Forum menu
I think everyone should retest every ten years, yes it would be a pain in the ass, but it would go someway to address poor habits / keep the roads safer
I think my departed grandad never even had a test he was in his 90s when he finally stopped driving and that was because he couldn't lift his foot of the clutch, not that he was a real liability on the road
Raising the minimum age for a driving licence would... remove the most accident-prone drivers.
But are they the most accident-prone because they are young, or because they're inexperienced? If the former then sure, if the latter then it won't make a fig of difference. The stats I've seen state "first year of driving" rather than absolute age.
Pedal error commonly occurs when vehicles are traveling at low speeds, such as while parking.
I've owned an automatic but I never will again - lovely to drive, but I fear the above. ^^^^
My uncles haven't sat a test but they are in Tipperary. They do occasionally drive in the UK though.
I think everyone should retest every ten years, yes it would be a pain in the ass, but it would go someway to address poor habits / keep the roads safer
Yep - it's one of those things that could be brought in in (eg) 2028 and then just rolled upwards so it wouldn't affect anyone currently driving now but it'd become a thing in due course. It'd also give the industry time to scale up to the point (in 2038) when they have to start full retesting.
In reality nothing is going to change in terms of practical driving tests. Currently DVSA are struggling to keep up with demand. My wife is on a waiting list to get a driving test slot. I can’t see the government suddenly doubling the funding for this in an era when they are trying to cut spending.
The government is already pro autonomous vehicles so they will be hoping to do away with the requirement for driving tests in the future. It’s probably not that far off.
The government is already pro autonomous vehicles so they will be hoping to do away with the requirement for driving tests in the future. It’s probably not that far off.
Even if they were available today, it will take at least a generation to ween us off normal cars be they electric/petrol/diesel etc This is not going to happen any time soon
It wouldn’t hurt if we all had to refresher training/tests every 10 years or so
Thread could have ended there - it's a competency issue not an age issue. Helping my kids learn to drive in recent years was educational for me too.
Derbyshire County Council run a scheme where drivers over 50 can have an assessment and get tips and pointers. I suspect those who really need it don't sign up to it
I think everyone should retest every ten years, yes it would be a pain in the ass, but it would go someway to address poor habits / keep the roads safer
I think it might reduce the number of drivers, but I doubt it'd improve quality much.
Quantity because lots of people don't drive at various times of their life (for example at Uni, or if they live somewhere with transport links), and once in that situation they may not bother renewing their test, and then it becomes self fulfilling they'll they'll move to places with transport links, etc.
Quality because the evidence doesn't show that those who've recently passed their test are any better (statistically they're the worst). I suspect that most people 25-60 could put their phone down, stop at amber traffic lights and stick to the speed limits for 45min once a decade. The question is about removing those people from the road who may actually be a danger to others through no fault of their own.
Talking about young people is a red herring. There might be other things that can and should be done to improve those statistics. For example black boxes are now a common thing that didn't exist even when i took my test, and presumably work. Occupancy limits and curfews, I think would need careful evidence based consideration to make sure you weren't just encouraging even more car's onto the road (e.g. that example in the news, would you just have had 4 kids racing each other, or 4x more traffic in and out of Collage? But we're looking specifically at that exponential increase at the other end of the curve.
Cognitive impairment tests or medical tests don't sound as if they are something that DVSA exemainers need to be involved in. Suspect a network of private clinics would spring up around it once a legal requirement was in place. How do medicals for HGV and Pilots work?
Been great riding to work without the psychotic school run parents.
@gwaelod
My grandfather got his licence without a test,
I’m pretty sure he said it was a matter of weeks after he got it that the test was introduced. He was born april 1918.
So anyone still driving (edit: before the test was actually introduced) must be 106+.
That must be a pretty small number.
My grandfather only had one accident in 75 years of driving (a tiny scrape while reversing in a vehicle showroom) and he decided to stop driving because he was aware that he couldn’t feel the pedals properly under his feet.
HGV's require a medical at any GP surgery, is not specialist. Test blood pressure,eye sight, urine for diabetes and a questionaire about known medical conditions. Thanks that'll be £150.
I guess the doctor could be doing undeclared observations for cognitive decline etc?
On the point about younger drivers, the inquiry that reported in Wales last week on the deaths of those 4 lads in Eryri raised a graduated driving license as a possibility. That along with a restricted class of vehicle for some drivers may help with issues around young people, jobs, rural areas, reintroducing banned drivers to the roads….etc
I can see the justification for the minimum 6 months of learning (although with the costs these days, its probably a case that people will do the same number of hours, just more spread out), and the no young passengers type rules... but restricted vehicles? already basically acounted for in insurance for all but the very few with very wealthy parents.
Those 4 boys in Wales were in a ford fiesta. Ok a slim chance it might have been an RS but it was almost certainly a base model 1.2 eco-boost. with 350kg+ of teenager weighing it down. I'm not sure how you restrict someone much more than that...
Does anyone think the rapid acceleration of ev’s is going to cause more of a problem for people
Not for those who switch it off. The Renault Zoe, for example, in eco will accelerate much like a ICE car. However those who want to use it to get out of a junction quickly or squeeze into a space on a roundabout will take advantage of the rapid acceleration and reduce the reaction time for other users.
I think it will be less pedal error and more lack of patience of some drivers of whatever age.
Those 4 boys in Wales were in a ford fiesta. Ok a slim chance it might have been an RS but it was almost certainly a base model 1.2 eco-boost. with 350kg+ of teenager weighing it down. I’m not sure how you restrict someone much more than that…
In Northern Ireland they're restricted to 45mph and have to display R plates.
Everyone should retake the test every 10 yrs or less after passing, then every 5 years after 70yrs old. imho.
I don't think retaking a test would stop a lot of crap drivers as they would just do the study to ensure they passed and then continue driving as badly as they did before. It is not because they don't know what they should do, it is because they don't care.
Most people are going to know what the speed limits are on the road they are driving on but don't stick to them most of the time. Guess what they would do if in a a test, do you think they would ensure they stick to them?
I can’t see the government suddenly doubling the funding for this in an era when they are trying to cut spending.
What if testing was run at a profit?
The graph posted by @scotroutes seems to show driver deaths - anyone got a graph of others harmed and/or damage to property?
I'm all for both younger drivers having a progressive entitlement for a couple of years after passing a test - other countries have things like R plates, or engine and speed restrictions, or not driving at night or with passengers.
I'm also up for a withdrawal of driving license for anyone who is not fit to drive medically, through lack of skills or attitude. This could be old age, or could be after an accident, or a host of other reasons..
How we implement and afford this, not a clue. But as it stands it seems that a minority of drivers cause significant loss and damage anyway, so why not take those costs and somehow a reduction is 'reinvested' in driver standards and stricter licensing?
I think it would help with the elderly.. As if they become incompetent in terms of reaction time, spacial awareness etc and not nessesarily realise it.
If they still have enough function to pass a practical and theory test then you have to assume a basic level of competence.
It's not a 'catch all' by any means but would surely result in harm reduction.
It won't account for people who know how to drive but just drive like bum holes anyway.. But that goes for all ages, it's absolutely not exclusive to the elderly or sub 25yo male drivers.
My nan bless her hung her keys up about 2 yrs before she died as she realise she was getting a bit sketchy.. But some people don't like to admit it or don't realise how much they've lost the motor skills (no pun intended).
Surely an online speed awareness type course shouldn't be impossible to introduce as a mandatory thing at minimal cost.
I’m not sure how you restrict someone much more than that…
Its more a "graduated driving licence" rather than vehicle capability restriction. Main proposals seem to be restrictions on driving at night and not being allowed to carry passengers of a similar age.
Plus some driving offences resulting in immediate disqualification (vs the three points or similar currently).
Its more a “graduated driving licence” rather than vehicle capability restriction. Main proposals seem to be restrictions on driving at night and not being allowed to carry passengers of a similar age.
It's the enforcement that would be the obvious issue. Black box in car is automated. Checking that someone who's been driving less than X years/is under X age/ Isn't carrying passengers needs an awful lot of random stops. if it's 'under 21' you're basically on a 'challenge 25' in the pub type thing - you'd have to pull over everyone who looked under 25. Which isn't easy to tell visually, at night. How do you spot passengers if they're going to duck when they see a police car or be hidden in the back behind tinted windows?
General 'car brain' is that anythings legal as long as you don't get caught - we've not dealt (really) with drink/drug driving, speeding, mobile phone use - people do all that because the chance of getting caught remains tiny. If I walk past a queue of traffic in London you can guarantee at least 10% of drivers are tapping away at their phones. Last week saw a woman on her phone, with her open laptop on the armrest and a small child jumping up and down on the passenger seat.
Surely an online speed awareness type course shouldn’t be impossible to introduce as a mandatory thing at minimal cost.
"Hey daughter, please can you undertake this little test for me?"
Main proposals seem to be restrictions on driving at night
Which is a bit shitty for those working in the hospitality sector.
“Hey daughter, please can you undertake this little test for me?”
They can attend in person like a theory test. Whether they can drive home afterwards of course.....
The inquiry heard that before the crash, Mrs Duncan had cancelled her insurance because she did not want to pay the money for it as she felt she did not use her car enough.
She was already driving illegally so not sure how there been a 'test' would've stopped her driving.
Main proposals seem to be restrictions on driving at night
So when the clocks change at the weekend folk here (Scotland) would have to be off the road by 4:30pm, and 3:30pm come December yet could drive until 11pm in June?
I really don't think either of my parents should be driving and some of the most dangerous driving I see is not as a result of going to fast it is the lack of awareness of what's going on around them, unable to respond quickly and not turn their heads to look. This doesn't just affect older people, I accept.
Surely an online speed awareness type course shouldn’t be impossible to introduce as a mandatory thing at minimal cost.
I tried to unlock a Lime e-bike late one night in London and the phone app made me take a reactions test to prove I wasn't drunk or tired. Before I can hire a Lime e-scooter, my driving licence has to be uploaded to the app and verified. It'll run a geo-fenced speed restriction in certain areas too.
The levels that CAN be put in place are incredible but if you mention the idea of the car running a reactions test on you or even having an onboard breathalyser, everyone would be up in arms about it.
But for renting at e-bike (restricted to 15mph) at 10pm, you have to jump through all these hoops.
Cars are all integrated / connected these days, it'd be easy to use the bloody massive infotainment system that's built into most of them to run through 30s of testing every once in a while.
Cars are all integrated / connected these days, it’d be easy to use the bloody massive infotainment system that’s built into most of them to run through 30s of testing every once in a while.
I'm imagining with all the mood lighting in new Audi's it'd look like an episode of Who Wants to Be a Millionaire as the lights house lights go down
In Northern Ireland they’re restricted to 45mph and have to display R plates.
"However, both rear tyres were only half the required inflated pressure for carrying four people.
Mr Thompson said, in his view, Hugo had driven into a bend on the road too fast, causing the vehicle to come off the road.
He said he calculated the maximum theoretical speed around the bend was 38mph.
But he added: "Having driven the bend myself the fastest speed I felt comfortable negotiating the bend was 26mph."
He said the Ford Fiesta had entered that bend at a speed that was in excess of the limit to negotiate it, even though that may well have been below the road's 60mph limit.
Mr Thompson said the actions of Hugo Morris needed to be considered in the accident.
While it had been raining heavily, with leaf cover on the road, the investigator said he did not consider weather conditions played a role in the collision."
Not sure a 45mph limit (assume thats a legal limit relying on an officer clocking them, not a physical restriction on the car?) and a sticker would help here
I really don’t think either of my parents should be driving and some of the most dangerous driving I see is not as a result of going to fast it is the lack of awareness of what’s going on around them, unable to respond quickly and not turn their heads to look. This doesn’t just affect older people, I accept.
And if they have an accident, as this woman did, and kill someone how will you feel about not stopping them?
So when the clocks change at the weekend folk here (Scotland) would have to be off the road by 4:30pm
Nope. Its night in the colloquial sense vs the strict definition of sundown to up. Proposal is something like 11pm to 5am. Think the logic is that the number of young driver accidents during that period is higher than the baseline but could be wrong. It may also overlap with the other one about not having passengers eg drunk mates egging you on.
We had the usual "pedal slips" and other cars paint on my MIL car until we took the keys away about 2 years ago. She hates us for it but I have no doubt she was becoming a real risk to other people, and if she had injured somebody I would have felt accountable.
I think we should retest every 5 years over around age 55/60 (I am 60 BTW)
Think the logic is that the number of young driver accidents during that period is higher than the baseline but could be wrong
Doubt it, it’s not like it’s something that hasn’t happened before ?
Has there been a FAI (or Inquest) that recommended age based cognitive testing?
The more appropriate option would be to simply require re-testing at intervals.
It’d need some evidence base, i.e how frequently does it need to be to discover enough bad drivers that it was worthwhile, or how quickly do people decline.
I only skim read the FAI report but I think they heard evidence but concluded that the immediate need was for >80's and the SoS should consider it for >75s. Expert evidence seemed to suggest that whilst actual driver testing would be the gold standard - cognitive impairment testing could be a more realistic step.
I just love this, another kick the elderly thread.
Not at all. But an elderly woman killed a toddler because she appeared to have reached a point where she should no longer be driving, and was no longer able to make sensible decisions about her own or other people's safety, even after the accident she seemed to have no appreciation of what was going on. Should society ignore the fact that some people are a potential hazard to others because those people are old?
You can all do one, I really resent having to keep reappliying for my license every three years while being subjected on the road to all the dangerous behaviour on other road users.
I'm not sure why you resent having to renew your license every three years. My wife has to for a medical condition - its a minor inconvenience but anyone could see that its a necessary safeguard against deterioration of her health to the extent it affects driving. Now I do think there also needs to be a better mechanism for her clinical team to raise a concern before the three years, just as there should be for old folk - but the point here, if you bother to read the judgement before dismissing it, was that the lady involved actually appeared quite lucid and had obviously had her license renewed multiple times, so the current system didn't work.
This is one quite rare incidence but some 17 year old kid can kill 3 of his mates and himeself and none of you even commented.
Well I was responding to a press story about the fatal accident inquiry. If there's an FAI on a teenager killing his mates then I'll happily discuss the outcomes. My point (which to be fair most people seem to have missed) was that this wasn't just some road safety organisation claiming we should be more thorough, or a driver training place with a vested interest, or the bereaved family. it was a fatal accident inquiry. They are relatively uncommon in the first place, but even less common to make formal recommendations. My question was do those recommendations carry any real weight?
I am sick of close passes , cars doing red light plus three or four in the all England light jumping championship, The idiot in Rusholme who passed me at speed in the straight on lane to turn right in front of the the cars in the process of turning right, the person in the Audi who overtook me in the 20mph zone when I was obeying the speed limit.
You are 100% right, we should not even consider doing anything about the license renewals of people with dementia until all those other issues are resolved 😉
For the record my partner has promised to tell me the moment my driving is no longer safe so I can give up before getting to the point of being dangerous.
What if her judgement goes first or the same time? What if you won't listen at that point (dementia isn't great at helping sound judgements)? What if she thinks, as many do in those circumstances, he's not the worst and it will affect our lifestyle if we cant get about and surely the Dr would have said something...
By the way, I think it is telling that the body representing GPs essentially refused to take part in the FAI. I understand if they don't think they are the right people to make that decision etc, but attending the inquiry and saying that, or raising concerns about impact on workload etc would have enabled the Sheriff to take that into account in making his recommendations.
Most cases of dementia are diagnosed between the ages of 40 and 65.
I think you have misquoted something there... Under 65's with dementia are known as early onset dementia - the clear implication being that "normal" dementia is not diagnosed until 65+!
Parents' friend (late 70s) informed them that he'd recently stopped using his sleep apnea mask. Seemingly, the continued validity of his driving licence was conditional on his maintaining this treatment.
Needless to say, he's still driving. Tellingly, his son hasn't allowed him to drive his grandchildren in years.
Instead of fussing over this we should be aiming for a society where everyone can get where they need to by bicycle and/or public transport, and perhaps the occasional car hire. The personal car is probably incompatible with widespread human survival in the centuries to come anyway, and is at the epicentre of a current public health crisis which includes premature cognitive decline. Most of the cars I see on the roads around me every day just don’t need to be there and our lives would be better if they weren’t.
Not sure a 45mph limit (assume thats a legal limit relying on an officer clocking them, not a physical restriction on the car?) and a sticker would help here
Same as any speed limit really then. There was nothing stopping them trying to take the bend at 100.
OTOH it might have put them off going on the road trip at all and got the train instead.
And any measures are inevitably going to have to be assessed based on the bigger picture, a 45mph limit would do nothing to prevent deaths around most towns, it might have an impact out of town. Yes it relies on enforcement, but that's the same as the motorcycle restrictions which are largely stuck to and workable (e.g. no pillions, I've seen the police pull over riders and pillions on small capacity bikes to check licenses etc).
What if testing was run at a profit?
This. Absolutely this.
Petrol currently at 1.35 ish a litre. Way too cheap. My litmus paper is the school run. When petrol was 1.70 a litre, there were very few who'd leave the engine running while the parents sat there. Now, there's a few. QED petrol is too cheap.
It's back to the entitlement thing. "WHY should I, a driver, have to pay?"
Oh, and I did enjoy the comments about regular retesting likely having no impact on safety. Some people drive like incompetent buffoons through choice. Most people drive like that because of habit.
If you change the habit, you change the output. So retests work by constantly reminding people of how they need to drive, so they do it better & more often... Which forms a habit.
Pilots don't often crash aeroplanes. Why is that? Because they aren't tested often? Or because they are?
Instead of fussing over this we should be aiming for a society where everyone can get where they need to by bicycle and/or public transport, and perhaps the occasional car hire.
Indeed.
But carnormativity runs deep.
(As do challenges in rural areas).
Pilots don’t often crash aeroplanes. Why is that? Because they aren’t tested often? Or because they are?
I'd hypothesize because they have a crew and ATC looking over their shoulder constantly? If a pilot did something stupid it would get noticed and investigated. I'd say that's a better argument for black boxes universally than regular testing.
Indeed.
But carnormativity runs deep.
(As do challenges in rural areas).
Nothing changes, until it does.
To answer the OP's question.
There was a case a couple of years ago near me of someone with dementia pulling out - ended up killing a toddler in a pram on the pavement.
Nothing was done then, nothing will be done now. People who should not be allowed in a car will continue to be allowed to kill and maim.
I haven't read the whole thread so don't know if this has been mentioned already. We have built a society based on car travel for the past 50 years, it isn't any wonder that the elderly are reluctant to give up their cars when that creates a level of isolation from the services they need and activities they can still enjoy.
If we want not only old people to consider their impact on road safety but just make our own environments nicer and more traffic free then the concept of the 15 minute city is the way to go, make living without a car a realistic lifestyle choice bring most of the facilities and services we need in life within walking distance or a short trip on an efficient public transport.
I didn't own a car from about 2012 until 2023, but arthritic knees meant using public transport had become an issue for me, I had already set my life up so I could have relatively quick and easy commute to work on bike or public transport, but I still found I needed a car. So at 55 now, and I am having thoughts now about what my life will be like when I get older, with services getting more centralised, friends being quite geographically distributed, local high streets dying etc would I be able to survive without a car?