BSM Driving School

misscutiepie1984

thanks for that ...... I

misscutiepie1984

thanks for that ...... I have a feeling its going to be a long winded process because they have admitted it is there error and arelooking into it but have not heard anything since. As it stands its up to the instructor to give me a refund but it is out of their pocket, which is not fair as it was not their error in my opinion.

Sssssss

if it was a 2hour lesson which you had paid for, why couldn't the instructor wait more then 10 minutes while you continued to look for the paperwork?

uktim29

misscutiepie1984 wrote: »

As it stands its up to the instructor to give me a refund but it is out of their pocket, which is not fair as it was not their error in my opinion.

I don't think it was their error either.

It's like needing other people to tell you that when you buy a car you need to get it insured, taxed and make sure it's got an MOT. If you didn't do this and got fined would you be asking for a refund because you didn't get a phone call telling you the week before?

Some things you need to take responsibility for yourself and not rely on others all the time. Legal documents are one of those things.

misscutiepie1984

Uktim29 - does it make your feel good about yourself when your RUDE to people. It must be wonderful to be so perfect!!!

uktim29

It's not being rude. It's just my opinion.

The thing which has annoyed me is you've just pointed the finger, you were also responsible.

emmy05

i went with an independant driving instructor and he informed me that id need both parts of my license, which i knew this anyway, but at least he told me, unlike yours, hope you get it sorted xxxxx

misscutiepie1984

uktim29 wrote: »

It's like needing other people to tell you that when you buy a car you need to get it insured, taxed and make sure it's got an MOT.

An interesting point but doesn't this undermine your argument somewhat and reinforce my assertion that all relevant information should be made available to the consumer prior to commencement of a process of a serious nature. This is particularly so when there are vital legal and practical implications to consider.

As I'm sure you will be aware, when I vehicle is purchased in the UK, a V5 document or 'log book' must be submitted detailing information on the new owner. The DLVA then uses the information contained on their databases to routinely send out 'reminders' that their road fund license is due to expire and requires renewal. The reminder contains all relevant information on exactly what to pay and where to pay it. A vaild road fund license cannot be obtained without a valid insurance policy or MOT test certificate. So, using your analogy I would have never encountered a problem simply because all the relevant information would be made available to me in a timely fashion. That is the very least I or anyone else should expect from a government agency or indeed a large company.

Do you think the DVLA are wasting their time and undoubtedly millions of taxpayers pounds sending out written reminders to renew their car tax simply because we should all take more responsibility for our lives and not need prompting? Do you not believe I should have been furnished with all the proper information at least a week prior the commencing of what, to the average person, is the most hazardous undertaking they will make on a daily basis?

I'm not advocating a 'nanny state' which is what I think you are implying. I'm merely arguing that all the appropriate information should have been made available to me. On this occasion the customer relations were sorely lacking and as a result of this omission I have suffered an unjust pecuniary loss.

Definately not moneysaving!

cajef

misscutiepie1984 wrote: »

I had no intention of learning to drive back then and only acquired the license as, in the absence of national identity cards, the drivers license has become the de facto standard form of identification and as such an invaluable article in terms of opening bank account/credit cards etc..

However, after seven years and not one financial institution requesting the paper counterpart I don't believe it is entirely unreasonable to expect the memory to fade.

however as one of the largest driving tuition agencies in the UK they are in a stonger position to bare the loss.

While a lot of people use the photocard as some form of ID the various financial institutions are only using the photo as proof of identity, the fact remains that it is not an ID card but a driving licence and as such both parts make up the licence and need to be produced for driving purposes for the police, the DSA and driving instructors, they have to be visually checked, but I do agree that you should have been informed of this by BSM.

Unfortunately while BSM are a large agency all their instructors are actually self employed and work on a franchise basis, it is the instructor that loses his income not BSM so it is him that would have to bare the loss as they will not compensate him.

However as I said previously I do sympathise with you and think you have a strong case against them for lack of communication, when I was instructing I always made sure that the pupil was informed that both parts of the licence needed to be seen at the first lesson when they made their initial enquiries and bookings and on confirmation of the date and time in a courtesy phone call, usually a few days before the actual lesson.

Keep talking to the manager and threaten to escalate it further if you do not get a refund.

HC_2

cajef wrote: »

While a lot of people use the photocard as some form of ID the various financial institutions are only using the photo as proof of identity, the fact remains that it is not an ID card but a driving licence and as such both parts make up the licence and need to be produced for driving purposes for the police, the DSA and driving instructors, they have to be visually checked, but I do agree that you should have been informed of this by BSM.

Unfortunately while BSM are a large agency all their instructors are actually self employed and work on a franchise basis, it is the instructor that loses his income not BSM so it is him that would have to bare the loss as they will not compensate him.

However as I said previously I do sympathise with you and think you have a strong case against them for lack of communication, when I was instructing I always made sure that the pupil was informed that both parts of the licence needed to be seen at the first lesson when they made their initial enquiries and bookings and on confirmation of the date and time in a courtesy phone call, usually a few days before the actual lesson.

Keep talking to the manager and threaten to escalate it further if you do not get a refund.

Excellent post. I totally agree.

Yes, you probably were a bit silly not realising that BSM would need to see both parts of your licence. However, I would have thought it was up to them to make sure you knew that before your first lesson. (Unless it's in the BSM T&C - have you checked?)

My daughter learned to drive recently, and her instructor told her clearly that she would need to provide both parts before any lesson could take place.

Edit: sorry, I realise now that BSM admit they have breached their T&Cs in not forewarning you. Strange, then, that they are not coughing up.