AIBU to think drivers (more so elderly) need to be retested?

[ayonoosh]

I know I'll probably get lumped with being ageist here. I want to preface I think all drivers should be tested after perhaps 10 years but once at retirement age or 70s, every few years?

I live in a town that's predominantly one way. In the past 7 days I have seen 2 elderly drivers run red lights. One elderly driver go the wrong way up a very well signed street, with other drivers beeping and flashing and they just kept going, one elderly driver driving on the opposite side of the road going onto a short duel carriage way (!!) and an elderly driver drive down the middle of the bollards in Tesco.

this isn't an unusual amount of it too, there are so many posts on the local community pages with cars and registrations and people posting about it. It is so incredibly dangerous. We have a uni in town too and have our fair share of young drivers, I do see them hurtling around town at stupid speeds but they aren't as common as the elderly drivers reported.

I know young drivers cause more crashes, but elderly people tend to have low mileage bias, I think if they drove mile for mile the stats may differ. Elderly drivers responsible for deaths have increased by 42% in the last decade.

AIBU to think mandatory testing for all, especially for elderly should be implemented? I know the money, time, stubbornness, etc etc make it unrealistic, and there are terrible drivers of all ages of course. But if age related reaction times are something that doesn't apply to you, then surely it's a tick box activity and back to driving?

im seeing increasingly more elderly pootling at 50 in the middle lane on the M25, as well as stupid taxi drivers doing it too. they ought to be retested too.

what's everyone's thoughts?

Black boxes and AI analysed driving to monitor people could certainly be useful in helping assess whether people are competent to drive.

I guess there is a question as to how soon self driving cars will come into being. If they come in soon then I'd expect that a lot of older people will use them to continue "driving", but I think that self driving cars are currently a lot further away than most people think.

I don't share your sentiments about near misses. Even definition of a near miss is problematic both in terms of what constitutes a near miss and who is actually at fault. Insurance companies are probably only concerned with events that lead to cost, although near misses are probably a good future predictor of those.

Personally I think there is enough for us to do with actual accident data being under utiliised and medical testing without having to resort to near miss information.

The key issues are the prevention of accidents that cause expense/injury (as far as motor insurance/government are concerned).

What is his insurance like ? It must be astronomical if he is having repeat accidents at 93 years old.

You can buy people off with the odd prang but an accident that requires a hospital visit isn't normally the kind that doesn't involve insurance.

I’m 75, and consider myself a good driver. The last few mistakes I’ve seen people make have not been older drivers, though I accept that there are some bad older drivers. I agree that a test every so often would be ideal, but impractical. I would be happy if I had to take an assessment drive with a driving school though. I do know people who still drive who I think should not, including someone who has an eye condition that means her peripheral vision is impaired. But she says it’s ok because she only drives locally now…..

@IridescentRainbowthats the issue though, you all THINK you’re brilliant drivers and won’t hear any differently but in reality you haven’t got a single clue what’s going on around you and the only reason you’re not in more accidents is thanks to the sharp thinking and defensive driving of younger drivers that you probably didn’t even notice were behind you

How dare you presume that? I drive hundreds of miles, I follow the Highway Code. I use the motor way properly and don’t hog the middle lane. I always keep to the 2 second rule. I keep to speed limits and I indicate properly. Do you consider yourself a good driver ? I presume you do. Do you think that with more practice your driving will he get worse? I am very aware that some people have slower reactions when they get older, and I know that my husband was one of those. That’s why he gave up driving. Not actually because his driving had deteriorated, but because he realised that in general life he was slowing down. I’m aware that the same thing will happen to me, and I will give up driving if and when that happens. In the meantime I rely on my very outspoken son to tell me if he thinks I need to give up! He’s an HGV driver with strong opinions about a lot of the drivers he witnesses in his day to day life. He doesn’t sugar coat things and he’s happy to let me drive his grandchildren. I will say again, I am a good driver!

We could go further and not allow people to drive until they've lived here legally and been citizens for at least thirty years. This would stop the net million aditional people per year being able to drive (I know some of them are children, but they would be able to drive when they reach 17 under the present system).

Had to throw in a bit of casual racism there didn’t you @Dotjones. Honestly, the ageism is bad enough!

Agree to some extent as I see 90 year olds in carpark opposite my house struggling with parking😬 but just wish people would stop defining 70 as 'elderly'. Just watched Jeremy vine where a statistic was quoted that the 70 year olds of today have the cognitive ability of 53yr old of 2000 (think that was the year the study said). Then the very next item is talking about retirement age increasing to 70........so we are expected to work til 70 but not capable of driving a car! I've driven all over Europe since I passed my test 45 years ago without ever having caused even a slight bump and still able to do a full shift as HCP at 66 but it is inferred that we are a danger to society at 70😡

@Dotjones

Tell me you live in London or one of the handful of other big cities with excellent public transport without telling me that!!

Car driving is essential in most of the UK, particularly smaller cities, towns, rural areas etc with either poor public transport or expensive public transport.

Not everyone lives within walking distance or easy/cheap public transport to workplaces, amenities, etc.

Not allowing under 25s to drive would just increase young adult unemployment in many areas.

I do think all drivers should have a 'test of competence' every 10 years. So, not a full test, but a 'we think you know what you're doing' assessment. If you fail that, then full re-test.
I get that there's a problem with resourcing testers, but the number of people who have completely avoidable accidents every year could be weeded out a bit.
I've been driving for 30 years, and although I've only once had a (minor) accident that was my fault, I've had three more, where people drove into me. I know I've developed bad habits in all that time, too.

I've had three members of my family killed in road accidents. One was their fault. The other two were one as a drunk driver, and the other as a young (21) driver in their father's uber powerful car. I know our parents didn't allow us to drive the 'big car' for a few years, and no passengers when we were new drivers, etc. The Australian model for P plates falls along those lines - 0 alcohol, smaller engine, reduced speeds, etc.

We had to have a conversation with my Grandad when he was 84, to say. 'time to give up the car', as he hit a bollard outside the Spar shop, and his reactions weren't as good any more. To be fair, he had almost stopped driving already... We're (my siblings and I) ready to have the conversation with my parents, should it arise. They know that we will be telling them when we think it's time to hand over the keys.

I think there should be compulsory eye tests, including a field vision test, for everyone every 3 years and your results are sent to the DVLA. Then you get a code on your driving licence saying you have to wear glasses or contact lenses if necessary or if certain standards of visual acuity cannot be met with glasses then the person will have to stop driving.

I had cataracts a couple of years ago at a "young" age, ie. mid 40s. They progressed rapidly and at the point where the surgeon in the hospital saw me for the pre-examination I had already stopped driving because I didn't feel safe. She told me that there are people driving around all over the place whose eyes have deteriorated over the years and they haven't started to wear glasses, never mind the people with peripheral vision loss and that their eyesight was worse than mine.

I think a good start would be with regular eye tests for all drivers. I think in the UK the code in your driving licence is a self-declaration of whether you need to wear glasses or not. That should be done officially (I live in another country where an optician or a doctor declares whether you need glasses or contact lenses before you take your test).
And then it needs to be updated regularly.

I had to get the code taken off mine (again, it's a driving licence from an EU country) after the cataract operation because I didn't need glasses any more. The eye examination to get the code removed was extensive and had to be performed by an ophthalmologist and not the optician.

I am not saying that all accidents by elderly people are caused by poor eyesight but probably a lot are and it would be a start towards making things safer and would also mean that people of any age can't just declare they need no glasses when they are 17 and continue to drive without going for regular tests.

The elderly person who ran in to the back of my car at a red light couldn't see properly. All that came out when the police arrived (had to call them because he was aggressive and refusing to share insurance details). Later on his wife started phoning me screaming at me to not let it go through the insurance and they'd pay for the damage to the car because "he'll get his licence taken off him because his eyesight is so bad". Well great, he managed to run into my car at a red light and damaged it but what if there had been a child on the crossing.

Sorry - but much of this is only feasible if you live in a major city with excellent transport options.
For example, 2000 miles a year is about 1/4 of the average mileage done by most drivers. I have shared care of a family member who lives 110 mile round trip from me. It would be a train and two buses to get to her, as I'd have to go into the city, to come back out again. I go to her roughly twice per month - so there's roughly 2500 on that, before anything else. I'm also disabled (like many others will be), and can't manage standing/walking a long way. Does that mean we're unable to leave our homes?

I think what PP meant, was that people that come to live in the UK should be here for X amount of time so they get used to our roads and Highway Code, instead of anyone being able to drive and being at risk to other road users because they're not used to the road.

Under-25s cause most of the accidents probably due to lack of experience and/or recklessness. The over 70s have plenty of experience and are likely to be more careful, slower drivers, but are much more likely to be coping with worse eyesight, hearing and reaction times than they had in earlier years. This group is more likely to be saved from harm by regular tests than the younger group.

No they didn’t @ayonoosh…

I think there are differences between suitable solutions for the driving risks of younger, older people and specific situations such as those driving tired. I don’t think restrictive driving conditions on younger people would help, experience is obviously a factor and limiting that just pushes the risks further away and also impacts on the ability for younger people to work/live etc. Retesting would achieve nothing, because in reality they have the skills and knowledge to drive, it’s a decision making issue. I do think a public safety campaign could help this group and other groups like those that drive tired.

Unfortunately for older drivers, the decline in driving ability is present every time they are behind the wheel and the decline will continue. Retesting theoretical knowledge is pointless because it’s the physical skill/ reaction, perception awareness and processing time that’s the issue. I do feel that some kind of review/ retest would be good from 75 upwards.

Within this thread there is a lot of people talking about things that other drivers do, what I do think applies to both older and younger drivers is the lack of ability/ awareness of other drivers. I think you learn to spot the drivers who you may need to keep your distance from, but older drivers often appear to start to lose this. If you are always surrounded by bad and dangerous drivers, is it something you are doing or not observing from your surroundings?

Things like not speeding, leaving suitable gaps, not sticking in the middle lane etc are all important things to drive safe but they are not the things I see as the issue with older drivers, it’s perception awareness and how to you know when that’s declining as an individual person? Is it our instincts to blame it on others e.g that car that came from nowhere.

Our roads are much less forgiving these days due to volumes of traffic, I can imagine that I would be extremely reluctant to stop driving when the time comes, so maybe it needs to be a routine retest past a certain age.

It's probably true to say the barrier to entry for driving (passing the test) has increased quite significantly in the past few years, with things like the hazard perception test being used. However at the other end of the scale, keeping your licence, the testing and requirements for licence retention have not become more stringent at all.

This is true just bring the driver age to 30 so our roads are safe

Have you not seen young drivers:
dangerously overtaking in 30 zones
tailgating
driving round with no front number plate
run red lights
there are a few very dangerous young motorists including motor cyclists out there - it is not just young people. Yes you are being ageist!!

Young drivers also drive with illegal registration plates- tinted, 3D, characters piped with a different colour border, non standard font and tiny number plates https://www.oxfordshirelive.co.uk/news/oxfordshire-news/car-hilariously-tiny-number-plate-6216554.amp

I have noticed that majority of these drivers have an attitude problem

@Mokel 3D printed plates have absolutely zero correlation to your driving capabilities.

Statistics and graphs from https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/104949/html/

Showing fatalities per age group, and fatalities per mile driven. The over 80s are just as much of a problem as the 17-24s.

Yes and a relatively young person was speeding in my close recently and far too near the kerb with a very young child on it, so not an age thing, just total lack of respect!

In my experience as (mostly) a pedestrian it tends to be young and middle-aged drivers who speed, go through red lights and seem to have forgotten how an indicator works.

Retesting of all drivers would be a good thing, but probably impractical.

The senior coroner for Lancashire has called for better checks for visual problems in older drivers https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czrv1g2yl0xo

The problem is that every 3 years people over the age of 70 self certify themselves to say that they are fit to drive. One man who was jailed knocking down and killing a man didn’t disclose his visual impairment to the DVLA and the consultants said he’s not fit to drive.

But younger people have quicker reaction times.

there's a current thread running about a menopausal woman who has 6 points on her licence due to 'brain fog.'

utterly ridiculous. If you can't drive safely, get off the road (applies to all ages)