> It must be a really quiet day in Manchester news wise.
>
> A stupid bint on her driving test drove through a puddle and splashed
> a pedestrian.
> The mother-of-two protested that if she had swerved to avoid the
> puddle she might have caused an accident.
> The examiner then said she should have swapped details with the
> pedestrian as she had driven without consideration to other road
> users.
> Said the DSA "We agree with the examiner, she really was a stupid
> bint."
> Said the stupid bint "It was the third time I have done this, why
> should I have to hand over my details to him."
> Said the pedestrian "It was horrible, I was soaked. I would not want
> her details, she is a double bagger."
> Said the stupid bint "This is unfair, I am going to complain to the
> BBC, and look even more stupid."
> ...

> It must be a really quiet day in Manchester news wise.

> A stupid bint on her driving test drove through a puddle and splashed
> a pedestrian.
> The mother-of-two protested that if she had swerved to avoid the
> puddle she might have caused an accident.
> The examiner then said she should have swapped details with the
> pedestrian as she had driven without consideration to other road
> users.
> Said the DSA "We agree with the examiner, she really was a stupid
> bint."
> Said the stupid bint "It was the third time I have done this, why
> should I have to hand over my details to him."
> Said the pedestrian "It was horrible, I was soaked. I would not want
> her details, she is a double bagger."
> Said the stupid bint "This is unfair, I am going to complain to the
> BBC, and look even more stupid."

> More (or less):
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/7605026.stm

>The "argument" that the driver should have stopped and spoken to the
>drenchee is, IMHO, childish. What's done is done (and it's happened to
>us all, as well). Quite apart from the risks arising from
>confrontation, there would be nothing useful the driver could do unless
>he carried a mobile hair-dryer and a bale of clean dry fluffy towels in
>the boot.

>In uk.transport, JNugent wrote:

>>The "argument" that the driver should have stopped and spoken to the
>>drenchee is, IMHO, childish. What's done is done (and it's happened to
>>us all, as well). Quite apart from the risks arising from
>>confrontation, there would be nothing useful the driver could do unless
>>he carried a mobile hair-dryer and a bale of clean dry fluffy towels in
>>the boot.

>
>When I took the test my examiner

> drummed it into me that during the test
>you're supposed to be on your best behaviour, clearly demonstrating
>your knowledge of, and adherence to, the highway code. While in everyday
>driving what you say you might be relevant, on the test it isn't. The
>examiner presumably (and understandably) came to the conclusion that she
>didn't know what she was supposed to do. Fail.

> "NotMe" googlemail.com> wrote in message
> news:5054b023-4c1c-4339-a667-175b178e4e18@e53g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...

>> It must be a really quiet day in Manchester news wise.
>>
>> A stupid bint on her driving test drove through a puddle and splashed
>> a pedestrian.
>> The mother-of-two protested that if she had swerved to avoid the
>> puddle she might have caused an accident.
>> The examiner then said she should have swapped details with the
>> pedestrian as she had driven without consideration to other road
>> users.
>> Said the DSA "We agree with the examiner, she really was a stupid
>> bint."
>> Said the stupid bint "It was the third time I have done this, why
>> should I have to hand over my details to him."
>> Said the pedestrian "It was horrible, I was soaked. I would not want
>> her details, she is a double bagger."
>> Said the stupid bint "This is unfair, I am going to complain to the ...