Red driving school car not taxed test refused - ** WON **

[batman1956]

My friend turned up for her practical driving test having been trained by Red Driving School only to have the examiner refuse to conduct the test as the car did not have a current "tax disc"

 

The instructor wrongly informed the pupil that the test would automatically be rebooked by the DSA this proved to be wrong as Red were the ones at fault.

 

 

We tried to get the test fee refunded by Red who have refused stating that the instructor is responsible however the instructor states that Red who she franchises to are responsible for taxing the car and a look at their website seems to confirm this.

 

In the meantime my friend cannot afford to rebook her test and is having to take further training (with a different driving school) to maintain her driving standard.

 

What can she do to get her test fee refunded?

Edited September 15, 2012 by citizenB
formatting

[BankFodder]

I think that she can do far better than just get her test fee refunded.

 

I think that there will be a value on the inconvenience, the extra time, the extra training - as well as the test fee.

 

I would attack both the instructor and the school together and let them sort it out between them.

I think that you should be looking to half of the cost of the extra lessons. How long is the delay to the next test?

[BankFodder]

I see that they have just announced that they are in partership with the RAC. I'm sure that this kind of story wouldn't please the RAC. I would also threaten them with a letter to the RAC as well as a resport to Trading Standards.

[batman1956]

The published waiting time at the test centre is 9 weeks. Red are hiding behind a franchise agreement to blame the instructor who now apparently no longer works for them. Their terms and conditions are quite vague and misleading regarding instances like this. Would CPUTR 2008 or The Sale of Goods and Services Act be of any help?

[BankFodder]

Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982.

 

Go for both of them. If you can't get the address of the instructor from them then sue them on their own for the moment.

You can make it clearto the judge that they have refused to disclose the instructor's details to you.

Don't forget to tell them who you are going to report it to.

 

Who did you pay the money to? I'm sure that you paid it to the school. They have a contractual responsibility to provide you with what you paid for. Whether or not the taxing of the vehicle is their responsibility, they have a legal duty to make sure that the contract was properly carried out.

[batman1956]

As I understand it she paid the instructor for lessons and the instructor then forwarded the money to Red. I assume that what would happen is that at the end of each week/month the instructor would have earned £xxxx. and then paid the franchise fee keeping the balance as "wages" Forgive me if I seem a bit thick but how can the instructor be at fault when Red lease the vehicle to them? Or would this be deemed a duty of care?

[BankFodder]

Pleasae follow the advice regarding the Supply of Goods and Services Act and suing Red.

 

There's not a lot more to be said.

[batman1956]

Ok I have composed a letter for her to send. Please would you comment and change/remove anything you feel is needed

Address line 1

Address line 2

Address line 3

Postcode

 

Dated

 

Dear Sirs,

With reference to the driving test which was due to take place at (name of test centre) on (date of test) This test did not go ahead as the vehicle was not displaying a vehicle excise duty disc. I am informed by the Driving Standards Agency that no test fee will be refunded or test rebooked without payment of the test fee.

With this in mind I would think the moral duty to pay for a new test lies with Red Driving School. Having spoken to the driving school and met with a refusal I have started to explore any legal grounds to get satisfaction.

The Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 cover such an event and as such I demand that Red Driving School with whom my contract exists reimburses my expenses.

It has been intimated by phone that the contract is in fact with your franchised instructor who I am informed no longer works at your company but as terms and conditions supplied by Red Driving School clearly state that they will always supply a roadworthy vehicle then they are ultimately responsible and it is they who should give a refund and, should they feel inclined, seek recompense from the instructor.

I would assert that the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 will protect our interests in the above scenario.

It is clear that no blame can be attached to the pupil for the failure of Red Driving School and/or its franchisee and I will have no hesitation in taking further action to gain recompense

 

WHAT I REQUIRE

 

Payment of the lost test fee no later than 14 days from the date of this letter.

 

Should you be of the opinion that Red Driving School are not responsible for this loss you should state clearly in writing again within 14 days from the date of this letter your reasons why you feel that this is the case.

 

Yours Sincerely

Edited September 15, 2012 by batman1956
remove identifying text

[BankFodder]

Dear Sirs

With reference to the driving test which was due to take place at (name of test centre) on (date of test) This test did not go ahead as the vehicle was not displaying a vehicle excise duty disc. I am informed by the Driving Standards Agency that no test fee will be refunded or test rebooked without payment of the test fee.

It is clear that you are contractually liable. Under the Supply of Goods and Services Act you have a duty carry out your services with reasonable care and skill and it is clear that you have not done so in this case.

I require that you refund me my test fee within 14 days and in addition you make a reasonable proposal as to compensation for the inconvenience and the additional costs I am having to incur in order to keep up my level of driving skill whilst wating for my next test.

I would point out that you have a legal duty to ensure that your school cars are properly taxed and insured. I note that you have recently partnered with the RAC and I am intending to complain to the RAC and also to Trading Standards if you do not settle this matter with me quickly and adequately.

 

If I do not receive a proper offer from you within 14 days, then I shall issue proceedings in the County Court and without further notice.

YF

 

Don't make this threat if you aren't prepared to go ahead.

[batman1956]

Many thanks

[Nimrod205]

Hi batman,

 

I am a Driving Instructor (not with Red) and may be able to help you understand the situation that exists between Red Driving School and its instructors. All of Red's instructors are "franchised", that is to say that they pay Red a fixed fee every week which includes the supply of pupils and a training vehicle which is taxed and insured. This franchise fee is payable whether or not the instructor has any paying pupils. Once someone has contacted Red to provide lessons, the pupil is passed to an instructor who then becomes responsible for the instruction required. Any disagreements or disputes need to be handled (initially) by the instructor concerned.

 

However, the vehicle itself is not owned by the instructor, it is only on loan and part of the franchise agreement. Red Driving School is responsible for making sure that it is fully taxed and insured and would have been sent a tax reminder by the DVLA in the month it was due to expire.

 

As a matter of interest, can you:

1. let me know the date on which the test was due to take place?

2. If you know whether a tax disc was visible on the windscreen or not?

 

I find it hard to believe (although anything is possible) that a driving instructor would present an untaxed vehicle for a driving test. It would seem to me that Red must take responsibility. Don't let them fob you off.

[batman1956]

Hi Nimrod. The test date was 4th September and as far as I know the expired tax disc (August) was still displayed on the vehicle presented for test.

[Nimrod205]

Hi batman, that is what I suspected.

 

I believe that the Examiner at the Driving Test Centre has made an error in that the tax disc on the instructor's car was, in fact, still valid. The following is a quote direct from the DVLA website but the bold typeface and colour have been added by me for clarity.

 

will be able to legally continue to drive their vehicles for up to 5 days while they wait for their new tax disc to arrive[/b]. This will only apply where the new tax disc has been applied for before the current one expires and motorists should continue to display the expired disc on their vehicle, until the new one arrives. This will be of great benefit to those motorists who have to leave buying their tax disc until the last day of the month, because they are waiting to be paid. They can now still do that, but also get the benefits of taxing online, by phone or by post.

 

I suggest you contact the Driving Standards Agency and complain. They should, at the very least, provide a new driving test free of charge.

 

Hope this helps.

Edited September 16, 2012 by Nimrod205

[batman1956]

Wow thanks Nimrod. I have informed my friend who will contact the DSA tomorrow. Will keep this thread updated.

[BankFodder]

it is still the responsibility of the school.

This is for them to do, not you

[batman1956]

I understand what you are saying BankFodder but the school is making no effort to help in any way. Meanwhile she is paying for lessons which she may not need. Perhaps a solution would be to contact the DSA and get a new test date (if they agree they are in the wrong) and also persue Red for the extra costs.

[Nimrod205]

Bankfodder, unfortunately Red Driving School played no part in the booking of the driving test. Knowing the Driving Standards Agency, they will not entertain anybody but the test candidate. If a complaint is to be made by anyone else, they will quote the Data Protection Act unless the complainant has given written permission for that person to act on their behalf.

[BankFodder]

Regardless of all of this, I the school are responsible under SGSA 1982. I wouldn't ease up on them. I would send them a letter and give them a rapid deadline for action and then sue.

 

I don't understand why you are in any doubt about it or why you prefer to pursue some faceless bureaucratic agency.

 

the school are liable and accessible and they are the target. Even though the examiner made a mistake, the instructor should have pointed out the rules to him/her - but of course, maybe the instructor didn't know about the rules either - in fact if the instructor - or the school have said nothing about this rule to you then the probability is that they dod not. Once they become aware of the rule I expect that they will try to cite it in order to support their argument as to why they should not be held liable.

Put it before the judge.

[batman1956]

Would that not induce a risk? The school would probably them try to imply that they knew the rule all along and would possibly be found not liable as technically the car was fit for purpose. I hear what you are both saying and thank you both for your input. All I can do is put both sides of the case to her and let her make a decision. What I do know is that when I booked a test for one of my children I was not allowed to make any change to that test without giving 2 "identifiers" so I assume rightly or wrongly that this would be the same in this scenario.

[BankFodder]

But your contract was not for the car. Your contract was for lessons use of the car, advice, support expertise - the whole lot.

You expected that all you would need to do was to be conscientious about your driving, turn up on time and take the test. You expected to have to know your highway code but not little convulted regulations - newly introduced about the display of tax disks.

 

That kind of thing was up to the instructor and up to the school.

 

Anyway, it is up to you. You seem to be prepared to accept minimum standards of customer service and I don't think that there is much else to say.

It is a relatively straightforward problem.

[batman1956]

The problem is that it took her several weeks to get the £62 test fee together and to take Red to court would cost again with the risk of losing. Neither her or me are happy with the service given but it is a catch 22 situation. The judges lottery could jeapordise her right to a refund because Red can afford legal representation and she cannot. I know your advice is well founded but in many ways justice in this country is for the rich. Whilst you are correct to say all the things that you do about the contract, the problem is that Red do have a loophole to climb through where it is more probable that the DSA don't.

[labrat]

yes but its NOT the DSA's responcability to check the tax is valid

 

they require a valid disc in the window it doesnt matter if they had renewed it as the driving examanier has no method of checking this

[batman1956]

The DSA have confirmed that no liability lies with them. Whilst the 5 day rule does exist there needs to be proof that the tax has been applied for and in this case there was no proof. Therefore as BankFodder says Red are at fault and so it is Red who must be bought to book.

[unclebulgaria67]

The CAG site team probably deleted the RED post, as they need a company log on, before they can post.

 

My understanding is that Red Driving School instructors are self employed and you need to deal with the individual instructor. They will be liable.

[batman1956]

While that is the case the franchise fee includes an element for the upkeep of the car and the franchise agreement clearly states this

 

http://www.reddrivingschool.com/become_an_instructor.aspx

 

So it would be a case of Red Driving School with who the contract was formed being liable as far as I understand it.