Driving test question - complaint?
Discussion
A family member has just failed their driving test. There was a singular “major” which was an allegation of being too hesitant to overtake a cyclist.
The road is an NSL. The first “opportunity” they “should” have taken was here:
They were in the left carriageway. Cyclist was riding at more than 10mph. Overtaking would therefor have been illegal (not to mention the unsighted bend).
Second was 100 yards further, similar layout. Third was here:
Cyclist in left lane as before. Oncoming traffic at 60mph.
Examiner *directed* family member to overtake within their lane, saying “there’s plenty of room,” meaning they were *very* close to the cyclist (as can be seen, no room to leave a decent gap). Fail was for this only.
This strikes me as outrageous. I realise there’s no grounds for appeal here, but the protection of cyclists is fundamental to the Highway Code these days. Issuing fails for not breaking the law (crossing solid white line) or for not endangering the cyclist seems a pretty poor show IMHO.
Any thoughts?
The road is an NSL. The first “opportunity” they “should” have taken was here:
They were in the left carriageway. Cyclist was riding at more than 10mph. Overtaking would therefor have been illegal (not to mention the unsighted bend).
Second was 100 yards further, similar layout. Third was here:
Cyclist in left lane as before. Oncoming traffic at 60mph.
Examiner *directed* family member to overtake within their lane, saying “there’s plenty of room,” meaning they were *very* close to the cyclist (as can be seen, no room to leave a decent gap). Fail was for this only.
This strikes me as outrageous. I realise there’s no grounds for appeal here, but the protection of cyclists is fundamental to the Highway Code these days. Issuing fails for not breaking the law (crossing solid white line) or for not endangering the cyclist seems a pretty poor show IMHO.
Any thoughts?
skwdenyer said:
A family member has just failed their driving test. There was a singular “major” which was an allegation of being too hesitant to overtake a cyclist.
The road is an NSL. The first “opportunity” they “should” have taken was here:
They were in the left carriageway. Cyclist was riding at more than 10mph. Overtaking would therefor have been illegal (not to mention the unsighted bend).
Second was 100 yards further, similar layout. Third was here:
Cyclist in left lane as before. Oncoming traffic at 60mph.
Examiner *directed* family member to overtake within their lane, saying “there’s plenty of room,” meaning they were *very* close to the cyclist (as can be seen, no room to leave a decent gap). Fail was for this only.
This strikes me as outrageous. I realise there’s no grounds for appeal here, but the protection of cyclists is fundamental to the Highway Code these days. Issuing fails for not breaking the law (crossing solid white line) or for not endangering the cyclist seems a pretty poor show IMHO.
Any thoughts?
Who and how are you going to complain?The road is an NSL. The first “opportunity” they “should” have taken was here:
They were in the left carriageway. Cyclist was riding at more than 10mph. Overtaking would therefor have been illegal (not to mention the unsighted bend).
Second was 100 yards further, similar layout. Third was here:
Cyclist in left lane as before. Oncoming traffic at 60mph.
Examiner *directed* family member to overtake within their lane, saying “there’s plenty of room,” meaning they were *very* close to the cyclist (as can be seen, no room to leave a decent gap). Fail was for this only.
This strikes me as outrageous. I realise there’s no grounds for appeal here, but the protection of cyclists is fundamental to the Highway Code these days. Issuing fails for not breaking the law (crossing solid white line) or for not endangering the cyclist seems a pretty poor show IMHO.
Any thoughts?
Is there dash cam footage available?
I may well be wrong about this, but I have a distant memory of being told that you can formally complain about the 'conduct' of the test but not the examiner's judgement of you.
It's possible that the examiner directing your family member to overtake would be part of the 'conduct' of the test.
It's possible that the examiner directing your family member to overtake would be part of the 'conduct' of the test.
Even if you did complain, and that complaint was successful, you'd only receive a free re-test. There's not a lot else you can do. Chalk it up to a bad experience. I failed my first driving test for driving through an amber light. Just got on with it and booked again. Further driving tuition can't hurt.
skwdenyer said:
A family member has just failed their driving test. There was a singular “major” which was an allegation of being too hesitant to overtake a cyclist.
The road is an NSL. The first “opportunity” they “should” have taken was here:
They were in the left carriageway. Cyclist was riding at more than 10mph. Overtaking would therefor have been illegal (not to mention the unsighted bend).
Second was 100 yards further, similar layout. Third was here:
Cyclist in left lane as before. Oncoming traffic at 60mph.
Examiner *directed* family member to overtake within their lane, saying “there’s plenty of room,” meaning they were *very* close to the cyclist (as can be seen, no room to leave a decent gap). Fail was for this only.
This strikes me as outrageous. I realise there’s no grounds for appeal here, but the protection of cyclists is fundamental to the Highway Code these days. Issuing fails for not breaking the law (crossing solid white line) or for not endangering the cyclist seems a pretty poor show IMHO.
Any thoughts?
In the first two instances, 100% should not be overtaking. As for the third, IF the was a significant gap with opposite direction traffic, they should (IMO) have used the gears and strong acceleration to pass the bike. However, if there weren't any significant gaps they'd be falling foul of the Highway Codes advice on the matter As a guide: leave at least 1.5 metres when overtaking cyclists at speeds of up to 30mphThe road is an NSL. The first “opportunity” they “should” have taken was here:
They were in the left carriageway. Cyclist was riding at more than 10mph. Overtaking would therefor have been illegal (not to mention the unsighted bend).
Second was 100 yards further, similar layout. Third was here:
Cyclist in left lane as before. Oncoming traffic at 60mph.
Examiner *directed* family member to overtake within their lane, saying “there’s plenty of room,” meaning they were *very* close to the cyclist (as can be seen, no room to leave a decent gap). Fail was for this only.
This strikes me as outrageous. I realise there’s no grounds for appeal here, but the protection of cyclists is fundamental to the Highway Code these days. Issuing fails for not breaking the law (crossing solid white line) or for not endangering the cyclist seems a pretty poor show IMHO.
Any thoughts?
Fermit said:
In the first two instances, 100% should not be overtaking. As for the third, IF the was a significant gap with opposite direction traffic, they should (IMO) have used the gears and strong acceleration to pass the bike. However, if there weren't any significant gaps they'd be falling foul of the Highway Codes advice on the matter As a guide: leave at least 1.5 metres when overtaking cyclists at speeds of up to 30mph
No gaps. Examiner directed them to overtake *within* the lane *without* crossing the white line, apparently saying “go on, there’s plenty of room.”In answer to other points:
- I know someone who’s just failed may have a dim view, but let’s just assume that’s not the issue here
- No dash cam footage, no, and in any case it is not admissible in any form.
- As for complaint, it is more whether an informal note to the test centre is in order. There’s obviously no legal route here, more that obviously dangerous and/or illegal directions and expectations are simply not on.
This is their second failure. On the first, the examiner was so fat he was out of breath walking to the car 50 metres from the test centre, could barely get the seatbelt on, and was unable to turn his head without moving his whole upper body (this was witnessed by family member accompanying them). Failed first test for an apparent failure to check a mirror, which is just one of those things however frustrating. Failing once is must a rite of passage sometimes, but failing a second time for something apparently so controversial is obviously pretty sore. Otherwise just 3 minors.
Should the learner here have simply refused to pass as directed, saying “I’m sorry, I can’t leave a safe gap if I do as you ask”? Pretty tough for a young person to directly challenge an examiner like that.
If you fail your test, the examiner was rude, unhelpful, patronising, shouting, didn't explain things properly, had his fail target to meet that week etc etc.
If you pass, he/she are the best people in the world.
As said above, you can complain but it goes through the courts and only if you have a very good case the test wasn't directed to the required standard. You can't overturn the result. You'll only get a free retest if the court agrees with you.
Put it behind and book another test.
If you pass, he/she are the best people in the world.
As said above, you can complain but it goes through the courts and only if you have a very good case the test wasn't directed to the required standard. You can't overturn the result. You'll only get a free retest if the court agrees with you.
Put it behind and book another test.
My daughter failed her first test for overtaking a badly parked car on double yellows right outside the test centre at the end of her test.
It was her bad luck that a speeding car came the other way around a blind bend just as she was half way past.
I saw the whole thing as I was waiting for her.
The instructor blamed her and failed her.
I asked if I could complain and was told to complain to the chief examiner for the area.
He turned out to be the guy who had examined her.
Case dismissed.
She eventually passed her test at the seventh attempt, but after loads more experience with me in the suicide seat.
She just kept having blonde moments and failing on one thing each time, like being told to pull over and stop on a busy dual carriageway, so deciding to park half on the pavement, or being told to turn left at a roundabout in Grantham and turning into Asda's carpark.....
Persistence paid off and she passed eventually, but the result of all that extra practice meant she has been a good driver since that day and has never had an accident or speeding fine in 19 years driving.
It was her bad luck that a speeding car came the other way around a blind bend just as she was half way past.
I saw the whole thing as I was waiting for her.
The instructor blamed her and failed her.
I asked if I could complain and was told to complain to the chief examiner for the area.
He turned out to be the guy who had examined her.
Case dismissed.
She eventually passed her test at the seventh attempt, but after loads more experience with me in the suicide seat.
She just kept having blonde moments and failing on one thing each time, like being told to pull over and stop on a busy dual carriageway, so deciding to park half on the pavement, or being told to turn left at a roundabout in Grantham and turning into Asda's carpark.....
Persistence paid off and she passed eventually, but the result of all that extra practice meant she has been a good driver since that day and has never had an accident or speeding fine in 19 years driving.
I had pretty similar on my 1st test many years ago.
Although mine was a small slow council sweeper through the town,
If I recall it counted against me as I’d hesitated, then by not passing inconvenienced other folk ….
Examiner told me despite oncoming cars, street was wide enough for 3 wide…
Driving instructor gave me praise, on an otherwise clean sheet, said it was wrong in his opinion & also that if I’d shown no hesitation & just gone 3 wide with oncoming cars I’d likely have got failed for that!!!
Although mine was a small slow council sweeper through the town,
If I recall it counted against me as I’d hesitated, then by not passing inconvenienced other folk ….
Examiner told me despite oncoming cars, street was wide enough for 3 wide…
Driving instructor gave me praise, on an otherwise clean sheet, said it was wrong in his opinion & also that if I’d shown no hesitation & just gone 3 wide with oncoming cars I’d likely have got failed for that!!!
Simpo Two said:
QBee said:
or being told to turn left at a roundabout in Grantham and turning into Asda's carpark....
Is that really a fail? It's not dangerous in any way and a perfectly common error in real driving!If it was part of the “drive to xyz” then you would need to get it right.
Complaints are detailed on the DVSA website - https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/driver...
If you are successful you will get the test fee back.
It may protect others in the future - I can't speak for all areas, but all complaints go to my local test centre manager and b*llokings are given to examiners to make silly decisions.
regarding dash cam - not much point, as....
If you are successful you will get the test fee back.
It may protect others in the future - I can't speak for all areas, but all complaints go to my local test centre manager and b*llokings are given to examiners to make silly decisions.
regarding dash cam - not much point, as....
DVSA website said:
You cannot use video or audio recordings to challenge your driving test result.
The Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA) will not review or comment on driving test videos or recordings.
Basically they are Gods in their own little empire and many (not all) know it and have an appalling attitude.The Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA) will not review or comment on driving test videos or recordings.
It may be that the pupil was just sitting behind the bike and not actively looking for an overtake, not looking for the opportunity or positioning.
On the advanced IAM stuff they are looking for you to be “hunting” it doesn’t matter if you do not make an overtake, it is the being ready.
I suspect she may have just switched off behind the bike rider perhaps?
On the advanced IAM stuff they are looking for you to be “hunting” it doesn’t matter if you do not make an overtake, it is the being ready.
I suspect she may have just switched off behind the bike rider perhaps?
Caddyshack said:
It may be that the pupil was just sitting behind the bike and not actively looking for an overtake, not looking for the opportunity or positioning.
That's happened increasingly since 30mph limits became the norm and the world became just a crocodile of traffic. People just go into numpty mode and stare at the back of whatever's in front of them. Indeed there's a high chance now that if you spot a gap and overtake, the person you just overtook will flash you 
It's as if people don't know how to drive any more, they only know how to queue.Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff