Peter Radford v The Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors

1. This appeal concerns a decision of the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors (“the Registrar”) made on 08 October 2025 to refuse to grant the Appellant a second trainee licence.

2. The Appellant is a trainee driving instructor who was granted a licence under s.129 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (“ the Act ”). This licence ran for a period of six months between 03 March 2025 and 02 September 2025.

3. Within their appeal form GRC1, the Appellant requested this appeal be decided without a hearing. The Respondent did not request an oral hearing. The Tribunal has the benefit of the Appellant’s reasons for appeal, submissions to the Respondent and the Respondent’s response. Having reviewed the same I do not consider that further information is required from either party in order to make an informed decision. I am therefore satisfied that I can properly determine the issues without a hearing in accordance with Rule 32(1)(b) of The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009. The Legal Framework

4. The grant of a trainee licence enables applicants to provide instruction for payment before they are qualified. The circumstances in which a licence can be granted are set out in section 129 of the Act , and the Motor Cars (Driving Instruction) Regulations 2005.

5. In order to qualify as an Approved Driving Instructor, applicants pass the Qualifying Examination. This is made up of: the written examination (Part 1); the driving ability and fitness test (Part 2); and the instructional ability and fitness test (Part 3). Three attempts are permitted at each Part. The Part 2 and Part 3 tests must be successfully completed within two years of passing Part 1 (unless the Part 3 test is booked before expiration of the two years) failing which the whole Qualifying Examination must be retaken.

6. 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" . The purpose of the provisions governing the issue of licences is to afford applicants the opportunity of giving instruction to members of the public in order to achieve registration. The system of issuing licences is not and must not be allowed to become an alternative to the system of registration.

7. As applicant may be granted a trainee licence if they have passed Part 2 of the Qualifying examination. However, holding a trainee licence is not necessary in order to take the Part 3 test of qualify as an Approved Driving Instructor.

8. Pursuant to section 129(6) of the Act , “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 […] if the Registrar decides to refuse the application, until the time limited for an appeal under the following provisions of this Part of . the Act against the decision has expired and, if such an appeal is duly brought, it is finally disposed of”

9. The powers of the Tribunal in determining this appeal are set out in section 131 of the Act . The Tribunal may make such order as it thinks fit ( section 131(3) ). 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 as wrong rests with the Appellant. Chronology

10. The Appellant passed Part 1 of the Qualifying Examination on 04 June 2024. The Appellant passed Part 2 of the Qualifying Examination on 15 October 2024. The Appellant applied for a trainee licence which was granted on 03 March 2025 and valid from that date to 02 September 2025.

11. On 17 August 2025, the Appellant applied for a second trainee licence. As the Appellant applied before the first licence expired, this means that at the date of this consideration the Appellant has been the beneficiary of a trainee licence for just over one year.

12. The Appellant has not yet taken the Part 3 test and it is understood that the Appellant has not attempted to book a date for the Part 3 test. Evidence

13. I have considered a bundle of evidence containing an Index and 21 numbered pages, this includes the Appellant’s test history from the Registrar. Whilst it is my intention to refer only to the relevant facts and evidence necessary to explain my decision, the Parties can nevertheless be assured I have considered the hearing bundle in its entirety.

14. The Appellant submits they have been unable to undertake training or take the Part 3 test due to working 80 to 90 hours per week. They are seeking to appeal the Registrar’s decision as demonstrating they have taken this step is a requirement of their franchise agreement. In their submissions to the Registrar on 28 August 2025, prior to the date of the decision, they submit they have been experiencing anxiety and fatigue which has affected their ability to undertake training and they do not consider it is safe, for themselves or students to continue in their training.

15. The Respondent submits that the reasons for the refusal are that 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 to obtain any necessary practical experience in tuition. Further the Appellant has failed to comply with the conditions of their first licence as they have not provided evidence of completion of mandatory additional training having failed to return their training record form ADI 21AT. Conclusions

16. It is not the case that applicants are entitled to continual renewal of trainee licences until they pass their Part 3 test. The six-month period of trainee licences is set on the basis that this provides an adequate period to prepare.

17. The refusal of a second trainee licence does not bar the Appellant from attempting the Part 3 test of the qualifying examination however having regard to the Appellant’s submissions I note it does not appear to be the Appellant’s intention to do so.

18. I accept and am sympathetic to the Appellant’s submissions regarding the difficult circumstances they have experienced with their health during their period of training. However, the Appellant does not appear to dispute the Registrars decision in substance and the main thrust of their submissions both to the Tribunal and the Registrar is that they are required by the terms of their franchise agreement to appeal the decision of the Registrar. The Appellant, it would seem, does not intend to continue their training towards registrations at this time. The terms of the Appellant’s agreement with AA are not a matter for this tribunal. I have concluded that the specific circumstances raised by the Appellant do not demonstrate evidence of exceptional personal circumstances.

19. For completeness, the Appellant has not challenged the assertion that, by failing to evidence completion of mandatory additional training, they have failed to comply with a condition of their first trainee licence. The Appellant has neither asserted nor provided evidence to show that they complied with that condition and accepts in their submissions that their circumstances have prevent them being able to compete any training within a 3 to 4 month period. Although I acknowledge the difficult circumstances in which this arose, I am satisfied the Appellant breached this condition of his first trainee licence.

20. Therefore, I am not persuaded the Registrar’s decision was wrong. This appeal is therefore dismissed and the Respondent decision of 08 October 2025 is upheld.