cant stop putting on weight, because this is uncontrollable and no 250cc motorcycle can carry his weight safely he is an exception. But im happy to help you out in anyway i can bro:2thumbsup

[Patrick]

I know it sucks to be denied the exemption, but I have to side with the LTSA lady.

The licensing exemptions were intended to reduce cases of genuine hardship. If you have a car license and access to a car, then you don't meet the necessary criteria.

I did the same as Samgab, for my Learners, and got it without hesitation, for the same reasons he had.

When I got the restricted, they said I had to apply again, $22.20 thanks for coming. I said no thanks, thats a tank of gas. Didn't "attract" attention then went for the full.

And I had two cars...... but they didn't ask about that......

So by their own reasoning, its a safety thing? Give it to the learner, but not the restricted? Go figure...........

[scumdog]

Errrm read again - was found not guilty = no conviction or disqual (mandatory isnt it?) your a cop you should know the law buddy


And i got given 50 demerits for drink driving the night i got done, went to court I was not guilty then i got a extra 50 from the LSTA - READ MATE READ!!!!! sheesh

so ended up with 100 demerits for something I was found not guilty on



OK, so when they do a check they see you got 100 demerits for an EBA you 'didn't' do??

Whadya think they'll do?

They'll look at the 100 demerits and think hmmmm, there has to be SOME reason he got 'em.

And right or wrong you're screwed.

Even if it seems like I can't read, k?

Hell, I KNOW life ain't fair - but that's life. (Otherwise I'd still have all my fingers and no punch-up scars)

[McJim]

(Otherwise I'd still have all my fingers and no punch-up scars)

'sonly coz you punch like a little girlie :Pokey:

[scumdog]

'sonly coz you punch like a little girlie :Pokey:

Now THERE'S worry - ya know how a little girlie punches.....:bleh:

[NOMIS]

OK, so when they do a check they see you got 100 demerits for an EBA you 'didn't' do??

Whadya think they'll do?

They'll look at the 100 demerits and think hmmmm, there has to be SOME reason he got 'em.

And right or wrong you're screwed.

Even if it seems like I can't read, k?

Hell, I KNOW life ain't fair - but that's life. (Otherwise I'd still have all my fingers and no punch-up scars)



yes true it is, life isnt fair
and yes i got 100 demerit points due to human error and people who cant be bothered doing there jobs correctly, the lady pollice offficer even shoed up in court and explained to the judge what had ahppend ( about being breath tested 5 mins before failing ) and judge let me off, demerits where still given. ehh?

[PirateJafa]

I work shift work, and my shift schedule has recently changed.
So now, 6 nights of every fortnight, I finish work either just after 10pm or just before 5am.
I'm on my restricted, and have never had a motorcycle crash or ticket. I'm now 31yo, and relatively responsible.

Intriguing. I got an exemption just six months ago when I was still a teenager, which not only allowed me to ride home from the nightshift in the godforsaken hours of the morning, but also to ride a NC30, which is well out of what would be considered the "learner" category.

Just had it amended recently to include the plate number of my second NC30 so that I can ride both legally.

They must be cracking down!

[NOMIS]

Intriguing. I got an exemption just six months ago when I was still a teenager, which not only allowed me to ride home from the nightshift in the godforsaken hours of the morning, but also to ride a NC30, which is well out of what would be considered the "learner" category.

Just had it amended recently to include the plate number of my second NC30 so that I can ride both legally.

They must be cracking down!

Prob because Helen works there now. lol. shes the excemption team leader. I hate how ive done a defensive driving course for my car, and to shorten the period I have to do the same course again for my motorbike - now is that revenue gathering or what... pay enough in rego's

[Patrick]

yes true it is, life isnt fair
and yes i got 100 demerit points due to human error and people who cant be bothered doing there jobs correctly, the lady pollice offficer even shoed up in court and explained to the judge what had ahppend ( about being breath tested 5 mins before failing ) and judge let me off, demerits where still given. ehh?

You got lucky. As you know, it takes time for booze to be processed by the body... that 5 minutes can be the difference from being under, to being over for a young un... (doesn't take much at all to be over for an under 20...).

Consuming alcohol and driving as a learner is a breach of the learner licence conditions and carries 50 demerits.

[PirateJafa]

Prob because Helen works there now. lol. shes the excemption team leader. I hate how ive done a defensive driving course for my car, and to shorten the period I have to do the same course again for my motorbike - now is that revenue gathering or what... pay enough in rego's

Helen Scoon? She's been there at least since I got my first exemption, as she signed that one off. Top lady. :niceone:

[CookMySock]

OK, so when they do a check they see you got 100 demerits for an EBA you 'didn't' do??

Whadya think they'll do?Who cares? It's what the judge does that counts. Would YOU stand some supposely-offender in front of the judge on the basis of "There must be some reason for..." ? Unless you like egg on your face, I do not think so.

Steve

[EatOrBeEaten]

Sucks mate, sorry to hear they rejected it.

I've got all the paperwork to apply to get my learner licence period decreased as I've had a UK learner's for years, but I'm not sure they'll give it to me...

[Ixion]

..
Consuming alcohol and driving as a learner is a breach of the learner licence conditions and carries 50 demerits.

? . where is that mandated ? I don't see it in the licence conditions clauses of Driver Licencing Road Rule 1999.


Conditions of learner licence

(1) The holder of a learner licence of a particular class is authorised to drive a vehicle to which that class of licence relates if the holder complies with the following conditions:
(a) The holder must not drive the vehicle (unless driving a motorcycle, moped, or an all-terrain vehicle) unless the holder is accompanied in the vehicle by a person who—
(i) Holds, and has held for at least 2 years, a full licence of a class that authorises that person to drive that vehicle; and
(ii) Is in charge of the vehicle; and
(iii) Is seated in the front passenger seat or, if there is no front passenger seat available, is seated as close as is practicable to the driver; and
(b) in the case of a Class 1L licence, where the holder is driving a car, the holder must display on the vehicle an “L” plate as specified in clause 66:
(c) in the case of a Class 1L or Class 6L licence, where the holder is riding a moped, the holder—
(i) must display on the vehicle an “L” plate as specified in clause 66; and
(ii) must not drive between the hours of 10 pm and 5 am; and
(iii) must not carry another person on the moped or in a sidecar attached to the moped:
(d) in the case of a Class 6L licence, where the holder is riding a motorcycle, the holder—
(i) must display on the vehicle an “L” plate as specified in clause 66; and
(ii) must not—
(A) drive between the hours of 10 pm and 5 am; or
(B) drive at a speed exceeding 70 km/h, unless taking the restricted licence test for a Class 6R licence under clause 48(5); or
(C) drive a motorcycle that has a total piston displacement exceeding 250 cm3; or
(D) carry another person on the motorcycle or in a sidecar attached to the motorcycle

(2) The conditions imposed under this clause are in addition to any conditions imposed on the licence holder under Part 9.

[samgab]

FYI, alcohol limits relating to age:

<a href="http://www.landtransport.govt.nz/roadcode/about-limits/alcohol-and-drugs-limits.html">Legal alcohol limits for driving
The law says you must not drive if the amount of alcohol in your blood or breath exceeds certain age-related limits. These limits are shown below.

Under twenty

You must not drive if you have more than 30 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood, or more than 150 micrograms of alcohol per litre of breath. This is effectively a zero limit – consuming just one alcoholic drink will mean you can be charged with drink driving.

Twenty or over

You must not drive if you have more than 80 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood, or more than 400 micrograms of alcohol per litre of breath.

It is difficult to say how many alcoholic drinks you can have before you reach these limits. It depends on many factors, including:

whether you are male or female
your size
how much food you have eaten.
Because of this, and because even small amounts of alcohol can affect your driving, the best advice is: if you drink at all, don't drive.

If you've been drinking, call a taxi, take a bus or get someone who hasn't been drinking, such as a friend or 'dial-a-driver', to drive you home.</a>

[Ixion]

Yes. But none of these are either licence conditions , or a complete alcohol ban. The limit for under twenties is low (sucks to be youff), but it is not zero. And it is not a condition of the learner licence. AFAIAA the alcohol limit for a learner licence is the same as anyone else.

[YLWDUC]

Samgab, honestly land and transport wouldnt find your reasoning worth an exemption. Its not their problem its just yours mate, if your job requires riding out of hours then its up to you to find another job that fits in with your riding times.

If it's the curfew issue at stake, there are plenty of car drivers that have done exactly the same thing and just asked for permission to drive on XX day after hours on YY route to and from work/night classes/soup kitchen etc. The intent of the curfew is that for the most part, L and R drivers are kept off the road in the most dangerous times and are less likely to be involved in drunk driving etc.

Yes, there are plenty of inconsistencies in the way exemptions are granted or not, but that's another issue.

[piston broke]

ok,i skimmed all the posts.but.
as far as i'm concerned the only exemption should be to ride out of stated hours(i didn't know this was the case till now)
there is no way that a learner should be allowed to ride more than the given cc rateing.
learners licence is there for a reason.it's cause you probably don't have the right skills.
i think they should do the same with cars,i.e normaly aspirated.under 2.0l

[NOMIS]

ok,i skimmed all the posts.but.
as far as i'm concerned the only exemption should be to ride out of stated hours(i didn't know this was the case till now)
there is no way that a learner should be allowed to ride more than the given cc rateing.
learners licence is there for a reason.it's cause you probably don't have the right skills.
i think they should do the same with cars,i.e normaly aspirated.under 2.0l

You must be old,

How ever when I have children.. and it comes to buying car's now way in hell will the be allowed something fast.. start out in the equivilant of a 1.3L corolla. Same goes for bike's if they want one, (hopefully not)

[Patrick]

? . where is that mandated ? I don't see it in the licence conditions clauses of Driver Licencing Road Rule 1999.

learners (poss restricted too) under 20 who get done for eba get 50 demerits as well... Fully licenced do not...

[samgab]

If it's the curfew issue at stake, there are plenty of car drivers that have done exactly the same thing and just asked for permission to drive on XX day after hours on YY route to and from work/night classes/soup kitchen etc. The intent of the curfew is that for the most part, L and R drivers are kept off the road in the most dangerous times and are less likely to be involved in drunk driving etc.

Yes, there are plenty of inconsistencies in the way exemptions are granted or not, but that's another issue.

You get it.
When I was 15, and on my learners, sure I was perhaps not completely equipped to be in control of a vehicle at night. Things look different, it can be harder to judge distances and speeds when you're not used to it, and yes, it takes practise to get used to that.
But I've been in control of vehicles at night for years now, so that that issue is no longer a problem.
Also, when one is simply going home from work to sleep, alcohol isn't a factor. Maybe in some other road users...
But my travelling in Auckland at 4am is actually safer than when I head in to work at 8am or home at 5pm.
But I'm not going to keep whining about it, I accept that it was declined. Just wanted to have a bit of a rant at the time.
I'm just going to apply for my full licence, no big deal.

[mozzee]

I personally just take the risk on my restricted. So far I have been lucky enough to get off. Infact I got off every time even when I was on a learners without L plates and speeding too. KNOCKING ON WOOD! But then again I am a female - maybe it makes a little difference (sorry guys)!

I'd suggest just taking the risk Sam. Most cops are pretty good and when you tell them what you do for a living I'm pretty sure they will let you off. Unless of course you were going 180km/h and just killed a pedestrian - that would be different!!

I have just gone through the exact same probs with lowering the allowance from my restricted to the full... And to make matters even worse I'm 24! BUT I turn 25 during the period that I am allegable to go for my full - so this just confuses them even more!!

I have spoken to about 8 different people at LTSA and about 5 at the AA, and they have all given me different advice. Ranging from yes you can go for your full after 3 months because you are 25 at the time of sitting it, to no you can't because you haven't been 25 for long enough so you have to wait 6 months, no your defensive cert is not for motorbikes so wait a year, when does the cert expire (there's no date), no you have to do a special motorbike course, etc etc (you get the point).

So the moment I turn 25 (next month) I will be heading to the AA with my defensive driving cert (7 years old) and see where I get (Even if I have to make several phone calls to LTSA whilst standing in the AA line)!!

[samgab]

You'll probably beat your head against a brick wall on this. They say you can't fight city hall and this is one of those cases.

Go out and buy a 50cc cheapie and commute on your car licence.

Ha, funny you should say that, because it was commuting on a 50cc that got me back into biking again. Then I found it was too gutless to maintain speed up the steep Auckland hills, so I went for a 150, and then to a 250...
The other really odd thing, is that the VTR250 uses only a fraction less petrol than the 50cc used to.
But there are extra expenses; like WOF, more expensive Rego, tyres, and such. Still happier riding the VTR than the scooter :)
Also, now I can do fun trips like the Coro loop, which would be just no fun at all on a moped.