97 yo driver causes crash

AdrianC

Iceweasel wrote: »

He's already had a new one delivered.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/breaking-prince-philip-delivered-replacement-13874747?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar

I wish my insurance company were half as quick.

Umm, you do realise they stopped making Freelander 2s four years ago, right?

So it's probably just another one of the royal household fleet, simply transferred from Balmoral or Windsor.

Gloomendoom wrote: »

My father's insurance company required a doctor to certify he was fit to drive.

Which is very different from the DVLA requiring a doctor's cert to replace his licence.

jk0

tonyh66 wrote: »

royal cars are built like tanks, bulletproof glass etc makes them quite heavy, im surprised the other car managed to turn it over. Bet the security were krapping themselves thinking it was an assasination attempt.
I see the papers are not going with the blind pensioner causes road accident angle, going with road speed to be reduced and cameras installed, wonder who they are saying might be to blame?

Ha. Do you remember when Prince Charles crashed that plane? The investigation found that the co-pilot should have seized control.



I was all set for them to say Philip's protection officer should have jammed on the handbrake, and stuck it in neutral.

twhitehousescat

Ectophile

kazwookie wrote: »

I am suprised that his car went over, they are big and heavy, it must some wack on the side of it.

also where was his protection squad? as there has been no mention.

Also why the hell is he still driving on public roads?

There are people who say they drive a big 4x4 because it's safer in an accident. But in that photo, it's very noticeable which car has ended up the wrong way up.


Ordinary family cars are a lot less likely to roll over in an accident.


Before anyone thinks this is an anti-4x4 rant, I drive an old Freelander, and am thinking of replacing it with a newer one soon. But I have no illusions that driving it makes me magically safe from accidents.

Robisere

He was "..dazzled by the sun" and he would not have seen the other car. Nor took the time to lower his sun visor and turn it sideways, which is what I do in joining a main road from a side road, in the same circumstances. The fact is that he turned out of a side road at a junction and into the path of an oncoming vehicle which was driving along a main road. Had anyone else done that, it might have been construed as 'driving without due care and attention'.

Car_54

Robisere wrote: »

He was "..dazzled by the sun" and he would not have seen the other car. Nor took the time to lower his sun visor and turn it sideways, which is what I do in joining a main road from a side road, in the same circumstances. The fact is that he turned out of a side road at a junction and into the path of an oncoming vehicle which was driving along a main road. Had anyone else done that, it might have been construed as 'driving without due care and attention'.

Or at the very least failure to comply with a sign.

Robisere

https://getpocket.com/redirect?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fphoto.php%3Ffbid%3D2065989573491427%26set%3Da.134084173348653%26type%3D3%26eid%3DARBrZPpO15gMhTECxbxpyMc_NE6qUp-wkBjbWUqbGUp-8AU6mLS2_AejfO_7JpAjDKDg7EfXkI1YULTc&formCheck=3246e61de7e93bf3097098a562d5f12e

twhitehousescat

Gloomendoom

AdrianC wrote: »

Which is very different from the DVLA requiring a doctor's cert to replace his licence.

Exactly!
.................

AdrianC

AdrianC wrote: »

Umm, you do realise they stopped making Freelander 2s four years ago, right?

So it's probably just another one of the royal household fleet, simply transferred from Balmoral or Windsor.

Yep, it is.
The one he crashed was on a normal 13-plate.
The one that's been delivered is on a very short private plate, blurred in all the pics, but almost certainly OXV1, the one he's been photographed in at Windsor for a few years.