Category - ADI

Driving Examiners to Strike? (2011 Episode)

Union LogicThe PCS Union has worked hard this last year to have its members go out on strike at all costs. It has finally succeeded. Its officials must be wetting themselves with glee now they have finally accomplished what they have been trying to do for at least the last 12 months.

Originally, they were egging on actual DSA staff to strike concerning proposed office relocations. Unfortunately, the relocation plans were shelved and the chance to strike was lost. Unfazed, they simply waited for another opportunity – this time, that old stalwart: teachers.

Sarah Robinson, a PCS branch secretary, has obviously been practising that special rhetoric that makes them sound like a bad Japanese-to-English translation, but which they nevertheless thrive on within unions:

Never before since the 1940s have workers been asked to defend our public services in the way they will in the coming months.

They’re an olive short of a pizza. Always were, always will be.

Anyway, assuming that you live in an area where union membership is more important than food, cigarettes, booze… even life, itself… then you need to keep an eye on the dates these comedians are earmarking for action when you book driving tests.

GDE Matrix Coming via a New Route?

Interesting story in the Saarbrücker Zeitung, reporting that new drivers will have to have a feedback session with a driving instructor three months after gaining their licences.

The story reports:

The Transport Ministry is drawing up the plans following the example of Austria where the sessions serve to remind beginning drivers of what they are supposed to do and to rid them of any bad habits they might be developing.

Austria? That made my ears prick up, for some reason. They were quite involved in the original GDE Matrix report. So was Germany, for that matter.

“Austria has achieved good success with the post-test evaluation teaching concept,” Gero Storjohann, Christian Democratic Union transport expert told the paper.

And evaluation of this sort is typical of what the GDE Matrix/coaching thing lives for.

The problem as I see it is that the Germans appear to be assuming that Austria’s 30% lower death rate among young drivers is purely down to this assessment. That, of course, is complete nonsense.

I wonder if this is how the EU is going to slip coaching into the driver training systems of the various member states?

Northern Ireland Introduces Independent Driving

The BBC reports that from 27 June, candidates sitting the driving test in Northern Ireland will have to complete an independent driving section.

The aim of this is to assess whether the candidates can drive safely whilst making decisions independently.

The entire story is pitched – both by the BBC and Environment Minister, Alex Atwood – as if this has never been done before anywhere else. It makes absolutely no mention of the fact that on the mainland we’ve been doing exactly this since last October. It even appears to be trying to avoid the term “independent driving”. Atwood says:

The change I am launching, while a significant addition to the familiar driving test, should hold no fear for candidates.

Well, bully for him, coming up with this totally “unique” idea.

Still, at least one group representing driving instructors in NI was positive about it. That IS a bit different to what happened over here.

DSA Facilities Management Savings

Soapbox RadicalOooooh! This one will get the little DSA-hating rads out there wet about their nether regions!

According to this press release, the DSA has signed a 4-year deal with Interserve for the servicing and maintenance of their sites – a total of 439 properties across the UK. The Dft and VOSA is also included in this deal.

The deal apparently reduces costs by up to 40 per cent of their current value.

The only part which worries me is the fact that it includes switchboard and helpdesk answering services. I hope this doesn’t include bookings.

The reason I say that is that I have direct experience of one such management service provider (Capita) taking over tech support for a large technical product supplier (PC World). In the end, it was like buying a fox to guard your chickens – it seemed cute, but it got ugly very quickly.

Worst Winter on Record Coming?

This article is from 2011, so it is very old. However, someone says the same thing every years, so you can just insert whatever year you like into it.

I saw this scaremongering story from ChoiceQuote – an online insurance website.

ATS Euromaster is advising all drivers to pre-order cold-weather tyres for protection against heavy snow and freezing temperatures. Roughly translated, this means “we don’t want to overstock, but we want to increase sales, too. So we’ll start early this year.” ATS goes on to say it could have sold last year’s stock several times over. Well, yes, because it didn’t have significant stocks (no UK supplier ever has – cold-weather tyres are a new fad over here) and the weather caught everyone out.

Then, they’ve got some weather forecaster predicting unsafe driving conditions…

…during what could be the worst winter on record.

The forecaster is from an organisation called Exacta. A quick look at their website reveals this:

Exacta Weather is a non-profit weather organisation that comprises a team of meteorologists from around the world, who share and supply their data and research with Exacta Weather. All the forecast information they provide is on a purely voluntary basis, they simply have a passion for weather and offer proven track records in accurate long range and seasonal weather forecasting. Exacta Weather will also bring you all the latest weather news from around the globe, which also currently includes long range weather forecasts for the UK, Northern Europe, and the USA.

[Paypal donation button here]

Exacta Weather is a FREE long range weather service that does not charge for forecasts or receive any government funding. Any donations towards operating costs will be highly appreciated.

The key elements here are a “passion” for the weather and the fact that they don’t receive any government funding. It means they’re no more likely to hit the mark than some crazy bloke with seaweed hanging up in his garage, and that they probably consist… of a bunch of crazy people with seaweed hanging up in their garages! I’m not sure if the “data” they obtain are from the organisations they work for (in which case those organisations and their supercomputers will be better able to use those data), or self-generated (back to the seaweed again).

So, in summary, it is two companies feathering their nests by gambling on something for which the outcome cannot be predicted, by scaremongering.

I have a prediction for the winter. It will be generally colder than summer, it might be wet, and it may or may not snow heavily at some point.

EDIT 31/8/2011: Someone wrote to me today to point out that Exacta is a reputable company which has “predicted the last two harsh winters accurately”.

I can’t find the old forecasts so I can’t really comment on those pertaining to the last two winters. Weather forecasters have a habit of making sure that their forecasts look right, and old ones that are wrong tend not to hang around for people to see. However, I did point out that one of their forecasters said of this summer:

It would be adequate to suggest below average temperatures in terms of how I calculate solar activity in my forecasts, so it looks like a summer of grey skies and damp weather, and it’s probably safe to say that there will be no BBQ summer again this year”.

I also issued a warning for torrential downpours and severe flooding.

As I pointed out to the reader, that could be ANY summer. And it’s debatable whether we have actually had a “summer of grey skies and damp weather”. Up this way, it’s been mild with few downpours, and there have been hot spells. Nothing at all like the summer we had three or four years ago – where it really did flood.

So, although I take his point, my scepticism of weather forecasting remains – and any suggestion of a forthcoming harsh winter stands a 50% chance of being right. O h yeah. And if the Met Office and NASA can’t get it 100% right, then no one can – no matter how well-meaning they are.

I also maintain my original stance: that ATS – a major supplier of tyres in the UK – has its own interests at heart.

EDIT 30/9/2011: It has been absolutely bloody boiling these last three days – records being broken for the time of year – and it looks like continuing for several days yet. That certainly didn’t appear in any of the long-range forecasts while they were still long range. However, I note that the information is creeping in as part of those forecasts now we’re actually experiencing it, so I wouldn’t be surprised if someone claimed next year that it was forecast.

Speed Awareness Course Cutbacks

I saw this story in The Blackburn Citizen. Apparently, speed awareness courses – these are where people who have been caught speeding can avoid points on their licences by attending the course – no longer involve a driving element. It’s now all classroom based.

I love the part where they say it is to “cut costs and improve results”.

How will it improve results? The article doesn’t actually say, so you have to do a little bit of surmising and reading between the lines.

According to the council, research by the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) is set to be released which suggests that motorists are not benefiting enough from the [practical] driving lessons to justify the cost and time.

It’s hard to see how a practical element – delivered properly, of course – would be of less value than a theoretical element. It’s even harder to see how a purely theoretical approach is, in any shape or form, going to get the message across that speeding is wrong if people don’t already know it (which they do, of course).

On[e] 52-year-old from Chorley, who was caught doing 37mph in a 30mph zone, said he was disappointed not to do the driving on a recent course…

…“But I had been looking forward to the practical element…”

I’ll just point out that if he was “caught doing 37mph” then his speedo would have been showing something closer to 45mph. So rather than being booked on to a speed awareness course he should have been undergoing medical tests to confirm that he wasn’t too stupid to possess a driving licence. He could easily book refresher lessons in his own time if he genuinely acknowledges he is a bad driver, and wasn’t just trying to avoid points (possibly taking him over the limit, of course. The article doesn’t go into that kind of detail) on his licence.

Then there are the inevitable comments to the online story. One, from Chris P Bacon, of Colne, writes:

Anyone stupid enough to pay good money to be dictated to by a load of no-marks wanting to throw around their (non-existent) weight needs to be pitied. If you are foolish enough to infringe a minor driving regulation and even more foolish to get caught, cough the fine and take the points.

This is proof that speed awareness courses don’t work. People with this sort of idiotic attitude are never going to learn. Chris P Bacon obviously thinks that doing 45mph (on your speedo) when it is a 30mph zone is a “minor” issue. Then there is another one from bacupbabe, of Bacup:

I would imagine that all the driving instructors who were employed to do the driving part of the course are now down at the dole. I think dropping the driving part of the course was a good idea. I went on one of these courses to avoid the points. I found the theory part of the test very helpful but the patronising preaching from the driving instructor got on my nerves.

See what I mean? They shouldn’t have licences, and the police are nuts to think that these wishy-washy courses are going to change people who have the intellects of grass.

But going back to the ACPO statement that the practical element wasn’t having any benefits, there is another comment from someone right at the bottom in reply to bacupbabe. It says:

It was suggested, when this scheme first came in, that competent instructors were difficult to find and only those who couldn’t hack it were taken on.

I suspect that this one may be much closer to the mark, because it dovetails with what ACPO has said.

Serves Her Right!

BreathalyzerJenna Pavis, a 27-year old trainee hairdresser from Acomb, has been banned for 2 years for drink-driving in an uninsured car fast at 1am in the morning. She was 2½ times the legal limit.

The usual sob stories came out in court. Apparently, it’s totally out of character. She had 8 years’ no claims bonus (yep. Everyone does until they get caught). She’d had an argument with her boyfriend. And the insurance problem was due to a standing order issue between bank and insurance company which she’d been meaning to get sorted, but which had resulted in the policy being cancelled (after running that through the linguistics computer, it translates as “probably couldn’t afford the payments”).

Apparently, she’d planned to become a mobile hairdresser. So much for that idea.

When you listen to the defence in all these cases, you are forced to conclude that everyone who ever breaks the law is a decent person who never does this sort of thing. The reality is almost certainly that many of the people involved are likely to be doing this sort of thing regularly but just haven’t been caught before.

Learning to Drive by Cutting Corners?

This is a very old article. DSA is now DVSA.

Here’s an interesting article from Tiger.co.uk (site no longer exists), reviewing the cost of getting on the road for new drivers.

It points out the following:

The Driving Standards Agency suggest that it is very unlikely that anyone except an approved driving instructor will have the knowledge and experience necessary to teach learner drivers properly. Research conducted by the agency shows that the average number of professional lessons required to pass a test is 47, along with 20 hours of private practice with someone who has held their driving licence for at least 3 years and is over the age of 21.

According to the AA driving school the average cost of a driving lesson in the UK currently is £24, which makes the prospect of having to afford 47 quite expensive; particularly among a group who are already being hit by increased education fees and a pressurised job market.

Tiger (now defunct)

It goes on to say that there is a “worrying trend” to ignore the DSA’s advice and to try to learn without “professional” help in order to save money.

Tiger then summarises typical costs involved in going from novice to on-the-road (likely to be higher for some males, and assuming first time passes):

  • provisional licence – £50
  • lessons – £1,128
  • learner insurance – £256
  • test fees – £106
  • used car – £1,350
  • road tax – £130
  • insurance – £2,431

This amounts to £5,451, of which driving lessons represent 20% of the overall outlay.

What the article fails to mention, though, is that if someone is given poor training then they won’t usually pass. Some will, but most won’t – so they end up having to take lessons anyway, make multiple attempts at the test, and the overall cost usually ends up higher than if they’d done it properly in the first place.

And there is something else that Tiger (and the DSA, and the AA) has missed. Not all instructors are equal – in more ways than one.

I’ve just picked up a new pupil. When I enquired about her driving experience, she told me she’d had 14 hours with an instructor, but she wasn’t happy with how well she was progressing so she wanted a new trainer. She told me she hadn’t done any of the manoeuvres, and had just driven around on lessons. I concluded that she could probably drive quite well, so I’d begin introducing a couple of manoeuvres once I’d checked out her driving.

On her first lesson she couldn’t even get the car moving without stalling. She’d never had the clutch explained to her, never done any clutch control exercises, and – it turned out from the look of terror on her face when I moved out on to a main road – never driven on proper roads!

When I questioned her on this, it seems that her instructor often turned up late, picked her up and drove her to a location, let her drive for an hour, then drove her back home – usually finishing early. She was paying for 2 hour lessons, but getting little more than 1 hour of driving much of the time. Seven lessons of this – and around £300 of her money – she’d gotten wise. But many don’t.

The thing is, there is nothing wrong with her driving. In one 2 hour lesson I got her doing a turn in the road to the point where all she has to do is practice it, discovered that she is a natural reverse steerer for the corner reverse exercise, and introduced the parallel park. On her second lesson, which was just an hour, we did clutch control exercises on a hill and she was able to drive in slow traffic and move off at junctions without stalling.

After 14 hours, she should have already covered most of that, and definitely how to move off properly, because she was easily capable of learning it. Instead, she’d been taught to find the bite before/without gas and work the rest out for herself (she doesn’t know if she’d been using diesel or not, but I have my suspicions).

So Tiger (and the DSA, and the AA) need to be careful not to gloss over these sorts of problems. They’re far more common than many would like to believe. Not all “professionals” are professional, and some parents are capable of doing an infinitely better than some instructors.

Which Test Centre is Easiest?

Note that this is an old article, and the test centres in Nottingham have changed. We now (in 2022, and since 2018) have Colwick, Chilwell, and Watnall. Chalfont Drive closed down several years ago.

A reader asked this interesting question about test centres. It is also a common search term used to find the blog.

In Nottingham we have two test centres – Colwick MPTC and Chalfont Drive. Colwick replaced the original Gedling and West Bridgford centres, and it was the first one to include the bay parking exercise.

The commencement of tests at Colwick was precisely the time when the rumour started that Chalfont Drive test centre was easier, and that rumour persists to this day. But why?

The bay park really was at the heart of the matter. It caught many instructors out – they didn’t know how to teach it – and there was a mass exodus to Chalfont to avoid having to do so. The waiting times there increased dramatically – at one point it was over 8 weeks compared with less than a fortnight at Colwick. People might not believe this, but it is true.

Another “problem” with Colwick was the test centre itself. The entrance is a long driveway with a sharp dog-leg bend. Traffic is single file on this bend, and there is a priority Give Way in favour of those leaving the centre. In the first few months it was so bad that the centre manager had to send out a letter explaining to instructors how to use it! More than one had taught their pupils to keep left, resulting in close – very close – encounters with the fence. On one occasion not long after it opened, tests had to be cancelled because a learner got their car lodged on the gates!

Colwick MPTC is also slap in the middle of an industrial estate, and during the day there are quite a few lorries driving around it.

A lot of ADIs also opposed Colwick just on principle. It was the old story of resentment towards change. Gedling and West Bridgford were in nightmare locations – in busy town centres with almost no parking and, just before their closure, council-bred traffic wardens camping outside just to slap tickets on learner cars.But people were familiar with them, and whinged openly about the extra mileage (Colwick is 3.5 miles from West Bridgford and 2.9 miles from Gedling).

Putting all this together – resenting change and trying to justify it, not being able to handle bay park, lorries, or the nasty entrance – ADIs had to sell their new-found preference for Chalfont to their pupils. And that’s where the rumours started.

Well, let’s take a look at the facts. This link [out of date, so removed] provides some actual data concerning pass rates at both test centres (and all others in the UK). At the time of writing Colwick actually has a higher pass rate than Chalfont, but the difference is statistically insignificant and for all practical purposes Colwick has the same pass rate as Chalfont.

Do they do bay parking at Chalfont Drive test centre?

Short answer, “no”. However, it is still on the syllabus and if Chalfont examiners suddenly had somewhere to do it, then they could ask a candidate to do it on their test – and technically they wouldn’t have to give anyone advanced warning.

A good ADI will teach his pupils how to bay park because they’re going to have to do it once they pass their tests. A good learner won’t be trying to choose which test centre to do their test at based on avoiding the bay park.

To be honest, the bay park is probably the easiest manoeuvre of the lot! The only people who think otherwise are those who can’t teach it, and those who are hung up about anything to do with “parking” and having other cars next to them.

Learn how to do it, then it doesn’t matter whether Chalfont does it or not.

Note that this is an old article, and the test centres in Nottingham have changed. We now (in 2022, and since 2018) have Colwick, Chilwell, and Watnall. Chalfont Drive closed down several years ago.

Driving Tests Rigged… Quotas?

A reader sent me this link to a story in This Is Croydon Today.

To start with, it’s yet another freedom of information (FOI) muck-raking exercise by a second-rate journalist in a third-rate newspaper (The Croydon Advertiser). It appears to be a case of monkey-see-monkey-do, as they have copied exactly what a load of other cheap local rags have done and looked to see if anyone in the area has taken a large number of tests before finally passing (they found one: 23 attempts).

In the absence of anything else worth writing about along these lines, they have then made an apparent attempt to suggest that DVSA is trying to fulfil quotas by suggesting that learners are more likely to fail at the end of the month than at the beginning. The hack responsible bases this, and all his other claims, on test results for a single 3-month period covering October-December 2010. But then they go on to say:

Pass rates at both centres were highest in the middle of the month (between the 11th and 20th) and lowest at the end (on or after the 21st), with a five per cent gap in success at the Croydon test centre, in Canterbury Road, Broad Green.

Well, excuse me a minute. If they are highest in the middle, that suggests they are lower at the beginning as well as the end. Not just the end, as the article suggests.

AbacusThere are lies, damned lies, and reporters who haven’t got a clue about statistics – but who still go ahead and try to interpret them. This unnamed reporter is a prime example.

I wrote in this article (September 2010) that examiners DO NOT have quotas to fulfil. However, whether or not individual examiners set themselves quotas so they don’t deviate from the local average is another matter entirely. I’m sure some of them do it, but it doesn’t affect the overall situation that much.

As I’ve said before, if an examiner is doing their job properly then they will have a pass rate that is close to the average without having to try to fudge it. If they ARE fudging it, then the internal system the DVSA is using will eventually sniff it out because they clearly AREN’T doing their jobs properly. The way for that to happen is if people appeal when they disagree with a result.

But having said that, the reasons for failure are pretty straightforward. Yes, there are hard routes and easier ones, but pupils manage to screw up big time on the easy ones often enough, so it stands to reason they will screw up even more on the harder ones. I can honestly say I have never disagreed with a result, and only a handful of my hundreds of pupils have – and even then, I didn’t: they made a genuine mistake and failed for it.

These idiots who don’t understand statistics seem to expect the pass rate to be 100% all of the time. One single fail and they’re over it like a rash.

The only thing I would say is that some examiners play it by the book, whereas others use a bit of commonsense. So a pupil who brushes the kerb when turning left might get automatically failed by the rigid examiner, no matter how good the rest of the drive was. The sensible examiner might reason that the rest of the drive was good so he’ll overlook that particular fault.

Do driving examiners fail people deliberately?

The short answer is NO. They do not. They are not told to fail people as part of any quota.

However, there are corrupt people in all walks of life, and as I explained above, it is possible that some examiners – a tiny percentage – fiddle their pass rates in order to avoid being “told off” by their managers.

Do examiners “fix” test results?

No.