BAILII
British and Irish Legal Information Institute


Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information

[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber)


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) >> Plant v Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors [2025] UKFTT 793 (GRC) (30 June 2025)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKFTT/GRC/2025/793.html
Cite as: [2025] UKFTT 793 (GRC)

[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]

Neutral citation number: [2025] UKFTT 793 (GRC)

 

 Case Reference: FT/D/2025/0041

First-tier Tribunal

(General Regulatory Chamber)

Transport

 

Heard on the papers on 26th June 2025

Decision given on: 30 June 2025

Before

 

JUDGE ARMSTRONG-HOLMES

 

Between

 

MATTHEW PLANT

Appellant

and

 

REGISTRAR OF APPROVED DRIVING INSTRUCTORS

Respondent

 

Decision: The appeal is dismissed.

 

 

REASONS


Background and Chronology

 

1.      The Appellant appeals against the decision of the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors ("The Registrar"), dated 11th December 2024, refusing his application for a third trainee licence.

2.      The parties were agreeable to the determination of this appeal on the papers, that is to say, without an oral hearing. I am satisfied, pursuant to Rule 32(1)(b) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009, that I can properly determine the issues without a hearing.

 

3.      The Appellant had previously been granted two trainee licence, which were valid over the periods from 6th November 2023 to 5th November 2024. On 4th November 2024 he applied for a third trainee licence.

4.      On 14th November 2024, the Respondent notified the Appellant, by email, that consideration was being given to refusing his application. The Appellant was invited to make any written representations in response with 14 days of this notification, pursuant to section 129(8) Road Traffic Act 1988 ("the Act").

5.      The Appellant responded in writing on 18th November 2024, making written representations, which included: -

                                              i.            That since he started training in November 2023, he has only been able to take the Part 3 test twice, which he unfortunately failed due to the really long wait time to receive a test date.

                                           ii.             That he has been working as a PDI (Potential Driving Instructor) for this time and doing really well passing a lot of students, and that he wishes to be able to pass his Part 3.

                                         iii.            That his second attempt at the Part 3 was not long ago and he swiftly booked to hold another test date which he's only just been provided with for next year.

                                         iv.            That he is working hard with his trainer who he is paying well to get him to pass his Part 3, and he feels he should be able to have a chance to continue working and training to pass the Part 3.

6.      On 11th December 2024, the Respondent gave the Appellant notice under section 129(4) of the Act that he was refusing his application for a second trainee licence. The following reasons were given for this refusal:

                                              i.            That the Appellant has not provided any evidence of lost training time.

                                           ii.             That the Appellant had already been granted two trainee licences for 6 months each for the purpose of gaining sufficient experience to pass the final part (Part 3) of the Approved Driving Instructor qualifying examination, which is a more than adequate period of time within which to do this.

                                         iii.            That it was not Parliament's intention to that candidates should be issued licences for as long as it takes them to pass the examination, and the trainee licence system must not be allowed to become an alternative to registration as a fully qualified Approved Driving Instructor.

6.      The Appellant was informed in that notice that he may appeal this decision to this Tribunal within 14 days from the date of that notification.

 

7.      The Appellant's Notice of Appeal, dated 23rd December 2024, was received by the Tribunal on the same date. The reasons he provided were as follows:

 

                                              i.            That he has been working and training to become a qualified Approved Driving Instructor over the past year.

 

                                           ii.             That he has booked his Part 3 tests as soon as he could, and that due to the book to hold system he has only been able to complete 2 attempts.

                                         iii.            That he has a Part 3 booked for the beginning of January [2025], and he hopes to work and train in this time to give himself the best possible opportunity to pass.

 

                                         iv.            That because of the delays [in being able to book a Part 3 test], and the book to hold system he should be allowed to carry on working towards his goal.

 

                                            v.            That he has taken [his training] on full-time due to the amount of time needed to get qualified and he couldn't keep it alongside his previous job.

 

                                         vi.            That his current financial situation places reliance upon him passing his Part 3.

 

8.      In the response to the appeal, the Respondent refers to the lack of any evidence of lost training time or a lack of pupils. His reasons for refusing the application reiterate those reasons provided within the notice of 11th December 2024, but additionally include the following:

 

                                              i.            That the Appellant has already had the benefit of two trainee licences covering a period of 12 months.

 

                                           ii.             Since passing his Driving Ability Test (Part 2), the Appellant has failed the Instructional Ability Test (Part 3) twice, and has cancelled two tests booked for 26th July 2024 and 15th January 2025. Despite ample time and opportunity, the Appellant has not been able to reach the required standard for qualification as an Approved Driving Instructor.

 

                                         iii.            The refusal of a third trainee licence does not bar the Appellant from attempting the instructional ability test (Part 3) of the examinations. He does not need to hold a licence for that purpose, nor is it essential for him to give professional tuition under a licence in order to obtain further training. The Appellant could attend a training course, or study and practise with an Approved Driving Instructor, or give tuition on his own (provided that he does not receive payment of any kind for this). These are all alternatives used by some trainees who acquire the registration without obtaining any licences at all.

 

9.      Although not given as a reason for refusing the licence, the Respondent confirmed that the Appellant had not yet booked his final attempt at the Instructional Ability Test (Part 3).

 

Legal Framework

7.      The circumstances in which a person may be granted a trainee licence are detailed within Section 129 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 ("The Act"), and the Motor Cars (Driving Instruction) Regulations 2005 ("the Regulations"). The granting of a trainee licence permits applicants to provide instruction for payment before they are qualified and placed on the Register of Approved Driving Instructors. The granting of a trainee licence under section 129(1) of the Act is:

"for the purpose of enabling a person to acquire practical experience in giving instruction in driving motor cars with a view to undergoing such part of the examination...as consists of a practical test of ability and fitness to instruct."

8.      To qualify as an Approved Driving Instructor, applicants must pass the 'Qualifying Examination', comprised of three parts: the written examination ('Part 1'); the driving ability and fitness test ('Part 2'); and the instructional ability and fitness test ('Part 3').

9.      The whole qualifying examination must be completed within two years of passing the Part 1 examination, and whilst there is no restriction on the number of attempts a candidate may take the Part 1 qualifying examination, Parts 2 and 3 permit only three attempts at each. Should an applicant fail to comply with these requirements, the entire examination would need to be retaken (i.e. Parts, 1, 2 and 3). However, they would not be permitted to retake any part of the examination until 2 years after the date when they passed their Part 1 examination - see Regulation 3(3) of the Regulations.

10.  Upon passing Part 2, an applicant may be granted a trainee licence. The granting of a trainee licence permits applicants to provide driving instruction for payment before they are fully qualified and on the Register of Approved Driving Instructors (s.123(1) of the Act). It is possible to qualify as an Approved Driving Instructor without having held a trainee licence.

11.  Section 129(3) of the Act permits the Registrar to "refuse to grant a licence under this section to an applicant to whom such a licence has previously been issued". However, he must give written notice stating that he is considering the refusal of the application and give particulars of the grounds upon which he is considering this (s.129(7) of the Act). Once notice of this consideration has been given, section 129(8)(c) provides that:

"before deciding whether or not to refuse the application, the Registrar must take into consideration any such representations made within that period."

12.  The period referred to within that section is a period of 14 days from the date when notice was given by the Registrar (s.129(8)(a) of the Act), and the Registrar is not permitted to decide to refuse the application for the licence until after this period has come to an end (s.129(8)(b)).

13.  Section 129(6) provides as follows:

"Notwithstanding any provision of regulations made by virtue of subsection (5) above prescribing the period for which a licence is to be in force, where a person applies for a new licence in substitution for a licence held by him and current at the date of the application, the previous licence shall not expire–

(a)   until the commencement of the new licence, or

(b)   if the Registrar decides to refuse the application, until the time limited for an appeal under the following provisions of this Part of this Act against the decision has expired and, if such an appeal is duly brought, it is finally disposed of."

14.  The Appellant's right of appeal and the powers of the Tribunal to determine this appeal are set out within s.131 of the Act. The Tribunal may make such an order as it thinks fit.

15.  When making its decision, the Tribunal stands in the shoes of the Registrar and takes a fresh decision on the evidence available to it, giving appropriate weight to the Registrar's decision as the person tasked by Parliament with making such decisions.

16.  It is for the Appellant to show, on the balance of probabilities, that the Respondent's decision was wrong.


Discussion and Conclusions

17.  I have read and considered a 20-page bundle of documents, provided by the Respondent, which includes the Notice of Appeal and the written representations made by the Appellant to the Respondent at that earlier stage.

 

18.  The decision for this Tribunal to decide is whether the Respondent's decision to refuse the Appellant's application for a third trainee licence was wrong. In support of this contention, the Appellant has advanced a number of reasons, most of which relates to his financial need to become qualified and that he has been working hard to become fully qualified. He has additionally submitted that there have been delays in the booking process, that he booked his Part 3 tests as soon as he could, and that he has only been able to complete two tests because of the book to hold system.

 

19.  The period covered by his two trainee licences was originally from 6th November 2023 to 5th November 2024, though as a biproduct of this appeal, the period covered by his second licence runs until the disposal of the appeal. In terms of Part 3 tests booked within the period which ran until 5th November 2024, the Appellant did in fact manage to book four. Those were on 19th April 2024 (failed), 26th July 2024 (Appellant cancelled), 2nd August 2024 (cancelled through no fault of the Appellant), and 17th September 2004 (failed). Thereafter, the Appellant booked a Part 3 test for 15th January 2025, and he refers to this within his reasons for this appeal. However, this test was cancelled by the Appellant. Had he taken that test, then this appeal would serve no purpose, as only three attempts at the Part 3 test are permitted, and pass or fail, the Appellant would then either be placed on the register of Approved Driving Instructors, or alternatively, he would be required to begin the Qualification Examination afresh, albeit not before 6th September 2025, which is two years following the date he passed his Part 1 test).

 

20.  It is clear that the Respondent saw fit to grant the Appellant a second licence to provide him with further opportunity to obtain additional training, but as the Respondent points out, a single trainee licence is normally sufficient and is considered ample time within which to obtain sufficient training so as to pass the Part 3 test. The Appellant's contention that he has not had sufficient time, in the absence of any supporting evidence which shows a loss of training time or other good reasons, amounts to no more than a bald assertion, particularly when he had managed to book four tests within the period of his licence, though I accept that one of those dates was cancelled through no fault of his.

 

21.  In reaching my decision I have had regard to all of the reasons advanced by the Appellant for this appeal, and the submissions advanced by the Respondent. I remind myself that I must give appropriate weight to the decision of the Registrar, given that they were appointed to make such decisions by Parliament. I bear in mind that it was not Parliament's intention that candidates should be issued trainee licences for as long as it takes them to pass the examination, and I consider that is a powerful argument that the trainee licence system must not become an alternative to registration as an Approved Driving Instructor. For the Registrar to grant a second or third licence, in the absence of any compelling reason to do so, would, it seems to me, undermine the very purpose of the Qualifying Examination process, which is to ensure that prospective driving instructors are able to meet the competencies of fitness and ability within a reasonable timeframe. In the circumstances of this case, the Appellant has not provided any good or compelling reason for his application for a third licence to be granted, and I am not persuaded that the Respondent was wrong to refuse his application for a third trainee licence.

 

22.  The appeal is dismissed.  

 

Signed:                                                                                 Date:

Judge Armstrong-Holmes                                                 26th June 2025

About BAILII - FAQ - Copyright Policy - Disclaimers - Privacy Policy amended on 25/11/2010