Jeremy Howard v Registrar for Approved Driving Instructors

Introduction

1. This is an appeal against a decision of the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors (‘the Registrar’) made on 24 September 2025 to refuse to grant the Appellant a third trainee licence. Legal Framework

2. The grant of a trainee licence enables applicants to provide instruction for payment before they are qualified.

3. A trainee licence may be granted in the circumstances set out in s. 129 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (‘ the Act ’) and the Motor Cars (Driving Instruction) Regulations 2005.

4. A licence under section 129(1) of the Act is granted: ‘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.’

5. In order to qualify as an Approved Driving Instructor, applicants must pass the Qualifying Examination. This comprises: the written examination (‘Part 1’); the driving ability and fitness test (‘Part 2’); and the instructional ability and fitness test (‘Part 3’).

6. Three attempts are permitted at each part. The whole examination must be completed within 2 years of passing Part 1, failing which the whole examination has to be retaken.

7. If a candidate has passed Part 2, they may be granted a trainee licence. The grant of a trainee licence enables applicants to provide instruction for payment before they are qualified. It is possible to qualify as an Approved Driving Instructor without having held a trainee licence.

8. The powers of the Tribunal in determining this appeal are set out in s.131 of the Act . The Tribunal may make such order as it thinks fit.

9. 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. The burden of proof in satisfying the Tribunal that the Registrar’s decision was wrong rests with the Appellant. Factual Background to the Appeal The Appellant passed Part 1 of the Qualifying Examination on 22 February 2024. He passed Part 2 on 19 June 2024. The Driving Standards Agency (‘DSA’) cancelled the appellant’s first booked Part 3 test whicih was scheduled to take place on 13 March 2025. The appellant failed a first attempt at the Part 3 on 2 June 2025 and failed his second attempt on 10 November 2025. The appellant has one final attempt remaining. At the date the bundle was prepared, that final attempt was booked and scheduled to take place on 23 February 2026 although during oral submissions at the hearing, the appellant told me that this test had been cancelled again by the DSVA and rebooked for 11 May 2026. Since the test has been booked within the 2-year time frame permitted to pass all examinations, the test may go ahead and is not time barred.

10. The Appellant applied for a trainee licence which was granted and was valid from 26 August 2024 to 25 August 2025 following an application for a second licence.

11. The Appellant, applied for a third trainee licence on 7 August 2025 which was refused by the Registrar.

12. The reasons for the Registrar’s decision, in summary, were that no evidence of lost practice time had been provided by the Appellant and that the Appellant had already had a sufficient amount of time to gain experience to assist in passing Part 3 of the Qualifying Examination and that it was not the intention of Parliament that candidates should be issued with trainee licences for as long as it takes them to pass the examination, and that the trainee licence system must not be used as an alternative to registration as a fully qualified Approved Driving Instructor. Appeal to the Tribunal

13. The grounds of appeal are, in summary: a. The Appellant has had tests cancelled by the DSA which set him back. b. The Appellant lost training time as he had to travel to South Africa to care for a relative. c. The Appellant lost training time due to the vandalisation of his vehicle rendering it unusable for two weeks. d. The Appellant requires his licence to fund his training as he does not have further expendable income to cover the training costs.

14. The Registrar in his response states: a. The purpose of the provisions governing the issue of 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 and must not be allowed to become an alternative to the system of registration. b. The licence granted to applicants is not to enable the instructor to teach for however long it takes to pass the examinations, but to allow up to six months experience of instruction. This provides a very reasonable period in which to reach the qualifying standard in the examination and in particular, to obtain any necessary practical experience in tuition. The Appellant has already had two trainee licences which cover a period of 12 months. Moreover, by virtue of the Appellant having applied for a third licence before the expiry date of the second, that licence has remained in force to the present time and will allow him to continue to give paid instruction until determination of the appeal. c. Since passing his driving ability test the Appellant has failed the instructional ability test twice and one test was cancelled by the DSA for 13 March 2025. Despite ample time and opportunity, the Appellant has not been able to reach the required standard for qualification as an Approved Driving Instructor. d. The refusal of a third licence does not bar the Appellant from attempting the instructional ability test of the Register examinations. 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 further training. The Appellant could attend a training course, or study and practice with an Approved Driving Instructor or give tuition on his own (provided that he does not receive payment of any kind for this). These alternatives are used by some trainees who acquire registration without obtaining any licences at all. e. The Appellant had a final attempt at the Part 3 tests booked for 23 February 2026 (which I now understand to have been cancelled by the DSA). Evidence

15. I read and took account of a bundle of documents and the Appellant made oral submissions during the hearing. Those submissions mirror the grounds of appeal, however the Appellant also confirmed that he is financially tied to his leased instruction vehicle until his final attempt at the Part 3 test has been taken. He cannot end the lease before he has taken his final attempt, which has now been moved by DSA through no fault of his own. The Appellant confirmed that he requires the income from paid tuition to make the lease payments in relation to the vehicle. Discussion and Conclusions

16. I accept that the Appellant has been negatively affected due to the cancellation of tests by the DSA. I further accept that the DSA conduct has financial implications upon the Appellant in relation to his lease vehicle.

17. I also accept that the Appellant has lost training time due to the unfortunate event involving the vandalisation of his vehicle and his travel to care for a relative.

18. The Appellant has failed two Part 3 tests, however the DSA have also cancelled two Part 3 tests and this is beyond the appellant’s control. The cancellation of the test on 23 February 2026 has delayed the Appellant’s final attempt by a period of around 3 month months.

19. I note that the Appellant has already had the benefit of two trainee licence covering a period of 12 months. Moreover, by virtue of his application for a third licence prior to the expiry of his second licence, the Appellant has retained his trainee licence until the date of this decision and has been permitted to provide paid instruction during this time.

20. Having weighed all matters in the balance, I am persuaded that the Registrar’s decision was wrong in that the Registrar failed to give adequate regard to the Appellant’s circumstances which explained why he had not been able to gain the necessary skills and experience to pass his Part 3 test earlier. These are relevant factors which should have been taken into account by the Registrar. I also consider that the Registrar was wrong in not giving adequate regard to the conduct of the DSA in cancelling the Appellant’s tests, particularly so close to his test dates. By cancelling within a short period f time before the test, the Appellant is clearly set back, and the ‘test-ready’ position is delayed.

21. I am mindful that, because this appeal was lodged “in time,” the appellant has in effect already benefited from the continued validity of his licence pending the outcome of the Appeal. This has extended his licence by over the 6-month period requested by the Appellant. In practical terms, the appellant has already partly received the advantage he sought. I have also considered the points raised by the Registrar regarding the intended purpose of a trainee driving licence.

22. The cancellation of the Part 3 test booked for 23 February 2026 by the DSA has led me to consider that, in all of the circumstances, it is appropriate to extend the appellant’s trainee licence to 11 May 2026, at which point he will have hopefully passed the Part 3 test and if not, would not be permitted to hold a trainee licence in any event given that only three attempts of the Part 3 test are permitted.

23. Accordingly, I allow the appeal and direct that the Appellant’s trainee licence is extended until 11 May 2026.