A driving school is not just a formality on the way to obtaining a licence. It is a direct investment in safety, costs, and time. Based on publicly available information, contracts, communication, and training organisation analysed throughout 2025, several risk factors can be identified.
BAVA Driving School has experienced a significant drop from 4th place in the 2024 ranking to 1st place in the 2025 anti-ranking. This is not the “worst driving school” in the traditional sense — it represents the top of the highest-risk driving school category, where consumers should be particularly critical.
Based on observations and available data from 2025, BAVA Driving School stands out with a range of practices that may create the most significant risks for consumers — financially, in terms of training quality, and from a legal perspective.
It should be noted that BAVA Driving School ranked 2nd in the ANTI TOP based on year-long voting by portal users, while the other part of the evaluation was based on expert analysis.
Misleading and outdated information
For at least a year, exam statistics displayed on the homepage of bavaautoskola.lv were outdated. By the end of the year, real data differed by up to approximately 20%. Such discrepancies can be verified using CSDD monthly statistics and publicly available web archive data.
Additionally, the reviews published on the website are selected and posted by the school itself, meaning their authenticity and objectivity cannot be independently verified.
Selective data interpretation and positioning
Throughout the year, social media communication featured selective “top rankings”, positioning the school as one of the largest in Latvia, including claims of being the second largest.
However, according to CSDD data on the number of graduates in 2024–2025, BAVA ranks only 7th. This raises valid questions about the accuracy of communication and data interpretation. It should be noted that inconsistencies were also observed between monthly and aggregated CSDD data.
Aggressive price dumping and mismatch with actual offers
In 2025, BAVA активно used price dumping strategies for both theory and driving lessons. However, in practice, these offers may be difficult to access:
- driving lessons from EUR 14 — available only with a single instructor,
- actual availability — practically minimal.
Furthermore, the contract clearly states that the school does not guarantee the lowest advertised price, meaning the advertised offer may be purely informational.
This creates a risk that the initial offer does not reflect actual costs.
Mismatch between digital positioning and actual performance
Public statements emphasise the superiority of the school’s digital solutions. However, 2025 CSDD data on e-learning platforms shows the school ranking last.
Legally questionable training organisation
A particularly important aspect is the organisation of payments for driving lessons.
According to Cabinet Regulation No. 358, payment for training must be made to the driving school. However, in practice, direct payments to instructors are allowed, creating several risks:
- training may not be registered in CSDD systems,
- students may be unable to defend their rights in disputes,
- there is a risk that training may be considered non-compliant.
This means that part of the training process may take place outside full regulatory control.
Increased risk of losing training progress
If training is not properly registered or does not comply with regulations, students may face situations where:
- their progress is not recognised,
- they are required to repeat training,
- they cannot submit a substantiated complaint.
Unreasonably intensive training schedule
Although regulations allow up to one year for theory learning, the contract sets a significantly shorter period (approximately 5 months) with multiple interim deadlines.
This may create excessive pressure on students and increase the risk of incomplete training.
Premature start of driving training
The contract allows driving lessons to begin after minimal payment, while regulations require basic theoretical knowledge.
This may affect:
- student safety,
- training quality,
- psychological comfort during learning.
Financially unfavourable contract terms
The contract states that:
- payments are non-refundable,
- funds can only be used for services.
Considering the advance payment structure, this creates significant financial risk for students.
Systemically limited instructor competition
The absence of an electronic driving scheduling system means:
- limited ability to choose instructors,
- potentially higher costs,
- reduced competition among instructors.
Conclusion — the combination of these factors makes this driving school a choice that requires particularly careful evaluation before making a decision.
A driving school is not merely a formality on the way to obtaining a driving licence. It is a direct investment in safety, costs and time. In 2025, by analysing publicly available information, contracts, communication and the organisation of training, several risk factors can be identified.
In 2025, GROSS Driving School ranked 2nd in the Anti Top. This is not the “worst driving school” in the classical sense — it is a high-risk choice segment, where consumers need to carry out a particularly careful assessment.
Based on the observations and information available during 2025, GROSS Driving School stands out for a number of practices that may create significant risks for consumers — financially, in terms of training quality, and from a legal perspective.
Marketing communication and the interpretation of “free” offers
The driving school’s communication regularly emphasises the possibility of studying theory free of charge or with a huge discount. Although such an offer available 24/7/365 may seem attractive, it is misleadingly positioned as a unique advantage. At the same time, similar opportunities in the market have effectively already become standard practice.
This may create a distorted perception of the overall cost structure, because the main cost component in driving school services is traditionally practical driving training, not theory.
Hidden costs and lack of transparency in the pricing structure
A significant risk factor is the distribution of payments between the driving school and the instructor, which the learner is not always clearly informed about before starting the training.
In practice, this means:
- part of the payment goes to the driving school as commission,
- the instructor’s financial benefit for the first ten lessons is reduced due to the commission,
- the learner starts training from a financially unfavourable position and perspective.
Such a structure may significantly affect the overall costs and reduce transparency.
Restrictions on instructor choice and lack of competition
The training model often involves assigning the learner to a specific instructor.
This may lead to several consequences:
- limited ability to change instructor,
- an increased number of driving lessons,
- higher overall costs,
- less competition between instructors.
As a result, the learner may find themselves in a situation where the training process is not optimal in terms of either time or costs.
Legally unclear payment practice
As in other examples in the market, in practice payments directly to the instructor are allowed.
According to Cabinet Regulation No. 358, payment for training must be made to the driving school. If payments are made outside this system, there are risks:
- the training may not be fully registered,
- dispute resolution may become complicated,
- the possibilities for consumer rights protection may be limited.
In addition, the practice of concluding a separate agreement with the instructor is used, which creates further uncertainty:
- who assumes responsibility for the quality of training,
- what should be done if cooperation with the instructor fails,
- how continuity of the service is ensured.
Premature start of practical driving training
In the organisation of training, a tendency can be observed to start driving lessons at an early stage, when theoretical knowledge has not yet been sufficiently consolidated.
This may affect:
- road traffic safety,
- training effectiveness,
- the learner’s psychological comfort,
- the number of driving lessons and the overall costs.
In practice, this may lead to a situation where theory is learned in parallel with driving, rather than serving as the foundation for high-quality training.
Lack of distance learning solutions
Unlike other major market participants, the driving school does not have its own fully developed distance learning product.
This may mean:
- limited flexibility for learners,
- lower quality of digital service,
- less effective theory learning.
In modern conditions, where a digital learning environment is an important advantage, this factor is becoming increasingly significant.
Inaccuracies in contract terms and consumer risks
When analysing the structure of the contract, several potentially unfavourable aspects for the learner can be identified:
- unclear or interpretable terms,
- limited possibilities to recover funds paid,
- additional financial risks in various situations.
This may create a situation where the learner does not fully understand their obligations and possible risks.
Stability of training results
Publicly available data indicate average results in both theory and driving.
This in itself is not a critical factor, but in combination with other risks it may affect the overall effectiveness of training and the time required to achieve the result.
Final conclusion — the combination of factors — a non-transparent pricing structure, restricted instructor competition, legally unclear payment organisation, lack of digital solutions and contract-related risks — makes GROSS Driving School a choice that requires particularly careful assessment before making a decision.
A driving school is a direct investment in safety, costs and time. By analysing publicly available information, contracts, communication and the organisation of training, several risk factors in obtaining a driving licence can be identified.
In 2025, Credo Autoprieks Driving School ranked 4th in the Anti Top. This is not a “bad driving school” in the classical sense — it is a representative of a higher-risk segment, where consumers need to carry out a particularly critical assessment.
Based on the available information and market observations, the driving school stands out for several systemic factors that may affect costs, training quality and consumer safety.
Daily theory price dumping as an acquisition tool
The driving school’s communication regularly uses especially low prices or promotional offers for theory training, for example a significantly reduced price compared with the standard level — usually EUR 1 for the theory course.
This approach:
- creates the illusion of a highly favourable offer,
- focuses the customer’s attention on the price of theory,
- draws attention away from the total costs, especially practical driving training.
Considering that practical driving training accounts for the largest part of the costs, theory price dumping may be more of a marketing tool than real value for the customer.
Hidden customer fee and increase in total costs
When analysing the pricing structure, a model can be identified where:
- part of the advance payment for practical driving training is redirected to the driving school as commission,
- the final costs for the learner increase,
- the total costs become less transparent.
This creates a situation where the learner does not always fully understand the overall cost structure.
In addition, publicly available information indicates that in certain cases, when choosing an instructor outside the system, an additional fee is applied, although this could be considered an industry standard.
Instructor assignment and restriction of competition
The training organisation uses a model where the learner is generally assigned to a specific instructor.
This may create:
- limited choice,
- difficulties changing instructor,
- a higher number of driving lessons,
- higher costs.
If there is no effective internal competition between instructors in the market, both quality and efficiency suffer.
Lack of an electronic driving lesson system
Unlike the most modern market solutions, the driving school does not have a fully developed electronic driving lesson booking system for organising basic practical driving training, only for driving school exams.
This means:
- less transparency,
- more complicated access to lessons,
- greater dependence on individual arrangements.
In a digital environment, this is a significant factor for competitiveness and quality.
Risks of unlawful payment practices
As in other market cases, in practice payments directly to the instructor are allowed.
According to the regulatory framework, including Cabinet Regulation No. 358, payments must be made through the driving school. If this is not observed, there are risks:
- the training may not be fully recorded,
- dispute resolution may become complicated,
- consumer protection may be limited.
Forced learning pace and premature promotion of practical driving training
The structure of the contract and training organisation may create a situation where:
- theory is learned at an accelerated pace,
- driving is started early,
- theory is learned in parallel with practice.
This may affect:
- training quality,
- safety,
- the learner’s comfort,
- and may create significant additional costs.
In an optimal model, theory serves as the foundation and is not replaced by practice.
Contract terms and consumer risk
When analysing the contract approach, several potentially unfavourable aspects can be identified:
- accelerated deadlines,
- limited possibilities to recover funds,
- risk of increased total costs.
This may create a situation where the learner assumes greater obligations than they initially realise.
The impact of the driving school’s scale on the market
The scale of the driving school — a broad branch network and a large number of customers — also creates a systemic impact on the market:
- normalisation of price dumping,
- competitive pressure on quality,
- adoption of similar practices by other market participants.
In this case, Credo Autoprieks is rather not setting market trends, but more following other large market players. This means that the impact goes beyond the level of a single driving school.
Training results
Publicly available information indicates average results, despite an aggressive pricing and volume strategy.
This means that:
- a low price does not always mean high efficiency,
- the final result may require more time and costs.
Final conclusion — the combination of factors — constant theory price dumping, a non-transparent pricing structure, instructor assignment, lack of digital solutions, legal risks and contract terms — makes this driving school a choice that requires particularly careful assessment before making a decision.
Obtaining a driving licence is not merely a formal process — it is a combination of safety, financial planning and time investment. This is why choosing a driving school is, in fact, a strategic decision rather than a spontaneous reaction to advertising or price. If one analyses not only the offer on the surface, but also the contracts, training organisation and communication approach, it becomes clear that the models of different driving schools differ significantly, and these differences directly affect the final result — how quickly, how well and at what cost a driving licence is obtained.
In the context of 2025, a particularly interesting case is Einšteins Driving School, which ranks 5th in the Anti Top. This position does not mean that the driving school is unable to provide quality training — rather, it reflects a complex combination of a very strong market position, effective marketing and, at the same time, a number of systemic factors that may be unfavourable to the consumer. A positive aspect should also be noted — compared with 2024, the driving school has made progress, especially in the area of contract terms, moving from a highly problematic model to an acceptable one. However, its influence on the market remains so significant that even partial improvements do not change the overall picture.
It should be noted that Einšteins Driving School ranked 1st in the ANTI TOP based on year-long voting by portal users, while the other part of the evaluation was based on expert analysis. However, proportionality in relation to the number of learners should also be taken into account. Along with the voting results, we also received very detailed complaints, for example, about the teaching style of the driving school’s leading theory instructor Marika Bērziņa in in-person lessons, the uninteresting and boring distance learning, as well as unsatisfactory experiences with certain instructors.
Market dumping as a deliberate strategy
As the largest market player, the driving school does not merely participate in competition — it significantly influences it.
- The price of theory is used as the main acquisition tool,
- an impression of a highly affordable service is created,
- the customer’s attention is diverted away from the total costs,
- the strategy is based on low financial literacy in society.
In practice, this means that:
- decisions are often made based on incomplete information,
- at the beginning, the customer focuses on the smallest part of the costs,
- this approach becomes normalised in the market.
This model is effective in attracting customers, but at the same time it creates long-term risks both for consumers and for the market as a whole.
The reality of total costs and the perception of “expensiveness”
Once the training process has started, the real cost structure becomes apparent.
- Most services are more expensive than the market average,
- total costs often rank among the TOP 2 in Latvia,
- the initial impression does not correspond to reality.
Additional cost elements:
- a fee for using thematic Road Traffic Regulations exercises, which is a unique practice in Latvia,
- penalties for cancelling driving lessons,
- additional payments that are not intuitively understandable.
As a result:
- a large number of complaints about “expensiveness” arise,
- customers experience the increase in costs as unexpected.
The key issue is that the problem is not only the price, but the fact that the total cost and time commitment are not fully communicated.
Very short theory learning deadlines
The driving school offers accelerated theory training, which may seem attractive at first glance.
- Short course deadlines,
- rapid transition to driving,
- emphasis on the speed of the process.
However, this approach has side effects:
- superficial understanding of theory,
- insufficient preparation for driving,
- a higher number of required driving lessons,
- higher total costs.
This creates a situation where speed at the beginning later turns into additional time and costs.
Instructor availability and process efficiency
The large number of customers affects practical training.
- Limited instructor availability,
- waiting time for lessons,
- more complicated schedule planning.
Consequences:
- a longer training process,
- a higher number of driving lessons,
- higher total costs.
The scale effect is clearly visible here — size provides volume, but not always efficiency.
Digital service — one of the best in the market
At the same time, the driving school stands out with a strong digital environment.
- Convenient user experience,
- structured application and communication process,
- modern technical solutions — a good website and application.
This is one of the main reasons for the large number of customers.
However, it is important to understand:
- digital convenience does not mean lower costs,
- digital service does not mean more effective training.
Social responsibility and communication quality
Considering the scale of the driving school, its impact on society is significant.
However, its communication is dominated by:
- entertaining content on social media,
- low educational value,
- insufficient information about costs and risks.
As a result:
- consumers make incomplete decisions,
- market perception is distorted,
- social responsibility does not correspond to the level of influence.
Training results
Public data show stable, but not outstanding, performance.
- Results are above average,
- they are good, but not at the level of the market leaders,
- there is a significant distance from the best in the market.
This means that:
- customer volume is not a direct indicator of quality,
- efficiency is not maximised.
Progress compared with 2024 and necessary improvements
Compared with 2024, Einšteins Driving School has made visible progress, and this cannot be ignored. The most significant changes concern the contract terms — they have become more correct, more understandable and generally closer to consumer interests. As a result, certain legal risks, which were previously one of the main points of criticism, have also decreased. The overall model has now become more structured and easier to understand, which in itself is a significant step in the right direction.
However, this progress relates more to improvements in “form” than to substantial changes in “content”. Several systemic factors that affect both the consumer and the market as a whole still remain. The high level of total costs has not changed significantly, and the pricing structure is still often not intuitively understandable.
The strong impact of dumping on the sector also continues, deforming price perception and affecting competition. Communication quality remains insufficient — especially in relation to explaining the real costs and time required. Considering the scale of the driving school, this impact becomes systemic rather than individual.
As a result, a contradictory profile emerges. On the one hand, it is a driving school with a very strong digital service, a more orderly legal environment and above-average training results. On the other hand, significant risks still remain: total costs are often high and insufficiently transparent, theory learning deadlines are short, various additional fee elements exist, and communication lacks sufficient social responsibility. The combination of these factors means that the driving school’s influence on the overall quality of the market remains very strong.