Just saw the following on the TV
Staff at a centre where the learners take the written test became suspicious when many of those taking the test were arriving with bandanas on their heads and most passing the test.
Out of 400 applicants 97% passed.
A certain individual was said to have made £200K profit but now has two years inside to think about it. He was outside the test centre with a mobile phone so he could relay the answers to each individual via their hidden earpiece.
The questions remain. Why only 97% sucess rate? Why did it take so long to identify the scam.
|
Here is another question...What was the individual charged with?. It seems that all he was guilty of is relaying answers through a mobile phone while offsite. I would think the infraction would actually lie with the applicant.
If the figures above are correct, 2 years for 200,000 doesn't seem too bad to me. There are corporate executives out there who don't make 100,000 per year and it could be said that they are not above a bit of fraud themselves. 8-)
|
LOL, try Manila where the answer sheet is sold to you at the entrance and if you miss that it's posted in the comfort room.
It is normally impossible to fail the Philippines driving test, in fact for a small fee you can get your license without a single driving lesson, but anyway, a Brit lady friend of ours did everything the right way, took the written test, did the lessons, and failed the practical.
Reason: excessive use of the rear view mirror. This is only for reversing and pulling out and should not be used while the vehicle is in forward motion because it causes the driver to take his/her eyes off the road. What happens to other vehicles behind is their responsibility not yours (more or less verbatim).
Of course as Growlette pointed out with one of her "stupid dumbcluck foreigner" looks which she normally reserves for me , if she'd paid her 500 pesos up front none of this need have happened...."what is it with you people?" (another of her pet phrases).
|
|
Is the Philippines licence valid over here? If it is you might have a nice little business opportunity there...
|
As a visitor your foreign licence is definitely valid in the UK (? 90 days is usual for a non-resident anywhere in the world) as is the case in most countries. As a recognised non-resident by the UK Revenue I am simply a visitor. I have several foreign licences inc UK but I always use one of them to rent a car there. I may well speed or park and get a ticket which Hertz will charge back to me (incidentally only once in 30+ years of visits) but no way can some seat-warmer stick points on my licence that way.
I will exercise my right to drive wherever and whenever I want and having a swag of various licences make sure of that. Very handy. I recall getting pulled by a very nice Plod at the bottom of Ditchling Beacon, I hadn't done anything wrong, but it was one of those late night things. I showed him my Iranian licence and he said with a laugh, "that's OK sir, no point in booking you if had done anything wrong 'cos you wouldn't be around for the court case anyway would you? On your way and drive carefully".
Check out those Perpetual Traveller sites.
|
|
I guess the question is what sort of a person is so utterly hopeless at the pathetically easy test that is the theory (Yes, all this was over the theory, wasn't it?) that they feel it was £400 well spent..
|
|
I understand that there are tens of thousands of young people who can't pass the theory test because their education doesn't equip them to read and comprehend well enough for even this "pathetically easy test!"
|
Indeed. It discriminates against the illiterate.
200K for 2 years in prison. Doesn't sound too bad a deal to me. Do a 3 year Ph.D. and you get far less reward and even more contempt from the general public.
|
|
|
|
|
Answer: Bogus asylum seekers and illegal immigrants from Afghanistan (primarily) who probably couldn't read any English, knew nothing about the Highway Code and were very happy to pay £400 of either UK taxpayers money or ill gotten gains to a crooked Iranian in order to obtain a licence which could then be used to acquire other ID without attracting too much attention from the authorities from whom they wanted to keep as far away from as possible.
|
Volvoman this is almost the first post of yours I've ever agreed with. Keep up the good work ;-)
|
|
Blimey, I'd better check where I've gone wrong ;-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here is another question...What was the individual charged with?.
Obtaining property by deception. Some of the candidates were prosecuted for obtaining their licences by deception.
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_news/england/london/3116445...m
news.independent.co.uk/uk/crime/story.jsp?story=42...5
I know another scam... buy a book containing all the questions and answers and read it on the morning of your test.
Whoops... just realised that's legal and the book is published by the DSA!
|
The questions never end...
What "property" did he obtain?. The licenses went into the hands of the applicants, unless they are talking about the applicant's fee they paid him being the property, but they weren't decieved into giving him that property. The candidates being prosecuted I fully understand, as they did obtain their license by deception.
I am not saying for one minute that he shouldn't be charged and punished, just that I don't understand the charge handed down and why that one was chosen. Do they not have an "aiding and abetting deception" or "conspiracy to defraud a gov't agency" type charge?.
Unless you are a judge or man of the law, I don't expect you to answer these, wellie. Just curiously thinking out loud in the hopes that someone will have answers 8-)
|
|
|
|
|
