Neelofar Hamidi v The Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors

NCN: [2026] UKFTT 00710 (GRC) First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) Transport Case Reference: FT/D/2025/1323 Decided without a hearing Decision given on: 19 May 2026 Before

JUDGE MATON Between

NEELOFAR HAMIDI and

THE REGISTRAR OF APPROVED DRIVING INSTRUCTORS Decision: The appeal is Dismissed.

REASONS Appellant Respondent 1. This is an appeal against the decision of the Registrar dated 13 November 2025 that the Appellant should not be granted a second trainee licence.

2. The Tribunal received and considered a bundle of documents. The bundle included an incomplete copy of the Appellant’s notice of appeal. This was an unfortunate omission by the Registrar, but I have been able to refer to a copy of the form held on the Tribunal’s file and have considered this.

3. The Appellant said that she wants her appeal to be determined without a hearing, and the Registrar has notified the Tribunal that he does not propose routinely to attend appeals against refusals to grant trainee licences.

4. By rule 32 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009, an appeal can be decided without a hearing if each party has consented to this, and if the Tribunal is satisfied that it can properly determine the issues without a hearing.

5. I am satisfied that these requirements were met in this case, and that this was a fair and just way to decide the Appeal. © CROWN COPYRIGHT 2024 Relevant law 6. The grant of a trainee licence enables applicants to provide driving instruction for payment before they are qualified.

7. A trainee licence may be granted in the circumstances set out in s129 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (“the Act”) and the Motor Cars (Driving Instruction) Regulations 2005.

8. A licence under s129(1) of the Act is granted: “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.” 9. In order to qualify as for registration as an approved driving instructor, applicants must pass the Qualifying Examination. This comprises: a written examination (“Part 1”); a driving ability and fitness test (“Part 2”); and an instructional ability and fitness test (“Part 3”).

10. Three attempts are permitted at each part. The whole examination must be completed within two years of passing Part 1, failing which the whole examination has to be retaken.

11. 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. Under s129(2) of the Act, the Registrar must grant a licence to an applicant who fulfils specified conditions, including that they have passed Parts 1 and 2. Under s129(3) the Registrar has discretion to refuse an application for a second or subsequent licence.

12. Under s129(6)(b), where a person applies for a new licence in substitution for a licence held by them and current at the date of the application, the previous licence will not expire if the Registrar decides to refuse the application, until the time limit for an appeal against the decision has expired and, if such an appeal is duly brought, it is finally disposed of.

13. The powers of the Tribunal in relation to appeals against decisions not to grant trainee licences are set out in s131 of the Act. When making a decision on any such appeal, the Tribunal stands in the shoes of the Registrar and takes a fresh decision on the evidence available to it, giving appropriate weight to the Registrar’s decision as the person tasked by Parliament with making such decisions. Background 14. The Appellant was granted a trainee licence valid from 17 March 2025 to 16 September 2025. The Registrar also submits that she was granted a licence from 14 August 2023 to 13 February 2024.

15. The Appellant applied for a further trainee licence on 2 October 2025, and in an email dated 16 October 2025 the Registrar advised that he was considering refusing the application, and invited the Appellant to make representations regarding this. The Appellant made representations in emails dated 16 and 22 October 2025. The Registrar wrote to the Appellant by email dated 13 November 2025, refusing the application.

16. The Appellant appealed to the Tribunal. The Appeal 17. The Appellant submits that: a. she did not have any students for the first two months of her licence; b. her training has been disrupted due to her trainer being unavailable, and due to medical difficulties which she has suffered; c. she has had difficulty booking test slots.

18. The Registrar submits that: a. b. c. the Appellant did not complete any training during the first three months of her licence; 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; that 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; d. he also submits that, by virtue of the Appellant having applied for a second licence before the expiry date of the first, that licence remained in force and would allow her to continue to give paid instruction until determination of the Appeal – but the Registrar’s own evidence shows that this submission is incorrect; e. f. since passing her driving ability test the Appellant had failed the instructional ability test once; and that despite ample time and opportunity, the Appellant had not been able to reach the required standard for qualification as an approved driving instructor; the refusal of a second licence does not bar the Appellant from attempting Part 3; she does not need to hold a licence for that purpose, nor is it essential for her to give professional tuition under licence in order to obtain further training; and that alternatives are available to acquire registration without obtaining a licence.

19. The Registrar noted at the time of filing his response to the appeal dated 22 April 2026 that the Appellant had a further Part 3 attempt booked for 11 May 2026. Discussion 20. In relation to the Registrar’s submission that the Appellant did not complete any training during the first three months of her licence, the Appellant submits that this was due to the absence of her trainer. She has provided evidence that she completed 20 hours of training by 19 September 2025, slightly more than six months after the grant of her licence. The failure to complete 20 hours of training within the first three months does not bar the Appellant from being granted for further licence, but it is a factor to take into account.

21. The absence of the Appellant’s trainer, who was in another country for a period of time during her licence, will have been inconvenient, but she provides no evidence of having sought alternative training provision.

22. It is clear that the Appellant has suffered some disruption to her training. She provides evidence of having suffered a miscarriage during the first six months of her licence, and submits that she is also suffering from a separate illness, although provides no evidence to support this latter statement.

23. Although the Appellant was only granted one six-month licence from March 2025, she has had the benefit of a previous training licence period. Conclusion and decision 24. Having considered the matters set out above, I find that, although the Appellant’s training has been disrupted, and she has had difficulty securing attempts at Part 3, in the circumstances of the case this does not outweigh the Registrar’s reasons for refusing the Appellant a further trainee licence.

25. Accordingly, I am not persuaded that the Registrar’s decision was wrong, and I dismiss the Appeal. Signed Judge Maton Date: 11 May 2026 This decision was amended under Rule 40 on 18 May 2026 to address an error in paragraph numbering and a typographical error in what is now paragraph 22. No other change was made to the wording or substance of the decision. 4