Fit to drive?

Strider590

iolanthe07 wrote: »

Older drivers are, statistically, much safer than younger drivers - hence the huge difference in insurance premiums.

That myth has already been dispelled.

mikey72

Strider590 wrote: »

That myth has already been dispelled.

Put up the link to the source of your stats on accidents and claims will you, its something I have an interest in from the insurance board on here.

Strider590

mikey72 wrote: »

Put up the link to the source of your stats on accidents and claims will you, its something I have an interest in from the insurance board on here.

Well it appears that searching for the official DOT reports now sends you on an endless loop around 3 webpages, the only choice appears to be paying £40 for a hard copy.


There is http://www.smartdriving.co.uk/Driving/DefensiveDriving/Older_Drivers/Older_Drivers.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/ipm/2008/09/some_statistics_on_elderly_dri.shtml

http://road.cc/content/news/16637-rac-foundation-asks-larger-road-signs-older-drivers

"When turning right at junctions older drivers are five times more likely than others to move into the path of a vehicle approaching from the right."

Seeing as cars pulling out of road junctions is the number one cause of death to motorcyclists, I think the above is pretty scary.

I don't know about you, but I don't care too much if a 17yr old wants to plant mommies GTI upside down in a field, chances are it's only him and his passengers that'll get hurt, this is natural selection...... But what does worry me, is driving along a 60mph road only to have some doddery old fool pull out of a side road with less than thinking distance to spare. What scares me is the idea of a coach load of people driving down the M5 motorway only to be confronted by Arthur and Doris in their Rover 25, driving the wrong way up the southbound carriageway. Both scenario's occur all too frequently!!

vaio

You seem to be suggesting that old 'uns have both more and more expensive accidents than the young 'uns.

If this was the case I'm staggered that the insurance companies haven't picked up on it.

My dad (70's) pays about 10% of what my niece (17) pays for a similar car

Strider590

vaio wrote: »

You seem to be suggesting that old 'uns have both more and more expensive accidents than the young 'uns.

If this was the case I'm staggered that the insurance companies haven't picked up on it.

My dad (70's) pays about 10% of what my niece (17) pays for a similar car

No, im not saying that..... It's obvious that younger drivers are generally having more serious (and costly) accidents, whilst the more elderly tend to have minor accidents, like bashing other cars in carparks (and then driving off) for example. The sort of stuff that people don't tell the insurance company about, as it's not worth the loss of NCB.

But you see, right there is the problem..... Serious accidents are always recorded/reported, where minor accidents are rarely recorded/reported. So where it's been stated that the elderly have as many accidents, when you factor in the lower mileage AND that lack of these minor accidents being reported, you have to come to the conclusion that the figures would probably be far worse than the statistics hint at.

mikey72

"Where age-based testing has been introduced in other parts of the world it has not necessarily improved road safety........

Mitchell (2010) makes clear that in European countries where stricter licensing regimes exist, the safety record of older drivers is not better. All the evidence suggests that aged based testing of either medical condition or driving skills has no positive effect on road safety."

From the links in your ref

http://www.racfoundation.org/assets/rac_foundation/content/downloadables/maintaining%20safe%20mobility%20-%20rac%20foundation%20-%20140410%20-%20report.pdf

"who had become a driving instructor by gaining his qualification a year earlier at the age of 75"

from your link http://www.smartdriving.co.uk/Driving/DefensiveDriving/Older_Drivers/Older_Drivers.html

"The worry, as ever, is that most drivers' definition of a "better" road really means a faster road"

may be your problem here.

http://road.cc/content/news/16637-rac-foundation-asks-larger-road-signs-older-drivers

cyclonebri1

Problem is stryder you infer or rather state that all old drivers should be removed from the road, what are your views on black yellow pink and brown people, and where do you stand on Gay/lesbian issues??

Alright I'm pushing the issue with the comments above, but what I am saying is that you cannot, and you will know you cannot, categorise people the way you have in your earlier posts.

I retired a couple of years ago at 55, I now drive more often than I ever used to do, yes I have given on the Westfield and the Cyclone for the simple reason they were just a tad too "raw" for my aching bones.

I sometimes think from your posts that you'll will never have to worry about hanging up the driving gloves, I worry more about you surviving 'till then with your present driving abilities and attitude to other road users:o:o:o

Strider590

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

Problem is stryder you infer or rather state that all old drivers should be removed from the road, what are your views on black yellow pink and brown people, and where do you stand on Gay/lesbian issues??

That's simple.... I believe in absolute equality. All people treated as equals (until they prove themselves to be otherwise).

And before you say what I know your going to say, if a 20yr old would get banned for driving through a bus stop or going the wrong way down a motorway, then so should an 80yr old who does the same thing.... But in the current system, the later would get nothing but a slap on the wrist and a complimentary eyesight test, whilst the former would get a huge fine, 6 points (or a ban) and possible jail time.

cyclonebri1

Strider590 wrote: »

That's simple.... I believe in absolute equality. All people treated as equals jail time.

Then qualify your posts accordingly rather than say;

'Old folk are liabilities'


There is something else that comes into play I have to say and that is the issue of intent.

No you strider can use that to your advantage I'm sure, ie, the old fella doesn't intend to create havoc, but he does, due to age.

But then again the young chap creates the same havoc, but this time due to inexperience, chancing attitude or shear bloody mindedness.

Now, ask any judge who's deeper in the wrong and who will get sympathy and who will be taught a lesson.

The fact is age has to be allowed for, cop the age discrimination act, your driving as great as you claim it to be should allow for this.

As I said below, expect the unexpected

The_Turner

Age doesn't have to be allowed for when dealing with offences under the rta. It's the standard of driving at the time.