People who complain they failed their driving test

ninty9er

Just after opening a thread in the Limerick Forum. Someone complaining they failed their test because of "x":rolleyes:

Unless you're a complete imbecile you can't plain fail your test on ONE item. Said they had 5 grade 2s and this was the ONE that failed them:rolleyes: They failed on all 6 not that ONE.

And if you fail, you're judged not fit...GET OVER IT

Rant over!

prentice

Err you can fail on one mistake. Its called a grade 3 mistake and is considered dangerous driving.

And the judgement of that is so ridiculously arbitrary as to be nonsensical.

samsemtex

ninty9er wrote: »

Just after opening a thread in the Limerick Forum. Someone complaining they failed their test because of "x":rolleyes:

Unless you're a complete imbecile you can't plain fail your test on ONE item. Said they had 5 grade 2s and this was the ONE that failed them:rolleyes: They failed on all 6 not that ONE.

And if you fail, you're judged not fit...GET OVER IT

Rant over!

Thats a fairly **** rant to be honest. I failed on one mistake my first time. Zero grade twos and i got one grade 3 for ignoring a fairly concealed temporary road works sign saying a road which is normally 2 way is temporarily one way. The road was exactly the same as it has always beem, ie. one side wasnt blocked off or anything and it was the only way to get to the driving centre as far as i was aware.

I hesitated before going down it as i could tell it was a little different and the driving instructor made absolutely no indication of the new temporary way to get to the centre. I dont think i should have failed on that ONE mistake.

So no, you are not a complete imbecile if you say you failed on one mistake.

ninty9er

ninty9er wrote: »

Unless you're a complete imbecile you can't plain fail your test on ONE item.

prentice wrote: »

Err you can fail on one mistake. Its called a grade 3 mistake and is considered dangerous driving.

Read the original post;)

CyberGhost

I hate it when people think since they've been turning the wheel and pushing pedals for years they know how to drive, don't take any lessons before the test, fail it miserably and then complain.

maidhc

CyberGhost wrote: »

I hate it when people think since they've been turning the wheel and pushing pedals for years they know how to drive, don't take any lessons before the test, fail it miserably and then complain.

And what about people who successfully navigate the suburbs at 50km/h and then feel they are invincible?

Alanstrainor

ninty9er wrote: »

Unless you're a complete imbecile you can't plain fail your test on ONE item.

Thats a bit harsh dont you think? Getting a grade 3 fault doesn't mean you're an idiot! It could happen for numerous unforeseen reasons, like pedestrians walking out infront of your cr during the test and you not reacting quick enough.etc

inforfun

I dont think i ever met anyone who failed the test and admitted they screwed up.
It is always someone or something else to blame.

mikemac

People on Monday morning always fail as the tester is grumpy coming back to work
People on Friday evening always fail as the tester couldn't give a **** as they are concentrating on their weekend plans.
By Thursday your chances are failing as the tester has a quota of passes each week and they might be used up.
Girls should always wear attractive and revealing clothes to increase their chances
When the tester doesn't chat to you then must be ignorant so I knew I was going to fail (eh, they aren't supposed to talk)
The tester was friendly and chatted to me in the test. I was distracted, who do I sue???

Anyone care to add to the list

Yakult

inforfun wrote: »

I dont think i ever met anyone who failed the test and admitted they screwed up.
It is always someone or something else to blame.

I've met one. My brother.

He just said he's observation wasnt good enough and he got it wrong one too many times.

I just think its gas when you fail you can drive away like nothing happened lol.

CyberGhost

maidhc wrote: »

And what about people who successfully navigate the suburbs at 50km/h and then feel they are invincible?

I hate them too, I hate everybody.

pyramuid man

R_H_C_P wrote: »

I just think its gas when you fail you can drive away like nothing happened lol.

Ahem, technically you cant.

Anan1

R_H_C_P wrote: »

I've met one. My brother.

He just said he's observation wasnt good enough and he got it wrong one too many times.

Fair play to your brother, he's a bigger person than most.

Yakult

pyramuid man wrote: »

Ahem, technically you cant.

haha technically you cant

Anan1 wrote: »

Fair play to your brother, he's a bigger person than most.

Tbh, he needed it way more than I did so I was pretty annoyed when he didnt pass. but sure he's given it another go and this time more preperation.

Wishbone Ash

ninty9er wrote: »

Unless you're a complete imbecile you can't plain fail your test on ONE item

I made an instant failure fault (pre Grade 1, 2, 3 days) on the C+E test the first time I did it. I didn't react to potentially dangerous hazard and I deserved to fail. The tester closed his clip board and threw it down on the dashboard. But I'm hardly an imbecile.

For anyone who is familiar with the area, it occurred on the Tolka Bridge near Millmount House in Drumcondra (Dublin). It was a dark, wet evening in January at about 4.30pm and I was negotiating the narrow lane on the left of the bridge (outbound). I was momentarily watching traffic to my right when I didn't spot an unlit cyclist who decided to dismount the footpath and go into my blind spot and almost getting killed. The examiner told me that I should have anticapated the cyclist's possible intent as the footpath was coming to an end. And he was indeed correct.

inforfun wrote: »

I dont think i ever met anyone who failed the test and admitted they screwed up.
It is always someone or something else to blame.

I've failed three tests (A, B and C+E) on the first time out and I deserved to fail each time.

Lots of people admit that they deserved to fail and lots of people who have been successful also admit that they should have failed.

R_H_C_P wrote: »

I just think its gas when you fail you can drive away like nothing happened lol.

Perhaps one 'can' but would not be legally entitled to do so unless accompaied (except for those in categories A, M and W).

jimbling

micmclo wrote: »

Girls should always wear attractive and revealing clothes to increase their chances

This is a no brainer. I know a number of girls that are useless drivers and passed with flying colours.

One of these girls crashed into a kerb when doing the reverse around a corner. Even broke one of the hubcaps. And still Passed

Wishbone Ash

jimbling wrote: »

One of these girls crashed into a kerb when doing the reverse around a corner. Even broke one of the hubcaps. And still Passed

That is not a Grade 3 fault.

inforfun

R_H_C_P wrote: »

I've met one. My brother.



I just think its gas when you fail you can drive away like nothing happened lol.

Fair play to your brother.


And about your 2nd line.... Gas isnt exactly the word that comes up in my mind with those situations.

:eek: Describes it better..

Rosita

R_H_C_P wrote: »

I just think its gas when you fail you can drive away like nothing happened lol.

I think it's gas that people appear to think it's okay to drive to the test as an L-driver and then think it odd that someone can drive away (having failed the test) as an L-driver. The status of the driver has not changed.

It is not like someone has committed a crime in failing the test. In reality every full licence driver in the country with the possible exception of those who have completed their test in the last fortnight would fail a driving text miserably.

It seems strange that we think it is okay for those people to be driving around yet it is not acceptable for someone who has probably done a lot better than the full licence driver would do in the driving test to drive away afterwards.

If people genuinely believe that the ability to pass the series of manouveres that is the driving test is an absolute requirement in order to drive safely and competently then everybody should have a test once a year.

A logistical nightmare no doubt - but no less so than impounding the cars of anyone who fails a driving test and that is the logical extension of what some people seem to think. And if people genuinely believe that the driving test is the absolute test of competence (and it is not without merit) then is it not ludricous that someone has to prove their competence in a vehicle just the once in the lives? It seems so if people are being consistent in their arguments.

Wishbone Ash

Rosita wrote: »

In reality every full licence driver in the country with the possible exception of those who have completed their test in the last fortnight would fail a driving text miserably.

Although I don't consider myself to be a good driver (as they are a rareity) I consider that my driving is a lot better now than it was 20 years ago. I've learned a lot from my experiences over those years.

Rossita wrote:

If people genuinely believe that the ability to pass the series of manouveres that is the driving test is an absolute requirement in order to drive safely and competently then everybody should have a test once a year.

I agree but it would be a logistical nightmare especially for those of use who hold multi-category licences.

inforfun

Rosita wrote: »

And if people genuinely believe that the driving test is the absolute test of competence (and it is not without merit) then is it not ludricous that someone has to prove their competence in a vehicle just the once in the lives? It seems so if people are being consistent in their arguments.

I passed my test first time after 20 or so driving lessons (not here, in Holland).
So that gave me 20 hours of experience and i did realise that was nothing.

I really think people shouldnt be driving a car if they dont have the proper license to do so.
I have experience of driving here as well as in Holland. I can honestly say that in my few years driving here i have seen many more cock-ups in traffic than in 2x that time in Holland. And i am not exactly impressed with the standard of driving in Holland.

I also think that when someone can not pass a driving test in 3 times they should never be allowed to do the test again. You can have bad luck once, maybe twice but if you fail 3 times you are just not capable/intelligent/talented enough to drive.

Rosita

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Although I don't consider myself to be a good driver (as they are a rareity) I consider that my driving is a lot better now than it was 20 years ago. I've learned a lot from my experiences over those years.

It is alomost certainly true that you are a better driver now than 20 years ago, but the driving test does not measure experience. It measures one's ability to perform a series of manouveres in a specific manner. The chances are that most full licence drivers would pick up faults for lack of observation on a 3-point turn, say, even thought their experience would suggest that they will almost certainly do this very safely.

While the driving test encourages good habits, it is debatable whether the mere passing of it gives any great guarantees as to general competence. But if the test is held to be a genuine test of competence by many - to the point that they think someone who fails it should not be allowed on the road afterwards - it is inconsistent of them not to recommened constant retraining of full licence drivers.

towel401

jimbling wrote: »

This is a no brainer. I know a number of girls that are useless drivers and passed with flying colours.

One of these girls crashed into a kerb when doing the reverse around a corner. Even broke one of the hubcaps. And still Passed

girls only need to spread their legs to pass any test. duh

kc66

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

That is not a Grade 3 fault.

The tester can fail you for touching the kerb while reversing around the corner. It happens. So it must be a grade 3 fault.

Rosita

inforfun wrote: »

I also think that when someone can not pass a driving test in 3 times they should never be allowed to do the test again. You can have bad luck once, maybe twice but if you fail 3 times you are just not capable/intelligent/talented enough to drive.

This is nuts in fairness. People can fails tests for all sorts of reasons - poor preparation, the slightest of technicalities etc.

There also is the issue that every driving test is unique. Hazards will differ from occasion to occasion. The extent of on-coming traffic, the state of roundabouts, roadworks can all affect individual tests.

To impute a lack of intelligence or talent to someone who fails a test three times and to give them a life ban for doing so is more than a tad over the top.

The driving test is about the ability to repeat a series of often unnatural - for the average driver - operations (like checking your head-rest before driving off.......come on!.). This is hardly brain-surgery and would be a dubious measure of intelligence or talent in any broad sense.

Some people are better at playing pool thann others. Some people can run faster than others or are physically stronger than others. None of those, no less than driving ability, I would suggest, implies higher intelligence or general talent.

Alanstrainor

kc66 wrote: »

The tester can fail you for touching the kerb while reversing around the corner. It happens. So it must be a grade 3 fault.

That is not true. Where are you getting this information from. However if one were to "mount" the kerb, that is to say that one or more wheels ends up on the kerb that IS a grade 3 fault. Hitting a kerb can warrant a grade 2 fault, but it all depends on the circumstances.
EDIT: just to say that, for one, a lot of people will try and sugar coat the circumstances of their failure, to make it seem like it was "the system" or examinor that was to blame for their failure. And to quote a poster on learning to drive recenty (apologies, cant remember who it was!).
It's not the examinor who fails you. It's the marking sheet, the examinor merely marks the sheets and adds up the result at the end.

samsemtex

inforfun wrote: »

Fair play to your brother.


And about your 2nd line.... Gas isnt exactly the word that comes up in my mind with those situations.

:eek: Describes it better..

Why? the Irish driving test is not a test of driving ability. Someone who has passed their test is not a better driver on that grounds. It reminds me on the ECDL computer test. My friend has it and keeps reminding me how he is more qualified on computers than i am despite the fact he is completely incompetent at computers and i am very capable at programming. Its a joke and means nothing.

Maybe if we had a decent driving test/learning scheme so many young fellas wouldnt be killed on Irish roads. Look at the Finnish model that takes three years. Its mainly because Finnish roads are unpredictable and dangerous in their nature, the teach you how to deal with that. Here, we have even more unpredictible and probably even more dangerous yet look that the joke of a test we have.

Anan1

samsemtex wrote: »

Why? the Irish driving test is not a test of driving ability. Someone who has passed their test is not a better driver on that grounds.

Better than who? They are probably better than someone who has tried to pass their test and failed, for example.

samsemtex

Anan1 wrote: »

Better than who? They are probably better than someone who has tried to pass their test and failed, for example.

No, not necessarily. Ive plenty of friends on a provisional that i would sit in with far quicker than ones who have a full licence. I passed my test and that day made the worst driving mistake ive ever made due to arrogance that i passed a meaningless test. When i failed my test the first time everyone of my friends said i was by far the best driver out of the other two i was living with who had passed their test. One of whom could not do a hill start, clips mirrors constantly when driving in traffic, looks directly at you when he talks while driving and doesnt change down gears correctly ie. when he is overtaking. Now if im a judged to be a worse driver than him just because i ignored a badly positioned no entry sign then i think its a pretty pathetic way of testing people. And its not just me being arrogant, he is a shocking driver and most of my friends who have failed would indeed be better than him yet he is the only one who passed first time.

r3nu4l

micmclo wrote: »

Anyone care to add to the list

Yup,

The test centre in [insert town here] has a really high failure rate (usually just over 50%) and everyone knows it's harder to pass your test there. :rolleyes:

What about the other 40-odd percent that managed to pass then? Oh yeah, they were probably all girls who were driving naked during the test

Jaysoose

samsemtex wrote: »

No, not necessarily. Ive plenty of friends on a provisional that i would sit in with far quicker than ones who have a full licence. I passed my test and that day made the worst driving mistake ive ever made due to arrogance that i passed a meaningless test. When i failed my test the first time everyone of my friends said i was by far the best driver out of the other two i was living with who had passed their test. One of whom could not do a hill start, clips mirrors constantly when driving in traffic, looks directly at you when he talks while driving and doesnt change down gears correctly ie. when he is overtaking. Now if im a judged to be a worse driver than him just because i ignored a badly positioned no entry sign then i think its a pretty pathetic way of testing people. And its not just me being arrogant, he is a shocking driver and most of my friends who have failed would indeed be better than him yet he is the only one who passed first time.

To be fair the level of driving you describe in your circle of friends sounds shocking and none of you are placed to judge anybodies driving. At least you are balanced, what with having a chip on both shoulders about the driving test.