I feel sorry for the learner, what was the instructor thinking? it’ll be ok all sins forgiven as its got a learner badge on.
and it looked like she was going to pass. Possibly family member/friend instructor car?
Question for ROG: Can a learner demand to see insurance/mot docs?
Driver-Once-More:
Question for ROG: Can a learner demand to see insurance/mot docs?
Absolutely nowt to stop you asking. I know what I’d do if the request was denied.
Good job they stopped them before they passed, six points for no insurance would have them needing to retake their test, as a new driver.
Doesn’t look entirely professional to start with especially that L plate which looks homemade, which itself would make be highly suspicious. Wonder how long they’ve been driving around in that car and if anyone else has passed in it - could they be prosecuted after the event technically?
As for seeing the info, could just check it online for at least basic insurance - ownvehicle.askmid.com/ - which they would be allowed to do as they are entitled to drive it. Admittedly, not sure how many would actually think to do this.
personally if i where a copper and ran a pnc on a car that was being used for a test ( easy to tell examiners always wear high viz) i would follow it back to the test center and book the owner of the car After the test was finished. its a bit unfair on the poor learner to have his test interrupted like that…
The instructor should be struck off or the very least banned for teaching for a long time .
The examiner was surely also assuming the car was insured: when I took the IAM advanced test the examiner wanted to see MOT and proof of insurance (this was when still I had a tax disc).
I guess examiners wouldn’t be charged for being ‘in charge of’’ an uninsured car, would they?
no and nor would the learner. the law says something to the effect of “you must have taken reasonable steps to ensure the vehicle is insured” well driving your registered instructors car is in my opinion reasonable to assume its insured…
Section 165 of the road traffic act gives the police powers to seize the vehicle. It is a requirement of law to have the revelant class of vehicle taxed tested and insured. Regarding the learner. It is reasonable to expect the car to be insured. Therefore, they should not be liable to prosecution for no insurance. Technically you can. In regards to the examiner he is a crown employee therefore he would not be liable.
I think her not passing a test when she was on course is the issue here if I were a examiner in that instance she would of been passed.
Am I right in thinking that the examiner can’t pass the learner if they don’t complete the test? 
Good thing that come of it theres one less on the road 
Kwakers ive never seen a car examiner in hi-viz.
Also the police tweet: “Would of” should be “would have” 
bazza123:
Kwakers ive never seen a car examiner in hi-viz.Also the police tweet: “Would of” should be “would have”
All examiners where hi-vis for tests but not sure why.
At the start of every driving test, the candidate is required to sign a declaration that the vehicle is insured. I’ve been training drivers in excess of 40 years and ONCE has a candidate asked to see the certificate of insurance.
Clearly it works on trust, but it is seriously flawed.
In the same way, how many folks know that their training vehicle is taxed or MOT’d?
Shouldn’t really have to worry about things like this but the industry is not regulated properly and there’s plenty of scope for folks to get it wrong. For years there was one HGV school running on “social domestic and pleasure”. But no-one bothered him and he’s long since retired.
Am I right in thinking that the examiner can’t pass the learner if they don’t complete the test?
Correct. In a case like this it would be recorded as “no result”. The benefit is that the candidate doesn’t have to wait the statutory period before taking another test.
personally if i where a copper and ran a pnc on a car that was being used for a test ( easy to tell examiners always wear high viz) i would follow it back to the test center and book the owner of the car After the test was finished. its a bit unfair on the poor learner to have his test interrupted like that…
I see the point … but what happens if the car has a bump? Would cause more than a little embarrassment to the officer I think.
All examiners where hi-vis for tests but not sure why
Hi vis is a requirement for all examiners now. This is since the introduction of “show me, tell me” questions where the examiner is outside the vehicle. Presumably the powers that be consider the risk of being mown down to be reduced by the wearing of a hi vis.
Pete