Advanced Driving Hub

I cited the wikipedia page not because I believed it to be accurate, but as evidence that the author(s) shared my own perception, that a Police advanced driving career is perhaps the mist convincing qualification for an examiner. And until fairly recently my perception was that nearly all IAM examiners had indeed that background.

Quite apart from wikipedia, how about...
https://iamsoutheasterngroup.org.uk/wha ... /iam-test/
"The Test is conducted by examiners employed by the IAM all of whom have reached Police advanced level, as well as having considerable additional driving experience."
or
https://iam-cornwall.org.uk/advanced-dr ... ssessment/
"The IAM Assessment is carried out by an IAM RoadSmart Examiner and so is independent of the Cornwall Group and conducted by a serving or retired Police Traffic Officer. "

I'm finding these links just be google search. Which is not scientific as my searches are obviously biased, and you can 'prove' pretty much anything by a biased Google search. But I do think these examples show that it's not just me and wikipedia that hold, or encourage, such a perception.

In days gone by I'd have suggested taking part in a driving day, but for a while they've been few and far between. There's comfort in meeting up with a group, rather than a seemingly random unknown person, and pairing off for short drives, but there's a thread in which a handful of forum participants offered to meet up with others who wanted to practice and maybe get some thoughts from another. There's also the list of all forum participants, and maybe some relatively frequent posters might be interested in meeting for two-way feedback, although I'd avoid any who're rank, for obvious reasons.

Folks, thanks for all suggestions. I’m aware of all the other options, some less formal than others, but my gut feeling is that what I’d really like is a formal retest.

I’m thinking now that maybe the RoSPA concept as suggested earlier in thread and which actually mandates retests, might be more up my street?

On the topic of examiner qualifications…
https://www.rospa.com/shop/products/adv ... iding-test
“ The test lasts around 60 minutes, and is taken with a RoSPA Examiner, all of whom are serving or retired Police Officers, within the UK. ”

Repeat, I am absolutely not suggesting that IAM’s own examiners, appointed from own members, are in any way substandard.

The simple fact is ex-plods are becoming rarer, more so on the 2 wheeled side.

Fellowship IAM membership has 3 year re-testing, just the same as ROSPA.

Unless you particularly want to gain a f1rst, talk to your local group who I am sure would be happy to take you out on assessment, probably for the cost of a cuppa and a slice of cake, and advise you on a path forward.

GTR1400MAN wrote:The simple fact is ex-plods are becoming rarer, more so on the 2 wheeled side.

I suppose that does make sense, as a logical consequence of obvious cutbacks on traffic police numbers. Not only are there going to be less fewer officers available to help even if they wanted to, but a few years later ( as in ‘now’ ) the pool of retired officers will shrink too.

What would be the future equivalent? Perhaps, once all vehicles are fully autonomous, advanced driver assessment by a retired enforcement camera? I can’t see that working too well.

Another Bill wrote:

GTR1400MAN wrote:The simple fact is ex-plods are becoming rarer, more so on the 2 wheeled side.

I suppose that does make sense, as a logical consequence of obvious cutbacks on traffic police numbers. Not only are there going to be less fewer officers available to help even if they wanted to, but a few years later ( as in ‘now’ ) the pool of retired officers will shrink too.

What would be the future equivalent? Perhaps, once all vehicles are fully autonomous, advanced driver assessment by a retired enforcement camera? I can’t see that working too well.

It's not a new phenomenon, been happening for years. IAM had non-police (albeit still holding a police-delivered riding qualification) examiners in about 2006.

But it actually started much further back, possibly to the 80s, when the ban ended on police having second jobs. Many had already been unofficially involved with rider training (albeit with senior agreement).

Then the laws around rider training changed, effectively killing off the volunteer sector. This aligned with a dramatic increase in police officers providing advanced instruction, further reducing the pool of potential examiners.

But there's an elephant on the road

Should there be a 'disconnect' between training and testing? It does confuse and concern me when I hear tales of riders going through observed runs, cross-checks, but then fail - and list of things that were apparently different to what they'd been taught.

Now, combining this history and concern, one of H's war stories

When (1989) we introduced the Blue Riband award, we knew that most traffic officers who would be interested in being examiners were mostly already signed up by IAM or RoSPA. So we took the decision that any instructor could also examine. They would be training and examining against the same standards. Several training centres formed 'syndicates' for delivering training and instructor training, helping to ensure consistent standards. This was helped by involving external assessors, often police riders. These may also have been instructors with other organisations or, in some cases, IAM examiners.

So, long way around to say that I agree with John 'Police' isn't the ultimate and only option for examiners.

My extremely limited experience of non police IAM examiners locally suggests that they may well be less expert than the police ones. As has been implied by others above, there are a number of us here who have even more training, experience, and dare I say relevant expertise than the police examiners, some of whom would be happy to go out with you for a mug of coffee if the stamp of an official test was not important to you. If that was of interest (and you have not already done so) you should tell us where you live.

Not that I would in any way discourage you from moving forward with either IAM or Rospa (I continue to belong to both).

waremark wrote:Not that I would in any way discourage you from moving forward with either IAM or Rospa (I continue to belong to both).

And rest assured if I do decide to go with RoSPA for a retest, I will continue to maintain IAM membership too. I’ll always feel a debt of gratitude to IAM for fulfilling my bucket list ambition of advanced driving test. I still marvel at the value for money of initial course and test, considering all the many hours spent with my excellent observer. I shudder to think how much a 17 year old new driver would have paid for all these hours with a commercial driving school, preparing for basic driving test. The least I can do in return is to keep paying a few £ every year in appreciation.

The harder bit is, when I talk to newly qualified young drivers who’ve spent a small fortune getting their licence, I now start harping on, why not a few £ more on IAM? A great time to do it, I say. But so far, without exception, has fallen on deaf ears.

Another Bill wrote:I’m thinking now that maybe the RoSPA concept as suggested earlier in thread and which actually mandates retests, might be more up my street?

If you take up the optional Fellow's membership with the IAM you'll get a re-test every three years. I did one last year and it was exactly the same format as the original test (with the same ex-police examiner).

waremark wrote:My extremely limited experience of non police IAM examiners locally suggests that they may well be less expert than the police

On that subject, we're very lucky in Bristol that our three local examiners include two ex-police instructors and one current traffic officer.