Category - ADI

I notice from this weeks ASA Rulings that Bill Plant had lodged a complaint against The AA’s claim to be the “only national driving school using fully-qualified instructors”.

When I read it, I remembered that it had occurred to me a few times recently that Bill Plant was now using “only fully-qualified instructors” as a strapline on most of its cars. No problem with that, though their website does come across as a little hypocritical when it explains the differences (i.e. the weaknesses) between ADIs and PDIs. Apparently, it made the switch around 2011/12, but before that time it was happy to send PDIs out to new pupils.

I don’t have a problem with the PDI system as such – everyone has to learn somehow, and the PDI route is one way which has helped a lot of people (I didn’t go that way myself, but a lot of people do). The problems that exist with it arise largely from the lesson payment structure, with many PDIs using it as a way of making money while they are learning and charging whack, but not knowing how to teach properly and – in many cases – not being good enough to become ADIs in the end. The hapless pupil loses out either by being left without an instructor, or by being taught ineffectively or even inappropriately, having been charged full-price for the privilege. Often, both. But I digress.

Bill Plant’s ASA claim was centred on the assertion that they were also a national driving school using fully qualified instructors, so the AA’s claim to be ‘”the only” one was false. Since Bill Plant does not seem to be making such a claim for itself yet, this seems to have been a bit of an advanced preparation exercise on its part.

The adjudication makes interesting reading – certainly with regard some of the numbers. Apparently, the AA has over 1,800 liveried cars, whereas Bill Plant has “over 500” (from its own Facebook page). The AA had used Bill Plant’s website to check for lesson availability in various places and concluded that there was no instructor coverage in at least 15 post code locations. The AA used its own coverage data with 1,800 instructors to argue that Bill Plant (with only “over 500”) could not provide national coverage. Their research suggests that Bill Plant is unable to provide coverage to at least 11% of the population, meaning a “national” claim was not valid.

But this is where it gets very interesting. Upon investigation, the ASA deduced from Bill Plant’s instructor records that at least one instructor was expected to cover an absolutely huge postcode area in order to “provide coverage”, and some of the names provided for certain postcodes didn’t appear “on the full instructor database” (I’m assuming that means the ADI Register) at all.

Bill Plant doesn’t cover Northern Ireland. It argued that this was irrelevant, since the UK ADI qualification system is different to that in NI. The ASA confirmed with DVTNI that the qualification processes are identical and licence transfer was easy.

The claim by Bill Plant was not upheld. The ASA ruling also makes it clear that Bill Plant is not a “national” school – which no doubt damages its short-term plans.

Personally, I wonder why companies do this to themselves – particularly the part where there appears to be some “creativity” regarding instructor names and the areas they cover. If you’re offering lessons in an Audi (not the most economical car to run), offering “5 for £56” and “first lesson free”, and charging several pounds less than the going rate in any given area, you are not going to stay in business long if you have a lot of travel between lessons (i.e. cover large postcode areas). So any such coverage claims for an individual just have to be suspect. Likewise, with the Bill Plant instructor names given to the ASA not appearing on the Register – you can only realistically conclude one thing from that.

Edit: I’ve removed the Bill Plant logo at their request. They disagree with the article. It’s a shame – it was being used in a legitimate reporting situation.

This came in on the newsfeeds. A driving instructor has published a book which claims to teach people to drive in 24 hours.

In the article, the most bizarre list of contradictory nonsense is put forward, with the instructor in question claiming to take a “totally different approach” to learning to drive. He says that he “listens to his pupils” and “cut[s] out red tape”. He claims that he lets them know from day one that he “is their friend, not their superior”. And it’s incredible that he’s stayed in business for so long if he’s always followed the mantra about them paying as little as possible.

I love it when someone takes something that is really simple in terms of the skills needed – like learning to drive – and then tries to take “a totally different approach” to teaching it. It’s like wanting to travel from London to Scotland – most people would foolishly believe that this involves driving North, but then some comedian like this guy comes along and that you should drive South instead! It’s just a pointless complication.

The reality is that it doesn’t matter how much of a “friend” you think you are to your pupils, you are still taking money off them and providing a service – and that’s above and beyond the fact that there is usually a 30+ year difference in ages. The average youngster doesn’t consider “old” friends to be very cool at all.

Instructors have business relationships and not “friendships” with their pupils. If a cheaper deal comes along, most of them will be off like a cat in a rainstorm. No amount of perceived “friendship” will hold on to them.

Of all the people I’ve ever taught, I remain in regular contact with just one of them (even though he’s a Chelsea supporter). I’ve lost count of the number of my ex-pupils who have seen me in the street over the years, or in the local supermarket, and who have tried to pretend they haven’t if they’re with their mates (one of them even did it while I was still teaching her). It’s the immature mind-set of most teenagers, and anyone who thinks that they’re a genuine “friend” is just deluding themselves.

You can learn all there is to know about driving in a few hours, just like you can learn all there is to know about playing the guitar by reading a book in a day. But learning how to drive properly – or play guitar – takes longer. MUCH longer.

Driving instruction is about teaching people what to do, and how to do it properly through practice. By definition, practice results in experience, and experience takes time. Certainly more than 24 hours.

If you cut out the practice, you’re putting people on the road before they are ready. But maybe this is what this instructor means by “cut[ting] out red tape”.

Edit: I’ve noticed a lot of people finding this page having searched for “driving for dummies”. Come on, people! Even if there was a book with that title it wouldn’t help you. I made that image above myself as a joke.

The only book that comes close is Driving: The Essential Skills. But don’t think that it will teach you how to do the basics – the only way to learn that is to practice in a real car.