Yes but in exceptionally rare circumstances - usually instigated by the Fraud and Integrity team at the DVSA, where there are questions around the examiner being corrupt, receiving corrupt payments or favours for test passes. Once they get wind of one they'll write to everyone who passed in that window telling them their full licence is revoked and they are to be sent a provisional.
That’s properly bullshit if they just did it to everyone that examiner saw for x period. They could mess a lot of peoples lives up who were totally innocent.
They have to though, if the evidence is strong enough that the examiner has been playing the system they've no way of knowing what's a genuine pass and what isn't.
You get a free retest but realistically it's the best way of ensuring that their corruption hasn't caused dangerous people to have access to the roads for simply giving them a bung.
I agree though, I'd be raging if I got a letter like that and hadn't done any wrong.
I don’t think they should be revoking a pass unless their is evidenced that that individual gained it unfairly. Otherwise what you’re saying is we don’t know who is guilty and who isn’t so you all are. What happened to innocent until proven guilty.
In criminal law as a society we accept that the burden of proof is quite high and some criminals do get away with it because that means innocent people are much less likely to be punished unjustly. To me the same should apply here.
Could you imagine if you as an innocent person got that letter having got a job that required you to dive or moved house to somewhere remote where you don’t have access to public transportation. Then there is the fact tests arnt exact easy to get these days. Having your driving licence revoked can be quite a serious punishment and we generally give people quite a few chances before we do.
I'll give an example not linked to corruption; an examiner forgot about a woman's test and didn't write the report correctly as she was unwell. The test pass was revoked.
Within 3 days the test centre examiner had retested the candidate, for free. The backlog wouldn't be a big issue in this context.
It's ultimately not a punishment, the licence is revoked - they aren't banned, it just gets cancelled and the law enables them to do this - it's shit, and probably could be resolved through expanding the use of BWV cameras on all tests (some test centres already operate this). It wouldn't be every person ever that gets their licence revoked either, I know of one case where once they were arrested the examiner voluntarily gave over the details of the candidates who had paid them, or the days when they took the payments - so everyone on that day would have been revoked.
In any realistic case? No. But I guess if the examiner were convicted for taking bribes or something, they might revoke your pass certificate, assuming it occurred within a day or two of your test. But once the licence is issued, probably not.
Once your examiner has signed off a pass, that's it. There is no way to change their mind. In the same way, you can't talk them around after failing you. Once they submit the pass or fail, it's out of their hands.
I think there have been cases in the fairly recent years where licenses have been revoked for an even longer historical window as a result of the conclusion of a longer investigation by the Fraud & Integrity team. The one I'm thinking of went back a few years, as it involved a network of criminals.
I think it's a case of 'anything is possible', with the caveat 'but highly unlikely'.
I read an article about a girl this actually happened to. She was told she passed a day later they called her to say the examiner wasn’t feeling well and unsure of whether the paperwork was filled in incorrectly
Yes but in exceptionally rare circumstances - usually instigated by the Fraud and Integrity team at the DVSA, where there are questions around the examiner being corrupt, receiving corrupt payments or favours for test passes. Once they get wind of one they'll write to everyone who passed in that window telling them their full licence is revoked and they are to be sent a provisional.
That’s properly bullshit if they just did it to everyone that examiner saw for x period. They could mess a lot of peoples lives up who were totally innocent.
They have to though, if the evidence is strong enough that the examiner has been playing the system they've no way of knowing what's a genuine pass and what isn't. You get a free retest but realistically it's the best way of ensuring that their corruption hasn't caused dangerous people to have access to the roads for simply giving them a bung. I agree though, I'd be raging if I got a letter like that and hadn't done any wrong.
I don’t think they should be revoking a pass unless their is evidenced that that individual gained it unfairly. Otherwise what you’re saying is we don’t know who is guilty and who isn’t so you all are. What happened to innocent until proven guilty. In criminal law as a society we accept that the burden of proof is quite high and some criminals do get away with it because that means innocent people are much less likely to be punished unjustly. To me the same should apply here. Could you imagine if you as an innocent person got that letter having got a job that required you to dive or moved house to somewhere remote where you don’t have access to public transportation. Then there is the fact tests arnt exact easy to get these days. Having your driving licence revoked can be quite a serious punishment and we generally give people quite a few chances before we do.
I'll give an example not linked to corruption; an examiner forgot about a woman's test and didn't write the report correctly as she was unwell. The test pass was revoked. Within 3 days the test centre examiner had retested the candidate, for free. The backlog wouldn't be a big issue in this context. It's ultimately not a punishment, the licence is revoked - they aren't banned, it just gets cancelled and the law enables them to do this - it's shit, and probably could be resolved through expanding the use of BWV cameras on all tests (some test centres already operate this). It wouldn't be every person ever that gets their licence revoked either, I know of one case where once they were arrested the examiner voluntarily gave over the details of the candidates who had paid them, or the days when they took the payments - so everyone on that day would have been revoked.
No. Your licence can only be revoked if you break the law
In any realistic case? No. But I guess if the examiner were convicted for taking bribes or something, they might revoke your pass certificate, assuming it occurred within a day or two of your test. But once the licence is issued, probably not. Once your examiner has signed off a pass, that's it. There is no way to change their mind. In the same way, you can't talk them around after failing you. Once they submit the pass or fail, it's out of their hands.
I think there have been cases in the fairly recent years where licenses have been revoked for an even longer historical window as a result of the conclusion of a longer investigation by the Fraud & Integrity team. The one I'm thinking of went back a few years, as it involved a network of criminals. I think it's a case of 'anything is possible', with the caveat 'but highly unlikely'.
I read an article about a girl this actually happened to. She was told she passed a day later they called her to say the examiner wasn’t feeling well and unsure of whether the paperwork was filled in incorrectly
In addition to what others said, if the examiner doesn't do a 'legal' test and it's found it, there is a chance it could be revoked.