Safe Speed Forums

An interesting article in the Mail (bottom of P3) today suggesting 50% of experienced drivers (10 - 30 years) would fail their test if they retook it. Half of those that failed did so for 'dangerous driving' offences which carry instant disqualification from the test.

This has raised an interesting question about testing and its use. The only group of normal road users who can prove themselves to be capable of passing the test are the newly qualified who we know are the highest risk group. It is likely that the people who failed would be among the safest drivers. The ability to pass the test is clearly not as clear a descriminator of the ability to drive without incident (I decided not to use well or satisfactorly as clearly not being able to pass the test would indicate neither to be true) as many would like to suggest.

It is interesting that the top two reasons for failing were undue hesitation at junctions and speeding both of which I would suggest could be difficult to define definatively. OK some people will post that speeding is easy to define but that is a different debate.

But the driving test is as much a box-ticking exercise as a genuine test of driving ability.

With a lesson or two of coaching in "how to pass the test" I'm sure far more than 50% would pass easily.

And many safe and competent drivers would fail on the grounds of "speeding".

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

Interesting to note that "half would fail for dangerous driving offences" and the top two are noted as "speeding" and "hesistation at junctions".

So they are, more or less. saying that these two faults amount to "dangerous driving"...interesting.....

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.

Isn't there a 50% failure rate anyway? If undue hesitation at junctions means experienced drivers don't just hurtle out into the tiniest gaps then I'm all for it....Newly qualified and learners don't hesitate and junctions long enough to even look these days. They seem to be taught just to drive straight out.

To make any sense of this story you'd need the pass rate for the learners and the pass rate for the already qualified drivers. If for example learners had a 40% pass rate and the qualified had a 50% pass rate then surely it would also be true to say that the experienced were 20% more likely to pass the test than a typical learner! Assuming my maths and stats isn't up the wall which is entirely possible

I'm sure that when I took my test, 1973, there was a failure for "causing another road user to brake or swerve (or something similar) such as pulling out in front of another motorist, whereby he would have to brake not to go into the back of you and would have to reduce his speed considerably. Does this still apply?
people seem to pull out in front of you regardless these days.

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.