[Closed] Should you be made to periodically resit your driving test?

People would pay if they had to.  And they should have to. Every ten years seems about right.

So would you pay to resit your test every ten years?

Yes.

I think anyone who gets two endorsable driving offences should resit their test immediately too.

Not sure we have the testing infrastructure to achieve it though without major government investment.

Politically it's a non-starter so it'll never happen. The number of middle age voters who'd fail their tests each year would be huge.

Yes 100 % rules have changed, roads have changed too. I'd also support more graduated licensing too.

I think it would be a good idea but the usual suspects will declare it a "war on motorists" or some such. On a personal note, I doubt if I had to walk into a test centre now without any preparation that I'd pass the test. I suspect that's true for a lot of people.

I'd like to see compulsory eye tests for anyone convicted of a moving traffic offence, speeding, etc. A random optician is chosen close to your home/place of work and the results are sent to DVLA.

New law comes in very soon that means learners accompanied by driving instructors can drive on motorways..

Makes sense..

Oh, saw something today on FB that mentioned if you are caught using a mobile whilst driving, or using a mobile phone whilst the engines on and you are stopped, means an instant 3mth Ban... (that might need clarification) but it was a feed from Surrey Police.

Yes

Never happen

Next

yokaiser

So would you pay to resit your test every ten years?

Would I re-sit my test every ten years? Sure, why not. It would do no harm to brush up on the fundamentals. Would I pay? Depends how much. If I failed would I lose my licence? Go back to a provisional? What impact would this have on  my insurance or my job?

It would also have the side effect of reducing pollution, traffic jams, accidents, insurance premiums, wear and tear and improve the public transport system.

I think this is a stretch, especially insurance and traffic jams.

Yes certainly. I would be more than happy to - and pay for the privilege.

I'm all for retests - I'd start with anyone getting above 6 points total, also anyone (both drivers unless proper evidence of zero fault for one of them) involved in more than one RTC on an open road (would also stop serial "whiplashers")

And the 2nd or maybe 3rd retest should be held to a higher standard than the current "minimum"

Won't happen populist politics at its worst - in the current political climate no sitting or potential government will want to be seen to alienate the "rights" of motorists. Periodic simulator re-tests would be a good idea, plus a compulsory eye test.

Maybe...but actually new drivers are far more dangerous than older ones in general so I don't really see that it would be all that useful.

What I would like to see is more disqualification and mandatory re-test for people convicted of driving offences. That would target the poor/dangerous drivers much more effectively, and be harder for the daily hate to froth about.

Bikebouy, i never believe anything i read on fb, but the .gov website is quite clear on this matter, it doesn’t matter whether your engine is on, it’s where you are at the time.

eg, sitting at traffic lights with your engine off=illegal to use phone.

sitting in a layby with engine running=legal to use phone. What matters, it seems, is whether you are actually on a public road as part of general traffic. When parked, even at the side of the road, you aren’t part of traffic.

I drive buses for a living, we (all of us, and truck drivers too) have to undergo periodic training as part of the CPC programme, one of the things that occasionally surprises me, is that i am wrong about something i was certain about.

I’d agree with comments above, retesting is a good idea, but it’ll never happen due to politics.

No point. People would pass the test and still drive badly. No one gives a toss anymore.

Mandatory points for any accident.

It is ridiculous that you can receive points for driving perfectly safely, yet let your standards slip to the point of actually causing an accident and most people get off scot free.

So that for a start, then retests as well.

Also concentrate tuition more on attitude. Motorists are a terribly entitled bunch. We need to stop people seeing driving as a ticket to freedom and start them seeing it as a shackle to responsibility.

And FFS, drive less. All of you can make that choice.

sitting in a layby with engine running=legal to use phone

https://www.gov.uk/using-mobile-phones-when-driving-the-law says you can use a phone when you're "safely parked" and that text links to https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/waiting-and-parking-238-to-252#239

which says (Rule 239, Parking) fourth bullet point:

• you MUST switch off the engine, headlights and fog lights

That says to me that you DO have to switch the engine off to use the phone legally, which is also what I was told on a LA minibus course.

Not periodically, just every time you notch up 6 points as suggested above.

Yes.

I have to be reassessed every 5 years with work so have no issues, I also belive a full retest after a certain age.

No: More plain clothes Traffic Police would help solve the problem. To many clever (stupid) bastards flaunting it atm.

Greybeard, i stand corrected

Yes , time or points . I still can't believe a banned driver doesn't have to take a compulsory retest, .

So as I’ve picked up 6 points in 25 years and approximately 1 million miles do I need a re-test?

FWIW I don’t disagree but I know plenty who have never picked up points but can’t drive for toffee unless it’s on their set commuter route. Being a passenger in a ‘commuter only’ drivers car terrifies me.

The driving test is about jumping through hoops. There IS a deeper almost more philosophical point to driving well as to how you approach problem and the solution. Which is harder to test.

This one again!

Yes is the answer.

However my 90 year old neighbour still probably drives better than most of the ****s in my town...

Without a doubt yes.

Absolutely.

As someone with Type 1 diabetes mine only lasts three years and whilst I don't have to resit the test each time I do have to reapply for my licence and I wouldn't have a problem resitting the test when I get to a certain age; I believe that a retest at, say, 70 should be mandatory - if not sooner.

Hmmm, not sure actually...and am wondering if this idea in itself might not be a knee jerk reaction?

I'm not saying any of these suggestions are necessarily bad ideas, but to consider the OP's rationale, which is that driving standards are 'plummeting' for a moment and that as a consequence safety needs to be improved - even the most cursory look at accident stats suggest that significant reductions have been made over the last 20 years in fatalities and injuries, which admittedly has flatlined in recent years, but then traffic levels have been increasing significantly, so to me the rationale looks a bit flawed - deaths and injuries certainly aren't rocketing in the way being suggested (and no that's not an attempt to minimise the devastating impact of the accidents that happen)

Also as has been pointed out it tends to be the young and the old who are involved in serious accidents, so again not sure how that fits with the comments about the 'middle-aged' (and yes I am reluctantly admitting to being one of those!)...

If the question is how do we further improve road safety coz there are still too many people being killed on the roads, then yes fine this might be part of the package, but how about reducing traffic volume in the first place - so instead of spending huge amounts on testing infrastructure spend it on public transport, cycle infrastructure, pedestrian infrastructure etc..

Also the majority of people, rightly or wrongly, drive differently on their driving test to how they subsequently go on to drive, so what would stop people simply driving to a standard then reverting to bad habits once they have the piece of paper?  Driver behaviour may well be an issue but I feel there is probably a better solution than a once every test ten years in terms of driver education.

Oh, and cyclists are killing people right, left and centre so we need lots of new legislation, maybe a cycling test, compulsory helmets etc...see what I mean...  : )

Should you be made to periodically resit your driving test?

No.

Sort of.

A full test every 10 years is going to be a massive burden on drivers and the system generally, and also the ability to "pass" a test doesn't necessarily take into account what many years of experience gives you, if that makes sense.  Someone might be better at passing a test when they are 17 years old than 60, but a far worse real world driver.

However, eyesight, reactions, etc, do decline with age, and this needs to be taken into account.  I would say that an interim smaller test to pick up obvious issues at let's say 60/70/75/80/etc.  This could even be VR based to pick up clear physical issues and make things more cost effective.  If you fail then you have to take a far longer "experienced driver" test before anything is done.

Just keeping your license until something happens seems madness.

Full re-tests every 10 years for everyone seems too far.

Driving is a privilege, not a right.

Retest every 5 years I would say.

Driving standards and road craft understanding are pretty poor.

I'm an old duffer, most of my generation think it's a right to drive. most have appalling standard of driving and understanding.

Maybe physical and eye test every 20 years, the optician I saw recently was shocked I hadn’t had an eye test in 30 years.

I’ve never felt the need and fortunately my eyesight is about the same as 30 years ago. As for the middle aged comment, the stats don’t agree.

No

I think driving standards in the uk are very good considering the amount of traffic etc. Never understand why a lot of people seem to think it’s bedlam out on the roads. I drive a lot in a large city and that’s just not my experience at all. Likewise when i’m out on my bike.

Yes, and it should be a tougher test.

Two time periods. A shorter one for those who stay at L test level, say 3 years.

If you pass your advanced test, you get 5 years.

Use some of the extra revenue generated from test fees to fund traffic police.

Make it a simple process/punishment to be an instant retest for certain motoring offences.

Also, if you drive for work, the advanced test should be compulsory...

...and yes, my work involves driving.

I wouldn't object to compulsory retests every so often, maybe every 15yrs dropping to 10yrs then 5yrs as people get into old age.

However I'm not sure I agree with

I can’t help but feel that the standard of driving is plummeting.

What makes you think this? I think people are getting a bit better if anything.

One of the most stressful experiences of my life so I'd say for the love of God no! On purely selfish reasons you understand...

Personally I'd not deal with the plummeting standards through retesting. I wouldn't object to a test and  even a prior skills refresher along the way but I just don't think it will generate better drivers.

If a 17 year old with limited experience can pass a test then someone who has years of experience and a bit of refresher training will likely find it a lowish hurdle in all but the more extreme cases. Let's not forget that many new drivers who have passed their test also have accidents soon thereafter.

Many of the worst would manage a refresher course and to squeak through the retest then go and drive like they always did (badly).

I would instead invest the money required for the retest infrastructure in a much enhanced roads policing model using technology and people on the road (well in cars and vans) and I'd target crap driving, unsafe vehicles and blatant law breaking. I'd make it clear and set the fines so it was self funding.

I'd also like to see "message" policing powers.

Pulled over for an illegal number plate or front windows that are illegally tinted etc. - vehicle gets compulsory and immediate prohibition order, recovered to a secure site. Removal of tints/replacement of iffy number plate at owner's expense and vehicle only returned once that and any fine is paid.

Caught using a mobile, crush it at the side of the road. That would probably have more effect than 6 points for some people.

Technology based system allowing dashcam footage to be used for a new specific offence of tailgating. Mandatory ban for HGV and PCV drivers caught tailgating passenger cars for more than Xxx seconds (bearing in mind the massive destruction / risk to life that these vehicles pose even when compared to cars).

Totting up system works ok imo but needs to be less people running around on >12 points.

More speed cameras (single point and average).

More than anything I think what is needed is to send a message to vehicle users...comply or get caught and punished. At the minute the roads policing units are under resourced and there is not much deterrent.

I drive regularly for work. I like my perfectly clean license so I behave accordingly. I've always got that desire in my head to get me and everyone else I share the road with home to their families in one piece and to not lose my livelihood. I may be in the minority.

No,

It’s a completely pointless exorsize - do you think Bad drivers get that way because they’ve forgotten how to drive?

I don’t want to spend time and money to prove to someone I can do something I do every day to the lost basic legal minimum just in case. We’ve got a system and it’s getting sterner, more offences carry more points, fines are larger and if it’s warranted you can be forced to re-take your test. Accidents are down and fatalities are down.

Some people don't perform well under pressure. I'm a reasonable driver but still took 4 attempts to pass back in the day. Having said that, I'd still happily submit myself to refresher training and retesting if everyone else had to.

As far as compulsory retesting goes, i agree that driving is seen as for more of a right than a privilege for retesting to be accepted by the majority. It would have to be a gradual culture change....possibly via the following steps:

1. Incentive for voluntary refresher and retesting, possibly via reduced or subsidised insurance reduction.

2. More marked and unmarked camera cars monitoring driving standards, with the discretion to dispense seeds of wisdom where the soil is fertile.

3. First Incentivised, then later complsory fitting of dash and rear view cams with the aim of properly determining fault and poor driving standards.

4. Taking all moderatly to seriously bad driving offences to a proper court case, with video being shown to magistrates or judge and compulsory attendance of the defendent in person.

5.  Compulsory retesting at 6 points.

6. Gradual introduction of retesting for all.

Every 5 years up to 65, every 2 after.

If you have an accident deemed your fault, every year for 5 years, then revert to every 5 years (or 2 years if 65+) if no blame-worthies during "probation" period.

And compulsory dashcams for all motor vehicles, footage of all accidents must be handed over to police.

" more offences carry more points, fines are larger"

<span style="font-size: 0.8rem;"> Agreed. Problem is catching enough people to send a message that you're likely to get done. </span>

As for points for accidents I'm not sure how that could work or even in fact whether it would be counter productive for the victims of collisions.

If you are rear ended while waiting at a red light clearly you've done nothing wrong and I assume the person who mentioned this would envisage points for the person who rear ended you and not the victim.

<span style="font-size: 0.8rem;">An automatic set of points would imo be a barrier to getting insurance settled because you are going to get much more contested liability even in hopeless cases. You also have the issue of criminal level of proof (points) Vs civil level of proof (insurance).   </span>

<span style="font-size: 0.8rem;">Automatic points would also imo encourage the already seemingly rising number of hit and runs. Loss of no claims is a big enough cause to run away for some people. Imagine how many more would run away from automatic points. </span>

No I don't think you should.

I think driving standards have slipped due to there being very little enforcement of the rules of the road.

I hardly ever see a traffic officer despite them being based about four miles from my house.

I think there should be a better system for reporting people you think should not be driving also periodic medical checks.

Just in the process of looking at insurance for my daughter, who's recently passed her test

... so, instead of retests, how about mandatory in-car black box systems like young drivers are offered instead of a retest after 6 points or an accident.  Won't stop all shit driving but erratic movement (presumably including hard braking when they look up from their phones) must be a massive predictor of likelihood of crashing.  Maybe they look at speeds too, I dunno - even if they can't know the location's speed limit, at the very least they could detect going over 70 which is unacceptable "anywhere"

No, but incentivise people to undertake regular training, by increasing insurance premiums after 5yrs which would then ratchet up by 10% per annum afterwards and are reset after completing the training

Oh where to start ,

yes Somthing needs to be done but It won’t

maybe dash cams for everyone ? Going a little far but with the lack of traffic police it might help

small edit

I’m all for making progress and don’t think speed is totally evil , just speed in the wrong place is poor judgement

is 80 or 90 on a motorway dangerous?

No, but incentivise people to undertake regular training, by increasing insurance premiums after 5yrs which would then ratchet up by 10% per annum afterwards and are reset after completing the training

Errrrrr..... how about incentivising people by reducing their policies in a meaningful way if they undertook re testing? People would trip over themselves because as it stands it's a license to make up figures and print money.

100% yes.... Every 5 years

Alternative could be as is said above and compulsory black boxes on all vehicles.

Most companies I drive for (hgv) use telematics which measure various aspects of your driving style from harsh braking and cornering to overspeeding or harsh acceleration. If this was introduced more widespread along with someway of encouraging better driving then driving standards imo would improve quite quickly.

I've been saying for years that every driver should resit their driving test every 5 years.

Can't see it being a vote winner...

Most companies I drive for (hgv) use telematics which measure various aspects of your driving style from harsh braking and cornering to overspeeding or harsh acceleration

The flaw there is Goodhart's law. If you are known to be measuring something then it ceases to be a good measure.,

For example if you check harsh braking then that might encourage people to decide to ignore the minor detail that an amber light means stop unless its unsafe to do otherwise. Harsh acceleration and you might have a vehicle crawling away after the light turns green and hence stopping more than one or two other vehicles getting through (which in turn might have someone think sod it and jump the amber).

I spent a couple of years where part of my job was providing managers with information from a call centre. I like to think I managed to convince them that whatever I provided was just a starting point for them to start paying attention to a particular person. For example if you decided the measure was an average of 2mins on a call there are several ways to hit that figure.

Sounds like a nonsense idea. Not like people are completely comfortable driving after they pass the test the first time.

Another test measuring basic skills isn't going to do anything for road safety.

No to retesting as people will just front it for the test then back to old habits.

Yes to :-

more traffic police

more average speed cameras

CCTV where motorists regularly queue jump / use wrong lanes deliberatly then fine them through the post with the footage e mailed to them.

Black Boxes for everyone.

Apart from getting more police, these are a lot easier to introduce than create more test centres when the DVSA is struggling to find locations as its is and recruit more examiners as it's rubbish job.

Apt post for a Friday, between 3 and 6pm people seem to drive like their hair is on fire.

"That says to me that you DO have to switch the engine off to use the phone legally, which is also what I was told on a LA minibus course."

No, this isn't the case; these are separate regulations. Reg 98 of the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986 says that when stationary you must stop machinery to prevent noise (with various exceptions). Reg 110 was added by an amendment to the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986 and includes a prohibition on driving while using a hand-held mobile phone (again with exceptions)

The key is what constitutes driving, and a temporary stop in traffic is still driving, e.g. traffic lights. If I've reached my destination (which could be a shop on the way home) and park then I'm not driving; whether I switch my engine off or not doesn't affect this but may be a separate offence under reg 98

In that case are the police right to broadcast the “rule” that they are currently stating that:

“You are causing an offence of using a mobile phone whilst stationary whilst the vehicles engine is on”

I’m all for interpretation and clarity, but there seems to be some confusion being brought into the “offence” of using a mobile phone whilst driving and/or stationary..

It either is an offence, or it isn’t an offence.

"...accident stats suggest that significant reductions have been made over the last 20 years in fatalities and injuries, which admittedly has flatlined in recent years, but then traffic levels have been increasing significantly, so to me the rationale looks a bit flawed – deaths and injuries certainly aren’t rocketing in the way being suggested (and no that’s not an attempt to minimise the devastating impact of the accidents that happen)"

Technology will have played a part here, e.g. ABS, airbags (fitted externally on some vehicles now) pedestrian-friendly exterior design, NCAP testing, Electronic Stability Controls, etc. and will tend to mask driver standards

Apparently we'll see level 4 autonomous cars in 2 to 4 years with level five soon after that. No doubt they'll be hugely popular with the tablet addicted generation. It doesn't take a great deal of imagination to see how mandatory re testing for dumb car ludites would become popular.

At the minute I think you'd just see a huge increase in uninsured and illegal drivers.

100% yes.

In any industry if you had machine that injured over 180,000 people a year and killed 1792, then the operators would absolutely be required to have regular retests and strict licensing.

Just look how many people don’t know how to signal correctly on a roundabout, don’t know that amber means stop, or don’t know what a dual carriageway is.

Every discussion of speed awareness course on here is full of people saying they learned useful information and were horrified at people on the course who didn’t know basic road rules.

So would you pay to resit your test every ten years?

Its interesting isn’t it that there are lots of people agreeing with the concept and willing to pay for the privilege, yet very few of them will have spent any money on driver training in the last ten years despite it being perfectly possible and likely to have more impact on their own driving standards.  I infer from this that most people who think we should retest actually believe they drive better than most other people.

GrahamS has it.

Nope. Its not all drivers that need retests and extra training. It some drivers.

A ban should mean a ban on the topping up system. We have a huge number of drivers banned several times over and still driving. Increase penalties for bad driving, without insurance, MOT etc. And I mean increase significantly.

43 years driving and Ive been rear ended twice, only accidents. Do I need more training and resits of exam? Don't think so.

Punishments should be for those that break the regulations/law. In most, all, cases the people that commit the crimes are the very ones that are least likely turn up for tests or training. Such as driving without a licence, drink driving.

Every discussion of speed awareness course on here is full of people saying they learned useful information and were horrified at people on the course who didn’t know basic road rules.

True, but 4 weeks after the course do you think anyone changed their driving?   Speaking personally I didn't.  On the way home from the course I did, the next day a little bit, a week later back to how I was driving before the course.  Would be exactly the same after a test.

As others have said, if you don't enforce road laws/driving safety then people do what they want until they get caught or crash.

There is a straight stretch of country road near me with a 30 mph speed limit. At least once a week I get overtaken on that stretch.

Also parking at school dropping off/collecting times is atrocious, with parents parking on zigzag lines and even on the pelican crossings themselves. Just stopping in the middle of the road, never signalling and pulling out on pedestrians, cyclist and other road users.

I see complete disregard of other road users and the speed limits. Jumping of red lights, quite often on pedestrian crossings and dreadful overtaking of cyclists ( on blind bends often with a few cm of room).  And tailgating to the extent you can't see the front of the reg plate.

Very little in the way of a thank you if you let another motorist out of a side road. Also motorists coming at you when you have right of way on your side of the road, they just come round cars on their side, bullying you to stop yourself. Many times I've been forced to stop or ended up in the gutter.

I personally don't think I would pass a test today. However I always use my mirrors, signal, read the road well ahead and feel I'm courteous to other road users.

It seems you are taught to pass your text nowadays, not taught to actually drive.

It seems you are taught to pass your text nowadays, not taught to actually drive.

Every generation says that about about the next.  Actually though the test has got progressively harder over time.  The stats also suggest that the longer you’ve been driving / older you are the less likely you are to have an accident.

Generally not in favour but can definitely see some benefits. Maybe some sort of compulsory £20 non-road-based test lasting say 30 minutes every 5 years to include basic eye test, hazard perception, highway code, reaction time tests etc Tests could be weighted for example so failing the eye test is immediate fail!). Score 50% or less and will have to take a full retest with a couple driving lessons.  50-70% triggers a short refresher course. Over 70% and fit to drive for another 5 years. Maybe incentivise it too with insurance reductions depending on how well you score?

So lang as we see driving as a privilege and not a right ...

As I understand the underlying issue for the OP is to prevent or reduce the decline in driving standards, I'm not sure retaking a driving test per se would work. Personally, I'd prefer the approach of capital punishment for all those who don't know how to use a mini roundabout, or continue to use the middle lane.

In other words, those that don't understand the two fundamental requirements of driving in the UK: Give way to the right and keep left unless overtaking.

Instant death and their decapitated heads on spikes at the scene of their crime.

HTH

It sounds like a good idea and I'm in favour - but I'm not sure it would make a huge amount of difference.

Although some people may benefit from additional training, I think the major culprit to bad driving is attitude and I don't think a re-test will help with that.

By attitude I mean impatience, hostility and aggression.  The "I'm more important than you" brigade.  More traffic cops would help with that.

Oh where to start ,

yes Somthing needs to be done but It won’t

maybe dash cams for everyone ? Going a little far but with the lack of traffic police it might help

small edit

I’m all for making progress and don’t think speed is totally evil , just speed in the wrong place is poor judgement

is 80 or 90 on a motorway dangerous?

There might be something in the use of dashcams, the number of people who don’t understand the use of indicators when manoeuvring is astonishing, particularly with HGV’s, I had to brake suddenly on the motorway the other day when an artic just pulled out as I was about to go past, and there was something coming up fast in the outside lane, so I had nowhere to go.

The company name was painted on the cab, so a note could have been sent to the haulier with a warning, or to anyone potentially causing an accident by failing to look before a manoeuvre.

As regards speed, there are some here who get very sanctimonious where speed is concerned, and refuse to accept that modern cars can safely go faster than cars in the 60’s when speed limits were set, even the police ignore the 70 limit on motorways, the number of times I’ve followed marked patrol cars doing over 80, according to my satnav, and have slowly pulled away from me, because I tend to stick to an indicated 80, roughly 76-78 mph when I’m driving is more than I can count.

90 would be too fast, but cruising at an indicated 80 is perfectly reasonable, even in small cars these days, they have good brakes and tyres, and are much safer than when I started driving in the early 70’s, when cars still had drum brakes, cross-ply skinny tyres and no seat-belts, crumple-zones and airbags.