Is appealing the driving test decision worth it?

ash1511 · 02-10-2015 11:17am #1

Hi,

I've failed my driving test (for the 3rd time) today. I'm feeling miserable now. Have been driving since years (in other countries and had a full licence). I do not agree with the decision and when I asked him to explain my faults (for the 2nd time) he said "well, I've already done and I'm not here to debate with you".

My question: Is it worth the time and money to appeal the decision? Has anyone appealed and passed (if the judge agreed that the tester was wrong)? Also, how much is the solicitor fees for it, if you have an idea?

Thanks in advance

02-10-2015 11:18am

What were the reasons given?

ash1511 · 02-10-2015 11:22am

Deleted User wrote: »

What were the reasons given?

Got 4 green and blue each on 'progress on the straight'. He said I was too slow. I know I wasnt. I was always under the speed limit (3km/hr less than the limit). Changing lanes 1 blue. Reaction to hazard 1 blue.

DrPhilG · 02-10-2015 11:25am

I considered appealing my bike test a few years back. The things he failed me on were complete poop. But at the end of the day the test is not supervised nor recorded. There isn't any grounds for appeal other than your word versus the instructor so I can't imagine it would get anywhere.

my3cents · 02-10-2015 11:45am

Isn't the appeal fee the same cost as a test? If so you might as well just do another test and hope you get a different examiner?

Carlos Orange · 02-10-2015 11:51am

A quick Google brings up

Driving Test
Article 33 of the Road Traffic Act, 1961 provides for an appeal to the District Court. The Court may affirm the decision of the tester or direct that a further test be offered to you free of charge.

http://www.rsa.ie/Utility/Contact-Us/Make-a-complaint-Report-an-incident/Right-of-appeal/

If they are the only possible outcomes I wouldn't think it is worth appealing.

ash1511 · 02-10-2015 11:58am

psinno wrote: »

A quick Google brings up

Driving Test
Article 33 of the Road Traffic Act, 1961 provides for an appeal to the District Court. The Court may affirm the decision of the tester or direct that a further test be offered to you free of charge.

http://www.rsa.ie/Utility/Contact-Us/Make-a-complaint-Report-an-incident/Right-of-appeal/

If they are the only possible outcomes I wouldn't think it is worth appealing.

I got the same thing when I had googled it and wasn't sure should I appeal it or not. Since there is no evidence, I'm inclined to think that the judge will decide against me.

biko · 02-10-2015 12:02pm

Did you fail from the same tester?
Tbh, it's unlikely it'll lead anywhere. I'd focus on the faults you were given and see if there is anything I could do about it. They don't fail you for fun.

my3cents · 02-10-2015 12:03pm

You can't appeal against the actual test results (the points noted by the examiner during the test) they stand whatever the outcome. If you win you get a free test, imagine that free test might be the toughest test you've ever taken.

ash1511 · 02-10-2015 12:06pm

biko wrote: »

Did you fail from the same tester?
Tbh, it's unlikely it'll lead anywhere. I'd focus on the faults you were given and see if there is anything I could do about it. They don't fail you for fun.

No with different testers. Not for fun I know. Think why we have to pay the same fees for all the tests (1st or re-test).

ash1511 · 02-10-2015 12:07pm

my3cents wrote: »

You can't appeal against the actual test results (the points noted by the examiner during the test) they stand whatever the outcome. If you win you get a free test, imagine that free test might be the toughest test you've ever taken.

Could be. I hate paying €85 everytime (knowing that I shouldn't and I was not at fault)

Alkers · 02-10-2015 12:12pm

ash1511 wrote: »

Got 4 green and blue each on 'progress on the straight'. He said I was too slow. I know I wasnt. I was always under the speed limit (3km/hr less than the limit). Changing lanes 1 blue. Reaction to hazard 1 blue.

From memory, I would have driven at 50 if the limit is 50 etc. IIRC you only get marked down for speeding if you're at the limit + 10%. Also maybe you were too slow accelerating from lights etc?

I wouldn't appeal and work on your confidence, if you can give the tester the impression you're confident in your ability (and back it up by making them feel safe in the car), you'll go along way to passing as you sound like you have the basics down.

my3cents · 02-10-2015 12:14pm

This guy didn't think so

fin12 · 02-10-2015 12:18pm

I dont know is it worth appealing, there's a man in Cork who has failed the test 13 times even though he has been driving for the past 40 years and has never had an accident. He took a case against the RSA but he didn't win. I think my mum after she failed the 3rd time complained so the fourth time she did it she requested that another tester or supervisor sit in the back while the test was going on, passed that time.

ash1511 · 02-10-2015 12:20pm

Simona1986 wrote: »

From memory, I would have driven at 50 if the limit is 50 etc. IIRC you only get marked down for speeding if you're at the limit + 10%. Also maybe you were too slow accelerating from lights etc?

I wouldn't appeal and work on your confidence, if you can give the tester the impression you're confident in your ability (and back it up by making them feel safe in the car), you'll go along way to passing as you sound like you have the basics down.

Thanks. My driving instructor is still in shock. He can't believe that I didn't pass this time. I've booked another test now. Hope I pass it this time (fingers crossed)

fin12 · 02-10-2015 12:20pm

my3cents wrote: »

This guy didn't think so

Hey that's the same man I'm talking about it, he's actually failed it now 12 or 13 times. Its a joke, I think they shouldn't be allowed fail anyone after 10 times. Nobody really drives the way they do when they are doing the driving test, I dont anyway. Its a money racket with them.

ash1511 · 02-10-2015 12:22pm

fin12 wrote: »

I dont know is it worth appealing, there's a man in Cork who has failed the test 13 times even though he has been driving for the past 40 years and has never had an accident. He took a case against the RSA but he didn't win. I think my mum after she failed the 3rd time complained so the fourth time she did it she requested that another tester or supervisor sit in the back while the test was going on, passed that time.

Oh.. I didn't know we could do that! Whom did she ask? The tester for another tester? So she had two people testing her!?!

ash1511 · 02-10-2015 12:23pm

fin12 wrote: »

Hey that's the same man I'm talking about it, he's actually failed it now 12 or 13 times. Its a joke, I think they shouldn't be allowed fail anyone after 10 times. Nobody really drives the way they do when they are doing the driving test, I dont anyway. Its a money racket with them.

I second you on that. Money racket it is. Worst part - we can't do anything about it

fin12 · 02-10-2015 12:23pm

ash1511 wrote: »

Oh.. I didn't know we could do that! Whom did she ask? The tester for another tester? So she had two people testing her!?!

no she didn't have two people testing her, the guy in the back was just supervising the tester. I'm not sure IL have to ask, maybe it was the test center. Il get back to you when I ask her.

fin12 · 02-10-2015 12:24pm

Actually its crazy there are people in England who have failed the test over 30 times.

SillyBeans · 02-10-2015 12:24pm

fin12 wrote: »

I think they shouldn't be allowed fail anyone after 10 times.

If that was the case, every dangerous, incompetent, idiot driver could just do 11 tests and pass, regardless of whether or not they're at the standard...

ash1511 · 02-10-2015 12:26pm

fin12 wrote: »

no she didn't have two people testing her, the guy in the back was just supervising the tester. I'm not sure IL have to ask, maybe it was the test center. Il get back to you when I ask her.

Yes please do. Thanks!

fin12 · 02-10-2015 12:27pm

SillyBeans wrote: »

If that was the case, every dangerous, incompetent, idiot driver could just do 11 tests and pass, regardless of whether or not they're at the standard...

There are plenty of dangerous drivers out there, I dont believe that makes you a safe driver because you past the test. whats the percentage of L drivers in accidents to people with full license's. Like I said most people drive different on the day of the test then they do all the rest of the time they drive.

And your forgetting its also a business.

ash1511 · 02-10-2015 12:27pm

SillyBeans wrote: »

If that was the case, every dangerous, incompetent, idiot driver could just do 11 tests and pass, regardless of whether or not they're at the standard...

The issue is that they are failing people who don't deserve to fail and who are better drivers than the testers themselves.

SillyBeans · 02-10-2015 12:32pm

fin12 wrote: »

There are plenty of dangerous drivers out there, I dont believe that makes you a safe driver because you past the test. whats the percentage of L drivers in accidents to people with full license's. Like I said most people drive different on the day of the test then they do all the rest of the time they drive.

And your forgetting its also a business.

I'm forgetting nothing. Why should someone automatically pass because they've failed 10 times? What exactly does that achieve? If you're going down that route we may aswell go down the route of just handing out licences without any training like they did years ago!

ash1511 wrote: »

The issue is that they are failing people who don't deserve to fail and who are better drivers than the testers themselves.

According to the drivers, they're hardly going to admit they're rubbish drivers!

Of course some people are failed unfairly, I wouldn't say it's done on purpose though, it's a bit subjective unfortunately. Maybe change the test so that there's no room for interpretation. Maybe have two testers for each test, both scoring individually?

Pizzle · 02-10-2015 12:36pm

fin12 wrote: »

Hey that's the same man I'm talking about it, he's actually failed it now 12 or 13 times. Its a joke, I think they shouldn't be allowed fail anyone after 10 times. Nobody really drives the way they do when they are doing the driving test, I dont anyway. Its a money racket with them.

Would you be happy driving in a car with someone who got their license in this way? Or worse still, how about school bus drivers?

fin12 · 02-10-2015 12:37pm

SillyBeans wrote: »

I'm forgetting nothing. Why should someone automatically pass because they've failed 10 times? What exactly does that achieve? If you're going down that route we may aswell go down the route of just handing out licences without any training like they did years ago!

According to the drivers, they're hardly going to admit they're rubbish drivers!

Of course some people are failed unfairly, I wouldn't say it's done on purpose though, it's a bit subjective unfortunately. Maybe change the test so that there's no room for interpretation. Maybe have two testers for each test, both scoring individually?

Well can you explain so how somebody can be driving for the past 40 years, never had an accident and yet has failed the test 13 times. Clearly there's something wrong there?? Do you not agree that most people drive different than they normally do on their driving test?

fin12 · 02-10-2015 12:39pm

Pizzle wrote: »

Would you be happy driving in a car with someone who got their license in this way? Or worse still, how about school bus drivers?

Ya I would. I wouldn't have suggested it otherwise. I sit in with people who have L plates, what's the difference

Pizzle · 02-10-2015 12:49pm

I take the point that the way someone drives on a test is not going to be their day-to-day style of driving. At the same time, you are being examined/tested on some of the very basic elements of driving.

If someone fails the test >10 times, it's almost certainly for a very good reason.

I failed my test a few months ago and couldn't have any complaints. My situational awareness wasn't good in certain places. Now I have to go back, work on those issues, take it again. In the end I'll be a better driver.

marathont · 02-10-2015 12:55pm

fin12 wrote: »

Well can you explain so how somebody can be driving for the past 40 years, never had an accident and yet has failed the test 13 times. Clearly there's something wrong there?? Do you not agree that most people drive different than they normally do on their driving test?

The fact that someone has driven for forty years and never had an accident is irrelevant. They could still be dangerous on the road or at least a nuisance to other drivers.

If someone has failed the test 13 times, there is something wrong. maybe they are just extra nervous when doing the test, but you cant blame the tester\test for that.

Larbre34 · 02-10-2015 12:58pm

fin12 wrote: »

Hey that's the same man I'm talking about it, he's actually failed it now 12 or 13 times. Its a joke, I think they shouldn't be allowed fail anyone after 10 times. Nobody really drives the way they do when they are doing the driving test, I dont anyway. Its a money racket with them.

Funnily enough, I did drive the test the way I do every day and I passed first time.

If a tester thinks you are obsessing about the speedo and not actually watching the road, he will fail you. If he thinks you are causing more of a hazard by over compensating in your observance of whatever signing and lining you pass, he will fail you.

To pass a driving test, you really need to be confident enough in your driving not to be nervous on the day, you should be that experienced by the time you take a test. The only thing you should do differently with a tester in the car is slightly exaggerate your head movements to ensure he knows you are checking mirrors and blindspots routinely. They always say to girls, wear some long earrings for the test, so that they jingle lightly when you move your head to observe, its a good indicator for the tester.

my3cents · 02-10-2015 1:02pm

fin12 wrote: »

Hey that's the same man I'm talking about it, he's actually failed it now 12 or 13 times. Its a joke, I think they shouldn't be allowed fail anyone after 10 times. Nobody really drives the way they do when they are doing the driving test, I dont anyway. Its a money racket with them.

]

I'd put money on the fact he never took any lessons between the tests because he was such an experienced driver :rolleyes:

OP when was the last time you took a driving lesson?

SillyBeans · 02-10-2015 1:02pm

fin12 wrote: »

Well can you explain so how somebody can be driving for the past 40 years, never had an accident and yet has failed the test 13 times. Clearly there's something wrong there?? Do you not agree that most people drive different than they normally do on their driving test?

Maybe they've never been in an accident because they're just very lucky. Maybe there has been a lot of close calls that perhaps the person isn't aware of. Not having an accident doesn't mean you're safe. I know plenty of awful drivers who have never been in an accident. I also know plenty of great drivers who have been.

I do agree that most people drive differently to how they do during a driving test. That's not really the issue though. There has to be some sort of test to prove competency. Would you be happy to have an operation by a surgeon who failed their exams 10 times and passed automatically then? Maybe they work differently when they're not being supervised or examined, most people do, doesn't mean they should be allowed to practice. Why have a test at all if they get an automatic pass after multiple failures?

You seem to be getting very irate about this...

fin12 · 02-10-2015 1:06pm

Well I passed the test first time as well and it was because I took a lot of driving lessons and had a very good driving instructor and also knew not to drive the way I normally do. ya I agree about the exaggerated head movements.

fin12 · 02-10-2015 1:07pm

my3cents wrote: »

]

I'd put money on the fact he never took any lessons between the tests because he was such an experienced driver :rolleyes:

OP when was the last time you took a driving lesson?

a few months ago before I passed my test, why? and I took nearly 30 of them and they are the reason why i passed.

ash1511 · 02-10-2015 1:07pm

my3cents wrote: »

]

I'd put money on the fact he never took any lessons between the tests because he was such an experienced driver :rolleyes:

OP when was the last time you took a driving lesson?

2 days back

my3cents · 02-10-2015 1:11pm

fin12 wrote: »

a few months ago before I passed my test, why? and I took nearly 30 of them and they are the reason why i passed.

Sorry not aimed at you, but if someone is complaining that they failed and doesn't take anymore lessons then I don't really see how they can expect to pass. The OP seems to be doing the right thing.

fin12 · 02-10-2015 1:16pm

my3cents wrote: »

Sorry not aimed at you, but someone is complaining that they failed and doesn't take anymore lessons then I don't really see how they can expect to pass. The OP seems to be doing the right thing.

oh right sorry, I agree with you because I know a friend who is going for the test for the second time and has taken no lessons and I've basically said I dont think they will pass without some lessons. The lessons teach you how to drive to pass the test but who normally drives like that after?

fin12 · 02-10-2015 1:42pm

Sorry guys, my reason for saying they shouldn't be allowed fail anyone after 10 times is because these people that keep doing the test multiple times are determined to drive and stay on the road so regardless of whether they pass or not they are going to continue driving. I just think its unfair to keep taking these people's money when they have failed multiple times before.

They have to come up with a new way of dealing with people who keep failing because it just doesn't seem fair to me.

Pizzle · 02-10-2015 1:46pm

fin12 wrote: »

Sorry guys, my reason for saying they shouldn't be allowed fail anyone after 10 times is because these people that keep doing the test multiple times are determined to drive and stay on the road so regardless of whether they pass or not they are going to continue driving. I just think its unfair to keep taking these people's money when they have failed multiple times before.

They have to come up with a new way of dealing with people who keep failing because it just doesn't seem fair to me.

I don't agree. Just because they are determined to drive doesn't mean they should. It could be a case that they just aren't cut out for driving. They shouldn't be entitled to a driving license unless they can demonstrate that they are a competent and safe driver.

ash1511 · 02-10-2015 1:46pm

my3cents wrote: »

Sorry not aimed at you, but if someone is complaining that they failed and doesn't take anymore lessons then I don't really see how they can expect to pass. The OP seems to be doing the right thing.

Right thing and then too failed thrice unfairly

ash1511 · 02-10-2015 1:49pm

Pizzle wrote: »

I don't agree. Just because they are determined to drive doesn't mean they should. It could be a case that they just aren't cut out for driving. They shouldn't be entitled to a driving license unless they can demonstrate that they are a competent and safe driver.

And for that, I think the RSA should think of a better way to test people, be it the 1st time or 10th time someone is sitting for a test. You can't question the tester's decision is the worst rule.

biko · 02-10-2015 1:54pm

My ex failed 3 times. I knew she wasn't great at progress and after driving with her a summer she did the test again and passed.

Pizzle · 02-10-2015 1:55pm

It does seem crazy that the examiners decision is final. It's a shame that a dash cam or something can't be attached to your car when sitting the test.

I wonder is that even allowed? It would be beneficial to look back on the recording and see exactly where you went wrong.

SillyBeans · 02-10-2015 2:00pm

Don't get me wrong, it can of course be very harsh on the people who get extremely nervous when they do a test but at the same time, just giving them the licence won't really do any favours. 9 times out of 10 if someone fails, I'd imagine it was the right call. If I can't keep my composure to drive during a test, who's to say I'd keep my composure if an ambulance needed to get past, if there were poor driving conditions, if I had to drive my (non-existent) babies around? You do need to be able to keep your nerve to drive well so, even though it really sucks, it's a necessary evil in my opinion. Whether or not we follow the standard of driving required by the test after we have a licence is irrelevant. There is a standard required to pass. If you can't meet that standard, you fail. Nobody has the right to a driving licence.

The dash cam idea is good, if it could be linked to your speedo even better. The problem with not being able to challenge the examiner is that it is your word against theirs. They've been passed as competent to perform these tests so there word does count for more. How does the judge know you drove as well as you say. The only possible solution is to offer a free retest which I think is fair enough. If they just passed you on appeal, every woeful driver would just appeal the decision.

ash1511 · 02-10-2015 2:01pm

Pizzle wrote: »

It does seem crazy that the examiners decision is final. It's a shame that a dash cam or something can't be attached to your car when sitting the test.

I wonder is that even allowed? It would be beneficial to look back on the recording and see exactly where you went wrong.

Exactly. But that would mean all the tests are conducting fairly. Which in turn means that they won't be able to make money on the re-tests.

SillyBeans · 02-10-2015 2:15pm

ash1511 wrote: »

Exactly. But that would mean all the tests are conducting fairly. Which in turn means that they won't be able to make money on the re-tests.

But they can't just change the result based on what you've said. A retest is the only fair option. Yes, you may have been treated harshly, but how could somebody else judge that. If you failed a leaving cert paper, would you expect them to give you an A without seeing the paper, just because you felt you deserved better? I'm not saying you weren't harshly treated but how can someone who wasn't there know that. The dash cam idea or having a second examiner is probably the only solution to those types of things unfortunately. Chalk it down to experience, work on the things they've mentioned and pass it with flying colours next time

ash1511 · 02-10-2015 2:29pm

SillyBeans wrote: »

But they can't just change the result based on what you've said. A retest is the only fair option. Yes, you may have been treated harshly, but how could somebody else judge that. If you failed a leaving cert paper, would you expect them to give you an A without seeing the paper, just because you felt you deserved better? I'm not saying you weren't harshly treated but how can someone who wasn't there know that. The dash cam idea or having a second examiner is probably the only solution to those types of things unfortunately. Chalk it down to experience, work on the things they've mentioned and pass it with flying colours next time

Thanks SillyBeans. I have been tested thrice. Every time the tester comes up with something new. I show it to my instructor and he gets surprised. I take a pre-test before my tests everytime although my instructor tells me that I don't need it since I drive well. Trust me had there been a dash cam or something, I would have proved my point. Unfortunately, there isn't. & they make money out of this. Appealing , taking pre-tests before the test or even asking for a dash cam won't help.

SillyBeans · 02-10-2015 2:33pm

ash1511 wrote: »

Thanks SillyBeans. I have been tested thrice. Every time the tester comes up with something new. I show it to my instructor and he gets surprised. I take a pre-test before my tests everytime although my instructor tells me that I don't need it since I drive well. Trust me had there been a dash cam or something, I would have proved my point. Unfortunately, there isn't. & they make money out of this. Appealing , taking pre-tests before the test or even asking for a dash cam won't help.

But maybe you did make a mistake that you weren't aware of. Or indeed maybe you didn't. That's what I'm saying, I don't know if you did, the person who decides the appeals doesn't know if you did. In the examiners professional opinion, you didn't meet the standard. You instructor can be surprised all he wants, he wasn't there. I had a fault for messing up my gears on the test, I'd never done that in my lessons, my instructor was surprised, I still made the mistake. Having different mistakes on different tests is quite normal, no two trips in the car are identical so why would you expect to have the same faults?

hardCopy · 02-10-2015 2:34pm

Pizzle wrote: »

Would you be happy driving in a car with someone who got their license in this way? Or worse still, how about school bus drivers?

If someone fails TEN times they should be banned for life. I wouldn't trust them on a bicycle.

Simon2015 · 02-10-2015 2:46pm

When I did my first driving test I knew straight away I was going to fail because I got a very bad vibe off the tester.

I did infact fail but I passed it 2 months later when I did the test again.

I think there some testers out there who get pleasure out of failing people.

Is appealing the driving test decision worth it?

Comments