New 'Gold Standard' Driving School Club

I’ve been to a meeting today, to a very large training company that are setting up a truck driving school approval scheme. Some of the big names were there, Denby, Wallace, Voss, Viamaster, some colleges, councils and of course little old me!

What does this all mean? Well as we all know the LGV training industry is littered with cowboy companies, all you need to set up a driving school is a truck and driving licence! Everyone knows it needs to change but how? Many things were discussed, trainee ratios, age of vehicles used, paperwork, instructor qualifications, course syllabus and so on.

But as we have i assume lots of potential customers and also instructors on this forum, i’ll ask the question, do we we need a gold standard scheme that good driving schools (not brokers) can sign up to? Do you customers think its worth it? Would you choose an approved company over a non-approved training school.

This has all come about due to ‘apparently’ the DVSA have been told that the Voluntary Register of LGV Instructors should come to an end, as the role of the DVSA is to set and maintain the standards not train instructors to do the job, that is the responsibility of industry to basically self regulate what they do. If you didn’t know of this instructor register than I’m not surprised, most customers are clueless as to its existence and not many driving schools join the register. We have been considering leaving it ourselves for many years as it benefits our customers or us very little.

As I see it, the industry needs some ‘tough love’ for too long now driving schools have been providing shoddy training, it can be such a gamble for the customer, the brokers are making good money at the expense of customers and the poor driving schools contracted to work for them are suffering too. I’m all in favour of smartening up this industry but only if the customer wants it because frankly nothing comes for free, all the work that will go into development and advertising needs to be passed on to the customer, they will however be guaranteed to receive a good quality of service from any provider wearing this seal of approval.

Personally I know our company depends on reputation and word of mouth, but as most people don’t talk anymore but instead go onto google to find the answers, I see lots of people taken in by LGV training brokers. As I said at the meeting - we love spending money on shinny new trucks thinking that will get us lots of business, while the brokers spend money on website development which actually gets them far more business!

Any thoughts on the matter are appreciated, i’m going back in January for round two of the meetings!

The ADI system already in place - could that be adjusted to fit the needs of upgrade training?

Anything that improves standards of training delivery and guarantees a proper job done to a recognised high standard has my support. But, the DSA LGV Accredited Training Centre is in place. Hardly anyone knows about this - whether in the industry or not. It’s getting confused with having a private test centre. The two things are entirely different.

DVSA have been told that the Voluntary Register of LGV Instructors should come to an end, as the role of the DVSA is to set and maintain the standards not train instructors to do the job,

Don’t understand that comment as the DVSA don’t carry out the training - just the testing and registration. The DVSA at the highest level, deny all knowledge of the scheme coming to an end. I had that conversation only a few weeks ago when the rumour mill started.

Sadly, the first question that some folks still ask is “how much”? I have had some come along and say they are booking with us because of the accreditation but not on a regular basis. But we also rely heavily on recommendation, our very smart image and results.

I am assuming that an organisation similar to RTITB is behind the “Gold Standard”. That is, of course, a private organisation that is profit driven. Whereas the DVSA is a government agency that has to cover it’s costs.

With a little scepticism I support the idea overall.

I look forward to further updates.

Pete :laughing: :laughing:

The “quality of training” is what we all deserve, but I would hate to see “the big fish eat the little fish” senario.

What exactly is a “good” trainer?
The pass or fail largely depends on the pupil,more so than a good or bad trainer imo…
All this gold standard crap is just yet another way to get more money from firstly trainers and the prospective new drivers as the cost gets passed down…has all the money made from the DCPC run out already■■?

Sorry ckm I can’t agree. The outcome of the test is mostly dependant on the trainers ability to pass the relevant knowledge to the candidate.

20 candidates will each need training in a different way. Obviously the actual driving techniques needed are the same for all but preparing a person mentally for the test is the true skill of a trainer. If a trainer does not have this skill the candidate is effectively self teaching.

I doubt many trainers have more than about 30% pass rate for the 1st few months. A truly skilled master trainer should be able to achieve 70%~80% over a year.

The candidate doesn’t really need to be a good driver to pass. They need to follow exactly what they have been taught to do.

I could write 2 books on this subject.

Dunno,there just doesn’t seem a year goes by when there is someone trying to screw more money from learner drivers…I passed 11 years ago and it cost me enough then,would hate to learn now.

Dunno,there just doesn’t seem a year goes by when there is someone trying to screw more money from learner drivers…I passed 11 years ago and it cost me enough then,would hate to learn now.

I believe the context of the OP is that there is some truly appalling “training” on offer and it’s not easy for the potential customer to sort out what is good and what isn’t. Some form of regulation is desperately needed and the sooner, the better.

Surely it has to be a good thing to weed out the robbing cowboys running rough old trucks and delivering poor training.

I also agree with the comment from TROTSKY3

I would hate to see “the big fish eat the little fish” senario.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with a good one man band operation provided it is run properly. Some of us have grown over the years to larger organisations built on success. But I was a one man band once. And I was good then as well.

I don’t believe this conversation has anything to do with favouring larger trainers; just a matter of trying to ensure that the customer has a choice of trainers who are going to do a good job.

Today, I have assessed a lady on a bus who has had two courses. Well nearly. She asked for her money back on the first one when the vehicle was constantly breaking down. The second provider repeatedly called the vehicle back in so it could do a school run. On both occasions, the “trainer” was a driver - and only a driver with no training background. This customer has learned so little that she is still in need of a full course. And this is after spending around £2k so far. It’s this sort of practice that should be outlawed IMO.

Pete :laughing: :laughing:

As a punter, I had no idea about DSA certification until after I passed my tests and I feel it is wrong that so much money can be extorted by complete cowboys running knackered trucks who have no idea about teaching or interest in doing it well.

I was very lucky to have an outstanding C+E instructor who not only taught me to drive but built my confidence over the week in such a way that I went into the test fairly confident I had a good chance of passing and it made all the difference. If there is a way of giving people like this a gold star, then I’m all for it.

There are some good schools out there that care passionately about getting it right, and anything that can help a punter differentiate and find these schools is probably to be welcomed.

th2013:
As a punter, I had no idea about DSA certification until after I passed my tests and I feel it is wrong that so much money can be extorted by complete cowboys running knackered trucks who have no idea about teaching or interest in doing it well.

I was very lucky to have an outstanding C+E instructor who not only taught me to drive but built my confidence over the week in such a way that I went into the test fairly confident I had a good chance of passing and it made all the difference. If there is a way of giving people like this a gold star, then I’m all for it.

There are some good schools out there that care passionately about getting it right, and anything that can help a punter differentiate and find these schools is probably to be welcomed.

i have decorated for about 20 yrs ,I have no qualifications, my old paint brushes and tools are my most reliable ones, and my clients were of the highest caliber.
I too was shocked to find out that JOE BLOGGS bought a truck and taught.
I also know if i had a truck there would be some good drivers out there.
it all has to do with the person teaching.

The LGV training industry certainly needs 2 basic things -

All trainers to be checked that they are delivering good training - that means someone would need to be in the cab with the trainer and a trainee = 3 seats needed
Role play does not cut it

Vehicles to be checked as being in a reasonable condition

The LGV training industry certainly needs 2 basic things -

All trainers to be checked that they are delivering good training - that means someone would need to be in the cab with the trainer and a trainee = 3 seats needed
Role play does not cut it

Vehicles to be checked as being in a reasonable condition

Totally agree with the first comment - trainers should be checked and role play (where the examiner plays the candidate) isn’t the same as a genuine candidate.

Last comment from ROG, I would change the word “reasonable” to “excellent”. Very few people learn on a car more than a couple of years old yet they’ll put up with an ageing vehicle that doesn’t work properly.

Note: I am fully aware it’s possible to have a very well maintained older vehicle that does work properly. These would happily pass the criteria. But the sad fact is that most wouldn’t.

The other thing that needs to be in the pot is the operating standards of the trainer eg constantly changing instructor, not having correct facilities for reversing, any evidence of substandard trading.

Pete :laughing: :laughing:

Personally I believe for any system to work and make a level playing field for everyone it has come from the government.

These vigilante meetings for training providers are for their sole benefit only.

A good training provider will prevail in this industry.

I would welcome a change of legislation from the government which should help to rid of the brokers and training providers that only survive because of their connection to the brokers.

Paul :smiley:

Tockwith Training:
I’ve been to a meeting today, to a very large training company that are setting up a truck driving school approval scheme. Some of the big names were there, Denby, Wallace, Voss, Viamaster, some colleges, councils and of course little old me! !

This is confusing or alarming can’t quite decide which…so a very large training company are setting up a truck driving approval scheme,can anyone else see what I see there■■?

Tesco did something similar with petrol station,build a petrol station near an small independent one,price them out of the market by undercutting said small independent station then once the independent went under because they couldn’t conpete they had free reign and charged over the odds because there was no other filling stations within X amount of miles.

Who governs the “very large training company” if it’s their scheme where a select few are invited to join?

I passed my class 2 with a one man band,passed 1st time and he didn’t have a special approval from anyone.

I have an idea which might be useful…

All training schools to be issued with a unique number - no training vehicles = no number

Trainees to use an online rating system using their driver & NI numbers

All training schools legally required to show the ratings

Ratings to cover various aspects of the trainee experience

Maybe the data base could also be held by the DVSA who could be given the authority to investigate any school who fell short of an expected rating

Slightly changing ROG’s idea…

Simply drop the exemption from O licensing for training vehicles and reputable operators can publish their O license number.
No vehicles = no O license, and also enforce regular maintenance.

(Now vehicles have to be loaded for tests I think it’s simply common sense if they are subject to the same requirements as every other loaded LGV on the roads.)

I realise that this is another hoop for the one-man-band to jump through but maybe its a necessary evil?

th2013:
Slightly changing ROG’s idea…

Simply drop the exemption from O licensing for training vehicles and reputable operators can publish their O license number.
No vehicles = no O license, and also enforce regular maintenance.

(Now vehicles have to be loaded for tests I think it’s simply common sense if they are subject to the same requirements as every other loaded LGV on the roads.)

I realise that this is another hoop for the one-man-band to jump through but maybe its a necessary evil?

As the mileage done would not be comparable then perhaps a modification of the O licence rules could be made for such

This is confusing or alarming can’t quite decide which…so a very large training company are setting up a truck driving approval scheme,can anyone else see what I see there■■?

Yes I can. And you’ve made me think about this a bit differently - so thankyou. I will be giving this more thought before passing much more comment.

With regard to ROG’s idea, I’m all for anything that raises standards and shows who is good and who isn’t.

The O licence exception should be removed without the slightest shadow of doubt. There is provision in the O licence regs for low mileage vehicles so no need for any changes. This may help raise the standards.

In the meantime, the only accreditation is dft.gov.uk/fyn/lgv.php

I’m going to watch from the sidelines and then make a decision.

I’ve been asked why I wasn’t in the list of invited trainers. My understanding is that the trainers invited to the meeting were invited because they are Fork Lift trainers accredited by the same organisation. Not quite sure what relevance that has to LGV but maybe it’s a start.

Could be interesting - or a total waste of time and money.

Pete :laughing: :laughing:

quote "Well as we all know the LGV training industry is littered with cowboy companies, all you need to set up a driving school is a truck and driving licence! Everyone knows it needs to change but how? "

By having meetings?