ADUK Archive

I also do not agree with re-testing but would like to see periodic assessments.
Assessments to determine if someone is driving safely - nothing more than that.
Those assessments not to be done by DSA.
Asessors to have completed an accredditted course.
Assessor course put together by all safety driving parties including DSA.
Safe driving certificate issued to driver if assessor happy
Copy sent to DVLA - no certificate, licence suspended until one is received.
System in place to refer to DSA if not driving safely for possible re-testing

Yeh, I know, I'm in cloud cuckoo land.......

hmm, ADI's testing people - that's surely a recipe for potential conflicts of interest?

I think one of the reasons this hasn't taken off is that everyone has a different belief on what is safe and it'll usually tie with what they've been taught. For example, is a DSA driver doing 100mph down a clear motorway in good conditions, etc, safe? Is an off-duty traffic officer doing the same safe? Will people drive properly for the assessment or are we looking to assess their everyday driving?

Enforcement could also be interesting

Chris

Octy_Ross wrote:hmm, ADI's testing people - that's surely a recipe for potential conflicts of interest?

So because it's difficult it's better not to bother trying? While I agree there's a potential conflict of interest, how is it so different to getting your MoT done? Offer the choice of sitting the test with a DSA examiner who's not allowed to teach if you're that bothered.

chriskay wrote:

jont wrote:

Octy_Ross wrote:hmm, ADI's testing people - that's surely a recipe for potential conflicts of interest?

So because it's difficult it's better not to bother trying? While I agree there's a potential conflict of interest, how is it so different to getting your MoT done? Offer the choice of sitting the test with a DSA examiner who's not allowed to teach if you're that bothered.

Jon; I think the whole idea is that DSA examiners would not be involved. As far as potential ADI conflict is concerned, you could be required to be assessed by an ADI from whom you'd not had any coaching.

What I was getting at is that in the same sense there's a potential conflict of interest between a garage that will do repair work to your car and offering MoTs, you can go to a council depot or similar that *only* does MoTs, therefore cannot have a conflict of interest. But most people don't bother.

In the same way, if you allowed people to sit their assessment with a DSA examiner rather than an ADI, the vast majority probably wouldn't bother, but it deflects the issue of conflict of interest for those that are concerned about it. I think Ross's concern is not so much knowing the ADI prior to the test and therefore passing people that they shouldn't, but instead the issue that an ADI short of work may suggest you need additional coaching to reach the required standard.

My point exactly Jon.

'twas just a concern....I could also imagine the 'general public' driver who thinks they're driving gods not understanding the reasoning and pointing at the government and saying things like

"they just want to rip the driver off more"

Ross.

Would an IAM/RoSPA pass be acceptable?

As to re-test/assessment period, surely it should be 10 years, to co-incide with the existing licence. If you're unfortuneate enough to have a photo one

ROG wrote:Copy sent to DVLA - no certificate, licence suspended until one is received.

chriskay wrote:Surely this turns an assessment into a test?

As it would only be suspended until an assessment is done and not revoked then........

If ADIs do this it is unlikely that there would be any conflict of interest because if this was brought in it would probably create full time jobs. Maybe, ADIs who wanted to do this would have to surrender their ADI badges so that there would not be a conflict. There would have to be regulation of these ADI so that they were all working to the same standard. Which grade ADIs would be allowed to do this?

Reading the above about full time jobs, surrendering badges, regulated etc. I know, we could call them examiners!!!

Can you imagine how many people would be taken off the road with any form of re-assessment? I mean, I think it would be absolutely bloody marvellous, but I'm not stupid to think enough people give a fry about driving standards and safety that Govt. could even contemplate any form of reassessment move. I'd love to see compulsory IAM (rather than any cobbled together rubbish that the DSA come up with) but we pretty much have to accept that all the Driving Gods currently on the road will only be taken off by their death or incarceration.

My favoured approach would be slightly less demanding. I would require all drivers to take at least 7 hours training with an ADI every 10 years. ADI's concerned would have a specific qualification equivalent to that required today to be on the fleet register.

These retraining sessions would not be assessments, let alone tests. The intention would be for them to be a positive self-improvement process, and would probably be accepted as such by most people. While it might not be obvious how this would deal with older drivers, in practice no doubt ADI's would make appropriate suggestions to those they thought should give up, at least adding weight to the comments of family members. In addition, I would require simple medical tests including tests of cognitive ability on a regular basis for drivers over 70.

waremark wrote:My favoured approach would be slightly less demanding. I would require all drivers to take at least 7 hours training with an ADI every 10 years. ADI's concerned would have a specific qualification equivalent to that required today to be on the fleet register.

These retraining sessions would not be assessments, let alone tests. The intention would be for them to be a positive self-improvement process, and would probably be accepted as such by most people. While it might not be obvious how this would deal with older drivers, in practice no doubt ADI's would make appropriate suggestions to those they thought should give up, at least adding weight to the comments of family members. In addition, I would require simple medical tests including tests of cognitive ability on a regular basis for drivers over 70.

I sometimes feel cognitive tests might be useful on those under 70 too.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

I agree with the sentiment here... but think it should be taken further still.

A bad driver is neither old or young, male or female, black or white, tall or short, fat or thin.

A bad driver is just somebody bad at driving, and they come in all shapes, sizes and flavours.

I would be strongly in favour of a compulsory retest for all drivers every 5 years. I know this is not practical, and would not be popular.

I know various people who have driving licences, but elect not to use them. If they haven't driven for 10 years or more in some cases, or for some passed the test but never have had their own car and have very limited experience, I think a regular retest would at the very least force them to either keep their standards / practice up, or take away the opportunity to get behind the wheel so they will not hurt themselves or somebody else.

I would be happy to have my driving regularly checked, and the driving of every other road user I see. It would make me a happier person driving around, and hopefully vastly reduce the number of incredibly stupid acts that take place on our roads.

Other than from a cost and administration point of view, anybody who would take issue with such an idea is IMO somebody who would struggle to maintain a passable level of driving.

Most of us know people I imagine who worry us as drivers, but will not listen to us because they've been driving longer, or know better, or just wont listen to advice or feedback from a friend or colleague. When they had an examiner telling them something was wrong however, they would take notice and remember at least for a while!

Newly-passed drivers should have a re-assessment at the end of their 2-year probation period.

Drivers should have to re-take their practical test every year from the age of 70.

chriskay wrote:
But excluding BRAKE

Agree with your sentiment there Chris. They would soonest have us return to needing someone walking in front carrying a red flag

I do think some form of assessment or retest would be a good idea. How it would be resourced and enforced would be another matter. DSA would go into melt-down, and many drivers would just ignore it, after all how many unlicensed drivers are on the roads? It might be one that the Insurance industry could drive forward with prohibitive premiums for older drivers unless they had their driving assessed.