Worried about dad's fitness to drive

bryanb

AdrianC wrote: »

Only up to a certain point. Middle-aged drivers have the lowest premiums, with premiums rising for elderly drivers. A lot of elderly drivers will also fail to report the minor damage they cause to their insurers, either because they're completely unaware of parking dings and scrapes or because they'll pay to sort it themselves.

A lot of drivers who are not elderly choose not to report such things as well

alastairq

A lot of elderly drivers will also fail to report the minor damage they cause to their insurers, either because they're completely unaware of parking dings and scrapes or because they'll pay to sort it themselves

Erm, like, most drivers, across the age range, would do?

AdrianC

bryanb wrote: »

A lot of drivers who are not elderly choose not to report such things as well

Sure. But since that's precisely the type of damage which elderly drivers with failing faculties cause most often...

AdrianC

DUTR wrote: »

Why are you shocked? Are you saying the passenger does not hinder the drivers view?

If he doesn't, I certainly will. In the unlikely event a passenger hinders my view, I'll ask them to move to clear it. I certainly won't ever trust their opinion over my own observation.

DUTR

greenval wrote: »

It's difficult because the issue for many isn't just giving up driving but the loss of independence driving gives you. That said I had to give up at 45 due to sight problems so I know what it's like.
I think you are right to be concerned but it may be a case of exploring the wider issues or as someone else said looking at getting different mirrors or angling them differently.

My Mum gave up of her own accord in her 70s, two of my neighbours are in their 70 s and still driving , I don't think it's a one hat fits all, and I wonder how many of the advocates responding here will hand back their license when they reach an age?

Mojisola

bryanb wrote: »

Insurance companies treat older drivers as better drivers (lower premiums) and they have all the accident statistics.
Anyone got better information than them?

http://www.rospa.com/roadsafety/policy/statements/older-drivers.aspx
Reported statistics indicate that the risk of being involved in an accident increases after the age of 70, and up to that age drivers are no more likely to cause a crash than to be the victim of another road user's mistake. However, drivers over 70 and especially over 80 years, drivers are more likely to be at fault when they crash.

DUTR

AdrianC wrote: »

If he doesn't, I certainly will. In the unlikely event a passenger hinders my view, I'll ask them to move to clear it. I certainly won't ever trust their opinion over my own observation.

It's not about trusting their opinion over yours, it's additional information for you to make the descision. The final descision always rests with the driver in charge of the vehicle.

JustinR1979

DUTR wrote: »

My Mum gave up of her own accord in her 70s, two of my neighbours are in their 70 s and still driving , I don't think it's a one hat fits all, and I wonder how many of the advocates responding here will hand back their license when they reach an age?

Hopefully refreshers and retraining/testing are brought in before too long
I did a forklift test years ago, can't drive one now as had no refreshers. Can still jump in a car and do 150mph though, and can carry on for decades like that.

AdrianC

DUTR wrote: »

It's not about trusting their opinion over yours, it's additional information for you to make the descision. The final descision always rests with the driver in charge of the vehicle.

Of course it's about trusting their opinion. If you can see it to be clear, then their opinion adds nothing. If you can't see it to be clear, their opinion is the only information you have - so you're trusting their opinion.

If you've pulled up to a junction at a bad enough angle that your passenger has the only line of sight, then you've already cocked up. Compounding it by relying on their opinion rather than adjusting your position so that you can see is just making a poor manoeuvre worse.

DUTR

AdrianC wrote: »

Of course it's about trusting their opinion. If you can see it to be clear, then their opinion adds nothing. If you can't see it to be clear, their opinion is the only information you have - so you're trusting their opinion.

If you've pulled up to a junction at a bad enough angle that your passenger has the only line of sight, then you've already cocked up. Compounding it by relying on their opinion rather than adjusting your position so that you can see is just making a poor manoeuvre worse.

I beleive you are considering the passenger as a total block of vision to the nearside, that is not what I'm saying.
If you were a passenger in my car, then I do not have the same full view as if there was no passenger to the nearside. Executing a right hand turn into a road, then you have two pairs of eyes observing to the left and the passenger perhaps has a better view, for them to say it's clear or otherwise is no big issue for me. Likewise if I'm a passenger in the front, my driver is not going to take offence at me saying for example "it's clear after...."