1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144 
DEAR
Page 67
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
SIR
UNROADWORTHY LEGISLATION
• Your Any Questions' column of 15-21 February contained a question on the sale of =roadworthy vehicles.
In his answer, Colin Ward appeared to be unaware of existing, and indeed previous legislation on the offence of selling an unroadworthy vehicle.
Such an offence was created by Section 64 of the 1960 Road Traffic Act, Section 60 of the 1972 Road Traffic Act, and currently, it is an offence under Section 75 of the 1988 Road Traffic Act. It carries a maximum fine at level 5 (i2,000).
D J Smith, Elmley Castle, Pershore, Worcs.
CPC FEEDBACK • I was very interested to read Murdo Morrison's piece on the CPC exams (CM 22-28 March).
For some time now there has been a vociferous minority (in terms of numbers of centres) complaining of: (a) cheating; (b) the inadequacy of questions set (up to a third being irrelevant ambiguous or obscure).
To take cheating first, it can never be stamped out: some people — teachers and students — will take the short way out. But the instances of cheating will be very small. The RSA have responded in a responsible way, by instituting an investigation.
In my 23 years experience I know of only one teacher who 'gave away the exam' he was involved with. He was asked to resign or be dismissed, he chose to resign.
I have heard of rumours of cheating . . . I disregard them. There is no proof, they are probably opinions of people who had difficulty in passing the CPC. Where is the proof of cheating? No doubt the RSA will find it if it exists. With regard to the third of questions which are irrelevant, ambiguous or obscure; it would have been useful to have some examples.
My experience reveals the percentage would be in lower single figures. Some professional exams I am involved with have a poorer record than this. This does not excuse the errors, but RSA's record and their system of checking does seem to me to be as good as, if not better, than comparable bodies.
The major criticism of most examiners is that students fail to read the questions properly.
This may be part of the problem, when I instruct my students to read the questions carefully, some indulge in 'mental gymnastics' and find meanings that are never there.
Finally, with regard to marketing and management techniques, being difficult to test by multiple choice questions. . surely not, RSA have set questions on other difficult areas in the CPC. Let RSA stay with the tried and tested system of assessment, bearing in mind it is the lowest level of qualification (apart from the grandfather rights) and those who wish to go further can take the appropriate qualifications with the varied criteria for assessment suitable to those levels.
One last word, those taking home study or weekend courses who take the exam at an indepedent centre can rest assured that no one administering their exam has an interest in passing them by cheating.
A Baker BA (hons) law, Durham County.
C012111lercial Motor welcomes readers' letters, which can be phoned in on 01-661 3689 (24-hour service). Letters may be edited for length.