Case Reference: FT/D/2026/0060
Transport
Heard by Cloud Video Platform
Before
JUDGE MATON
Between
DARREN BATES
Appellant
and
THE REGISTRAR OF APPROVED DRIVING INSTRUCTORS
Respondent
Representation:
The Appellant did not appear and was not represented.
The Respondent did not appear and was not represented.
Decision: The appeal is Dismissed.
REASONS
This is an appeal against the decision of the Registrar dated 7 January 2026 that the Appellant should not be granted a third trainee licence.
The Tribunal received and considered a bundle of documents.
On the morning of the hearing the Tribunal was unable to contact Appellant by telephone, and he did not attend at the time of the hearing.
The Registrar has notified the Tribunal that he does not propose routinely to attend appeals against refusals to grant trainee licences.
By rule 36 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009, a hearing can proceed in the absence of a party if the Tribunal is satisfied that the party had notice of the hearing and that it is in the interests of justice to proceed.
I am satisfied that these requirements were met in this case, and that this was a fair and just way to decide the Appeal.
Relevant law
The grant of a trainee licence enables applicants to provide driving instruction for payment before they are qualified.
A trainee licence may be granted in the circumstances set out in s129 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (“the Act”) and the Motor Cars (Driving Instruction) Regulations 2005.
In order to qualify for registration as an approved driving instructor, applicants must pass the Qualifying Examination. This comprises: a written examination (“Part 1”); a driving ability and fitness test (“Part 2”); and an instructional ability and fitness test (“Part 3”).
Three attempts are permitted at each part. The whole examination must be completed within two years of passing Part 1, failing which the whole examination has to be retaken.
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. Under s129(2) of the Act, the Registrar must grant a licence to an applicant who fulfils specified conditions, including that they have passed Parts 1 and 2. Under s129(3) the Registrar has discretion to refuse an application for a second or subsequent licence.
Under s129(6)(b), where a person applies for a new licence in substitution for a licence held by them and current at the date of the application, the previous licence will not expire if the Registrar decides to refuse the application, until the time limit for an appeal against the decision has expired and, if such an appeal is duly brought, it is finally disposed of.
The powers of the Tribunal in relation to appeals against decisions not to grant trainee licences are set out in s131 of the Act. When making a decision on any such appeal, 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.
Background
The Appellant was granted two consecutive trainee licences valid from 14 October 2024 to 13 October 2025.
The Appellant applied for a further trainee licence on 10 October 2025, and in an email dated 22 October 2025 the Registrar advised that he was considering refusing the application, and invited the Appellant to make representations regarding this. The Appellant made representations in an email dated 3 November 2025. The Registrar wrote to the Appellant by email dated 7 January 2026, refusing the application.
The Appellant appealed to the Tribunal.
The Appeal
The Appellant submits that:
the Registrar’s basing his decision partly on the Appellant using his licence as a source of income conflicts which the commercial realities of driving instruction;
the ability to charge for tuition is needed in order to cover the inevitable upfront and ongoing costs of training;
the Registrar’s decision does not take into account the Appellant’s training and development to date; and
he has experienced delays in booking Part 3 tests.
The Registrar submits that:
the Appellant provides no evidence of lost training time, and appears to be using his licence as a source of income;
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;
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; that 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; moreover, by virtue of the Appellant having applied for a third licence before the expiry date of the second, that licence remained in force and would allow him to continue to give paid instruction until determination of the Appeal;
since passing his driving ability test the Appellant had failed the instructional ability test twice; and that despite ample time and opportunity, the Appellant had not been able to reach the required standard for qualification as an approved driving instructor;
the refusal of a third licence does not bar the Appellant from attempting Part 3; 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; and that alternatives are available to acquire registration without obtaining a licence.
The Registrar noted at the time of filing his response to the appeal dated 28 April 2026 that the Appellant had a further Part 3 attempt booked for 8 June 2026.
Discussion
I accept the Appellant’s arguments that the charging of fees for driving instruction is an inherent part of the framework of the training process as currently structured. The receipt of income by trainee instructors is explicitly envisaged by the statutory scheme of training, and the Registrar has not explained either to the Appellant or to the Tribunal why this ought to be a reason in favour of refusing the Appellant’s application.
However, the role of the Tribunal is not to review how the Registrar made his decision, but to take a fresh decision standing in the shoes of the Registrar.
The purpose of trainee licenses is to help trainee instructors to prepare for the Part 3 test. The Appellant has had the benefit of two six-month licences and the statutory extension of his licence period during the course of this appeal. Although he has had difficulties booking tests, he does not provide any evidence of having been unable to use his licence period to prepare for the test.
The Appellant does not explain his submission that the Registrar’s decision does not take into account his training and development, or what relevance this might have to this appeal.
Conclusion and decision
Having considered the matters set out above, I find that, although the Appellant had difficulty securing attempts at the Part 3 test, and although I do not place any weight on the registrars references to the apparent receiving income during his license period, the grounds of appeal do not outweigh the Registrar’s reasons for refusing the Appellant a third trainee licence.
Accordingly, I am not persuaded that the Registrar’s decision was wrong, and I dismiss the Appeal.
Signed Date:
Judge Maton 1 June 2026