When I got home this afternoon, I went to the bank to deposit some money.

My bank – The Halifax – has a FastTrak machine, where you just put your card in, then it takes your money and cheques, counts them, and makes the deposit. It isn’t quite as fast as the name suggests (you have to confirm the amount for each cheque), and it IS temperamental concerning damaged notes and cheques, but it does the job. It’s main benefit is that most people stay away from it, so when there is a queue of 20 people waiting for the one cashier on duty, I can just stroll in, do the business, and stroll out.

Incidentally, I need to have a word with some of my pupils and make sure they stop tearing big chunks off their cheques when they tear them out of the book, and to try and use handwriting that isn’t quite so… copperplate in appearance. The machine doesn’t like that!

It was a torn cheque that forced me to go and stand in the queue to deposit it person-to-person. There were TWO (shock!) cashiers on duty, and one person in the queue, who’d just walked in (dammit). Cashier No. 1 became available, then cashier No. 2 immediately after. The guy in front walked to No. 1, who now declared he was no longer available, so I had to step back for him to go to No. 2.

And guess what?

Well, no matter how hard I try, I cannot understand why I, personally, would ever want to go into a bank and instigate business with one of the cashiers unless it involved either putting money IN or taking money OUT of my account. I just can’t.

But it seems that everyone else on the planet engages in anything BUT depositing or withdrawing money. This explains why there is always a mile-long queue (especially at the Halifax). This guy was no exception, and whatever he was doing it took a bloody long time – longer even than the length of time it takes a human cashier to credit a single cheque to your account in the Halifax (and that’s LONG): another cashier saw the queue building up again and came on duty, and the guy was still at whatever it was when I went out!

I’ve noticed quite a few hits from people who are obviously searching for answers to specific questions – either to do with driving instruction or driving lessons, or with things I have written about on this blog.

One of the most common is “welding rod keeps getting stuck ” – from people who have found the links to my posts detailing the construction of my kneeling chair. Well, I’d like to think I have edited the relevant posts to provide the answers on that, but I have now added a Contact Form (see the button at the top right). If anyone wants any specific information – and assuming I can answer them – please use the form to send me an email.

On the driving front, I see search terms where people are obviously looking for the answer to a specific question. A recent one has been “dsa approach to roundabouts ” and “adi roundabout questions “. Previously, I’ve seen “adi parallel park “, “adi turn in road “, and “adi reversing “, to name just a few. I assume that these are PDIs looking for help.

If I can be of assistance I’d be more than happy to answer any direct questions – and you won’t have to worry about me revealing your identity. Again, please use the Contact Form (see the button top right). And don’t worry if you are not English-speaking… I can use one of the Google translation tools, just as many of you use them to translate pages from this site.

I saw this story in the Daily Mail today.

Girls with their eyes on the rearview mirror and one hand clutching the mascara or lipstick are to blame for nearly half a million accidents a year, it was revealed yesterday.

I’ve seen quite a few doing this, particularly first thing in the morning. Women often don’t seem to be able to accept that the car isn’t an extension of their homes, and behave behind the wheel as they would in their kitchens or bathrooms. Selfishly.

When I’m with pupils, people-watching can be fun. When a female driver stops at lights, the first thing she often does – even before putting the handbrake on – is lean over and toussle her hair! Or that thing women do, where they appear to be rubbing in face cream with their middle fingers just below their eyes. Or turn completely around to do or say something to the baby in the back seat (that one scares me: they often have a kid in back, and yet appear to be oblivious to the world outside). Or lean over and duck below seat level to do something in the glovebox or on the floor – and miss the lights changing.

One thing you see a lot of: badly adjusted mirrors! If you can’t see the side of their heads or their eyes in that rearview mirror, then they can’ see you. And it’s because they have it adjusted so they can see themselves!

Back in June, I published a post about people who send texts whilst driving.

I often say to pupils when we’re out on lessons (and if it’s safe to do so) and we’re sitting at traffic lights “just have a look at this guy on the right. Look at his eyes. He’s sending a text.” And they are. You should see how they react when they see us looking at them.

Today, I got this link via an email from PCMag – a site I subscribe to. Bear in mind that it is an American site, but there is no way the data aren’t valid for us in the UK.

Distracted drivers **“ including those sending and reading text messages from behind the wheel **“ caused the deaths of nearly 6,000 people in 2008, according to Wednesday data from the Department of Transportation.

In addition to the almost 6,000 people who died last year, more than half a million people were injured by distracted drivers, according to Wednesday findings from DOT and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Driver distraction was involved in 16 percent of all fatal crashes last year.

Unlike the UK, America doesn’t appear to have a nationwide legislation regarding use of mobile phones. However, since it seems that most people in the UK flaunt the rule anyway, it is likely that they contribute to a significant number of accidents over here.

EDIT 4/10/2009: One of my pupils sent me the link to a recent BBC story . It contains this video on YouTube, created to show the dangers of texting when driving – it’s the full HD version from YouTube I’ve linked to, and it is very graphic:

[Link removed – no longer works]

I have to be honest, but I find it incredible that people who are as stupid as this are even allowed to sit a driving test, let alone go out unsupervised. But it is a growing problem – and as much as I applaud Gwent Police for doing it, it is going to take a little more than a video on YouTube to turn braindead idiots into even passably responsible drivers.

If you think I’m being unreasonable, look at some of the usual “learned” responses to the video on the YouTube page here .

I was on a lesson this morning and I said to my pupil as we were stopped at lights:

Look at the guy driving the car behind. What do you think he is doing?

His eyes were up and down, up and down. As we moved off, he overtook and I warned my pupil he would probably cut in. He did. He then weaved in and out across two lanes and turned left without indicating – stopping on green lights to let someone turn in front of him for some reason (they were stationary in the middle of the road). He disappeared somewhat faster than us after that. Then – about half a mile further on – we came to a roundabout. A car cut out across three lanes of traffic right in front of us, and guess who it was? My pupil said:

Look! It’s him again!

He then wandered in and out across two lanes of a dual carriageway and disappeared at speed again.

A while back, following a consultation exercise, the DSA decided that from October 2010 instructors were going to have to sit in on candidates’ tests whether they (or the candidate) liked it or not.

Now personally, I didn’t want to have to do this, but neither did I have much of a problem with it. But I must say that the logic the DSA had used in order to bring this in was highly questionable.

The consultation it came out of (allegedly) was to do with cutting accidents among new drivers. If you didn’t see the actual consultation, you will undoubtedly have heard the confused echoes via pupils or the press – all the talk of having to wait until people were 18 before being allowed to drive, having to take lessons with a qualified instructor (ADI), having to take a minimum number of lessons, and so on.

In reality, those confused echoes originated from some semi-sensible ideas that had been thrown around. There was talk of having ADIs sign off candidates’ competence at manoeuvres, which would mean the test itself was longer and involved trickier driving skills. This would mean that pupils had to be trained to a higher level (i.e. one of the concerns about current poor road skills and subsequent accidents) by someone who knew what they were doing (an ADI), which would take longer (at least 12 months in most cases). This is partly where the misconception about raising the driving age to 18 came from.

The DSA’s consultation paper didn’t ask people what they thought could be done. It simply told people what was probably going to happen anyway. Worse still, the semi-sensible ideas like the one given above had already been dismissed – in fact, anything other than the most banal and ridiculous ideas had been long gone from the agenda. Cutting a long story short, the only thing which was likely to be implemented in most peoples lifetimes – and it is quite frightening really that such an expensive consultation could have ended up being so limited – was the one about sitting in the back on tests.

Quite where this idea came from isn’t known. Not to me, anyway. But somehow or other, the DSA had decided that road accidents among new drivers were as a direct result of ADIs not sitting in on candidates’ tests!

Because of my background, I could hazard a guess as to where this idea came from. It is so abstract and unjustifiable that it could only come from someone who doesn’t have a clue about driving, driving instruction, and driver attitudes on the roads (or how deep a problem attitude is, and how it goes way beyond just driving). So I suspect the blame must lie  initially with one of the DSA’s new graduates a few years ago, and then a chain of people highly trained in Teamworking®, commissioned to praise that new graduate. No doubt, that original new graduate is well on his or her way up the “corporate” (this is a Government department) ladder.

But I digress: to anyone with an ounce of sense, it is obvious that accidents are not down to ADIs not sitting in on tests.

That’s the background. The good news is, though, that from what I have heard this week the idea has now been scrapped – ADIs will NOT have to sit in on tests any more . Candidates will be asked specifically if they want their ADI there, but that’s all.

EDIT 29/09/2009: Reading the various forums you’d be forgiven for thinking that the DSA backed down on this after a major battle involving broadswords and light sabres, during which they were roundly defeated by the Mighty [INSERT NAME OF THE LEADER OF WHICHEVER ORGANISATION OR UNION IS CLAIMING CREDIT], and forced to renounce The Dark Side for ever more. Phrases such as “DSA caves in” and “DSA backs down” are rife.

The reality appears to be as follows:

[those present heard] the DSA explain that they were proposing to trial allowing the pupil the choice to allow their ADI to sit in and observe their test.

Not quite what is being reported by some, and it does leave the way open for the idea to be resurrected in future.

A colleague of mine sent me an email from his franchiser which explains:

 

There are benefits to all concerned from the introduction of the observer on test, in particular because it introduces a basis for regular dialogue between the driving instructors and the examiners at their local driving test centre. We all recognise that communication could be improved between these parties , and so if as a result there is greater openness, understanding and cooperation between instructors and examiners for the good of the candidates taking the driving test, that will benefit road safety and all concerned.

 

It is a pragmatic compromise on the part of the DSA giving them the opportunity to trial the observer on test more widely before they consider introducing it through regulation at a later stage.

 

Following in from the first post in this series, I was out with a pupil last night. Everything was fine – she was driving well, keeping to lanes… it was… well, fine.

We came to a roundabout, where ‘straight ahead’ is the first exit, and if it wasn’t for the presence of the roundabout the road would actually be almost straight, with a slight curl to the left. I pointed up the road we wanted and said:

We’re going straight ahead at the roundabout, first exit… it’s up there [I’m pointing here, remember].

So, she gets on to the roundabout – it’s not a large one – in the left lane (of three). At the exact point where we just want to follow the road ahead, she just about rips the wheel off the steering column and tries to take us across two lanes of traffic to take the right-hand 2nd exit.

It reminded me of a pupil I had last year (which I may have mentioned previously). We were on a lesson in the dark during one of the cold spells. It was -2°C outside, and the gritters were out in force. As we approached a simple two-exit roundabout (the first exit was at 90 degrees and was a left turn, the second exit was literally straight ahead), I told him we were going straight ahead.

The problem was, he didn’t even begin to think about where ‘straight ahead’ was until he’d got on to the roundabout. In the split second he had to work it out, his brain told him that ‘straight ahead’ was wherever the car was pointing. Unfortunately, this translated into trying to remove the steering wheel from the steering column to take the first exit, because that was just about visible out of the windscreen now we were at an angle on the roundabout!

When they do things like this it is a great opportunity to explain the importance of planning ahead. It also emphasises the importance of you planning ahead and bringing a spare set of underwear!

No matter how many times they do something totally unexpected, you can be sure they’ll find something else even more unexpected to scare you to death with in future.

Well done KC for passing first time with just 4 driver faults on the toughest test route they have at that test centre – and after only 23½ hours of tuition, too!

Compared to my last pupil on test, you were a model student and a pleasure to teach.

It was also good to see you driving on your own within 4 hours. Be safe!

I was on a lesson tonight, and the pupil had got the mirrors set and we had just driven off from his house. Bearing in mind he has his test in a couple of weeks, after about a hundred metres he said:

Is the mirror set on dim?

I glanced over and could just see the top of his head and most of the ceiling in it. I reached over, twitched the mirror downwards, and replied:

No. Only you.

Earlier in the week, I was driving along with another pupil. We’d just gone past National Speed Limit signs, and he said:

What’s the speed limit here?

I answered (surprised, as I know he knows what these signs mean, and he’d accelerated anyway):

It’s 60 – didn’t you see those NSL signs?

He replied:

Yes, but why does it say 50 on those signs?

I explained:

There is a railway track up on that embankment, and they are there for the trains.

Then again, today, I had one pupil who “lost it” (his own words) at a roundabout and tried to aim straight across it to take the exit we wanted, and then – after I grabbed the wheel – repeatedly tried to drive in any direction except on the road by engaging full lock one side, then the other. When I tried to get to the bottom of it (and I tried very hard), the only thing the pupil could say about why he did it was:

I honestly don’t know.

I hate that outcome.

And also today (the same pupil who hadn’t adjusted his mirror properly), I said:

At the roundabout, turn right, 3rd exit.

It’s a small roundabout, so we approach a little too fast, swing round quickly past exits 1 and 2, then past 3, and finally exit 4, at which point I grabbed the wheel to prevent us going back the way we came (but slicing across two lanes, as it is a dual carriageway).

And this is the bit that always gets me:

Weren’t you counting the exits so you could take the correct one?

Yes!

So why didn’t you take exit 3?

No answer.

Well done, GS, for passing with 6 driver faults. There will never be another one like you!

I offer my thanks to The Almighty for this pass, as it now means I won’t have to argue with you anymore about such things as when I used to have to grab the wheel because you were going too wide, it didn’t matter that you “were going to steer back” just as I grabbed it. The fact that I had to grab it at all was the issue.

Ah, yes. And when you used to approach junctions too fast and I used the dual controls, the fact that you “were going to stop” was of much lower priority than my significant concern that you had left it too late and might not. And the examiner would have seen it that way, too.

And at roundabouts, when you would insist on taking your eyes off the oncoming traffic just as a gap was appearing to stare left, and so missed the opportunity and ended up holding traffic up. Every time without fail, and then argued with me about it.

And at junctions, when you would stare blankly to the right (when turning left) – with absolutely nothing visible for miles – and then drive out without steering or looking left at all, and then argue with me about grabbing the wheel or using the brake to avoid traffic coming from that side.

And all those times when you were unable to complete a manoeuvre properly, yet when I tried to analyse why it had gone wrong you would say “I know I did it wrong so there’s no point in going on about it”. If you’d have listened you could have passed with fewer lessons, instead of having to hit on the correct procedure by trial and error.

But that’s all in the past now. Phew!