- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Statue of Justice, Old Bailey (licensed CC BY 2.0 on Flickr by Ronnie Macdonald).jpgMotorist, 81, who twice crashed into cyclist while overtaking him keeps driving licence
An 81-year old driver who twice crashed into a cyclist will be able to continue to drive after magistrates decided not to ban him.
Instead, Cyril Booker’s driving licence was endorsed with eight penalty points and the pensioner will have to pay a total of £224 in fine, victim surcharge and costs, reports the Daily Gazette.
Booker, from Basildon, admitted driving without due care and attention and failing to stop when he appeared at Colchester Magistrates’ Court this week.
The court heard that he had twice tried to overtake the cyclist while driving his Nissan Juke on Halstead Road, Eight Ash Green, near Colchester on 7 June this year.
However, he twice hit the cyclist as he attempted the manoeuvre, causing unspecified damage.
Several people in the comments to the local newspaper’s article questioned why Booker had been allowed to keep his driving licence, as well as questioning why older drivers are not required to undergo a retest when reapplying for it.
One wrote: “Old people should be retested every certain amount of time, especially those that have held licences for many decades.
“They are dangers to too many people. Guarantee many would fail. That’s the worrying thing.”
Another said: “Everyone should be retested every five years and banned if they fail a second test, which they have to take in the six months after a fail.
“A fail should also be notifiable to an insurer. I can't drive a fork lift in a warehouse without regular tests.
“Why can I then go outside and drive a ton of metal at speed having passed an hour-long test 25 years ago?”
Currently, motorists aged 70 or over are required to reapply for their driving licence every three years, but there is no requirement for them to retake their driving test.
A poll earlier this year found that almost three in four (74 per cent) Brits agreed that older drivers should be required to retake their driving test with two thirds saying that should happen before the driver’s 80th birthday.
> Three quarters of Brits want drivers to retake their driving test
By contrast, only 18 per cent of respondents believed that current regulations should remain in force.
In a statement released after an 80-year-old driver was handed a suspended jail sentence and banned from driving for life after causing the death of a cyclist by careless driving, the charity Cycling UK called for a review of the licensing system for older drivers.
> Do we need mandatory retesting for older drivers?
“Cycling UK recognises that sentencing elderly and otherwise law-abiding citizens for driving offences, when they have a long and largely unblemished driving record, is an unenviable task for judges more accustomed to punishing offenders they perceive the prisons were designed for,” the organisation said.
“This case however, not for the first time, raises the increasingly important issue of how, with an ageing population where people want to maintain independence and continue driving as long as possible, the DVLA regulates and tests the fitness to drive of those whose reactions, sight and road confidence are declining,” it added.
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- rct 14 min 12 sec ago
You can get those on Garmin Connect now.
- David9694 20 min 52 sec ago
Car crashes into side of Winchester city centre church https://www.hampshirechronicle.co.uk/news/24642034.car-crashes-side-winc...
- d10brp 59 min 43 sec ago
I just bought a bike from Tredz and their service was excellent. Quick responses, plenty of flexibility, easy to get through to a human and have a...
- chrisonabike 1 hour 22 min ago
Sadly that is the first thing I thought...
- Paul J 1 hour 30 min ago
Yeah, machined hollows are sort of fineish - if design-engineered with care (inc. validation testing) - fine. The machining can at least be...
- wtjs 1 hour 36 min ago
And rechargeables used to die very quickly. I guess they still do but modern built in rechargeables give some signal as the charge gets low...
- Spangly Shiny 1 hour 45 min ago
Clearly the doped up driver did not see the rider, quite possibly because he never bothered to look. That still leaves the fact that he chose to...
- Simon E 1 hour 56 min ago
A friend commented on his strava upload after a wet ride at the weekend "Definitely need to get the winter bike out! 🚜💩 all over the roads"...
- Rendel Harris 3 hours 12 min ago
If I might offer a translation of what Prudhomme said that actually makes sense: "Given cycling's history, and not such distant history either, it...
- the little onion 3 hours 34 min ago
Why so harsh? Surely accidents happen?
Add new comment
37 comments
That would be great combined with no drivers seatbelt and very weak seat runner bolts. Dangerous drivers would become safer or die quickly, win win. As a bonus they would experience the danger we face every day we choose to go out on two wheels.
And the rusty 12" bayonet sticking out of the steering wheel.
I am still amazed at the number of people I see braking going round a bend - even learners !
The book I mentioned in my first post does look at a spike on the wheel but the author concludes that this would have little impact: people do not see driving as risky and people who do behave riskily do not compensate for their increased riskiness in other ways. "for example, drivers who do no use seatbelts tend to be young, male and more likely to drive riskily - in other words members of the very group of drivers who are most likely to crash".
It's an interesting subject, and it's unclear, to me at least, whether making driving appear much more dangerous to themselves for people who take risks would reduce their risk taking; must read more about it.
EDIT: Actually, having thought about it for a bit, it is likely that the bayonet would reduce their risk-taking behaviour. Everyone has a level of risk that they are willing to accept, so increasing perceived risk is likely to reduce risk taking. It would be fascinating to investigate how much parental attitudes affected risk-taking by their offspring; is the parent's action in reducing risk to as close to possible as zero affecting the behaviour of their children, who then have very little concept of risk and the consequences of their actions?
As I get older, I have changed my views on road safety. I now think (without any scientific evidence whatsover) that cars are too safe for motorists and roads are to safe for motorists. Design seems to favour reducing the amount that drivers have to think about... intuitively that should mean there is more capacity for the important decisions. However I'm not sure it works like that... not needing to think seems to result in 'I won't think' and blame is pushed on to everyone else. I see this in local media with junctions blamed, businesses blamed, colour of the sky blamed (seriously), councils blamed... when the reality is a motorist drove like a prick.
I'd be in favour of deliberately difficult roads and junctions to navigate with messaging that says says it is supposed to be difficult. If you can't manage it don't fucking drive.
Doesn't seem to stop the carnage in India, Thailand etc. though. Driving there is much more dangerous than the UK (by the numbers). Obviously "but different culture"...
I think the way to make it safer is maybe learn from places where it is very safe for *all* road users. So:
https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2021/01/06/the-third-edition-of-susta...
Not like the UK where "we made a desert and called it (road)peace". *We* have focused on making it safe for the occupants of each motor vehicle. We've excluded almost all others from our roads, pushed them to the fringes, made them wait ages to cross roads or take long diversions...
Yes - this is very interesting stuff. I would note that humans are equipped with some fairly "budget" heuristics for judging risk. We often judge based on "what others get away with". Consider eg. use of drugs by "respectable" people with careers, children etc (mentioning no politicians - although maybe that was all youthful folly...)
So spikes are not sufficient - drivers would have to see the gruesome results frequently in media. Much more often than we currently see "horror crash..." in the news. And ideally have a friend or two with scars or a dead relative.
Pages