Northern Industrial Training LLC

Re: Complaint # [redacted]
Mr. [redacted] made his application for the NIT 1-day CDL training on 3/16/15, and he was added to a waiting list for the first open date. The 1-day program description defines this program as suitable for the "very experienced driver." A training day became available on...

3/30/15 and was offered to Mr. [redacted] who accepted the date and paid the course fee on 3/20/15. Mr. [redacted] arrived at the training site on time and training began at 8:00 a.m.
The training program that Mr. [redacted] requested consists of: Hands-on equipment and vehicle training, to include road time, driving range exercises, city driving, highway driving, defensive driving, pre-trip inspection, airbrakes and backing maneuvers. (See attached course detail)
The CDL practical exam is regulated by Federal and State law and consists of 3 specific parts: Pre-trip, Backing (basic control), and finally the Road Skills exam. The examiner is limited to using approved descriptions when communicating test maneuvers and reads the directions and shows diagrams off of an approved testing instruction sheet. Federal law also dictates that the examiner cannot have previously instructed the CDL applicant. This fact is communicated to all people including Mr. [redacted] prior to the start of their course.
During Mr. [redacted] CDL practical exam he passed his pre-trip and backing (basic control) sections of the exam and then proceeded to the road skills portion. Mr. [redacted] manually put the vehicle in neutral and coasted as he approached 2 separate intersections. Excessive coasting is an automatic failure and at that time the examiner must return the vehicle back to a safe location. Excessive coasting was addressed in the instructions by the examiner prior to the start of the road skills portion of the exam. (See attached statements by examiner)
When the examiner returned the vehicle to the range (safe location) he began to explain Mr. [redacted] the exam results. Mr. [redacted] became hostile shouting profanities at the examiner and did not stay to discuss options for moving forward, but immediately left the training grounds.
After the course and exam had finished, Mr. [redacted] did not approach the management at NIT seeking a re-test schedule or opportunities for a refund.   He made zero attempts to resolve his concerns with NIT.
In summary Mr. [redacted] requested a course that has a very clear description of what to expect and who the course is designed for. Mr. [redacted] became hostile and grossly unprofessional towards the examiner shouting profanities and he did not contact NIT management to resolve any of his concerns. He then communicated incorrectly the portion of the exam he failed, and his actions immediately following the course/exam completion to the Revdex.com .
We understand the frustration when someone fails an examination, however CDL examinations are not subjective, there are strict rules that examiners must follow, and in no case is shouting profanities and acting hostile towards our employees acceptable.
Attached are instructor and examiner statements as well as a copy of Mr. [redacted] CDL exam results.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Director of Administration
[redacted]SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS REDACTED BY Revdex.com[redacted]