Category - Driving Tests

Parallel Parking

I get a lot of hits from people asking about parallel parking, so I’m going to write a How To… article on the subject to go along with the others. This article isn’t it – it’s just a bit of a discussion.An old parallel parking tutorial diagram

In my own experience, I’ve found that the manoeuvre pupils seem to have the most trouble with is reversing around a corner. I suspect that this is down to the fact that, unlike the others, you have to remain in control with precise adjustments throughout. However, before they’ve actually had a go, most pupils will identify parking – parallel parking, in particular – as the “most difficult”. I love to watch the look on their faces the first time I tell them that’s what we’re going to do today, but the look once they see how easy it is even better.

Parallel parking amounts to the same thing whatever method you use – the driver has to reverse into a space following a sort of backwards “S” shaped path. Any subsequent farting about comes as a result of not following that path properly, and that’s usually because the method they used isn’t very good.

Here’s a true story. Earlier this year one of my serial failers got the parallel park manoeuvre on three of her four tests (including the one she eventually passed on). It was the source of a serious fault on two of them, and the reason for that was that she had absolutely insisted on using the method her previous instructor had taught her, even though it only worked about 50% of the time. Her method involved estimating the position of the kerb (which could easily vary by ½ a metre or more), and some other nonsense about putting on one turn of the wheel, “lining up with the rear lights” on the target car, and then turning one turn the other way (this went tits up on one test because the target car was facing the other way and she couldn’t see its lights). After her last fail – amidst the tears – I put my foot down and told her she was learning MY method or nothing. As I say, she got the same manoeuvre the next time, and passed.

Whenever I pick up a new pupil who has covered the parallel park elsewhere I give them a chance to show me how they do it. If they can remember how to do it at all – and many can’t – they usually end up either too far back or too far away from the kerb. Having said that, if any of them can achieve a satisfactory result using their own method, I’ll let them carry on using it – but I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times that’s happened. As long as I live, I will never understand why someone would teach pupils to reverse beyond the end of the target car, but only to apply partial lock (it’s usually “one turn”) and expect to finish within the requisite two car lengths. I’ll also never understand why someone would teach a method to a beginner which depends on how well the target car is parked, and which involves guessing where the kerb is. And don’t get me started on the problems that arise when the target vehicle is a lorry or stretch limo – try lining up diagonally with the lights and see how good the method is then!

You see, the problem stems from the fact that people who have been driving for years – and this includes a lot of instructors – have something that learners don’t. It’s called “experience”. Experience means many things, but one aspect of it is that “guessing” where the kerb is becomes slightly easier for more experienced drivers, whereas a beginner won’t have a clue – and nor will many of them be likely to acquire one by taking a couple of hours of driving lessons a week. However, let’s not deceive ourselves here. I said slightly easier, and if watching “experienced” people trying to park outside the local shops is anything to go by, this just means that there’s a marginally reduced risk of them flattening a passer-by or altering their bumper trim against street furniture. It certainly doesn’t make them parking experts.

Something else to consider is that an “experienced” driver can arse about for as long as they want until they eventually manage to park, or their conscience kicks in and they drive off to find somewhere else. It doesn’t matter if they hit the kerb or finish on it, take up two spaces, or end up diagonally with their back end sticking a metre into the road (well, not unless the council’s traffic Gestapo have been told to crack down on it at the time). In most cases, they will have the social conscience of a dog on a croquet lawn, and they won’t give a toss about how much inconvenience they are causing for everyone else (that’s another aspect of “experience”). A learner, on the other hand, is typically 17 years old, shy, nervous, has an examiner sitting next to them, and has basically got one shot at doing it perfectly in order to gain the shiny new driving licence on which their future depends. The two situations are not even in the same ball park.

For this reason, a learner needs a method that is as fool proof as possible, and not some Zen-like nonsense that fails as often as it succeeds.

The driving test is only the first step in learning to drive. Passing it means you are deemed safe to go out and gain more experience by practicing and consolidating what you learnt on your lessons. The first time you go out on your own it will be a new experience, but the second time it won’t be. The more you go out, the more confident you will become. Exactly the same thing applies to something like parallel park, where the first time you try it for real you’ll be nervous, but you will learn from it and begin to develop your own system. That’s how it has always been.

Fewer Learners Crashing On Test

A reader sent me a link to a recent press release, which reports that fewer learners are having crashes while on their driving tests. I was aware of it because the author, Pete McAllister, had asked me for my opinion before it was published. I was meaning to get around to reporting on it myself, but I got side-tracked and forgot. It’s a bit embarrassing really, as the “experts within the driving instruction industry” referred to includes me!

At the time I didn’t know what the actual figures were, and my comments to Pete reflected that. In a nutshell, it all comes down to what caused/avoided the accident in the first place – was it the skill (or lack thereof) by the test candidate, lack of skill by the other driver, or a change in the behaviour of the examiners? Overall, it’s probably a combination of all of those things, but if I was putting money on it I’d bet most heavily on the examiners being more proactive in dealing with situations, though I doubt that the DVSA would admit to it.

However, once the report was published and I saw the figures, my immediate reaction was “what decline?” If you ignore 2014 data (because they’re incomplete), the car accident data look like this when you plot them on a graph.On-test crash data graph

There aren’t enough data to conclude that the trend is downwards. In fact, if I was analysing these data, the only figure I’d be interested in would be 2012 and why it was so high. Overall, the trend is more or less flat, and it certainly isn’t showing a major drop.

To be fair, though, the “massive drop” referred to is with the 2014 data, which so far sit at only 20 crashes (presumably for the first quarter). That would point to a figure of around 80 for the year. And that IS a big fall if it continues for the whole 12 months.

Assuming that the 2014 data remain as low as they currently appear to be, I honestly don’t know what has caused the fall. Certainly, nothing I’ve seen on any of my own tests can explain it. However, if you start to speculate, you need to have much more information – who were the candidates who had crashes previously, and what were the circumstances? Has that demographic changed in any way? I don’t think the DVSA holds that kind of detail.

I still favour the idea that examiners are more prepared to take action, and it would be useful to know if the number of abandoned tests has gone up in any way as a result. Maybe someone should do an FOI request to find out, because the DVSA would definitely know that.

Test Pass: 19/4/2014

TickWell done to Anna, who passed today first time with just 5 driver faults. I really wish all my pupils were like her – she was a fast learner, anxious to be a safe driver, and very pleasant with it all. As I said to her more than once, she was easily capable of passing, even though as we got closer to her test her nerves did start to kick in a little. But it didn’t matter in the end, and she has a car all lined up.

It also puts my pass rate for the year up to 55% – I finally managed to break away from 50%, although my hard-core of serial failers has held me back a bit this year. Mind you, of my passes 75% have been first timers, so it’s not all bad.

Test Pass: 14/4/2014

TickWell done to Ian, who passed on Monday first time with 11 driver faults. He’s been a nice guy to teach, although his repeated “is this on the test route?” questions were a little tedious sometimes. As I pointed out frequently to him, if you can drive it doesn’t matter where we do the lessons, and I will show you any tricky features!

He also had a severe case of “stampy foot” when it came to roundabouts and junctions, but we finally got that sorted out.

Cost Of The Theory Test To Fall?

The DVSA is asking for opinions on plans to reduce the cost of the Theory Test. Quite frankly, it is a cynical government vote-winning exercise ahead of the next General Election.

The bulletin makes what must rate as the most stupidest sales pitch imaginable:

The proposals, which could save learner drivers in excess of £100 million pounds over the next nine years…

The simple fact is that most people pay for ONE theory test in their entire life. So the real saving is actually £6. You can multiply it by any number you want, but the fact remains that the most anyone will save is £6 per test, which is nearly 17 million times less than what the government is claiming.

Those ADIs who are supporting the idea on behalf of their little darlings need to start thinking a little bit further ahead instead of pursuing a continual vendetta they don’t understand against everything the DVSA stands for. The current price of £31 for a test which lasts around 90 minutes is hardly a lot by modern standards, particularly when you consider the importance of the end product. Pro rata, it is less than the cost of a driving lesson.

Reduce it by 25% and more of the little darlings might start thinking £25 an hour for a driving lesson is too much, too.

The price is fine as it is.

Toyota Yaris Recall And Driving Tests

This is an old article. However, it might be useful for anyone buying a used Yaris to prompt them to make sure their car has had the fix applied.

DVSA has sent out a warning about Toyota Yaris vehicles built between 2005 and 2010. The Yaris is subject to a recall notice as a result of serious safety issues (27 models are involved, of which the Yaris is one). The recall was issued by Toyota 10 April 2014.

As the bulletin makes absolutely clear, you cannot take a test in any vehicle subject to a recall if you cannot prove remedial work has been carried out.

Anyone with a test booked within the next three days (from 16 April 2014) will be able to cancel and rearrange without losing their fee. Anyone with a test more than three days hence has still got time to rearrange it without losing their fee – but the implication is that if you don’t rearrange it, and then fall within the normal three working days grace period, then you will lose your fee.

There is no excuse for any ADI not to know about the recall if they have a Toyota, nor is there any excuse for trying to take a test in one without having had the remedial work carried out. Note what the bulletin says:

DVSA examiners may accept proof from the Toyota Online Recall Tool. You or your pupil would need to access this tool and complete the verification process on a suitable device to show the examiner, without delaying the testing schedule.

Either that, or they need to see a garage report that the work has been carried out.

No Foreign Language Tests From 7 April 2014

As of yesterday – Monday, 7 April 2014 – both theory and practical driving tests can only be conducted in English or Welsh.

Now, there isn’t a lot of linguistic clutter in that statement, and it means just what it says: YOU CAN ONLY TAKE YOUR THEORY OR PRACTICAL TEST IN ENGLISH OR WELSH FROM 7 APRIL 2014.

Can I take my test in Punjabi after April 2014?

No! You can only take your tests in English or Welsh after 7 April 2014. You cannot have an interpreter on your practical test unless it is for British Sign Language (BSL). Read my earlier article which spells out clearly which languages are no longer supported.

(This is an actual search term used to find the blog today – 8 April. It was actually written in better English than most search terms).

Test Pass: 4/4/2014

TickWell done to Duncan, who passed first time (with me) today with 8 driver faults. He told me that if he’d have failed this time – having taken his test four times several years ago – he was going to give up. To be honest, he was one of those who I’d have put money on passing, so I’ve no idea what he was thinking to coming up with something like that, but as they saying goes, there’s nowt so queer as folk.

He’s been a pleasure to teach, even though he was a Manchester Utd supporter. Mind you, this season, making fun of Manchester Utd supporters has been like shooting fish in a barrel, so maybe that’s just my imagination. His brother, on the other hand, is a Liverpool supporter and I also taught him to drive – several years ago, fortunately. I’d probably have refused to teach him if he was with me now! Joking aside, though, it’s nice when you get a text like this:

Just texting to say thank you again, I wouldn’t have got through it without you and and the lessons have been a pleasure. Take care mate.

This is what makes the job worthwhile. And it puts me above 50% for the year, again, though I’m still not happy with that – it’s well below my overall rate for last year.

The Driving Test is 80

The driving test turned 80 years old yesterday. It came in as part of the Road Traffic Act of 1934.

Back then, there were almost 7,500 deaths each year on the roads. The figure is around 1,750 today. The only major changes since 1934 have been the mandatory use of speedometers and safety glass (1937) and compulsory seatbelts (1983). In 1990 it became Law that supervising drivers must be 21 or older and have held a full licence for three years, and this apparently resulted in a major fall in accidents. A written theory test was introduced in 1996, and the Hazard Perception Test in 2002.

One comment in this news source intrigued me:

…the fatality figure last year stood at 1,754, and although there is still some way to go before we see an end to deaths on our roads, the figure proves that legislation works.

So it appears that someone somewhere is expecting – in all seriousness – that road casualties will eventually reach 0%. People really do talk nonsense sometimes. I’ve got more chance of winning the Lottery every week from now until the day I die than that has of happening. It’s a totally unrealistic target. Someone needs to look up the meaning of the word “accident”.

Who’s Driving On Britain’s Roads

A new documentary is scheduled to be shown on 10 April 2014 on ITV (10.35 pm). It promises to “delve into the murky world” of test fraud and illegal driving. It follows the DSA’s Fraud & Integrity Team and the press release suggest the problem is far deeper than you’d imagine, and that the people behind it will go to any lengths to commit such fraud.