To think people over 80 should not drive

[TorridAntelope]

I don't care how bright and sparky they are, the stats show they are dangerous

I don’t think it’s surprising that people misinterpret the collision stats as it’s all reported in such an ad hoc way. We know that young drivers are a problem because there are some awful cases being reported on the national news. We also know older drivers are a problem although it may feel like there are less reports on the national news (it does to me). Then, there are almost daily reports of collisions in the local news, but there is rarely anything to stitch all the stories together to examine if there are any trends in what is happening. Contrast with the railways, that rarely has any collisions etc. - but if they do, it will be headline news & endlessly analysed. Given that people are being injured & dying on roads every week there’s a real case for more reporting on this.

This isn’t unusual for transport issues as there is lots of poor reporting - a few examples
eg 1. politicians agitating to widen roads but no examination if this will reduce congestion - reported with no reference to the research on induced demand, which suggests that widening roads doesn’t in fact reduce congestion or reference to how plans will affect local air pollution problems
2 reporting on e-bike problems, but no examination of when the bike classes as a bicycle or a motorbike or whether the battery is legal or illegal

This lack of clear reporting really does affect the debate about road safety as when things are reported clearly it just cuts to the heart of the problem - like that graph re elderly drivers shows the problem so clearly.

It’s women not men over 80 that are the risk (per miles driven). Also if you are the driver in an accident and you are in your 80s you have a much higher risk of being seriously injured or killed as you are more frail, compared to a young driver in the same accident. Plus probably things like the seatbelt will not be designed for a woman who’s shrunk to 4 foot 11.

So that graph itself doesn’t necessarily mean they are worse drivers. But it’s certainly statistics that should make you very cautious about an elderly parent driving.

What @Badbadbunny says is interesting. I wish they’d publish statistics that were actually meaningful!

that is a bit rash. My 86 year old dad plays tennis and golf once a week. He has even done 36 holes in the last year . Nothing wrong with his eye sight or coordination or ability to read conditions.

Shall we do the same for under 25s. They are an equal risk to themselves and others on the road

No they are not. The graph upthread clearly shows over-80s are the biggest risk group by a massive margin.

@WhoStoleAllTheUserNames

What says is interesting. I wish they’d publish statistics that were actually meaningful!

A lot of detailed statistics are in the public domain, but are complicated, so the media don't report the detail for two reasons, firstly being that the journalists often don't understand complicated statistics themselves, and secondly, even if one does, they know the general public target audience won't understand them.

Hence rather than a proper detailed analysis, all that ever appears on the TV and in newspapers is dumbed down "noddy" graphics that never tell the whole story.

The graph clearly shows you’re incorrect in your statement, when you also take into account there are twice as many 18-25 year olds as there are over 85s it really is a problem with elderly drivers

Insurance companies charges are comparable for teens and elderly as they do analysis the statistics in great detail

That graph gives no indication of fault.
An elderly person is AT higher risk of death or serious injury due to their age but is not necessarily the greater risk of the two age groups

Then why do insurance companies charge more?

My mum’s insurance when she was 91 was significantly lower than the insurance that my friend’s daughter had to lay when she first passed her test at 21.

That would be because she had absolutely no driving history if she only just passed her test. A lot of 21 year olds would have passed 4 years earlier and would have lower insurance if they had had no claims in that time. I don't think one individual anecdote disproves all the statistics about accidents!

"No claims discount" and "years of driving claim free discount" will be zero. Someone who has just passed their test has neither.

A 91 year old, assuming few claims, will have maximum discounts if they had a protected no claims discount and only, say, 1 or 2 claims per decade.

No claims discounts and discounts for "number of years without an accident or conviction" rise rapidly year by year, starting with zero for a newly passed driver and could be very significant after say 5 years to knock 50% or even 75% off the premium.

Your friend's daughter should have passed her test at 17 and had she been driving accident/conviction free for 4 years, her premiums would be a lot lower!

That's not comparing like for like though.
There are lots of factors that go into a insurance quote.
My car insurance increased 20% when I was made redundant as unemployed people are classed as higher risk of making fraudulent or exaggerated claims due to financial pressures.
If you have a "social and commuting" policy these are often more expensive than just social as it means you are more likely to be on the roads in rush hour when more accidents happen. If you drive less mileage you will also get lower premiums. As hours on the road increases your risk of accidents.

In some areas and cars it is cheaper to say that your car is left on your driveway as it is less likely to be pranged or broken into. In other areas or with other cars it is cheaper to have it parked on the road as there is then ambiguity about which house the car belongs to and if car thefts for that particular car are associated with the theft of car keys from the home this is preferable.

There is also the cost of the area. We moved from a city centre to the suburbs and had our premiums go up as this area had history of a several million £ car crash for cash insurance fraud crime gang. We then moved to a small rural town and despite having to increase the distance we were now needing to drive our premiums went down

My grandad drove until his mid to late 80s and noticed and significant increase in his premiums once he was in his 80s. He gave up driving after a bout of double pneumonia but kept the car and changed the insurance so my mum and her sister could drive them where they needed to go. Keeping the details of the policy the same but removing the 87 yo and adding two 60 year old females lowered the premium.

Young men are the most dangerous on the road. Should we ban all men under 25 from driving?

I am all for regulation of elderly drivers, but it's unfair to ban all. Especially when living rurally a car can be essential for basics like grocery shopping.

what is significantly lower?

My NDN insurance aged 90 was £2000 per year, whereas my dd's insurances was £800 age 23

My Mum’s insurance premium for the last year she was driving was about £350. My friend’s daughter paid well over £1000 in the same year.

You can't allow dangerous drivers to put lives at risk so they can get their groceries!
A cut-off age would concentrate the mind on how you will manage when you have to legally stop driving rather than ignoring the reality.

So once past 80 you just don't eat. Not every 80 year old has family or would feel confident using a computer to do internet shopping, What are they supposed to do?

Don't be silly.
The chief point is that no one should be driving past the age at which they are capable of doing so safely for any reason. An older person preferring to drive to a supermarket is not a reason to put other people's lives at risk. The safe age will obviously vary from person to person.

Absolute rubbish. “Some” older drivers should not be any longer. My 90 year old Dad just completed a formal driving assessment which confirmed his reactions, mobility, eyesight and cognitive function are tip top and he is perfectly fine to continue driving.

Make sensible arrangements to either move to somewhere with shops closer or do internet shopping (i help my mum with this).
Having a mandatory cut-off age would concentrate people's minds on how they are going to manage once that age is reached.
The current system enables people to just carry on regardless of how safe they are.
There is a mandatory age before people can legally drive but for some reason we won't tackle a mandatory when people should stop.
And i don't care if someone's dad is safe at 90 or someone else's dad stopped at 70. They are very much the minority and the law needs to catch the majority.

It’ll be a moot point in a generation when driverless cars are freely available. Until then, rather than an arbitrary cut off age, it would be far more sensible to make a formal assessment like ilovemyshed describes mandatory.

They are "supposed" to plan ahead. Which significant numbers of elderly people just refuse to do.

If you read the Cockroach Cafe threads, so many elderly parents insist they are fine and will carry on just as they are. The reality is then that family have to step up and bail them out as things start to go wrong because they can't manage any longer.

I'd like to think I would be more reasonable, but am now on my 4th time of supporting a vulnerable ageing parent through the last years of life and every single one of them has shown a huge element of denial. So I suspect it's a self defense mechanism and we will be exactly the same when it comes to it.

The truth is, we will either die or become dependent then die. Modern medicine means we are living longer, but that means more frailty and more dementia.

No-one who has poor eyesight, or whose reactions and decision making are impaired by dementia, should be driving. So if you live in an area where you are dependent on driving, you need to face up to that fact and put a plan in place. Allowing you to drive and risk other people's lives is not the answer.

DD, ages 19, was recently dropped at the station by my 90 year old FIL. There was a trail of carnage.
MIL couldn't work the sat nav. Then FIL continuously ignored her and kept missing the turning. Other cars were braking, giving them a wide berth and FIL ploughed on.
But it suits their kids not to have a hard conversation, it suits the PIL to pretend they are not old.
I'm furious about it but any suggestions of shifting to taxis and online shopping , its like I've thrown a punch out of no where. How dare I!
And they lie, lie about the optician saying it's fine, people drive with one eye. That the car broke by itself. I've lost so much respect for them in recent years they are regressing to toddlers rather than problem solving adults.