Mark Howard v Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors
NCN: [2026] UKFTT 00594 (GRC)
Case Reference: FT/D/2025/1242
First-tier Tribunal
(General Regulatory Chamber)
Transport
Heard by Cloud Video Platform
Heard on: 15 April 2026
Decision given on: 17 April 2026
Before
JUDGE TAFT
Between
MARK HOWARD
Appellant
and
REGISTRAR OF APPROVED DRIVING INSTRUCTORS
Respondent
Representation:
For the Appellant: Did not attend
For the Respondent: Did not attend
Decision: The appeal is Allowed
Substituted Decision Notice: The Respondent must grant a third trainee licence to the Appellant. This licence will expire on 15 June 2026.
Mode of hearing:
I am satisfied that it was fair and just to conduct the hearing using Cloud Video Platform (CVP).The Tribunal clerk attempted to contact the Appellant at commencement of the hearing. The Respondent has indicated that it does not intend to appear at hearings of this nature for the foreseeable future. I considered Rule 36 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009 (as amended), noted that both parties were given notice of the hearing and determined that it was in the interests of justice to proceed.REASONS
Introduction
Mr Howard is a trainee driving instructor who was granted trainee licences under section 129 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (the “Act”), for two six-month periods. He was refused a third trainee licence by a decision of the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors (‘the Registrar’) made on 5 November 2025. Mr Howard now appeals that decision.
Legal Framework
In order to qualify as an Approved Driving Instructor, applicants must pass the ‘Qualifying Examination’ comprised of three parts: the written examination (‘Part 1’); the driving ability and fitness test (‘Part 2’); and the instructional ability and fitness test (‘Part 3’). The whole qualifying examination must be completed within two years of passing Part 1. Only three attempts are allowed for each Part. The whole examination must be retaken if an applicant fails Part 2 or Part 3 three times or does not pass both within the two years.
If a candidate has passed Part 2, they may be granted a licence under section 129(1) of the Act:
“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.”
This is commonly known as 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.
By section 129(3) of the Act
"The Registrar may refuse to grant a licence under this section to an applicant to whom such a licence has previously been issued."
By section 129(8)(c) of the Act
"before deciding whether or not to refuse the application, the Registrar must take into consideration any such representations made within that period."
By section 129(6) of the Act
"Notwithstanding any provision of regulations made by virtue of subsection (5) above prescribing the period for which a licence is to be in force, 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—
(a)until the commencement of the new licence, or
if the Registrar decides to refuse the application, until the time limited for an appeal under the following provisions of this Part of this Act against the decision has expired and, if such an appeal is duly brought, it is finally disposed of."
Section 131 of the Act gives a right of appeal to this Tribunal. The Tribunal may make such order as it thinks fit. In doing so, the Tribunal must consider whether the Registrar’s decision was wrong. The Tribunal makes a fresh decision on the evidence available to it but must give 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 Mr Howard.
The Decision
On 26 September 2025, the Registrar informed Mr Howard that he was considering refusing his application for a third trainee licence. Mr Howard made representations on 26 September that
during his first licence, he had repeatedly tried to find a Part 3 test in Worksop without success;
out of desperation, he booked at test in Chesterfield for 23 April 2025, which he failed; and
he then tried again to find a test in Worksop but was booked to hold on 11 July 2025 and as at the date of the email was still waiting for a test.
On 5 November 2025, the Registrar notified Mr Howard that it refused his application for a third trainee licence. The notice of refusal states the reasons for the refusal as:
Mr Howard had not provided any evidence of lost training time;
Mr Howard had already been granted two trainee licences of six months duration which is considered to be a more than adequate period of time.
It was not Parliament’s intention that the candidates should be issued licences for as long as it takes them to pass the examination and the trainee licence system must not be allowed to become an alternative to registration as a fully qualified Approved Driving Instructor.
The Appeal
Mr Howard’s notice of appeal relies on the following grounds as reasons for the appeal:
The ongoing lack of availability of Part 3 tests has not been taken into account;
Prior to his first attempt, he repeatedly tried to find a test in Worksop without success;
Out of desperation, he booked a test in Chesterfield for 23 April 2025, which he failed;
He then tried again to find a test in Worksop but was booked to hold on 11 July 2025;
On 4 November 2025, he was notified that he had a Part 3 test booked for 19 December 2025;
He then received notification that this was cancelled and rescheduled for 15 January 2026;
Being granted two licences of six months duration is not sufficient time to pass because of the lack of availability of tests; and
He has a limited number of pupils due to family commitments so has not had the equivalent training experience of a full-time trainee.
The Registrar’s statement of case dated 23 February 2026 resists the appeal. The Registrar states that:
Mr Howard has not provided any evidence of lost training time or lack of pupils;
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. 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. Mr Howard was given two trainee licences totalling twelve months. Moreover, by virtue of Mr Howard having applied for a third licence before the expiry date of the first, that licence has remained in force to the present time and will allow him to continue to give paid instruction until determination of the appeal.
Since passing his driving ability test, Mr Howard has failed the instructional ability test twice. Despite ample time and opportunity Mr Howard has not been able to reach the required standard for qualification as an Approved Driving Instructor.
The refusal of a third licence does not bar Mr Howard from attempting the instructional ability test of the Register examinations. 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. Mr Howard could attend a training course, or study and practice with an Approved Driving Instructor or give tuition on his own (provided that he does not receive payment of any kind for this). These alternatives are used by some trainees who acquire registration without obtaining any licences at all.
The evidence
I considered a bundle of evidence containing 24 pages, including Mr Howard’s full trainee licence history from the Registrar.
Findings of Fact
Mr Howard passed his Part 1 test on 8 April 2024 and Part 2 test on 11 July 2024. Mr Howard’s first trainee licence was granted on 30 September 2024 for a period of six months. During the period of that licence, Mr Howard could not obtain a test date in his home location of Worksop. He was granted a second trainee licence, which was due to expire on 29 September 2025. During that time, he took and failed his Part 3 test in Chesterfield on 23 April 2025. He then attempted again to book in Worksop but was placed on hold from 11 July 2025. He was not offered a date until 19 December 2025, outside the second licence period. That date was then cancelled and rescheduled for 15 January 2026. Mr Howard failed that second attempt. He has a third attempt booked for 17 April 2026.
Conclusions
I considered Mr Howard’s points of appeal.
The six-month period of trainee licences is set on the basis that this is considered to be an adequate period to prepare for the Part 3 Test. Mr Howard has already had the benefit of two trainee licences covering a period of twelve months.
A trainee licence must not become an alternative to qualification by passing the Part 3 test. However, the Registrar’s decision did not engage with the fact relied upon by Mr Howard – that delays in offering him a test date have prevented him from having three attempts at the test within the trainee licence period. This is not a case of an ADI cancelling tests but the DVSA failing to offer a date and then themselves cancelling a booked test. The six months’ duration of the trainee licence is only a reasonable period in which to pass the Part 3 test if a test date is available within a reasonable period of time after booking.
On the information available to the Registrar at the time of its decision in September 2025, the decision was wrong.
However, by applying for a third trainee licence Mr Howard has had the benefit of s.129(6)(b) of the Act extending the trainee licence until this appeal is disposed of. Had the third trainee licence been granted this would have expired before the consideration of this appeal. He has had the opportunity to sit a second test during that time, which he failed. His third test is arranged for 17 April 2026.
So whilst the decision not to grant a third licence in September 2025 was wrong, it would also be wrong to grant a further six months from today. I substitute a decision granting a third licence to expire in two months, to enable Mr Howard to prepare for his third attempt at the test, and to cover the possibility of that test being cancelled by DVSA.
SignedDate: 15 April 2026
Judge Taft