To think a cometency driving test should be done at retirement-ish age?

[hidinginthenightgarden]

A few weeks ago I read about a crash caused by an old lady who tried to over take a tractor but couldn't go fast enough and ended up knocking a lady off her bike. Her husband then ran over his wife and killed her. It was one of many incidents I have heard of where people of a certain age cannot drive fast enough (or safe enough) to be on the roads. Yesterday I saw a man on the motorway doing 50mph in a brand new landrover. My own Grandfather gave up driving on the motorway when he felt uncomfortable driving the required speed - sensible, but others will not want to lose their "freedom" so won't make such decisions.
Shouldn't there be some sort of competency test around age 65/70 to test you are still able to see far enough, drive fast enough on a motorway and so on? Or if deemed fairer, maybe we should all have to do one every 10 years until we reach 65 and then it becomes every 5 years?

What is wrong with 60 on the motorway

Goodness knows. Last weekend when it was so windy I was on an elevated section of motorway near Exeter, doing 60mph. Everyone went past me. Everyone. And very quickly too. You'd think the speed limit was way higher than 70.

OZp = OP

I think some type of refresher course would benefit everyone. And I am 60.

Havingtochangeusername - I am obviously talking about regular not old and cannot drive too fast or it falls apart cars. Not lorries that I expect to be behind at 60. The guy I saw yesterday, driving at 50 on a motorway, was driving a huge, new looking landrover. A powerful car that can clearly drive as it is intended. In this case the driver is the problem not the car.

Flobochin - sure, how about when the lorries enter the country they have to pass a quick eye test or some sort of quick course (like a driving assault course) to prove they can handle their vehicle. They can then carry the papers that said they have passed for 2-3 yrs, before having to repeat the test upon entry again.
This would maybe mean that the companys had to test their own drivers before sending them to another country to deliver goods.

Off to work. Will not be responding any longer - appreciate the discussion though.

I agree some kind of test every 10 years would be a good idea. There are bad drivers of every age. I see alot more aggression on the road, people doing illegal turns and manuovers, and not taking time to look properly when pulling out at junctions. A test would remind everyone that having a licence isn't a right for the rest of your life. Taking bad drivers off the road is a good thing for everyone.

I don't know the stats, but I think that very young males will statistically probably be the most dangerous drivers. But there are many groups that are perceived as bad drivers - elderly, females etc. If you notice someone driving terribly then more often than not they will be from one of these 'bad driver' groups. Where do you draw the line?

I totally agree OP. After what I went through with my stubborn, pre dementia diagnosis, father who refused to see that his judgement of speed, distance, everything really was so poor he could have easily caused an accident, and refused to voluntarily stop driving, I would have welcomed someone 'official' to see how bad he was and then revoked his licence, as he'd listen to them. Wouldn't listen to me....

@hidinginthenightgarden How do you police that, do you know how many ports there are in the UK? Who will finance it? Do you know how many foreign drivers are in the ZuK at any one time?

It's unrealistic what you suggest.

This is just shooting at the wrong target.
As PPs have pointed out, the vast majority of serious accidents are caused by drivers in their 20’s.
If you are worried about a particular elderly driver (eg a relative) you can ask them to relinquish their licence voluntarily, and, if they refuse, report them to the DVLC or their GP, to have their licence removed.
Many people of all ages drive st 50 or 60mph to conserve fuel- this is to be commended on environmental grounds. If you don’t like it, simply overtake them.
I’m 63, and have never had or caused an accident despite having driven 480,000 miles.
That’s literally almost to the Moon and back! We oldies have enormous driving experience and far more road sense than boy racers!

Up until recently I would have been one of those people shouting ageism at you.

However I think maybe testing people sometime between 70 or 75 might actually not be a bad idea now. Two different friends have lost parents (75,76) in car crashes which were 100% their fault in the last year. One of the crashes also killed the oncoming driver and gave life changing injuries to the passenger.

I’m pretty sure my FIL (71) can’t see properly and he drives everywhere at 20mph now. And I’ve noticed that my Dad’s driving (former professional driver) has changed considerably from the age of 68 to 73. Thankfully he and Mum have both agreed at 75 they’ll give up despite living rurally.

With a rapidly ageing population - 1.2m drivers aged between 80-89 and 100k over 90, there should be a better check than ticking a couple of boxes on a DVLA form.

Op I will put this right here

www.brake.org.uk/news/15-facts-a-resources/facts/488-young-drivers-the-hard-facts.

One of the cardinal rules of driving that I was taught by my driving instructor is this:
"Never allow yourself to be pressured into driving in a manner that makes you feel less safe or less in control."

He explained that what that means is that you should drive at the speed that you feel is appropriate for the road/traffic conditions, the weather conditions, the car you are driving and, crucially, your own perception of your competence and ability. In other words, "drive within your comfort zone."

I think it's perfectly reasonable and acceptable, and above all sensible for elderly drivers to drive more slowly than they did when they were younger. They are undoubtedly aware that their reaction time has slowed and they therefore need to allow for a longer stopping time.

It's no different from a younger driver slowing down in fog or heavy rain. Older people are simply adapting responsibly to the driving conditions.

@hidinginthenightgarden

The Department for Transport (DfT) says there is no evidence older drivers are more likely to cause an accident, and it has no plans to restrict licensing or mandate extra training on the basis of age

I don't see anything wrong with driving at 50 on the motorway as long as you are not blocking the middle lane, and are aware of what is going on around you eg the need to change speed and/or lane when slip roads join etc.
I would prefer it if more people indicated when changing lanes.

I think a compulsory eye test for ALL drivers would be helpful. The number of people who won't accept that their eyesight deteriorates as they get older (not old, but 30 - 50ish) and won't get their eyes tested in case they have to wear - horror - glasses is just weird.

The thing with retesting is that drivers who are inconsiderate could just drive perfectly on their test and then go back to being a dangerous driver when they've passed their test again. Retesting would show the people who may not be able to see as well any more, or the ones who don't have good enough reaction speeds, but inconsiderate and dangerous drivers will work out how to play the system.

I don't see anything wrong with driving at 50 on the motorway as long as you are not blocking the middle lane, and are aware of what is going on around you eg the need to change speed and/or lane when slip roads join etc.

The motorway I drive on a lot has quite a few bends where you can't see very far ahead - if I come round a bend doing 65mph, even if I've slowed down for it, I'm going to have to brake sharply if there's a driver in front of me doing just 50mph and not showing an inclination to speed up. In my experience, which is mainly commuter traffic, it's the vehicles doing 50mph who are more of a hazard than the ones doing 80+.

I do actually think that they should increase the age limit and that they should say no back seat passengers for the first 12-18 months. This would stop young drivers showing off to their mates!

A coolleague's husband, who is a traffic cop, agrees with this.

He reckons that a lot of accidents involving young drivers are because they pass their tests, fill the car up with their friends, and start showing off. He says that they don't realise how much the extra weight of 3 teens crammed into the back of a small hatchback affects the acceleration, braking and handling, and they lose control of the car as a result.

I do think that people in their 80s and beyond should be tested. I e come across too many drivers with dementia.

I agree OP. But I would set it at 75.

All these stats are nonsense unless you look at how ‘bad’ each age group is per mile they drive. Can’t find the stats for the U.K. Look at America.
By 75 statistically you are only going to get worse. Young people with experience and maturity will get better. And thank goodness we don’t have 16 year olds driving!

For me it's usually a lorry or a van with a trailer.

Aren't caravans and trailers restricted to 60 mph?

We have an elderly motorhome that struggles to do over 60, and in windy conditions doesn't feel safe much above 50.

Maybe we should do all our driving on B-roads, so we don't hold the rest of you up!

The motorway I drive on a lot has quite a few bends where you can't see very far ahead - if I come round a bend doing 65mph, even if I've slowed down for it, I'm going to have to brake sharply if there's a driver in front of me doing just 50mph

You should have slowed down enough that you can stop within the distance you can see. There could be anything around the bend - including a multi-car pile up which you would just add to.

I wouldn't retest, but I would introduce a physical exam maybe every three years to be submitted to the DVLA by drivers' over 75 GPs. This would focus on reaction time, cognitive ability, vision, range of movement in the shoulders and neck and grip strength. This could give the opportunity to identify issues that could be solved with prescription updates, car modifications or physio, and then if things don't improve would form the basis for someone having their licence removed. I would suggest it might be easier for someone to accept they can't drive due to, for example, arthritis causing joint issues, rather than being told by your nearest and dearest that that you're unfit to be on the road, which is unfortunately the position many families are put in.

The problem at the moment is that we basically rely on people realising it's now the time to give up, and unfortunately that doesn't always work. You're relying on people to voluntarily give up one of life's great freedoms before they pose a real hazard to pedestrians and other road users. In a an aging population we need to be more proactive about this- it's not about banning old people, it's about helping everyone make safe journeys where we can. Young people's' driving will improve with experience and practice, but the effects of age are rather one way.

I agree but I think it should be done on a case by case basis, rather than forcing everyone who hits a certain age to take it. And I think retirement age is too early - you're more likely to be competent than not. I would say 80ish, if there has to be a blanket age.

There are already controls on the statistically more hazardous younger drivers. They have a lower threshold of points before losing their licence and high insurance.

Many years later, I still cringe at the memory of my first couple of attempts to pass a tractor, a skill that I didn't learn in my urban based lessons. I didn't gear down sufficiently to gain the power to pass efficiently, but it was a learning experience, and I refined my technique to do it in a much safer manner. A person in their 70-80s+ is much less likely to learn from their error. Vision, and information processing have passed their peak and can only deteriorate from that point, some sooner rather than later, some slowly and difficult to percieve, some rapidly. Some will continue to be excellent drivers into advanced old age in the same way that there are some excellent young drivers. In very general terms, younger drivers will gain experience and calm down and improve, and older drivers will find it harder to adapt to change as their mental and physical health changes.

I have a relative in her 80s at the pootling around town stage. I have no idea about the quality of her driving as I haven't observed it in years. There are certainly traffic layouts that she wouldn't pass a test on these days such as very urban areas with heavy traffic and with tram layouts/ signage that she has never encountered. Brushing up on a current highway code wouldn't solve the issue, because there is also the ability to rapidly process a lot of unfamiliar information at play. Going slow might give other drivers more advantage in avoiding or minimising the impact of an incident, but that is putting the onus on the observation skills and reactions of other drivers... rather a gamble!

If I'm driving at 60-65 mph in lane 1, I can reasonably accelerate to pass in lane 2 and anticipate that vehicles ahead such as lorries, buses or caravans might necessitate that. By the time I've registered that a Micra is going slower than expected at 45-50mph, I may not have the opportunity to have a break in traffic to safely overtake and will need to brake down to their speed. The gap in speed of lane 1 and lane 2 gets more dangerous to pull out to overtake or traffic to pull in then brake if they are approaching a junction. The driver of the slow vehicle will continue obliviously without incident, but they are creating a hazard to the other road users around them. Similar to the overly fast lane hoppers who slice around oblivious to the concept of a stopping distance leaving startled drivers in their wake.

If there were random spot check driving tests, drivers of all demographics would regularly fail, but old age (whenever it affects the individial) tends not to be an asset in adjusting habits and amending behaviour.