Advantage Training

[denis_f]

Peter Smythe:

• we have bills to pay and principles (important as they are) don’t pay the rent.

indeed they don’t !

This is a question for the Mods. Is there a way that these odd gaps could be offered to Trucknet members at a good price? If that were the case then I wouldn’t need to use a broker to fill the gaps and Trucknet members would get a special deal for short notice bookings. That’s surely a win/win? Remember, we’re only talking a handfull of gaps a year. Or maybe that crosses the advertising line.

I will be advised on this.

Pete

it’s something that would need discussion within the mod team, the rules are there to keep the forums readable and not swamped with adverts, however I can see that TruckNet members getting a discount is a good thing as far as I’m concerned

[lja]

SmashedCrabFace:
Exactly Harry, anyone daft enough to trust a national newspaper is daft enough not to be allowed to drive a lorry.

VERY VERY TRUE!! I definitely agree. Err…but doesn’t that include about 90% of the British population? (I personally wouldn’t wipe my behind on one!)

[chevmac]

Having met Peter in the past i have no doubt that he runs a very very professional training centre, which I’m sure many trainers would swap with him at a moments notice - I am a training provider who like Peter works very hard to provide the highest standard of training at all times - in very difficult times i guess.

My reason for posting is to question why such a huge change of principles happened in a matter of days

Peter wrote;

"Personally I’m sick to the back teeth of hearing the horror stories. Sooner the industry is properly regulated, the better.

We started doing tiny bits of work for a broker when the recession started but have now ceased due to their ridiculous trading methods. Typically, guy comes having first been ripped off"

“The broker I refer to is Advantage.”

If you feel so strongly about this why do their work

“I’m fortunate, I can afford to do their work or not”

So why do it then

As a highly respected and trusted trainer I feel you have let yourself on this one down Peter - principles don’t pay the bills I fully agree but please don’t bombard the forum with warning messages about brokers ,including Advantage, and then within 2 days tell us that ‘some brokers are ok because you choose to use them’.

I just feel this is giving mixed messages to potential newbies who read these posts

[paul_pstt]

I’ve only pointed out that there are brokers who do not set out to “take the money and run”.

My feelings on brokers in general are extremely well known. If I was to withdraw my services, it only means that the folk who have booked with that particular broker who may have sent them to me will now end up with inferior training. Who wins then?

Pete

[chevmac]

Peter Smythe:
I’ve only pointed out that there are brokers who do not set out to “take the money and run”.

My feelings on brokers in general are extremely well known. If I was to withdraw my services, it only means that the folk who have booked with that particular broker who may have sent them to me will now end up with inferior training. Who wins then?

Pete

The trainee should never end up with inferior training, who ever they go to, but they would get the same inferior training if they booked direct with that poor trainer - which as we both know happens.

That was never my point as my post clearly states - but you did quote Advantage as sending candidatesto you who" typicall, guy comes having first been ripped off"

[jamesfwpurdy]

In response to LGVTrainer’s post;

b) They appear to have nationwide/local centres (or they imply they do but wont commit on any till youve paid-yes I know should have set alarm bells ringing but the ones I “trained” with were the fourth I’d spoken to over a few weeks and seemed the best option.)

c) They appear to have job contacts and recruitment specialists (really they send you job centre internet adverts for jobs that are flipping miles away!!!) (OR send you CV/covering letter advice copied/pasted exactly from nextstep.direct.gov website with their own logo.)

d) they seem to be a one stop shop- to be fair they did everything (if a little iffy) just not as quickly as I would have liked. Also I was farmed out to a different trainer for my mod 4 who did all the training on a Scania artic when my test was on a Daf rigid so could work the wipers lol.

e) people feel reassured by a company that looks large.

Yes with hindsight I would have shopped around and found a local trainer who I felt comfortable with, checked the vehicle etc etc but in my niaevity and determination to make a go of it after losing my job and trying other things that didn’t work out.

Saying that, I now have my cat C,CPC all passed first time and have earnt back the money I spent. Granted I’m only doing agency work but its a start.

[paul_pstt]

The trainee should never end up with inferior training, who ever they go to, but they would get the same inferior training if they booked direct with that poor trainer - which as we both know happens.

That was never my point as my post clearly states - but you did quote Advantage as sending candidatesto you who" typicall, guy comes having first been ripped off"

The other trainer used by Advantage for my area definitely offers inferior training - and yes, if the candidate books direct with them they will receive inferior training. But I set myself apart from that - and very proudly. At least the candidate is sure of getting professional training if they are sent to us.

I stand by my comment that candidates arrive having first been ripped off insofar that they have generally paid more to Advantage than they would have paid had they booked direct. I also feel that the delay in arranging training amounts to a degree of “rip off”. What I can’t say about Advantage is that they “rip off” people in the way that some brokers do/have done. ie. take the money and run. They have been around for a while. If they intended doing the ultimate rip off, I think it would have happened by now.

But I emphasise my general feelings about brokers - ie candidates will generally be better off dealing direct with a good trainer. Sadly, there are some trainers out there that do not fall in this category and, in these cases, the candidate may actually score by dealing with a broker. They will at least get their theory tests etc sorted for them and will have a direct point of contact. This is not always the case with some trainers.

I seem to have opened a real can of worms with this! To clarify: a good trainer has to be the best bet for the candidate - full support start to finish. A poor trainer will expect the candidate to arrive having done all the leg work himself before arranging the course to whatever standard. Some brokers will take the money and run or do very little. Advantage seem to arrange what they undertake to arrange albeit not ever so quickly. I cannot vouch for the standard of training generally.

In short, the whole thing is a mess. It should be properly regulated to take all the “ifs and buts” out of it. In the meantime it’s “buyer beware”. Candidates are best advised to visit the trainer, look at the trucks and sit in them, meet the trainers and look at the facilities.

It’s clear that brokers gain work by offering credit. Some trainers do, some dont. It’s always got to be worth the question.

Hope this makes sense, Pete

[chevmac]

Some of the points you make are valid Peter and I would never doubt your credibality as a professional trainer, but for me I still have something in the back of my mind that doesn’t understand your very very quick change in stance - oh well we all make decisions for business that I GUESS NOT EVERY ONE UNDERSTANDS.

I was recently approached by a broker, not Advantage I will add,(more than once) and asked to deliver a no more than 16 hour course -including test- on cat c without even meeting the trainee, needless to say I DID TELL THEM TO GO ELSEWHERE. I would not asume that is all EVERYONE NEEDS because we both know that is not the case.

[dieseldave]

Given that many people can read what’s written in this topic, let’s see whether we can introduce some clarity…

It should be realised that there are two types of brokers, one type is honest, whereas the other type is nothing more than a dishonest scammer.

In terms of quality, there is a wide spectrum of LGV training providers.

It seems generally agreed that brokers aren’t necessary to the process of obtaining an LGV licence, however and in all fairness, it must be said that there’s absolutely nothing illegal about what honest brokers do.

The ‘edge’ that both types of broker possess seems to be an ability to build a convincing (flashy) website and make it come up first in search engine results, which takes advantage of trainee’s inability (or human laziness) to scroll through and evaluate search results.

As for any LGV training provider’s commercial decision to ‘work’ with honest brokers, surely that’s a question for each individual owner to determine?

If NO providers worked for brokers, it might make life difficult for both the provider AND the broker.
In these financially troubled times, having principles doesn’t pay the bills.

Any disagreement so far?

And now a question for the providers: Do you have a view on whether and to what extent there’s any overcapacity in the market for LGV training provision?

[nearly_there]

If you pay out in excess of a grand without shopping about then its your own fault your taking for a ride

[dar1976]

DD

The points you raise with reference to honest brokers (can’t believe I am writing the two words in the same sentence) are valid and therefore cannot be disagreed with.

The issue is with the U turn in Peter’s advice. It appears that one day he would not touch this broker with a barge pole and advising others to stay well clear. Then a couple of days later he is contradicting this advice by admitting to having had dealings with them.

I am sure you realise I have a lot of respect for Pete and his training school and to that end this should not be viewed as a personal attack on him.

I am just a little confused by the U turn taken in his usual sound advice.

Reference your question.

There are a lot of training providers. Not all of them provide quality

Just a thought. I know it was aimed at providers. But thought I’d add my two pennies worth.

[rog]

Before the internet there was never a need for LGV training brokers

There is still no NEED for those brokers

So the question is why do potential trainees opt to go with them?

The answer is -

nearly there:
If you pay out in excess of a grand without shopping about then its your own fault

[paul_pstt]

I am just a little confused by the U turn taken in his usual sound advice.

It’s obvious this can be taken as a U turn - and to a point, it is.

What I have tried to establish (for no gain of my own) is the fact that not all brokers are criminal.

Having got that sorted, I went a little further and named one that I believe does not intend closing down and running away with the money.

No more - no less!

I repeat, I dislike the presence of brokers in the industry - but if someone decides to train with Advantage, then they’re not likely to loose their money.

If that consistutes a U turn, so be it.

Occasionally, I regret posting on this forum - - - this is fast becoming one of those occasions!!! Pete

[rog]

Peter Smythe:
What I have tried to establish (for no gain of my own) is the fact that not all brokers are criminal.

But is there a NEED for them?

If they all disapeared would that have any effect on the industry

[tachograph]

I think the problem with the opening post in this thread is that it comes across almost as an advert for Advantage, I don’t see why any training company should be criticised for accepting work from a broker they feel is reasonably reputable but the line would probably have been best drawn before actually advertising the broker.

It’s easy to criticise but as Peter rightly says “principles (important as they are) don’t pay the rent” and at least from what I’ve read anyone training with Peter Smythe is going to get good training.

These are some snippets I’ve taken off the Advantage website in less than 5 minutes of reading, does anyone really think a broker that makes statements like these should be freely advertised on a reputable driver forum, so whilst I think it’s reasonable for a good training centre to take work off this broker the first post in this thread may have been a mistake

[simonb]

aaa

[tachograph]

SimonB:
for the ‘80,000’ vacancies they looked at ALL agency positions on any one day and then added all the perm positions advertised - the figure was around 80,000 - what they don’t say is that some of those jobs are only for 4hrs on one day.

What they also don’t say is that of all the agency jobs advertised many if not most won’t actually exist, and of those agency jobs that do exist many if not most will be being advertised several times over by different agencies.

[coffeeholic]

In another thread in this forum, running simultaneously with this one, Peter is tearing into another broker. Reading both threads he is knocking one and promoting the other and the only real difference I can see is he has an agreement with one involving getting paid before even doing the work and with the other he doesn’t have a relationship. Prior to this new arrangement with Advantage he had reported them for being dishonest in their advertising and torn into them on a regular basis. Regardless of cries of times are hard and principals don’t pay the bills and so on you really can’t be complaining about a companies dishonest practices one moment, to the extent you report them, and after doing a deal them deciding they are suddenly okay the next.

Sorry but to me that stinks and for me personally, and it appears others on this thread, he has lost a degree of credibility.

Peter Smythe:
Buyer beware!! Anyone thinking of training should deal direct with a trainer they have visited. The exception to the rule is booking with a reputable trainer on rock solid recommendation.

I guess there are now two exceptions Peter? Book with a reputable trainer on a rock solid recommendation or through Advantage.

[paul_pstt]

Sorry but to me that stinks and for me personally, and it appears others on this thread, he has lost a degree of credibility.

Ok. I took that risk when I posted. I knew it was risky but thought I’d be able to put up a sufficiently robust argument for my actions.

For anyone to say

he has lost a degree of credibility.

worries me - to put it mildly. I am well known for being straightforward and honest in my dealings with both suppliers and candidates. I’m not prepared to risk my reputation for the sake of any broker so I have issued instructions to the office not to accept any more work from any broker with immediate effect.

Please can I have my credibility back? Pete

[coffeeholic]

Peter Smythe:
Please can I have my credibility back? Pete

Somebody admitting they have made an error of judgement and doing something to change that when challenged by others speaks volumes, so you can certainly have your credibility back from me.