Routine licence re-testing - would you support it?

[Bibio]

yes. across the board car, lorry, bike etc.etc.

every 10 years and only the practical part (old on road). eye sight test at opticians every 3 years. bad eye sight and bad driving go hand in hand.

the hazard perseption test is flawed and does not take into account good alert drivers who spot hazards to early.

refresher course, no need for tests

I hold all the licence categories you can get - so for me it'd be a total nightmare scenario, and wouldn't be fair.. regular refresher course every ten years or so to keep you up to date maybe..

But I see people driving each day who shouldn't be (like the middle lane hoggers who drive at 50 or 45 in the 70 limit motorways, and don't move over. The police should be pulling these idiots over, impounding their vehicle and revoking their licence until they've been on a strict driving refresher course... all they do is cause mayhem on the roads..

I'm all for retesting the grannies and grandads, who hold you up on the road by driving at 30-35mph on 60 limit roads, and don't move over to let you by.. I was held up for 10 miles in my car trying to get home for a meeting by one of these prats in a new nissan micra.... couldn't get past him for traffic, and ended up rally driving past him on a country road, because me and several other motorists were getting annoyed at the slow speeds...Aged 65 or over - retest or surrender the licence..

I don't think average Joe needs mandatory retesting, despite some of the evidence to the contrary. I would be tempted by a scheme to get people who get banned required to take their test again, as they have already proved that their grasp of the rules is lacking.

Better access to training would be a worthwhile investment, I suspect, but the attitude has to change in the way that we currently see a licence as an entitlement.

Voted no against more bureaucracy and more than likely stealth tax on the test.

The only further tests I would consider would be ones to grant you additional bonuses to your license ie you've passed our advanced driving test, you're now legally entitled to do 100 in national speed limit zones. Pass a stunt riding course and wheelies are now allowed off the lights. That sounds like way too much fun to ever be made into a law though.

[keith_d]

It would be more useful to get the insurance industry involved than the government. Get them to agree on a standardised one day refresher with a test at the end which qualifies you for a 5% insurance discount for the next 4 years if you meet the standard.

With any luck it would be cost neutral, with the reduction in claims balancing out the cost of the training, as well as improving the general standard of driving.

Yes and no.

If we had a first driving test that was more akin to Finland's, which is ball-bustingly hard according to my Finnish girlfriend, then retesting would be less important because you would have weeded out a good chunk of bad drivers in the first place.

With the lower standards of the UK test, which are still fairly high compared to other parts of the world, re-testing every 5 years wouldn't hurt. No direct charge for the test, just fund it via an increase in some non-regressive tax (so not road tax, probably income tax instead).

Driving and riding are privileges, not rights. As part of the privilege, you should commit to keeping your standards up and be willing to allow them to be assessed. Would you refuse to let doctors be revalidated for clinical competency on the grounds that it's a financial burden on them as well as threatening their livelihoods? Driving's not much different.

Of course, this would only work if you had a decent public transport network to accommodate those who lose the right to drive. Fine if you live in London or another big city, difficult if you live out in the sticks.

NO! IMO it wouldnt make the roads far, far safer at all. It would have no significant affect.

The people on the roads today have all passed their tests. So they will just pass it again? Makes no difference to their skill of driving. all it would do is just p1ss people off that they have to re-do it, and pass it again, with the same level of skill they passed thier previous test.

[dizzyblonde]

Originally Posted by Bibio

yes. across the board car, lorry, bike etc.etc.

every 10 years and only the practical part (old on road). eye sight test at opticians every 3 years. bad eye sight and bad driving go hand in hand.

the hazard perseption test is flawed and does not take into account good alert drivers who spot hazards to early.

I was thinking along these lines, but more a refresher than a test. You're supposed to visit the opticians anyway every two years for those of us who wear specs, so should be for everyone else too. I agree with the hazard perception test with alert road users.

However I wouldn't like to have to got through the rigmarole of doing test, and or refreshers to justify my good use of the road. I think my No Claims and zero accident rate shows I'm safe to be on the road....however maybe those who fall off regularly (even though they don't claim) or get knocked off, should voluntarily put themselves forward for a refresher course every now and again.

IMO-Not retest after all the test is only proving you can operate the machinery and drive to a minimum standard,with no medical from a doctor
21-50 every ten years,50-65 every 5 years 65-70 every 2 ears and 70 on wards annually.COMPUTER SIMULATED ASSESSMENT + MEDICAL,even if only an eye examination, and if you fail either after a second attempt having had treatment for medical or addition driving training,prohibition till you have taken a statutory more complex retest and strict medical..Harsh but being honest would eliminate a lot of the people who drive with medical conditions that interfere with good driving,as well as the incompetent.
My personal circumstances dictate that I must have medicals to keep my license and I appreciate that if I don't reach that medical standard I don't deserve to have the entitlement to drive.I would be willing to do assessments as likewise I would want to know that I was considered proficient enough to satisfy the required driving skills,not just my own judgment but satifying the required standards by the assessors.

P.S. I would add that this would be for the highest classification held on your license and not for every type--example being if you have a car license this would also cover you for your bike.
Your driving license is based on attaing certain levels that entitle you to drive and at the moment you have nothing after you have passed your test apart from self declaration on the medical