Should there be 2-way radios for Mod 2 tests?

[Danders]

Hello All,

I wrote the below in autumn with the intention of passing it on to MCN for their readers news. Have a read and tell me what you think - should something be done initiate candidate - examiner communication during Module 2? Would it introduce more danger with a new rider operating a radio as well as a bike?

In early summer this year I took my Module 2 test. All was going well until I took a wrong turning off a roundabout (third exit right instead of fourth). When the examiner didn’t follow (for reasons I have since assumed to be because she was in a rush as it was the end of the day) I did not panic. I pulled up where I could and awaited an expected instruction to wait for her to come and find me - after all she knows the roads, saw where I went and my instructor had briefed me on the procedure for the situation I found myself in. Instead what I got was an entirely flustered message saying one of 2 things - carry on and follow signs to said destination, or turn around and follow signs to said destination. With no 2 way radio to ask for confirmation, I assumed she could not have meant for me to turn around on a dual carriageway and with no further clarification of the message (or any other communication whatsoever) I hesitantly continued on my own, unassisted, still under test conditions with no mobile phone. I was soon lost in a town I don’t know.
I returned to the test centre 20 minutes later to find it shut, I had to enter the 'exit' to the carpark - no one was around.

The examiner soon returned, having barely had time to get off her bike, take the radio off me and mutter something along the lines of 'you won’t be charged, it'll go down as a special code' she left me with my jaw dropped at the lack of feedback, paperwork, professionalism, explanation, manners etc...

3 working days after this I contacted DSA customer services - who knew nothing about the test result. Apparently it should have been phoned through straight away - a code given to my riding school and, as it was their fault, a retest organised as soon as possible, free of charge. Customer services contacted the test centre to get the feedback which came back, low and behold, as loss of fee - candidate at fault, next test slot in 6 weeks. Apparently the examiner followed all procedures correctly and the reason for no further comms was because the radio was ‘out of range’. I knew this wasn’t the case (they have a range of 5km) I wasn’t in the wrong and I knew the test centre knew that.

The second stage, if you ever have the misfortune to need complain to the DSA, is an email to customer services. I summarised the above and got the same response - I had lost my fee and the examiner had performed faultlessly.
I decided to write back to confirm that the DSA fully supported the examiner’s decision to ask me to ride on unassisted and also for written confirmation of the exact procedure, should an examiner become separated from the candidate.
I got a second reply from 'Head of Corporate Correspondence' saying that as a ‘gesture of goodwill’ I could have my test fee back and be considered for out of pocket expenses. I also got confirmation that:

The examiner "should have asked you to pull over at the first available safe opportunity after you had taken the wrong exit" and then should have "then taken an alternative route to meet you and continue with the test".

This is in effect confirming that I was lied to in the previous communications and the DSA do not actually know their own policies. Further to this, this particular examiner seemed more keen on leaving work early than to provide me with her full attention. Does anyone know how/if examiners are continually tested to ensure they area aware of their responsibilities/procedures?

It raises my question - Should 2 way radios be provided to candidates on Module 2 tests, for use in such situations?

I passed my Module 2 at another test centre and had the end of this summer on my bike, but my first experience on a bigger bike, on my own was certainly not a fun one. Riding when distracted and without license in a town you do not know is not a good start.

I should mention to anyone yet to take their Module 2 that my second examiner was entirely professional, calm and concise with his instructions and the test was no problem.

[missyburd]

Hmmm. I too got lost in a similar situation when I did my mod 2. Took the examiner nigh on 15 minutes to find me. I took the wrong exit on a roundabout, ended up on a dual carriageway with nowhere safe to pull over (wasn't going to stop on the dc), just carried on till I got to a petrol station where I could stop. Eventually I waved the examiner down when I saw her approach the roundabout I'd come off which she went round once before spotting me. This delay meant my test lasted one hour as opposed to 40 minutes and the poor chap waiting to take his test after me had to come back another day :(

Had I had a 2way radio in that case I'm not entirely sure it would have helped that much. Obviously the examiner knew the area far better than I did, and it doesn't take a genius to know where I came off and to just follow that road. I wasn't exactly going to take the opportunity to hide down a back road else I would have been lost. I knew I'd still have to do the length of the test regardless of how long we'd been, boxes to tick etc. Besides which, if the examiner had heard my humming whilst I was riding it would have drove her insane ;)

Sounds like yours was a crappy experience, you shouldn't have been asked to find your own way in a strange place, the examiner certainly shouldn't have assumed you had your bearings. I had no idea where I was on most of my test, too busy concentrating on indicators and lifesavers etc to take note of landmarks.

Bet you had no problems passing your retest though eh? :)

[Luckypants]

Moved to 'Bike Talk' where this will get more attention.

[yorkie_chris]

No I don't think test candidates should have the additional task loading of controlling a push to talk radio or worrying about setting microphones up etc. There's nothing wrong with the one way comms system, it's been like that for years. Just like there was nowt wrong with the old 1 part test.

I do think the examiners should be professional and not be liars and thieves though.

[rb8989]

I took two 'wrong' exits on my mod 2. The examiner was very good and gave me new directions. I was safe and passed. I think the 1-way system sufficed in this case.

[Owenski]

What I don't get is why neither of your examiners followed you in the first place?
They should be shadowing you all the time anyway, so unless they lost sight of you and assumed you'd both be on the intended route I don't see why they didn't just follow you allowing them to give further instruction based on what situation they find you in.

No need for 2 ways IMO.

[yorkie_chris]

Many possibilities... too small a gap for them to pull out into traffic with you, caught at lights etc. it happens quite often.

[Owenski]

All those are going to be covered by the "Unless they lost sight of you and assumed you'd both be on the intended route" statement which thinking about it covers quite a broad brand of possibilities.

I do recall my test had a "pull over and wait for me please" due to the gap closing before he could get through. I supose in your cases though they will have not initially known you were lost and with no way of been able to play marko-polo so you're relying on them realising you're not where you should be but also picking up your track from other possible routes.

OP I can see why once lost and having continued you'd have had such a slim chance of rejoining the examiner but I'd say that should have gone down as "just one of those things" tbh, unless you hadn't been out long I'm surprised she didn't just pass you to keep you quiet/happy. Pretty sure if I'd have been in her position I'd have said "Right ok, you're back safe that's good. I saw nothing dangerous before the test so lets do some basic manouvers just here and I'll conclude the test" (whilst thinking please please don't tell my boss etc etc).

[Danders]

I cant really say exactly why I wasnt followed in the case above; she said it was not safe to do so and you cant expect them to take risks. I have my own opinion though and it is that she was more keen to leave work on time and thought it could have been the best option. I then think she just got flustered. My riding school had said after that it is not the first time that he had questioned the examiner's capability to keep cool and clear under similar circumstances.

It was just a frustrating situation where in that particular instance a 2 way radio could have saved my test and the extra hassle.

I agree though; worrying about another push button on the handle bars whilst riding would have added more difficulty.

[Spank86]

Following instructions could also have saved your test.

[Danders]

With the haste she was in to leave me when I did finally meet up - Im pretty sure going through any paperwork was just adding extra time. It was like she had a place to be after work and thats all she thought about. It may have been out of procedure, but more professional, to at least ask me in the follwouing morning to carry out the paper bits/feedback.

Anyway. I hope following my conversation with the chap at corporate correspondance she had some further training on how to better handle things and give clearer (/more) communication.

[Messie]

Good to hear some people's psychic abilities are working. I try to stick to what I can see and hear before making gross assumptions about people's intentions and motivations.

I can see why you're frustrated but a) if you'd followed the instructions correctly in the first place there would have been no problem,b) did what you should have done and stayed where you were until collected (including the possibility that riding whilst not being under supervision might be against the terms of your current license) and c) having a 2 way radio may not have altered the situation at all and may even have made the situation worse.

So no, I don't think there should be 2 way radios for bike tests

[Danders]

Following instructions could also have saved your test.

My point exactly-had she also followed what she was told when trained there would have been no issue. The point of my post was to discuss the situation having accepted that my mistake is a given.

Messie-Theres no need to be psychic-she had a better place to be-don't you at the end of your working day? But don't you (or wouldnt you) tidy up any loose ends properly before you leave the office/work place? There is no 'gross assumption'. I saw and heard a person dealing with their job in an un- *conscientious way.

[Spank86]

Although she probably trained quite some time ago, you on the other had were told to take the third exit presumably mere seconds before.

If you can't follow instructions whilst negotiating traffic perhaps it was for the best that you failed.

[Messie]

She might have just heard a loved one was ill; she may have been ill herself. I have no idea but neither do you, so don't make assumptions. She may even have been so frustrated at an ill prepared numpty trying to pass their bike test before they were ready?
I am interested in what your instructed you to do in such circumstances. Mine was adamant that if I lost the examiner I was to pull over at a safe place and await collection. In my case riding a 500cc bike not being under supervision was illegal, but that was 10 years ago so maybe that has changed since

[Danders]

If we are now at a stage where we are suggesting people shouldn't have licenses based on their human errors, maybe you should re read the post you read not long ago and realise I was in fact told to exit on the fourth. My exiting the 3rd was how this all started. There being procedures to follow in the event hat a candidate takes a wrong turning, like many passing candidates do, suggests that the test is more about being safe-taking wrong turnings despite instructions shouldn't and doesnt result in them failing.

[Spank86]

Too lenient in my opinion.

[Messie]

Eh? I agree, I think. You took a wrong turn. You should have stayed there and waited to be collected - I think. I've said that how it was for me and I was wondering if it's the same now. Why didn't you? Particularly as you admit you didn't fully understand the instructions sent over her 1 way radio.
You post is a little unclear though. I do think that people shouldn't have license based on their errors yes sometimes but it depends- is that so wrong? We all make mistakes and I'm fairly sure about what you should have done in your case.I made a mistake on my test (stalled) but followed procedure fully so still passed.
What did your instructor tell you to do in such circumstances? Was your instructor with you on the day of the test? What size bike were you riding? (I admit that I'm not fully up to spped about what you are allowed to ride now without passes on the different modules)

[Danders]

She might have just heard a loved one was ill; she may have been ill herself. I have no idea but neither do you, so don't make assumptions. She may even have been so frustrated at an ill prepared numpty trying to pass their bike test before they were ready?
I am interested in what your instructed you to do in such circumstances. Mine was adamant that if I lost the examiner I was to pull over at a safe place and await collection. In my case riding a 500cc bike not being under supervision was illegal, but that was 10 years ago so maybe that has changed since

Well, you seem adamant to tell me I'm making assumptions. I class all of your comments above as 'better places to be' like visiting these poorly people in hospital. You seem to have read something along the lines of 'she'd have rather been in the pub' or similar. I'm quite aware there are many people such as yourself on forums-quick to insult, hence my attempt at being as generic as possible.

The only gross assumption, based certainly in nothing that you've either seen or heard, by the way, is yours. I was we'll prepared, and you're on no ground to judge my numptyness!

[Danders]

Too lenient in my opinion.

An interesting and relevant comment.

You're right, Messie I should have stayed put in hindsight. Instead I took the examiners instruction above that of my instructor. I did wait a while as I thought was correct, then upon realising that the instructor was not comin for me, and was expecting me to find her, I did so. Her instruction was clear enough for me to know it certainly did not(and she admits) involve staying put.

[Spank86]

An interesting and relevant comment.

It is actually, well relevant, what you find interesting I couldn't begin to speculate.

How would she come for you if she didn't know which turning you took?

I assume she didn't know as I would suspect shed have followed you had she known.

[Messie]

I didn't say you were a numpty. I am not quick to insult in this case
However as you don't seem to want to answer my questions, I'll leave the discussion.

Good luck for your next test

[Danders]

I didn't say you were a numpty. I am not quick to insult in this case
However as you don't seem to want to answer my questions, I'll leave the discussion.

Good luck for your next test

I know it a lengthy post, but I have passed since-its in the first post . The answer to your first question is also in there somewhere, and the size if the bike I was riding and whether my instructor was there is of little relevance of the original post. If you can't be bothered to read the thread there is little point in answering your irrelevant q's anyway.

Spank- she was right behind me. And No need to speculate. Really really Intersting-right up my street :)

[Spank86]

So she watched you ride the wrong way and toddled off elsewhere anyway?

That seems odd.

[Messie]

I know it a lengthy post, but I have passed since-its in the first post . The answer to your first question is also in there somewhere, and the size if the bike I was riding and whether my instructor was there is of little relevance of the original post. If you can't be bothered to read the thread there is little point in answering your irrelevant q's anyway.

Spank- she was right behind me. And No need to speculate. Really really Intersting-right up my street :)

So you did. Well done!

[Danders]

She did, toddled right off- She was 'committed' in her own words. which she may well have been. That's not the point.

This thread has taken a fascinating turn. My intention was to share my experience, my opinion and to make it of more interest, suggest a point for debate as you do in a forum. Save it being just (probably to be honest the main reason) a method of venting my frustration.

[Spank86]

Sounds like she could have used a retest.

There's no way she could be behind you and still committed to the NEXT exit.

At worst she might have had to go round again.

Sounds like my old driving examiner, she was rubbish but luckily she still passed me.

[Sid Squid]

It's a given that test candidates will make errors and take wrong turns, r/about exits etc, tests are commonly taken in areas with which the candidates are not familiar.
It's all very well saying that OP should have taken the correct exit, but the possibility that route errors may be made is all too foreseeable, as such the process for recovering from such errors is where the problem lies. Added to this is that the ensuing situation wasn't handled as well as it might have been.

In any given circumstance a two way radio might occasionally help, but the added complication of using such equipment, for someone who is by definition an inexperienced rider taking a test which requires and should be given their full concentration, outweighs the potential benefit I would have thought.

[yorkie_chris]

It's a given that test candidates will make errors and take wrong turns, r/about exits etc, tests are commonly taken in areas with which the candidates are not familiar.

IMO this should be positively encouraged.

Kn*bhead drivers... roundabout... oh I need exit, erm, THAT ONE.. #swerve#

A bit of an uncertainty about which junction etc you want and making sure you handle that safely is a really valuable bit of the test.

[Sid Squid]

IMO this should be positively encouraged.

Kn*bhead drivers... roundabout... oh I need exit, erm, THAT ONE.. #swerve#

A bit of an uncertainty about which junction etc you want and making sure you handle that safely is a really valuable bit of the test.
Yep, good training for the real world.

[missyburd]

Aye, shows a controlled reaction instead of a panicky one. Everyone gets lost at some point, and if you're nervous as well then it says a lot if you don't end up doing owt daft and carry on as normal.

[ChrisCurvyS]

I turned right into a petrol station on my test rather than right at the traffic lights immediately after it.

Thought it was some sort of a challenge to see how well I could follow instructions - he said 'merge into the approaching filter lane and take your next available right'. There immediately approaching filter lane was for traffic turning right into the garage but he didn't see it as it was chucking it down. Had a laugh about it once he'd come back and found me.

But yes, sounds like the OP had a rough time and I wondered about (voice activated) two-way radios myself while I was on lessons. Very easy to make mistakes on roundabouts, particularly when there are service roads, ghost junctions etc that the instructor may or may not be classing as an exit.