Yeah, yeah, whatever. Fair cop.
It was, genuinely, a useful couple of hours; we covered the basic of speed limits (i.e. it's pretty obviously 30, 60 or 70, unless there's a sign telling you otherwise), honest discussion about why people speed, the significant effect that just a couple of MPH over the limit has on stopping distances and impact speeds, the tiny effect that going faster actually has on arriving sooner, hazard awareness and techniques for dealing with tailgaters, stress, distraction etc etc. All done in a very open, collegiate, non-judgemental, way.
Anyway, it got me thinking - it's pretty mad, really, that they're not something that everyone has to do at, I dunno, ten-year intervals or something, to keep their license. Most professions that involve the use of complicated machinery or techniques in a hazardous environment need some sort of recertification, why not driving a vehicle on the road?
Discuss...
I did one ages back, (35 on a radar gun in a 30 dual carriageway) ..and I was genuinely astonished how most folks know next to nothing about the Highway code, or signs or traffic signs...
Yeah but don't dare interfere with folk's God given right to drive. It's their right, don't you know? 🙂
I, for one, are in favour or some sort of regular/ongoing checks. I don't drive many miles but do have an interest in driving (not necessarily driving quickly), so undertook advanced driving training myself. Just makes sense and I find it genuinely helpful.
Yep, they're good and should be compulsary every 10 years [or similar] - along with doing a CBT before learning to drive a car.
I found mine very interesting to be honest and yes, the stopping distance thing surprised me a lot.
It was nicely unpatronising for the large part as well and agree, it is the Surrey of thing that I thing should be mandatory every few years.
<BLEAT> ANOTHER TAX ON DRIVERS!!@!@!@@! </BLEAT>
I think it's a good idea TBH. Everybody should be able to drive to the standard required of a test - no harm in checking/ refreshing every so often.
Did 1 a few yrs ago.
Completely agree that there should be an element of this either in the test itself or as part of regular testing.
Was very informative.
I wonder if rather than making them mandatory, you could attach a discount to insurance to voluntarily completion of one to encourage people to do so.
I wonder if rather than making them mandatory, you could attach a discount to insurance to voluntarily completion of one to encourage people to do so.
Is a good idea, but the insurance companies will, understandably, only do this if there's data to support that drivers who've been on one are at a lower risk of being involved in an accident. Intuitively they should be, but they'd need hard data.
Well, if the hard data can’t be found, what’s the point of them?
...is a very good point, fair enough.
heh when i did mine i was convinced it was literally a time-wasting deterant and i'd be on my phone all afternoon. Was quite interesting and i actually learned some stuff.
(won't admit it was what the "National Speed Limit" sign meant 😳 *)
Did chuckle when they went round everyone and asked then why they were over the limit. Err my brothers friends dog was at the vet and i had to get his wifes sisters kid from karate and i was late and the signage was not clear and i was accelerating to get up a hill etc
"What caused you to be here?"
Me: was pressing my pedal too hard for the given senario 🙁
One more senior lady was convinced she was right and they were wrong and she was not for changing.
Might have enjoyed it a little bit,
But in answer to your question, possibly
*in my defence i learned to drive in Gibraltar.
*In Addition to that, it was a momentary lapse of concentation on a main road. wasn't tearing up a residental area or anything
I did one years ago. Went in expecting not to learn much, and yet I think it genuinely changed the way I drive. Mainly just small things, but all small things that I'd never put much thought into, or wasn't aware of previously, and are now normal considerations every time I sit behind the wheel.
I think that's a bloomin marvellous idea, along with making everyone do a motorcycle CBT.
Yeah, I did one last month. Less tedious than I expected - amazing how many people on it didn't know their speed limits though.
I did one a few years ago.
It was OK, I did learn what a "dual carriageway" actually is.
The instructor was very anti cyclist, she made some pretty stupid remarks, the rest of the group lapped it up. Didn't make much of a fuss as I am sure she would of kicked me out.
Did one probably 12 or 14 years ago and I still bear it in mind when I drive now.
I'm sure they are useful, given driving standards out there.
They should be mandatory.
The instructor was very anti cyclist, she made some pretty stupid remarks, the rest of the group lapped it up. Didn’t make much of a fuss as I am sure she would of kicked me out.
You should report this (with evidence) after you've 'passed'. It's plain wrong.
Agree with the OP.. did mine in the past year... found it useful and gained an understanding more than I thought I would.
Think it too should be a 10 year thing!
DrP
What would be better is re doing a test every 10 years.
speed limits dont make safe drivers, they just help to minimise the impact of poor driving.
You sit it all the time, people who sit either at the speed limit, or 10 mph below it, but are quite clearly paying no attention to whats going on around.
I did one a few years back and found it useful. Hopefully never again though. My error was believing I was in a 40, but it was a 30 🤦
There has to be a move to retesting, these could form part of it. My lad learned to drive last year, taking him out to practice identified a few of my own bad habits.
Any countries have regular retests do we know, from our international members? Do they work?
IMO, there should be mandatory training and testing every 10 years.
Random thought.....If speeding (the actual driving faster bit as well as the lack of observance that gets you caught bit) increases your statistical likelihood of being involved in or causing incidents, does living or working near a speed awareness course venue increase your insurance premium? A honeypot location that draws in Britain's least impressive drivers.
To the OP - yes, when put like that it's a no brainer isn't it. The number of refresher courses I have to go on for stuff at work but my car is easily the device I operate that has the biggest likelihood to generate mass carnage.
You should report this (with evidence)
What possible evidence could I have? It would be my word against hers.
Did one a few years back.
Agreed the course was good and it definitely changed the way I drive.
Also there was a quite hilarious cross section of society and attitudes on the course along with me which was worth attending for on its own.
The best one was a very vocal gammon type guy who kept adding '...and then you're buggered' to the end of his sentences.
The instructor kept correcting him with more PC language to use and by the end of the course many people (me & instructor both included) could hardly stop themselves laughing out loud at the gammon guy. No clue at all.
OP - you didn't tell us why you were there, was it because you weren't aware of speed limits etc or were speeding on purpose?
If it was the latter, what's the point of a refresh, as you already knew the law but were breaking it on purpose. If it was the former, then I've no problem with you voluntarily handing in your licence and taking your test 'again'.
Discuss.
I wonder if rather than making them mandatory, you could attach a discount to insurance to voluntarily completion of one to encourage people to do so.
Isn't this what taking advanced driving courses already achieve?
What possible evidence could I have? It would be my word against hers.
What you heard. You might not be the only person who has made a complaint.
OP – you didn’t tell us why you were there, was it because you weren’t aware of speed limits etc or were speeding on purpose?
If it was the latter, what’s the point of a refresh, as you already knew the law but were breaking it on purpose. If it was the former, then I’ve no problem with you voluntarily handing in your licence and taking your test ‘again’.
Discuss.
Crap baiting skills. Discuss.
I know that it's a good idea to wash my hands before handling food. But I've got to confess I don't always bother even though I know I should. If I got to spend an hour with a microbiologist explaining exactly why it's a good idea and the consequences with photos of petri dishes and unwell bowels, there is a good chance my laissez-faire attitude to hand hygiene might be given a reboot. See also every machine safety refresher training course on the planet.
OP – you didn’t tell us why you were there, was it because you weren’t aware of speed limits etc or were speeding on purpose?
If it was the latter, what’s the point of a refresh, as you already knew the law but were breaking it on purpose. If it was the former, then I’ve no problem with you voluntarily handing in your licence and taking your test ‘again’.
Well, at least it took 28 posts before the sanctimonious crowd joined in.
I was there because I was caught, fair and square, doing 44 in a 40. I was doing 44 in a 40 because I hadn't noticed the limit change from 60. I hadn't noticed it change because I'm human, and make mistakes.
Mine took 3hrs because we had a cyclist hating truck driver who just wouldn't let it lie. Arguing with the course leader while the rest of us sat with our head in our hands. I could have made it worse of course by standing up for cyclist but I'd lost the will to live by that point
What would be better is re doing a test every 10 years.
My daughter recently passed her test. She wasn't taught to drive safely or even particularly competently - she was taught purely how to pass the driving test. Being retested regularly wouldn't stop people from reverting to their bad habits once they are away from the test centre.
I did one a few years ago (34mph before I'd actually exited the 30 zone)
I actually found it quite interesting but it shocked me how many people were in there for their 3rd or 4th time and there were certainly a few there who were completely disinterested or convinced it was all a gigantic infringement on their god-given right to drive.
Anyway, it got me thinking – it’s pretty mad, really, that they’re not something that everyone has to do at, I dunno, ten-year intervals or something, to keep their license. Most professions that involve the use of complicated machinery or techniques in a hazardous environment need some sort of recertification, why not driving a vehicle on the road?
Oh very much this - in no other area of life is it acceptable to pass a test to operate heavy machinery and then do literally no further training whatsoever over the next 50+ years. Imagine if you got on a plane and the pilot said "yeah, I passed in the little training school Cessna 30 years ago..." and then had no further training other than just picking it up as you go on an A380... 😲
That's what happens on the road. It's insane that you can pass in a 1.2L Nissan Micra and then you can go out and buy a 3L twin turbo V8 the next day!
FMT600 is the form that tells you what military vehicles you are allowed to drive. It's surprising what it tells you compared to a normal driving test.
Eg parading the vehicle (checking lights, fluids etc) where the fluids go and how to tow, change wheels etc.
Go for northern Europe and you need to know road signs and how laws differ.
There's no way they'll be made mandatory, yes it would create a little industry, but what's the punishment for not doing it, or staying awake, you can't force people to learn and understand unfortunately.
It's always good to know information that helps improve you, but even the braking distances examples are all put in front of you with barely half the variables that can affect them, you start sticking error bars on those distances with certain scenarios and it can look a lot worse, and those error bars, such as braking performance and vehicle condition are a one off check annually for most.
If it was the latter, what’s the point of a refresh, as you already knew the law but were breaking it on purpose.
Very little of the speed awareness course I attended could be described as a refresh. It was a much more thought provoking and down to earth conversation about a whole variety of things. It's designed to positively challenge your perspective. Which I think is why many people take something away from it.
I actually found it quite interesting but it shocked me how many people were in there for their 3rd or 4th time
Full disclosure - yesterday's was my second, previous one was nine years ago. Maybe that goes some way to support the "refresher every ten years might be a good idea" thing, I dunno.
Agree that it should be something everyone does after a few years. I did one four years ago after being caught doing 57 in a 50, was gunning it out of a sliproad to make a gap. I suddenly felt much happier when I heard some of the 'stories' from others about why they were there. A proper cross-section of society and intelligences. My favourite bit was when one young lad got called out after saying all cyclists should be banned off the road, turns out over half the room, including one of the instructors, was a regular cyclist, mainly commuters. He threw a proper hissy fit and was kicked off the course, told he now had to pay the fine and take points plus losing his course fee.
I wonder if rather than making them mandatory, you could attach a discount to insurance to voluntarily completion of one to encourage people to do so.
Is a good idea, but the insurance companies will, understandably, only do this if there’s data to support that drivers who’ve been on one are at a lower risk of being involved in an accident. Intuitively they should be, but they’d need hard data.
When I phoned up my insurers to tell them of a change in circumstances (new job hence higher mileage due to commuting) they gave me a big discount purely based on the fact I had passed my Class 2 HGV and had a valid DCPC card. Their reasoning when asked was that the DCPC meant my knowledge was much more up to date than others and that HGV drivers tend to rarely have a crash in their cars as they're used to the larger size and spotting hazards more often. So a national scheme of refresher training may well get you a discount, it does for new drivers doing Pass Plus so it's not beyond the realms of setting up an equivalent for drivers of 5+ years experience.
Slight hijack, I was driving through a road I've not driven before at the weekend, pavement, normal width, lined with houses and marked as a 40, I still can't work out why it wasn't a 30.
As for people not knowing limits all the people round here drive at 50 on a national speed limit road, then stay at 50 when a 40 zone starts.
I did one, it made me a better driver. But the whole discussion about retraining and retesting needs to be had.
My mother is 83, passed her test in the 1970's and hasn't driven a car for over 20 years, yet she has just renewed her licence again 'just in case' all she had to do to get a new licence was to fill in a medical declaration. She has never been done for speeding, or had an accident (mainly because she never drove more that a couple of miles in any case) so has never had any more training since the day she passed.
But if she wanted to, she could get in a car tomorrow and they have changed a lot in the past 20 years, and drive herself anywhere perfectly legally. Surely this can't be right. The very thought of it is enough to give me nightmares.
I wonder if rather than making them mandatory, you could attach a discount to insurance to voluntarily completion of one to encourage people to do so.
Isn’t this what taking advanced driving courses already achieve?
Yes and no. https://www.cornmarketinsurance.co.uk/valued-groups/iam-roadsmart-insurance/ - for IAM members, but they no longer price-match and won't cover my current car anyway as too high risk. I've never found any insurer offering a discount/better rate when I've mentioned I'm an IAM member, so perhaps back to a previous point here that additional training =/= a safer driver.
It’s insane that you can pass in a 1.2L Nissan Micra and then you can go out and buy a 3L twin turbo V8 the next day!
lets be honest, Footballers and Saudi Princes aside, the insurance companies are doing a pretty good job at policing this.
My dad was part of the group that came up with them in the first place. A couple of police forces (Essex and Hertfordshire, I think) spotted there seemed to be a group of drivers who were done for speeding, but only a bit, who didn't seem to understand why it was a problem and why they'd been caught, but responded well to roadside police officers giving them a bit an education.
When they first tried the scheme, over two years the rate of re-offendending among those who had taken a course dropped so much that they proposed it was rolled out nationally to the then Minister for Transport (I can't remember who it was then, this was 25-30 years ago). It then took years to get it through, even though it was so obviously effective.
I think about five years later the same group also proposed that it became an ongoing part of the driving licence system - as IHN said, standard industrial practice for remaining qualified to use any other piece of dangerous machinery - and were flat-out refused, told that it was impossible and un-workable, the motor industry would lobby against it and the public wouldn't support it.