Mandatory driving/riding assessment at 70

[gibbo]

This subject seems to crop up on a number of occasions with individuals around my age. Some seem to think it's an invasion of their private life and another nanny state nail; others think it's a good idea to have this assessment in conjunction with re-applying for their licence and signing a declaration to their medical competence when they reach that three score year and ten.

My view. It's an excellent idea so I'll be voting YES. I've not quite reached that age yet but I'm all in favour of a test just to make sure I'm not a danger to myself but potentially to other road users. I'd even go so far as a medical as well including an eye test to confirm competency.

Your comments good and bad as always are most welcome. 

[black-k1]

Yes, I think there should be a mandatory driving reassessment, but not just at 70. I think there should be a reassessment 5 years after passing your test, then every 10 years after that until aged over 67 (state retirement age). At that point, reassessments should be every 5 years until over 80, then every 2 years. Failure of your reassessment should allow you to drive for 1 more year during which time you have to pass the reassessment test. Failure to pass during that 1 year should result in loss of license entitlement for that particular group (and associated sub groups).

Doing this would help ensure driving standards are kept at a higher level and knowledge is refreshed and updated on a regular basis.

[richtea]

Rather than just a test, how about a mandatory training refresher (with a human - on the road, not a computer)?
Basic would do, not advanced.

Passing would be the test criteria.

[gibbo]

Well, I've bumped this subject back to the top again as I'm puzzled that so few forum members have bothered to move that little cursor to the YES, NO or NOT SURE icon. Thank you to black k1 and richtea for commenting on this as well.

As most on this forum seem to be nearer 70 than 40 years of age perhaps this subject is a 'head in the sand' thing. There are over 400+ members on here with 30 members posting 200 or more items, so again I'm puzzled at the lack of contribution on this matter.

Please humour me, and as a favour have a vote. 

[Paul C]

I'm all for reassessment at 70. A possible realistic route is through insurance companies. An assessment of driving capability with, for example, a two month "period to improve" if a driver does not meet the required standard. Alternatively being a holder of an advanced qualification which requires updating periodically.
Perhaps also a requirement to show regular eye testing from 50.

[frosty]

Every ten years regardless of age

[Swindon Andy]

I agree with basic assessment at 70, provided it is just that. Eyes and base competence only. Who wants to have to prepare for another full driving test? That's the danger, people will create a whole new industry.

[Phmode]

Well, whilst I normally support polls, this one didn't have an answer that I agree with.

Everyone that I know who is near or over 70, including many in here, can drive the socks off 80% of the rest of the pilchards on the road. The other 20% of all ages, are at or above the standard of the ones I know who are spending, or planning how to spend, their pensions.

So, for those wrinklies (generic) that I know, an assessment would merely be a waste of money, cos one thing's for sure, assessments won't be free.

In some sort of particular order, I would start with:

1 Yummy mummies and daddies(?) who only do the school and supermarket run...can't see beyond the end of the bonnet, never take their eyes off the darlings in the rear-view, drive agressively, park on double yellows cos it's their 'right' and screw the rest of us.

2 Those who declare a very low annual mileage on their insurance details...they are either lying in the hopes of a cheaper premium or are genuinely not doing the mileage to keep their standards up, assuming they were 'up' in the first place.

3 Those who live in the city and never go farther than the M25 or its equivalent nor faster than 11 mph...give 'em a clear stretch of motorway and they suddenly become LTWOC's (members of the lane two owners club) or, more likely, lane three etc. etc. with no sense of speed, acceleration or braking ability.

4 Everyone who gets done for a moving traffic offence...not aware of their surroundings, don't understand traffic laws, have zero consideration for other road users etc. etc.. (This may include me after a Mach 1.4 photo intercept on Saturday morning...)

5 Any one who drives at 35 in a 50 or de-restricted rural area...last night's worst yet, 25 mph in a late-plate, top of the range, mega-huge BMW saloon. Mile after mile till I overtook from the back of the queue; old man, chin on the steering wheel, you know the type. Either blind as a bat, no confidence or all his awareness senses had packed up. These are types who cause massive frustration in others and this leads to risk-taking and accidents and it's no use bleating about patience, 15 miles at running speed is no joke and is an offence against mankind but the county police car is never around when you need them, only when you don't!

6 Anyone seen in an inappropriate lane on a motorway.

So, yes I support re-assessment but not based on a figure plucked from the air.

I would also support graded licences, different rules of the road for those who have taken appropriate advanced training etc.

As an aside, I received my new wrinkly licence in the post within three days of my application; and yes, it still had my motorcycle entitlement on it 

[Paul C]

I would consider adding...

People who sit near the steering wheel, unless they have very short arms.
People who drive wearing hoodies, thus obscuring their vision.
People who have a satnav fixed to the windscreen in their direct line of sight.
People who fix sunscreens to the (front) passenger window to keep the sun out of the baby's eyes.

Rant over 😀

[Phmode]

Love 'em all.

Keep 'em coming 

Brian (who senses a huge thread hijack under way...)

[richtea]

I would consider adding...

People who sit near the steering wheel, unless they have very short arms.
People who drive wearing hoodies, thus obscuring their vision.
People who have a satnav fixed to the windscreen in their direct line of sight.
People who fix sunscreens to the (front) passenger window to keep the sun out of the baby's eyes.

Rant over

People

Just people. Ban them all.
Brian, can you arrange this, please? You've got previous experience of banning people. 

[Phmode]

I thought you wus banned..

[sudolea]

How just as funny as useless a thread this one here is 

Makes me think of my time in the Airforce, when I still was a bachelor and had all the time of the world to spend evenings at the bar : the further the evening evolved, the harder we got convinced the Airforce had to be reorganised, the harder we were reorganising it, and the more touroughly we did it... Just to realise, the morning after, that nothing had changed. Well on the contrary : the Airforce hadn't changed, and the hangover was ... well ... still hanging around.

My two cents of input : such a test is useless as long as morons I see driving around keep on driving around like they do. Some morons aged 35 years old will never, even not after a lifetime of training, have the skills to drive decently. I just hope I don't cross them at the wrong time, wrong place, especially not when I am on my motorbike...

I once was on the road with a 74- year old (German) GS rider. I wish I could ride like he could. I may come to that point, once. In the meantime, let me practice, not pass (useless) exams, please...

[Melvin]

Probably like a few others on here I took my IAM test when I was 70 on a Goldwing,passed at the second attempt.

[Steve CH]

In Switzerland we have a very severe medical and eye test at 70 repeated every two years which as far as I am concerned is fine. It does not catch all it should, things can change even in two years a 77 year old bat ran into the back of my sons car said she didn’t see it, her eye sight had changed sufficiently in the two years as not to be able to see more than 50 meters.
As for a riding/driving assessment thats something else, a bike is self regulating if you can’t do it you fall off and your dead. You don’t fall off cars so maybe there is something in an assessment.

Steve