scareneb the amount of bad parking you see from parents outside schools never ceases to amaze me, or the arrogance and attitude of the drivers.

that car has a rep of shit drivers, Literally everyone that drives that are brain dead

Yes and they'll always open a door on the road side, causing vehicles to stop...

I live next door to a primary school and I get so much abuse just for wanting to access my own driveway when some pillock has parked across it. Some of them do just move, some move and then move back over once I'm in (which is fine), some leave their cars altogether, and some just tell you to get fucked. Horrible people, some of them.

Selrahc 95...Make a formal complaint with the headteacher about being blocked in or being unable to gain access to your drive, at the grandson's school, there's several houses with drives, used to see near on fighting and it was mainly woman who start it.

What about people who have the windscreen wiper on as well?

Probably looking at their lap.

A typical brand-new car owner, evidently! Only a few weeks old at most, on an 18 plate.

always seems to be a middle aged women who have their wipers on and not an ounce of rain

if you look a bit harder, the car is brand new so the driver may not know where the control for the rear wiper is. Probably has put it on by accident, and doesn't want to deal with it until there's a safe place to pullover and sort it. My rule is, never speak before engaging my brain.

Charlotte Sinclair that's one of the signs of a good driver instructer.

When I had to do an emergency stop for a pedestrian my instructor wanted to get out to teach the pedestrian a lesson lol

Mark C Littler lol quite rightXD

Met182; may just be me, but WAS he beeping the student? Struck me he would have been more offended by the car two behind the student emerging indiscreetly; that forced him into a brake/swerve...

@@mikethecabbie8476 "the car two behind the student emerging indiscreetly" do you mean the taxi? the one that starts beeping at 3:04 ?

Beeping is to warn others of your presence. Any other use than that is illegal and therefore incorrect.

the roads are like an obstacle course these days...going to need a 4x4 at this rate

TheMrsar28 Yes that’s very true it’s not doing my or anyone else’s car any good as you can’t always avoid them or see them until it’s to late for that matter. Steve.

I wonder where all the tax money is going? Oh yeah on mass-immigration and welfare :L

Wouldn't work because if your confident handling the machine it's not difficult to be ''on your best behaviour'' for an hour or so. Give authority's more abilities to charge points, cut the point system from 12 to 8, when a licence is revoked no recourse and tests can only be taken again AFTER 3 years and minimum 20 hours further driving tuition.

U paying?

@@zukhrufhussain2271 motorists pay, driving is a privilege not a right. Only driving allows people to operate killing machines with no additional training and very little policing of operation, hence the 1.25million road deaths globally every year.

You're right that the word "beware" has negative connotations but it literally means "be aware". So any negative spin you put on that is your own fault.

@@BaldMancTwat Sorry to say you're a little wrong there. Beware implies danger, where be aware draws your attention to something. It's why the sign on my gate says Beware Dog, and not, Be aware dog. The latter would be replaced with, please close the gate, dog loose.

@@BaldMancTwat Let me get this straight, you agree with the guy, but then slag him off for it? Have a word with yourself...

@@kailani37 The dictionary definition of beware is be cautious and aware of dangers, so the other guy is right.

However his attitude and tone is all wrong

iluvgsds or be aware of road users.

Congratulations on passing. Now the real learning begins...

Wish me

I have my test tomorrow wish me luck

Congratulations Dave. I’m made up my videos helped. Thanks for watching, Ashley

But if the learner learns to deal with a-holes now, they'll be better drivers later, So I should be a jerk to learners right?

david wall Me too, and a lot of his advice is just as relevant across the pond.

That’s amazing guys! Many thanks, Ashley

to be fair I don't think the car was ever far enough in front of the cyclist to see them in the mirror Which brings up an interesting point. over here it is illegal for a cyclist to pass on the left of a car with its left-hand indicator on. but could you say that the cyclist was trying to pass the car?

@@SilverMe2004 I think in both of these cases, the motorists were behind the cyclists to begin with and with that in mind should have stayed behind the respective cyclist and turned behind them...instead of being impatient and left-hooking each cyclist. With that said, I also think that the cyclists didn't help their situations by cycling so close to the kerb; whereas had they been cycling further out they would not only have been seen sooner, they would also have had room to manoeuvre to escape from being almost crushed on the roadside.

Its always the cyclist fault isn't it never the car I think if you're doing your lesson you should have to ride a bike to understand how it works on the road and see what it's like for brain dead drivers who seems to think it's ok two left hook or try to kill on your bike. That Motorists is 100% in the world and if you can't see the cyclist you shouldn't be driving on the road.

"Things that are behind me don't exist" - That driver's motto. They overtook the cyclist seconds earlier. Braindead.

@@SilverMe2004 I've had it done to me - it so happened I was turning the same way last time, and I returned the favour by overtaking right, then hooking left into the bike lane! But they were stationary at a junction then. When you do it under moving conditions, you cut into the cyclist's stopping distance, then slow down for the turn. It's the equivalent of overtaking on the motorway, cutting in just in front of the person's bumper, then slamming your brakes on.

Please, are you new to this whole driving thing? It's always the cyclist's fault! Always! even 11:40 it's all because that dam cyclist!

Mikethecabbie When you're emerging you need to make sure it's clear both ways. Overtaker wouldn't have taken 100% blame. Despite being a numpty.

Please have a look in the description. Thanks for watching, Ashley

Ashley Neal thanks Ashley, I didn't spot the description. It gets hidden away on mobile. That's great quality for the price, think I'll order the ultra! Cheers mate.

Presumably they would have their hazards on...

@@joosiej85 They did...

Haha, if only that were true for parts of Liverpool! Not convinced anyone would care:P They should, but I don't think they would

ShitHappens 68 you can't just dig up a whole town to install grid system roads. Those town have been there a thousand years in some cases. Certainly most towns predate the founding of the US. That's no excuse for the state of those roads. Generally throughout Europe they tend to better, but the UK and Ireland are fairly rough off the main roads.

also what's the deal with you britbongs and your ex colonies driving on the wrong side of the road too?

Trooper ThatsAll Most of the incidents on the video are the car drivers faults. So rather than sticking up for the group of road users I’m most affiliated with, I highlight all poor road use. This in case you hadn’t noticed includes cyclists and drivers. Unfortunately this is a typical comment from a selfish road user. Me myself cycle a lot on the road and off it. Just remember to expect the unexpected from any road user rather than pointing the fingers at others. Thanks for watching and taking time to comment. Ashley

Also from a couple of weeks back. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/ptujadZ8yt3InKc.html

@@ashley_neal true, always keep and I eye on the unexpected. I am speaking as a seasoned cyclist, there are cyclists that use the road, young and old. The issue I have is that the cyclist title suggests wrong doing by the riders, but on both occasions I witnessed left hookers, drivers not anticipated the up coming dangers to the riders by the the drivers mistakes. At that point was a good example if you had students with you to explain the unexpected actions/distractions or carless operation from drivers. Not all cyclists are bloody minded and foolish, I will always try and promote cycling including good and will criticise bad behavior. In this case with your heading, it should have something other than the Cyclist! . Trooper

J Rider: *But cyclists are the menace right?* Some interesting info about that: *Question:* Cyclists cause havoc on the roads, don’t they? *Answer:* No, they don’t. Let’s get the dangers that cyclists pose to other road users in perspective ... •Although cycling is not as dangerous as many people think (see Q1), cyclists suffer more injuries per mile than people in cars. Moreover (and hardly surprisingly), cyclists are much more likely to be hurt in a collision with a motor vehicle than the driver or passenger. Contrary to popular belief, however, they are less likely to be at fault. * From 2012-2016, cycling accounted for only 1% of distance travelled,16 but cyclists represented 6% of reported fatalities and 14% of serious injuries * In 2016, out of the 14,668 collisions involving a car and cycle, no car occupant died. In contrast, 99.7% of the cyclists in these collisions were injured in some way, but only 1.3% of car occupants. Fifty cyclists were killed. * Cycles, along with buses/coaches, tend to be the vehicle-type least likely to have ‘contributory factors’ (CFs) attributed them by the police who attend collision scenes. *Question:* Cyclists are always cycling illegally on the pavement and harming pedestrians, aren’t they? *Answer:* No, they’re not. Cycling UK doesn’t condone illegal, dangerous or inconsiderate cycling, but it’s important to put this issue into perspective. Also, a good cure for problem behaviour is to understand why it happens and find a way of solving whatever proves to be causing it... •Motor vehicles are a much bigger threat to pedestrians than cycles, even in urban areas where they are most likely to mix. In fact, it is very rare for a cyclist to kill a pedestrian anywhere, in the road or away from it. From 2007 to 2016 (GB), in any location (i.e. road or footway, urban and rural): * Motor vehicles (i.e. car, motorbike, bus, van, HGV etc.) were involved in 99.4% of collisions in which a pedestrian died, and 98.5% of collisions in which a pedestrian was seriously injured; * Cycles were involved on average in about three pedestrian fatalities a year, and 82 reported serious injuries-or c.0.6% of pedestrian fatalities overall, and 1.5% of reported serious injuries. •Mile for mile, pedestrians are more likely to be killed by a motor vehicle than cycle. From 2012-2016(GB): * For every one billion vehicle miles ridden overall, cycles were involved in 1.4 pedestrian fatalities; * For every one billion miles they drove, cars were involved in 1.9 pedestrian fatalities; * Motor vehicles in total (i.e. car, motorbike, bus, van, HGV etc.) were involved in 2.4 pedestrian fatalities. •Very few pedestrians are hurt by cycles on the pavement/verge. From 2007-2016 (GB): * Cycles were involved in 0.4 pedestrian fatalities on the footway/verge on average a year, and about 19 serious pedestrian injuries. No pedestrians were hit and killed by a cycle on the footway/verge in 2007, 2009,2011-2013, in 2015 or 2016. (Note: it isn’t possible to tell from these figures who was at fault or whether the footway had been converted to ‘shared use’). www.cyclinguk.org/sites/default/files/document/2018/03/1803_cyclinguk_10-common-questions_rvv.pdf