My IAM Experience

[Craikeybaby]

trashbat said:

I can't agree with that. Why should a customer, and they are customers because they pay, be expected to accept arbitrary splits between group and national? As far as you as a customer are concerned, you pay your money and you deal with the IAM.

Whether the group or franchise or whatever it is gets the right amount of money from head office is an internal problem that they shouldn't be leaking out into how they behave towards members of the public. I understand that it's volunteers and amateurs but if anything that makes it harder to excuse.

That is my view exactly. If the IAM head office hadn't suggested I went to the local group I wouldn't have. After the problems getting my test booked I shouldn't have been surprised that it didn't go smoothly.

My perception of the IAM was of a large commercial organisation, obviously there's a bit of a disconnect there by using volunteers to do a lot of their training.

[SK425]

trashbat said:

I can't agree with that. Why should a customer, and they are customers because they pay, be expected to accept arbitrary splits between group and national?

It would perfectly reasonable to expect that of a customer, but only if when they bought the 'national' product it was made clear to them that it has nothing to do with the local groups.

[Glosphil]

SK425 said:

It would perfectly reasonable to expect that of a customer, but only if when they bought the 'national' product it was made clear to them that it has nothing to do with the local groups.

As I quoted from the IAM web-site - "Our Fast Track programme condenses weeks of training into two half days intensive one-to-one road-training sessions with a Professional Instructor". No mention of local, volunteer group involvement and the local groups do not have Professional Instructors. Also no mention of drives outside the 'two half days'. Unfortunately some paid members of the IAM staff do tend to expect the local group volunteers to act as if they are salaried members of the IAM.

Having bought one product (Fast Track) is it reasonable to expect part of another product ('standard' Skill For Life) free of charge? Despite the group having received no money from the IAM I, and a member of another group, have stated our groups would have provided assistance provided the group was joined. Group annual subscriptions vary from £10 to £25 as local subs are set by group committees not the IAM.

From your description of your direct dealings with the IAM I would have thought you would be complaining to the IAM rather than moaning on a motoring forum about local volunteer groups. My experience of over 100 associates taking the IAM test is that, with our group at least, it is the associates messing about with pre-arranged test appointments with the examiners not the other way around.

[greygoose]

I am not sure it is reasonable to expect someone to know the difference between the local and national branches of the IAM as a newcomer. It just makes the whole outfit seem disjointed and shambolic in my opinion.

[R0G]

IAM groups are 'affiliated' with the main IAM and not directly controlled by the main body

I think each group has its own charity number

[SVS]

greygoose said:

I am not sure it is reasonable to expect someone to know the difference between the local and national branches of the IAM as a newcomer.

I agree. IAM HQ should have taken responsibility for making sure this was all sorted for the OP.

Also, volunteers or not, I disagree with how this particular local group responded. If they can put an IAM badge on their car, they should act as representatives for the IAM as a whole.

Perhaps the OP's experience with his local group shows why the IAM is in the process of introducing more full-time staff and greater quality management.

[SK425]

SVS said:

Also, volunteers or not, I disagree with how this particular local group responded. If they can put an IAM badge on their car, they should act as representatives for the IAM as a whole.

It sounds like it was IAM HQ giving out misinformation.

Craikeybaby said:

A couple of months ago I got in touch with the local IAM group, who proved to be most unhelpful, saying that because I joined as a fast track member they wouldn't be able to help me and that I should call "London" and pay them more money.

It appears to me that the group was entirely correct there. The OP perceived them as unhelpful though so there may have been a problem with the way the message was delivered, if not its accuracy, and being a volunteer is no excuse for appearing unhelpful. However, if a volunteer is having to spend their time fielding calls that aren't about the thing they volunteered for, they have every right to be pissed off (not that that's the OP's problem). If IAM HQ expects group members to put up with that, perhaps it should reflect a little on the definition of 'volunteer'.

What the hell IAM HQ thinks it's doing taking £250 off people before making any assessment of their driving to establish whether they are likely to progress well to test standard in two intensive half days is a different question. I think that's disgraceful - it's entirely predicatable that that would lead to disgruntlement such as the OP's, and IAM HQ dumping that st on its volunteers is extraordinarily short-sighted.

[SVS]

Was the group really correct? Presumably the OP would have had Associate membership of the IAM. So he could join a local IAM group, albeit with a nominal fee for group membership, couldn't he?

More to the point, I wonder how many members of this group have tried to encourage people to join the IAM. Was turning away a new Associate member the right thing to do? I believe not. If they had welcomed the OP with open arms and helped him to pass his IAM test, they could have had an enthusiastic group member for years. At best, turning away the OP was short sighted.

If someone invests £249 in a FastTrack course, he or she has shown commitment and enthusiasm for advanced driving. In other words, exactly the sort of person every IAM group should want as a member.

If this local group is a registered charity, what's its mission? Does its mission relate to improving road safety or helping people to pass their advanced test? I'd imagine that helping the OP to pass his IAM test would fit well with the group's charitable aims. Instead, this group has left him understandably disgruntled.

I hope the OP joins an ADUK driving day instead.

[Craikeybaby]

Glosphil said:

As I quoted from the IAM web-site - "Our Fast Track programme condenses weeks of training into two half days intensive one-to-one road-training sessions with a Professional Instructor". No mention of local, volunteer group involvement and the local groups do not have Professional Instructors. Also no mention of drives outside the 'two half days'. Unfortunately some paid members of the IAM staff do tend to expect the local group volunteers to act as if they are salaried members of the IAM.

Having bought one product (Fast Track) is it reasonable to expect part of another product ('standard' Skill For Life) free of charge? Despite the group having received no money from the IAM I, and a member of another group, have stated our groups would have provided assistance provided the group was joined. Group annual subscriptions vary from £10 to £25 as local subs are set by group committees not the IAM.

From your description of your direct dealings with the IAM I would have thought you would be complaining to the IAM rather than moaning on a motoring forum about local volunteer groups. My experience of over 100 associates taking the IAM test is that, with our group at least, it is the associates messing about with pre-arranged test appointments with the examiners not the other way around.

I didn't expect to recieve the extra training from the local group - the examiner and IAM HQ both told me that was what I should do. I also did complain to the IAM HQ about being messed around by them/the examiner, they offered me a free retest, after I'd had the training with the local group. After getting pissed off trying to arrange the training I gave up on the IAM. I only posted on here as I find it annoying when people start a thread like this and don't follow it up.

SVS said:

I hope the OP joins an ADUK driving day instead.

This certainly won't be the end of my journey into advanced driving, I just won't be going forward with the IAM.

[Glosphil]

Craikeybaby said:

Glosphil said:

As I quoted from the IAM web-site - "Our Fast Track programme condenses weeks of training into two half days intensive one-to-one road-training sessions with a Professional Instructor". No mention of local, volunteer group involvement and the local groups do not have Professional Instructors. Also no mention of drives outside the 'two half days'. Unfortunately some paid members of the IAM staff do tend to expect the local group volunteers to act as if they are salaried members of the IAM.

Having bought one product (Fast Track) is it reasonable to expect part of another product ('standard' Skill For Life) free of charge? Despite the group having received no money from the IAM I, and a member of another group, have stated our groups would have provided assistance provided the group was joined. Group annual subscriptions vary from £10 to £25 as local subs are set by group committees not the IAM.

From your description of your direct dealings with the IAM I would have thought you would be complaining to the IAM rather than moaning on a motoring forum about local volunteer groups. My experience of over 100 associates taking the IAM test is that, with our group at least, it is the associates messing about with pre-arranged test appointments with the examiners not the other way around.

I didn't expect to recieve the extra training from the local group - the examiner and IAM HQ both told me that was what I should do. I also did complain to the IAM HQ about being messed around by them/the examiner, they offered me a free retest, after I'd had the training with the local group. After getting pissed off trying to arrange the training I gave up on the IAM. I only posted on here as I find it annoying when people start a thread like this and don't follow it up.

SVS said:

I hope the OP joins an ADUK driving day instead.

This certainly won't be the end of my journey into advanced driving, I just won't be going forward with the IAM.

Perhaps the whole mess could have been avoided if some one at the IAM had contacted the relevant group and ascertained whether they were willing to help before suggesting that you contact the group directly. Unfortunately many IAM staff forget (or just ignore) that all local group are run by volunteers not paid staff.

Only a sample of 3 but those I know who have used Fast Track to pass the IAM Advanced driving test had no interest in the local group and did not stay members of the IAM after passing the IAM test. Indeed many associates see the IAM test as the end of their involvement with the IAM. This doesn't bother me; at least those drivers have been given the opportunity to give some thought to their driving and perhaps even improved.

I certainly agree with an earlier comment that Fast Track should not be sold without some check (I haven't a clue how) that two half days training is sufficient for that particularly driver to be able to reach IAM Advanced Test standard. I know from personal conversations with IAM examiners that at some of them disagree with the concept of Fast Track as they feel it is too 'test oriented' rather than providing a lasting improvement in the standard of driving.

I'm pleased to hear that you intend to continue with your "journey into advanced driving" and I hope your next experience fulfils your expectations.

[SVS]

Sure, FastTrack isn't perfect. Neither is Skills for Life. How many people give up along the way before completing SfL?

Glosphil said:

Perhaps the whole mess could have been avoided if some one at the IAM had contacted the relevant group and ascertained whether they were willing to help before suggesting that you contact the group directly.

That would clearly have been the right thing to happen. Given the OP's earlier hiccups with his examiner, I'm disappointed that IAM HQ didn't do exactly that.

That said, it doesn't excuse the local group from being poor ambassadors for the IAM. The OP would probably have needed less observed drives than usual, having had the benefit of FastTrack training. It wouldn't been a big deal for a local Observer to take him out on a handful of drives. How is that an abuse by HQ of local volunteers? If you're an Observer, that's what you volunteered for! I used to be an Observer and would have been very happy to help a FastTrack candidate; I fail to see the problem with doing so.

The OP's local group needs to get a grip and remember its charitable mission.

[Glosphil]

SVS said:

Sure, FastTrack isn't perfect. Neither is Skills for Life. How many people give up along the way before completing SfL?

Glosphil said:

Perhaps the whole mess could have been avoided if some one at the IAM had contacted the relevant group and ascertained whether they were willing to help before suggesting that you contact the group directly.

That would clearly have been the right thing to happen. Given the OP's earlier hiccups with his examiner, I'm disappointed that IAM HQ didn't do exactly that.

That said, it doesn't excuse the local group from being poor ambassadors for the IAM. The OP would probably have needed less observed drives than usual, having had the benefit of FastTrack training. It wouldn't been a big deal for a local Observer to take him out on a handful of drives. How is that an abuse by HQ of local volunteers? If you're an Observer, that's what you volunteered for! I used to be an Observer and would have been very happy to help a FastTrack candidate; I fail to see the problem with doing so.

The OP's local group needs to get a grip and remember its charitable mission.

As you say, local groups have a charitable mission; which I see as assisting drivers who wish to raise their standard of driving. However, I do not see the charitable mission as including picking up the pieces when a package sold and supplied directly by the IAM goes wrong. The IAM market Fast Track with the line "Our Fast Track programme condenses weeks of training into two half days ", i.e., avoiding the method used by the groups. 'My' group would have assisted the OP but he would have been placed in the queue of associates behind those who had chosen to come to the local group in the first place. In my view, if Fast Track 'goes wrong' it is up to the IAM to resolve the issues using their paid staff and not to expect a local group (of volunteers)to provide a solution.

There seems to be moves within the IAM to expect the group volunteers to act more and more as if they are paid IAM staff. This could well result in more observers having your status of "I used to be an Observer".

[trashbat]

At some point, that's just part and parcel of working for/with a large charity, is it not? The higher up full time & exec get paid, the people on the ground do not, and directives flow downwards. I suppose it comes down to what you're willing to suck up to fulfil your own personal aim which is presumably just about improving driving standards.

I sympathise, for different reasons, but it is internal politics and I don't think it ought to be exposed to paying candidates.

[Strangely Brown]

trashbat said:

... but it is internal politics and I don't think it ought to be exposed to paying candidates.

And there lies that that greyest of grey areas... the fact that the customer is paying for driving tuition from non-ADIs. Sure, the volunteers themselves don't actually get paid, but the IAM and the group do.

[trashbat]

Strangely Brown said:

And there lies that that greyest of grey areas... the fact that the customer is paying for driving tuition from non-ADIs. Sure, the volunteers themselves don't actually get paid, but the IAM and the group do.

Meh. I don't think that was really the spirit of that legislation - it was to protect novice driver consumers from having money extracted by the unskilled and unregulated. The IAM arrangement is one where generally everyone knows what they're getting into.

[Strangely Brown]

trashbat said:

eh. I don't think that was really the spirit of that legislation - it was to protect novice driver consumers from having money extracted by the unskilled and unregulated.

In terms of AD, are those that come to the groups not "novice driver consumers"? Are they not having money extracted? Does passing an IAM test and an internal observer course make the volunteer observers "skilled and unregulated"?

trashbat said:

The IAM arrangement is one where generally everyone knows what they're getting into.

Do they?

[trashbat]

I think they generally do, although apparently not so much that it doesn't have to be explained to them. And no, they're not novice drivers. They passed the DSA test, generally have some experience and come to the IAM of their own accord rather than as a necessity. I just don't think it's a vector that the law was particularly interested in, no more so than track day or skid pan tuition.

[Strangely Brown]

trashbat said:

I think they generally do, although apparently not so much that it doesn't have to be explained to them. And no, they're not novice drivers. They passed the DSA test, generally have some experience and come to the IAM of their own accord rather than as a necessity.

As I said, "In terms of AD..." they are novices.

trashbat said:

I just don't think it's a vector that the law was particularly interested in, no more so than track day or skid pan tuition.

They are required to be ADIs, on road or off road makes no difference. The IAM/RoSPA thing is a grey area that the DSA turn a blind eye to but it doesn't mean that it's strictly legal.

[R0G]

Strangely Brown said:

They are required to be ADIs, on road or off road makes no difference. The IAM/RoSPA thing is a grey area that the DSA turn a blind eye to but it doesn't mean that it's strictly legal.

An ADI gets paid but an observer does not - that means the law has been complied with in full so no grey area

Most who bring this up are ADIs - are you?

[SK425]

Strangely Brown said:

trashbat said:

I just don't think it's a vector that the law was particularly interested in, no more so than track day or skid pan tuition.

They are required to be ADIs, on road or off road makes no difference.

Doesn't it? I thought it made all the difference. If the tuition is not on the road, they don't have to be an ADI do they?