the UK Driving Test - Is It Adequate?

[Suze]

No it isn't but it's all part of general awareness. A kid running off the pavement in front of you isn't at first running in the road but you'd still have to take action to avoid it, like you would if a car pulled out of a car park in front of you....

I did not see it, because it wasn't there.

The point is there was a car there which you said earlier you had failed to observe...the examiner is not fulfilling quotas, he obviously had cause for concern that in that particular circumstance you were not as aware as you possibly could have been.

[Asp]

Originally Posted by Suze

I thought it was just to draw attention to a speed bump until I was about to go up it and some man stepped out in front of me and Sam said it was a pedestrian crossing...

Well, that's fair enough. If a bloke steps off the pavement infront of my car then:
1) I'll give way to him, he might made a dent in the bonnet
2) If he's got the intention of moving to the opposite side of the road, there's a pedestrian crossing.

[Asp]

Originally Posted by The STIG

The examiner actually said afterwards that the car he saw was moving around in a car park alongside the road, but he thought it had moved out of my way (which it hadn't).

Which goes back to the earlier point made by other posters - how did you know it hadn't moved out of your way? Are you aware of where the car was at all times? Or, was the first time you saw it as you passed it (when it was in the car park) - as it may have ended up in the car park because it had to avoid you.

I'm afraid I also have to question the theory of "I did not see it, because it wasn't there.". Just because you didn't see it, it doesn't mean it wasn't there (before you saw it in the car park in the example).
When moving lanes on a motorway, I can look in my mirrors and not see a car. Doesn't mean there isn't one though - that's why I check my blind spot.
[Theoretical example, I accept that 99% of the time you'll be aware of a car there because of prior observation]

This proves that they do have quotas - another one of the government's tricks to limit road use no doubt.

How would that work then? As, learner drivers are still on the road, if under supervision. And nearly everyone passes eventually - heck, even that woman from Driving School managed it!

However, if your attitude was "Never trust an examiner of any kind - they're all... of dubious parentage." before you got into the car, I wouldn't be surprised if the examiner did make something up to fail you!

[The STIG]

Originally Posted by Asp

Which goes back to the earlier point made by other posters - how did you know it hadn't moved out of your way? Are you aware of where the car was at all times? Or, was the first time you saw it as you passed it (when it was in the car park) - as it may have ended up in the car park because it had to avoid you.

The first time I saw it was in the car park - in a position which would have meant it had had to drive through a hedge to leave the road directly - as it would if this liar of an examinar is to be belived. There were no ford escort sized holes in the hedge.

I'm afraid I also have to question the theory of "I did not see it, because it wasn't there.". Just because you didn't see it, it doesn't mean it wasn't there (before you saw it in the car park in the example).
When moving lanes on a motorway, I can look in my mirrors and not see a car. Doesn't mean there isn't one though - that's why I check my blind spot.
[Theoretical example, I accept that 99% of the time you'll be aware of a car there because of prior observation]

For starters, I checked up the road before pulling out, and saw it was clear, so I continued. Incidently I did check the blind spot as well, which I always do when entering a motorway.

Once on the motorway, I'm rarely going fast enough to overtake anything anyway... but I digress.

How would that work then? As, learner drivers are still on the road, if under supervision. And nearly everyone passes eventually - heck, even that woman from Driving School managed it!

Ok, bad example. the fact remains that there ARE quotas - otherwise why do they fail people for no other reason than their own satisfaction?

However, if your attitude was "Never trust an examiner of any kind - they're all... of dubious parentage." before you got into the car, I wouldn't be surprised if the examiner did make something up to fail you!

It wasn't before, but it certainly was after.

This after a previous test failed because I couldn't parralell park into a space not even Russ Swift could get into.

[Suze]

Originally Posted by Asp

Well, that's fair enough. If a bloke steps off the pavement infront of my car then:
1) I'll give way to him, he might made a dent in the bonnet
2) If he's got the intention of moving to the opposite side of the road, there's a pedestrian crossing.

1) Agreed

2) Still leaves the question of is this black and yellow painted speed bump a pedestrian crossing (which I now presume is a yes) and if so how are you supposed to know this? I will dig out the highway code book later but as I said earlier, couldn't find it on the online version.

[Suze]

Originally Posted by The STIG

Ok, bad example. the fact remains that there ARE quotas - otherwise why do they fail people for no other reason than their own satisfaction?

Because they're not good enough or deemed safe enough by the examiner to be given a license! NOT because of quotas.

This after a previous test failed because I couldn't parralell park into a space not even Russ Swift could get into.

Having not been there, I can't comment on the size of the space, however I doubt an examiner would ask you to paralell park into an impossible space.

For whatever reasons on the day the examiner decided not to give you the pass mark - however much you disagree or feel it was unfair, you need to accept it and stop blaming the examiners!

[Peter Mallett]

@STIG.

Are you Welsh?

Only it is a fact that Welsh peeps cannot pass their test first time. Something to do with government quotas.

[touringlegend]

They have quotas here in Scotland too. My mate got failed for driving over the kerb into the test centre the wrong way. At least thats what he told me.

[Tim Falce]

Originally Posted by The STIG

This proves that they do have quotas - another one of the government's tricks to limit road use no doubt. Never trust an examiner of any kind - they're all... of dubious parentage.

Next you'll be saying there are quotas for MOT passes and failures.

Never trust an examiner of any kind - they're all... of dubious parentage.

I'll check my birth certificate later.

[Asp]

Originally Posted by The STIG

The first time I saw it was in the car park - in a position which would have meant it had had to drive through a hedge to leave the road directly - as it would if this liar of an examinar is to be belived. There were no ford escort sized holes in the hedge.

Fair enough, when though? As I say, it could well have been after you "forced" it into there...

Ok, bad example. the fact remains that there ARE quotas - otherwise why do they fail people for no other reason than their own satisfaction?

Tell you what, use the Freedom of Information act to find the Directive instructing examiners to ensure X% of people fail their test.
When you do that, it will become a fact. Until then, it's your personal speculation based on your own experience. The fact that you're the only one stating this means that the majority of the evidence is actually showing that there aren't quotas!

This after a previous test failed because I couldn't parralell park into a space not even Russ Swift could get into.

That's fine, you need to be able to reverse into a space, IIRC, 1 and a half times the length of your car. If the space wasn't that big, you should have bumped the cars behind to make it that big, using a tape measure if required to prove to the examiner that you weren't making the space too big

I hate to say it Kev, but this looks like sour grapes over failing, and nothing else. It's a natural reaction to not like people who fail you, but you have to take onboard that once in a while, things are your fault.
I passed my test first time, but it wasn't without any minors. I learnt from the mistakes I did make and hopefully don't commit those faults any more. If I'd have failed on a major error, I'd have taken it on board, and made sure I didn't do it again. Even if I thought the examiner was harsh making me reverse into a small bay, I'd have gone away and practised until I could get into a bay the size of a postage stamp. You wouldn't end up being a worse driver for it!

[Suze]

Originally Posted by Asp

Even if I thought the examiner was harsh making me reverse into a small bay, I'd have gone away and practised until I could get into a bay the size of a postage stamp. You wouldn't end up being a worse driver for it!

I wasn't too great on three point turns - I've practised and practised and now can do them quite happily in our road, which requires a 9 / 11 point turn or thereabouts - makes doing a 3 point turn seem so much easier and comes in useful being able to manouvre in narrow areas sometimes

I should add, the one thing I couldn't do for the first couple of months living here was park in the local Sainsburys car park....don't ask why, but every other car park is fine. Just about got over that one now too, ended up being a mental thing in the end

[Peter Mallett]

Originally Posted by Suze

ended up being a mental thing in the end

And there, ladies and gentlemen, we have the answer!

Sorry Suze couldn't resist.

[Tim Falce]

Originally Posted by Suze

I should add, the one thing I couldn't do for the first couple of months living here was park in the local Sainsburys car park....don't ask why, but every other car park is fine. Just about got over that one now too, ended up being a mental thing in the end

I still can't park in our local Sainsbury's car park and it's been there over 20 years. With me it's a mental thing as well. I go mental at all the Muppets who dither and **** around trying to park. I find it easier to go to Tescos.

[Suze]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

And there, ladies and gentlemen, we have the answer!

Sorry Suze couldn't resist.

Hehe no worries

The worse car park here is the one by the market...normally very busy and people sit in the middle of the bleeding car park so no-one can pass them waiting "just incase" someone comes back....they are muppets as well, however bullying tactics tend to work.

[redshoes]

Originally Posted by The STIG

One failed me for running a car which was not there off the road

Originally Posted by The STIG

I did not see it, because it wasn't there.

Originally Posted by The STIG

even the examiner said it wasn't there.

So we are all agreed that there was no car to be seen.

Originally Posted by The STIG

The first time I saw it was in the car park

Are you now saying that the WAS a car and you DID see it?

Have to agree with Asp, this sounds like a bad case of sour grapes. Did you appeal the decision? If the examiner later said that there wasn't car (which you have implied) then why did you not ask him to change his decision accordingly?

Originally Posted by The STIG

This after a previous test failed because I couldn't parralell park into a space not even Russ Swift could get into.

If you felt you were being hard done by why didn't you raise this with the examiner at the time. Far better to question the examiner before attempting the manoeuvre rather than winge about it later.

[The STIG]

Originally Posted by redshoes

So we are all agreed that there was no car to be seen.

Are you now saying that the WAS a car and you DID see it?

Let me clarify...

There was no car on the road for me to run off it.

The car which the examiner thought he saw on the road was in fact parked in the car park

Did you appeal the decision? If the examiner later said that there wasn't car (which you have implied) then why did you not ask him to change his decision accordingly?

I did challenge him about it, but it was his word against mine, and at the end of the day he's the one with the clipboard. I'm just the one paying £90 each time.

If you felt you were being hard done by why didn't you raise this with the examiner at the time. Far better to question the examiner before attempting the manoeuvre rather than winge about it later.

Frankly, I didn't think you could question instructions like that.

[redshoes]

Originally Posted by The STIG

I did challenge him about it, but it was his word against mine, and at the end of the day he's the one with the clipboard. I'm just the one paying £90 each time.

At the end of the day it's your £90 (is that how much a test is these days?). Personally if I felt I was being unfairly stiffed out of £90 I'd have something to say on the matter.

Frankly, I didn't think you could question instructions like that.

Why not. If the examiner told you to take the next roundabout at 80mph while picking your nose with your left hand would you not question that.

[GORDON STREETER]

I took my test in a ser 2 lwb landrover and when the examiner asked me to do a 3 point turn he failed me for being abusive (this is true ) he told me afterwards that I could have taken more !

[The STIG]

Originally Posted by redshoes

At the end of the day it's your £90 (is that how much a test is these days?). Personally if I felt I was being unfairly stiffed out of £90 I'd have something to say on the matter.

I was hiring the car, so it went up quite a bit!

Why not. If the examiner told you to take the next roundabout at 80mph while picking your nose with your left hand would you not question that.

Very good point. I guess nerves got the better of me.