Returning to the office after the test

edgarsec

Hi all:

A quick question. When the driving test is finished, the tester will ask the candidate to accompany her/him to the office for the result.

My question: is it a requirement to comply with this request? Could the candidate refuse?

My guess is that if the candidate has passed, the tester will give a signal after the test. Thus, if he/she asks to return to office without saying anything, this is an indication of failure. So, why would the candidate want to return to the office?

Any thoughts
Edgar

Samsgirl

I had to go back to the office to be told I.passed and have the certificate of comptency issued. That was 2004, may ve different now.

punisher5112

edgarsec wrote: »

Hi all:

A quick question. When the driving test is finished, the tester will ask the candidate to accompany her/him to the office for the result.

My question: is it a requirement to comply with this request? Could the candidate refuse?

My guess is that if the candidate has passed, the tester will give a signal after the test. Thus, if he/she asks to return to office without saying anything, this is an indication of failure. So, why would the candidate want to return to the office?

Any thoughts
Edgar

That's a sure way to getting a fail.

Honestly don't go looking for hassle. No some don't tell you until your inside that you have passed.

That's a bad way to start.

thelad95

The tester doesn't tell you whether you've passed or failed until you're back in the office, why would you refuse?

Admittedly it is a bit of a waste of time though, all they do is give you a piece of paper saying whether you've passed or failed and then explain any faults if you got any, this all could easily be done sitting in the car in the carpark after the test but I suppose because of data protection or something they have to do it in the office.

listermint

Perplexing thread.

punisher5112

thelad95 wrote: »

The tester doesn't tell you whether you've passed or failed until you're back in the office, why would you refuse?

Admittedly it is a bit of a waste of time though, all they do is give you a piece of paper saying whether you've passed or failed and then explain any faults if you got any, this all could easily be done sitting in the car in the carpark after the test but I suppose because of data protection or something they have to do it in the office.

One reason would be for copy of sheet and also in some cases for safety as some get extremely aggressive or upset.

At least they can't drive off right away.

athtrasna

Also you get the sheet that shows how you did, how many faults of each type etc. If you failed it will give you an idea of what you need to work on for next time. Even if you pass it's helpful to see faults and how close you came to failing.

edgarsec

Thanks for the replies.

Okay I guess you have to take a gamble, then. If you think you have failed, why go through the embarrassment of going back to the office? What possible gain is there?

I went back last time, and it was utterly humiliating to be told you failed when you are surrounded by others that have passed.

My American driving tester issued my certificate in the car!

Hana98

It's not really a big deal. I failed the car test a good few times. I would have rather been crying in the office than the car park to be honest. It's not humiliating at all. There's always others in the same boat as you

doolox

Its probably established practice to return to the office before saying anything about the results in order to avoid emotional interference with the candidates driving abilities or lack thereof.....

Has it ever happened that a test was abandoned and the tester had to take over driving the test car when faced with a candidate bad enough to be an immediate danger to themselves and other road users?

What is the law regarding driving to and from the centre?

Does a candidate have to bring a qualified driver with them on the day of the test to get to and from the centre legally?

Can a third party accompany the tester and the candidate in the car during the test when faced with cultures which frown on encounters between single female relatives and strange men??

punisher5112

To answer yes it has happened where driving was so bad they would take over.

clairek6

I passed and was brought back to the office. I know I had to fill in my details on an iPad which may not have worked without wifi.. suits the examiner too he has to go back anyways for the next candidate

dennyk

When I passed my test, the tester gave no indication of the result until we were back in the office at his desk and he went through his official spiel. You're gonna have to go back into the office to get your result, so just be prepared for it either way. Half the people who take the test fail, and many of those people who passed may well have failed themselves on their last try, so it's not like they're going to be judging you; they'd be sympathetic if anything, I'm sure, but most likely they're too concerned with their own result to pay any attention to yours anyway.

doolox wrote: »

What is the law regarding driving to and from the centre? Does a candidate have to bring a qualified driver with them on the day of the test to get to and from the centre legally?

Legally, yes, you are never supposed to drive without a qualified accompanying driver on a learner's permit, and you are still a learner driver until you have actually received your full license from the NDLS, even after you've passed your test. Now, whether the tester will care how you arrived is anyone's guess, though. I drove to my test alone and stuck my L plates up in the test centre parking lot (technically legal for me, as I had a full foreign license and insurance under same, and I was allowed to drive alone on that since I hadn't been resident here for a year yet). The tester didn't say anything about the fact that no one was accompanying me, and it evidently didn't make any difference on my test as I passed with just a couple Grade 2s. If you are truly just a learner without another full license, though, I wouldn't recommend flaunting the law; besides the tester, there's always a chance of getting done by the Gardai for being unaccompanied, which carries penalty points.

doolox wrote: »

Can a third party accompany the tester and the candidate in the car during the test when faced with cultures which frown on encounters between single female relatives and strange men??

I believe the RSA may allow some testees to be accompanied on the test if it is for religious or medical reasons, but you'd have to contact them in advance to make arrangements, as I believe they must also send a supervisor along on the test. Whether they'd make such an exemption for "cultural" reasons as opposed to religious, I don't know.

pablo128

A mate of mine was doing the test in Tallaght, and fcuked it up royally. I cant remember what exactly he did wrong but it was a serious mistake. He got flustered then and made a few more mistakes. Anyway he stopped in Tallaght village and told the tester to get out, and drove home.

Apparently the tester wasn't a happy bunny.

Dravokivich

edgarsec wrote: »

Thanks for the replies.

Okay I guess you have to take a gamble, then. If you think you have failed, why go through the embarrassment of going back to the office? What possible gain is there?

I went back last time, and it was utterly humiliating to be told you failed when you are surrounded by others that have passed.

My American driving tester issued my certificate in the car!

What's so embarrassing about it? No-one else is going to know how you did. They don't announce it or ring any bells for passing.

Mary63

I would think they bring you into the office for their own safety, I wouldn't like to be sitting in a parked car with a very angry person especially if he or she had locked the doors..

Lurching

Maybe concentrate on your driving and not whether or not you'll have to go back to the office or not.
If you're already worried about something like this before you start your test, you're concentration will be in the wrong place during the test.

irish_goat

pablo128 wrote: »

A mate of mine was doing the test in Tallaght, and fcuked it up royally. I cant remember what exactly he did wrong but it was a serious mistake. He got flustered then and made a few more mistakes. Anyway he stopped in Tallaght village and told the tester to get out, and drove home.

Apparently the tester wasn't a happy bunny.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h38Q76d7hmU

J_R

Hi,

Perhaps this is why he wants to be sitting behind his desk when he impart the bad news ?

neris

the testers dont bring you back to humiliate you. being back in the office gives you a more relaxed time to ask them questions about where you went wrong or mistakes you made. majority of testers are friendly, easy going and helpful especially after the test whether you pass or fail they,ll have advice or pointers for you.

Claireyy

neris wrote: »

the testers dont bring you back to humiliate you. being back in the office gives you a more relaxed time to ask them questions about where you went wrong or mistakes you made. majority of testers are friendly, easy going and helpful especially after the test whether you pass or fail they,ll have advice or pointers for you.

Don't agree with this at all. Failed my test for the third time yesterday morning. I had 8 grade 2s and 1 Grade 3. The grade 3 was given to me because the windows had become fogged up. It was then recorded as something completely different on my marking sheet.

When I asked to discuss this further, I was refused. Going back into the office is a complete waste of time, imo. In fact, being handed a sheet and told to apply for a second learner's permit is extremely patronising. I'm hardly going to need another learner's permit if I have just sat the full test.

The second attempt was the same. The instructor refused to discuss my errors when back in the office. He was also wincing during the test and on one point he raised his voice to me because a motorcylist pulled out from a footpath right in front of me. This shouldn't have happened as he should not have been exiting from where he did and yet I was given an automatic fail.

All of my experiences doing the test have been awful and the instructors are nothing but a horrible bunch of money-grabbers who will find any reason to fail you.

Friendly, easy-going and helpful, don't make me laugh.

TallGlass

Claireyy wrote: »

Don't agree with this at all. Failed my test for the third time yesterday morning. I had 8 grade 2s and 1 Grade 3. The grade 3 was given to me because the windows had become fogged up. It was then recorded as something completely different on my marking sheet.

When I asked to discuss this further, I was refused. Going back into the office is a complete waste of time, imo. In fact, being handed a sheet and told to apply for a second learner's permit is extremely patronising. I'm hardly going to need another learner's permit if I have just sat the full test.

The second attempt was the same. The instructor refused to discuss my errors when back in the office. He was also wincing during the test and on one point he raised his voice to me because a motorcylist pulled out from a footpath right in front of me. This shouldn't have happened as he should not have been exiting from where he did and yet I was given an automatic fail.

All of my experiences doing the test have been awful and the instructors are nothing but a horrible bunch of money-grabbers who will find any reason to fail you.

Friendly, easy-going and helpful, don't make me laugh.

I think you need to ease up and just take advise on board and you might end up passing the test.

Motorcycles or cars pulling out from roads happens all the time. You've to plan ahead for it, he might have thought you seen what was unfolding in front of you and when it became clear to him that you hadn't, raising his voice might have been the only thing he could do at that stage.

As for the OP just go to the office and find out, if he says fail, just walk off. You don't need to hang around then.

nhunter100

edgarsec wrote:

My question: is it a requirement to comply with this request? Could the candidate refuse?

Why would you refuse? What's to be gained by behaving like a numpty?

Claireyy

nhunter100 wrote: »

Why would you refuse? What's to be gained by behaving like a numpty?

Because it's absolutely not necessary. The only reason that was even introduced is because instructors were being assaulted in the car. Sitting in the office with them is a complete waste of time. All they do is fill out a sheet. They don't discuss your errors. "Which roundabout did this happen? I can't remember now etc."

nhunter100

Claireyy wrote:

Because it's absolutely not necessary. The only reason that was even introduced is because instructors were being assaulted in the car. Sitting in the office with them is a complete waste of time. All they do is fill out a sheet. They don't discuss your errors. "Which roundabout did this happen? I can't remember now etc."

Do you realise you contradict yourself in your second sentence?

cml387

Claireyy wrote: »

Because it's absolutely not necessary. The only reason that was even introduced is because instructors were being assaulted in the car. Sitting in the office with them is a complete waste of time. All they do is fill out a sheet. They don't discuss your errors. "Which roundabout did this happen? I can't remember now etc."

If,as you claim, instructors were being assaulted then I'd say it's absolutely necessary.

Wishbone Ash

Claireyy wrote: »

...When I asked to discuss this further, I was refused.
... The instructor refused to discuss my errors when back in the office....

The tester is not permitted enter into a discussion about the reasons why you were unsuccessful.

You are entitled to apply to the District Court for a retest if you feel you have a grievance.

Claireyy wrote:

He was also wincing during the test and on one point he raised his voice to me because a motorcylist pulled out from a footpath right in front of me. This shouldn't have happened as he should not have been exiting from where he did and yet I was given an automatic fail.

The fact that it shouldn't happen is irrelevant. Everyday people are confronted with things that shouldn't have happen but do. The tester needs to know that you acted properly following someone else's error/bad driving. The fact that the tester winced leads me to think you didn't react correctly.

Claireyy wrote:

the instructors are nothing but a horrible bunch of money-grabbers who will find any reason to fail you.

Instructors merely instruct, they don't examine people. Tester are on a fixed wage so I don't see how they can be 'money grabbers'. The testers don't fail people, people fail themselves.

Claireyy

Yeah and I failed because my windows were slightly foggy? Also, that's a ridiculous notion. Imagine going to the dentist and him refusing to discuss what's wrong with your teeth. If you are paying that much you should be able to discuss your mistakes so it shouldn't happen again.

And as for testers being assaulted, what does that say. They're protecting themselves. That's the only reason they bring you into the office.

Cows Go µ

I must have been really lucky doing my test. The first guy was dead silent but I could actually feel the disapproval. In fairness though, I wasn't ready. I'd had a few lessons when I first started driving to get me going then after a year of driving with my mum, I'd picked up lots of bad habits. I only went for one lesson more lesson to prep for the test and that wasn't enough time to unlearn everything (I did it before the compulsory lessons). I deserved the disapproval. He basically told me I needed to do more lessons which I did.

The second time, I had a good few more lessons to get ready. But the second tester really helped, he could tell I was super nervous so started talking to me on the way to the car and had me (mostly) relaxed. I'm so glad he did because I wouldn't have passed without him doing that.

Pete Moss

Claireyy wrote: »

Because it's absolutely not necessary. The only reason that was even introduced is because instructors were being assaulted in the car. Sitting in the office with them is a complete waste of time. All they do is fill out a sheet. They don't discuss your errors. "Which roundabout did this happen? I can't remember now etc."

Well then, for that reason of tester safety alone, it is necessary.

I passed second time around, so I've experienced getting bad and good news in the test centre. Either time, I found re-entering the test centre after the test was not that big of a deal, it's basically the results stage of the test, but I can see why some may be anxious about it.
To be honest though, if you're dreading the thoughts of being told whether you passed or failed in the test centre, then I'd try remove that from your mind as it'll increase anxiety and, most likely, affect your driving on the day.

Wishbone Ash

Claireyy wrote: »

Yeah and I failed because my windows were slightly foggy? Also, that's a ridiculous notion. Imagine going to the dentist and him refusing to discuss what's wrong with your teeth. If you are paying that much you should be able to discuss your mistakes so it shouldn't happen again.

And as for testers being assaulted, what does that say. They're protecting themselves. That's the only reason they bring you into the office.

You have a lot to learn!

nhunter100

Claireyy wrote:

Yeah and I failed because my windows were slightly foggy? Also, that's a ridiculous notion. Imagine going to the dentist and him refusing to discuss what's wrong with your teeth. If you are paying that much you should be able to discuss your mistakes so it shouldn't happen again.

So your windows were foggy, an indication that either your heater was not working or you didn't know how to use the secondary controls in your car. Being unable to see out a window is not good IMHO. The sheet you recieve on failure of your test tells you what you did wrong and let's you know what to work on with your instructor.

Cows Go µ

Claireyy wrote: »

And as for testers being assaulted, what does that say. They're protecting themselves. That's the only reason they bring you into the office.

Well duh, if it's for safety they have to. Would you like to be assaulted in your job just because you were giving bad news?

Pete Moss

Claireyy wrote: »

Yeah and I failed because my windows were slightly foggy? Also, that's a ridiculous notion. Imagine going to the dentist and him refusing to discuss what's wrong with your teeth. If you are paying that much you should be able to discuss your mistakes so it shouldn't happen again.

And as for testers being assaulted, what does that say. They're protecting themselves. That's the only reason they bring you into the office.

That's a ridiculous comparison. Tooth decay isn't going to result in you plowing into another car or person.

The tester is there to assess your ability to drive to a required standard, not to offer advice on how to pass next time. That's why you pay your driving instructor.

beechwood55

So you could see the tester wincing. Were you not looking at the road ahead of you?

nhunter100

beechwood55 wrote:

So you could see the tester wincing. Were you not looking at the road ahead of you?

She couldn't see the road, the windows were foggy.

beechwood55

Ah! I see! But thankfully the tester could see the motorcyclist who pulled out in front of her....

Claireyy

This is not even the same test. The motorcyclist incidence happened months ago as did the tester who was wincing. Neither of these things occurred at the same time or yesterday but you'd know that if you read over my messages instead of jumping to conclusions. The weather was extremely poor visibility that day and I accept that things didn't go right.

But as for yesterday,how do you know that I couldn't see. Where you there?I had 8 grade 2s so clearly my driving wasn't that bad. I have never had more than 14 marks on any of my tests so I'm not a reckless or dangerous driver like you are insinuating. I have never driven unaccompanied and I drive a family member to work every day in rush hour traffic and there has never been an incident.

Stop assuming things about my driving when you know nothing about me or my ability. The last time I went with my instructor he said I should pass easily.

I am allowed to have my own opinion on the office situation. The candidate should not be forced to go into the office if they don't want to. It's highly unlikely that you'd get away with assaulting an instructor anyway no matter how upset you are. I doubt many would try it because I certainly wouldn't.

beechwood55

You would be breaking the law to drive unaccompanied so don't see why you are giving yourself a pat on the back for that. Is your family member a driving instructor or tester? Just because there has never been an incident does not mean that your driving is good enough to pass a test. The majority of people manage to drive every day without there being any incidents.

nhunter100

Claireyy wrote:

I am allowed to have my own opinion on the office situation. The candidate should not be forced to go into the office if they don't want to. It's highly unlikely that you'd get away with assaulting an instructor anyway no matter how upset you are. I doubt many would try it because I certainly wouldn't.

You're not forced, but if you don't go into the office you don't get the cert to state whether you have passed or not. Simple don't sit the test if 2 minutes in an office is such a drama for you.

Claireyy

I'm sorry I said anything at all. I voiced my opinion on something which I should be allowed to do without being made feel insignificant . The only reason that I even brought up my own driving is because you were insinuating that I am am bad driver. My instructor would say otherwise and my last tester even agreed that it is difficult to judge people within such a short time frame. But I suppose I'm not allowed to say that either.

Claireyy

nhunter100 wrote: »

You're not forced, but if you don't go into the office you don't get the cert to state whether you have passed or not. Simple don't sit the test if 2 minutes in an office is such a drama for you.

BTW, that joke about the fog was hilarious. Well done, I bet you feel thrilledwith yourself, you nasty person.

nhunter100

Claireyy wrote:

I'm sorry I said anything at all. I voiced my opinion on something which I should be allowed to do without being made feel insignificant . The only reason that I even brought up my own driving is because you were insinuating that I am am bad driver. My instructor would say otherwise and my last tester even agreed that it is difficult to judge people within such a short time frame. But I suppose I'm not allowed to say that either.

Driving without a clear view, foggy windows and causing the tester to wince because you failed to react to a motorcyclist does not indicate a good driver to me. You are entitled to your opinion but as such others are entitled to challenge it.

witchgirl26

I failed my test 3 times before I passed it. Only on the first time did I know for certain I had failed - the others I didn't know until I was sat in the office. In fact the tester who passed me had the same facial expression throughout the whole thing so I couldn't have judged. Plus my mam was waiting for me in the test centre so had to go back in to collect her!

It's not to humiliate you or anything that sinister. Yes it's partially to protect the tester as would you want to be attacked for just doing your job? They're not out to get people. I mean some of them are grumpy as hell, believe me I know that, but at the end of the day you don't know what someone that day has put them through!

Claireyy wrote: »

But as for yesterday,how do you know that I couldn't see. Where you there?I had 8 grade 2s so clearly my driving wasn't that bad. I have never had more than 14 marks on any of my tests so I'm not a reckless or dangerous driver like you are insinuating. I have never driven unaccompanied and I drive a family member to work every day in rush hour traffic and there has never been an incident.

Stop assuming things about my driving when you know nothing about me or my ability. The last time I went with my instructor he said I should pass easily.

Claireyy - just because you think you are a great driver, does not mean that you will pass the test. I was told 3 times by instructors in the hours before sitting tests that I should be grand and breeze through. It only happened on the last time. The others I must have been nervous and honestly when I looked back on the sheet, I wouldn't have argued with most of the marks I got.

They can only judge you on the hour they are in the car, not all the other times you drove well. But to be honest it sounds like you're blaming them rather than focusing on just fixing any issues so you can go back & get hardly any or no marks.

Claireyy wrote: »

I am allowed to have my own opinion on the office situation. The candidate should not be forced to go into the office if they don't want to. It's highly unlikely that you'd get away with assaulting an instructor anyway no matter how upset you are. I doubt many would try it because I certainly wouldn't.

You're right - perfectly entitled to have your own opinion but to use your analogy from earlier. If a dentist wanted to bring you into the office rather than reception to discuss your dental health, would you refuse coz it would be fine to do it in reception and you didn't want to be forced to go into the office?

Claireyy

nhunter100 wrote: »

Driving without a clear view, foggy windows and causing the tester to wince because you failed to react to a motorcyclist does not indicate a good driver to me. You are entitled to your opinion but as such others are entitled to challenge it.

Yeah and that's fair enough. You can challenge it. No need to get personal though.

nhunter100

Claireyy wrote:

BTW, that joke about the fog was hilarious. Well done, I bet you feel thrilledwith yourself, you nasty person.

Actually didn't think of it as a joke. Nothing funny about someone willing to drive without a clear view of the road. As for accusing me of being nasty, you need to grow up.

nhunter100

Claireyy wrote:

Yeah and that's fair enough. You can challenge it. No need to get personal though.

Personal? Where did I get personal? Only one being personal was you.

Dravokivich

TallGlass wrote: »

As for the OP just go to the office and find out, if he says fail, just walk off. You don't need to hang around then.

You'll need any failure certs when renewing your permit. So the driver being tested will need to go to the office, be briefed over the results, acknowledge it and sign off on them.

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

The tester is not permitted enter into a discussion about the reasons why you were unsuccessful.

Permitted or Required?

I find this a bit odd as I had a small chat with the tester about why I failed. I advised why I had done something in the manner I did and they suggested what they would have preferred to have seen instead.

Claireyy wrote: »

In fact, being handed a sheet and told to apply for a second learner's permit is extremely patronising. I'm hardly going to need another learner's permit if I have just sat the full test.

Stop thinking of yourself. A selfish driver is the most unsafe driver out there. You've not been endorsed by anyone of authority. Acknowledge that and focus on what you need to do to achieve it.

infogiver

Claireyy wrote: »

Yeah and I failed because my windows were slightly foggy? Also, that's a ridiculous notion. Imagine going to the dentist and him refusing to discuss what's wrong with your teeth. If you are paying that much you should be able to discuss your mistakes so it shouldn't happen again.

And as for testers being assaulted, what does that say. They're protecting themselves. That's the only reason they bring you into the office.

Do you think that testers should have to put up with being assaulted by candidates or something? you seem to think that it is ridiculous them not wanting to be attacked. Are you attacked much in your job?

thelad95

@Claireeey, if you're serious about passing your test, you need to stop the attitude, stop blaming the testers for everything, they receive a wage to judge your driving and the vast majority of them are fair. Driving with fogged up windows is deserving of a fail, you learn in your first lesson how to use the secondary controls of the car, one press of a button would have kept the windows clear and satisfied the tester that you know how to use this vital secondary control. A child could have run out in front of you and you might not have seen them.

You cannot blame the motorcyclists actions, the testers don't live in cloud cuckoo land, they know people do stupid things on the road and your meant to drive in a way that compensates for that. I know it sounds a bit unfair and can be very frustrating but just use a bit of common sense. For example, if you see a row of parked cars, there's three very common things that can happen, number one person opens car door without looking, number two, car pulls out without looking in their blind spot so they don't see you, number three car pulls out without indicating. If the speed limit is say 50 on this stretch of road, do 45, you won't be penalised for slow progress and you'll have that extra second to react to others stupidity.

Bicycle

I had €1,500 worth of damage done to my car last year by a driver whose windows were fogged up.

I was stuck in a line of traffic, not moving, and the guy in the fogged up car could not see my (brightly coloured) car clearly. He drove into me at possibly 20km per hour. I was barely rattled but because of the angle he drove into me, he did a lot of damage.