Paper Driving Licence

sevenhills

iolanthe07 wrote: »

The paper one works perfectly ok

A friend of mine was denied car rental at San Francisco airport because he had a paper licence; even though it was valid, there was no photograph on it which seemed to be unacceptable.

I updated the address on my driving license, at no cost. I kept the old license and carry that in my wallet for ID
If I lose it, no big deal.

AdrianC

sevenhills wrote: »

I updated the address on my driving license, at no cost.

At which point, the new licence is your current licence.

I kept the old license and carry that in my wallet for ID
If I lose it, no big deal.

An old licence with an old address is not proof of ID. Especially if it's a pre-photocard paper one. It's just a worthless piece of paper.

DVLA haven't issued non-photocard licences for two decades.

Car_54

aardvaak wrote: »

Having to go through the hastle of getting & sending a photo and paying licence fee

There is no fee. So a minor inconvenience rather than suffering?

castle96

over 70 it's 1 x 3yrs. Is there a cost at 70/every 3 yrs?

Inner_Zone

castle96 wrote: »

over 70 it's 1 x 3yrs. Is there a cost at 70/every 3 yrs?

Have you ignored post 19 or the links in this thread?

hollie.weimeraner

iolanthe07 wrote: »

The paper one works perfectly ok

A friend of mine was denied car rental at San Francisco airport because he had a paper licence; even though it was valid, there was no photograph on it which seemed to be unacceptable.

No issues at all with my paper licence in SF although you do still have to take the code so they can check your endorsements. They accepted my passport as photo ID

AdrianC

It's no great surprise that other countries regard ancient UK paper-only licences as a bit suspicious. They really are global outliers in terms of not having a photo - so problems are to be expected. Not all the time, obviously, because they are valid. But when you've got a minimum-wage disinterested drone on the desk, and a big queue behind you, they're just going to do the minimum they can to actually be bothered. They aren't looking for a creased, fading sheet of A4. That's not what a driving licence looks like to them.

Remember, they're only even a small minority of UK licences now... They're only held by those who haven't changed any details, including address, or hit age 70, in the last two decades. And not even all of them - because some will have changed to a photocard voluntarily, recognising the convenience. If ever I need photo ID, my licence is in my wallet. No other photo ID is. So there's a parcel needs collecting from the PO? The bank? Three guesses what comes out...

The only credible argument in favour of retaining an old pre-photocard licence is simple luddism. Everything else is built on the back of that.

hollie.weimeraner

AdrianC wrote: »

The only credible argument in favour of retaining an old pre-photocard licence is simple luddism. Everything else is built on the back of that.

That's a bit harsh on the MSE basis that it costs £20 to change the licence for no specific reason as it is still valid.

AdrianC

hollie.weimeraner wrote: »

That's a bit harsh on the MSE basis that it costs £20 to change the licence for no specific reason as it is still valid.

£14, once a decade...

Which is about the interval that people should need to retake their driving test at. Combine them, job jobbed.

hollie.weimeraner

AdrianC wrote: »

£14, once a decade...

Which is about the interval that people should need to retake their driving test at. Combine them, job jobbed.

£20 to change from paper to plastic:

https://www.gov.uk/exchange-paper-driving-licence

It's £14 to renew the photograph every 10 years.

have you seen the waiting list for tests in some areas? Can you imagine the logistical nightmare of re testing everyone in the UK every 10 years?

Not that I disagree with the idea of re testing per se though but then that is digressing.