Driving Test FAIL - Appealing the result - Anyone tried/succeeded ?

quoia

Posting this query for my nephew.

Having done ALL the standard required manoeuvres perfectly etc. etc.

... travelling down a country lane at about 40 mph and a pheasant shot out of the hedgerow.

The EXAMINER APPLIED THE BRAKES SHARPLY WITHOUT WARNING !!!!

Having completed the test he announced a FAIL

He had recorded just 4 minors - which can be totally ignored ...

BUT 1 MAJOR - for the "pheasant incident"

Apparently my nephew was "NOT IN FULL POSSESSION OF THE VEHICLE" at that time.

Well he wouldn't be IN FULL POSSESSION would he - the EXAMINER was in POSSESSION OF THE BRAKES !!!

He's absolutely distraught - even his instructor can't believe/understand the situation.

The examiner couldn't wait to get out of the car and disappear before too many questions came his way.
Apparently his only relevant comment was that he applied the brakes becauuse he didn't want the bird to come to any harm !

My nephew's instructor has already said that there is no actual or specific requirement to take ANY action to avoid hitting the pheasant - brake or not, hit it or not, swerve (in control) or not, should not have been detrimental to the overall test result.

So ? APPEAL the result ?
Anyone tried ? Outcome ?
Overturned ? Or is it pointless ?

[Deleted User]

Appeal. But he will only get a free re-test. They won't change the result of a previous test.

Happychappy

Was it at the Sinfin Lane centre ?

quoia

Happychappy wrote: »

Was it at the Sinfin Lane centre ?

No, he lives in Castle Gresley near Swadlincote.
Not sure exactly where his nearest test centre is located.

BLT_2

quoia wrote: »

Posting this query for my nephew.

Having done ALL the standard required manoeuvres perfectly etc. etc.

... travelling down a country lane at about 40 mph and a pheasant shot out of the hedgerow.

The EXAMINER APPLIED THE BRAKES SHARPLY WITHOUT WARNING !!!!

Having completed the test he announced a FAIL

He had recorded just 4 minors - which can be totally ignored ...

BUT 1 MAJOR - for the "pheasant incident"

Apparently my nephew was "NOT IN FULL POSSESSION OF THE VEHICLE" at that time.

Well he wouldn't be IN FULL POSSESSION would he - the EXAMINER was in POSSESSION OF THE BRAKES !!!

He's absolutely distraught - even his instructor can't believe/understand the situation.

The examiner couldn't wait to get out of the car and disappear before too many questions came his way.
Apparently his only relevant comment was that he applied the brakes becauuse he didn't want the bird to come to any harm !

My nephew's instructor has already said that there is no actual or specific requirement to take ANY action to avoid hitting the pheasant - brake or not, hit it or not, swerve (in control) or not, should not have been detrimental to the overall test result.

So ? APPEAL the result ?
Anyone tried ? Outcome ?
Overturned ? Or is it pointless ?

As he left the car did the instructor 'flip him the bird'

Takoda

That examiner sounds like a 'fowl' chap!!! :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

optimus_primera

Did the examiner just 'Duck' and run? He sounds like a right 'tit' .......

geordieracer

seems a poultry amount to get failed on

BLT_2

Takoda wrote: »

That examiner sounds like a 'fowl' chap!!! :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

He sounded quite 'pheasant' to me :rotfl:

DaveF327

Don't "grouse" (sorry ) Here are the facts:

quoia wrote: »

BUT 1 MAJOR - for the "pheasant incident"

Apparently my nephew was "NOT IN FULL POSSESSION OF THE VEHICLE" at that time.

There isn't a box on the DL25 labelled "reaction to wildfowl", so what exactly was the fault marked under?

Well he wouldn't be IN FULL POSSESSION would he - the EXAMINER was in POSSESSION OF THE BRAKES !!!

If the ETA box is marked, it means Examiner Took Action to avoid a danger.

The examiner couldn't wait to get out of the car and disappear before too many questions came his way.

Examiners cannot discuss the test in detail. They can only state the facts and summarise the reason for failure.

Or is it pointless ?

Yes. The only appeal allowed by law is if the statutory test requirements weren't complied with. Unless you have evidence of this, you have no chance. Disagreeing with a decision won't get you anywhere as an examiner's decision is final.

dacouch

I would have got out of the car and given the examiner the bird