Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    I passed first time with 4 minors. Hope that makes you guys feel better.



    Seriously it doesn't matter who takes your test. If you fail, it's your own fault.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DuckBilledPlatypus)
    I failed today....thanks to a Miserable Old Man John who is the chief examiner of my local centre....complete prick!!!.....renound for being a prick. I Had a few minors on my sheet and stalled once thats fair enough but he sat in his chair silent and intimidating with Dark Blue glasses on not making conversation and generally making me feel nervous.....I know not all old people are like this guy but Euthanasia seemed a great idea after meeting this tosser...Watch out if you ever get an Instructor called John and he is old...he will fail you :mad:


    Anyone had any experiences on Tests or with instructors..why did you fail?
    Bayton Road?
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    A mate of mine did her second test and was told that she failed it for doing 40 in a 30
    Her mum is a driving instructor and took a pupil up the same road that my mate had failed on. Some muppet had turned the speed signs round and no-one had clocked it!

    She got a free test with the chief examiner and passed with 2 minors

    I got a minor on my first test for a cyclist colliding with the back of the car cause he wasn't looking where he was going. Not my fault ¬¬

    Passed 3rd time with 10 minors though
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Meagz)
    I passed first time with 4 minors. Hope that makes you guys feel better.
    Seriously it doesn't matter who takes your test. If you fail, it's your own fault.
    not true, the examiner *should* be able to judge whether or not a driver is capable and safe to drive on their own, unfortunately too many are machines.

    just like you i got 4 minors, but apparently on the last double-mini roundabout, i didn't look to the right and so caused another car to have to ''''hesitate''''.

    I say apparently because i noticed nothing at that roundabout, and so had no reason to store it to memory. it was simply the examiners view that i hadn't looked at all hence the major for observation. when i would say i had looked early, judged it was safe and so progressed to worry about the next roundabout and the area in between with lanes to choose. ok i should have checked again when i was literally about to go onto the roundabout, but that should be a minor. for i was still looking, i had my eyes open, and nothing happened in my peripharel, after all examiners own words i made another car 'hesitate', not slam on the brakes, or cause the examiner to do it for me... i mean he could of made that up, but i couldn't argue it whatever.

    so don't try and be an expert, i'd say the only difference between your test and my test was that when you and i got back to our test centres your examiner said well done pass, mine said, fail, because of an incident that practically didn't even exist and that i had no memory of occuring (because it wasn't anything).

    If an examiner cannot say if i'm good enough to pass after 45 minutes of near perfect driving, 4 minors ok, but u know how ridiculous minors can be. Then what the hell is he doing being an examiner, ok maybe he followed protocol, and u can't say he had no right to. But its the same as if a parking warden gives you a parking ticket because you pulled up on double yellows to save a dying child. Hes allowed to, its his job, but you'd hope he might have compassion, and just maybe be 'human'??? so it does matter who you have with you. ultimately a driving test is subjective, and so by definition its the persons opinion.

    basically they need a hawkeye system, at least a computer won't make mistakes that its then too proud to admit were mistakes, 99% of examiners won't give a **** if they fail someone, which is wrong, they have power but no responsibility, spiderman wouldn't like that.

    sorry bout the rant but i hope u agree with my points.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Harty_09)
    not true, the examiner *should* be able to judge whether or not a driver is capable and safe to drive on their own, unfortunately too many are machines.

    just like you i got 4 minors, but apparently on the last double-mini roundabout, i didn't look to the right and so caused another car to have to ''''hesitate''''.

    I say apparently because i noticed nothing at that roundabout, and so had no reason to store it to memory. it was simply the examiners view that i hadn't looked at all hence the major for observation. when i would say i had looked early, judged it was safe and so progressed to worry about the next roundabout and the area in between with lanes to choose. ok i should have checked again when i was literally about to go onto the roundabout, but that should be a minor. for i was still looking, i had my eyes open, and nothing happened in my peripharel, after all examiners own words i made another car 'hesitate', not slam on the brakes, or cause the examiner to do it for me... i mean he could of made that up, but i couldn't argue it whatever.

    so don't try and be an expert, i'd say the only difference between your test and my test was that when you and i got back to our test centres your examiner said well done pass, mine said, fail, because of an incident that practically didn't even exist and that i had no memory of occuring (because it wasn't anything).

    If an examiner cannot say if i'm good enough to pass after 45 minutes of near perfect driving, 4 minors ok, but u know how ridiculous minors can be. Then what the hell is he doing being an examiner, ok maybe he followed protocol, and u can't say he had no right to. But its the same as if a parking warden gives you a parking ticket because you pulled up on double yellows to save a dying child. Hes allowed to, its his job, but you'd hope he might have compassion, and just maybe be 'human'??? so it does matter who you have with you. ultimately a driving test is subjective, and so by definition its the persons opinion.

    basically they need a hawkeye system, at least a computer won't make mistakes that its then too proud to admit were mistakes, 99% of examiners won't give a **** if they fail someone, which is wrong, they have power but no responsibility, spiderman wouldn't like that.

    sorry bout the rant but i hope u agree with my points.
    I'm sorry, but you can't honestly fail your test and say you drove perfectly. The examiners want to pass you! For one thing, it's less paperwork. It makes them happy to give you the result you want. Examiners are people too and think how they feel getting crap like this from idiots who find it impossible to take responsibility for their own shortcomings.

    The examiner is highly trained to notice, and assess faults - don't think that you're qualified to say what is and isn't a fault. I can't be the only one who spotted the irony in you saying "don't be an expert" and then trying to say you know best.

    Of course examiners are able to assess whether or not a fault is worthy. So this idea that they just mark everything they see is wrong. If you deviate from what is expected, the examiner has to assess, whether the deviation broke any laws or was sufficient to warrant a fault.

    The fact that you didn't notice anything worthy of a serious/dangerous fault is frightening. Remember, the examiner is just watching, you have the car to control - maybe concentrate more on your driving and less on doing a job you're nowhere near qualified to do and you'll perform a bit better.

    On your serious/major fault I'd say that you didn't give way to vehicles on your right. And I'll agree that if I was the driver you inconvenienced I'd be quite glad you failed for that. Not looking on approach to junctions is something I hate to see, as a passenger or as a driver who has priority. Because it makes me question whether you have seen me, whether you're going to pull out or stop. So I would be forced to slow down. Whether or not the driver was stationary, he was on your right at the roundabout - giving him priority - so you should have given way to him. Treat double mini roundabouts as separate roundabouts. However, as you have (deliberately I'm sure) been incredibly vague, I can't be sure since you haven't mentioned the entire situation. What I can be sure of is that the examiner made the right call.

    I'm sure many examiners will be thrilled to hear that you regard them as superheroes rather than comic book villains!
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    A driving test isn't subjective, then people will drive however they want to. There is a specific standard everyone has to aim for in order to pass.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Harty_09)
    examiners own words i made another car 'hesitate', not slam on the brakes
    That's all that is needed for a fail. You must give priority to the right. As soon as you make a car with priority hesitate for you, you've driven contrary to the rules.

    As for the root cause of the problem, the coup de gras is in your previous statement:
    i noticed nothing at that roundabout,
    Enough said. If you don't notice hazards (whether you're preoccupied about lanes or not) then you're a risk and that is why you failed.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    i'm not gonna argue with all your points.
    But just a few.

    regarding the roundabout fail, imagine you'd driven for an hour then been told that on one part something had happened, your hardly ever going to have a memory which you have no doubt is right when questioned. So that avenue is pointless, i'm not gonna start doubting myself, though equally i'm not saying i was 100% right.

    Advisor your points are fine, the 1st, i agree with totally, my problem with that is more the system, everyone makes mistakes from time to time, if u drive for long enough you will make a mistake, you also never stop improving (hopefully with your driving), so to say when your near the bottom of the learning curve if you make 1 mistake that causes another driver to react in 45 mins you fail isn't wholly right. for a lot of learners there is luck involved with nothing happening, you hope nothing arises within the time your being examined, but if it does like in my case, which i'm not argueing... (its pointless), to have a system which catagorizes so much is wrong. Like R.Murray said... examiners are highly trained to notice and asses your faults. So surely they should be given more responsibility in the form... 'u made 1 mistake on a roundabout, but on the 10 previous ones you were v.good, therefore i will pass it off as a minor blip etc...' naturally i'm relating it to my scenario haha, but its the same for other cases. In Germany its down to the examiner at the end to make a judgement, not just look and tick boxes. Because seriously all british ones have to do is watch what you do and how you react, and in the case of majors judge whether or not your actions cause another car to have to react.... no joke i could do that.

    your second point Advisor, regarding my quote. that can act in two ways, either there was nothing to see that was a hazard when i looked, (yes i know i should have looked again when about to go onto it), or the examiner was right, there was a car there right in front of me and i was looking somewhere else the whole time.

    As for hafa... ha, well yes it is. if it wasn't then every minor should be a major. For i got 2 minors for not checking mirrors when chaning speed, (i'm not debating whether or not they were correct minors), but, if a car had been overtaking and i had caused a problem by accelerating having not checked that would be a major... the only difference between the major and the minor is factors out of our own control. If we were completely un subjective then u can't rationally say there is a difference between the two scenario's in terms how your actions (or lack of) should be judged. And i think you'll find basically everything is subjective, the examiner is viewing the test and judging based on how THEY see it. you seem to have thought when i said subjective i meant that the subjective bit was down to the person sitting the test...

    And R.Murray, you seem to neglect the idea that i'd driven with this examiner for about 44 minutes previously, so i'd hope he'd noticed me checking then, and the other minors were nothing to do with observation at junctions.
    You say
    'not looking on approach to junctions is something i hate to see'
    i agree,haha but what, u think 'thats my driving style' mate quite funny but no, i do check every time, i don't take risks. and like i'd said, i had already gone over at least 10 mini roundabouts, (seriously the test town couldn't have many more if they tried, like the ones where a normal junction wud do perfectly but they have a mini roundabout instead).

    oh and i'm confused about this bit
    'The fact that you didn't notice anything worthy of a serious/dangerous fault is frightening. Remember, the examiner is just watching, you have the car to control - maybe concentrate more on your driving and less on doing a job you're nowhere near qualified to do and you'll perform a bit better.'

    yes the fact i was driving is probably why i wasn't staring to the right the whole time like the examiner to see if a car did have to 'hesitate', (u do seem to be acting as though i was about to drive onto a busy multi lane roundabout having not checked and then started complaining when the examiner put the brake on), in your words, 'serious/dangerous fault' was to apparently 'not look' (ur saying if the examiner is right and i didn't look, i should easily have noticed the major fault of not looking???) all that happened was that a car had to hesitate... pls stop exagerating, though again its quite funny.

    And just judging you as a person 'And I'll agree that if I was the driver you inconvenienced I'd be quite glad you failed for that' MATE UR HARD.

    you see mate, its not hard to look forward, (thats what u do when you drive right) and slow down if someone accidentaly doesn't spot you. Seems you'd rather drive into them then sue them for complete negligence. i wish everyone was like you... oh wait thats america (ha jokes... kinda)

    I would happily do that for anyone, knowing they'd do it for me. U however would never give way to someone if the road markings didn't tell u too though, because U ARE THE MAN, and everyone else must never do anything that might accidentaly inconveniance U. this is simply my take on you as a person based on ur unflinching ideals... or ur entire family are driving examiners.

    just clear it up, the only way the car had to hesitate is if it arrived practically exactly the same time as me, don't think it was waiting there or was there ahead of me, it wasn't. even if i didn't physically look right, i can still see 180 degrees, and the road from the right was easily within that field of vision on the approach.i can see, i don't know how i didn't see it, trust.

    basically it seems i remember everything but the other car, which is annoyin as the other car is what made it an issue.

    and i'm pretty sure i didn't refer to examiners as superheroes or supervillains.

    i look forward to any responses
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I'll respond to some of your points - since you're very wordy I'm going to do it in the quote.
    (Original post by Harty_09)
    i'm not gonna argue with all your points.
    But just a few.

    regarding the roundabout fail, imagine you'd driven for an hour then been told that on one part something had happened, your hardly ever going to have a memory which you have no doubt is right when questioned. So that avenue is pointless, i'm not gonna start doubting myself, though equally i'm not saying i was 100% right.

    When you've just driven for slightly over 30 minutes (not an hour) you should be able to remember if something dangerous or out of the ordinary happened. After my test (and all my mock tests) I was able to drive through the test in my mind and remember what I did. It wasn't that hard. Also, examiners are trained to give detailed debriefs at the end of the test and have to be able to weight the fault so that the candidate understands why they failed (this wasn't always the case - examiners have become far more pleasant in recent years. There used to be no debrief or pleasantries).

    Advisor your points are fine, the 1st, i agree with totally, my problem with that is more the system, everyone makes mistakes from time to time, if u drive for long enough you will make a mistake, you also never stop improving (hopefully with your driving), so to say when your near the bottom of the learning curve if you make 1 mistake that causes another driver to react in 45 mins you fail isn't wholly right. for a lot of learners there is luck involved...

    You can't drive on luck. You can't be taught how to deal with everything that is going to happen on the roads. So you need to be able to deal with anything. If you show that you can't deal with a hazard (even one caused by someone else) then you have shown you aren't safe. It is unfortunate that there are learners who wouldn't be able to deal with certain situations that pass since the specific situation arises, but those are the limitations of the test.

    ...with nothing happening, you hope nothing arises within the time your being examined, but if it does like in my case, which i'm not argueing... (its pointless), to have a system which catagorizes so much is wrong. Like R.Murray said... examiners are highly trained to notice and asses your faults. So surely they should be given more responsibility in the form... 'u made 1 mistake on a roundabout, but on the 10 previous ones you were v.good, therefore i will pass it off as a minor blip etc...'

    They can do that, but if you cause another road user to have to take some kind of action, then you've taken that discretion away from them. Simple as that. I'm not going to track down the link again but there is a document showing how faults are assessed, look for it in one of my other posts (I have linked to it so often but doubt many people bother to look through it). Do read the disclaimer that I put against it too, because reading this does not qualify you to second guess an examiner.

    naturally i'm relating it to my scenario haha, but its the same for other cases. In Germany its down to the examiner at the end to make a judgement, not just look and tick boxes. Because seriously all british ones have to do is watch what you do and how you react, and in the case of majors judge whether or not your actions cause another car to have to react.... no joke i could do that.

    Not a chance in hell.

    your second point Advisor, regarding my quote. that can act in two ways, either there was nothing to see that was a hazard when i looked, (yes i know i should have looked again when about to go onto it),

    Look for bikes! If a biker had come onto the roundabout, with him having priority it's a fair bet that you'd not have seen him.

    or the examiner was right, there was a car there right in front of me and i was looking somewhere else the whole time.

    Quite probably.

    As for hafa... ha, well yes it is. if it wasn't then every minor should be a major. For i got 2 minors for not checking mirrors when chaning speed, (i'm not debating whether or not they were correct minors)

    Mirrors are essential! I can't see why you wouldn't check your mirrors. However, we'll leave that line of argument for now.

    , but, if a car had been overtaking and i had caused a problem by accelerating having not checked that would be a major... the only difference between the major and the minor is factors out of our own control.

    I agree with you on this one. I think that if you did something wrong and it was pure chance that no one was there to be affected it should be treated as if there was someone affected. If it was serious. Once again this is a limitation of the test and the examiners can't justify the fault since they don't set the standards it's done higher up the ladder than them.

    If we were completely un subjective then u can't rationally say there is a difference between the two scenario's in terms how your actions (or lack of) should be judged. And i think you'll find basically everything is subjective, the examiner is viewing the test and judging based on how THEY see it. you seem to have thought when i said subjective i meant that the subjective bit was down to the person sitting the test...

    And R.Murray, you seem to neglect the idea that i'd driven with this examiner for about 44 minutes previously, so i'd hope he'd noticed me checking then, and the other minors were nothing to do with observation at junctions.

    I never said that they were. However, if you have done something right a 999 times, and on the thousandth, you screw it up and create a hazard, if you're on test that's hard lines but it was down to you.

    You say
    'not looking on approach to junctions is something i hate to see'
    i agree,haha but what, u think 'thats my driving style' mate quite funny but no, i do check every time, i don't take risks. and like i'd said, i had already gone over at least 10 mini roundabouts, (seriously the test town couldn't have many more if they tried, like the ones where a normal junction wud do perfectly but they have a mini roundabout instead).

    Mini-roundabouts are great since they keep the flow moving and give everyone an equal chance to get onto the road.

    oh and i'm confused about this bit
    'The fact that you didn't notice anything worthy of a serious/dangerous fault is frightening. Remember, the examiner is just watching, you have the car to control - maybe concentrate more on your driving and less on doing a job you're nowhere near qualified to do and you'll perform a bit better.'

    yes the fact i was driving is probably why i wasn't staring to the right the whole time like the examiner...

    A couple of things to pick you up on here. You shouldn't stare anyway, the car will tend to go where you're looking so it should really be glances not stares. The examiner can't stare either for a couple of reasons. They have to watch you, they have to see what's going on around the car and they can't prompt you to do observations by staring or making their own.

    ...to see if a car did have to 'hesitate', (u do seem to be acting as though i was about to drive onto a busy multi lane roundabout having not checked and then started complaining when the examiner put the brake on), in your words, 'serious/dangerous fault' was to apparently 'not look' (ur saying if the examiner is right and i didn't look, i should easily have noticed the major fault of not looking???) You clearly didn't - which is frightening (as I said previously). all that happened was that a car had to hesitate... pls stop exagerating, though again its quite funny.

    And just judging you as a person 'And I'll agree that if I was the driver you inconvenienced I'd be quite glad you failed for that' MATE UR HARD.

    Not at all, you were breaking the law. You weren't going to give way to the person on your right. Causing them to have to stop, then you went on your merry way. Inconsiderate drivers are a pet hate of mine, cos I've seen plenty.

    you see mate, its not hard to look forward, (thats what u do when you drive right) and slow down if someone accidentaly doesn't spot you.

    Actually I tend to use my mirrors quite frequently as well as making eye contact with other road users who may not have seen me. And if I had priority, why should I have to slow down for someone who thinks it's okay to miss the odd car now and again?

    ...Seems you'd rather drive into them then sue them for complete negligence.

    [/I]I actually believe that accident avoidance and defensive driving is something everyone should do. So although I shouldn't have to slow down, I will.[/i]
    i wish everyone was like you... oh wait thats america (ha jokes... kinda)

    I would happily do that for anyone, knowing they'd do it for me. U however would never give way to someone if the road markings didn't tell u too though, because U ARE THE MAN,

    I'll do anything that keeps my car roadworthy, if it means slowing down to avoid hitting someone who either thinks observations are for everyone else but not them or hasn't seen me, then I'll do it. However, I am under no obligation do so happily considering I had priority.


    and everyone else must never do anything that might accidentaly inconveniance U.


    You should certainly do your best not to, yes.

    this is simply my take on you as a person based on ur unflinching ideals... or ur entire family are driving examiners.


    I don't get why you think that people expecting a decent standard of driving in combination with common courtesy is idealistic.

    just clear it up, the only way the car had to hesitate is if it arrived practically exactly the same time as me, don't think it was waiting there or was there ahead of me, it wasn't. even if i didn't physically look right, i can still see 180 degrees, and the road from the right was easily within that field of vision on the approach.i can see, i don't know how i didn't see it, trust.

    basically it seems i remember everything but the other car, which is annoyin as the other car is what made it an issue.

    [i]Earlier in this post you mentioned the subjectiveness of the driving test, saying how it was wrong that a driver fault can be elevated to a serious/dangerous fault based on whether there is someone there. So which is it? Either you think a fault should be made into a serious fault because of a specific (and in some cases hypothetical) situation or you think that people should be allowed to do whatever the hell they liked and still get a license to drive any car anywhere in Britain.

    and i'm pretty sure i didn't refer to examiners as superheroes or supervillains.


    My apologies, I skim read the post and saw the word "spiderman" and read it wrongly.

    i look forward to any responses
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DuckBilledPlatypus)
    I failed today....thanks to a Miserable Old Man John who is the chief examiner of my local centre....complete prick!!!.....renound for being a prick. I Had a few minors on my sheet and stalled once thats fair enough but he sat in his chair silent and intimidating with Dark Blue glasses on not making conversation and generally making me feel nervous.....I know not all old people are like this guy but Euthanasia seemed a great idea after meeting this tosser...Watch out if you ever get an Instructor called John and he is old...he will fail you :mad:


    Anyone had any experiences on Tests or with instructors..why did you fail?
    I had this guy! He was a complete tosser. Whilst having my first test the car shock a few times and he was shaking his head like the car crashed. So stupid. And he doesn't talk, wears the stupid shades, such a complete pr*ck. Even my instructer said he's a fool as the guy would never smile or anything.

    John you :snow::snow::snow::snow::snow::snow::snow:, quit NOW & get laid.

    Beware of him guys. White haired, bald in the middle. Very stubborn. He will make you feel nervous then fail.

    Otherwise all the best and i hope you all pass!
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    Failed my first test with a woman who was really nice and put me at ease throughout the whole test but had no option but to fail me when my bay park was so bad

    Failed my 2nd & 3rd tests with a man who had exactly the same conversation with me both times, 2nd test was so bad, but I am still bitter about failing my 3rd test because apparantly i didn't look in my mirrors before signalling (got 5 minors for it) which i'm sure i didn't do.

    4th test I had the chief examiner and he was perfectly fine and I passed with 6 minors!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by R. Murray)
    I'll respond to some of your points - since you're very wordy I'm going to do it in the quote.
    Best part of this discussion:

    "you see mate, its not hard to look forward, (thats what u do when you drive right) and slow down if someone accidentaly doesn't spot you.

    Actually I tend to use my mirrors quite frequently as well as making eye contact with other road users who may not have seen me. And if I had priority, why should I have to slow down for someone who thinks it's okay to miss the odd car now and again?"


    Personally I think it's pretty terrible that anyone thinks they can not give way on a roundabout and expect a car with right of way to be able to stop. It's entirely down to you to not make them change direction.

    I think this is especially important on a driving test, since you won't move off quickly at all, so are very likely to hold up someone already on a roundabout. I don't think learners appreciate how slowly they drive sometimes!

    I also reckon that most of the stories in this thread are very one-sided, always the examiners fault right!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Haha
    I failed first time with an instructor called John

    He even put that I was 'Mr. Rachel' pah!
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Failed first time with a really nice woman...got 2 majors, one for completely messing up my RRC, the other was for something that happened at a mini-roundabout, not entirely sure what happened there.

    Second time, again, 2 majors but with different woman. Not quite as nice and marked more harshly I think. Got a major for not indicating when pulling in as there was apparently a car behind...I'd looked in the mirror and had I seen a car I would've indicated. Other major was for going through a narrow gap when I shouldn't have.

    Anyway, 3rd test in 2 weeks or so, hopefully it'll be a case of 3rd time lucky!
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    On my first test i had a decent examiner. He didnt talk much but he seemed a nice enough guy and didnt make me feel nervous or anything. Only got 4 minors but failed because i got 2 majors- 1 because i ended up a little bit too far away from the kerb when doing parralell parking (hardly something to fail me for but oh well) and the other was for going in the wrong lane at a roundabout (my own stupid fault i know).

    On my second test i had this examiner called mark who was a miserable idiot who is well known at my test centre for being really harsh and a complete idiot. He spoke to me once, then spent the rest of the time sighing and tutting. It really put me off and i kept thinking he was doing it because of me. Apparently he always does that though. He was also a bit snotty with me at times. I didnt do very well on that test and failed again. Although i did badly, i wasnt quite as bad on the test as his marking made me out to be.

    I hope its third time lucky, and i hope i dont have mark again!!!
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    On my first test i had a decent examiner. He didnt talk much but he seemed a nice enough guy and didnt make me feel nervous or anything. Only got 4 minors but failed because i got 2 majors- 1 because i ended up a little bit too far away from the kerb when doing parralell parking (hardly something to fail me for but oh well) and the other was for going in the wrong lane at a roundabout (my own stupid fault i know).

    On my second test i had this examiner called mark who was a miserable idiot who is well known at my test centre for being really harsh and a complete idiot. He spoke to me once, then spent the rest of the time sighing and tutting. It really put me off and i kept thinking he was doing it because of me. Apparently he always does that though. He was also a bit snotty with me at times. I didnt do very well on that test and failed again. Although i did badly, i wasnt quite as bad on the test as his marking made me out to be.

    I hope its third time lucky, and i hope i dont have mark again!!!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    If you already knew that he had a bad reputation.. why did you not request to the test centre to not be examined by him ?
    Offline

    0
    (Original post by DuckBilledPlatypus)
    I Had a few minors on my sheet
    So you failed for what exactly?
    "A few" means a number that is small within its context. If you got "a few minors" you would have to have between two and, say, eight before it becomes too significant a number to be dismissed as "a few". If you failed on minors you got sixteen or more, so you can't have failed because of "a few minors".

    Saying someone is a bad examiner because they had sunglasses on, didn't talk and then failed you for not being a good enough driver is ridiculous. Talking and not wearing any eyewear is nothing to do with his job and if you can't drive decently for forty-five minutes just because someone isn't speaking then you're not fit to hold a full license.

    I had one of these renowned tossers as an examiner for two tests and he passed me on the second one because I was good enough to pass.
    You weren't, bad luck, try again.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I think it may be a John thing. There was one at the test centre I did my first test at that was an absolute douchebag. I'djust failed, got out of the car, and heard John in the car next to me saying to the boy who was being examined "Well you don't think you passed do you?!" in an incredulous voice.

    I think I had a mental block about the examiners who failed me. I'm sure they were nice people, but I still hate them because they failed me Number 3 was ridiculously pedantic, and told me at the end of the test that if I'd been 2 inches closer to the kerb in my reverse round the corner I'd have passed. I got 1 minor that test.

    The test I passed on (number 4... go me) I got the loveliest examiner. She was quite young, in her 20s, had been to various festivals, and we chatted all the way through. She stopped me 5 minutes into the test and told me to stop freaking out, and that she wasn't going to let me continue before I calmed down a bit Then after she told me I'd passed she asked me where I got my dress from and said it was nice talking to me, and told my instuctor she has an awesome job getting to talk to people who aren't the boring other examiners, haha.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    i had a really friendly older lady examiner on my 1st test - FAILED! on 2nd test i had a very quiet/serious middle aged man and i PASSED! lol

    really i would say that your examiner should not make a difference, i can see how someone who is more 'serious' may make you feel nervous but you just have to be strong and concentrate on the drive, you should pass if you are up to the standard required, not how friendly the examiner is
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.