[RedAlert]

Just seen this message on:

http://www.ukadi.co.uk/2008/06/becoming-driving-instructor-dont-do-it.html

In response to someone who wanted his money back from Red driving school which might be of interest to others.

"ITV Tonight programme showed the lies Red driving school/The instructor College/LVG ltd use to get the unspecting public to part with £3,500+ Look at the ITV Tonight website and watch last nights show (i.e. 27th March)

Lie 1. You can expect to earn £600 per week.
Lie 2. The job is recession proof.
Lie 3. There is a national shortage of driving instructors in the UK.
Lie 4. It is usual to qualify within 20 weeks.

Take your pick any or all of the above if you have any liturature from them or copies of there webpages etc with these lies on them or you are confident you remember the sales person stating such lies you have good grounds for misrepresentation and a full refund if you would not have gone ahead if you knew these to be lies in the first place. In other words you relied on these false representations such tthat they become part of the contract in UK law."

[RotHeissPfefferStreber]

Seeing as you are going to SPAM the forums over this, here is my post to your ill-informed garbage from the main topic:

RedAlert, once again you're talking absolute garbage as a result of your blinkered bias.

As I pointed out earlier in this thread, I turned over well in excess of £1,000 a couple of weeks ago. I manage £900 many weeks (when busy) or as little as £600 on a quiet week. After business expenses that leaves me with between £300 and £800+ depending on work loads.

So your lie #1 is a pathetic, misinformed lie in itself: you CAN earn £600 a week

Red believes it can support its other assertions. Until you know what that support is, shooting your mouth off with your own biased nonsense wouldn't seem to be the most sensible course of action. But then, being sensible isn't something you specialise in, is it?

That programme didn't leave Red looking any worse than it did before.

And it was hardly the long-awaited revelation that Red is breaking the law the Facebook nutters were expecting, was it?

I was going to ask if any of them had seen it - then realised that if one had they all had, seeing as they post here under multiple usernames to try and mislead people (gosh! And Red are bad for apparently misleading anyone. Go figure that twisted logic

FACT: Red is not breaking any laws, so learn a little about basic law before keep trotting out that rubbish

[Ordit Trainer]

Hi Terry and to all others in a similar position, I am a Driving Instructor Trainer who is on the Ordit Register, you might be interested to know that one of the conditions of being a member of Ordit (Official Register of Driving Instructor Trainers) is that any advertising must be legal, decent, honest and truthful and prepared with a sense of responsibility to both trainees and competitors and that any claim made in advertising shall be able to be substantiated objectively by documentary evidence. I would advise anybody who feels that they have been wronged or duped into parting with money to go onto the DSA website and read the conditions of being on the Ordit register, then check to see if the people that you have paid your money to are on the Ordit register and if so make a formal complaint in writing to the DSA. The training schools I have read about on this forum seem to be newly registered members of Ordit and they have to abide by the terms and conditions, it seems that from reading the large number of complaints that something is badly wrong. I have been training people to be driving instructors for over 25 years and I am very concerned that people seem to being duped into training courses. I feel that the DSA are letting this industry down by not giving people advice before they part with a lot of money. There is no reason why anybody who wants to become a driving instructor should need to pay out for all of the training in advance including all the exam fees, the only reason I can come up with is that if you become a statistic then the training company has all of your money ? I do not need to come on here and advertise myself, all I want is for people to open their eyes a bit wider when choosing an ADI trainer. over the years I have heard hundreds of sad stories from people who have parted with lots of money to companies that are on this forum including their previous names and predecessors, such as Lets drive, Mentor and 1st Mentor. You might be wise to find out if these previous 'here today - gone tomorrow' companies are the same people getting the complaints today? and if so why did they keep changing their names? My advice is always go to a company who charge for their ADI training by the hour, that way you are in control.

[RotHeissPfefferStreber]

I can assure you, Ordit Trainer, that I know of several trainers with the various schools operating under the LVG banner who have been ORDIT registered for some years.

TIC's advertising has also been investigated previously and found not to breach any advertising codes. The claims they make have stood up to scrutiny in the sense that they are used.

Lets Drive did not change its name. It was bought out by LVG when it folded and was assimilated. It operated under the same name for a while until it merged into Red. It also operated for some years, so it was hardly a 'here today, gone tomorrow' outfit.

If you knew the facts, you'd know all about the shenanigans involving many individuals who have started up schools in the past, and whose activities have caused schools to occasionally relaunch under new names without having any ulterior motive.

You need to be sure of the facts and not make assumptions about underhand reasons for names changing. I would imagine that making libellous comments is something that could get someone thrown off the ORDIT register if they weren't careful, just as much as making false claims about their own business could (seeing as they're basically the same thing).

Paying a private trainer by the hour is one way of doing it to be sure, but it is not the only way - and there are no guarantees it is a better way. Being on the ORDIT register is absolutely no guarantee whatsoever that a trainer is any good.

By far the most important thing is not who you pay the money to, but whether you pay money to anyone at all. If you are not going to be good enough to be an ADI you should leave it in the bank.

No good managing to scrape a green badge if you screw up at business or don't deliver decent training. A green badge is no guarantee of such quality training.

[terry johns]

[terry johns]

[RotHeissPfefferStreber]

Your 'friend' is trying to help you, Terry

You've been 'given enough information' by people you know nothing about and who post on a forum riddled with SPAM and pornography adverts?

Good luck! Don't forget you are still in exactly the same position you were in to start with - just having a few new stories (possibly fabricated or exaggerated by those with multiple log on personas) to make you feel better. Not every story is valid, even if any of them are.

[mighty580]

ive been watching this forum for a while now and can only say that everything that RHPS has said is true, i started my training last week and im realy enjoying it, great instructor whos has time to explain everything ,in other words your not a number to them, i done my home work b4 i signed up and was happy enough by what i found, ive also talked to some driving instructors who by no means put me off going for it, £3500 is a lot of money to lose i know, but how much is it to get your lorry test??????? i`l tell you its £2000+ for you class 1, if you pass it first time, then whos going to give you a job without exp, after spending al the money? so all i can say is im happy with tic sofar

[RotHeissPfefferStreber]

I've not checked into Looney Tunes for about a month, but I just did and there are a handful of new posts which make interesting reading.

Here's a good one:

[mimicafe]

Hi,

I fell into the Red scam and they have changed my life. They couldn’t deliver what they promised me. It is now 1 year since I signed the agreement and the bank has written me to pay back £6839.64 (lump sum) or £189.99 per month till the whole amount is paid off.

I contacted Red back in December 2008 to refund my money, but they see no grounds for refund. I have contacted the Consumer agency and other organisation, and I think this case might end up in the court.

Now I am looking for people who are in a similar situation and who are willing to testify in writing or in the court about all the Red salesman promised during the meeting. If I am able to get people to second me on the ground of misrepresentation, then we may be able to prove that Red have purposely packaged their product to mislead people.

Please write directly to my using my e-mail address mimicafe@googlemail.com.


Cheers

Babs

[mimicafe]

Just to update you guys of progress. The Finance Ombudsman Service are in contact with The Instructor College (LVG Ltd) about my case and I hope they can help. I do believe that even though The Instructor College lie to most of us verbally, there should be consequences. They law cannot permit companies to lie to people as long as they lie verbally.

I have also contacted the Trading Standards Agency for London Borough of Harrow and Brent, and they have opened a case to investigate the matter. I argued that The Instructor College are engaged in business malpractices and they use dubious techniques to get innocent people to sign up for their training course. Telling lies to customers is illegal, and Trading Standings will take legal action against the company.

I have pointed out to the Trading Standards Agency that many people have falling victims to the scam and Trading Standards would like anyone who has been miss-sold the training course to write to them explaining the exact circumstances.

Please, could you all write the Trading Standards Agency using the address and reference number provided below? Remember to explain all details of the lies TIC told you before you sign up with them.

Note: Trading Standards Agency are aware that the victims are spread throughout the UK, but they are able to open this case in my name to cover all victims. So please do you best to write them ASAP to highlight your individual dispute with The Instructor College.

Please write to:

<removed at request of Trading Standards>

I have also informed Trading Standards to look the Issue On ITV Tonight Programme. The video is no linger accessible on ITV website, but it is available on UTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnhkyLYbqIY


Please also contact the Financial Ombudsman Service to complain about the dispute with The Instructor College. The more people contact the agencies, the better our chances of resolving the issues.

[RotHeissPfefferStreber]

It's going to be funny watching this turn out exactly as expected

In one corner, Red - with its clear Terms & Conditions in black & white with advertising claims that have been investigated before and found to not be in breach of any rules or regulations.

In the other corner - a thousand individuals with different gripes: some having signed up without telling the missus on a spur of the moment (and blaming Red); some having signed up without realising it was a loan and that interest was payable (and blaming Red); some signing up intending to pay the £3,500 loan back inside the interest-free period EVEN THOUGH THEY WERE ON INCOME SUPPORT - and only deciding to cancel once they realised that wasn't going to happen (and blaming Red); some who failed the exams (and blame Red); some who realised how hard it was and threw in the towel (and blamed Red); some having points on their licence allegedly without knowing (and blaming Red); some with points on their licence clearly hoping it wouldn't get noticed due to a name/address change (and blaming Red when it was); and others who are cleverly concealing the exact nature of their whinge because they know it is as risible as the rest (but still blaming Red).

Yep! Very entertaining indeed

[mimicafe]

Hello RotHeissPfefferStreber,

It is obvious that you are Red insider, because you seem to know everything about their terms and conditions. Are you not those you lie to people that they will be allowed to register as PDI even if they have points on their licence? I personally heard Red told someone that they can write to the DSA to explain their situation and the DSA will give them a chance after consideration their individual circumstances.

Why do you sign up anyone who comes to you? Sincerely, have you at Red ever turned away anyone because you feel they will not meet the requirements? All that you are looking for is to get people sign the contract and loan agreement, and you never keep to the verbal promises you make to people. Isn't it because you believe that all the verbal promises you make are not bending?

I don’t think the law has given Red the licence to lie to people as long as they do so verbally. Misleading customers (whether written or verbally) is illegal and fraudulent, and the law has to do something to protect innocent people from companies such as Red.

I think it is time the law stops Red from the malpractices and lies. What a shame.

Why do you think all the people blame Red for everything? This is because you lied to them in order to get them sign your contract, and then it later becomes clear to them they shouldn't have signed up in the first place. But who lied to them to make them sign up? The answer is RED.

When I meet the people at the Instructor College, I believed in all they said to me. If people have been driving for several years, then it is natural for them to think that they are good drivers. So Red uses this notion to mislead people by telling them they can qualify as driving instructor within 6 or 8 weeks. Red knows well they lack the resources to train the number of people they accept every year, but yet they keep accepting more and more people.

I feel I have been misled by Red and I am committed to fighting them wherever this might take me to.

[johnfrederick]

[RotHeissPfefferStreber]

Mimicafe, I know Red's terms and conditions because some clown from Crazy Land posted them on that Facebook site and then took them down again when it became totally clear that every whinger and whiner had clearly not read a single word, even though they'd signed up to them.

If you can prove Red has lied to you then you take them to the cleaners and beyond. But you'd better make sure your own claims are pure white - and from what I've seen that is something which cannot be said of any of the whingers and whiners so far. Not being able to cancel a legally binding contract 12 months after the event is not Red's problem but the moron's who signed up in the first place.

-------------

John, I know what Red's assertions are because they were on that TV show everyone was wetting their pants over. These assertions, in turn, are the basis of the claims they make on their website. Red claims it can support its assertions which it uses to advertise its product. Do you understand now or do I need to explain it further for you?

It isn't a 'fact' that only 30-33% pass their exams. It is much MUCH worse than that... but it depends on what you are using as your baseline. Red isn't saying that 90% of its PDIs become ADIs when nationally the figure is closer to 10%. It is using its own figures - or 'assertions' - which it says it can justify if necessary as advertising copy, and which it apparently has used to justify itself to the watchdogs on at least one occasion.

Some may find that dishonest, some may just see it as something people selling something do.

The adverts are not lying and it is pathetic to think that keep saying it is somehow going to make it true. Everything in the ads is possible, and that has been accepted by the complaints people. So you see, Red are actually telling fewer lies than you are in this context, are they not? And they are actually on higher moral ground than you, because they are using justifiable statements to sell their goods whereas you are using less concrete assertions to try and damage them (something which, in legal terms, carries the name of 'libel').

I can assure you I DO make that sort of income as an ADI. It's hard work, and not reliable income at that end of the range, but it IS possible (as it happens, I DID spend 3 years - 4 in fact - at Uni but this job has nothing to do with that as it was quite some time ago). The numpties trying to earn a quick buck simply can't handle what is involved which is why they whinge and whine so.

---------

To anyone incapable of understanding this simple detail I will say it in big letters and small words:

ME NOT WORK FOR RED.

ME NOT EVER WORK FOR RED.

ME NOT TRAIN WITH RED.

People who don't understand that are the ones who need to stay away from this profession for their own good.

[mimicafe]

RotHeissPfefferStreber,

If you are not on TIC/Red payroll, then your position in this matter is a strange.

1) Your argue vehemently in support of Red/TIC
2) You use abusive words against people who are not happy with the service they receive from Red.
3) You believe no one else can read and understand anything but you


Do you believe people shouldn't express their anger and dissatisfaction?
I net so many people at Red/TIC, and I never heard anyone say they have happy with the service they receive from Red. Every single person I met at Red has nothing positive to comment about Red and most of them will NEVER recommend TIC/Red to anyone. For any serious company, customer satisfaction should be high priority.

Now, when people contact Red to express their satisfaction, all they are often told is sorry, you red our terms and agreed to sign the contract.

Most of us who signed the contract with Red are not as stupid as you think. We did so because we believed what they told us verbally. For many people, the most compelling argument for signing the contract with Red/TIC is what we were promised verbally. Never did we know that a company such as Red would purposely train their sales people to mislead people by providing them with false information concerning their product. We thought these people are honest people who are willing to help us better our lives. How were we to know that they are sales people, specially trained to mislead people to sign up with Red at whatever cost. And that is exactly what people at Red do. They make sure they feed people as much false information as possible in order to get them sign the loan agreement for over £3500. Once they loan agreement is signed and they know you cannot cancel it anymore (because the cooling down period has past), then they begin to show their true face.

So please, stop using all those abusive words as if you were depending yourself. Do not feel offended when people utter their opinion about TIC/Red.
Stop depending Red/TIC as if it were a religious matter.

[RotHeissPfefferStreber]

mimicafe, I suggest you take a look at the previous umpteen pages and work out who was using offensive words to try and state their cases.

For my part, I will point out yet again that I am totally opposed to anyone trying to transfer blame for their own bad decisions on anyone or anything else. Those are the people I class as stupid - in the colloquial sense, as I cannot comment on stupidity in a medical context without more details.

Seems like these people were totally happy to be allowed to go unchecked using any language they saw fit to use against Red, but now they're trying to play the innocent-and-all-offended card.

Just how do you think Red would filter applicants without the obvious implication that they aren't up to the job (in colloquial terms: too stupid for it)? Eh?

You cannot back out of an agreement 12 months down the line just because you don't want the toy anymore (or because you broke it, or because you can't use it).

The vast majority of people whinging and whining are in exactly that position.

Of the handful who just might have a case, they are foolishly trying to ride on the backs of these whingers and whiners to gain momentum. They don't realise that that momentum is heading in the wrong direction.

You talk of bettering your life/lives - you'd have signed up to this no matter who it was with, and you would have failed just as easily. EVERY COMPANY WHO DOES DIT IS HAPPY TO TAKE YOU ON IF THEY NEED THE WORK, WHETHER SELF-EMPLOYED OR LARGE SCHOOL. The only thing any of them can say is 'no we wouldn't', but that is not something that holds up especially when you look at how many people fail who went PAYG.

The chance of failure is over 90%. With anyone.

I will continue to defend Red religiously against the pagans who claim they aren't religious at all

[doctordick]

RotHeissPfefferStreber,

You have issues! I agree with the last comment that labelled you an unnecessarily aggravated guy thats spouting vehemously at all the other members complaining about Red.

Yes I agree with most of your points but how about a bit of tact and/or compassion?

I really do not know much about this but I've seen the adverts and at the time it was pretty obvious it was a bit dodgy. My point being that Red have, either consciously or not, mislead a lot of people. Of course I'd assume they have done this totally legally and I'm sure the people that were 'tricked' should have done their homework. Although I've heard of companies losing in court due to 'misleading' people - although legal it was still deemed untrustworthy.

[RotHeissPfefferStreber]

If I have what you call 'issues', what do you call it when someone has 7 points on their licence and doesn't know it and signs up for a £3,500 on the basis that they have a clean licence?

Or if they think getting married and changing their name will remove (or hide) any such points so sign up for the loan anyway?

Or if they sign up for a £3,500 loan on the spur of the moment, don't tell the missus, and then all hell breaks loose when they get home?

Or if they're on income support, sign for the loan, 'plan' to pay it back inside a year, fail miserably to do so (big surprise there, then), don't actually do much (if any) training through their own choice, then try and back out afterwards?

Or if they don't realise they are signing for a loan, and don't realise loans have interest payable on them?

And then - in all cases - blame Red for it?

You really think these people need sympathy other than for their sheer idiocy? I don't.

[doctordick]

I agree that they should not blame Red!

What I don't agree with is your need to rub it in their face! Did your mother ever tell you not to speak if you've got nothing nice to say? Would you speak to these people in the same manner if you were in the same room with them?
Are they doing you harm or offence?

[RotHeissPfefferStreber]

Ah, no! Don't try and turn it round on me

It was THEY who started it and - if I and one or two others hadn't spoken up - they WOULD have blamed Red and created a very misleading picture of the true events.

If THESE people were in the same room, and given what I have said above (that it was THEY who started this idiotic Red-slagging on here), then yes I would talk to them in this way. However, I suspect being in the same room would be dangerous for anyone with sympathies other than the ones these people hold, though. Which is part of my point...

[petervonryan]

I just cannot believe this guy RotHeissPfefferStreber who says he has no connection to red driving school...By the ammount of posts he makes I would reckon his full time job is to sit in front of a PC all day working on public relations for red driving school!!

There are just too many complaints (not just here at gumtree) but all over the internet for there to be no substance behind the smell coming from this red driving school.
when you hear that it is connected to other driving schools that went out of business the alarm bells start ringing immediately.

I really would like a break down of how much money people make as a driving instructor....lets say I am more than sceptical about old RotHeissPfefferStreber financial claims...the majority of people taking driving lessons are going to be in a job...so the times of day that they will be available for lessons is gonna be 6am to say 8.30am and 6pm till say 10pm....or all day sat and sun....dont leave many hours to get your money in does it....then there is the unpaid time and petrol money running from job to job the overheads diesel, insurance ..depreciation of vehicle value..etc etc..and yet after all this there is £600 left over??

Nah can't see it myself...remember red says £30,000 per annum...they dont say in the advert if that is gross or net but I suspect its net...with deductions listed above plus tax and national insurance to come as well I would be suprised if anyone could get £300 a week clear after a fifty hour week....that is my opinion just back of the fag packet calculations but I do not think it stacks up.

[RotHeissPfefferStreber]

That's it, Peter! A great way to live your life: if it doesn't fit in with your preconceptions just carry on believing those preconceptions against the facts

OK. Seeing as it is so difficult for you, just go ahead believing I work for Red. It doesn't make any difference: a fact is a fact, though I doubt you'd recognise one of those unless it bit you. And probably not even then.

Let's try this once again for you. Nice and slowly so you stand a chance of understanding:

NONE OF THE WHINGES AND WHINES PUT FORWARD SO FAR CONTAIN ANY SUBSTANCE.

THEY CONSIST OF PEOPLE WHO ARE TRYING TO BACK OUT OF SOMETHING BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T REALISE WHAT THEY WERE DOING.

ONE GUY SIGNED UP TO £3.5K ON A WHIM AND DIDN'T TELL HIS WIFE (SHE WENT NUTS).

SOMEONE ELSE WAS PLANNING ON PAYING THE £3.5K BACK INSIDE A YEAR WHILST ON INCOME SUPPORT (AND SHE HAS KIDS - WHAT IS INCOME SUPPORT ACTUALLY FOR, I WONDER).

ANOTHER HASN'T EVEN LOOKED AT THE PART 1 MATERIAL AFTER A YEAR.

TWO OR THREE OF THEM HAD POINTS ON THEIR LICENCES AND CLAIM THEY DIDN'T KNOW OR - IN ONE CASE IT SEEMS - HOPED GETTING MARRIED AND CHANGING NAMES WOULD OBSCURE THE FACT.

VIRTUALLY ALL THE OTHERS ARE TRYING TO BACK OUT NOW THE PAYMENTS ARE DUE.

I REPEAT: NOT ONE PERSON HAS A VALID COMPLAINT JUDGING BY WHAT THEY HAVE SAID.

AND THEY ARE ALL BLAMING RED - EVEN THOSE WHO HAD HUGE NUMBERS OF POINTS ON THEIR LICENCES!

The cost breakdown is easy (well, for some):

Charge £24 per hour and do 40 hours - turnover £960.

Take a typical franchise - let's say The AA. Costs £200 a week. Pay £30 for each new pupil (say, one a week on average) - total £230.

Fuel - on a 40 hour week likely to be between £120-£150.

Total business costs: up to £380.

Gross profit: 960-380 = £580.

On a 48 week year that works out as 580 x 48 = £27,840.

Now down in London the hourly rate can be as high as £27 or £28. In some places in Yorkshire it is as low as £17 (maybe lower). Some ADIs undercut and charge stupidly low prices. Some franchises cost as little as £30, but you need a car from somewhere. But earning MORE than £30k IS possible - just not everywhere.

I can assure you that even on a bad week I am not far off clearing £300 (in any case, I have a breakeven point to pay all the bills which I have never fallen below all the time I have been doing this). The ones you are listening to are the part-timers and those who thought they'd save money by going independent immediately after qualification. They have to advertise and undercut each other, and that costs a lot of money - and it doesn't work very quickly, if at all.

I've had weeks close to 50 hours recently. I am available anytime people want lessons - sometimes I start at 7am and sometimes I finish at midnight. Not every day or every week, but I don't say 'no'. I book tests for early slots and Pass Plus in summer needs the dark (hence the couple of midnighters I've done). But in that wide time range I can easily get three 2 hour lessons in with plenty of time to spare to come on here and listen to the rubbish spouted by the whingers and whiners. I can even book in a couple of extra 2 hour sessions sometime, which covers the occasional cancellations (Monday this week started with 7 hours booked but ended up with just 2 due to illness and unforeseen circumstances - but I don't care because of the good days.

Virgin (formerly NTL) has loads of complaints plastered over the Internet - mostly from idiots who need to get help to turn on the lights. I have been with NTL/Virgin for many years and never had a problem - and I have a nice shiny 20MB connection which rarely goes wrong. So just because people whinge and whine doesn't mean there is a problem

[petervonryan]

Ok let's take it from the top RotHeissPfefferStreber.

I have gone over a few of the recent posts and people have claimed that you write in an aggresive and demeaning manner this you deny and say that other people started it first.
(bit of a playground attitude there)

That being as it may, I wrote a post in a totally mantter of fact tone as say someone chatting in a pub. what do I get as a reply from RotHeissPfefferStreber would you believe it, a demeaning and insulting response.

Well lets say you had a tough day teaching and were stressed out and a little tetchey...Calm down

Now the 40 hours are spent giving lessons there is the driving between jobs and to and from home...of course everyone has to travel to and from work but not several times each day so a lot of extra time should be alloted to the 40 hrs teaching I would rekeon it closer to sixty than fifty.

now lets move on and take a look at those figures shall we..
RotHeissPfefferStreber puts the weekly business costs at £380 on week of takings £960

here RotHeissPfefferStreber lists just two costs the franchise and fuel..

where is the insurance

the depreciation of the vehicle

maintenance of vehicle oil tyres mot service charges etc

And the savings fund for the eventual vehicle replacement

Gross profit of £580 don't forget tax and national insurance
and last of all if you have got this job for the long term you should be putting away at least £300 for a pension the net left from the £580 would be around £280 X 48 = net pay per annum of £13,440

A Long Long way from red's fictional £30,000

Wait to your blood pressure goes down before you reply and try not to be demeaning or abusive if you can help it RotHeissPfefferStreber

[RotHeissPfefferStreber]

Wow, you have a very short and very selective memory

You said: