To think ROSPA should make it clear that Older Driver Assessments might result in a loss of license?

[sprucinitup]

An elderly relative was recently diagnosed with a medical condition which does not result in automatic loss of driving license, but nevertheless, his GP recommended that he undertake a free Older Driver Assessment, saying he thought it might be "helpful". He gave my relative a leaflet which also described the assessment as "helpful". My relative booked an assessment. It consisted of online cognitive tests and a practical driving assessment. At the end of this, my relative was told he was driving too hesitantly. But rather than offering the "re-training" mentioned in the leaflet, they removed his license.

He is understandably very upset about this, because he wasn't warned that loss of license was a potential outcome.

This is the website: https://www.olderdrivers.org.uk/driver-assessment/ . If there is info on there about loss of license then it must be well buried because I can't see it.

He is very responsible, and will of course accept the decision, but aibu to think that there should be a more transparent process, so that elderly folk don't feel tricked into giving up their license by stealth?

Stopping someone driving unsafely IS helping them

I think that informed consent is an important principle. To me its in the same box, although not identical, to a surgeon removing additional organs during an operation without consent "because I am helping the person, its what is best for them"
Having said that, as i keep saying, we don't know the whole story here.

As previously mentioned unless he thought he was up for a good driving award why else would he have been having a driving test?

I would expect tips to be given and another test booked for a few months later given there is no where it says the licence should be revoked

If they are revoking licences when it doesn’t say this could be the outcome then I would appeal the decision.

The whole traffic and road safety relies on proper signage. No proper signage and you get fined then appeal and take them to court if need be (done that a few times and won)

Seems like they are starting to drop the ball on paperwork.

Think it is pretty dim to think they can do anything they like and expect no one to appeal and sue for wrongful revoking of their licence

Companies and government agencies don’t seem to understand that just because they assume that something is obvious, without it being specified in writing then it doesn’t exist.

Surely if anyone thinks someone is unfit to drive they should stop them.

I'm pretty sure if someone hit someone and went to court and the court asked them whether they had done any assement they would say yes, and they told me I was fit to drive. Wouldn't necessarily get them off, but might be helpful in building supporting evidence. So if they think he is unfit to drive they should report him.

Also I think his doctor probably did him a favour in the respect he could have said no driving and wrote to the DVLA but instead suggested a proper assessment instead.

If the only outcome of the assessment is "you are OK to drive" then there wouldn't be much point having it.

What would the person have done if they knew in advance that they may have had a negative report to the DVLA ? No win situation for them if you game this outcome. Either a) they would have gone anyway, and been found unfit anyway or b) not gone, and still be an unfit driver on the road.

I do agree with most though that there needs to be a more standardised and official test for this.

Take screen shots of all the details and terms and conditions and tell your relative to appeal the decision based on the fact that no where does it say the assessor has the power to revoke a driving licence.

I don't know why anyone is positing things like "mandatory testing every five years". It should be fairly obvious that the system has nowhere near the capacity to handle that volume of tests and it's hard to see how it ever could.

I'm not sure why it would improve road safety anyway. How would retests stop people speeding or using their phone?

I don't believe anyone other than the DVLA can revoke a licence, as has probably already been stated many times on here.

Other organisations/people can only write to the DVLA and ask for someones licence to be revoked, and whether the DVLA will revoke depends very much on who is doing the writing.

Agree.
And there's not a million miles between driving when you are no longer fit to do so because of the aging process and driving when you are not fit to do so because you have been drinking.
Most people don't condone drink driving but older people get a pass because they're elderly?
It must be a real blow to get to the stage where you can no longer drive safely but if people aren't safe on the road, then they shouldn't be on the road.

This is a bit of a crazy way of looking at things. Let's not ban guns because people will murder with knives instead.

Taking the specific case, speeding is reckoned to be a factor in 30% of road accidents, so it appears there is significant scope for cognitive impairment and poor vision to take large % chunks out of the remaining 70%.

And yes of course that number of tests could be implemented if the government employed and trained up the right people. Or even implemented VR testing. It just doesn't want to.

This is a wild take. This was a driving assessment in light of what sounds like cognitive decline recommended by a GP who wouldn't recommend it if they didn't suspect it could be an issue. You want someone not fit to drive to be allowed to keep driving while continuing today ecline?

This wasn't a skills test like a normal driving test, this was a check of how a health condition is affecting driving capability

I think we shoukd have mandatory retests every 10 years/every 3 years over 70, but I recognise that woukd come with huge costs, and the system is currently struggling with fitting in driving tests as it is, so no government could go for that at the moment; and it wouldn't be my top priority if I were chancellor and we suddenly gained a few spare billion down the back of the sofa. (Plus on an entirely personal level, I am quite glad I don't have to retake my test, as I really struggled with nerves because of having the examiner sitting next to me.)

In any case, it is not at it is now. I agree that if it were clear that the result could be that the DVLA is advised, some people who should wouldn't opt to do the test. But it still ought to be clear that a possible outcome is that in the case of poor results, the DVLA will be informed and they could decide to revoke the licence.

I also know that this could be printed across any form in giant red letters, and some people still wouldn't absorb the message.

nope, they will be looking at the contents of the letter and the reason for the letter.

of course there will finally come a solution to this with driverless cars......

As long as the state pension age doesnt get any higher and they arent expected to get to work because cant have it both ways.

In this case, removing the licence is also helping, and potentially saving the lives of, other people.

Yep This website is full of outrage when the DWP does it

That's probably the reason why they are so ineffective at it if they don't triage the requests correctly.

To me it makes sense that a letter from a Dr or a road safety testing organisation should carry more weight than someone at random, who may have all sorts of nefarious reasons for wanting to get someones licence revoked.

A standardised reporting form would probably help as well.

that's why I said same box but not identical

This sneaky way of doing it wont work though will it Do we think the OPs FIL will just keep meekly quiet about this or will talk
PEOPLE TALK Word will get around about this.

I don't know how anyone could see the name of something that made it explicitly clear that their driving was being assessed and not understand that if their driving under assessment wasn't up to scratch there was a potential that they'd no longer be able to drive, sorry.

So when a work coach at the Job Centre says an appointment there is just to help you and then you suddenly end up with a sanction and had no idea that would happen or what youve done then thats OK then.

The rules on older drivers need to be stricter. I say this from a personal perspective as my car was written off in the autumn by an 88 year old wearing thick glasses and whose reactions did not look good. It was absolutely his fault, he did a right turn straight into me at traffic lights. Police who attended were quick to see that. I hope very much he has stopped driving. He was in a large and powerful car which will also have been written off. I am still feeling the side effects of his inability to drive correctly as I am in pain. I have no faith in self certification.

While I understand your relative thinks they were 'tricked', what did they expect from a process that is there to asses their safety to drive? Surely by definition by entering into such a process you voluntarily would surrender license if you were advised to give up driving?

I am fully in favour of drivers having their licenses revoked if they aren't up to snuff, but having looked at this website I have to agree with the OP - it is incredibly misleading. It suggests that the simple test is confidential and the detailed test is to identify weaknesses and suggest adaptations to help you drive for longer. Everything on this website that relates to stopping driving is framed as a personal decision unless the DVLA has told you to stop. It really needs to be clearer about the purpose and outcomes.