[i32I7qyH]

Er, appeal!? Sounds like a waste of time and effort to me why doesn't your friend just do what everyone else does, accept that he failed and retake his test?

[Usogwdkb]

Having taken the DSA Class A, Class B & Class C Tests, both Practical and Theory and being friends with a number of Instructors {biking} I might suggest it is you who are speaking bollocks.

LOL - No, I'm afraid that if you honestly think that there is some kind of "quota" or that some people are "failed" for no reason then you really are talking ****.
If you failed you failed for a reason - they don't just fail people for no reason.

It's a myth, put around by people who are, simply put...not up to passing their test.
People fail and rather than accept the point that they weren't good enough to pass they come up with some bullshit about "Well yer, I was told that there has to be a certain number of fails every day".

No - you were not good enough to pass.
Get over it, get another test booked and concentrate on being good enough next time.

[Habalinnyf]

LOL - No, I'm afraid that if you honestly think that there is some kind of "quota" or that some people are "failed" for no reason then you really are talking ****.
If you failed you failed for a reason - they don't just fail people for no reason.

It's a myth, put around by people who are, simply put...not up to passing their test.
People fail and rather than accept the point that they weren't good enough to pass they come up with some bullshit about "Well yer, I was told that there has to be a certain number of fails every day".

No - you were not good enough to pass.
Get over it, get another test booked and concentrate on being good enough next time.

I don't know you but I already hate you. Kudos on the great personaility there chet.

[Habalinnyf]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/transport/...427458,00.html

Now see what your tiny mind can make of this article.
Granted it initially appears to favour the Candidate taking the test but read behind the lines. Each Examiner is under scrutinisation and a deviation of 10% either way is enough to warrant a DSA lead investigation.

Now imagine this, you have 20 Amazing drivers Monday to Wednesday, you pass them all but hit your Quota of 47%, you now have one of two choices.

1.) Continue to pass drivers based on their ability and risk investigation

2.) Fail candidates who would have otherwise passed.

I know what alot of people would do, based on stat padding by the NHS, Police, County Councils, infact all Public run bodies.

Now lets hear a valid defense instead of "You talk bollox" or a "Yo Momma" joke.

[Usogwdkb]

I don't know you but I already hate you. Kudos on the great personaility there chet.

*Yawn*
You bore me

[Usogwdkb]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/transport/...427458,00.html

Now see what your tiny mind can make of this article.
Granted it initially appears to favour the Candidate taking the test but read behind the lines. Each Examiner is under scrutinisation and a deviation of 10% either way is enough to warrant a DSA lead investigation.

Now imagine this, you have 20 Amazing drivers Monday to Wednesday, you pass them all but hit your Quota of 47%, you now have one of two choices.

1.) Continue to pass drivers based on their ability and risk investigation

2.) Fail candidates who would have otherwise passed.

I know what alot of people would do, based on stat padding by the NHS, Police, County Councils, infact all Public run bodies.

Now lets hear a valid defense instead of "You talk bollox" or a "Yo Momma" joke.

I don't need to defend myself.
I'm not sure what you're on about with regards "Yo Momma".
I'm typing English - so not quite sure what that actually means.
Bollocks doesn't contain the letter x - however I'm afraid you are still talking it.

People go into a driving test with a completely clean sheet.
As you progress through your test you are asked to complete certain tasks.
So long as you don't make any mistakes - guess what...you pass!!
If you make a minor error - guess what...you pass!!
If however you aren't up to the grade - guess what...you fail!!

Your posted link does actually indicate more people pass who should fail - thus actually going against your argument.
Article says more people than should pass test, you say "read between the lines" and suddenly it means the opposit??
It's also the Guardian newspaper - I've got no more reason to believe something they have said without backup as I have anybody else.
The DSA for example say it's an upban myth - which it is.

But there you go - you keep on believing your urban myths.
Here's another couple for you:

1. There are still crimes in the UK that in theory carry the death penalty
2. The daddy long legs is the most poisionious insect but cannot actually inject it's poison so is harmless.

Those two along with your "failure quota" are simply pub trivia.

[Yyaqyped]

You have to keep with the flow of traffic. If you are unable to reach the speed limit, or unwilling then you should not be motorway driving, and thus no licence. When I did my motorcycle test in 1995 I got noted down for not being fast enough. In this case it was a faulty bike, there was a massive problem with my baffles being blocked. This in turn lost me power and I was unable to do 50mph up a hill in my YB100. I was barely making 30mph and duly got marked down and failed. I got it fixed for my next test two weeks later and duly passed with not a single fault. [thumbup]

You mate is a danger to the road imo.

[Habalinnyf]

load of crap.

Can you not understand, +/- 10% it says so in the fookin article.
Regardless of the individual Examiner involved this proves beyond a shadow of a doubt there is a form of Quota involved.
The same Article can be found in multiple media outlets so it's irrelevant if you trust the gaurdian or not.

Since you appear to have trouble thinking outside of your ignorance box allow me to hightlight a section of the article:-

"The agency said it looked carefully at examiners whose pass rate varied from the average among colleagues by more than 10%: "This 10% variance rule is confirmed by the National Audit Office as a reasonable measure."

So do you understand that while this article shows that substandard drivers can pass, logically it proves this can also work in the opposite direction; an Examiner who's passed a high percentage of candidates in the first portion of the month would need to fail a percentage for the rest of the month to meet the approved guidelines.

Nobody wants their work to come under scrutiny no matter what your proffession so as with the majority of Human beings, they choose an easy life over a morally correct one.

It's not rocket science.

[sitescools]

hmmm

thats certainly one interesting article there.

I think its a bit outrageous if such a system exists.

It would be very unfair to pass / fail to meet such "quotas" [thumbdown]

For info, my friend is trying re-taking his test; with no appeal as he doesn't think it would get anywhere as many of you have said.

Although, I still think it might be worth a shot, it is, apparently, more effort than its worth.

[Enrobrorb]

I'm sorry, but there is nothing wrong with driving at 60Mph on a dual carrage, or motorway. More problems are caused on the roads by people not choosing the correct lanes. If drivers learn to stick as far left as possible, leaving the right hand lanes for overtaking traffic, someone driving at 60Mph wouldn't pose a problem - you'd have adiquate room to overtake and drive faster if you choose.

IMO, I don't buy the percentage have to fail, it's utter rubbish. So many people take their tests who are not simply ready are enough to keep the pass rate realatively low.

What I think you'll find is that your mate didn't inspire the instructor enough that he was confortable driving. Maybe nerves, I don't know but I can garuntee he wouldn't give a major for no reason. Hell, look how much that sticks out - a major is a massive sign and therefore "questionable". Much easier to give the 14 minors to fail, would blend in so much more.

Your mate failed, get over it.