Taiyyab Qureshi v Registrar for Approved Driving Instructors

This is an appeal against a decision of the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors (‘the Registrar’), made on 5^th February 2025, to refuse to grant the Appellant a second/third trainee licence.

The Appellant appeared at the hearing. The Respondent did not appear and was not represented.

On 10^th July, the Respondent filed a certificate of compliance, acknowledging the hearing date of 11^th August 2025. I am therefore satisfied that the Respondent had notice of the hearing. This Tribunal has been notified that the Respondent has made a decision not to attend trainee license appeal hearings for the foreseeable future.

Rule 36 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009 allows the Tribunal to continue in the absence of a party if it is satisfied that the party has been notified of the hearing or that reasonable steps have been taken to notify the party, and it is in the interests of justice to do so.

I took account of the overriding objective and was satisfied that it was in the interests of justice to proceed.

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

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.

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.’

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’).

Three attempts are permitted at each part. The final Part 3 test, must be booked within 2 years of passing Part 1. If it is not passed, the whole Qualifying Examination has to be retaken.

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.

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.

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.

The Appellant had not previously been on the Register of Approved Driving Instructors.

The Appellant passed Part 1 of the Qualifying Examination on 13^th July 2023 and Part 2 on 14^th December 2023.

The Appellant was in receipt of a trainee licence which was valid from 15^th January 2024 to 14^th July 2025 and which was later extended by the Respondent until 14^th January 2025.

The Appellant failed his first attempt at the Part 3 test on 15^th July 2024.

On 6^th January 2025 the Appellant applied for a third trainee licence. This application was therefore made before the expiry of the second trainee license. His license is extended to the date of this decision by virtue of that application.

On 8^th January 2025 the Appellant was informed, by the Respondent, that he was considering refusing the application and invited to make representations.

The Appellant made representations to the Respondent on 8^th January 2025. He stated that he was training with the AA and had had 12 pupils pass and 3 fail. He was about to book a final test and wanted the opportunity to maintain his practice until then. He did not want to let his pupils down and was confident he would pass.

The application was refused on 5^th February 2025.

The reason for the Respondent’s decision, in summary, was that the Appellant had already been granted two six month licenses and had therefore had adequate time to gain sufficient experience to pass the Part 3 examination.

The Appellant failed his second attempt at the Part 3 test on 18^th June 2025.

A third and final attempt at the Part 3 test is booked for 15^th September 2025.

The Appellant filed an appeal against the decision of the Respondent on 26^th February 2025.

The grounds of appeal were, in summary, that he believed the test waiting time of three to four months to be unfair; he was at a disadvantage to other students who had been able to take their tests sooner and no tests were available within his second license period.

The Respondent, in his response, stated:

I read and took account of a bundle of documents.

I heard evidence from the Appellant, who told me that he had been very frustrated at the difficulty obtaining test dates. In essence, he had felt ready for the test on the last occasion but had not passed. He had been given feedback which was helpful but which he could not put into practice without being pupils and he did not have the means to train pupils unless he was employed as a driving instructor. He could not be employed as a driving instructor if he did not have a trainee license. He would not be able to provide training free of charge because he was paying for the hire of the car, the insurance and the fuel (£100-£120 per week) and the insurance in order to deliver training and it would be impossible to fund this without charging money. He was teaching six hours a day for four days a week and this is his sole source of income.

If the license was not extended the Appellant would have to pay a pupil to attend the test with him and hire a car for the day. He would not be able to practice between now and then because he could not afford to do so.

I may overturn the decision of the Respondent if I am of the opinion that it was wrong. The burden is on the Appellant to show this.

I accept the evidence of the Appellant with regard to the difficulties obtaining a test date. I accept his evidence that he would have difficulty practicing if his appeal was to be refused. Each failed test has helped him prepare for the next and the fact that there is a lengthy time between those is out of the hands of the Appellant.

The test on 15^th September 2025 is the Appellant’s third and final attempt, after which he will either pass and be registered or he will be ineligible for further attempts.

Given the fact that the Appellant is only weeks away from a final test opportunity and that has been delayed because of the limited availability of test slots, I am minded to allow the appeal to give him the best chance of passing.

I am also conscious that tests are sometimes cancelled at short notice.

I am persuaded that the Respondent’s decision was wrong and I allow the appeal accordingly. The trainee license shall be extended for three months from the date of this decision, to 11^th November 2025.