Look for space

This is a personal message.

I rant so often on here, I thought I better write something positive for once. (Don't worry, normal service will be resumed shortly!)

You can take this however you like, whether driving, testing, teaching or just as a motto to live life by.

Look for Space.

What do I mean by this?

Well we spend too much time looking for trouble, as drivers spotting hazards, as assessors and examiners and trainers looking for faults, as human beings looking for trouble. It's how we've evolved.

The only problem with this is that by looking for trouble we so often find it.

There is a common effect which any driving instructor will tell you about - our customers are trained (from the HPT onwards) to look for potential hazards, that we start to concentrate on them. Learners will naturally look at the problem and as the hands follow the eyes they will steer towards it. We often do the same in life - we look for problems and by looking for them we find them and hit them head on.

Many trainers are aware of the power of a positive instruction (as opposed to the classic "don't think of pink elephants" problem), where you encourage a positive response, which for some reason gets a much more immediate and positive reaction. If you say "don't think of pink elephants" you think of them, then need a moment to clear your head, or often, you can't get the damn things out at all.

If you want someone not to think about pink elephants, tell them "think about the full moon on a clear bright cold night". The effect is immediate, needing no concious thought to change what we are doing.

The human brain has evolved to think in terms of positives. This means that a negative suggestion will take concious effort to apply. "Don't annoy uncle Doreen this Christmas", will have a completely different response initially to "Be nice to uncle Doreen" (until uncle Doreen sits in your favourite chair and looks like he/she is expecting to have everything done for him/her for the entire festive season at least).

So yes, we should be aware of the potential problems, but instead of thinking "don't hit the parked car", start looking for space. If you can't find it, or it is restricted - slow down until you can find it.

Back to the personal note - start thinking in terms of what you SHOULD do, CAN do and COULD do. If you are thinking of what you don't want to do - do what the shrinks would term "re-framing" - start to think of that thing in terms that positively steer you into a good place.

Using a driving instructor's car for test

People who just want to use my car for the driving test make me laugh.

When they ask, I usually bite my tongue and ask them why? Hell - why not use your own?

I even had a parent ask me this and I asked them why they would not lend them theirs (they had been teaching their son in it) as he would be more used to it - and what was their response?

"What if he crashes it?"

LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So him crashing my only source of income would be ok then would it?

Not a chance guys. If you want a car for the test - hire one.

If you want someone to teach you to drive - phone a driving instructor - not a car hire firm.

Just in case you're confused, you can take any car to a driving test as long as it is in a fit condition to use on the road (would pass an MOT on the day, including having no warning lights, everything works) and it is insured for the purposes of the test (check with your insurance company, they usually are, but some will stipulate that you tell them - if you don't and you crash on test then you're not covered and you can guarantee that the examiner will sue you for lots and lots of money - get it sorted). It needs tax and a valid MOT and remember that the examiner will ask the candidate to check certain things on the vehicle before the test starts (lights, brake lights, screenwash maybe.....) so don't turn up in a wreck, or you'll have wasted your fee.

The car does not need dual controls, the car does not need to be of a certain size.

The DSA have a list of unsuitable vehicles (vans without rear side windows, some convertibles), which are deemed unsuitable purely because of the vision from the examiner's seat.

So please - stop asking us this dumb question. We would be stupid to say yes.

Minimum driving age of 18

Well, this time the rumour is gaining weight.

Insurers are backing it, politicians are backing it, and it seems like the more vociferous (and less intelligent) tabloids are backing it.

Once these things start to gel, it will only take a couple of years for it to be law.

Ah well - that's going to be an interesting year for driving instructors!

Luckily most of my clientelle is slightly older than 17, but there will be a huge oversupply of instructors for that year - some of us will need to make way for the rest to earn a living.

Unfortunately though - I can't really see it having much effect in itself on accident statistics.

Some of the other suggestions might help though - one is the training log idea - driving for 120 hours or so before taking your test. This may or may not be with a driving instructor, but it woud certainly build experience - one of the main problems with novice drivers.

Another - to restrict young passengers (between 10 and 20 yrs old) could prove interesting - and again could help reduce the accident stats (who didn't show off to a car full of friends?!). I'm not sure how the police may find enforcing this one - they may welcome the ability to stop a vehicle full of youngsters on suspicion - but they may just be sick and tired of yet more rules to enforce.

Realistically a lot of this will come down to something many of us have been suggesting for a long time - we actually need more police on the road to enforce the laws that regulate which driving attitudes are acceptable and which aren't.

Driving Test Nerves

It's all too easy to forget exactly how these feel if you don't take regular tests and exams yourself.

I sometimes get a little annoyed when I see them start to get flustered, but I soon remind myself that I'm the same - however much I wish I could take my own advice!

Last "test" I was on I came within 1 minor of failing in the first 3 minutes. I had to really give myself a shake, and sure enough - didn't make another mistake at all. It's all to do with controlling how your brain works.

Not easy, but interesting - has anyone got any suggestions of books for overcoming test nerves that I can suggest to customers?

How to pass the UK driving test

There really is a simple answer to this.







Drive SAFELY.

That's all there is to it.

And yet I hear all the nay-sayers out there:

"but I failed for missing out couple of blindspot checks" - NO, you failed for moving off without being certain that it was safe.

"but I failed for driving at 52 in a 60 zone" - YES, the road was clear and you were driving too slowly - backing up traffic UNSAFELY.

"but I failed on observations on a manoover" - NO, you failed for not making sure that you weren't gonna hit anyone.

"but I failed because I went too wide on the reverse around a corner" - YES, you might have been driving on the wrong side of the road, or been blocking the junction for other traffic causing others to change their line or speed which could be UNSAFE.

"but I failed because I stopped at a roundabout - SURELY THAT COULDN'T BE UNSAFE?!" - TOO RIGHT IT COULD BE, the guy behind is looking at a clear roundabout and he isn't braking, and doesn't expect you to - rear end shunt time!

Think I've probably made that point, so I'll just remind you all - there is no bizaare ritual involved here, there is no need to ask "will I fail if I......?" because you know the answer all ready. You might not know it, but think about whatever it is that you're unsure about, and ask a few different questions:

Do I know what is going on around me? --------- If no, then find out.
If yes, then....
Do they know what I am going to do next? ------- If no, then tell them as clearly as possible without confusing them.
If yes, then....
Could I make another road user with priority change speed or direction? ------- If yes, wait till they're past.
If no, then....
Am I in full control of the car's speed and position? -------- If no, then slow down til you are.
If yes, then....
Carry on as you are! If you aren't putting yourself or anyone else in danger - you're fine. You've already passed, you just need to show them that you have.

Raising the driving age to 18.

If they raised the age of driving by a year every time this rumour surfaced I'd be too young to drive. In the late nineties a pressure group suggested that the legal driving age should be 21, and there have been rumours ever since.

The curious thing is that the most recent rumours have been about allowing people to drive under supervision aged 16 rather than raising the age!

The fact is, age is not a huge influence until you get past age 25. According to one of the leading scientists who researches these things we can't assess risk properly until then. Unfortunately she throws this bit of information in on a promotional film for the driving school she works for - and I don't think they'll be limiting their potential customers to over 25's! (Especially not when their basic idea is to sell their driving course to mummy and daddy!)

So this is another of those fantastic rumour mill things which come around every now and again.

Have a look around the roads and you'll find 17 year olds whose judgement is fantastic, some 40 year olds who have no awareness of what is going on around them, and some 80 year olds who can overtake sunday drivers perfectly.

Age is not an issue, attitude and inexperience is what kills young drivers, not their lack of birthdays.

THE FACTUAL BIT:
Currently in the UK, you can take your theory test on your 17th birthday, and provided you pass, you can take your test as soon after this as you can get a booking.
If you are in reciept of higher rate disability living allowance, you can do all this on your 16th birthday.

Psychometric tests before you can drive?

Hmmm. This one has started coming up recently.

Attitude testing done at the same time as the theory and hpt.

What would happen if you fail - 'Well you know your highway code backwards - 100% on that, your hazard perception is spot on, you see the problems, and react at the precise moment they develop from potential to actual hazards, but we think you're a bad 'un - so sod off, you can never drive - ever.'

I can't really see this one happening. Not because I don't want to encourage people to have a good attitude to driving, but because I think it is unworkable.

It would be fun though!
Try this one:

1: Do you feel that people who drive within the 2 second gap are -

a) Dangerous, and should be shot at dawn after having their mobile phones rivetted to their ears.
b) Stupid, and should be banned from being in charge of anything which can travel at more than 4 miles per hour.
c) Lazy, and every time they are caught should be whipped in order to get them to buck their ideas up.

2: Drivers who are found liable in the case of an accident should -

a) Be banned from driving as they are a danger to themselves and others.
b) Have to pay for the time and resources of the police and emergency services, thus forcing their insurance up so high they will never be able to afford it.
c) Be banned from driving until they can pass an advanced driving test requiring a thorough understanding of why these methods should be employed at ALL times.

3: Drivers who cannot signal correctly at least 98% of the time should -

a) Have their licences taken off them because if they cannot communicate in such a simple and necessary way they are obviously mentally deficient.
b) Only be able to drive vehicles which are brightly coloured (maybe orange, with 3 wheels), have large and visible warnings that the occupant's actions may be unpredictable, and be limited via a black box gps to the speed limit.
c) Be made to take a sign language course, and a morse code course, and a course in semaphore, passing stringent examinations in all thus enforcing the need and capability of clear and simple non-verbal communication.

If you answered mainly 'A' - you believe that many people on the road are dangerous. This may lead to anger and road rage - hand in your licence to the DVLA and get a bus pass.

If you answered mainly 'B' - you believe that many people on the road are stupid. Again - get a bus pass.

If you answered mainly 'C' - you believe that many people on the road are lazy. Become a driving instructor and help to do something about it!

DSA quotas!

They don't frickin exist people!

I'm kinda gettin tired of sayin this, but they really don't. So stop asking!

This is the old wives tale that if your test is at the end of the day/week/month/year/financial year, then you won't pass - because the examiner will have passed his 'quota' already. (And showing what stupid thinking this is - by the same logic if they haven't passed enough people then you'd be almost bound to pass!)

They don't exist - they never have. What does exist, always has and probably always will is VARIANCES.

If you are good enough, you pass your test, but how do we know that what one examiner thinks is good enough is the same as another examiner? (I say potato, you say potahhto...) Well this is where variances are necessary - if one old git at Smotheringhouseton test centre whose divorce is going badly decides that no-one is going to pass, then he will soon find his results flagged up on the DSA computer. The other 6 examiners tend to hover around 39% at Smotheringhouseton test centre, but 'the major' has a pass rate nearer 12% - why? What happens next is that 'the major' gets a visit from their 'supervising examiner', who sits in on the back of a load of tests with him to find out why his pass rate is so low. This supervising examiner finds that this examiner has decided to fail everyone who drives at 2 mph below the 60 limit on the ring road ('because it annoys the hell out of me when I'm on my way home'). 'The major', now has to undergo some retrospective training, to ensure that his marking is in line with everyone else.

After a few weeks, 'the major's' divorce comes thru, he is relaxing into single life, he now knows that 2mph under the limit is not a fail, but could be seen as a driver fault, and is becoming all smiles again at the test centre. No longer do the local 6th Form college students dread getting him on their test, no longer do instructors roleplay the old sod on mock tests, and all of this happiness is due to variances! Hurrah.

So no, quotas don't exist, and for some of the instructors who worry about variances in the same way - stop worrying - they'll keep you safe from examiners who don't like your face. In the mean time, instead of complaining about the examiners, look to your training instead.

For all the instructor's out there - have a look at the SDEs guidelines:

2.4 PASS/FAIL STATS – RESPONSIBILITY OF SDE/EIC
It cannot be too strongly emphasised that the passing of a constant, or nearly constant, percentage of candidates by an examiner, is not evidence that he has required the same standard of competence to be shown by all; nor can the fact that a number of examiners have shown a common percentage of passes be taken as evidence that their assessment is uniform. It is true that when an examiner has conducted over 400 tests (for category ‘B’ tests only) it would be reasonable to expect little difference between the percentages of passes within a centre, but this does not mean that a similar percentage should be looked for in the daily, weekly or monthly results of tests conducted by individual examiners. However, it is the responsibility of the SDE to ensure that any unusual trends are reported to the SM and investigates the route cause of any variance.

If you want to look at the whole sleep inducing document:

http://www.dsa.gov.uk/Documents/practical_test/dt2/DT2%2025%20October%2005.pdf

.......yawn.

UK Driving Test Getting Harder

Yup. It's gonna happen!

Well, they've been doing it for years - take anyone who took their test more than a year ago and ask them to sit it again with no extra training - they'd be stuffed!

Our wondrous minister Mr Ladyman, has stuck his nose in again complaining that ADIs aren't teaching good attitude to their customers (good attitude - from the guy who screamed around on Top Gear and has clocked up 9 penalty points for speeding?). So he wants people to do 120 hours behind the wheel before taking their test, maybe turn the thing into a 2 stage test, and make people drive at night and on different types of road, maybe take compulsory training with an ADI, learn about driving while at school.

Fair enough, most of it, though it all depends on how they implement it, but the way it has been presented has annoyed instructors even more than normal. By suggesting that ADIs don't do their job properly he is making sure that the public think that we're just conning them. (I dread to think how they'll respond when we tell them we want them all to take more lessons before we let them go to test because they'll mess up our pass rates - oh, and because you're not ready, you'll have to pay to re-book your test! Yeah right - that's gonna work.)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6223887.stm - basic intro to the story.

http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,12389-2527212,00.html - comment at The Times.

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&f=154&t=340548 - the pistonheads have it pretty much spot on - making the test harder is a fairly good idea, but will have no effect on safety - young lads are pretty good at upping their game for the test, but once they have that pink card in their hand.......

http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/forums/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/1596635/an/0/page/0 - some interesting comments, and some utter rubbish from the people in the know at 'horse and hound'!

http://www.beyonddriving.co.uk/2007/04/20/making-the-driving-test-harder/ - a take on this from an instructor.

http://www.theslant.co.uk/2007/01/02/driving-tests-to-get-harder/ - "instant fail upon ownership of burberry would be a start", slightly humourous take from The Slant.

Go to the forums and have a rant, or email the DSA's head of driver safety strategy direct at:
peter.ward@dsa.gsi.gov.uk

Or wind up the lovely Mr Ladyman himself:
stephen.ladyman@dft.gsi.gov.uk

Oh, and if you're getting worried about that driving test you've got booked - relax - this won't happen for approximately 32.367 years based on past experience of suggested changes.