So I took a drive test the other day and failed it. This was for my G2 license (Ontario, Canada) which is one step above a learners permit, one step below a full license.
I made a right turn on a red light. I came to a complete stop - not a rolling one. I checked traffic coming from the left, there were no cars anywhere near me. The instructor told me that I have to wait 3 full seconds at a red before making the right turn. I checked the Ontario Highway Traffic act, it says nothing about 3 seconds. At the end of the test she told me that I had a few minor errors which were acceptable, but that the red light violation is an automatic fail.
Is there anything I can practically do about this? Receiving a pass would be very nice, but I’m guessing they wouldn’t do that. Can I get a refund on my test fee, or get the next one for free? Can I get this employee drawn and quartered? The really painful part is that I passed the test years ago, but the license expired. I suppose all my experience has made me a worse driver.
The law in question:
“Exception – turn
(19) Despite subsection (18) and subject to subsection (14), a driver, after stopping his or her vehicle and yielding the right of way to traffic lawfully approaching so closely that to proceed would constitute an immediate hazard, may,
(a) turn to the right; or
(b) turn to the left from a one-way street into a one-way street,
without a green indication being shown. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 144 (19).”
You are right that the Act does not specify a three-second stop. There is no legal requirement that you stop for any specific length of time, only that you come to a full stop.
You can make a complaint, but unfortunately, I doubt anything would come of it. Try: CustomerComments @ drivetest.ca; or (Toll Free) 1-800-489-8450; Fax: 416-225-7313; Corporate Assurance Department, Serco DES Inc., 5000 Yonge Street
Suite 1402, North York, ON M2N 7E9
This bullshit goes on all the time all over the place. I’d suggest writing a nice calm denunciation of the bitch and then waiting until you pass your test and get your license and handing out the denunciation to everyone at the local equivalent of the DMV and in her home neighborhood until you get tired of it. Even if it takes 20 years.
You would need to test what is the standard to which you are being tested. It is unlikely to be “drives without actually breaking the law”; it’s more likely to be something like “drives safely and with competence”.
Someone at some point may have decided that the purpose in stopping is not to comply with the provision you quote, but to enable the driver to check for traffic coming from other directions, make an assessment and take a decision about whether it is safe to proceed, and that all of this must take some measurable time, and that this is about three seconds. This may form part of the examiner’s riding instructions regardign the application of the test.
You make not like this assessment of what amounts to “safe and competent driving” (or whatever the standard laid down by the law providing for the driving test is) but you can’t get it set aside simply by pointing out that the law does not require you to stop for three seconds in this situation. The law doesn’t require you to parallel park, or to complete variious other manouvres either, but in most places you will fail your test if you don’t do these things.
This isn’t about safe and competent driving. A traffic law violation is an automatic fail. I didn’t violate the traffic law. There are plenty of other little boxes that she could have checked off to indicate that I wasn’t being safe or observant during that particular maneuver. Instead she just quoted some BS law she heard from god knows where.
I’m not too angry with her, I don’t really care if she gets reprimanded or not. But I’ve heard these people have to fail a certain number of drivers and if that’s the case then I’m pissed. I don’t suppose any former DMV employees want to confirm that rumor?
I think I’ll call them tomorrow and see what they say. A refund would be nice, but I want to hear them admit that it was wrong.
Hmm. If she specifically says that you failed for a violation of the Rules of the Road, I don’t see a violation.
I see from further browsing that the application of the driving test in Ontario has been privatised. It’s not done by the MoT, but by some outfit called DriveTest. Could be that DriveTest is trying to act tough to show that they are maintaining standards. Or could be the DriveTest is trying to cut costs by not training examiners to the point where they actually know what the Rules require, and what constitutes a violation.
Either way, there might be some satisfaction to be got from complaining to the MoT. This is unlikely to help with your immediate problem, but in the tendering process there must be some provision for review of the quality of service provided by DriveTest, and if yours is not the only complaint that the MoT receives, this will harm DriveTest. Revenge, if not redress.
It’s worth noting that I see plenty of drivers with years of experience turn right through red lights without really stopping, and they’d all be sure they really stopped if someone asked them. As a new driver it’s possible your assessment of the stop differs from the instructor’s because of inexperience.
That doesn’t explain the “three seconds” claim, of course, and I’m not addressing that issue.
My general mental rule is there should be an instant in a “full stop” when a Denver boot could be bolted onto your car and nothing bad would happen…because you’re actually stopped, no momentum, no wheel movement. The imaginary boot doesn’t have to be on there for long, just an instant really; but you should be stopped cold (and assessing traffic while so stopped).
I see numbers of people every time I drive, perhaps the majority, who would never meet this condition, because they’re really not actually-by-God-stopping when they think they are.
Of course I wasn’t there. You could be completely correct in your assessment of your actions. I don’t mean to impugn you specifically; just to note that failure to actually stop in circumstances equivalent to yours is widespread among people who (presumably) think they would pass a driving test.
Assuming it is documented as to that’s why you failed.
Ask the DMV for the documentation that you are expected to perform at a level beyond the law. Include a copy of the staute.
Explain to the DMV that the tester did not make you aware of policy and procedure re: waiting time at red light/stop signs before the test. SInce there is no law regarding wait time (see #1), you could not reasonably know what was required to pass the test.
Explain that the test did not use any device to measure the time at the stop, hence she cannot definitively state that you did NOT wait 3 seconds.
IMHO: the tester was working on a prior law or urban legend.
the tester was most likely ignorant, (or maybe she just didnt like you)
there was a tester for awhile up here in Seattle that was failing drivers for not stopping twice at a stop sign…yeah the old double stop rule.
that didnt last long with all the complaints it was generating…so generate a complaint
Or it could be that it’s a standard directive to testers by the company management to fail a certain number of people regardless of how they actually did so they’ll have to pay the fee at least twice, for purposes of revenue improvement.
It seems unlikely this would be so. It would be like hiring the company that does road repairs to report on which roads are in need of repair - what the insurance industry would call a “moral hazard”.
Well I called the drivetest hot line and left a message of my complaint. They say they try to respond within a day so we’ll see how that goes. If I don’t get satisfaction, I’m calling the Ministry of Transportation on their asses. I usually never complain about stuff like this, but this time I’m really feeling it. I think I’ve got a good case.
Nitpick ( sorry for off-top ) how is it a “moral hazard”
not according to this
You probably meant “conflict of interests”.
Anyway why would be this “unlikely” it happens all the time.
The best example would be British MOT (compulsory annual vehicle test)
where private companies administering the test are also private repair garages.
But among the many definitions for “moral hazard” are such things as: “The risk that the existence of a contract will change the behavior of one or both parties to the contract” which is along the lines of what I intended.