Law for Caravan & Trailer test should be changed.

[rh010a2370]

Who agrees with me that the Caravan and Trailer test for which was introduced on the 1st January 1997 is unfair on the divers who passed their test on or after 1st January 1997.

The reason i say this is, the newer driver is getting punished under the D.V.L.A. Safe Driving for life campaign, i my self had to sit theory test at the cost of £18 at that time, ( now I believe it cost more as you have to sit an additional hazard perception test as well now ), Plus i had to sit my driving test three times before i passed at the cost of £37 a time, the driving test's were very intensive, and the driving examiner was very strict.

Million of drivers on the British road who passed their test before 1st January 1997 would fail the new driving theory and hazard perception test let alone the new driving tests.

So why should i get punished for towing a caravan, and why should i have to sit another test to do so, and give them another £89 for another test, their are probably thousands of drivers taking up caravanning for the first time this year who passed their driving test before 1st January 1997, with a majority of them with little or no experience at all of towing a caravan, Me i have got to make sure that my cars un-laden weight is more than the caravans maximum weight i want to tow, plus i have to make sure the booth weights combined doe's not exceed 3500kg, if i want a bigger caravan i have to sit this test, if i want to drive a vehicle with more than 8 seat's i have to sit another test, if want to drive a vehicle more than 3500kg i have to sit another test, but under this law drivers who passed their test before 1st January 1997 can tow what they like and drive a motor vehicles up to 7000kg ( that's safe thinking for you and safe driving as well ).

Some thing has to change, the D.V.L.A should introduce these test's for every driver to sit, the newer driver should not get single out and punished, By never having your hand out of your pocket to pay for test's while others get a way without pay for it.

Plus the driving laws are quite confusing and not clear at all, you have to make sure of the weights of the vehicles you are driving or towing.

Surly every motor car driver in Great Britain should be involved in the safe driving for life campaign, not only those who passed their test after 1st January 1997.

Please tell me what you think, if you agree or disagree.

Trebordee.

 

[MikeP]

"Million of drivers on the British road who passed their test before 1st January 1997 would fail the new driving theory and hazard perception test let alone the new driving tests".

Perhaps, but that does not mean that they are dangerous drivers. You have been trained to pass a test ... you will now spend the next 20,000 miles really learning to drive. I don't deny that there are some dodgy drivers out there, but the majority are fairly safe. It's only the nutters who catch your attention.

It would be impossible for every driver to be retested to the new standard - there are not enough instructors, test centres or examiners. The whole process is geared up to cope with the anticipated throughput of new drivers. Simple as that.

As new standards are introduced, someone will always feel hard done by. My Uncle never sat a test as you didn't have to in those days.

 

[Stephen_5122599]

Hi RreborDee.

It's not the fault of the DVLA or the DSA or even the government. It's all down to the E.C. with the harmonised driving licence regulations.

Regards

Steve

 

[rayc]

TreborDee, well that's life. There were plenty of drivers in the distant past who never had to sit a test, drove tanks in the war etc. I did not complain about that when I sat my test in the 60's

I also inherited group C+E and D+E in adition to the B+E. I wonder if your B+E test will actually make you a safer driver? I learnt the hard way in the armed forces where incedentally the age limit of 21 for HGV was reduced to 18 for military drivers. Was this because military drivers were more skillfull or realistic as without under 21 drivers there would not have been enough of them to get the Army on the road.

The world is not a fair place, there was no penalty point system when I started driving. Is it fair that now new drivers can have their licences revoked if they accummalate 6 penalty points?

There are very few accidents where the primary cause is the towing of a vehicle and the exemption from the test are quite generous at 3500kg train weight, ( or 4250kg if the trailer is less than 750kg), so I imagine that the vast majority of the older motorists you complain about would not need to pass the test to drive their units.

By the way there was a very tragic fatal recent accident locally where a lady who had just dropped her child of at school was killed by a trailer that had become detached from a LandRover. Perhaps a safety campaign to ensure that trailer safety chains are used woulkd be useful - I am sure that is covered on your course.

 

[Lutz]

In the interest of safety, raising standards of driving cannot be wrong. On the other hand, requiring holders of older driving licences to take the new test as well would be rather excessive. Besides, it has always been practice to allow continued validity of older licences whenever changes have taken place, especially as over the years these will gradually disappear anyway.

 

[BeemerMal]

TreborDee....It may seem unfair but as in most things in life there is a cut off point. It is proven that the new driving test has done little to improve driving standards, that is done only through experience on the road. Passing the test only proves the candidate knows what they should and should not do.

Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your viewpoint) the licence change in 1997 is a major change that places a financial burden onto those who want to obtain their B+E licence. However, the training on how to tow and how to reverse a caravan/trailor should not be seen as wasted.

I, like many caravanners, did not take a towing test and have not attended a towing course. My early towing training was carried out in an empty car park where a lorry driver friend showed me the basics of reversing. The rest is self taught, through trial and error (strong emphasis on error!). Many of those who have taken the towing test or have attended a towing course are still not accomplished at reversing a trailor because, unlike lorry drivers, they don't get the practice on a daily basis.

My father drove and towed from being 17 years old and he never took any driving test, this did'nt make him a bad driver!

Is this unfair on those who have had to take a driving test?

Drivers who reach 70 years of age have to pass a basic medical to retain their licence.

Is this unfair?

Most probably, as time goes by, the 70 age will be reduced and there is even talk of having to take another test at 60.

Is this unfair?

The insurance industry have always loaded premiums for young and new drivers because statistics show this group are more likely to be involved in an accident.

Is this unfair?

My wife will not be able to draw her pension at 60. Had she been born 3 years earlier she would have be able to do so.

Is this unfair?

Life is often unfair.

 

[rayc]

Lutz, I am not sure that driving standards have improved. There may be more regulation and more items included in the test (e.g. how to check the oil level) but driving has been dumbed down. I do believe that in the 60's drivers took more pride in their driving and once they had passed their test continued to practice and improve their skills.

Trebordee is complaining about the intensity of the tests he undertook as a result of Safe Driving for Life campaign. Perhaps if less of his contempories had looked at a driving licence as a responsibility, and not a right, then the campaign may not have been neccesary. ray

 

[Tony A.]

TreborDee,

It is no ones fault but your own if you had to pay for two extra tests because you couldn`t pass, I`m glad to hear that standards are being maintained,(the examiner was strict)when I passed my test in 1968 it took me three attempts, but I didn`t blame the examiner, I wasn`t good enough, simple as,

You seem to think you are being punished by changes in the law, maybe the country should revert back to the time when there wasn`t a test at all, think of all the people who where punished when the test was introduced, and all subsequent changes.

Anyone who tows should do so with a car which is heavier than the van ( the 85% rule, not law but recomended )3,500 kg combined weight is some big outfit why would you want bigger?.

Vehicles with more than eight seats are called buses, so it`s a good idea to make drivers take a test just for these, it`s called progress.

The fact that people who passed their test before 1st Jan 1997 can drive bigger vehicles than you doesn`t make the new law wrong.

So because you have had to pay for these extra tests, you think every driver should do the same. Can you imagine the caos of every driver on Britains roads going for a new test, It hasn`t happened because it`s impossible.

We have always had to make sure of weights, loads, number of axles, etc etc, before taking to the road.

I`m sure that the majority of drivers on the road would welcome a safe drivng campaign, but the cost to directly involve them would be prohibitive,

You are like so many before you, a victim of your age,

I missed a world war and national service, thank god,

but I had to take a driving test, unlike my father, who never had to take a test of any description, driving or even 11plus, O levels, or A levels. his life was a doddal apart from the 2nd world war, I wonder if he thought he was being picked on.

Just get on and do what you have to do and stop moaning,

things could be worse, the government might decide to put every eligble man into the army, to go and fight in some far off land, now that would p**s you off wouldn`t it.

You think you`ve been badly done to, but wait in a few years time it`ll all ghange again and you`ll think ( as I do now )I`m glad I don`t have to go through all that c**p just to drive my car.

Enjoy caravaning and try to be positive

Tony A.

 

[Damian]

The driving test is woefully inadequate as it is.

Drivers are simply taught to drive to a "standard" to pass a test, no more.

The real learning comes after, and it is only through time and experience, and if you have any sense further advanced driving courses, that you become a decent driver.

I fail to grasp the notion that new drivers are somehow being punished?

Punished for what exactly? having to satisfy a regulatory body that they are not a danger on the road? being assessed as to whether they are safe to do what they wish to do?

As for the limit of 3500kilos for a combined outfit, this was set to AVOID the majority of people who wish to caravan having to sit any extra tests, just stay below the limit.

As for the "burden" of having to know the weights of your outfit, well, surely this is not a hardship, and may in fact be a lifeasver, you have a DUTY to know what your towing and the relevant problems and dangers.

The comment about (treeborDee) having to take three tests to get the licence just proves that he/she was not assessed to be safe to be let loose on the road alone at the time, and as for the test being strict,that is what the test is for, its a TEST, not a jolly on a sunny afternoon!!!

Do not forget the Tester has to be satisfied that he or she is not letting someone out alone who is not really safe to be so, the examiner MUST be confident that the pupil has a good chance of survival on the roads.

As one examiner told me " I have to be able to sleep at night, knowing I have not put anyone at risk, as far as possible"

Throwing in comments about driving vehicles with more than 8 seats is a red herring, it is already a condition that ANY driver , regardless of when the test was passed, has to take another test to drive bigger seating vehicles,to gain the PCV entitlement.

Being a trainer and examiner for Motorcycles, anything which helps road safety is welcome, and in my own persoanl view, anyone taking a car test should only be allowed to do so AFTER they have taken their motorcycle test and been riding for 6 months.,,,,but thats another topic.

 

[rh010a2370]

The driving test is woefully inadequate as it is.

Drivers are simply taught to drive to a "standard" to pass a test, no more.

The real learning comes after, and it is only through time and experience, and if you have any sense further advanced driving courses, that you become a decent driver.

I fail to grasp the notion that new drivers are somehow being punished?

Punished for what exactly? having to satisfy a regulatory body that they are not a danger on the road? being assessed as to whether they are safe to do what they wish to do?

As for the limit of 3500kilos for a combined outfit, this was set to AVOID the majority of people who wish to caravan having to sit any extra tests, just stay below the limit.

As for the "burden" of having to know the weights of your outfit, well, surely this is not a hardship, and may in fact be a lifeasver, you have a DUTY to know what your towing and the relevant problems and dangers.

The comment about (treeborDee) having to take three tests to get the licence just proves that he/she was not assessed to be safe to be let loose on the road alone at the time, and as for the test being strict,that is what the test is for, its a TEST, not a jolly on a sunny afternoon!!!

Do not forget the Tester has to be satisfied that he or she is not letting someone out alone who is not really safe to be so, the examiner MUST be confident that the pupil has a good chance of survival on the roads.

As one examiner told me " I have to be able to sleep at night, knowing I have not put anyone at risk, as far as possible"

Throwing in comments about driving vehicles with more than 8 seats is a red herring, it is already a condition that ANY driver , regardless of when the test was passed, has to take another test to drive bigger seating vehicles,to gain the PCV entitlement.

Being a trainer and examiner for Motorcycles, anything which helps road safety is welcome, and in my own persoanl view, anyone taking a car test should only be allowed to do so AFTER they have taken their motorcycle test and been riding for 6 months.,,,,but thats another topic.

Throwing in comments about driving vehicles with more than 8 seats is a red herring, it is already a condition that ANY driver , regardless of when the test was passed, has to take another test to drive bigger seating vehicles,to gain the PCV entitlement.

You will find that you are wrong, Drivers who passed their test prior to January 1997, can drive up to a 14 seated mini bus on their licence.

Please check.

The comment about (treeborDee) having to take three tests to get the licence just proves that he/she was not assessed to be safe to be let loose on the road alone at the time, and as for the test being strict,that is what the test is for, its a TEST, not a jolly on a sunny afternoon!!!

For got to say i sat a driving test in 1982 when i was 18 and failed, but when i sat the first of the new tests in 1998 the test lasted for one hour exactly as to 20 minutes the very first time in 1982 ( yes you are Wright i was probably not ready to get let lose on the road at them times. ) But the second time i sat the new test in January 1999, that test lasted one hour ten minute and the driving examiner done every thing in his power to fail me, and he did, his excuse was i driving to much in the centre of the road when driving around the town, my driving instructor was in the car with me first and second time, when i sat that test he could not believe that he had fail me, but on third occasion my instructor was not in the car with me, the test lasted one hour and i had a different examiner from the first two times, and i passed. That's what i mean about being strict.

 

[Lenny]

TreborDee,

Let me see if i get this right:

you arent good enough to pass your driving test on the FIRST attempt, nor the SECOND attempt, yet your complaining you cant stick 2000kgs of caravan on the back of something and drag it up the country?

I would suggest that this law was implemented to try and stop people who really arent any good from killing themselves, or someone else. Needing 3 tests would be a worry to me.

Like someone said, you have only passed a test, you will take years to learn how to drive.

 

[Martin_E]

I passed my test first time many moons ago but to be fair some people are perfectly good at driving but when put in a test situation can suffer from very bad nerves. Some people when faced with exam questions can just go completely blank yet if they were asked the questions informally would probably know the answers.

I do think it is a good thing to have to take a test for towing the amount of people who I have come across over the years who can't reverse & have got to unhitch then push the trailer/van back by hand even for simple reversing with no corners to worry about.

Martin "E"

 

[Angus1]

Methinks TreborDee has a persecution complex!

"Examiner doing everything in his power to fail me"!!

Get a grip, if he wanted to he could have failed you on a whim, they don`t have to go around searching for unreasonable excuses.

Legislation changes.Fact. I don`t like much of it, but then again I don`t feel it`s directed at me personally.

The newer driver isn`t getting `punished`. How come that the `new` drivers account for a disproportionate amount of casualties in spite of the extra training and it supposedly being fresh in their minds, not to mention the faster reactions of (comparative) youth?

 

[BeemerMal]

TreborDee....Take a closer look at what you said. Perhaps you deliberately looked for confrontation with your headline post and your response to the comments Damian posted are written to get a reaction. Well done, it worked!

Perhaps if you had not taken such a long to finally pass your test you would not have needed to complete the B+E test? From your first test failure in 1982 to finally passing in 1998 is for sure a very long time.....possibly a record!

Can anyone beat this?

For info, Nobody is a failure because they fail a driving test. I failed twice before passing and on both failures it was my own fault. However, all Three tests were within 4 months of each other, not 16 years.

 

[rh010a2370]

TreborDee,

Let me see if i get this right:

you arent good enough to pass your driving test on the FIRST attempt, nor the SECOND attempt, yet your complaining you cant stick 2000kgs of caravan on the back of something and drag it up the country?

I would suggest that this law was implemented to try and stop people who really arent any good from killing themselves, or someone else. Needing 3 tests would be a worry to me.

Like someone said, you have only passed a test, you will take years to learn how to drive.

Lenny.

Like millions of other driver before January 1997 have failed to pass their test first time.

At least i was honest enough to tell everyone it took me three attempts to pass my driving test, their are thousands of drivers on the road trailing 2000kg caravan on the back of their cars that did not pass their test first time.

So try and come up with something constructive, instead of trying to make a fool of some one, " I can do this on my own without your help " thank you very much.

Your the type of driver that has the " I'M ALL WRIGHT JACK STUFF THE REST " attitude.

Please read the comment at the bottom of Damian post.

 

[rh010a2370]

I passed my test first time many moons ago but to be fair some people are perfectly good at driving but when put in a test situation can suffer from very bad nerves. Some people when faced with exam questions can just go completely blank yet if they were asked the questions informally would probably know the answers.

I do think it is a good thing to have to take a test for towing the amount of people who I have come across over the years who can't reverse & have got to unhitch then push the trailer/van back by hand even for simple reversing with no corners to worry about.

Martin "E"

Martin "E"

Thanks for that, Well put.

 

[rh010a2370]

TreborDee....Take a closer look at what you said. Perhaps you deliberately looked for confrontation with your headline post and your response to the comments Damian posted are written to get a reaction. Well done, it worked!

Perhaps if you had not taken such a long to finally pass your test you would not have needed to complete the B+E test? From your first test failure in 1982 to finally passing in 1998 is for sure a very long time.....possibly a record!

Can anyone beat this?

For info, Nobody is a failure because they fail a driving test. I failed twice before passing and on both failures it was my own fault. However, all Three tests were within 4 months of each other, not 16 years.

BeemerMal.

The reason their was 16 years between sitting my driving was purely down to financial reasons at that time, the company i worked for at that time paid for half the lesson and i paid for the other half, but when i failed my test the company would not pay for any more lesson, and the wages i was on at that time were

 

[emmerson2]

Three attempts to pass? That's one too many. I've personally always thought that it would be better to have two strikes and out for at least two years before you try again. And yes, I did pass first time, at 17yrs and three days old. A long, long time ago, but by 'eck I've learned a hell of a lot since then.The others are dead right, TreborDee, you only learn to drive AFTER you pass your test. As for being allowed to tow, there should be no more caravanners allowed; it's becoming far too popular.If it keeps going at this rate, there won't be enough pitches left for me!!!

 

[emmerson2]

To answer your original question,"who agrees with me etc....", er, I think that's "no-one"!!

 

[BeemerMal]

emmerson.....Three attempts to pass? That's one too many.

Excuse me I am sensative soul and very, very upset at what you said. In fact if I was'nt so upset I would take a fence...but they are at a premium these days...

 

[emmerson2]

Feller walking down our lane the other day stole my gate. I didn't tackle him -- he might have taken offence!!

 

[emmerson2]

Besides which, Beemermal, being sensitive and driving a BMW is surely a contradiction in terms? I strongly suspect that you are about as sensitive as I am!!!!

 

[ProfJohnL]

Hello TreborDee,

As with virtually all laws and regulations they are reactive, meaning that they are brought in to prevent a reoccurrence of a particular unfortunate event.

It is a feature of virtually all such legislation that whilst it might tackle the circumstances of the original event, it often come into conflict with other activities not necessarily connected with the original event, so it spawns a host of revisions which starts the process off again.

That is why we have such intricate regulations concerning vehicles and licences. It's the result of years of tinkering to try and encompass all forms of road vehicles, and then to cap it off, the EU starts to impose its foibles as well.

I have to agree that the current regulations are complex, and you do need to study them carefully to establish what you can and can't legally do, but that is one of the costs of living in a social society where we need laws and regulations to let everyone know what is expected of them.

Perhaps they could be reformulated to simplify them, but almost as soon as such a process were undertaken they would need to be revised to cater for the oddball situations that do occur and so we would be back to a similar status quo within a few years.

Sorry but if you want to remain part of this society, then you have to live by the rules.

 

[colin-yorkshire]

hi treborDee

you ask if it is fair, well yes it is for several reasons the most complling of which is inexperience new drivers are just not ready to take on extra resposiblities and the new laws dont go far enough, I would have much tighter restrictions placed on them untill they have a proven record of ability before moving on to something else like towing.

how many new drivers are on the road that can not reverse a car solo never mind with a trailer or at the time of the test have never driven in snow or on icy roads at night or on motorways or in fog yet you seem to be suggesting they are allowed to attach a 3.ton trailer to a 3.1/2 ton vehicle and set off without any futher instruction no way sorry it just not pracital.

in my view the present laws are just too lenient, and judging by the standards of driving I see every day wonder how some passed the test at all.

you know the ones who overtake at any cost just to get two cars in front at the next set of lights or the ones storming down the wrong lane at a junction and then cutting in right at the end or the ones that block off round a bouts and accses points

I dont think they learned to do them manovers in an instructors car.

 

[Steve L]

As a driver of 31 years behind the wheel of a car and 25 of those years spent towing in one format or another,plus HGV and motorcycle, I would agree with you all that even I would have to swat up to pass my driving test again. However that doesn't make me a bad driver, just a driver with a few million miles of bad habits.

While we can debate just where the definition point should be between private vehicle and LGV (HGV) as they are now called, there has to be a point at which a higher standard of driving skill must be obtained to handle seriously longer and heavier vehicles.

For example my car caravan combo is 39ft long (Car plus twin axle van) and has a Gross train weight of just under 3 tonnes. Would you let your 17 year old son/daughter who has just passed their test in a driving school Vauxhall Corsa, jump straight into the above car and van combo without previous training?

However just as contravertially these days is, the attitude of the modern driver. People seem to not be trained to think for themselves these days and they come out of the class room with all the theroretical qualifications but no common sense/rationalisation skills.

Take my appreniceship for instance. I trained for 5 years with a top aircraft material manufacturer to become a Toolmaker and experimental engineer. The first year was entirely "off the job" in their own purpose built training center and 1 day a week at college. The next 4 years were spent shadowing every skilled "time served" engineer in the company plus the 1 day at college to get "Hands on" experience. All the way through there were "phase tests" to check my knowledge absorbtion.

Today, a young apprentice does the same coarse in two/three years and so long as he is plonked infront of a CNC (computerised) machine he's fine, but give him an old Bridgeport milling m/c and he ain't got a clue.

The same can be said of modern drivers because with all the ABS this and the power assisted that, the actual getting to know your car has disappeared.

All too often these days people seem to see speed limits as targets and not sfety features, and as such will endevour to drive to the max permitted speed instead of taking stock of themselves and adjusting to suit. For example sat nav will direct you via the quickest shortest route, but this may take you down country lanes. However as the lanes have no speed restriction the "computer" believes you can do 60Mph, but do you?

Steve L.