Proposed New Driving Test

Just imagine how much it would cost with a forced minimum number of lessons too!

Driving shouldn't be a 'right' (I don't get the reluctance shown by the justice system to take peoples license away), but it shouldn't be prohibitively expensive either.
 
No problem, thanks for assuming I'm a bad driver whos had lots of crashes because I only had 9 hours of lessons.

Climb off your high horse and shoot it will you!

I made a specific point of saying I wasn't having a pop at you nor did I imply you'd had an accident or not in your driving career, my beef is with the holes in the current system, not you,you think 9 hours is enough for a lifetime behind the wheel? Fine, I disagree though.

I wondered what you'd learned since passing, the point being plenty of it could and arguably should be in the test.

You never stop learning, of course, but there's plenty that should be taught to new drivers which would then require more hours of training.

I'm a professional driver, I work and talk to many other professional drivers, the driving test and its inadequacies is a topic discussed endlessly with the consensus being it is inadequate and the training needs to be longer, for all classes of vehicle, hgv included.

We would all be better drivers if the test was harder and the learning time was longer, covering more aspects of driving, myself included!
 
It would be nice if they had a minimum amount of miles/hours/time before being allowed to pass your test to help build up the experience and competence. Include motorway driving, and some form of skidpan training as well as advanced driving techniques.
 
I think the only things I'd add to what we have no(I have very recently passed) is -;

motorway driving without pass-plus - I bought my car in luton and drove home through the motorway for the first time ever, that was an experiance! of course I knew the rules and how to deal with it but still it was something new - I'd have liked to try it before passing.

blind spots on HGV's etc

how/when to use fogs/mains(I know simple but the number of people that literally blind me is just stupid)

basic car maintenance, no not just "this is the bottle for windscreen washer" more along the lines of how to check the car before long journeys etc
 
I passed after 16 hours (a mix of 1 and 2 hour lessons) with 1 lesson a week up until I passed. I drove with my parents quite a lot which helped, meaning I passed first time (5 minors). I agree that as a 17 year old I was a bit of a numpty, but having a 1.0 Corsa certainly held me back :p
 
I had 16 lessons, not sure how people can need so many lessons. Rather than 50 being an average, it should be a maximum. If you can't do it by 50 lessons you shouldn't have a test. You can always tell the drivers that had so many lessons to pass...

Instructors probably rip people off, get the most lessons they can out of learners ;)

It really does need night driving, Motoway driving and a skid pan session and I also think proper car maintenance and controls should be covered eg. bulbs tyres and basic mechanical servicing that is tested. Retesting at 65 should also be compulsory

I can agree with this but don't see it happening anytime soon. Tyre change is a must imo otherwise no point having a spare tyre.
 
Last edited:
Climb off your high horse and shoot it will you!

I made a specific point of saying I wasn't having a pop at you nor did I imply you'd had an accident or not in your driving career, my beef is with the holes in the current system, not you,you think 9 hours is enough for a lifetime behind the wheel? Fine, I disagree though.

I wondered what you'd learned since passing, the point being plenty of it could and arguably should be in the test.

You never stop learning, of course, but there's plenty that should be taught to new drivers which would then require more hours of training.

I'm a professional driver, I work and talk to many other professional drivers, the driving test and its inadequacies is a topic discussed endlessly with the consensus being it is inadequate and the training needs to be longer, for all classes of vehicle, hgv included.

We would all be better drivers if the test was harder and the learning time was longer, covering more aspects of driving, myself included!

I was wondering how long until you would pull the "I'm a professional driver" card out. Driving for a living doesn't mean your a better driver, and it certainly doesn't put you on a high horse (I would offer you mine, but I've shot it) that allows you to then decide the ability of others based solely on something as arbitrary as number of lessons.

Nobody puts "I'm not having a go, but..." in a post unless they are having a go.

And personally, I have no opinion on what is or isn't the right amount of hours to do, but my driving instructor (I took the test in his car and he told me I was ready to book it) and my examiner both felt I had reached the level to be safe on the roads, so they clearly feel 9 was fine. Considering they were in the car with me and its their job to assess ability, and your.... a guy on the internet, I'm going to go with the "Professionals" opinion :p.

It would be nice if they had a minimum amount of miles/hours/time before being allowed to pass your test

Time != Ability. People learn at different rates.

Instructors probably rip people off, get the most lessons they can out of learners ;)

I'm certain this is a thing. I've known people spend the first 5 hours driving round and round dis-used trading estates before getting anywhere near an actual road. There are certainly some deliberately slow instructors out there dragging lessons out as for as long as they can. And then there are instructors who are just crap (like my friend I mentioned earlier. She probably had about 80 or 90 hours and 4 tests with one instructor and failed constantly. She then changed instructors and within about another 10 lessons she sailed through the test).
 
Last edited:
I was wondering how long until you would pull the "I'm a professional driver" card out. Driving for a living doesn't mean your a better driver, and it certainly doesn't put you on a high horse (I would offer you mine, but I've shot it) that allows you to then decide the ability of others based solely on something as arbitrary as number of lessons.

Nobody puts "I'm not having a go, but..." in a post unless they are having a go.

And personally, I have no opinion on what is or isn't the right amount of hours to do, but my driving instructor (I took the test in his car and he told me I was ready to book it) and my examiner both felt I had reached the level to be safe on the roads, so they clearly feel 9 was fine. Considering they were in the car with me and its their job to assess ability, and your.... a guy on the internet, I'm going to go with the "Professionals" opinion :p.

Again,way to miss the point!

Your taking my posts as "your a crap driver but I'm awesome because I'm a pro"

Again, no where did I say that and whilst you may feel people put the caveat that they are not having a go when they are but as I said, I made a specific point of saying that as I didn't want you to feel I was, frankly I wish I'd not bothered.

Agree to disagree here, shame your interpreting me as hostile toward you, it's the system and its inadequacy that's my beef, as it is amongst the other drivers (pro or not) who I talk to daily.

Glad you shot the horse but you didn't need to be on it in the first place.
 
But you didn't pick up on the system, you picked up specifically on my 9 hours and how that "didn't inspire confidence" and was "nowhere near enough training", and then tried to suggest that because of that I would have "learned the hard way".

It certainly reads like a jab at me specifically rather than the system, which you have justified by elevating yourself above me by stating you are a professional driver.
 
Never would've guessed as low as 21% pass first time. Are our standards too high or are instructors putting people forward for their test before they're ready? :confused:
 
Mandatory motorway training, education on HGV's blind spots, compulsory re-tests, some degree of skid control training.


Our driving test has so much room for improvement, if only they'd concentrate on the holes in the system rather than reducing costs.....



9 hours training for a lifetime of road use, hardly inspires confidence in the system tbh.


With the greatest of respect, 9 hours is no where near enough training for our modern congested roads.

I wonder what you've learned - perhaps the hard way - since the test? *

Please don't get me wrong, I'm not having a go at you, its the system and its inadequate (IMO) level of training as it currently stands.


I've highlighted where I've specifically pointed toward the systems faults, not yours.

* Here my meaning was you've surely learned plenty since passing - as we all do - my point being the lessons should cover more so you don't have learn - perhaps the hard way - once out on the roads on your own.

My point about professional drivers is we - as a group - generally feel the test and training - for all classes of licence - is inadequate and it has gaps that need filling.

If you wish to interpret that as I / we as professionals are better than you then fine, but your very mistaken.

Whilst maybe not better nor worse than you as drivers,as a group, generally were somewhat experienced and its with that experience in mind we generally feel the system is flawed.


In no way does that translate as Skeeter from OC/UK is a crap driver for only having 9 hours of lessons, more, it's reasonable to assume you or anybody else could be and should be better with more comprehensive training that covered more aspects of driving,again, myself included.
 
I've highlighted where I've specifically pointed toward the systems faults, not yours.

* Here my meaning was you've surely learned plenty since passing - as we all do - my point being the lessons should cover more so you don't have learn - perhaps the hard way - once out on the roads on your own.

My point about professional drivers is we - as a group - generally feel the test and training - for all classes of licence - is inadequate and it has gaps that need filling.

If you wish to interpret that as I / we as professionals are better than you then fine, but your very mistaken.

Whilst maybe not better nor worse than you as drivers,as a group, generally were somewhat experienced and its with that experience in mind we generally feel the system is flawed.


In no way does that translate as Skeeter from OC/UK is a crap driver for only having 9 hours of lessons, more, it's reasonable to assume you or anybody else could be and should be better with more comprehensive training that covered more aspects of driving,again, myself included.

Your underlying point is that the system is poor because "someone like me" had been let lose on the roads with only 9 hours training. The only way that point makes any sense is with the implication that I'm a bad driver. Your hardly going to claim is a poor system because it produces excellent drivers, are you :p.

Whether intentional or not, your point implies I'm a bad driver.

Never would've guessed as low as 21% pass first time. Are our standards too high or are instructors putting people forward for their test before they're ready? :confused:

Everyone seems to be claiming the exact opposite.
 
Last edited:
I do personally think we need to rethink the driving test and lessons behind it.

Whilst I wouldn't call myself a professional driver, I do ~2h of driving total a day going to and from work. Some of the standards on the road are atrocious and most people will say there is a general trend to see worse driving on a weekend than during your average rush hour.
 
Why do people assume that when they see generally poor driving standards on the road it is down to what they were taught prior to passing their test? Generally from what I've seen it has little to do with what they should know and do. And has far more to do with what rules they think apply to them (or more to the point don't) and their general attitude to other drivers.

No arguments that there should be wider scope in the test, Motorway experience is the glaringly obvious one. But the attitude they have to their own driving and other drivers is for the most part what makes them dangerous to other road users. Skills, techniques and methods can be taught, getting someone to change their attitude over the course of a few hours of instruction is difficult and very often a temporary while being observed. Once out on their own it forgotten or disregarded.

Test pass rates have been falling for nigh on a decade

Total
1,451,315, 949,409 65.4% (2007/8)
1,290,614, 844,022 65.4
1,347,463, 859,802 63.8
1,346,140, 848,992 63.1
1,371,475, 833,916 60.8
1,244,021, 735,356 59.1
1,541,896, 795,245 51.6
1,680,268, 857,189 51.0
463,695, 227,361 49.0 (2015/16)
 
Last edited:
I do personally think we need to rethink the driving test and lessons behind it.

Most definitely. There are large elements of driving (motorways, etc) that are actively removed from driving tests. Other than potentially a few Theory test questions, we are giving license to people who have zero understanding of how a motorway works!

A retest every 10yr would be a good idea. Stamp out those bad habits that develop after a few years on the road.

Even just a re-education thing like redoing a Theory test would help, as the rules of the road shift and change, plus other things we use little (hand signals, etc) will drift from our memories over time.

Why do people assume that when they see generally poor driving standards on the road it is down to what they were taught prior to passing their test? Generally from what I've seen it has little to do with what they should know and do. And has far more to do with what rules they think apply to them (or more to the point don't) and their general attitude to other drivers.

No arguments that there should be wider scope in the test, Motorway experience is the glaringly obvious one. But the attitude they have to their own driving and other drivers is for the most part what makes them dangerous to other road users. Skills, techniques and methods can be taught getting someone to change their attitude over the course of a few hours of instruction is difficult and very often a temporary while being observed change. Once out on their own it forgotten or disregarded.

You tacle this with far harsher penalties. You actually have to do quite a bit wrong to lose your license, which breads a culture of carelessness or simply not giving a **** because people know threes not much of a penalty coming their way if they get caught. Much like my view of speed cameras (If I don't know where they are and could be causght speeding round every corner, I'll drive within the speed limit everywhere) there should be an education that driving badly will mean you lose your license, rather than just get a slap on the wrist.
 
Last edited:
You tacle this with far harsher penalties. You actually have to do quite a bit wrong to lose your license, which breads a culture of carelessness or simply not giving a **** because people know threes not much of a penalty coming their way if they get caught. Much like my view of speed cameras (If I don't know where they are and could be causght speeding round every corner, I'll drive within the speed limit everywhere) there should be an education that driving badly will mean you lose your license, rather than just get a slap on the wrist.

There are two facets to that though. There are the drivers that think they are above the law and are generally aggressive in all things associated with driving, speed limits, signage, lane discipline, tailgating, you name it. Then there's the clueless who aren't even aware of what they have done wrong or the dangers they place themselves and other drivers in. Half need to be off the roads permanently the other half need training/re-educating.
The problem is that there are no traffic cars on the road to observe either, speed cameras make people compliant for all of 50 yards (that's if they actually see em :rolleyes:)
 
You've assumed I'm a dangerous driver because I only had 9 hours of lessons, but surely logic says requiring less training to reach the same standard level of competence as someone who took 50 hours to pass their test means I'm a better driver, and able to learn quicker?
Logic does, yes... but these are human beings we're talking about, who are anything but logical.
Driving is a perishable skill, as is driving knowledge and the general trend is downward, especially among those who 'cram' or otherwise learn quickly. My Ex passed her test with no formal training... you wouldn't want to be within five leagues of her on the road, though!!!

So it's a fair assumption, based on the sort of driver one typically encounters.

Personally I put it down to a decent driving instructor anyway. If I had gone with someone crap I'd have probably spent 20 hours in lessons and not known what I was doing. As it stands I had 9 quality hours and passed first time.
Were that the case, my very decent instructor would have a 100% pass rate.
Again, humans - People panic, forget, lose concentration or whatever and utterly FAIL on things they've done perfectly 100 times in the lessons...

blind spots on HGV's etc
I got "Blind Spots On Each Main Type Of Vehicle" for my bike lessons and was shocked when the car side didn't mention it. My instructor also rides and so she covered it, but did say it's not really a requirement.

how/when to use fogs/mains
You should know this one. It's one of the Tell Me/Show Me questions...

basic car maintenance, no not just "this is the bottle for windscreen washer" more along the lines of how to check the car before long journeys etc
You should know all of these too -These are the majority of the Tell Me/Show Me!

I know simple but the number of people that literally blind me is just stupid
I get this every night.
A lot of it is a mix between badly adjusted lights where people don't care, and people who use brighter lights to psychologically bolster their road presence and dominate. Lots of 4x4s do this anyway.

Generally from what I've seen it has little to do with what they should know and do. And has far more to do with what rules they think apply to them (or more to the point don't) and their general attitude to other drivers.
EXACTLY!!!

Test pass rates have been falling for nigh on a decade
Except in Reading.
Apparently they have had 42-46% for so long, everyone is highly suspicious!! :D
 
Back
Top Bottom