That proves my point perfectly. His driving instructor (assuming he had one) didn't train him how to respond to changing traffic lights mid turn, so had to rely on a driving examiner on test to tell him that he didn't know what to do in that situation. That's one hell of an expensive lesson. It's ludicrous to spend £62 on a driving test umpteen times over just to keep retaking and retaking it so an examiner can "teach" you driving over the course of multiple failure debriefs over months and years. (Yes, this actually happens with some 'private' entries)
Get trained properly by a good instructor, put in the hours, learn how to cope with all the "hypothetical" situations you can't quite practise and you'll pass first time.
**NEWSFLASH** To pass a basic test of competence to drive, one has to demonstrate 'knowing about a traffic light'.
Would you prefer to share the road with people who obviously don't have a clue about them? Good job you're not making decisions about who gets driving licences. I think I prefer letting the qualified driving experts decide.
To hold a licence, you must demonstrate the ability to drive in ALL road and traffic situations in ANY conditions. In other words, you
should have done lessons in busy times as well as quiet times. You
should know in theory how to deal with changing situations, even if you live in a quiet remote area, but want to hold a licence to drive in the busiest cities in the UK. Ideally you should have had experience in all weathers, but if not actually possible, your instructor should have drilled you thoroughly in how to use the controls in bad weather, such as wipers, windscreen washers, demisters, headlights etc. If you can't find and operate these correctly and prompty (even on the move) when it rains / gets dark / fogs up , then not only are you not ready to be unleashed onto the roads, but your instructor hasn't done his/her job properly.