Category - ADI

8-year Old Driver Nabbed by Police

Simpsons - Spring BreakThis is incredible. An American story via the newsfeeds reports that State Troopers in Louisiana responded to a call from a concerned motorist regarding a pick-up truck being driven erratically on the Interstate (motorway).

When they stopped it, they realised the driver was an 8-year old boy. His 4-year old sister was in the back seat, and his father – Billy Joe Madden – was drunk and asleep in the passenger seat.

The boy was driving from Hattiesburg (Mississippi) to Dallas (Texas). The distance is 490 miles, and would take 8½ hours. I’ll repeat that – 490 miles and 8½ hours!

Half of you wants to laugh at such a bizarre situation. However, the father was arrested on the following counts:

  • child desertion
  • parent allowing minor to drive
  • open container (alcohol)
  • no child restraint (two counts – the boy wasn’t wearing a seatbelt, and the younger girl had no restraint)

The children were handed over to the American social services until a family member could collect them.

Gimme All Your Lovin’

…all your bits and pieces, too! I couldn’t resist that (ZZ Top, if anyone’s wondering).

HeartThe Daily Mail reports that from tomorrow (Sunday?) you can’t get a new driving licence unless you declare whether you will donate your organs or not.

Apparently, critics reckon it is a first step to organ donation becoming compulsory.

I can’t really see what the big deal is. The question has always been there, so now you have to answer it – otherwise it’s the same as not filling in your surname or something: it is void and won’t be processed. The article reckons people often left it blank or “missed it”.

Somehow, it has become a big political issue. Tory MP Peter Bone manages to bamboozle with this statement:

I don’t remember this being discussed in Parliament and what they are saying is, “We’re going to stop you getting something you’re entitled to and ask you about something which is not relevant at all to what you’re applying for”…

It doesn’t apply to everyone. I may not need a new licence, so I won’t answer the question. It’s Big State gone mad.

Uh-huh! But anyway, if ever I see the question on a form, I just fill it in. Easy, really.

Update: Mind you, I’m not convinced by the London Evening Standard’s attempts to associate the issue with the war on Iraq or Libya! A little OTT, I think.

I think it’s up to ME to decide whether I donate my organs or not. Not the London Evening Standard, or anyone else.

Also covered by Sky News, and The Guardian.

Driving Test Results Not Understood by Media

This story is covered by both the Telegraph and the Daily Mail. It makes you wonder how long the DSA can withstand the strain of so many pointless FOI requests by the media.

This one trumpets:

More than 100,000 driving tests nearly ended in a crash [Telegraph}

Emergency stop: 112,000 driving tests almost ended in a crash last year [Daily Mail]

The reality is rather banal. Around 1.5 million tests were conducted, and just under half were passes. So, almost the same as the year before, actually. But the Mail and the Telegraph are trying to work an angle out of it.

Einstein - duhLet me just explain something. When a pupil goes to test, they are allowed to make a maximum of 15 driver errors. A typical driver error might be something like braking a little too harshly, or perhaps steering a bit abruptly. Or it might be passing a parked car a little too closely.

If the pupil keeps repeating the same fault, then the examiner will probably decide that it is serious enough to warrant a fail – so you can’t get all 15 driver faults for the same error.

Likewise, something that might be classed as a driver fault – like not looking over your shoulder before driving off just once when there is no one is coming – could easily become a serious fault if someone IS coming, or even a dangerous fault if someone is right at the side of you. Likewise, getting a bit close to parked cars can easily become serious if it is too close, or dangerous if you clip someone’s mirror.

If the examiner has to use the dual controls, grab the steering wheel, or even verbally correct an error, it is marked under “ETA” (examiner took action) and is a fail.

Much of the time, if a pupil commits a serious or dangerous fault then the examiner has to get involved. You could say that if he didn’t, then an accident of some sort could have been the outcome. This is just the way it is. It’s no big deal.

Except to the media.

The Mail is just about wetting its knickers when it says:

Nearly 112,000 hapless would-be drivers fail their driving tests because they are involved in near misses…

Many crashes were avoided by examiners taking control of the car according to figures released from the Driving Standards Agency (DSA)…

Incorrect use of mirrors led to over 200,000 candidates being failed, with more than 30,000 cases being classified as dangerous…

I’m sorry, but they’re just stating simple facts here. It’s like saying “it’s raining”, and then expecting everyone to scream and take out extra insurance. It isn’t like that.

The Telegraph is not much better:

Figures released by the Driving Standards Agency showed that in many of these cases, a collision was avoided by the examiner taking control of the car…

Their article isn’t as frantic as the Mail’s, but it still acts as if people should be shocked or afraid. They shouldn’t.

The only figures that makes you sit up and take notice are the one about 339 tests in which either the candidate or the examiner was injured, and the one where the examiner was physically or verbally assaulted. The rest is just stuff. Normal stuff.

Aberdeen Man Abuses Examiner

Stuart Low, 42, failed his driving test in Aberdeen, then verbally assaulted the examiner who failed him.

Low – there is a picture of him on this Evening Express link (long since dead) – was fined £80. Hard to read more as this publication is subscription – only.

Lincs Man is Banned, Then Drives Home

It seems that Lincolnshire also has its share of village idiots at the moment.

Sean Baker, 44, had appeared in front of Magistrates in Lincoln over driving with no insurance. The Lincolnshire Magistrates don’t appear to subscribe to the same interpretation of the law as their colleagues on Merseyside and in Lancashire, and banned him for six months.

Baker then left the court and was seen shortly afterwards by the police sergeant who had given evidence against him driving a Ford Ka.

His defence offered:

Mr Baker told me he has no excuse. He drove the car to court and didn’t expect to be disqualified.

Apparently the case was adjourned for probation reports to be compiled. I’d suggest an intelligence test, too.

Bolton Motorist Jailed for Dangerous Driving

I saw this in The Bolton News. Ashley Buckley, 21, was caught driving dangerously TWICE in less than 12 months. Police saw him behind the wheel of a Citroen Saxo – a car favoured by the Prat Men of our society – while he was disqualified from driving (presumably from the first time).

He flung the car around to face oncoming traffic, drove off, and stopped the car to run away. He had pulled off a similar stunt the previous time by driving through red lights (anyone looking to employ a getaway driver should avoid this guy).

The police didn’t need to chase him, because they knew who he was and just went round to his house later to arrest him (Buckley also seems to have the intellignece favoured by his kind).

His defence lawyer said:

He apologises for his stupidity.

Of course he does. Mind you, it is fortunate this was dealt with by the Crown Court (which jailed him for 10 months). If it had been the Magistrates on Merseyside or in Lancashire he would probably have been awarded damages for the stress the police put him under by spotting him, and sent on holiday somewhere.

As it is, he’ll have to wait a bit before trying for Arrest #3.

Driving Licence Points Sky High II

Lionel HutzThe BBC has obviously found a rich vein to suck dry here. They’ve done another FOI request – this time in Lancashire – and found a motorist on 30 points without a ban.

The article has the same Lionel Hutz-type lawyer and the text is more or less identical to that in the Merseyside story.

I’m still going with the common denominator here that it is the worst areas for crime where ridiculous amounts of “discretion” are being applied. The courts seem to think that by not putting these scumbags in prison (or banning them) they’ll somehow turn them into good guys.

The reality is that they’re just taking the piss.

Still Driving at 100!

Anyone who reads this blog regularly will know that I don’t have a lot of time for older drivers who are clearly a risk, and yet keep on driving (or complain if they are banned because of poor eyesight or other problems, as if they have some special right to drive).

When I first saw this in the newsfeeds, I was immediately sceptical – but the lady concerned, Peggy Hovell, doesn’t seem to fit the usual bill.

Even so, I will say what I’ve said before. At 100 years of age, she is a hell of a lot closer to the end than she is to the beginning. So is it safe for her to be on the road when she could – and let’s be honest about it – peg out at any time?

It’s a very tricky question.

Update: And the Daily Mail has got hold of it a few days later than everyone else.

Driving Licence Points Sky High

Driving LicenceAnother freedom of information (FOI) request – by the BBC this time - makes interesting reading. I’m not quite sure why they made the request, though they seem proud of the fact they did.

A driver on Merseyside is apparently happily driving around with 23 points on their licence. Another has 21 - and figures from the DVLA show that 322 people in that area have 12 or more points, yet aren’t banned.

The DVLA has no influence on the sentences given to offenders. The courts are entirely to blame for this ridiculous situation.

What makes this laughable is that the Magistrates’ Association sets out guidelines for imposing sentences for the courts to apply. This apparently includes taking into account the seriousness of the offense and the personal circumstances of the offender.

Manchester lawyer Nick Freeman said it was important that courts have some discretion in how they deal with points cases.

“I think if you take away that discretion then we don’t really need lawyers, we don’t need judges, we don’t need magistrates, we need robots.”

Well, maybe that’s exactly what we need. It’s hardly a good use of “discretion” when the areas most likely to have lunatics engaged in points-gathering activities are the ones most likely to have “discretion” applied like this. The “discretion” is 100% misguided.

One of my pupils’ told me her father had been arrested for being slightly above the drink-drive limit after he stopped to report an accident that he wasn’t involved in. His job depended on his driving licence, and yet he was still banned. Subsequently, the responsibility for driving him fell to my pupil – who was still learning at the time. It then became clear that she was suffering from bipolar disorder (like her mother), and the additional stress of this coupled with her exams was becoming a big problem for her.

Not a lot of discretion shown there, was there?

And yet if she’d lived on Merseyside, it could have all been different.

The problem is, these prats (I think the proper word is “scallys”) just think they can get away with it – and the courts are letting them. I mean, you have to go through four red lights or get caught speeding four times to get 12 points. Isn’t that enough for people to learn about right and wrong?

The courts are allowing twice that to these idiots.

More Driving Test Naïvete

Someone asked on a learner forum what to expect on the driving test. Along the way, another person asked::

Is it unlikely to have the same examiner twice?

They got the answer:

No, I had the same one three times.

At my two test centres, there are around 8-10 examiners working at each. That means you’ve got as high as a 1 in 10 chance of getting the same instructor twice. I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times it has happened, even with pupils who have taken more than 2 tests. It depends on where you are, and what day of the week it is (weekends, only one or two examiners might be working).

Then there is the comment:

You pull out of the test centre, either doing a bay park then or driving for about 10 mins before doing a reverse park, three point turn or reverse round the corner, drive for another ten mins then do independent driving

Not everyone has a test centre you can “pull out of” (one of ours, for example), which means that a bay park is probably not even on the agenda. Even if it is, there is a 50:50 chance the bay park manoeuvre will be done at the end of the test. And if that’s the manoeuvre you’re going to do, you won’t have to do any of the others – except maybe the emergency stop, which is separate and is carried out on a third of all tests. Again, it depends on where you are.

Someone else asks:

How many times do they ask you to pull over?

One reply says that they were asked three times. But for the record, I once had a pupil who was asked to pull over at least 10 times – the examiner explained at the end that it was a near perfect drive, but he just wasn’t checking his blind spots on moving away. He’d given him a lifeline by keep pulling over, but he didn’t cotton on to it, so he failed. On the way back the pupil said:

I couldn’t figure out what was going on. He just kept pulling me over!

I could have killed him. On his previous tests he had not had a single fault for this – on this one he just went nuts. Yet again, there is no set answer: it just depends.

But the best comment so far has to be:

Just check your mirrors like every 2 seconds and check EVERYWHERE before you pull out/do manouvers. I passed before the new rules came into play so i’m not sure what exactly happened, but as for the show me tell me questions, your allowed to write on the parts of the engine what they are (i.e brake fluid, screen wash) and apparently its not cheating. There is a full list of the questions they will ask you online, here’s the one I used: [link removed]

DON’T check your mirrors “like” every 2 seconds. You’ll spend more time looking behind than at what is happening in front.

DON’T write anything under the engine (unless you want them to think you’re a prat from the start). Strange as it may seem, the parts you need to remember have little pictures on them which can take the place of words if you learn what they mean! There are other tell-tale signs:

  • the windscreen washer reservoir has a picture of a windscreen with squirting water on it
  • the engine coolant/radiator fluid reservoir has a hot water symbol on it, and pipes lead to it from the radiator at the front of the car
  • the brake fluid reservoir has a normal brake symbol on it
  • the oil dipstick looks exactly how you expect one to look, and has a ring on the end so you can pull it out

It varies a little from car to car, but not by much. And the other thing to remember is that the test marking sheet has around 50+ tickable items on it. The show-me-tell-me questions are peanuts compared to the rest of it (you only get one fault if you get both of them wrong – though doing so will still make you look like you don’t know what you’re doing), so just learn them and concentrate on driving. Don’t make it harder than it needs to be.

I also shake my head sometimes at answers like this, which strongly suggest the author didn’t have a clue going in. Because the answer is rather simple…

If you want accurate information about the driving test, get it from the DSA – not people who think what happens to them is the only possible way. And your theory test material and driving instructor should cover the questions so they don’t come as a big surprise.