Well done Tom, who passed today with just 5 driver faults. This one has to go right up there on my list of best or most satisfying passes of all time.
I taught Tom’s sister and then – while I was teaching him – his girlfriend. His sister passed some time in the middle of last year, and his girlfriend earlier this year. His sister had told me about him while I was teaching her, and she’d said how he’d taken and failed his test 5 times and then his theory test certificate ran out and he’d got to do it again.
I didn’t give it much thought after that, but a few weeks after she’d passed I got a call from Tom. I was immediately aware of how he could talk until the cows came home! You just couldn’t shut him up. His favourite topic for discussion, I discovered, was:
how long it had taken him this far
how many lessons he’d had
how many tests he’d taken
how his theory test had run out
how he’d had to take it again
how everyone was passing before him
how it wasn’t fair that everyone should pass before him
etc.
go back to the first thing and start again
Don’t get me wrong. There was nothing wrong with him as such, but it was killing him not to be able to drive. And he’d get distracted by things extremely easily, which talking while he was driving made much worse.
I quickly suspected that there was something other than nerves involved. Tom was the one I was referring to when I mentioned ADHD not long back.
The thing was: I knew he could drive, but even the smallest mistake would send him into a spiral of depression – and far more serious mistakes due to dwelling on the initial one. But no one – including me – seemed to be able to get this simple fact into his skull!
You have to realise that this had nothing to do with how good a driver he was – it was all down to the pressure he was under to pass his test. I could trigger him at any moment just by mentioning something that I knew was on his list of “favourite topic” subjects. I used to wind him up deliberately sometimes just to show what effect it had.
Anyway, this was his first test with me after a concerted effort after being diagnosed with adult ADHD (which made him and his family feel much better now they understood why he’d been in trouble a lot at school – he’s in his late 20s now).
This is why this job can be so enjoyable. It’s impossible to explain how much this pass means to him.
I’ve written about this before, but we’re due an update since things have got much worse since that last article.
Let me just summarise an important detail here: trams might be politically correct as a form of transport, capable of making the average council employee wet their pants at the mere mention of them, but they are definitely not a green form of transport.
Nottingham’s existing tram is an utter joke. It’s been shoehorned into a place where there isn’t room for it in order to link the kinds of places which have a police helicopter hovering permanently above them to the City Centre. In Basford, for example, it runs alongside a railway line, and if you catch it right you can be waiting for ages (my current personal best is over 40 minutes) just to travel a few hundred metres.
The existing network is known as Phase I. Phase II began several months ago and was flagged in advance by the usual “Expect Delays” signs erected by the jubilant council and contract workers. The first of these appeared along University Boulevard ahead of cutting down most of the trees.
Since then, University Boulevard has become Hell On Earth every single night of the week. You see, it is a two-lane road, and it is one of only two ways of getting out towards Bramcote and Long Eaton short of testing cosmology theory to the max! But the complete imbeciles responsible for the tram – both council and contractor – have somehow been allowed to close one lane off, and all the traffic now has to get through using just one lane. Incredibly, this state of affairs has been operating since the beginning of June, and given that the workmen apparently working there are only visible for about 4 hours a day (and only on weekdays) there is no obvious end to the chaos.
It is even more unbelievable that the police have allowed it to continue. If I created tailbacks that long every night of the week I’d be committing a criminal offence, and I can’t see how it should be any different for those idiots who have authorised all of this.
The photo above shows the area affected. The far lane you can see is closed with large concrete blocks and the gap in the central; reservation is also coned off. If people need to get into the Hockey Club entrance you can see over the other side, they have to go to the next set of lights and turn round (the sign says “Hockey Club open as usual”, or something similar, but the extra 30 minutes it can take to get into it is far from “usual”).
The most frightening thing of all is that they could easily have flattened the central reservation and made a contraflow system to keep two lanes open. But they didn’t. That’s because they are – as I have already said – complete idiots.
But now the situation is getting much worse. You see, Phase II is going to take the tram to all the rough areas in Nottingham that Phase I missed. For several months there have been “Expect Delays” signs in Beeston, Long Eaton, parts of the City, and Clifton, and they’ve been busy clearing greenbelt and other land and turning it into muddy waste (during the bird nesting season, I hasten to add – all normal rules and regulations appear to be suspended when the project has “tram” in it).
Over the last two weeks it has become virtually impossible to bypass University Boulevard by going through Beeston and Chilwell because they have now begun work in those places (cutting off lanes and erecting “3-way lights”).
This week, work began on Haydn Road in the City, and that means huge delays if you try to go that way, and huge delays if you try to bypass it (because everyone else is trying to do the same). On Friday I got into the queue on Haydn Road, realised my mistake, then got stuck in another queue of people trying to avoid it in Hyson Green. ( EDIT: I take this one back – for a while, at least. They haven’t started roadworks there yet, so it must have been some other problem that I encountered this week. However, the warning signs say National Grid start work there on 23 July for up to 12 weeks – in normal-speak that means 15 weeks or more. )
Also this week, part of Southchurch Drive in Clifton is closed off with “3-way lights” in place.
They – that is, the council and the contractor involved – are not “sorry for any inconvenience” they cause. It is deliberate and they relish having caused it. They have made no attempt whatsoever to avoid any of it.
Nottingham is rapidly moving towards a total evening gridlock situation, and it is all the fault of the Council.
You should normally apply the parking brake whenever the vehicle is stationary.
Apply the parking brake… unless the wait is likely to be very short.
Your foot could easily slip off the footbrake if, for example, your shoes are wet or if you’re bumped from behind. You could then be pushed into another vehicle or a pedestrian…
The use of the parking brake is even more important in vehicles fitted with automatic transmission. The parking brake will help avoid
the possibility of ‘creep’
the vehicle surging forward if the accelerator is pressed accidentally while in D (Drive)
Although it might seem a controversial comment to make, the people who learn in automatics tend to be the kind who can easily get their feet mixed up, so that second warning is very relevant. It’s bad enough in a manual with some learners.
TES also says:
Section 22 Automatics and four-wheel drive
The importance of the parking brake
Fully applying the parking brake whenever your vehicle is stationary is even more important on an automatic.
If the selector lever is in any position other than P or N, it will move off under power if the accelerator is pressed (accidentally or on purpose) unless the brakes are on.
If the choke (manual or automatic) is in use, an even lighter accelerator pressure can move the vehicle away.
I view of this, it is surprising to see some ADIs advising that you shouldn’t use the parking brake in an automatic. This alternative advice seems to be based on the belief that the drivers in question find it difficult to apply, or that automatic drivers historically have fallen into the habit of not using it. It even appears that some ADIs purposely criticise use of the handbrake because they believe that a pupil’s previous instructor told them to use it every time they stop!
Let’s just set a few records straight. First of all, brake light glare is a very real problem. At night – and especially if it is raining – modern high-intensity brake lights can be painfully bright. TES says:
Junctions at night
Brake lights can dazzle. Don’t keep your foot on the brake pedal if you’re waiting at a junction or queuing in traffic… use the parking brake.
[Similarly with indicators]
Sitting at traffic lights with your foot on the brake is ignorant as well as the sign of a bad (or badly taught) driver.
Secondly, there are many things that learners are taught to do or not do when they are taking lessons. A good example would be adhering to speed limits. The simple fact that many of them choose to ignore speed limits totally once they pass does not mean they are right, or that ADIs should start teaching that way too. For that reason, the apparent fact that most automatic drivers fall into the lazy habit of just sitting there with their foot on the brakes does not in any way make them right or indicate that ADIs who teach in automatics should fall into line.
Going back to the comment I made above, people who learn in automatics very often do so because they can’t handle manual cars. I’ve persuaded several to move to automatics because they just don’t have the coordination to handle the clutch, gears, and brakes. Once they pass their tests, that lack of coordination is bound to lead to not using the handbrake for most of them. But it doesn’t mean they’re right – it just means they’re not very good drivers! (Before anyone rises to that, just think: no matter how nice someone is, how dedicated they are to learning, how desperate they are to pass, whatever their disability or other domestic circumstances, etc., it has no bearing whatsoever on whether they are a good driver or not. It’s just the way it is.)
On the driving test, you won’t immediately fail for not using the handbrake. But you will fail if not using it leads to some other problem, or even if the examiner perceives that there is a significant risk. ADIs shouldn’t be making their own rules up just to fit in with difficult learners.
Not using the parking brake by default is already half way to a fail. And nearly all of the way to being a bad or inconsiderate driver from the moment they get their licence!
But some automatics don’t have a parking brake.
All modern cars have some sort of parking brake. The dangers of not using it have already been outlined. Whether you operate it with your hand, your foot, or through some sort of telepathy, it is there for a reason.
If you’re stopped, brake light dazzle isn’t going to cause an accident, is it?
Driving at night and having to put up with dazzle can lead to tiredness or loss of concentration or awareness. Having bright lights shone unnecessarily in your face in uncomfortable at best, but can potentially lead to more dangerous situations.
If you are teaching people to avoid using the handbrake and not teaching them to think of those behind them, you need to take a serious look at what you are doing. Brake light dazzle IS a significant problem. Holding the car on the footbrake for too long, and especially at night, IS a sign of a bad or inconsiderate driver.
I hate it when I pick up pupils who have been told to use the handbrake every time they stop.
Well, good for you. However, you ought to allow for the fact that most new drivers find it difficult to assess when to do something that should be triggered by judgement or common sense, and often fall into the habit of either always doing it, or always not doing it as a result. They try to pigeon hole everything. So there is a good chance they were not actually told to apply the handbrake “every time”, but have developed that habit themselves as a “just in case” strategy (they do it with signalling to pull over or move off, amongst other things). Mine often try to do it, in spite of me never having taught them to.
TES makes it clear that you should use the handbrake where it would help you prevent the car from rolling.
So it comes down to two options for many learners. Do you:
NOT use the handbrake and risk rolling?
use it EVERY TIME just in case?
Only the first one carries any significant risk. The second is not a fault, nor is it a danger to other road users in itself. The only people who see it as a problem are certain ADIs who seem annoyed by it.
Someone found the blog on that search term! It depends on many factors including where you teach. Someone teaching in Central London is hardly going to be able to cover as many miles as someone in a less urban location.
Taking my own pupils as an example, a typical 2 hour lesson can cover anywhere from less than 5 miles to more than 60! It just depends on what you are trying to cover.
The one thing to remember is that although some people can learn new things very quickly, the one thing that cannot be hurried is experience. By definition, experience only comes with time and practice, and that means time on the road practicing driving. Inevitably, that translates into miles.
Many pupils are anxious about how much it will cost them to learn to drive, and I make it clear from the outset that if they can get a lot of quality private practice between lessons then they will learn over a shorter time period. I just tell them straight that if they can get insured on mum or dad’s car then that will avoid having to pay me for the road time instead. I also tell them that it is important that mum or dad prevents bad habits forming, so I suggest that they accompany us on a lesson and I show them some things to watch out for.
If I get someone who passes quickly (especially without any private practice) then I feel glad for both them and me. But I always have a nagging worry that they might not have had enough road experience to drive safely once they’re out on their own. That’s why I don’t try to scrimp on fuel and am happy to drive long distances and do manoeuvres a long way from the test centres.
I know that the primary consideration for many ADIs is fuel costs. I’ve written before about the cheapos and their stupid hourly rates. That’s one group that will avoid racking up many miles like the plague, because it eats into their already tiny profit margin.
An ADI should be teaching their learners whatever is necessary to make them safe new drivers once they pass their tests, and make allowances for whatever they are/are not doing in between lessons.
An ADI should not be teaching the bare minimum required to pass the test.
You can work out for yourself which of those groups the cheapos are likely to fall under.
More timely advice from the DSA, this time concerning junctions.
Rule 178
Advanced stop lines. Some signal-controlled junctions have advanced stop lines to allow cycles to be positioned ahead of other traffic.
Motorists, including motorcyclists, MUST stop at the first white line reached if the lights are amber or red and should avoid blocking the way or encroaching on the marked area at other times, e.g. if the junction ahead is blocked.
If your vehicle has proceeded over the first white line at the time that the signal goes red, you MUST stop at the second white line, even if your vehicle is in the marked area.
Allow cyclists time and space to move off when the green signal shows.
Read all the rules about road junctions (170-183)
I noticed recently someone was giving ridiculous advice about stopping in the cyclists’ forward area. Perhaps they should read this and learn.
As I explained in an article I wrote when I saw that, the word MUST (in bold red text in the paper copy) means that you must stop – by law – at the first line under normal circumstances.
These days you’d be forgiven for thinking that the marked area with the bicycle symbol is for taxis, Audis, and Corsas with loud exhausts and tinted windows. It isn’t, and the use of this space by those drivers bears tribute to how poor they really are when it comes to driving.
If you’re driving along normally and the lights change, you either stop at the first line or carry on. If you stop in the cyclists’ area then you’ve done it wrong (except in heavy traffic if the junction is blocked).
This message from the DSA tells you how you can sign up to get email alerts about their weekly Highway Code reminders.
Sign up to get a weekly reminder of Highway Code rules by email. Each weekly email focuses on a different rule.
You’ll need your email address to sign up – it takes about 1 minute to do.
Sign up
Essential reading
The Highway Code applies to England, Scotland and Wales. It’s essential reading for everyone.
It is important that all road users are aware of the code and are considerate towards each other. This applies to pedestrians as much as to drivers and riders.
Many of the rules in the code are legal requirements, and if you disobey these rules you are committing a criminal offence.
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.
Well done Tom, who passed today with just 5 driver faults. This one has to go right up there on my list of best or most satisfying passes of all time.
The existing network is known as Phase I. Phase II began several months ago and was flagged in advance by the usual “Expect Delays” signs erected by the jubilant council and contract workers. The first of these appeared along University Boulevard ahead of cutting down most of the trees.
Taking my own pupils as an example, a typical 2 hour lesson can cover anywhere from less than 5 miles to more than 60! It just depends on what you are trying to cover.
out how much it will cost them to learn to drive, and I make it clear from the outset that if they can get a lot of quality private practice between lessons then they will learn over a shorter time period. I just tell them straight that if they can get insured on mum or dad’s car then that will avoid having to pay me for the road time instead. I also tell them that it is important that mum or dad prevents bad habits forming, so I suggest that they accompany us on a lesson and I show them some things to watch out for.
I noticed recently someone was giving ridiculous advice about stopping in the cyclists’ forward area. Perhaps they should read this and learn.
wrong. But the four I’ve listed are common.