ADI - Diary Of An ADI

Learner Driver “Panicked” And Caused 70mph Police Chase

10/06/2013

Michael (or Mitchell, in some stories) Gough, 24, had his driving test booked. According to his story to the courts, his mother’s car had broken down and she was unable to take him to his test, so he decide to drive there himself in a BMW.

For reasons which haven’t been explained, the plates on his BMW (it doesn’t say whose car this was… EDIT: apparently it was a high-powered BMW, and it belonged to Gough) were actually the ones for his father’s Fiat (that isn’t explained, either). A police patrol car flagged this discrepancy up to the officers within, so the officers tried to flag Gough down. When they asked him to open the door he floored it and embarked upon a 70mph chase through 30mph zones. He ended up smashing into a parked car, and was caught as he tried to do a runner.

This specimen’s lawyer explained that:

…his actions were out of character: “[Gough] was very anxious to take his test. When he was stopped he made a decision which was totally out of character – it is baffling that he behaved this way,” adding that his decision to drive away from police was, “foolish”.

Let’s just recap what Gough was guilty of:

driving whilst uninsured
failing to stop for the police
driving on false plates
breaking the speed limit
being involved in an accident due to his own dangerous driving
attempting to leave the scene of an accident
trying to resist arrest

For someone who was acting “out of character” he sure chose a good way to experiment, didn’t he? The report continues:

It’s not yet clear why the number plates had been swapped over, but we do know it was a police search for a stolen BMW in the area that lead to police attempting to pull him over.

So there is also the suspicion of a stolen the car with false plates being used for the proposed driving test!

So, Gough hasn’t passed his test and yet he owns a “high-powered” BMW. It had as-yet unexplained false plates that alerted the police. Gough was prepared to drive off (and if he knew he had false plates, that provides something of a more valid reason than the pathetic “out of character” claim by his lawyer). He leapt from the car while it was still moving – a favoured skill of the car thief – to try and run away (you don’t do that without having had practice). The photograph of him shows him wearing a hoodie and with what looks like a fag cupped in his hand. He has been banned for 30 months and given a suspended prison sentence.

Unfortunately, it appears that he is a father. God help the kid with a role model like this to look up to.

On The Subject Of Careless Driving (And Old Drivers)…

10/06/2013

DOAADI

ADI, Bad Drivers, News

This story reports how James Sims, a 93-year old driver, has been banned from driving for 6 months after he hit the gas pedal instead of the brake, and continued to do so. He shot across a busy road, narrowly missed a cyclist, and crashed through a park fence. Tests carried out by the police at the time of the accident showed that he also had defective eyesight (i.e. he failed the eyesight test).

PC Andy Sumner of Chelmsford Road Policing Unit, said: “Essex Police are dealing with more instances where motorists are driving after a point in their life when they are not fit to do so through mobility, reactions, eye sight, or the combination of medications…”

The six-month ban is a joke – he should be banned permanently. However, the court has ruled that he must pass an ordinary driving test in order to regain his licence, so in some respects it is perhaps as good as a lifetime ban. But on the other hand, there are some unfortunate souls out there with ADI badges who “specialise” in putting this kind of person on the road in the first place. And that makes you wonder who is the real guilty party when some old or infirm drivers have accidents.

In a completely separate, but almost identical incident, a 92-year old driver, Ernest Glover, was killed when he shot out of a private road and forced a collision involving another vehicle. Police have concluded that he, too, hit the wrong pedal.

PC [David] Pygott said this involuntary acceleration was common in elderly people driving cars with automatic gears, as Mr Glover had been.

There is more than just coincidence involved here. Fortunately, and unlike in the Cassie McCord case, and the Neil Colquhoun tragedy, no innocent party was killed. But there are numerous other examples of harm caused by these elderly fools. Far too many examples, in fact.

It’s obvious that this serious problem with elderly drivers just won’t go away. And it makes you wonder when something sensible is going to be done about it instead of allowing the bleeding hearts to get their own way all the time.

DSA: Motorway Tailgating And Middle Lane Hogging Crackdown

05/06/2013

DOAADI

ADI, Bad Drivers, DSA, News

This came through via the DSA newsfeed, although it has been covered by all the main media today. The problem is that no one in the media (or anywhere else) seems to quite understand what it is they’re getting themselves all excited about. The BBC headlines the story by referring to “middle-lane hoggers” only, but tailgating is also involved.

Let’s just clarify what “middle-lane hogging” is, because the Audi drivers out there have already convinced themselves that this is going to keep at least two lanes open for their sole use in future. If you’re driving at 70mph on the motorway in the middle lane you are not hogging it if there is traffic to your left, or if you are likely to get boxed in behind that traffic if you were to move over into every gap. Unnecessary lane changing is probably more dangerous than moving steadily past slower traffic – and what motorway these days carries so little traffic that the left-hand lane isn’t fully occupied by slower-moving lorries and other vehicles most of the time? Let’s face facts here: if you’re driving along at 70mph, anyone who is travelling faster and catches up with you is breaking a much clearer existing law themselves, irrespective of which lane you’re in.

“Middle-lane hogging” is when (for example) someone is driving below the speed limit unnecessarily in the middle lane, perhaps (for example) going slower than the left lane, or maybe (for example) if they’re in it when there is nothing in the left lane at all – whether they’re driving at the speed limit or not. The term applies equally to people who drive in the third or outside lanes unnecessarily. The Highway Code is clear on the subject:

261

You MUST NOT exceed 70 mph (112 km/h), or the maximum speed limit permitted for your vehicle (see Speed limits table). If a lower speed limit is in force, either permanently or temporarily, at road works for example, you MUST NOT exceed the lower limit. On some motorways, mandatory motorway signals (which display the speed within a red ring) are used to vary the maximum speed limit to improve traffic flow. You MUST NOT exceed this speed limit.
Law RTRA sects 17, 86, 89 & sch 6

264

You should always drive in the left-hand lane when the road ahead is clear. If you are overtaking a number of slower-moving vehicles, you should return to the left-hand lane as soon as you are safely past. Slow-moving or speed-restricted vehicles should always remain in the left-hand lane of the carriageway unless overtaking. You MUST NOT drive on the hard shoulder except in an emergency or if directed to do so by the police, HA traffic officers in uniform or by signs.

Laws MT(E&W)R regs 5, 9 & 16(1)(a), MT(S)R regs 4, 8 & 14(1)(a), and RTA 1988, sects 35 & 186, as amended by TMA 2004 sect 6

“Tailgating” is technically any time when you are driving so close to another vehicle that you wouldn’t be able to stop safely if they braked hard (i.e. if you’re closer than two chevrons, where chevrons are painted on the road, or if you are not following the “two second rule”). However, even though driving too close is dangerous and anyone doing it deserves to be pulled over, the type of tailgating being being referred to is specifically the deliberate and aggressive kind intended to intimidate people and make them move out of the way. This aggressive form is a serious problem.

Another thing we should clarify is what these changes actually involve. At present, if the police saw someone tailgating or middle-lane hogging (which are already offences), they’d have to pull them over and then report them for processing by the courts. The process is slow and bureaucratic, and judging by what you see on Road Wars and similar shows, the police could have HD video footage from twenty different patrol cars of the guilty party driving within centimetres of another car, forty witnesses, and yet the case might still be thrown out as a result of “lack of evidence” or because some over-worked plod had spelled someone’s name wrong on a form.

But from July, instead of going down that route, the police will be able to issue roadside fixed penalties of £100 (with three-points attached) for careless driving offences such as those mentioned. Drivers will still be able to appeal through the courts. This is the only real change – as I said, all the offences mentioned were already offences before the change.

But it doesn’t mean that people need to start jostling to get into the left-hand lane every time they pass a lorry when there’s another one a few hundred metres ahead. Nor do they need to slam on their brakes and move over if they see a patrol car. Whenever we get a new law like this, everyone starts going on about the police trying to meet quotas for fines. But the simple fact is that you have to be doing something significantly wrong to get pulled over. Even now, the police can pull people over for using mobile phones and fine them/issue points, but they seldom do. All that’s happened is that tailgating and middle-lane hogging are now on the same list as mobile phones, and under the jurisdiction of the police.

DSA: New Test Centre At Beeston

03/06/2013

DOAADI

ADI, Driving Tests, DSA, News

This is an old article. Look at the date.

An alert from the DSA (DVSA from2014) informs ADIs that from 27 June 2013, tests will be conducted from a new test centre in Beeston. They did the right thing this time and waited until it was all sorted out before telling people.

The important thing to remember – and I guarantee that this will be too complicated for some people to understand, or impossible for some of them to accept – is that you cannot go into the test centre to practice. Access is controlled by a barrier and a security guard. And it looks like bay parking will be an optional manoeuvre now.

There’s no mention of when tests at Watnall will cease (from late 2014 tests recommenced at Watnall to cover for the closure of the Clarendon Street trial). It is possible that they will continue for the foreseeable future given the horrendous waiting time that has built up (no available tests are shown before the end of September).

DSA: Official Publication For New Driving Instructors

01/06/2013

DOAADI

ADI, DSA, News, Training

A new DVD is available from TSO aimed at those wishing to become driving instructors. I should clarify that it is firmly aimed at Part 1 of the qualifying process, although there is a bit of other stuff present.

If you’re just starting out, there’s no harm in getting this because it has all the necessary questions for you to study for Part 1. However, I still prefer the Focus Multimedia option because it’s cheaper and of proven quality.

DSA: Changes To Criminal Records Check

01/06/2013

DOAADI

ADI, DSA, News, Training

An email alert from the DSA advises that from 17 June 2013 only the driving instructor will receive a copy of the criminal records check (I still refer to it as the CRB, though I suppose CRC ought to be used instead).

The DSA will still be informed electronically if there is anything on the check, and if that’s the case then they may ask to see the actual hard copy – the original, not a photocopy or scan – which they will then return to you.

The alert also indicates that from 29 may 2013 “certain old and minor offences” will be removed from the CRB check. I should point out that people shouldn’t get their hopes up, because use of any kind of drugs is one of the ones that will never be removed, and it is up to the DSA to decide if you’re fit to be on the Register or not.

I haven’t seen anyone whinging about this yet – probably because no one has been able to concoct a suitable blame formula to have a dig at the DSA!

DSA: Examiner Strike, 31 May 2013

28/05/2013

DOAADI

ADI, Driving Tests, DSA, News

Another display of stupidity by the union fossils. A strike is planned for Friday, 31 May 2013, but candidates are advised to turn up for tests as usual.

Remember that not all examiners are foolish enough to be members of the union and of those that are, they’re not so foolish that they will all take part in any strike action. Certainly around my way all tests appeared to go ahead during the last strike. However, be aware that the further north you travel, IQs seem to dip sharply, and so the desire to be involved in strike action does seem to be greater in these more northerly places.

There is also the possibility that the union will call off the strike at the last minute. It did that a few strikes ago, and all those who cancelled/changed their test dates did so needlessly.

Remember that it is not the DSA who is to blame here. It is an on going dispute over pensions, and it is affecting large parts of the civil service.

What Is A Franchise?

18/05/2013

DOAADI

ADI

I have to laugh. I noticed on a forum someone asking how they can get out of their agreed contract with a national driving school franchise due to “lack of work”. But that isn’t the funny part.

Someone has posted in reply that the franchise in question isn’t a “real” one, and that a “real” one would give you “exclusive rights to the brand and pupils within a dedicated area”. This is total crap!

By way of explanation, take my favourite example – McDonalds. When you take out a franchise with them (all outlets are franchises, and cost a lot of money up front) you do not have exclusive rights to the brand. You do not have exclusive rights to the customers (whatever area they’re in). You have to sell exactly what McDonalds tells you to sell, how they want you to sell it, and the customers can go wherever the bloody hell they please (which I do frequently if there’s a queue or only one zit face serving whilst trying to assemble 10 Happy Meals at the same time). McDonalds – whether it be the franchisor or franchisee – has no rights over me whatsoever. But it is absolutely a “real” franchise.

Indeed, I have complained to McDonalds Head Office before about appalling customer service at certain branches and they’ve told me that it isn’t what they expect from their franchisees and that they’ll deal with it. And they have dealt with it. Non-approved practices screw up the brand image, and it is McDonalds (the franchisor) who owns the brand – not the franchisee.

If a franchisor decides that any given area can stand another franchised outlet – and it is they who have the resources to decide, and they who also lose out if they’re wrong – then it has every right to grant such a franchise. It is inordinately difficult for a franchisee to prove that perceived damage to their business was caused by the additional franchise – and not by the plethora of competitors who are springing up all the time. In the case of driving instruction and national brands, the brand is easily outnumbered by independent ADIs who are not affiliated to any multi-car school. However, most “big brands” aim to chip away at that, and the way to do it is to advertise like no independent could ever dream of, and increase the number of cars to handle the extra pupils which result. It’s what is known as “business”.

I also note that the person who complained about the lack of work appears to be turning 10 or more hours a week – which for someone who has only been going 4 months in the current economic climate (and in East London) is pretty damned good. If he’d gone as an independent straight away then he might now have been paying a third less for his car, but with less – possibly much less – than half of the work he currently has. You don’t need to be a genius to see which option is the better gamble as a start up instructor in an instructor-heavy location.

By definition, franchising is the use of another company’s successful business model. Further definitions include:

…an authorization granted by a government or company to an individual or group enabling them to carry out specified commercial activities, for example acting as an agent for a company’s products.

A franchise holder, on the other hand, is defined:

…a business or service given a franchise to operate.

It isn’t rocket science. But it would appear that even walking and chewing gum at the same time seems like rocket science to some people.

The “real” franchise imagined by the ADIs who have responded to the topic is completely imaginary, and the stuff of very biased minds. These nonsense replies are another example of ADIs with huge chips on their shoulders. Even the guy who asked the original question is clearly going to become one of them, given the fact that he is unhappy his franchise didn’t supply him with 300 hours of work within two days of signing up!

And so the cycle continues.

As an aside, although the comment has now disappeared, someone else chimed in on the same topic and dismissed all franchises as spawn of the devil, declaring that people should join a small local outfit like he did “instead”! Just another example of someone who hasn’t got a clue what they’re talking about (if it isn’t clear, a small local outfit is still a franchise).

Never Had Lessons, Over The Limit, Killed In Crash. Higher Justice At Work

16/05/2013

DOAADI

ADI, Bad Drivers, News

This came in on the news feed (the story is now truncated, as it happened a long time ago if you’re reading it now). Richard Crookes, 19, was more than twice the legal limit, wasn’t wearing a seat belt, and had never taken a driving lesson in his life.

He crashed the black Renault Clio he was driving (so add “no insurance” and any number of other related offences to the list) and was killed. His passenger sustained injuries but recovered. Evidence from the passenger suggests speeding was also involved:

“It was a terrifying journey and I asked him to stop and slow down,” he told the inquest.

His mother confirmed at the inquest that he didn’t even have a provisional driving licence!

Recording a verdict of accidental death, coroner Paul Kelly said: “The journey was uninsured and Richard Crookes was unfit to drive due to the alcohol consumed.

“He drove at excess speed and lost control, leaving the side of the A161.

“Richard Crookes was not wearing a seatbelt and sustained injuries not sustainable with life.

“It is a very sad and tragic waste of a young life.”

My view is less sympathetic. It was lucky he didn’t kill anyone else. Fortunately, there’s now no chance of him ever doing so. Sometimes, Higher Justice turns up an ace.

Driving Test Booking Scammers

15/05/2013

DOAADI

ADI, Driving Tests, News

The ASA has slammed Book Your Practical Test Online Ltd for the second time in less than 6 months. You may remember I reported on another of their adjudications in January this year. That last one was following deliberate attempts to look exactly like the old DirectGov booking site.

This time they have been pulled up over claims that they are “the fastest” and “the easiest” way to book your test online. Both claims were total bollocks even before ASA got on to the case. This time, Book Your Practical Test Online Ltd appears not even to have responded to the ASA to try and defend themselves, and ASA has concluded the same as me – that the claims are total bollocks (though not in those same words, of course).

I have a very low opinion of these scam artists. The only reason they get away with it is because English Law doesn’t have any balls, but plenty of loopholes for these bottom feeders to play with. They should not be doing this at all. It doesn’t matter that you include in your small print all sorts of disclaimers when you are purposely trying to mislead people with the big print and make them spend more than they need to by pretending you’re something you’re not.

Recently, two of my pupils have got caught in the web. Neither was aware that they were not booking directly with the DSA – and that’s where my argument comes into play. Book Your Practical Test Online Ltd knows full well that most people will fall into this category, and their previous deliberate attempts to mimic the DSA’s own website prove that beyond doubt. Let’s face facts here: no one in their right mind is going to pay £82 when they could be paying £62 with the DSA.

One pupil (around Christmas) had booked her test, and she phoned me to say that they’d told her they would get back to her when the test was booked! Alarm bells went off, and I immediately asked how much she’d paid. When she told me (£20 more than the DSA price) I informed her she had used a scam site. Fortunately, they’re not such big scammers that they won’t refund people’s money – they’d be shut down and prosecuted if they did that – and she got her money back and booked properly.

The second pupil tried to book her test a few weeks ago. She told me she couldn’t get online to book, as it wasn’t showing any free dates. Initially, I said the system must be down and to try the next day. But when she phoned me again because it was still not working properly, she added “and it’s more expensive than last time”. Again, alarm bells rang and it was confirmed she’d been sucked in by them.

These sorts of scammers deliberately engineer it so they come up in Google searches where they shouldn’t. And they have sponsored links in Google which means they guarantee themselves a prime place on any search to do with test booking. Even if you use “DSA” in your search, they still come up – indeed, adding “DSA” brings some of them higher up the normal search results, so it is clear what they are up to.

I should point out that anyone using Book Your Practical Test Online Ltd probably will get a test (I can’t comment on the others, though some will just take your money and run because they’re not even based in the UK). But people are unwittingly paying extra for something they didn’t want, ask for, or need, and they may get the run-around as a result. And that’s what makes it a scam.

It’s good to see that the DSA is using ASA to attack these scumbags.

Remember: to book your driving test, go to the DSA site. Do not use any other site.

Category - ADI