As good as framed …
Stupidly proud of myself for having passed, and guess what, now I *still* have less classes on my licence than most of you! Anyway, phew, and thanks so much for all the good lucks and congratulations. I was praying hard and just to prove there is a God, there was hardly any traffic on the roads 
Thanks again to Andy Taylor of Taylor Made Driving (link link link!), I couldn’t have done it without him!
Saw why the test only has a 20% pass rate this morning at the test centre though. This young chap was in to be tested at the same time as me and I watched him try the reversing thing, which is pretty much the first thing you do. He reversed, turned, then pulled forwards three times, and you’re only allowed to pull forwards twice in the whole thing. So he failed instantly.
Later on it turned out that my instructor had talked to him and found that his company had put him in for the test with little or no teaching, and he’d never reversed a trailer before in his life! Couldn’t believe that a company would waste the test fee like that; perhaps there are people out there who could just pass it (we’ll see if Steve manages) but given how hard I found it, thinking I was a decent enough driver in the first place, I’d be surprised.
So obviously the low pass rate is more because people enter it before they’re ready to do it, or because they take it without really knowing what it entails (chap today clearly didn’t know he could only pull forward twice as he really didn’t need to drive forward when he did).
Anyway. Now I’m looking forward to Steve’s turn, which hasn’t been arranged yet, but it won’t be too long to wait.
Have leapt back into normal mode here (having been in zombie ‘can’t think about anything else but towing’ mode for the past few days) and done lots of catching up on housework this afternoon, there is more to be done but it will have to wait until later or tomorrow.
July 18th, 2007 at 15:48
have never understood why ppl would go in for tests (of whatever kind) without doing a bit of research first, it’s just daft.
So when are you towing the tent into the distance then?
July 18th, 2007 at 16:24
Well done.
July 18th, 2007 at 16:43
you’ll have more on your licence than me now – annoying isn’t it? well done!
July 18th, 2007 at 17:05
Never looked at my licence to know what I can and can’t do!
July 18th, 2007 at 17:42
Congratulations, Sarah
Well done.
Cx
July 18th, 2007 at 18:06
Well done, Sarah! I knew you could do it. As you say, it’s all about preparation.
July 18th, 2007 at 18:48
Well done! i definitely wouldn’t pass and yet the classification is on my licence.
July 18th, 2007 at 18:54
Brilliant
July 18th, 2007 at 19:04
Kirsty, you can at least take comfort from the fact that it’s because you’re young – not like me, who just left it for ages before learning to drive in the first place!
Michelle – that’s the scary thing about this whole experience, realising how many people there are on the roads who wouldn’t.
In fact I wonder how many of us would pass the standard driving test after 10 years? Must say the whole thing has underlined my belief that drivers’ licences should have to be renewed by either a test or at the very least a refresher course every few years. Can’t see that ever being a reality as it would be blindingly expensive to instigate, but it would be very good for road users in general, in my opinion.
July 18th, 2007 at 19:37
Congratulations! I had to do the basic driving test when I moved here after driving in the states for 16 years. It is amazing how many bad habits you pick up over the years! The hardest part was remebering to keep both hands on the steering wheel and in the right position!
July 18th, 2007 at 19:59
well done! I have the bit on my licence already but I’ll be honest, I wouldn’t know where to start so more power to you for going out and doing it.
July 18th, 2007 at 20:18
Well done Sarah! Never looked at my licence to see what I can and can’t do, but was staggered recently when thinking the date rang a bell to realise it was 16 years since I passed my driving test
July 18th, 2007 at 21:22
Retesting everyone seems a bit punitive to me. I reckon they should have mandatory retesting for *any* traffic offence. So if you get done for speeding you automatically have to resit your test which, if you fail, has to be resit until you pass. In the meantime you can’t drive. That might see a big drop in driving offences.
July 18th, 2007 at 22:33
I guess that would work too – although it’s morons who hog the middle lane on motorways, or generally don’t pay attention to other road users who annoy me the most, so they might not have had a traffic offence, iyswim? It’s carelessness/complacency as much as anything else.
July 19th, 2007 at 5:21
*any* traffic offence? Having a bulb not working? parking past your ticket time? Travelling at 80mph on the motorway? That would be a lot of retests. I reckon a mandatory ‘refresher’ test every 10 years would make the roads safer. It would make sense for people who lose their licences for an offence to have to retake their test though.
July 19th, 2007 at 5:55
Any offence that gives you points. Might be a lot to start with but it would soon tail off. I am sure more people would fear a retest that a £60 fine and 3 points on their licence.
But retesting people is not going to stop people being morons is it?
July 19th, 2007 at 6:03
It might get the morons off the road, if they were stupid enough not to pass a refresher test.
I still think a routine renewal test would be a good idea. Not as a punitive measure, just as a ‘this is what we do in order to keep all our road users safe’, a standard thing. It would stop people developing so many careless habits, make them think more – and also weed out people whose health/eyesight has deteriorated past a safe level.
July 19th, 2007 at 7:33
But they probably would pass the test wouldn’t they. Most drivers are inconsiderate. All that would happen is people would drive differently to pass their test and then go back to being inconsiderate.
Is there any evidence to suggest that those just having passed their tests currently are more considerate drivers with less bad habits…..I doubt it. People slump very quickly into non-passing habits imo.
To be honest I am more likely to be hit by 17yo who has just passed their test than a 50 year old who hasn’t been tested in 30 years.
July 19th, 2007 at 7:39
Oh and I also think *all* road users should have some of test not just motorists.
July 19th, 2007 at 10:28
I think my experience just showed me, personally, how hard it was to drive to test standard, and I thought I was an ok driver before that. Therefore regardless of age or whatever else, everyone (as in everyone – pedestrians, cyclists, other drivers, etc) would benefit from road users having to have regular refresher courses in order to renew a licence every 10 years or so, like a passport. And yeah, agreed, all road users should have appropriate tests.
July 19th, 2007 at 14:22
Yeah I guess you thought you were better than you were;-) Steve will no doubt prove he *is* as good as he thinks.
July 19th, 2007 at 15:30
Interested in your idea of testing all road users Chris. I’m sure Riona would like to sit a test at 9 years so that she can ride her bike on the road. Wouldn’t make it safer, but the motoring lobby, who kill about 3000 people in the UK every year, would be happy.
As you’ve correctly identified it isn’t really testing that makes roads safer, it is considerate road sharing.
Finally and belatedly, well done Sarah.
July 19th, 2007 at 17:03
Well a significant minority of bike riders in Oxford don’t seem to realise that traffic lights apply to all road users, or that cycles are supposed to have front and rear lights in the dark. Perhaps a test would encourage those bike riders to learn and confirm with those rules for their *own* safety.
Out of interest what is the figure for deaths on the road that aren’t the fault of motorists? Is it really the case that all deaths on the roads are the fault of the drivers? I know that inconsiderate drivers are the chief road problem but I don’t believe the often promoted view that cyclists are always innocent vicims. Or pedestrians for that matter.
I guess the difference is that idiotic behaviour by pedestrians and cyclists is likely to lead to their own death (not the motorists) where as motorists idiotic behaviour will likely lead to the death of others. So I guess if one takes the view that as cyclists are only to go to kill themselves with inconsiderate behaviour then there is no need to test their competence on a road, likewise with pedestrians. There is probably something in that approach.
July 19th, 2007 at 17:44
Well done you
July 19th, 2007 at 18:24
Chris – I will not be entirely surprised if Steve passes his test (which is on Tuesday lunchtime, incidentally), because I genuinely think he is a good driver. However I will be laughing if he fails too, because it will serve him right for laughing at me over how difficult I was finding it!
July 19th, 2007 at 18:40
I like your logic Chris.
July 19th, 2007 at 18:50
If that were the logic government followed then it would not be law to wear a seatbelt. I think legislation that promotes less deaths has to be positive. How about ban cyclists (just winding you up Rog!)
July 19th, 2007 at 18:53
Sorry, last comment assumed that government follow logic.
July 20th, 2007 at 9:14
Sarah, I think your email problem is likely to be caused by spam.
If you log in via webmail you can administer spam on an account by account basis – look under ‘folders’ and there should be an option to empty spam folders.
However, it is easier to log in via ftp, go into the /mail/ directory and look for folders called ‘spam’ and delete them. Doing it this way does mean that you can’t review spam before deleting it though.
I don’t have any access to the server this account is on, so I am afraid I can’t log in and do it for you.
July 20th, 2007 at 9:22
Thanks Tim – not sure it is – but I’ve mailed you again anyway!
July 20th, 2007 at 16:02
Don’t know how many deaths are the result of motorists’ mistakes, but nearly all deaths involve a motor vehicle.
You have a point about taking responsibility, and that cyclists/peds/horsey people etc tend to lose more easily compared with motorists.
I don’t jump red lights and light up at night, and I’ll start listening to motorists moan about this when they start obeying the speed limits. All of them. All the time.
July 20th, 2007 at 16:46
Your last comment is a bit odd…..it’s kind of saying that motorists are equally right to ignore the moans of cyclists until cyclists *all* obey the rules of the road all of the time. I kind of think both groups need to listen to the moans of the others and start being more considerate in response to those moans. Not listening, as you suggest, ain’t really going to make things any better is it?
July 20th, 2007 at 21:52
Fair point, except that motorists kill people.