On the Chilwell Test Centre routes, there is one particular road which causes problems for pupils.
It’s a very narrow road called Baskin Lane, and is only a couple of minutes away from the test centre. What makes it tricky for pupils is that to negotiate it you have to do a right turn on to Chetwynd Road from High Road/Attenborough Lane (a blind bend), then Baskin Lane is an immediate right turn after that. There is usually at least one parked car on Chetwynd Road, parked directly opposite Baskin, and several parked on the right as you enter Baskin itself. There’s a 50:50 chance that someone will be coming out of Baskin past these parked cars. At the top of Baskin, pupils turn right or left on to Redland Drive, and this is on a moderately steep slope where rollback can occur if they get it wrong.
It’s important that pupils are familiar with this road, and to that end I took one down there for the first time this afternoon. I talked her through the initial right turn, then got her to slow right down to look into Baskin Lane to see if anyone was coming down it towards us. They were, so we stopped. However, as we waited, a twat in a blue Nissan Micra (reg. no. NU53 SZZ) decided to try and overtake us. As a result, he nearly collided head on with the car that we were waiting for, had to reverse back out to make way for it, then overtook us again before we could move.
What he did was stupid, dangerous, and illegal. And if the Police are interested – which they really ought to be – he apparently lives on Forester Close, part-way up Baskin Lane, since that’s where he turned into. The image above is frame from my dashcam footage, so his idiotic actions are preserved for posterity, and mean that the twat has no argument if he should take exception to me reporting it.
Remember: Blue Nissan Micra, registration number NU53 SZZ, driven by a halfwit who appears to live on Forester Close, just off Baskin Lane.
I’ve mentioned before that the blog is an outlet for my frustrations as a result of this job. This is a perfect example! I feel much better now.
A couple of days ago, I updated my article on Driving Tests and Lesson in Snow after someone found the blog due to their instructor claiming he wasn’t covered to drive in icy conditions.
Cancelling lessons because it is dangerous is fine, but I am not aware of any insurance policy which would preclude driving. I didn’t think much of it after I’d updated the article – but then I came across this story. It seems that some moron on Twitter started the rumour, and other morons have picked it up and run with it.
Police and insurers have assured people that insurance is valid even in the worst weather conditions. Obviously, the same rules apply in bad weather as they do in good weather. Namely, if you drive like a twat and have an accident, your insurance may be affected.
It is possible that the original reader’s instructor had also seen this story and been suckered by it.
They will only be allowed on with a qualified ADI, and the car they are in must be fitted with dual controls.
It’s worth emphasising that: you cannot go on the motorway with mum, dad, Kyle (who passed before you), or anyone else who hasn’t got a green ADI badge stuck in the window. This means PDIs – trainee driving instructors with pink badges – also cannot take learners on motorways.
No one should worry just yet. With such organisations as the RAC and Brake poking their oars in, each with its own preferred set of restrictions, any changes are unlikely to happen at all – let alone quickly. Add to that the fact that this was raised in Prime Minister’s Questions, and all that Theresa May has said is she’ll “look into it”, and the likely date of implementation is well over the horizon.
If it happens, Theresa May won’t still be PM. That you can be certain of.
I don’t have an issue with some form of graduated licence. If it were up to me, no one would be allowed to drive an Audi or BMW (ever), any car with any sort of modification, or when wearing a baseball cap or hoodie until they’re at least 30 and have taken an IQ test to show that they’re smarter than, say, a squirrel.
Anyone who is learning to drive now can forget about it affecting them. Remember that some time this year, learners are supposedly going to be allowed on motorways with ADIs (driving instructors). This was announced officially in August 2017, following “government proposals” in January 2017. There was a consultation circulated in December 2016. But this was the fulfilment of something that started back in 2011, which announced that learners were going to be allowed on motorways in 2012. A total of well over 7 years.
And we still don’t know when in 2018 it will happen. It requires an Act of Parliament to implement, and there is no sign of this happening. The government managed to get itself voted into a minority at the last election, Brexit is causing more and more headaches for an increasingly aged-looking May (the worst of these being Boris Johnson), and autonomous electric vehicles will apparently be the norm from sometime next summer (if you believe some of the crap that gets written).
Anyone due to take their first driving test in the new format, a bit of advice.
make sure you can handle roundabouts and multi-lane junctions competently when following satnav instructions
make sure you can do it on roundabouts and junctions you may not have driven on before
The satnav gives instructions differently from the verbal instructions your instructor or an examiner might have previously given. Whereas you might previously have been asked to “turn right, third exit, follow the signs towards Nottingham [or whatever], the satnav will say something like “go around the roundabout, third exit, A52 [or whatever]”.
Although the examiner might give some limited guidance in some situations, you need to be able to use the satnav display and any road signs to work out where you want to go. In a way, you have got to construct the old-style instruction in your head from the new-style one.
All the manoeuvres (edit: a reader points out that the reverse bay park is still done only at the test centre) can now be done away from the test centre, and that means the test can travel further before having to head back. Some of the routes are MUCH longer than any of the ones from pre-December 2016. Consequently, if your instructor doesn’t know about them, you may not have driven on many of the roads and roundabouts.
The new test is actually easier than the old one if you look at it objectively. However, the details above mean that SOME people will inevitably find it harder.
I’m going to do another article about the satnav, and I’ll add a link to it on this one once I’ve written it. Here it is.
Every year now, I make a concerted effort to fill my diary up to the rafters in the weeks running up to and during Christmas. I do this because I know from past experience that – without fail – as soon as Christmas starts to bite, people are going to start cancelling due to “illness”.
I don’t mind so much if they’re honest with me, but in the vast majority of cases any “illness” is simply a front for wanting to go Christmas shopping, do overtime, get pissed, recover from being pissed the night before, or to save money at this expensive time of year. Over-filling my diary means I still have a relatively decent amount of work remaining. This year has been better than most so far, but in the last two weeks I’ve had at least half a dozen last-minute cancellations and two no-shows (followed by profuse apologies, and claims of mortal illness).
Unfortunately, it is a sign of the times. With every year that passes, the trend is for people to get lazier and more dishonest. Which is probably why companies like Wagamama have strict working policies. Don’t get me wrong, I’m totally against zero-hours contracts (they cost me a small fortune over a typical year if I have teenage pupils who work at McDonalds), and Wagamama’s apparent rule that you have to get someone to cover for you if you can’t get in stinks to high heaven. But I guess it is one way of managing lazy, lying scumbags you’re unfortunate enough to have working for you.
No calling in sick! may I remind you that if you are unable to come for your shift it is your responsibility to find somebody to cover your shift (as per contract and handbook). Calling in sick during the next 2 weeks will result in disciplinary action being taken
Naturally. Wagamama’s head office as distanced itself from the message. The Unite Hospitality union, of course, has more to say:
To threaten workers with disciplinary action for being sick is not just morally reprehensible, it may be unlawful under the Health and Safety Act and Equality Act as it discriminates against those with long-term physical or mental health conditions.
The irony in the fact that the message targets lazy liars, whereas the union supports them, is lost on Unite Hospitality.
This is an old article from 2010, but it’s had a run of hits recently, and I have updated it to make sure it is current.
Someone has found the blog several times on the search term “abandoned tests”. I’m not exactly sure what they were looking for, but here’s a bit of information that is probably relevant.
I’ve had several abandoned tests in my career as an ADI. No matter how you look at it, they are embarrassing for you and traumatic for your pupil. One of them was around 2006 – the candidate tried to drive into a No Entry street leading off a roundabout after being told to “follow the road”.
When I discussed it with him afterwards he said that all that was going through his mind was “go straight ahead unless told otherwise” and that he’d seen the signs, but that instruction just ended up taking precedence in his head. He had been one of those learners who takes things in very slowly, even though he was a very intelligent lad (very good at Maths, and went on to study it at University). Once he’d made the error, he just lost it and the examiner pulled him over and abandoned the test. I had to walk about ¾ mile to find him where the examiner had stopped the car. He passed his test soon afterwards.
Another one was in 2008. That pupil was extremely slow, and although he was up to test standard, I don’t think his mind was ever going to be able to stay there. He got the Bay Park exercise right at the start of his test, and finished just on the line (which isn’t an automatic fail). He leaned out the door and said to the examiner “have I failed?”, and the examiner replied “I’ll tell you at the end”. Unfortunately, his mind was so one-tracked he was still thinking about the Bay Park when he attempted to drive into the gate at the end of the Test Centre driveway. The examiner abandoned it there and then, less than 5 minutes in, and about 5 metres outside the test centre. I vividly remember the examiner asking “is he on anything?”
In another example from 2013, a very nervous pupil made a simple mistake – and one which might not have been a test fail in the first place – but then cracked up and couldn’t continue. She was hysterical from what the examiner told me. She passed easily the 2nd time (which I had expected her to do the 1st).
And my most recent one was 2017, with another nervous pupil who had found learning difficult. The test hit her so badly that she pretty much forgot how to drive (I was sitting in on that one). She took further lessons with me and passed second attempt.
Although you always blame yourself, you can’t control what a candidate does when they are out there with the examiner. It all depends on what kind of people they are. All you can do is teach them as well as you possibly can.
In a nutshell, when an examiner abandons a test, he/she will typically leave the pupil with the car and inform you of the location when they get back to the centre (that was correct when I originally wrote this). Nowadays (2023 edit), they will always try to get back to the test centre unless the driving is so dangerous that would be a problem.
Sometimes (from what I’ve been told), the examiner might walk back with the pupil and have a chat. If you’re sitting in, you can take the examiner back to the test centre. The examiner cannot supervise a learner due to insurance cover, which is why he cannot bring them back once the test is terminated and the candidate becomes a learner again. Having said that, the examiners up here will make every effort to take the test to its conclusion back at the centre, and they will even dissuade candidates from terminating tests as long as there is no danger to them or the public.
Look at the date this was first published! It’s an old, old post! CCL definitely IS part of the Part 3 test in 2019.
A few years ago, on a now-defunct forum, one of the resident fossils took issue with comments I had made on the page where I provide the PST marking sheets for download. It was around the time DVSA (or DSA, as it then was) introduced CCL (client-centred learning) as part of the expected skills of an ADI. I had pointed out that since the Standards Check was going to be looking for evidence of CCL, and since learners were being taught using it, at some point the same approach would have to be used for ADI qualification on the Part2 and 3 tests.
My only point at the time was to indicate that once I had access to the necessary marking sheets for the new test, then I would make them available.
DVSA announced in 2016 that the Part 3 test would indeed be changing – an outcome so obvious that I can take no credit whatsoever for predicting it several years earlier. However, DVSA is not renowned for its efficiency or constancy, and although I cannot now recall the precise sequence of events (i.e. delays) to the change since its announcement, this latest email indicates that they still haven’t got the necessary Parliamentary approval, and the proposed start date of “late October” has been put back yet again.
No dates are given, but since any ADI with a test booked needs to be aware of what is happening, it would be logical to assume that the best-estimate start date for the new test has got to be at least as far away as the current longest waiting time between booking and taking a test. In other words, several months – and that’s several months from the date Parliamentary approval is gained, which may not be for several months in itself!
In short, don’t expect the new Part 3 testing regime to come into effect until 2018 (that’s my estimate). At least 2018 (that’s my cynicism).
Fair enough, I could be wrong, and they might get approval tomorrow [edit: they didn’t]. It came into effect in 2018], but I doubt it. Taking the Part 3 is stressful enough for people as it is. Knowing that the test was changing will have meant they will have been trained specifically for it, so to be told that it’s old-style PSTs is really going to screw them up.
On the one hand, it’s all the government’s fault for being so inefficient. But on the other hand, DVSA should not have announced a semi-specific start date before Parliamentary approval had been gained. It was obvious that it simply wasn’t going to happen to a fixed timescale.
It also makes me wonder when learners will finally be allowed on motorways. [edit: they are now – since June 2018 – anyway]. That also needs Parliamentary approval, and back in August it was expected “in 2018” (the ‘first half’ being implied). At this rate we’ll be lucky if it happens during the current government, which takes us right back to where we were before.
And these are the same twats trying to take us out of Europe. Make up a suitable sentence using the words “piss”, “up”, and “brewery”.
…a new team of dedicated Approved Driving Instructor (ADI) examiners, who’ll be conducting ADI qualifying tests and standards checks 5 days a week.
No dates or timings, no names, no locations. Just this email.
I’m not sure what to make of it just yet. Most of the stuff this “team” is going to do I could already obtain from my test centre if I simply phoned up (or went in) and asked. I don’t like being cynical towards DVSA, but this has all-cost-and-no-gain written all over it. And it uses the word “team”, which is never good.
I originally wrote this way back in 2010, and it was only a simple couple of paragraphs thrown out following a search term used to find the blog. Since then, I get periodic hits on the same search term: driving examiners are arseholes. I had another today.
Assuming that it’s a candidate who is searching, the lack of a question format suggests they are seeking like-minded people to rant with, rather than to actually ask if examiners are arseholes. The person using the term probably thinks they’ve been hard done by on their test after having failed, and is seeking to blame the examiner – quite possibly, in my own experience, in spite of ample evidence from their drive that the examiner was right.
On the other hand, it isn’t beyond the realms of possibility that it is an instructor who has taken exception to one of his pupils failing their test. I’ve seen more than one take to a forum to vent their anger at a test fail they disagreed with (at least two in the last month [in 2010]).
Examiners are not arseholes.
The purpose of the driving test is to ensure that a candidate meets the bare minimum requirement to be allowed out on the roads unsupervised. The pass ‘mark’ is actually quite low, which means that anything below it is going to result in a fail. That’s the way it is, and nothing the candidate or instructor can do is going to change it.
If you don’t check your mirrors a few times when you should have, you will accrue faults, but miss them one time too many and you will fail. You will fail if you miss the check even once if there is someone behind or alongside you. The same is true of blind spot checks, and observations at junctions. You will get away with poor checks up to a point, but if it’s obvious you have a problem in this area you will get a serious fault (and if there’s someone behind or coming towards you, you will fail immediately).
You’re expected to stop at amber or red traffic lights. If you could have done safely, but don’t, you will fail. Furthermore, you’re expected to understand how traffic lights work – green filter arrows, etc. – and if you sit there holding up traffic when you should be moving off, then you’ll fail for that, too. If you completely miss traffic lights, or drive in such a way that it looks like you have, you will fail.
If you don’t stay in lane – demonstrate good “lane discipline” – you will accrue faults. If you weave across lanes when someone is behind you, you will fail. If you don’t realise you are doing it – and let’s face facts here, if you knew, you wouldn’t be – you will fail. If you change lanes without checking your mirrors first, and signalling if necessary, you will fail.
If you pull out in front of someone, you will fail. If you did it because you thought you “could make it”, you have no excuse whatsoever. If you stall you will accrue faults, and one stall too many will result in a fail. If you cause a hold up by stalling even once, you will almost certainly fail for that alone.
If the speed limit is 30mph, it doesn’t mean you can drive at 40 and expect to get away with it. Anything illegal is a fail. And if the speed limit is 60mph and the road is clear, doing 30 is causing a hold up and you’ll fail for driving like that. You need to see the road signs, and be confident enough to drive according to what they tell you.
If you drive too fast for given situations, you are going to accrue faults. If you approach a junction or a bend too fast, or slow down too late, if the examiner uses the brake because you haven’t, you will fail. Even if you think you were going to brake, if you were too late you will fail. Harsh braking will accrue faults, and one time too many will get you a fail. Do it in front of someone and you’ll fail immediately.
If you don’t stop at a STOP junction – and I mean stop absolutely dead – you will fail. It is illegal not to stop at these, and slowing to a crawl, no matter how slow it is, is NOT stopping.
If you mangle the gears every time you change them, you will accrue faults. If you use the wrong gear you will accrue faults. Do it one time to many and you will fail. Do it once at the wrong time – going into 1st when you wanted 3rd in moving traffic, for example – and you will fail.
This list is by no means complete. But the bottom line is that if you do any of those things and fail your test, it is because of your poor driving skills – not because the examiner is an arsehole.