This recent email alert from the DSA outlines new legislation designed to protect learners.
Driving instructors who pose a significant threat to public safety will face immediate suspension under new legislation that was put forward in Parliament on Wednesday.
Under the current legislation, it takes a minimum of 45 days to prevent an instructor from continuing to give paid driving instruction.
However, from 13 July, the registrar of approved driving instructors will have the power to immediately suspend the registration or trainee licence of an instructor who presents a significant danger to the safety of the public.
Effective action to protect learners
Road Safety Minister Mike Penning said:
“Driving instructors play a vital role in helping to ensure Britain’s roads remain among the safest in the world.
“The vast majority of instructors meet the extremely high standards we require of them, but in the very rare cases where an instructor presents a significant danger to the public, it is right that we take prompt and effective action to protect learners and other road users.”
The registrar is likely to exercise the suspension power in cases where instructors have been convicted of a violent or sexual offence or are delivering tuition of a dangerously low standard, while the formal removal or revocation processes are being completed.
Right of appeal
Instructors retain the right of appeal against a decision to remove them from the register of approved driving instructors or to revoke their trainee licence.
The instructor will be able to apply for compensation in respect of the period of suspension if they are not subsequently removed from the register.
Although I don’t have an issue with this, I can’t help thinking that it is really protecting against something which isn’t quite as bad as the alert implies. A bit like that episode of The Simpsons, where Homer creates a panic about bears and the whole community is slapped with a “bear tax”.
Crap instructors shouldn’t get green badges in the first place. More needs to be done in that area, rather than trying to bolt the stable door once the horse has gone!
Stopping them getting through in the first place wouldn’t run the risk of impacting decent instructors’ livelihoods. This legislation puts those of us involved in it at risk if some idiot pupil makes a false complaint. Penning can pretend it’s about “dangerous instruction” all he likes. But in reality it is the words “sexual” and “violence” which are at the crux of this legislation, and those “offences” are extremely rare.
Signals warn and inform other road users, including pedestrians (see ‘Signals to other road users’), of your intended actions. You should always
give clear signals in plenty of time, having checked it is not misleading to signal at that time
use them to advise other road users before changing course or direction, stopping or moving off
cancel them after use
make sure your signals will not confuse others. If, for instance, you want to stop after a side road, do not signal until you are passing the road. If you signal earlier it may give the impression that you intend to turn into the road. Your brake lights will warn traffic behind you that you are slowing down
use an arm signal to emphasise or reinforce your signal if necessary. Remember that signalling does not give you priority
Download ‘Signals to other road users’ (PDF, 100K)
Read all the rules about signals
This advice is very relevant. Being out all day and you notice the sheer number of people who simply do not use their indicators – either properly, or at all.
It’s quite possible to enjoy being a driving instructor – just like it’s quite possible to enjoy any job. However, it seems to be standard practice to start hating work when you get to a certain age. That’s when you officially become a Grumpy Old Git and start annoying people.
One thing that you pick up when you do this job – indeed, something that any half-decent parent would pick up when trying (and failing) to educate their offspring on certain matters – is that no amount of advice, tuition,coaching, or anything else you want to call it is going to stop the average 17-year old behaving like every other 17-year old has ever behaved since time immemorial. And usually then some. Likewise, the DSA will always behave like the DSA, and driving tests will always be driving tests – with passes and fails.
I’m seeing an increasing number of ADIs retiring (or being close to retirement but still hanging on), stating that they’re “disillusioned” or words to that effect, who then can’t stop keep sticking the boot in on the industry that the rest of us are still involved with and enjoy.
It seems that the old adage about falling into a second childhood as the grey matter turns to jelly is true.
For God’s sake, if you’re going to retire, do it! Just walk away and retire, and stop keep trying to ruin it for everyone else. Go and play golf, or write letters to local newspapers about things that annoy you (that will fill up the long hours). And while you’re at it, buy one of these.
This is an old article, but it is still correct overall.
.I noticed someone asked a question on one of the forums about this. The range of replies was quite astounding, with everyone having their own “must-do-it-this-way” method, and poo-pooing everyone else’s “no-it-has-to-be-done-like-this” procedure.
Let’s take a look at the issue, starting in the most sensible place possible – the DT1 SOP that the examiners follow. It says (in various places throughout):
13 Move off:
Safely: failure to take effective observation before moving off, including the correct use of signals.
Under control: inability to move off smoothly, straight ahead, at an angle, or on a gradient.
This is fairly clear. You need to carry out effective safety checks before you move off.
1.30 MOVING OFF
The examiner should observe whether the candidate first sees to the front, then to the rear, that the way is clear for pulling out, gives the appropriate signal if necessary, and moves away smoothly and safely. Wherever possible, ability to move off on a reasonably steep uphill gradient should be tested. A candidate starting on a gradient should be capable of paying attention to other traffic as well as moving their vehicle away without rollback and/or excessive engine revolutions. If stopping on a hill is not possible an additional ‘normal’ stop need not be sought. However, the test must always include moving off at an angle from behind a stationary vehicle.
Also very clear. The examiner is expecting the candidate to check front and rear to make sure it’s safe to go. He expects them to signal if necessary.
3.32 MOVING OFF
The prime consideration when moving off is that the candidate does so safely, showing an awareness of the presence of other traffic and pedestrians.
The test should include a demonstration of the candidate’s ability to move off uphill, downhill and at an angle from a position reasonably close behind a stationary vehicle.
Gradients for testing the candidate’s ability to move off uphill or downhill should be between 8% (1 in 12) and 11% (1 in 9). Gradients steeper than 12% (1 in 8) should not be used in any circumstances.
Again, very clear. The prime consideration is that the candidate shows awareness of other road users and moves off safely. The examiner isn’t expecting to see a choreographed head-nodding routine, a “seven point check”, or any other silly procedure that someone has imagined up to try to make the whole business as automated as possible.
Assessment Criteria – (example = safely)
Driving Fault
Incorrect timing of the blind spot check when moving off with no risk to other road users. For e.g. Checking the blind spot after the vehicle has moved off.
Serious Fault
Moving off into the path of traffic or failing to take observation at all.
Dangerous Fault
Any situation brought about by the above lack of observation, that resulted in actual danger to the examiner, candidate, the general public or property.
This one gives the best indication of what should be happening (and why it often goes wrong). What is “incorrect timing”?
Well, I often pick up partly trained pupils who are terrible for this. I’ll say to them “drive on when you’re ready” and quick as a flash they fling the indicator on – when they aren’t even in gear and haven’t begun to think what might be going on behind.
But taking that one stage further, I also see a lot of pupils who will do one of the following:
look all around before they have the bite, then find it and move off
look all around, see something, wait, then move off without looking again
look all around, not see something that’s definitely coming, and move off anyway
look all around, see something coming, and move off anyway
This isn’t an exhaustive list. Pupils can find an infinite number of ways of doing things wrong. But the four I’ve listed are common.
The first one results in a delay between looking and moving – so something could have appeared behind during that period of delay in actually moving away.
The second one is similar. The pupil does the right thing for whatever they see coming, but then don’t check again for what might have appeared behind that while they were waiting.
The third one usually happens because they think they can move faster than they actually do, or because they misjudge the speed of the approaching vehicle. So they cause it to have to slow down or even brake hard.
The last one happens when they’re just doing the nodding-dog routine. They’re looking – sometimes not even that, as they just move their heads – but not seeing. I remember pulling one pupil to the side of the road to chew him out over his checks at a junction one time, but I couldn’t keep a straight face because his “observations” involved waving his head around with half-closed eyes as he looked at the gearstick! Better yet was the fact that he said “I know what you’re going to say”. And he did. He knew he’d done it.
So it’s very simple. when you move off, you’ve got to make sure it is safe to do so. The precise detail of how doesn’t matter as long as the safety aspect is adequately covered – and that means checking in front and behind to make sure nothing is coming.
What about signalling, though? As I have already mentioned I see a lot of pupils who just fling on the indicator to move away before they’ve looked or even got the car in gear!
This one is not as black and white as many instructors would like to believe (or try to make it). Of course, there are situations where you definitelyshould signal – and if you don’t then you will definitely fail your test. A good example is when pulling over and there is a car following you at a normal (or closer) distance behind. It would be dangerous to just stop without warning, so failure to signal in good time is almost certainly going to be marked as a serious fault. It’s harder to think of a definite situation where not signalling to move away would be regarded quite so severely by the examiner, but perhaps if you’re on a relatively narrow road and there is oncoming traffic (or pedestrians) quite close, moving away without a signal would be asking for trouble.
A lot of the time, though, whether or not you should signal – particularly when moving off – is a matter of opinion. For example, sometimes I will have noticed that a car parked not far in front of us has someone in it, but the pupil hasn’t. In that case, I would signal, but the pupil might not. I point this out to them as something they should look for – that the other car might want to move away, and that they need to know that we’re planning to go.
Examiners tend not to regard signalling/not signalling in these situations as a major problem, so learners who always signal to pull over or move away often won’t be faulted for the signal itself. I suspect that this is why many ADIs appear to teach their pupils to signal regardless. However, signalling blindly often degenerates into just that – proper and safe observation starts to suffer.
The usual guidance about when to signal is that if someone might realistically benefit from you doing it, then you should. And if you genuinely aren’t certain that anyone will, then signal anyway – and by that, I mean situations like “Hold on! Is there someone in that car?” and not “well, someone might turn up”.
At what point of the moving off procedure should you signal? As a general rule, it should be the last thing you do before actually moving. You look, assess, and decide – then signal and do it in one clean action! You do not want any delay between signal and moving away because something might turn up during that delay.
Usually, you shouldn’t use your indicators to request that people wait for you. One might stop, but that doesn’t mean the rest will, so it is dangerous under normal circumstances. There’s nothing worse than driving along on a free-moving road only to notice the clown in front has stopped dead to let someone out (and that is only marginally better than someone pulling out and forcing you to slow down). It stands to reason that doing it too often is going to increase the chances of someone tail-ending someone else if they aren’t paying attention.
If traffic is very heavy and slow-moving then you might use your indicators to request that someone lets you out.
So, you signal when you have decided to move out. You must not leave a long pause between looking and moving or signalling and moving.
All I have given above is a general procedure. It could be applied in a number of ways – even including stupid “seven-point checks” if you’re one of those who insists on this sort of thing. But as long as you check properly all around you – depending on the circumstances at the time – indicate if necessary, and move off immediately, then the actual process doesn’t matter.
I failed my test for “moving off/stopping – safely”. What did I do wrong?
It could have been one of a number of things, including:
not checking your mirrors
not checking your blindspot
not checking properly (just moving your head, or not moving it far enough)
missing something that was there
misjudging something’s speed and causing it to slow down or veer
moving off while you were checking
moving off before you’d checked
stopping without indicating when someone was behind
How do I find out what I did wrong?
Ask the examiner! And that goes for ADIs, too. There’s no point speculating or listening to people who will always blame the DSA for every fail.
What will happen if I don’t check properly?
It depends. If you miss a single shoulder/blindspot check and no one is coming, it will probably just be marked as a driver fault. If someone is coming though, it could easily be marked as a serious or dangerous fault depending on the actual situation.
In my experience, if you keep missing those checks in that same situation then it could easily mount up into a serious problem – and so be marked as a serious fault. Quite simply, missing one check (with nothing there) is a driver fault, but missing them most of the time is a serious fault.
An examiner once told me:
I work the on the “five strikes” principle unless something else makes it serious first.
As a result, I tell my pupils that if they’re lucky they’ll get away with doing something that is classed as a driver fault a couple of times. But beyond that they’re into very risky territory indeed.
I checked all round but the examiner said I didn’t.
The usual reason this happens is that you didn’t look properly – a quick flick of the head is not the same thing as actually looking to see what is coming. It is a very common problem with learners.
You must check in your blindspot – which is further round than just glancing to the offside.
But I know someone who got six driver faults under one category on their test.
You should be aiming for NO faults, not trying to calculate how many you can get away with. I know several examiners who will convert certain repeating driver faults into a serious one beyond a certain point, so it doesn’t matter that there are apparently some who won’t. It is the worst case that is most relevant, and the worst case is that a repeating fault could mount up into a serious one.
But examiners aren’t allowed to do that, are they?
Yes they are. Your main concern should be making sure you’re able to drive to the required standard so that you can easily pass the test (or, if you’re an ADI, teaching the same).
DT1 says:
There can however be occasions when one specific driving fault could by constant repetition, be regarded as serious and therefore a significant risk; for example when a candidate habitually fails to take mirror observation when appropriate.
It’s crystal clear, but if you still want to complain about it – or take issue with the precise meaning of the words “constant”, “repetition”, or “habitually” – take it up with the DSA through your local test centre manager. As much as it is clear that people want to believe otherwise, the fault is not with the examiners but with the test candidates genuinely not checking properly (possibly because they aren’t being taught properly).
It’s far better not to commit the fault (or to teach it) in the first place. Trying to weasel out of it after the event is pointless.
I have had a PPI claim upheld which – when I eventually get it – will be a nice little windfall. But the key word in there is “eventually”.
We’re in the 21st Century, but it drives me crazy that I can only pay cash into my account specifically at one of my bank’s branches. That means having to get to a high street somewhere, with parking and fuel costs, not to mention the general inconvenience (don’t get me started on old people waiting in the West Bridgford car parks without buying a ticket while their spouse does the shopping, blocking everyone else). And when I get there I have to keep my fingers crossed that there isn’t a queue, because it seems that 99.9% of other bank customers use the places for the sole purpose of raising impossibly complex queries that take ages to resolve and tie the only cashier working up for ten minutes. Even with just a couple of people in the queue and more than one cashier working (which isn’t often at Halifax), this can lead to a 10-15 minute wait just to deposit cash and cheques..
At my local branch they have a fast-deposit machine. That’s a very funny joke, because it isn’t fast at all (though admittedly it’s usually slightly faster than going to the cashiers’ desk when it’s working), and doubly so when someone else is trying to use it and is reading every single word on the screen and putting their money in all mixed up (and why the bloody hell do they then go straight to the withdrawal machine to check that it’s gone in? The other one just told you it had accepted your deposit, and you got a receipt. It’s the same system. Are you really that stupid?) Anyone over 35 – except for me – should be kept away from the automatic system, or maybe even forced to use a bank specifically for old people who are frightened of technology and who don’t trust banks with their money!
But all banks seem to want to raise bureaucracy to new heights in every area of their business. You see, the PPI refund I am waiting for to appear in my account is being paid by another bank – one I was with many moons ago and which stopped being a bank, hence my move elsewhere. I got a call from them on 30 May telling me the claim had been upheld, and that a letter would be sent out within 10 days for me to accept the offer formally.
We could have sorted it all out on the phone there and then, but that’s not how banks work. Instead, I had to wait 10 days – and we’re talking about WORKING days, so there were two weekends in the middle – for the letter to arrive, and that was after discovering that after the 30 May conversation the letter only went out on 6 June (oh, it was ordered on 30 May, they told me, but it wasn’t printed until a week later). I now learn that they will pay out “within 28 days” of receiving the acceptance form. Of course, the chances of that turning out to be much less than 28 days are extremely remote. I assume that the interest they’ll be earning on my money will pay for all the unnecessary arseing about involved – albeit only at their end.
Then this week, in a totally separate incident, a household bill for £200 I had paid by debit card last week was charged again by standing order – in other words, I have paid £400 instead of £200. The second £200 was removed from my account in ten seconds flat, but I now learn it will take “3 working days” for it to be credited back – and with the weekend now looming (thanks to the day and half already taken to discuss it and agree it WAS an error and not some fraudulent claim by a Master Criminal) that means Monday at the earliest.
Why is it that money can be taken in the blink of an eye, and yet giving it back takes forever?
I’m keeping my eye on services like Barclays Pingit. On paper it is a great idea, but until all banks offer something similar the extra hassle of topping up a separate “wallet” account for non-Barclays customers means it isn’t going to be that useful for taking lesson payments (the crap internet phone signal and/or availability is another downside).
But anything that removes the need to physically visit a branch or cash point can’t be all bad.
This is an old post. Nowadays (2022), you do not need to register separately to allow your ADI number to be used. It comes as part of the package when you access the instructor booking system, and has done for several years. However, if your pupils book their own tests, they still need to use your ADI number if you want to avoid overlapping tests. They can leave it blank as long as you are happy the date/time they are booking fits your diary, but if they use it then it helps you for any that YOU might be booking.
When you book your test using the DSA online booking facility, there is a box which asks for your instructor’s ADI number. On one of the forums frequented by student types, someone asked what it is.
I love this reply:
…its only asked for so your instructors pass/fail rate can be adjusted i think, but when you take your test they write it on the sheet
I wish people who don’t know the answers to questions wouldn’t keep trying to guess like this! People go away believing it.
Every ADI has an instructor number, and it is printed on their green badge. However, it is not a requirement that the green badge be displayed when someone takes their test, and many ADIs deliberately take it out so the examiner can’t record their number on the driving test report form. The radicals take it out just to be awkward, and people who want their pass rate to look artificially high (plus those who aren’t confident in their abilities as instructors) also remove it. I always leave mine in unless I am taking a pupil to test who I haven’t actually taught (and I stopped doing that years ago).
The reason the booking system asks for an ADI number is so that when pupils book their tests, the system can check against that number and prevent them booking a test at the same time as someone else’s with the same instructor. It’s potentially a good idea.
However, you (the ADI) have to register to make use of it, and a small criticism of the DSA (now, DVSA) is that although they may dream of a paperless society they are still as bureaucratic as hell. I’ve never had the inclination to follow the convoluted (last time I looked) registration process through. (Edit: this article was written in 2012, and as of 2014 is it much easier using the Business Gateway system).
Another reason for not bothering to use it for test bookings is that I simply tell pupils not to book a certain date or time, and they don’t. You can’t get simpler than that. And for 40 weeks of the year I have a maximum of one test per week. There are a few weeks where I might have up to three, but the density of test bookings isn’t sufficiently high to justify a complicated system to manage it for me.
And the last problem – which is actually the answer to the usual query when someone encounters that box when booking their tests – is that if you just leave it blank then you move on to the booking stage. You don’t need to fill it in, and if an ADI hasn’t registered it will return an error anyway. But this means that even if the instructor has registered, a pupil could leave it blank or type it in wrong (i.e. someone else’s number) and you’d still end up with a double booking.
Perhaps one day it will be a mandatory requirement, but it isn’t at the moment.
What is the ADI Number when I’m booking my test?
Explained above. Unless your instructor has specifically given you the number, just leave it blank.
I changed my instructor – should I change the ADI number I used to book my test?
You may as well leave it. The DSA will pay it no heed. All it does is stop your previous instructor automatically getting a test booking in that same time slot. It just isn’t worth the hassle.
What will happen if I used the wrong ADI number when I booked my test?
Nothing. Don’t worry about it. On the off chance the examiner mentions it, just explain what happened. It has nothing to do with your actual test.
That’s nonsense, of course, But it seems to be the favoured excuse of some learners when their mates are winding them up.
I was reading a forum where there are a lot of learners and people with immature attitudes hanging about, and someone was asking for opinions about whether they should change instructor. They write:
Had about 10-12 lessons and haven’t done all that much! Just mirror, signal, manoeuvre. Driving on main roads. Drove in 1,2,3,4 gear. Done mini roundabouts, hills, clutch control, but that’s about it.
Two of my friends started with the same instructor at the same time and they’ve done loads more, including parallel parking, turning around corners etc.
Every week they ask me what I’ve done and I always say nothing, which is starting to annoy me. I know I must be rubbish, but wondered if I should swap driving instructor because I don’t learn properly with this guy or something?
Oh and he’s always late, to me and my friends. But later with me. Been on time once. Latest was 40 minutes late.
The only part of that which is bad – assuming it’s true and not just an afterthought to imply blame – is the turning up late part. That’s just not on, especially if you’re paying for the lost time.
But 10-12 lessons, especially if they’re only one hour sessions, is not a lot. For many new drivers having covered all of that in the first paragraph in only 12 hours isn’t really that bad. My only comment is that I’d also have such a learner doing the manoeuvres by this stage.
As usual, some of the replies demonstrate an intelligence and level of immaturity which defies belief, but which is all too common in young people today:
I would definitely go with a different instructor if your doing less than your friends and he is turning up much later to your lessons, sounds like he thinks he can do whatever he likes, and it will only get worse.
This implies that everyone learns at the same rate. They don’t.
This one manages to plumb the depths of stupidity to new lows:
YES! You should totally change. I stuck with my instructor which was really dumb, it took me failing my test 4 times before I decided he had to go.
Also I was a really nervy driver, yet I drove at 60mph in 5th gear on an A road in my first lesson; sounds like he’s completely milking you, AND he’s late?! Bad, bad, bad!
Odd that it took four test failures to realise this, and even odder (not mention totally in contradiction to) what the same poster writes in reply to someone questioning the same thing:
Hey, I have nerves! I drove 250 miles with my Uncle totally fine three days before my last test. And I always come out with less than 8 minors, but I always make at least one serious mistake because I overthink everything.
So, this person can drive, but failing the test was their instructor’s fault? And they openly admit to being scared to even be in a car? And it’s funny how they are criticising their instructor for pushing them, when they’re accusing someone else’s instructor of “milking” them for allegedly not doing the same!
And as for “overthinking”… that is the bane of my life when I get pupils who do that, because it does hold them back. Often, the only way of dealing with it is driving time and experience-building – neither of which can be acquired overnight!
There are fast learners and slow learners in the world. If you’re one of the slow ones, you can’t really blame your instructor.
Apparently, an email is doing the rounds asking people to verify their driver’s licence details. It is a scam.
The email test is along the lines of:
From: DVLA Subject: Update Your License Details
We are currrently [sic] upgrading our database and all drivers are required to update and verify there [sic] driver’s license details.To complete your license verification with us, you are required to fill out the form in the link below.
{Fake link}
Drivers that [sic] refuses to upgrade his or her details within two weeks of receiving this verification email will lose his or her driver’s License and will have to take a fresh driving test.
We sincerely apologise for any inconviniences [sic] this might have caused you.
Thank you for your co-operation.
(c) Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency Swansea SA6 7JL
Ignore it and bin it. Even clicking it to “have a look” could be risky, especially with the crap spelling and grammar in it, so you’ve been warned.
An email alert from the DSA following on from a consultation.
If approved, the proposals would allow the police to issue fixed penalty notices (FPNs) for careless driving, and avoid the need for the ridiculous amount of deskwork such charges currently involve, and which the police will obviously avoid pursuing unless it is a serious offence as a result.
I notice that it doesn’t appear to have gone down to well amongst that group of ADIs who think that only they are capable of making such assessments, and who are blaming it on the DSA – when in fact it is a government issue.
If slapped with such an FPN, there would be a £90 fine and three points on your licence. More serious cases would still go through the courts where higher penalties would most likely be imposed.
The proposals would also see current FPN charges increase from £60 to £90 (e.g. using mobile phones, not wearing seatbelts, speeding). There are other changes also being considered, which you can read in the full document.
The consultation is still open for people to contribute to.
Another email alert advising on driving when you’re unwell or have conditions which could affect your driving:
Rule 90
Make sure that you are fit to drive. You MUST report to the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) any health condition likely to affect your driving.
Use the medical A to Zto see if you need to tell the DVLA about your medical condition.
If a pupil gets into the car for a lesson and I sense that they’re unwell, and especially if they confirm that they are (colds, flu, etc.) then I won’t let them drive.
I’ve also had pupils who I’ve discovered are taking tablets that preclude them from driving (one only last week who’d been stricken with chest pains apparently brought on by stress, and the tablets said he shouldn’t drive).
wrong. But the four I’ve listed are common.
We’re in the 21st Century, but it drives me crazy that I can only pay cash into my account specifically at one of my bank’s branches. That means having to get to a high street somewhere, with parking and fuel costs, not to mention the general inconvenience (don’t get me started on old people waiting in the West Bridgford car parks without buying a ticket while their spouse does the shopping, blocking everyone else). And when I get there I have to keep my fingers crossed that there isn’t a queue, because it seems that 99.9% of other bank customers use the places for the sole purpose of raising impossibly complex queries that take ages to resolve and tie the only cashier working up for ten minutes. Even with just a couple of people in the queue and more than one cashier working (which isn’t often at Halifax), this can lead to a 10-15 minute wait just to deposit cash and cheques..