I'd assume state bodies would generally be self-insured. Motor insurance underwritten by an insurance company is mandatory for individuals and private businesses because John Q. Random almost certainly doesn't have six figures in cash sitting around to pay for the damages when he causes a five-car accident on the M50, so his victims would be left out of pocket. That's not an issue for a government body, however; they'd have the means to self-insure.
The state claims agency deals with all claims against the government (once they fall under the scheme) in lieu of paying traditional insurance. Basically the idea is the government has deep pockets so why pay insurance companies for something the state can pay for individually itself. It works out cheaper I would imagine.
My understanding is no once they are DSA vehicle. Although I'm not sure it covers damage to the vehicle itself.
" Should DSAs display evidence of State
indemnity cover in DSA vehicles?
SCA-AF-01: State indemnity confirmation: DSA
vehicle (State indemnity motor disc) is provided in
lieu of a conventional insurance disc and confirms all appropriate indemnity arrangements. It should be
placed in each vehicle owned by a DSA and referred
to in the case of an accident or if requested by An
Garda Síochána"
FAQ from state claims agency %20Does%20State%20indemnity%20cover%20damages%20to,of%20DSA%20vehicles%2C%20including%20that%20to%20windscreens.)
It seems like their main ask is some way of checking whether the driver they're testing is insured or not, or otherwise give them a blanket liability waiver.
You can buy insurance on a direct debit. If you fail to pay the direct debit your insurance will be cancelled, but you'll still have a cert and disc that can be produced to the tester.
No, you sign a declaration saying you are insured, and they check the disk looks valid, but don't actually check it on any system to ensure its validity or that you are on it.
I'm so confused....you can't sit a driving test unless you have proof of car insurance...so how do they not know your insured if you must give proof of imsirnace before the driving test instructor even enters the car 🙄
It was a while since I did my test but I don't remember having to give proof of insurance. They checked the discs but that doesn't mean I was insured to drive that car. Just means someone else is insured.
From reading the article all they want is a way to verify an insurance policy which to me seems very fair
“The union has accused the RSA of failing to ensure that testers are fully and unconditionally covered by the State Claims Agency while carrying out their duties.”
“Fórsa said it will raise its concerns at a meeting at the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) which is due to take place on 20 January and will then determine its next steps.”
As if the waiting times for driving tests weren’t already long enough!
What’s more important: wait times for driving tests or the peace of mind of the people conducting the tests?
I don’t think we will make much progress on the former without the latter. If driving testers are not insured while doing their job we will have a hard time getting more people to do it.
Fórsa also said that the current insurance verification system leaves driver testers at risk when carrying out their work as there is no way to verify whether vehicles presented for driving tests are fully insured, and therefore driving testers may not be fully indemnified.
Mad idea, but how about we stop this whole “bring your own car or pay out the arse to use the instructors” thing and actually just supply insured cars for the tester’s to use.
But also, I’m a miserable aul soul and I see the massive backlog and I say fuck them all out and start from the ground up
Always felt that they should have a little fleet of cars for the testers to test people in. Couple of little hybrids or electric cars for automatic only tests. Couple of little manual cars for anyone else.
Would eliminate people complaining about failing because of a bad headlight or a warning light coming on. Test the drivers ability to drive. Their personal car is their personal problem
Don't think it's in general availability yet, but toyota built an electric car with fake gears in it good enough for some countries to accept for manual tests.
I am not joking, they made a car with varying torque profiles, fake clutch, and it'll pretend to stall itself if you drive it wrong. I think it's a psychological/gimmick thing they're going for.
Doesn’t have to be brand new, get the cunts a banger. That said, we had a shiteload of cars just waiting there for anyone to use when I worked at the council lol so it can’t be that expensive
It’s not just about the cost of the car, but the insurance cost that would be required to have thousands of unproven drivers at risk of harming themselves and others passing through them!
I must be missing something. They said get a banger and I mentioned insurance costs to provide the car probably being a pain in the arse too.
Edit: And yes, the testers are striking for themselves to be covered by insurance. Not for every other driver/pedestrian/property on the road to be covered if the person doing the test hits them.
An absolutely despicable organisation that has failed multiple times in its briefing, from improving road safety to facilitating testing, they are an absolute disaster all ends up.
Would you be willing to get into 9-10 cars per day with drivers who, by definition, aren't qualified to drive knowing that, if they crash and injure you, you'd be uninsured and you'd have to pay for everything out of your own pocket?
All business must have insurance for their employees but RSA?! This is unbelievable, as if I didn't have enough reasons to despise that organisation.
Wait till you find out that most government bodies don't and state vehicles usually don't have insurance either 😂
I'd assume state bodies would generally be self-insured. Motor insurance underwritten by an insurance company is mandatory for individuals and private businesses because John Q. Random almost certainly doesn't have six figures in cash sitting around to pay for the damages when he causes a five-car accident on the M50, so his victims would be left out of pocket. That's not an issue for a government body, however; they'd have the means to self-insure.
Would the state being the liable party sort of cover the risk inherently. Is that the logic? I know nothing, just curious.
The state claims agency deals with all claims against the government (once they fall under the scheme) in lieu of paying traditional insurance. Basically the idea is the government has deep pockets so why pay insurance companies for something the state can pay for individually itself. It works out cheaper I would imagine.
Yeah that makes total sense to me.
Cheaper, and you'd need a fucking massive insurance company to properly underwrite something that size.
I thought they had insurance, but no road tax. Maybe that was changed years ago.
My understanding is no once they are DSA vehicle. Although I'm not sure it covers damage to the vehicle itself.
" Should DSAs display evidence of State indemnity cover in DSA vehicles? SCA-AF-01: State indemnity confirmation: DSA vehicle (State indemnity motor disc) is provided in lieu of a conventional insurance disc and confirms all appropriate indemnity arrangements. It should be placed in each vehicle owned by a DSA and referred to in the case of an accident or if requested by An Garda Síochána"
FAQ from state claims agency %20Does%20State%20indemnity%20cover%20damages%20to,of%20DSA%20vehicles%2C%20including%20that%20to%20windscreens.)
Seems utterly daft that they wouldn't be entirely covered by their employer's insurance policy!
They might be the bad guys but they are correct here. It's easy fix aswell.
It seems like their main ask is some way of checking whether the driver they're testing is insured or not, or otherwise give them a blanket liability waiver.
But you have to prove you are a named driver on the insurance or you can't do your test...I'm so confused
You can buy insurance on a direct debit. If you fail to pay the direct debit your insurance will be cancelled, but you'll still have a cert and disc that can be produced to the tester.
No, you sign a declaration saying you are insured, and they check the disk looks valid, but don't actually check it on any system to ensure its validity or that you are on it.
No you don't. They don't ask or check, my friends did their tests without insurance, just their parents insurance on the car.
I'm so confused....you can't sit a driving test unless you have proof of car insurance...so how do they not know your insured if you must give proof of imsirnace before the driving test instructor even enters the car 🙄
It was a while since I did my test but I don't remember having to give proof of insurance. They checked the discs but that doesn't mean I was insured to drive that car. Just means someone else is insured.
From reading the article all they want is a way to verify an insurance policy which to me seems very fair
Ah ok I did mine several months ago, but I was so anxious. I didn't know what I had to show them. I just know I had whatever they required 🤣
They actually don't check it for some reason. Now, if you got into a crash while doing your test and uninsured, you would be absolutely fucked.
“The union has accused the RSA of failing to ensure that testers are fully and unconditionally covered by the State Claims Agency while carrying out their duties.”
“Fórsa said it will raise its concerns at a meeting at the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) which is due to take place on 20 January and will then determine its next steps.”
As if the waiting times for driving tests weren’t already long enough!
RSA showing once again it's not fit for purpose.
That’s what you when you let RTE presenters create a government department
What’s more important: wait times for driving tests or the peace of mind of the people conducting the tests?
I don’t think we will make much progress on the former without the latter. If driving testers are not insured while doing their job we will have a hard time getting more people to do it.
Fuck, I've a test the Monday after their meeting to discuss when to strike
Like, I see why they're doing it, but this is just my luck
Mad idea, but how about we stop this whole “bring your own car or pay out the arse to use the instructors” thing and actually just supply insured cars for the tester’s to use.
But also, I’m a miserable aul soul and I see the massive backlog and I say fuck them all out and start from the ground up
Always felt that they should have a little fleet of cars for the testers to test people in. Couple of little hybrids or electric cars for automatic only tests. Couple of little manual cars for anyone else.
Would eliminate people complaining about failing because of a bad headlight or a warning light coming on. Test the drivers ability to drive. Their personal car is their personal problem
Don't think it's in general availability yet, but toyota built an electric car with fake gears in it good enough for some countries to accept for manual tests.
I am not joking, they made a car with varying torque profiles, fake clutch, and it'll pretend to stall itself if you drive it wrong. I think it's a psychological/gimmick thing they're going for.
This is like when BMW added special speakers in the exhaust pipes of the i8 to make the sound of an engine.
Just well... Pointless.
Can’t imagine providing a fully insured car for potentially unsafe drivers to use comes cheap
As an individual, no.
As a government, there are lots of options that aren't open to us. For instance, they can insure themselves.
Doesn’t have to be brand new, get the cunts a banger. That said, we had a shiteload of cars just waiting there for anyone to use when I worked at the council lol so it can’t be that expensive
It’s not just about the cost of the car, but the insurance cost that would be required to have thousands of unproven drivers at risk of harming themselves and others passing through them!
This is so why male models coded. What do you think the testers are striking for?
Huh?
Zoolander reference. His point is he literally just explained what you asked the sentence before you asked him.
I must be missing something. They said get a banger and I mentioned insurance costs to provide the car probably being a pain in the arse too.
Edit: And yes, the testers are striking for themselves to be covered by insurance. Not for every other driver/pedestrian/property on the road to be covered if the person doing the test hits them.
Wasn't the RSA being disbanded?
An absolutely despicable organisation that has failed multiple times in its briefing, from improving road safety to facilitating testing, they are an absolute disaster all ends up.
Yet another rollback from this Government when it comes to road safety and transport
They’re not doing anything to fix the problems with it either
They scrapped that plan 😂
Always thought they should have cars that you do the test in a bit like when do lessons it would solve the problem
Some neck on this lot. Massive delays in getting tests at many centres around the country and now this.
Did you read the article? You think that they should be getting into cars without proper insurance cover in place to protect themselves?
Would you be willing to get into 9-10 cars per day with drivers who, by definition, aren't qualified to drive knowing that, if they crash and injure you, you'd be uninsured and you'd have to pay for everything out of your own pocket?
No? Some neck on you.......
Edit:I'm a dope
You can say you that again
Could you repeat that?
Can't read?
It's almost like a private company owning them will only result in making as much profit as possible
Provide students with a fucking test car from the center
A conversation needs to be had a national level at this point.