Further Driver Training - IAM & ROSPA

[Zbungle]

As a keen caravanner and motorist for many years I have developed quite an interest in the sheer fun of driving. Not just getting the car and/or caravan from A - B but doing so as skilfully and expertly as I can, making appropriate progress but always remaining as safe as I can be. I suppose you could say that this interest has gradually developed into almost an obsession with me, the art of high quality driving and, more recently, driver training.

Therefore, I find it difficult to understand why, when further driver training opportunities are available at some pretty low prices, e.g. £85 for the IAM's Skill for Life course, why so few people actually take them up. I'm not talking about the manoeuvring courses organised by both the C&CC and the CC as, in my experience, they do very little to enhance the quality of driving; they concentrate largely on moving the caravan. In fact, the C&CC course doesn't even take participants onto the highway. No, what I am talking about is enhanced driving skills or 'advanced driving', whether this is done as an IAM Advanced Towing course or simply an IAM Advanced/ROSPA solo course.

I read on another forum that fewer than 3% of the UK's license holders have had any training beyond the DSA driving test.

As a member of the IAM (and also an IAM Observer) perhaps I'm looking at it from the perspective of someone who already knows the benefits and therefore finds it easy to understand the advantages of further training. So can I pose this question to a group of people who, because they tug caravans behind them as something of a hobby, might be able to give me some insight. Why would you not want to take some further driver training to help get the best from your outfit.

I am not suggesting for one moment that caravanners in particular are in need of further training. Quite the contrary as, on the whole, the one's I come across are a responsible and sensible group of drivers. Even when it comes to the less experienced, not being able to reverse correctly onto a pitch is hardly likely to cause death or serious injury. But I would like to have some sort of understanding of what needs to be done to persuade people in outfits that often have a combined cost of over £20,000 (and sometimes double that!) to spend £85 on buying a 'Skill for Life.'

I would be very interested in your responses.

 

[Angus1]

An intersesting question, and one to which you will no doubt get many varied answers.

Have you ever considered that there may be a huge number of people out there with no interest in being better drivers, that see driving as purely a means to an end. Full stop.

There are also many drivers who are a complete hazard and shouldn`t really be let loose on the road, but our system means you get tested once and 70 years later you can still wobble about regardless (not an `ageist` statement, just an example of how silly the law is).

I really don`t think shelling out 85 quid will make any difference to those who use a car purely as a tool.

If anyone is interested they will already take their driving seriously, I learnt what the component parts of a car were and how they worked prior to learning to drive which influenced my approach to driving. It worked for me, had four driving `lessons` with my dad before taking my test aged 17 in the snow the Friday before Xmas. That was 34 years ago, have been accident free (apart from when hit twice when stationary!), conviction free in the three-quarter of a million miles done on both two and four wheels since.

I do unfortunately see a guy with an IAM sticker in the window most mornings, and he causes more frustration on the way to work than the rest of the traffic put togther by being indecisive, which is dangerous for everyone around him, but no doubt he is unaware of the potential carnage he may cause.

I don`t think your ad. will get too many responses, and I don`t think 85 quids worth of `tuition` will do a huge amount of good, other than to the coffers of the IAM.

 

[Robert_374242026]

I appreciate that you are a responsible driver.I passed my test first time also 57 years ago and my Wife 45 years ago and up till now touch wood have never caused an accident, however my wife has had 2 in which a guy who went through a red light and caused considerable damage and the next was a salesman it turned out who did not know the speed limit(40)on that stretch who came over a hump bridge and rammed into the back of her.Myself ,had a motorcyclist who run out of road and hit head on and a lady who could not pull up in time on a wet road hit me up the back.What i am saying is that all the training in the world we could not have done any avoiding action .We also know our day's of excessive speeds are over and keep to within the speed limits limits as much as possible. I would add something said many years ago when a person said "ive been travelling for years and never had an accident" , and the reply" was perhaps it was the other driver avoiding you."

 

[Angus1]

So your conclusion Robert is?

Don`t get me wrong, I`m not against driver training ( and I`m no angel, my dad used to call me the `helicopter` as there was no way of getting from A to B faster, but we all get older....), but if anyone advocated further driver training it should be in the form of a general increase in the standard of driving to hold a licence.

As you have found to your cost it is others that are causing you problems, thats without the unlicenced, uninsured, drunk and drugged up. If we are serious about improving the safety aspects of road use this is where we start, non lining the pockets of some organisation.

 

[GrahamSouthBrum]

I am dissapointed with the IAM.

I passed my motor cycle 1st time aged 16.

I passed my car test 1st time aged 17.

I passed my LGV 3 1st time aged 21.

I am RoSPA advanced Gold.

I am an EFAD (emergency fire appliance driver)at police standard.

And the Institute want me to pay

 

[Zbungle]

I think you miss the point of my original post Graham. Although my own experience is IAM based I am not on a recruiting drive for them, I am asking the more general question about why so few people, once they have passed their DSA test, go on to improve their driving skills, through whichever club or association they choose.

The fact that you are a RoSPA Gold driver and EFAD trained suggest that you are one of the 3% who feel that being able to drive well is so important that you sought further training. Of course you don't want to pay

 

[Ray R]

I would imagine that in a lot of cases the simple answer is time, everybody is so busy that things have to be prioritised and any advanced driving would probably come quite a way down the list. If there were incentives in place, such as automatically qualifying for a discount on your motor insurance, I am sure more people would find the time; I am as guilty as a lot of others as putting it off to do at a later date when I've more time.

 

[Robert_374242026]

So your conclusion Robert is?

Don`t get me wrong, I`m not against driver training ( and I`m no angel, my dad used to call me the `helicopter` as there was no way of getting from A to B faster, but we all get older....), but if anyone advocated further driver training it should be in the form of a general increase in the standard of driving to hold a licence.

As you have found to your cost it is others that are causing you problems, thats without the unlicenced, uninsured, drunk and drugged up. If we are serious about improving the safety aspects of road use this is where we start, non lining the pockets of some organisation.

My conclusion Angus is that the new drivers should have this type of training the cost to the goverment as it will be a saving in the long run.I know there are many more drivers out there than the new ones but it has to start somewhere .Mind you reading another gloom and doom thread thats going on we might not be able to drive unless you are a wage earner soon so that will get rid of a few.

 

[Dave E]

There is indeed an insurance discount for advanced driving qualifications which has benefited my premiums for years. However, I agree that the main benefit is that I enjoy my driving more and take a pride in it.

RoSPA is an excellent organisation but not everyone wants to retake their advanced test every three years but prefer to take a single test with the IAM.

Alternatively take both tests and help both improve standards. I am a RoSPA Gold/Observer and IAM Senior Observer.

 

[Dustydog]

I passed my IAM test in 1984 and have never looked back. I was an Observer for a number of years and that alone helped to hone my skills.And yes from time to time I do a refresher hour with a current observer.

For all the disbelievers let me assure you an IAM qualified driver will have a greater appreciation of what's going on, ie he / she will have a superior observation rate.

I know I am more safe and my family's safety and that of my rig will not be compromised.

Why not join a local IAM institute and find out more. You only have your life to lose.

Cheers

Alan

 

[ProfJohnL]

Hello Alan,

Your posting has me very worried.

You clearly state that you have never looked back since 1984. That must be dangerous driving.

As an observer, you should be aware of what is going on all around you, but if you don't look back then clearly you have failed on that score as well.

You state that IAM qualified drivers will have an appreciation of what's going on, and a superior observation rate. Clearly the observer on your refresher courses has not noticed you don't look back.

All right fun time over!

I am however genuinely concerned by the content of your posting.

The aspirations of the IAM and RoSPA are worthy, in that they try to reduce the occurrence of incidents, or to minimise the effect of them when they do occur.

Their method is to attempt to train drivers to be more perspective of aspect of driving and other around them, and to suggest alternative strategies to avoid or cope with threats or incidents.

Such training does not guarantee that an approved driver will be incident free. Equally it does not guarantee that the driver will not break the law either innocently or deliberatly.

Previously on this forum some drivers who have claimed to be IAM approved have also claimed that their instructors and examiners have authorised the to speed when overtaking.

Neither of the head offices of the IAM or RoSPA have supported this as it is illegal to speed, and just as illegal to encourage someone else to break the law.

I draw the conclusion that some approved Instructors/drivers are not actually following their training, and that compromises the 'integrity of their rig', and thus are also acting in an unsafe manner.

You make the case that implies that IAM approval effectively guarantees you and your passenger's safety. Clearly that is not a 100% sustainable position. There will have been IAM approved drivers that have had incident., and some fatal.

The converse argument is also insidious - to suggest that by not taking an IAM course, that a driver will be involved in a incident is also flawed, as through time there must be some none IAM drivers who have had a completely incident free driving record.

Lets be honest IAM and other similar courses can only help a driver to become more aware of what's going on, and may offer some new strategies to cope with what the road conditions may throw at us. It is only effective if the driver chooses to use the skills they have learnt.

So based on my experience I cannot accept your assurance that the driver in the car next to me with IAM sticker in the window is really going to as good as you make out.

 

[cokey1970]

John L,

I must be reading a completely different post by Alan because all I see him stating is that:

1. He has honed his skills

2. He has a greater appreciation/superior observation rate

3. He knows he is more safer as a result

I don't see mentioned anywhere that taking an IAM course is a 100% guarantee of safety.

 

[ProfJohnL]

Hello Martin

My response to Alan's post I accept was hard hitting, but I still think justified.

I have no problem with the IAM and RoSPA providing advance driver training, but what worries me was Alan's self assurance he was safe, and that his rig would not be compromised having taken IAM training.

If his rig cannot be compromised he is claiming 100% safety!

I also dislike his last sentence 'You only have your life to lose' which is contextually placed to imply that if you do not take an IAM your life is in danger, and by logic he is implying that you life is not in danger if you are IAM approved.

These statements are far too black and white, and consequently misleading.

It is also important to realise that even IAM trained drivers do sometimes make serious mistakes, sometimes even deliberate and unjustified breaches of the regulations, so simply being IAM does not hold back some of the impetuous urges to do reckless things

It concerns me that if Alan thinks he is 'safe' then he is likely to become complacent, and that leads to mistakes.

 

[Dustydog]

Hi John L,

Well many thanks for your tortfeasance. I never imply anything , I only say what I believe. No one is 100% safe. At least the IAM and Rospa courses do strive to make the individual a more safe driver.If an individual wishe sto improve their driving skills and hopefully become a safer driver, then what is your problem? Bizarre. We are all free in thye UK to make our own choices so why be so critical of those who merely wish to improve??

I will not look back at this post again.I am not interested in negativity but do wish you many safe hours driving without any mishaps.

Cheers

Alan

 

[Angus1]

I didn`t find John L`s posting as being "critical of those who merely wish to improve", more a criticism of the holier-than-thou attitude of the IAM posters.

I don`t think M.Schmacher is a member of the IAM, yet would bet my mortgage his observation,reactions and car control skills are somewhat superior, but as he hasn`t paid his 85 quid and got a sticker he must be less safe and only `has his life to lose`.

Total claptrap.

 

[ProfJohnL]

Thank you Angus, you have correctly identified my point and put very succinctly.

Alan, just in case you do take another look, I whole heartedly support the view that driver can benefit from further training such as IAM or RoSPA courses. But too many have posted on here making a point of claiming they have been approved, and then go on to relate how they have deliberately broken the law, and then gone on to justify it by saying they are trained to do it, and some even claiming that the Advanced Driving instructors have advised them its ok!

Incidentally your original post reads more like an advert for the IAM - new profession perhaps?

 

[colin-yorkshire]

hi all

like many of the other old codgers who use this forum I passed my m/cycle test @16 and my car test 3weeks after my 17th birthday (both first time passes)and was driving hgv's @21 (no extra test in those days)and have driven every day on two wheels and four and six and 8 and 10 both with and with out trailers since then. in total 43 years, I have never had any kind accident or any convictions ever, and have so many years with no claimes I think the insurance companies should pay me to drive on their policies, (I will have to stop blowing the trumpet now because im out of breath??)

I can't see any benifit from paying

 

[rayc]

Colin, in todays Britain you havn't proved anything unless you've got a certificate to show for it.

I'm surprised we are still allowed to change our gas cylinders without having had to attend a training course and getting a certificate.

 

[ProfJohnL]

hi all

like many of the other old codgers who use this forum I passed my m/cycle test @16 and my car test 3weeks after my 17th birthday (both first time passes)and was driving hgv's @21 (no extra test in those days)and have driven every day on two wheels and four and six and 8 and 10 both with and with out trailers since then. in total 43 years, I have never had any kind accident or any convictions ever, and have so many years with no claimes I think the insurance companies should pay me to drive on their policies, (I will have to stop blowing the trumpet now because im out of breath??)

I can't see any benifit from paying

 

[Dustydog]

Colin,

Coincidentally I too cut my teeth on motorcycles at 16 and cars at 17. My bike test was done on an old Raleigh Runabout moped. The test lasted all of 10 minutes doing a figure of eight course including three simple highway code questions. The car test was similar involving twenty minutes driving around Wimbledon and five minutes of discussion. Pass, Pass.

I'll say no more about the IAM test other than for me I learnt things that today I think should be a mandatory part of the standard driving test. As for those clever dicks who boast passing IAM and Rospa tests makes them "faster " drivers, then they are idiots who have failed to understand that both organisations primary objective is safety.

For what it's worth , rather than "sell" IAM may I suggest if any one is interested it is worth reading the "Roadcraft" book which is the standard police drivers course book. You can take it or leave it but personally it has been very useful to me.

Cheers

Alan

 

[GrahamSouthBrum]

"For what it's worth , rather than "sell" IAM may I suggest if any one is interested it is worth reading the "Roadcraft" book which is the standard police drivers course book. You can take it or leave it but personally it has been very useful to me."

Hi Alan,

I can only endorse what you have said about "Road Craft".

Fire Service driving & RoSPA advanced training is all about the Road Craft manual.

G.

 

[RogerL]

I am dissapointed with the IAM.

I passed my motor cycle 1st time aged 16.

I passed my car test 1st time aged 17.

I passed my LGV 3 1st time aged 21.

I am RoSPA advanced Gold.

I am an EFAD (emergency fire appliance driver)at police standard.

And the Institute want me to pay

 

[Gavin1974]

I'm new to towing and to give me more confidence/skill I was looking to book on the CC course. But in the original post Zbungle wasn't very positive about this course.

What are other people's experiences and what other course are out there that people would recommend?

Thanks Gavin

 

[Gavin1974]

I'm new to towing and to give me more confidence/skill I was looking to book on the CC course. But in the original post Zbungle wasn't very positive about this course.

What are other people's experiences and what other course are out there that people would recommend?

Thanks Gavin

 

[JasonR_374341560]

I hold both bike and car IAM passes but let my membership lapse some years ago. I could always get a better insurance deal for bikes and cars without the so called IAM discount.

Also some of the worst drivers I've come across are those that preach about speed and carry IAM badges or the like.

Understanding what your vehicle will do and how it reacts and where to position it on the road for safety will make you a far better driver than some dogooder who claims never to exceed the limit and is so busy looking behind him that he has little clue of what is actually happening in front of him.

To be honest if you are not capable of driving on our roads at 100mph plus or at higher speeds in safety, you would be better off sat at home not on our roads. That's not to suggest that people go out and break the UK limits, but that you should know where you could go fast and where to brake and position to get around a corners safely and then many more drivers would be safer. Sadly many UK drivers and caravanners have little idea of how to traverse simple S bend roads apart from at snail pace with no thought about the chaos caused by unnecessary braking and the time they cost others due to their lack of driving skill.

CC courses teach you what to do when manoeuvring a caravan, only experience will give you the complete skills and confidence. But I would do the training if I were starting out now caravanning.