[theonefrombrum]

http://www.keys-driving.co.uk/Reasonsforfailing.htm

How can failing your driving test possibly be relate to luck? What is unlucky about not taking effective observations at a junction? What is unlucky about not steering properly? I don't want to sound like I'm taking a dig at people who failed but I firmly believe that if you fail your driving test, unless the examiner was exceptionally harsh, then it's the driver's fault and luck plays no part. I think that if people didn't lie to themselves and instead acknowledged that they failed because of mistakes that they made, even if they are due to nerves which is understandable but still your fault, then they would stand a better chance of passing the next time as they seek to rectify any errors in their driving which caused them to fail.

Anybody agree with me?

[KX321]

I agree. I'm sick of hearing people I know say "They can only pass a certain percentage of people each day which is why they failed me" or something along those lines.

I understand that failing can be embarrassing but making stupid excuses rather than accepting why you failed is worse.

[theonefrombrum]

(Original post by KX321)
I agree. I'm sick of hearing people I know say "They can only pass a certain percentage of people each day which is why they failed me" or something along those lines.

I understand that failing can be embarrassing but making stupid excuses rather than accepting why you failed is worse.

Lol that's a classic and made even more funny when the reasons that the examiner gave them for their failure are sufficient enough reasons to prove that this person should not be allowed on the roads in any car without dual controls and an ADI, if that.

[Advisor]

You're absolutely right. I see a lot of posts here blaming the presence of an affected vehicle as being down to luck: "If that car hadn't been speeding / driving like an idiot, I'd have passed". The fact that they failed to judge the speed and direction of the car that was "unfortunately" there as they pulled out in front of it seems to escape them.

It may be that a pass is down to luck, where somebody can't control a car, stalling in precarious locations, but get away with it due to lack of traffic - but fails are never down to luck.

[dignityinclay]

Yeah, I understand what you mean.

All the times that I have failed my driving test to date (which is all of them as I still havent passed), I managed to find something else to blame like other drivers and feeling that the examiner was being harsh/exaggerating.

Having said that, inwardly, I know that I deserved to fail but I guess it comes down to frustration and feeling that on another day, I may have stood a chance.

A defence mechanism I suppose.

[Left Hand Drive]

Every time one of my friends or someone I knew failed there was always an excuse or they were hard done by!

[Michaelj]

I'm not disagreeing but some of the reasons that people have failed for are absoulete bull****. And hows it not luck if a inconsiderate driver doesn't check and pulls out and does something stupid? The examiner may panick and slam the brakes on = fail.

[Bellissima]

it makes them feel better, just like the "oh, all the better drivers pass second time, it's a fact"... erm.. no. when you passed your test has no relevance unless you are unbelievably **** and take it like 4+ times.

to be good enough to cope by yourself on the roads then you should be able to deal with pretty much any situation... if you can't then you don't deserve to pass. it CAN be luck whether you get a situation like shocking behaviour from other drivers, but if you fail then it's your own fault and you don't deserve to pass anyway.

[theonefrombrum]

(Original post by Michaelj)
I'm not disagreeing but some of the reasons that people have failed for are absoulete bull****. And hows it not luck if a inconsiderate driver doesn't check and pulls out and does something stupid? The examiner may panick and slam the brakes on = fail.

Yeah that's true but if you're a competent enough driver, you should be able to at least match the examiner's braking time if it's really neccesary and if you do and he or she still fails you, then like I said that's being exceptionally harsh.

I guess in a sense that would be a n unplanned but effective way to test the examinee's ability to do an emergency stop in its purest form, not in the easy way of them knowing that it's coming.

[Svenjamin]

If an examiner presses the brakes at the same time as you do then it's still a fail. The whole point is you should react before the examiner feels the need to intervene.

Luck will always come into it to a certain extent. Yes, competency should override the element of luck, but the difference between a driver fault and a serious fault is often only in the context of the situation. The same exact mistake in the same exact place can either be a minor or result in failing the test depending on what's around you (which is completely out of your control) - that sounds like luck to me.

As for excuses, I don't see why it matters to you? If people are making excuses, let them. Seems like you're bitching for bitching's sake.

[theonefrombrum]

(Original post by Svenjamin)
If an examiner presses the brakes at the same time as you do then it's still a fail. The whole point is you should react before the examiner feels the need to intervene.

Luck will always come into it to a certain extent. Yes, competency should override the element of luck, but the difference between a driver fault and a serious fault is often only in the context of the situation. The same exact mistake in the same exact place can either be a minor or result in failing the test depending on what's around you (which is completely out of your control) - that sounds like luck to me.

As for excuses, I don't see why it matters to you? If people are making excuses, let them. Seems like you're bitching for bitching's sake.

Please stop being ridiculous. Remember, the best arguments are backed up by clear examples and points made without them lack substance and are therefore unworthy of being properly responded to. If you don't mind, please describe these examples in which the context of a situation will render a decision as merely unlucky and not based on driver incompetency and if you manage to name a sufficient one, then i commend you.

But you won't.

Why does anything matter to anyone? FFS, just because it's not a hugely personal thing, it doesn't mean I can't comment on it and put forth an opinion. I feel that people are blatantly lying to themselves and like I stated, I believe that in doing so they are missing an opportunity to work on errors in their driving as they instead ignore it and hope that next time they 'don't get unlucky'. Getting hit by a car who went into you is unlucky, stalling 4 times and emerging onto a junction with a fast car approaching from the left isn't and you've clearly failed your test a few times and are bitter about it.

[a.partridge]

well two people taking the test who are at the same standard of driving won't always get the same result

this is because of the 'random' factors out of control of the driver mean that the difficulty of the test varies... so essentially the difference is between due to this 'luck'

if you are perfect you should be able to pass whatever the conditions yes - but nobody is.

It's like failing an exam because the questions you revised for didnt come up and the ones your friend revised did... even if you knew the same amount overall. The difference would be due to the random factors of what questions came up and you'd call it "luck".

If you knew everything then it wouldn't matter yes - but you're focusing on an ideal case that doesn't represent the vast majority of the people taking their test.

[Svenjamin]

(Original post by theonefrombrum)
Please stop being ridiculous. Remember, the best arguments are backed up by clear examples and points made without them lack substance and are therefore unworthy of being properly responded to. If you don't mind, please describe these examples in which the context of a situation will render a decision as merely unlucky and not based on driver incompetency and if you manage to name a sufficient one, then i commend you.

But you won't.

Why does anything matter to anyone? FFS, just because it's not a hugely personal thing, it doesn't mean I can't comment on it and put forth an opinion. I feel that people are blatantly lying to themselves and like I stated, I believe that in doing so they are missing an opportunity to work on errors in their driving as they instead ignore it and hope that next time they 'don't get unlucky'. Getting hit by a car who went into you is unlucky, stalling 4 times and emerging onto a junction with a fast car approaching from the left isn't and you've clearly failed your test a few times and are bitter about it.

Heard from an examiner's mouth:

Driving a few mph too slowly.
Road empty - Minor.
Car behind you - Serious, as the car will need to slow down and/or overtake.

Likewise, stalling in such a way that causes someone else to slow down or swerve. Would be a minor if there wasn't a car there.


I'm not saying people should blame their fail on luck. Pretty much the opposite actually, there are people passing because luck has fallen in their favour, so that's a flaw in the system.

As for your example, you're creating a strawman to try and prove your point. I don't think anyone would ever blame stalling on luck (let alone 4 times in 40 minutes?!). From these forums most the concerns about luck seem to stem from other drivers not giving the correct signals (e.g. not signalling on roundabouts).


Besides, when lessons + tests are so expensive, people are ALWAYS going to be annoyed that they have to retake. Often that will be expressed as excuses that they shouldn't have failed in the first place since they're annoyed they've effectively "wasted" money. If they're kidding themselves, then it effects no one but themselves. Likewise, anyone who convinces themselves they're a completely competent driver just because they've passed their test is equally foolish.

[Ice Constricter]

You cannot say luck plays no role whatsoever in a person passing, that's ****ing absurd. Many different factors that are determined by luck may cause a person to fail, mind you this isn't an excuse for failure but it can play a part. Anyway some of these factors are:

-The weather
-Road conditions (busy,quiet or moderate)
- Subjectiveness of examiners: what one examiner may class as a major fault might be what another classes as a minor.
-Time of day
-Events that are taking place at the time (e.g. family tragedy)

You may say a well prepared learner should be able to deal with the worst case scenarios in all these factors. And while that's true it doesn't mean luck can't mean the difference between a pass and a fail.

(Original post by a.partridge)
well two people taking the test who are at the same standard of driving won't always get the same result

this is because of the 'random' factors out of control of the driver mean that the difficulty of the test varies... so essentially the difference is between due to this 'luck'

if you are perfect you should be able to pass whatever the conditions yes - but nobody is.

It's like failing an exam because the questions you revised for didnt come up and the ones your friend revised did... even if you knew the same amount overall. The difference would be due to the random factors of what questions came up and you'd call it "luck".

If you knew everything then it wouldn't matter yes - but you're focusing on an ideal case that doesn't represent the vast majority of the people taking their test.

This!

I dunno why its so hard for the OP to understand. Nobody is even saying a that person who had 'bad luck' deserved to pass.

[FXX]

There are some situations where you're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't on a test.

Example, you're on a normal main road with a 40mph limit. The road curves gently to the left, and there is a HGV parked on the inside kerb while on a delivery.

Your options:
1) As you drive up to the HGV, you look around it to see if there is any oncoming traffic. You don't slow down much as you can see the road is clear. The examiner can't see, however, and slams the anchors on. You've failed the test.

2) You approach the HGV very slowly, making it obvious that you are doing your observations, but again don't stop entirely. You get a minor for driving slowly (maybe a major if you're holding up traffic behind you) and the examiner hits the brakes. You've failed the test.

3) You stop behind the HGV at a suitable distance and do your observations there. You get a major for hesitation. You've failed the test.

On a test my friend has recently, a milk float pulled out in front of her as soon as she left the test centre. It was doing 20mph in a 30mph zone (a residential area in town). Does she overtake or sit and wait, as there was a roundabout coming up at the end of the road? Well eventually she chose to overtake, but got a major for hesitation. Would she have been failed for overtaking straight away? Would she have failed if she had sat behind the milk float all the way? I'd call this situation unlucky as well, because no where tells you what examiners are looking for in this situation. All options are safe and legitimate, so how can you say when it is wrong? This was the only major she got, so it seems a bit of a harsh way to fail the test.

[nadiah]

I think some of it is down to luck. E.g. I got a turn in the road on my test, and passed. But if I'd have gotten a parallel park, I may well have failed as it's my weakest manouver! of course In that case I shouldn't have passed, and it wouldn't have been down to luck - BUT - it was "bad luck" that I would have been given that particular manouver.

[pshewitt1]

(Original post by theonefrombrum)
http://www.keys-driving.co.uk/Reasonsforfailing.htm

How can failing your driving test possibly be relate to luck? What is unlucky about not taking effective observations at a junction? What is unlucky about not steering properly? I don't want to sound like I'm taking a dig at people who failed but I firmly believe that if you fail your driving test, unless the examiner was exceptionally harsh, then it's the driver's fault and luck plays no part. I think that if people didn't lie to themselves and instead acknowledged that they failed because of mistakes that they made, even if they are due to nerves which is understandable but still your fault, then they would stand a better chance of passing the next time as they seek to rectify any errors in their driving which caused them to fail.

Anybody agree with me?

I was stopped at a red light on my test, a car then preceded to plough into me as the car was pushed over the line I was failed, i had 0 minors 0 majors and I was nearing the end of the 40 minutes. please explain how this is not bad luck?

[Dmon1Unlimited]

luck doesnt exist, its like a saying people use... i found a coin on the ground? "oh thats lucky"... no, its a coincidence, but people say it anyway... think the meaning has degraded a bit such that it can be used more generally without implying that the person believes in it

with excuses, its to be expected isn it? when people dont want to admit they flopped...

[Dmon1Unlimited]

(Original post by pshewitt1)
I was stopped at a red light on my test, a car then preceded to plough into me as the car was pushed over the line I was failed, i had 0 minors 0 majors and I was nearing the end of the 40 minutes. please explain how this is not bad luck?

is that not bad conduct rather than bad luck? could you not have complained for failing something that you had no part in/were a victim of?

[boromir9111]

'cause they have nothing else to blame