Complaint Review: Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles - Lynchburg Virginia

My Virginia Driver's license expired in 1998. I lived in Washington, D.C. and resolved that I would not be driving again because I would utilize the Metro system. I did not anticipate on returning to Lynchburg, but the situation unexpectedly change. Unfortunately, I did not continue to renew my driver's license after my car's transmission failed, and did not plan on purchasing a new automobile. It was also unfortunate that when I moved, the expired license was lost in transit. When I went to the Lynchburg DMV, I was unaware that I needed to obtain a Learner's Permit again. I took the test, and when I completed the test, I was informed that I had passed Parts 1 and 2. I was congratulated and given a Learner's Permit. When I arrived home, I received a call from a DMV representative who conveyed to me that I was given another candidate's Learner's Permit and that I should return it. I went back to the DMV and discovered  my original scores were eradicated. I had to re-take the exams and I missed one (1) question, guaranteeing an automatic failure. I went back again, and the representative made me sit in booth #7, of which the touch screen malfunctions. When I completed the test, once again, I "missed" one question in Part I, and I knew that I had selected the correct answer. The computer aborted the test before I could proceed to Part II. When I consulted with a manager, she employed psychological gas-lighting techniques and extrapolated the answers, and I saw that I had not selected the answer that was displayed on the screen. She indicated that I was the only candidate (out of I am sure, thousands) who complained. This assessment is inaccurate. When I was told to go to the Driver Improvement School (of which, I complied), every candidate in that class was there for the same reason as me: they took Part 1 and missed one (1) question.

The driver's manual is not consistent with the actual test. Incumbents are not stupid -- they are apprised of the fact that online practice tests may extrapolate random answers that may not be on the actual examination. The issue and facts are disparate. The road signs on the computer include exactly one (1) bizarre and non-existent road sign of which the candidates are totally unaware of, such as a non-existant chevron sign, or a misleading question deliberately designed to guarantee failutre.

Subsequently, it was conveyed to me by the President of the Driving Improvement Institution that the Virginia DMV does not "purge" records. I obtained a Learner's Permit in 1975, and started driving my own vehicle in 1985 when I obtained my first Driver's license. I do not believe that I am "not in the system", when I drove two cars from 1985-1998.

The protocols, back in the 1970s, was that an incumbent took one test, and I believe a score of 80% and above deemed the status as "passed." It is not fair to make a person study a manual and then to include a "trick" question that is not applicable to any road sign in the United States, thereby causing the incumbent to fail the test. There should be no "Part 1" and Part 2. I had an excellent driving record, and I am spending my entire salary paying people to haul me around town when I know the road signs in the states of Virginia, Maryland and the District of Columbia.

There is major unfairness and dishonesty being practiced. People who refuse to obey the traffic rules are given licenses, and I see reckless driving in this town on a daily basis, yet those who can drive and obey the traffic laws are penalized. Those records are archived, and they can be extrapolated to validate an individual has driven. Therefore, if the records remain archived, the individual can just take the road test, especially if they have absolutely no traffic violations. I've renewed my license in Arlington, VA on two separate ocassions, and I refuse to believe those records do not exist.