Help settle an argument! (Weird stuff that happened on my test)

growse

growse

growse

Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
7,139
Location
Ironing
This has been bugging me for a few weeks now.

I did my MOD2 bike test (for you car people, that's 40 minutes followed and assessed ride out on the roads :p) a few weeks back. I passed, but there was a certain amount of 'debate' between the examiner and instructor about some of the minors I picked up. I'd be interested in getting your opinions, and whether you would have done anything differently.

Issue #1:

There's a section of road on the test route which narrows at each end (proper full width in the middle section) and is marked with the 'You have priority over oncoming traffic' and 'Give way to oncoming traffic' signs at each end. These:

dftroads50811248.th.jpg


Anyway, the instructor had taken me round this way and stated repeatedly that what the examiner expected was for you to wait at the give way line if you could see *any* traffic at all approaching, regardless of how far away it was. He explained that whilst common sense suggests you would proceed if you don't cause any other traffic to slow down or change direction, examiners at the local test centre had been known to fail people who have proceeded when they could see a car coming . Even if that car was 500 yards away (because they had disobeyed an order sign, to give way to oncoming traffic). It's a known 'gotcha' at the particular centre, and the examiners like to take people down there - all the driving instructors know about it.

I get to the part in my test, and there's traffic coming. I wait. The last car goes past me, and I see another one in the distance approaching. I wait some more. All in all, I wait about 45-60s before I go. We get back to the test centre and I find I've picked up a minor for hesitation. This particular examiner was quite new to the area, and didn't seem to be aware that other examiners were failing people for proceeding when they could see oncoming traffic.

Anyway, I sat in the corner quietly whilst my instructor and examiner debated the highway code and what was 'correct' and what was 'sensible'. My instructor's main issue was the fact that you can't have a test center with some examiners failing people for doing one thing, and other examiners giving out minors for doing the other thing.

What would you have done? What does the law actually say you should do?

Issue #2:

The examiner asks me to pull over during the test. I look and see a cycle lane. I think "I'm not pulling into a cycle lane, because I've been taught not to". I ride on, go about another 1-1.5 miles and then pull over. Get back to the centre to find I've picked up a minor for 'bad planning' - the examiner was expecting me to pull over straight away, on the basis that the cycle lane had a 'broken line, not a solid line'.

Again, what would you have done? Does the type of painted line bordering a cycle lane make any difference to whether you can pull over in it or not?

A bit rambly, apologies. Be good to hear everyone's thoughts.
 
You exercise judgement - if your action would cause another car to have to slow, you're in the wrong, but waiting 60s is ridiculous.
 
If others had been failed for going through with any oncoming traffic, you did the best thing by waiting. I would rather have some minors and pass than fail for something I knew about.

In the real world you can just use common sense and do what is best, but as with many tests, you do it to the standard the examiner sets.
 
who cares

they're minors. In the real world scenario #1 wouldnt be an issue so theres no point worrying about what the instructor wanted you to do. Obviously he wasnt one of the stupid instructors that will fail you for going through when theres a car in the distance.

Better to gamble and wait, and find you've not got one of them, than to plow on through and find you have got one and get failed.

And scenario #2 wouldnt happen in the real world either, you'd just pull over.
 
Last edited:
1. Waiting for 45-60 seconds for a car to pass is definitely a bit hesitant.

2. Broken line on a cycle lane? You shouldn't cross it really... Bit of a definition problem there really - but it doesn't say you must not...

Cycle lanes. These are shown by road markings and signs. You MUST NOT drive or park in a cycle lane marked by a solid white line during its times of operation. Do not drive or park in a cycle lane marked by a broken white line unless it is unavoidable. You MUST NOT park in any cycle lane whilst waiting restrictions apply.
Click to expand...
 
1. The problem lies in the people failing those for not giving priority to oncoming traffic that is very far away. Giving priority or way isn't really defined anywhere, but if you can progress without interrupting their journey, then you have given sufficient priority.

2. I would argue that stopping in a cycle line during an examination is avoidable, defined by the fact that you avoided it by stopping elsewhere. Driving or parking in a cycle lane with a solid line is a contravention of the RTA, so you would be excused from this only in an emergency.
 
dunno about the cycle lane but the examiner was, well not wrong about the give way priority one but he did exercise bad judgement, if you had moved forward instead of waiting and somehow come into contact with the oncoming vehicle you would have been at fault in the event of an accident. You don't pull out at roundabouts just because waiting 60 seconds is silly do you? :P
 
To the "You passed! Who cares!" comments - I'm glad I passed, and I don't care enough to start hitting people with my keyboard. I'm just interested in what other people's opinions are and what they would have done.

I'm just surprised on issue #1 that there's apparently a lot of inconsistency between the examiners. I would have expected an issue like this to be quite clear cut in the highway code and therefore not have any ambiguity. The examiner I had was a good bloke and everything was very civil. He recognised that it would be a huge problem if other examiners in the same centre were expecting completely different behaviour from candidates at a relatively straightforward road sign.
 
Last edited:
growse said:
He recognised that it would be a huge problem if other examiners in the same centre were expecting completely different behaviour from candidates at a relatively straightforward road sign.
Click to expand...

but unfrotunately thats exactly what happens

As you've found for yourself, some will take the hump easily and fail you for going past the give way lines when there is a car further up the road, no matter how far up they are.

others will take a more sensible approach, and say that unless you cause somebody to have to brake etc.. its fine.

You gambled on getting the first type of examiner, but got the second. Its no biggie so dont think that just because you've got a minor for that you've done something wrong.
 
your examiner was spot on
#1 others have failed even if another vehicle was 500 yds away, by whose judgement? the persons who failed at this area maybe had their distances wrong and what they think is 500 yds is more like 100-200, or maybe don't want to admit they got it wrong so told their instructor it was further than it realy was. and as the instructor wouldn't have been there it's just their word.

would you wait 60 seconds at a give way junction if it was clear to go?


#2 anywhere that has broken White lines can be crossed if safe, and nessasary, look at it this way, some houses have bike lanes outside them, would you park there if it was your house, and it was safe? I would.
 
cyclopopcicle said:
#2 anywhere that has broken White lines can be crossed if safe, and nessasary, look at it this way, some houses have bike lanes outside them, would you park there if it was your house, and it was safe? I would.
Click to expand...
I disagree. A driving examination is there to validate your ability to safely control a vehicle, make progress, observe your surroundings and understand the rules of the road. If an examiner has asked you to stop, whether you choose to stop over broken white lines, or not, is surely personal choice over whether you feel it's "unavoidable" or not, and nothing to do with whether you can dive safely and competently - it's not a test of your actions in an emergency or situation where stopping over those lines is unavoidable. A good course of action for the examiner would have been to ask the person being tested why they did not stop over the cycle lane. If the answer was "I felt it better to stop later and not inconvenience cyclists", then that's fine.
 
If it was in the distance then I would have gone. If I was sat behind you in this situation it would not have been long before I was beeping the horn expressing my dissatisfaction at the dilly dallying.
 
PMKeates said:
I disagree. A driving examination is there to validate your ability to safely control a vehicle, make progress, observe your surroundings and understand the rules of the road. If an examiner has asked you to stop, whether you choose to stop over broken white lines, or not, is surely personal choice over whether you feel it's "unavoidable" or not, and nothing to do with whether you can dive safely and competently - it's not a test of your actions in an emergency or situation where stopping over those lines is unavoidable. A good course of action for the examiner would have been to ask the person being tested why they did not stop over the cycle lane. If the answer was "I felt it better to stop later and not inconvenience cyclists", then that's fine.
Click to expand...

i do see your point, but this is the problem with the highway code it is open to interpretation, and what one person would find reasonable another would not, but both can be correct at the same time. hence why some people appear to fail their driving test, when others pass for the same thing having been done.

ubersonic said:
that's completely different though, in this situation the car with lower priority has to wait until its clear to pass the sign AND drive down the length of the road under the priority system
Click to expand...


how is it? both are give way to other vehicles, and both if progress can be made without affecting any other rd user then it should be made, and you have also answered that same thing yourself "has to wait until its clear to pass the sign AND drive down the length of the road under the priority".
 
cyclopopcicle said:
i do see your point, but this is the problem with the highway code it is open to interpretation, and what one person would find reasonable another would not, but both can be correct at the same time. hence why some people appear to fail their driving test, when others pass for the same thing having been done.
Click to expand...
It's not a problem if the examiners realise that when something is down to personal preference, you cannot list it as a problem with someone's driving. It's like an examiner giving someone a minor for setting the climate control colder than their preference!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom