Elderly Drivers Causing Accidents "DRIVING ME CRAZY!"

[Andy]

Hi Everyone

ITV have contacted me looking for participants in a TV program about Elderly Drivers Causing Accidents called "DRIVING ME CRAZY!"
Gaz this may be one for you if interested ...... copy of email to me below with contact details at end if you can help out please contact them directly

cheers

Andy
=============================

Hello Andy,

Firstly, congratulations on the website, really great.

Secondly, I’m not sure if this is something you might be able to help with but I’m contacting you with regards to a new series of documentaries we are making here at ITV which focus on various aspects of driving and common issues experienced by British motorists.

The series will look at topical issues including the war over 4x4’s and elderly driver debate. The latter of these is why I am contacting you. We are going to have an unbiased and in depth look into the safety of elderly drivers and explore possible ways of insuring only the safe drivers remain on the road.

We are currently searching for people who have had their lives seriously affected as a result of a road accident caused by an un-roadworthy pensioner being at the wheel. We are offering people the chance to tell their own story and also voice their own suggestions on how the current regulations might be improved to ensure that this sort of incident doesn’t happen again.

I would really appreciate it if you might consider assisting me in anyway with my search. I would also welcome any suggestions you might have about sourcing people.

I hope this finds you well and I really look forward to hearing from you soon.

Many thanks

Sam Buckley         

Researcher

"DRIVING ME CRAZY!"

Tel: 0207 633 2799

Fax:0207 633 2747

16 Hatfields

London

SE1 8DJ

**********************************************************************
Please visit the official ITV website at www.itv.com
for the latest company news.

This email and any files transmitted are confidential and intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are
addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify
postmaster@itv.com

Thank you.
**********************************************************************

[Gazrobs]

Yup,

As per our mail chat I've contacted them as it's a very relevant topic for me.

[Gary Anderson]

This reply will get me into deep shit with the posters on this site again, however, I do not care.

road accident caused by an un-roadworthy pensioner being at the wheel

My Mum & Dad are both pensioners and in no way could they be classed as "unroadworthy pensionsers." In fact, my Mum & Dad have been driving since they were young, neither have any points or endorsements on their licence and my Mum has only been involved in one accident which was not her fault. An "unroadworthy young person" decided to change CD whilst not looking at the road and ran into her.

My Dad had an "unroadworthy disabled driver" run into him as he was driving down a road  on which Dad had right of way and the "unroadworthy disabled driver" did not stop at the dotted white line. Why? He told police "he did not see it."

Slate me, nail me, do whatever but I have come back from wherever I was stuck and thought I would defend the majority of drivers who are safe and roadworthy.

Why not focus on the young who borrow Dad's big fast car and think it a laugh to drive at speed

My Mum is with me as I type this and she says her insurance company have told her they would rather insure a woman than a man because it has been PROVEN that women are safe drivers.

As it is ITV and that is my area, I shall watch to see what stupid reasons they come up with. However, let's all remember that we too will be old one day and may be the "unroadworthy pensioner."

I said it before on Simon's site and I will say it again here. I cannot abide people slating others due to a small minority.

If you drive a BMW, Lexus, Jaguar, Merc or whatever and some youth steals his Dad's car for a joyride does that make you "unroadworthy" because you have the same car?

Some pensioners, young folk and middle aged folk are hellish drivers - don't judge everyone on the few.

[Coach]

Damn, here I am basically agreeing with Gary again. It's kinda nice.

Sure, there are some old and dangerous drivers and even more old and annoying drivers, but I'm uncomfortable with zeroing in on one group or another. I personally think it's better to have a little more danger than throw up added roadblocks to persons who are um challenged, though if they're inept beyond a certain point, something has to be done. That said, giving up driving can be psychologically devastating. Getting old is often emotionally difficult, and having your license yanked forever is drastic. I grant that the blind shouldn't be driving, but trusting to the tester's liberalism and sensitivity to aging is sure to result in a lot of ugliness, some of it unnecessary. As usual, good luck.

[Gazrobs]

Gary,

Well I don’t want to get into a forum war with you but I cannot let your biased & frankly over emotive comments pass without giving you my 2C. As a permanently disabled person who was knocked down & nearly killed then left badly disabled by a 77 year old man who didn’t look properly & as was proved to be careless & incompetant in his driving in court I feel I’m well qualified to make a judgement & I take offence to your biased & sometimes inaccurate statements.

I would feel the same BTW if I had been knocked down by a young male driver who you attack with such relish. No one is saying that ‘ALL’ pensioners are unroadworthy but you are implying that most are fine on the road & that a lot of young male tearaways etc are not (correct me if I’m wrong) & just because your Mum & Dad are fine you take offence to people implying that ‘some’ elderly folk are not.

There is no doubt that ‘some’ young male drivers are a problem & I wonder if you’d be so annoyed if they were making an unbiased factual programme about them but does that mean that all young male drivers are a problem? Well…… or does it make them the majority or the minority?.... because you say somewhat daftly in my opinion “. I cannot abide people slating others due to a small minority.” Well are you saying that the crazy young male drivers that we all know about are the majority? I expect not & they are probably the minority yet somewhat hypocritically you can’t abide older folk being criticised when clearly & statistically “SOME” are not competent.

The fact of the matter is that some young male drivers etc are unroadworthy & are bad drivers but also statistically so are ‘SOME’ older pensioners who drive. If you read the original post it says “We are going to have an unbiased and in depth look into the safety of elderly drivers and explore possible ways of insuring only the safe drivers remain on the road. “ so what is wrong with that I ask? If they are not roadworthy & if the numbers are increasing due to people living/driving longer then why not investigate? & only safe ones allowed.

IMO, there should be a competency test for older drivers & if they pass then fine let them carry on to a 100 for all I care but some are not as they get older, I would not want the test to be the same as when we were 17 as experience counts for a lot but basic observation/reaction time/eyesight etc etc is surely good for all. My father in law is knocking 80 & he’s fine as indeed I’m sure your parents are but don’t defend/attack/bias your argument because someone rightly questions how competent some older folks are because as sure as chickens lay eggs some are not & as people live longer then the knock on effect is they drive longer. The chap next to me wants to drive again because it’s his independence yet he can barely see or walk properly (not that I can) & is frankly just a really old man who would kill somebody I know & his GP has written to the DVLA along with others to protest if he ever gets behind a wheel but he thinks he’s ok & it’s difficult to stop him as there is no test.

The guy who knocked me off was a doddery old man who couldn’t read a number plate or look over his shoulder properly & I expect had crap reaction times & observation yet he’s still driving having walked away from my court case with 7 points & £350 fine. Why not have a programme on people in this category that do not want to give up their independence as I’m sure there have been programmes on young male crazy joyriders but no one took offence but the situation is exactly the same but you’ve biased your whole ‘argument’ on the fact that your parents are perfectly good drivers & why don’t we look at younger crazy male drivers (which they have in the past)

To reiterate the fact remains that there is an increasing number of ‘unroadworthy’ elder drivers (just like young males) & why should they be allowed to continue? If I was an older driver I’d have no issues with taking a competency test to prove my ‘roadworthiness’ as otherwise I shouldn’t be on the road.

As per the earlier quote they want an unbiased view on insuring only safe drivers are allowed on the road so what’s wrong with that I ask? And yes we all know that insurance companies rate women as less risks than men because statistically they make less claims but again you mislead by saying that “they would rather insure a woman than a man because it has been PROVEN that women are safe drivers.”
Well is that right? Or they make less claims hence are less risk but are women safe drivers? (by implication all women) some are I’m sure but so are some blokes.

You say you’ve come back to defend the majority well I agree but no one said that the majority are unroadworthy did they & maybe the majority of young males are ok too & have a bad reputation due to some drivers yet you’ll happily attack them. How do you know the figures or claims etc of older incompetent drivers vs younger drivers yet you’re prepared to get on your high horse on ‘gut feel’ because your parents or people you know are ok. Well every young driver I know are ok but should I base my decision on that.

You are an intelligent bloke so I suggest you think before writing emotive mails based on gut feel & not facts.

End of rant.

I’d be interested on hearing unbiased views of the others too.

[Gary Anderson]

OK! So on one site I am slated for not "properly using my qualifications" and I knew I would be slated for this before I started. So apart from being "emotive", I am also on a "high horse" well tough. What the hell have I ever done to you or anyone else on this site? Do you thoroughly check your facts. Obviously, you have resources that I dont considering the length of your post.

"We are going to have an unbiased look." That will have a laugh. Have you ever seen anyone having an "unbiaised" TV programme. Not even the news is unbiasied for God's sake.

Before it would have bothered me - today in my newfound state of mental stability it does not. You have your opinion Gaz and I have mine. I am sorry a doddery old fool knocked you down.

One last thing. I thought the idea of these forums was to express our opinions. Well that is what I have done. If it makes you feel better to rant at me then go ahead. Yes, I am an intelligent person. You say

so I suggest you think before writing emotive mails based on gut feel & not facts.

.

Let me send to you to a thread started by Jilly about a little girl who has ADHD. Well Gaz, I CHECKED my facts before I wrote that. However,  I shall remember that. So forgive me if next time someone posts a thread and I do not reply. I work dmaned near 22 hours every day, 7 days a week so forgive me if I cannot always take the time during my 10 minutes between ops to "Check my facts" however, I shall try to do so in the future therefore replies may not come fast and furious - it may take me 7, 8 9 or 10 weeks to reply. I shall be checking my facts. Not replying on gut.

You have placed a long and frankly character assasinating post here so go ahead. Post all you like. I am NOT starting a war with anyone. However, may I revert you back to a thread here where Jilly set out out sort out my suicidal mind. Well thanks a lot Gaz. Your lengthy and more emotive posting than mine has just set me back a good few days.

I am afraid I cannot be as non emotive as you lot appear to be. Forgive me for being what I am. I did not realise that the good folks of the forum who post on here had such character slating keys on their machines. Perhaps there should be regulations set down by the Administrator as to what should and should not be posted.

This is NOT emotive this is full blown anger. Slate me for not having all the facts at my hand but PLEASE DO NOT ASSISSNATE MY CHARACTER.

I dont suppose you get apologies on forums and I guess I would wait a helluva while before I got one. However, you'll forgive me Gaz if I remind you that I am myself  "permanently disabled" myself due to a bloody stupid train driver who thought he would jump a red light. That does not mean that if you thought train drivers were great people I would rip your character to bits. You know ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ABOUT ME except the little you are trying to read between the lines.

So, slate me for an opinion but PLEASE do not rip my character apart in the process. I have fought a long, hard battle to stay sane since my accident. Did you EVER stop to think that the emotions felt by me are caused by a life-threatening head injury suffered in that accident in January? They were not part of my character before but they are now. So next time you want to slate me - please check YOUR facts before you decide what you think I am.

[Andy]

Hi everyone,

firstly I've been busy last few days with my work as a trustee for dogs for the disabled and apologise that I have only just found time to check in on the forums.  As the originator of this post and the forum owner I feel duty bound to add my comments to this and the other 'personal' posts this thread has generated.

Both Gary and Gaz are valuable members of this spinal injuries community and until now they have both added valuable opnion, advice and content to these forums. 

The first thread of this post was a direct copy of an email I recieved from ITV the terms that seem to have started these arguments.  This was a genuine email and posted in a genuine attempt to help the programme researcher find content.  The comments and posts this has led to prove that this is a very emotive subject and everyone will have a different slant on it.  As I read the email it says that elderly drivers are just one area of driving that will be covered in the program series.

I personally know several elderly drivers where I live that in my opinion are potentially dangerous on the roads, however the current system allows them to continue driving virtually unchecked.  I also know a lot of drivers over 70 who I consider personally safe and good drivers too.  The purpose of the programme is to generate debate and to highlight the serious accidents and injuries that CAN be caused by some unchecked elderly drivers.  I would trust the program makers to give both sides of the coin and certanly don't think its on a mission to alienate large sections of society.

Gaz is spinally injured a he is today because of such a driver and understandably has very strong feelings on the subject.  I don't believe for one minute that he thinks all elderly drivers are unsafe either.  I equally understand Gary's feelings on the subject based on his own experiences.  I respect both of your opinions on the subject equally

As forum administrator however I don't agree with any sort of personal attacks which as I see it have occurred on both sides.  We are all adults and I would hope that you both can rectify this matter amicably and accept that the comments were generated in the 'heat of discussion' on an emotive subject for all.  I would suggest that mediation if possible should occur privately via  email or peronal messaging within the forum.  If one or both of you feel unable to resolve matters this way then I respect that decision too.

Whatever the outcome of these disagreements, you are both welcome to continue using the forums. 

HOWEVER I won't have the forums used in a threatening or insulting manner and would like to see an end to the personal attacks

[Coach]

Gary, Gaz, et al,

I've made a few false starts on a post encouraging you both to keep posting here but they were too ambitious and too long-winded to use. I expected some harsh criticism of LOVE NOTE and the only issue that came up was that Gary didn't much like it. Then Moose posts an email about a show that will include a segment on elderly drivers and how to keep the most dangerous off the road and all Hell breaks loose (well, there's been no bloodshed, and the slating was hardly a riot, let alone a war; as Hell goes it hasn't been too bad). (I never saw slate used this way; is it net slang or UK-English slang?) I hope you'll both stick around and that you won't be afraid now and then to disagree publicly with one another. When we disagree we tend more or less to attack and even demonize, but here on the Board, we're sort of muddling through, eh? So let's keep muddling through together, absorbing an occasional hurtful spat as merely a more-or-less well-intentioned clumsiness or even ill-considered spontaneous swing at a friend. And we can argue about the show about drivers after it airs!

[Gary Anderson]

For misusing the forums - SORRY
For my boss logging in on my name - SORRY

I am not aware of any abusive language - if there was - SORRY

Threatening behaviour - I cannot hold my hands up to that - I did not make a threat.

If I have given anyone false information - SORRY.

I accept that the comments were made in the "heat of the moment." However, that does not alter the fact that they cut to the quick. In my defence, I was NOT making a personal attack - I just did not see any reason for the comments and I have to say in the cold light of day still dont.

It won't affect my use of the forums, however, it may affect the advice. I shall think twice from now on.

I have also told Eric that if he wishes to post then he has to register.

[Gazrobs]

Well I thought I'd sleep on all of this over the weekend & not lower myself to a slanging match & to be honest fully intended to apologise for any offence. But then I saw the response by Gary's boss & was somewhat 'peeved' as there was some personal stuff in there too but hey ho I dealt with the matter privately with Andy & would still like to apologise for any offence.

The original intent was not to character assassinate & I didn't think words like emotove/high horse & biaised etc were that bad but they were reacted to so for that I'm sorry.

I still stand by the original content of my post though as I tried to reiterate a few times that 'SOME' (not all) elderly drivers are unsafe & there should be a test at a certain age (possibly) but one appropriate for their age to prove competence & if they pass then great keep driving for decades if they are safe.. Of course the version posted on Simons was much more sanitised given what went on & I wouldn't have reacted to that for sure.

I also intend to continue to read/post on both forums & hope that any differing views are not taken wrongly.

[Gary Anderson]

I cannot speak/reply for my boss - only for myself - however, if he has caused offence then on his behalf I apologise. On hindsight, it was a crazy thing to do, however, he reacted on the spur of the moment.

 

The original intent was not to character assassinate & I didn't think words like emotove/high horse & biaised etc were that bad but they were reacted to so for that I'm sorry.

It was not the above quote that I reacted to, it was the fact that the implication was made that I replied to posts without first being sure of my facts. To the best of my capabilities, I do try to make sure that the info given out is correct. As a doctor - I have to - otherwise who knows what might happen. So, before telling anyone anything, I try to make sure of my facts. If I do not know, then I will get an answer from someone who does.

Casting that aside, on other more mundane day to day matters, we are all entitled to our opinion and I was expressing mine.

However, like a telephone the forums are not face to face and therefore it is not what is said it is how it is said.  I too read both sites, however, prefer to favour this one and this is the one I post on. However, that said, I accept the apology and the matter is now at an end.

[Coach]

Gary, I liked it that your boss logged in. He didn't pretend to be you, and I think it's great he cares so much.  As to the more or less harsh words between you and Gaz and the whole blood-pressure raising brouhaha, we should all have noticed by now that writing is difficult. As Arthur confessed to Throck in LOVE NOTE, his rough draft oftens says the virtual opposite of what he means it to; almost all internet posting is written quickly and then sent, without the writer waiting a day and rereading and tweaking, and opportunities for misunderstanding abound. Even Moose, reminding your Boss he should register, comes off sounding a bit other than he probably wished. I feel sure he was in his heart of hearts moved by your boss's post, but also feel sure he didn't want to seem to Gaz to be taking sides and was searching for a way to calm things down.

We're trying, all of us (at least usually), and then, when we're hurt, sometimes lash out. Especially since we're often expressing views in which we're emotionally invested, it's really quite remarkable how civil we all remain. I assume you're sick of this discussion by now, but hey, at least we've again had something real that has stimulated posts.

[Gary Anderson]

Coach,

I have actually printed off "LOVE NOTE" and believe it or not am re-reading it. Well, I had to something when I was fishing!!

I assume you're sick of this discussion by now

You could say that - just a miniscule little bit.

but hey, at least we've again had something real that has stimulated
posts

It's a helluva way to go about getting replies!

[Jilly]

but hey, at least we've again had something real that has stimulated
posts

It's a helluva way to go about getting replies!

Yeah - thats what I thought too!

[Andy]

Received this email from ITV yesterday and thought it only fair to post it as the researcher for the programme makes several salient comments and makes apologies too.  I can only add that the debate that ensued after my original post to me makes the making of the programme a good idea. Email is unedited and reproduced in entirity


Hi Andy,

Thanks for the post and introducing me to Gary Roberts. He is fantastic and exactly the sort of story we are looking for. We’re going up to meet him next week.

I had a look at the forum and noticed a bit of a war going on about the issue. I’m sorry to have caused such a negative reaction and debate on your site. I really had hoped to get the point across that we’re certainly not out to demonise elderly drivers in any way. I hope the chap that was offended realises this.

I noticed in your comment on the forum mentioned you know people who shouldn’t be driving. One thing we are also looking for is some people who have family members who are concerned that elderly loved ones might not be safe on the roads and want them to stop. I know this is probably a long shot, but if you know anybody in this situation who might be appropriate, it would be fantastic to get in touch with them.

If not, no worries and many thanks for all your help and putting us in touch with Gary.

Sam

 

[Gary Anderson]

I had hoped that this had died down but obviously not.

Can I please make it clear to ITV and also to this forum that there is NOT a war going on in this forum. There NEVER has been and there NEVER will be.

I really do not want to back over old ground again as the matter is past and gone and I sure as hell would hate to be attacked again for writing emotively and fro my gut.

ITV can make any documentary they wish. I wish Gary luck in his TV appearance and I sure as hell hope he does not get misrepresented by them. As has happende with neighbours of ours who are due to appear on telly. That is another story.

This is not an emotive message. This has been well thought out by me. This word "WAR" is being used out of context. I sure as hell would hate the posters out there to think that I was planning an attack sucha as we have in Iraq or Afghanistan - that is war.

I was not objecting to the programme  I was objecting to

You are an intelligent bloke so I suggest you think before writing emotive mails based on gut feel & not facts. End of rant. I’d be interested on hearing unbiased views of the others too.

.

To the best of my abilities I tried to express an opinion which I still do not think was a biaised one, nor do I think it was in any way emotive and nor do I think I wrote from my "gut."

So please, if someone out there thinks I am in the habit of starting "forum wars" let me assure Administrator and everyone else, I would not have a monkey's clue where to start if I was going to start a war. As Gary says I am an intelligent man and thought wars had to be started by TWO people, not one.

Just wanted to get that off my chest and feel a helluva lot better for it.

Would everyone please also note that this is my LAST word on this matter. I just wanted to clear up the war situation.

My computer is playing up again so in case things don't work as they should I have sent a PM to both Administrator and Gary Roberts. It has just conked out on me so hopefully they were sent before the crash.

[Apparelyzed]

Andy,

Maybe it's time close this topic, and agree to disagree?

Just an idea.

Simon

[Jilly]

Simon...I agree...

Gaz...good luck with the program.......

[mttb14]

I have read all of these posts with interest, we own a 4x4 which is less than 3 year old, it does less than 12,000 miles a year, we do not drive it dangerously, the driving position is great for John and I really do not see why we are being picked on by the Government and media.  We were behind an L reg small vauxhall corsa today, which is in the low TAX bracket and the fumes it was chucking out were unbelievable, I don't think it had been serviced in years, but it is classed as environmentally friendlier than our Nissan Terrano, even though we do not chuck out excessive fumes and it is serviced very regularly.

We live in the Countryside and if we have snow or ice it is safer on the road due to the 4x4 option, John has been told that if he was in an accident and jarred his neck he is likely to be paralysed from the neck down, so by being able to use the 4x4 option in bad weather he is minimising the risks.  He also has better all round vision from it when he is driving and it has plenty of room in it for wheelchair etc.

A child hood friend of my was recently killed when his motorbike was travelling up a dual carriageway.  He was driving correctly at about 60 mph (as seen by witnesses) and a man in his twenties who was rushing to work decided to go straight across the dual carriageway without stopping.  His lack of concentration for a few seconds, or his decision in a rush, killed a 42 year old Colin while even though he overturned his car, he only broke a few bones.  The only time Colin had to react was to bite his tongue, infact he bit so hard that he bit his tongue in half in the impact.  He died at the scene.  That was all because a person made a wrong decision, he wasn't senile or a teenager, he was just a person in a rush who took a chance.  How many people have also been in a rush and have chanced a situation and luckily got away with it, or unluckily have not.

I have been behind many old, middle aged and young drivers who in my opinion should not be on the road.  I think in all fairness we should all be retested on a regular basis because we all take driving for granted and we all develop bad habits.  I consider my self a very good driver, and I have been told by many others that I am a good driver, and I am highly irritated by people who cannot reverse.  (Yes I am a woman, and yes I can reverse, infact much better than most men)  We were at the front of a line of traffic in a lane the other day, and a lady coming the otherway, driving a small Ford KA had to reverse back 200 yards to a pull in.  The lane was wide enough to reverse a bus in, but she hit the bank on the left and then pulled forward tried to reverse again and hit the bank on the right of her and then so on and on.  It took her a good 10 minutes and we watched in total disbelief, she just did not have a clue how to reverse straight back and to then pull into the layby in the left, and it is not just a case of women drivers as I have also seen many men drivers who cannot reverse.  I was on the verge of offering to reverse her car for her.

I have a friend who I would not get in a car with if she was driving, she is as blind as a bat and has no driving logic whatever. She cannot go forward all that well and she definately can't reverse.  I think reversing should be a much bigger part of the test, because being able to reverse is a very important part of driving.

I also hate people who tailgate, once when we were up in Yorkshire and they had chevrons painted on the road showing you how far apart you should be in the traffic, I was amazed by the gap you should really have between cars, that has not left me.  I have never driven up the backside of other cars, but where ever we go, we now try to keep that gap between us and a vehicle in front.  If John is driving and I think he is too close to a car in front I just say chevrons and he slows down to put the distance between them and us.  It really was helpful having them painted on the road, because it was a wake up call to us, and we do really try to drive with that in mind, but then you get cars, lorries, buses all getting in between the gap we have left and we then have to slow down to allow the vehicle infront to pull further away from us to put back the gap between us.  Safe stopping distances being observed by more drivers would definately save lives on motorways.

My dad was a long distance lorry driver and he taught us and loads of other people to drive, but he was continually on at you to concentrate on the road and not to look around at the scenery or anything else.  He made sure we could reverse using our mirrors as well as looking over our shoulders, he made sure we could jump in any sized vehicle and be able to drive it, and he also told us that if a car infront was indicating to turn left, assume the driver was stuppid and that they may turn right, and he has been proven right on that one so many times.  He always maintained when teaching someone and when he drove himself that the car was a tool which could be very dangerous in the wrong hands, and that you had to view it as a machine capable of killing.  When driving you did not have time to concentrate on conversations, or looking around, or singing along to music, you were in charge of that vehicle and you needed all of your concentration for the task of driving.  My brother and myself both drive exactly the same, neither of us look around we both concentrate on driving, John is by his own admission very easily distracted, and I'm continually on at him to look at the road not a buzzard flying over the motorway, etc.

There are definately too many toys in vehicles these days which distract drivers from the task in hand, and still people use their mobile phones when driving, I have seen loads of people trying to text whilst driving, well you definately can't be concentrating on both of those tasks properly!!!!!!

So I think there are definately good and bad drivers of all ages and when their bad driving impacts on the lives of others the consequences of their actions is truely horrendous.

I hope there was nothing in the above to offend anyone, but this is my views on the subject.

Maria

[Gazrobs]

Hi Maria,

Blimey can't you sleep (4.27am)

Lot's of good & valid points which I agree with & well put. Of course I know it's not only elderly drivers that make mistakes & we can all quote lots of examples of other catagories but there are examples & stats according to the police when I had my accident of higher than 'normal' problems they have had to deal with due to elderly drivers. Folks live longer & therefore drive longer but some don't realise that their reactions/eyesight/observation skills have slipped below the acceptable so my view is why not investigate? & of course even if they did they don't want to lose their independance I guess like the rest of us.

Why not have some kind of test say at 75 onwards on a regular basis that isn't like the test we had at 17 but tests all of the above & if you get through then great keep driving for decades if you are safe. I just want the unsafe ones to stop as indeed I think other people young/mad/incompetant should be retested for 'safeness' & they should not be on the road either.

Just my 2C

If Andy wants to close this then he has my backing but maybe some folks might be interested in my initial 'vet' next Monday with the director of the programme & subsequently if I get through the report of the film crew experience for the programme (I also drive a 4x4 so should be fun though it is a hybrid:-)) so maybe we can keep this open if their are no 'ill feeling' type of posts as it's a done deal now & all sorted IMHO

[Andy]

thanks for the responses everyone, I will lock this post now and it should gradually move off the first page.  I am interested in what happens from now with Gaz and ITV interviews etc as most of you are too I would imagine.  When you have further info you can share with us Gaz if you want to

please start a new topic in this forum

Thanks again to all who have responded on this post.  I am very thankful that our core members are ALL articulate people and value everyones contributions and input to these debates on the forums

Andy