General Regulatory Chamber
Transport
Heard on: 27 February 2025 |
||
B e f o r e :
____________________
IMTIAZ AHMED |
Appellant |
|
- and - |
||
REGISTRAR OF APPROVED DRIVING INSTRUCTORS |
Respondent |
____________________
The Appellant: Attended in person.
The Respondent did not attend.
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
The Appeal
a. The Appellant had failed one part 3 test. He had booked a second test and this had been put "on hold" because there was no tests available locally.
b. When the Appellant initially obtained his licence, he had fewer pupils available to him. He therefore had to travel 30 minutes each way to other areas to teach pupils, which led to a loss of available training time.
c. Prior to obtaining his licence, the Appellant worked as an interpreter. He had some continuing commitments to fulfil during the first six months, but had now stopped his interpreting work and was concentrating more on his instructional training.
d. The Appellant had also worked for two days a week in a local community centre helping elderly people which further limited his available time for training.
e. The Appellant suffered from a medical issue which limited the extent of training he good undertake in one day. The Appellant was obtaining medical treatment and hoped this would improve his condition.
f. In all the circumstances, the Appellant believed he fell within the scope of the DVSA's guidance for when it would issue a second licence.
a. The Registrar had refused the application for a second trainee licence because the Appellant had failed to comply with the conditions of his first licence as the training objectives on his ADI 21AT training record were not completed within the first three months of his first licence. Separately, the medical evidence the Appellant had supplied did not evidence how much training time was lost.
b. The purpose of the provisions governing the issue of trainee licences is to afford applicants the opportunity of giving instruction to members of the public whilst endeavouring to achieve registration. The system of issuing licences is not an alternative to the system of registration.
c. The purpose of a trainee licence is not to enable the instructor to teach for however long it takes to pass the exams but to allow a confined period of experience of instruction. Six months is ordinarily a very reasonable period in which to reach the necessary standard and in particular to obtain any necessary practical experience in tuition. The Appellant has already had a trainee licence, and by virtue of his appeal in respect of his latest application, his first licence has remained in force, which allows him to continue to give paid instruction until determination of the appeal.
d. The refusal of a second licence does not bar the Appellant from attempting the instructional ability test. He does not need to hold a licence for that purpose, nor is it essential for him to give professional tuition under licence in order to obtain training.
The law
The evidence
Discussion and Conclusion
Signed: Judge Scherbel-Ball
Date: 4 March 2025