Maybe He Should Stop Driving

I have to admit, although little about the accident is really known, I do agree.
 
Of course he shouldn't be driving, and from what we hear he pulled out of a driveway in the path of the other car (must have done too for the Rangie to have rolled). I bet they won't do him for Due Care & Attention like they did me when I was a student and did something similar (but not in a Rangie)
 
Hopefully that will boost JLR sales a bit. ;)

Glad he's OK, though hopefully he'll let someone else drive him around now.
 
Oh dear ,I bet someone up in heaven is laughing her arse off and saying karma is good
 
ecoleman said:
So you were all there and saw exactly what happened? Must be the old man at fault!

For all you know the other driver was going way to fast. Must have been a hell of an impact to role the range rover.
Click to expand...


I was not there, but the man should NOT be allowed to be driving at 97 yrs of age end of.
 
Dave70D said:
His reflexes will be a lot worse now than 30 odd years ago. Just think if it was his fault and he killed some poor person, GETS off FREE.
Click to expand...
But, did he?
 
Dave70D said:
I was not there, but the man should NOT be allowed to be driving at 97 yrs of age end of.
Click to expand...
Statistically I think you'll find that 97 year old drivers are safer than 17 year old drivers.
 
StewartR said:
Statistically I think you'll find that 97 year old drivers are safer than 17 year old drivers.
Click to expand...

17 year olds are training and education issue if that is true. That can be dealt with a lot better than slowing reaction and failing eyesight. I would dare to make an uneducated guess that many of the 17-year old crashes were indirectly provoked by inconsiderate 97 year old drivers...
 
LongLensPhotography said:
17 year olds are training and education issue if that is true. That can be dealt with a lot better than slowing reaction and failing eyesight. I would dare to make an uneducated guess that many of the 17-year old crashes were indirectly provoked by inconsiderate 97 year old drivers...
Click to expand...

What utter crap. There's a reason youngsters pay a fortune for insurance.
 
Last edited:
LongLensPhotography said:
17 year olds are training and education issue if that is true. That can be dealt with a lot better than slowing reaction and failing eyesight. I would dare to make an uneducated guess that many of the 17-year old crashes were indirectly provoked by inconsiderate 97 year old drivers...
Click to expand...


As I understand it driver education is oh so much improved since I learned to drive and passed my test (after 13 lessons, a first time pass.........and I had the examiners examiner sitting in the back) so it is more than a simplistic view of age vs training.

And as for inconsiderate driving ~ I have seen and experienced such driving exhibited by all ages and both genders! :(

But yes, IMO drivers in their latter years need to be medically fit and arguably that should include a reaction test...........and perhaps a little like there used to be (still is???) with those on provisional motorcycle license were limited to a 125cc bike. In other words, such older drivers because of the higher potential risk, associated with reduced/impaired reaction time, should not be driving the larger & more powerful vehicles .
 
Last edited:
StewartR said:
Statistically I think you'll find that 97 year old drivers are safer than 17 year old drivers.
Click to expand...
Statistically, that'll be because there are far far more 17 y/o drivers than 97 y/o drivers.
 
gremlin16 said:
Stupid question alert. If he had failed the breath test, would he have been pinched?
Click to expand...

He didn't, nor did the other driver


ecoleman said:
So you were all there and saw exactly what happened? Must be the old man at fault!

For all you know the other driver was going way to fast. Must have been a hell of an impact to role the range rover.
Click to expand...


I thought that too and a reinforced range rover at that
 
Box Brownie said:
IMO drivers in their latter years need to be medically fit and arguably that should include a reaction test...........and perhaps a little like there used to be (still is???) with those on provisional motorcycle license were limited to a 125cc bike. In other words, such older drivers because of the higher potential risk, associated with reduced/impaired reaction time, should not be driving the larger & more powerful vehicles .
Click to expand...
Perhaps you weren't aware that, after the age of 70, you have to renew your license every 3 years, and you have to be medically fit to drive (to the same standards that apply to the rest of the driving population).

Perhaps you weren't also aware that there is evidence that older drivers tend to be quite good at managing risks; they drive less, they drive less in the dark, and they drive less on unfamiliar roads. I was quite surprised to learn this, but older drivers in the last six months of their driving careers (ie in the six months before they decide they're not able to drive any longer, which I'm sure is often much later than their families think they should have given up!!) have a lower accident rate than drivers in the first six months of their careers. And that's even despite the fact that driving teaching and testing is so much better these days.

I would suggest that, if you wanted to restrict the availability of higher powered vehicles to certain subsets of the population, those affected should be those who statistically seem to be not capable of managing risk, which is predominantly younger men.
 
Listening to the news on the radio this morning , the relevant council are meeting today to discuss reducing the speed limit on that stretch of road.
There are knee jerk reactions, and there are knee jerk reactions.
 
Dave70D said:
I was not there, but the man should NOT be allowed to be driving at 97 yrs of age end of.
Click to expand...
That's ageist. If someone is physically and mentally fit enough to drive at the age of 97, it shouldn't be a problem. You could be 60 years old and medically unfit, or 100 and medically fit.
StewartR said:
Perhaps you weren't aware that, after the age of 70, you have to renew your license every 3 years, and you have to be medically fit to drive (to the same standards that apply to the rest of the driving population).
Click to expand...
This. The only question is whether we should introduce regular driving tests alongside medical fitness at intervals eg every 5 years irrespective of when the license was gained. IE if you wish to maintain your license, you need to pass a medical and physical fitness test.

StewartR said:
I would suggest that, if you wanted to restrict the availability of higher powered vehicles to certain subsets of the population, those affected should be those who statistically seem to be not capable of managing risk, which is predominantly younger men.
Click to expand...
I passed my test in my early 20s. My first car was a five year old Ford Fiesta. It had naff all power and there was a noticeable drop in power and worsening fuel consumption if I turned the aircon on. I'd drive cautiously for the first few months until I became confident, then I became overconfident and would drive aggressively (accelerate hard, brake late, turn sharply sort of thing). A black box, like some insurance companies offer, would have made me more cautious in driving irrespective of how powerful the car was.
 
StewartR said:
No it won't.
Click to expand...
Out of interest, do you have some statistics to back up that statement? I seriously doubt there has been any meaningful research on this subject which shows the real risks of accidents at either end of the driving age spectrum. The numbers of drivers in their 90's will be minuscule compared to 17 year old drivers, which is likely to make a percentile comparison unreliable.

As for the insurance cost, I think you'll probably find that they charge a fortune for insurance because they can. Though this is a guess as I don't have access to the complicated insurance calculation logarithm. :D
 
Last edited:
omens said:
That's ageist. If someone is physically and mentally fit enough to drive at the age of 97, it shouldn't be a problem. You could be 60 years old and medically unfit, or 100 and medically fit.
Click to expand...


Not at all, he stopped doing public duties because of health issues so he should think about not driving because of the same issues.
 
It's not like he was going through London on the M25.
I'm not surprised he was able to potter about close to home and local village whatever.
The exact circumstance might have caught out any driver, apparently that bit of road is accident prone - there may be many factors such as low sun making it almost impossible to see a car approaching.
 
Tony Else said:
Listening to the news on the radio this morning , the relevant council are meeting today to discuss reducing the speed limit on that stretch of road.
There are knee jerk reactions, and there are knee jerk reactions.
Click to expand...
They had a reporter at the roadside on BBC 1 breakfast this morning and I was surprised at the speed the traffic was travelling at, especially at a junction where the speed limit is invariably reduced to give traffic joining from side roads an opportunity to join safely.
 
It was a Freelander not a Range Rover :rolleyes:
 
Dave70D said:
Not at all, he stopped doing public duties because of health issues so he should think about not driving because of the same issues.
Click to expand...
From what I just read, his only health issue prior to retiring from public duties was that he had a heavy cold. As he had also recently lost a couple of close friends and himself being 95, he had decided to retire and take things easy, nothing that would have deemed him unfit to drive.
 
nilagin said:
They had a reporter at the roadside on BBC 1 breakfast this morning and I was surprised at the speed the traffic was travelling at, especially at a junction where the speed limit is invariably reduced to give traffic joining from side roads an opportunity to join safely.
Click to expand...

after hearing it on the radio, and subsequently posting on here, I have had a read up, and it would appear the section of road was already being considered for a speed reduction, and a meeting, arranged prior to the accident.
 
I don't know the circumstances of this collision but how easy is it for Range Rover/Freelander to end up on its side in an accident?

Although you have to renew your licence after the age of 70 you do not have to be medically fit.

As there is no medical test you only have to say you are medically fit. You should tell the DVLA about certain medical conditions but if you don't then no one will check up on you. However, if I recall correctly there is no medical check when you apply for licence at any age.

Dave
 
Tony Else said:
Listening to the news on the radio this morning , the relevant council are meeting today to discuss reducing the speed limit on that stretch of road.
There are knee jerk reactions, and there are knee jerk reactions.
Click to expand...

Also on the news was that there have been 5 deaths on that stretch of road. Not so much of a knee jerk reaction, if anything it could be a little too late.

I don’t know anything about this road or the crashes other than what has been reported.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top