# Ecouraged to tell fibs by dvla



## BrianG (Apr 14, 2013)

I am in my mid. 70s and developing sight problems. As you are probably aware over 70s have to renew licences every three years (I thinkit's 3). Anyway when ccompleting the form I have say if I can read a number plate at Xnumber of metres. I know that I can't but my specialist at the hospital tells me I am perfectly fit to drive.
Having had previous experience of the hassle which can ensue when telling the exact truth about health issues.ie weeks of form filling I have decided to say yes when filling in the form.
Am I being stupid, am I breaking the law? I suppose that I am. Wouldn't it be much easier if we all had to take a medical when first applying for a licence and every so often afterwards. The onus would then be on the DVLA rather than the individual. Mind you, knowing this country they would probably charge a fortune for the medical


----------



## shortcircuit (Apr 14, 2013)

I certainly would not have posted on here what your intentions are.  Edit out if you like.


----------



## BrianG (Apr 14, 2013)

Can't see the problem . Surely thoughts are not.


----------



## Bakedbeans (Apr 14, 2013)

BrianG said:


> Can't see the problem . Surely thoughts are not.




cant see is the problem :lol-049::lol-049::lol-049::lol-049:


----------



## n brown (Apr 14, 2013)

sometimes keeping schtum  is the way forward .in my experience old people drive to suit their abilities ,and if that means being stuck behind some old fart doing 15 mph ,fair play to him,when I get to that age I will be economical with the truth to keep mobile


----------



## Deleted member 24143 (Apr 14, 2013)

Most people drive their motorhomes carefully and well within speed limits so you have long reaction times. I wouldn't worry about it.


----------



## Smaug (Apr 14, 2013)

Kryten said:


> Most people drive their motorhomes carefully and well within speed limits so you have long reaction times. I wouldn't worry about it.



That's the usual assumption of other drivers. They tend to get a shock when they pull out of side roads just in front of me assuming I am travelling at 30mph when I am actually doing 60! I wouldn't mind if they matched my speed, but they usually only manage about 30mph themselves! lane:


----------



## Sparks (Apr 14, 2013)

Post Deleted


----------



## Deleted member 967 (Apr 14, 2013)

If you have a vehicle over 3500kg you have to have a form filled in by a doctor (form D4) to go with your D2 licence renewal form at 70 and every 3 years after that.   Eyesight is one of the questions.  Not just can you read a number plate but an exact description of your sight with and without glasses. Field of vision etc.

John


----------



## maingate (Apr 14, 2013)

I don't mind what you do.

I have no plans to be driving in your area. :lol-049:


----------



## Deleted member 18310 (Apr 15, 2013)

what happens when you pull out of a junction in to the path of a oncoming biker ?  guess you can say sorry mate I didn't see you that's if he's still alive of corse


----------



## Rockerboots (Apr 15, 2013)

Even though it is a hassel i would declaire it.  If there is an accident (your fault or not) depending on the severity they may discover your lack of disclosure in an investigation and you would be in it up to your neck.
 You could be lucky & never have a problem, on the other hand could you live with yourself if you killed someone knowing you had a problem and didn`t delaire it.

It`s the catch 22 situation.



Andy


----------



## bru (Apr 15, 2013)

fifey 21 said:


> what happens when you pull out of a junction in to the path of a oncoming biker ?  guess you can say sorry mate I didn't see you that's if he's still alive of corse



when was the last time you had your eyes tested and the perscription on your glasses changed 
have this done and could change the whole situation


----------



## Byronic (Apr 15, 2013)

maingate said:


> I don't mind what you do.
> 
> I have no plans to be driving in your area. :lol-049:



That's rather short sighted of you. 

Curious really, many motorists advocate more regular testing "to get the idiots off the road" and probably just as many reckon it's OK to drive around with defective vision" or at a speed commensurate with the degree of impairment!


----------



## ricc (Apr 15, 2013)

the ability to read a number plate is a pretty crude way of assessing whether someone can see well enough to drive.

ive worn glasses since childhood.....i would fail the sight test without them ... i carry a spare pair in the glovebox , but having said that i have in the spirit of scientific research tried driving without glasses.... no real problems driving with care on the quiet rural roads i normally frequent... after all a pedestrian is far bigger and easier to see than a number plate letter and you dont have to see them in perfect clarity to know they are there.... you dont have to identify the blur on the road to know its either a rabbit or a brick and should be avoided.

in short think about what youre doing assess your circumstances and dont do anything you wouldnt want the idiot coming towards you to be doing.

with old age reaction time and tunnel vision is probably more of a problem than perfect clarity.....do we all park up in thick fog?


----------



## Deleted member 967 (Apr 15, 2013)

BrianG said:


> I am in my mid. 70s and developing sight problems. As you are probably aware over 70s have to renew licences every three years (I thinkit's 3). Anyway when ccompleting the form I have say if I can read a number plate at Xnumber of metres. I know that I can't but my specialist at the hospital tells me I am perfectly fit to drive.
> Having had previous experience of the hassle which can ensue when telling the exact truth about health issues.ie weeks of form filling I have decided to say yes when filling in the form.
> Am I being stupid, am I breaking the law? I suppose that I am. Wouldn't it be much easier if we all had to take a medical when first applying for a licence and every so often afterwards. The onus would then be on the DVLA rather than the individual. Mind you, knowing this country they would probably charge a fortune for the medical



If you cannot met the eyesight standards set by DVLA then you should not be driving.  Your insurance will also be invalid.  You need to get it in writing from the doctors that you are OK to drive.  Word of mouth can be disputed.

John


----------



## Byronic (Apr 15, 2013)

ricc said:


> the ability to read a number plate is a pretty crude way of assessing whether someone can see well enough to drive.
> 
> ive worn glasses since childhood.....i would fail the sight test without them ... i carry a spare pair in the glovebox , but having said that i have in the spirit of scientific research tried driving without glasses.... no real problems driving with care on the quiet rural roads i normally frequent... after all a pedestrian is far bigger and easier to see than a number plate letter and you dont have to see them in perfect clarity to know they are there.... you dont have to identify the blur on the road to know its either a rabbit or a brick and should be avoided.
> 
> ...



May be a crude assessement, but a pretty quick way and cheap way of instantly weeding out those not even able to reach a basic standard.
We all park up in the fog, but the the driver with impaired vision is still going to be at the same relative level of sight disadvantage, compaired to the driver with unimpaired vision.


----------



## Wooie1958 (Apr 15, 2013)

I must be missing the point completely here, how on earth can you blame the DVLA for you telling lies ?

You have knowingly answered a question on the DVLA form wrong and in so doing you have committed an offence and because of that i think you`ll find
that your Insurance is Invalid as well.

If your eyesight does not meet the requirements as set out by the DVLA then you should not be driving !


----------



## wildman (Apr 15, 2013)

The wisdom of age should tell you when its time to stop driving. If you cannot pass the eyesight test wearing glasses then for goodness sake stop. With age our reactions are massively slower than when we were younger, yet cars and traffic speed have increased significantly in our lifetime. I Trust I will know when its time to turn in my licence for the sake of those around me.


----------



## Wooie1958 (Apr 15, 2013)

wildman said:


> The wisdom of age should tell you when its time to stop driving. If you cannot pass the eyesight test wearing glasses then for goodness sake stop. With age our reactions are massively slower than when we were younger, yet cars and traffic speed have increased significantly in our lifetime. I Trust I will know when its time to turn in my licence for the sake of those around me.





Well said.


----------



## frontslide (Apr 15, 2013)

If you cant read a number plate from 20 metres you should be letting someone else drive! i need glasses for driving but can easily read a plate at 20 metres without them.


----------



## frontslide (Apr 15, 2013)

ricc said:


> the ability to read a number plate is a pretty crude way of assessing whether someone can see well enough to drive.
> 
> ive worn glasses since childhood.....i would fail the sight test without them ... i carry a spare pair in the glovebox , but having said that i have in the spirit of scientific research tried driving without glasses.... no real problems driving with care on the quiet rural roads i normally frequent... after all a pedestrian is far bigger and easier to see than a number plate letter and you dont have to see them in perfect clarity to know they are there.... you dont have to identify the blur on the road to know its either a rabbit or a brick and should be avoided.
> 
> ...


So it was you i followed the other day down a country lane swerving to avoid the lost anorak hanging from the gate post!!


----------



## CooP (Apr 15, 2013)

I don't know what amazes me more, the fact that you are publicly boasting of your deliberate intention to drive dangerously and illegally in a manner that threatens members of my family, or the fact that so many others here don't see the problem. You are a scary group of people.


----------



## AuldTam (Apr 15, 2013)

Wooie1958 said:


> I must be missing the point completely here, how on earth can you blame the DVLA for you telling lies ?
> 
> You have knowingly answered a question on the DVLA form wrong and in so doing you have committed an offence and because of that i think you`ll find
> that your Insurance is Invalid as well.
> ...



-DITTO-


Have you thought about getting a prescription windscreen fitted...


----------



## Kontiki (Apr 15, 2013)

You say that you can't read a number plate at the required distance but your 'specialist' at the hospital says yu are ok to drive. What is the specialists job, is he an optician? Any defect in your vision is a  risk you are forcing on other drivers. Have you been checked out by an optician, ask if they consider you fit to drive. As somebody with 3 years to go before I get to 70 I am dreading having to face the fact I might be restricted from driving anything over 3.5 ton or not being allowed to drive at all but I would never consider taking a chance & hope my experience would overcome any physical impairment.


----------



## Wooie1958 (Apr 15, 2013)

If this individual carries on driving in this situation i genuinely hope that they get caught !

And when they do get caught i hope they *Throw The Book At Them*.


----------



## Byronic (Apr 15, 2013)

Wooie1958 said:


> If this individual carries on driving in this situation i genuinely hope that they get caught !
> 
> And when they do get caught i hope they *Throw The Book At Them*.



Preferably the Braille Version.


----------



## BrianG (Apr 15, 2013)

When I first started this thread  I expected some flack and I certainly have not been disappointed.
Let me first explain exactly what has happened, and the sequence of events.
1. August 2008 I reached the ripe old age of 70 and found my  D licence cancelled. I re-applied and took the relevant medical with a doctor who had no idea of my medical history because I had spent the previous 10 years out of the UK. I had , during these years, an operation for a hiatus hernia during which I had a heart problem involving the aortic valve together with an aneurism of the aorta. I thought it only correct to explain this to the doctor after which we decided to send the reports from the specialists concerned which were in Spanish to the DVLA together with the medical forms. FIVE MONTHS LATER, god knows how many letters later, the DVLA agreed to replace my D rating. Apparently they had trouble with the Spanish, had it been in Urdu, the result may have been quicker.
From this you  may see why I am loath to get involved again!
2. 2010 I went to the optician for a check. I already knew that, like most people of my age, I had the start of cataracts so I asked the optician for an appointment with an eye specialist with a view to cataract surgery. The specialist said that my cataracts were not severe enough for surgery but at the same time I had early stage glaucoma in the left eye and recommended I start eye drops. Glaucoma causes one to think of blindness so I asked the specialist how this would affect my driving. She checked my chart readings and said no problems but, as a precaution, did a field vision check which was satisfactory.
3 August 2011 Licence due for renewal I decided to not to bother with the D ratings and save myself  the £80 medical fee. When filling in the form I declared the visit to the specialist. You can guess what followed. When did you last see the specialist? What is her name and address? When did you last renew your glasses? THREE WEEKS LATER "We have made an appointment for you to have a  field vision test in two weeks time.  Following the test, another FOUR WEEKS my licence appeared in the post.  I could now go on holiday in France  a month later than planned.
4. After this lot I began to think about how well I could read things like number plates, that being the BASIC requirement, so I did some rough checks while out walking the dog in the mornings. Without buying myself a longer tape measure I think I cannot clearly read a number plate at the reqd distance.
I have been to another optician since doing this rough check who confirms that there is no significant change in my prescription.
I appreciate that this is a very long essay but I thank those that can be bothered to read it and maybe  see that I have not been acting foolishly to date and AM NOT putting other peoples lives at risk. As for the " can you read this plate at X metres and the other plate at Y metres" determining ones fitnrss to drive is laughable. How many people are out there with tunnel vision potentially knocking people off bikes. As for the GPs with their field vision finger test, equally laughable in my view.  
                                                                                        Thankyou  I hope I have put your minds at rest.
ps Licence renewal next August so still time to rethink.


----------



## witzend (Apr 15, 2013)

Mind you, knowing this country they would probably charge a fortune for the medical

Yes without a Doubt


----------



## oldpolicehouse (Apr 15, 2013)

BrianG said:


> When I first started this thread  I expected some flack and I certainly have not been disappointed.
> Let me first explain exactly what has happened, and the sequence of events.
> 1. August 2008 I reached the ripe old age of 70 and found my  D licence cancelled. I re-applied and took the relevant medical with a doctor who had no idea of my medical history because I had spent the previous 10 years out of the UK. I had , during these years, an operation for a hiatus hernia during which I had a heart problem involving the aortic valve together with an aneurism of the aorta. I thought it only correct to explain this to the doctor after which we decided to send the reports from the specialists concerned which were in Spanish to the DVLA together with the medical forms. FIVE MONTHS LATER, god knows how many letters later, the DVLA agreed to replace my D rating. Apparently they had trouble with the Spanish, had it been in Urdu, the result may have been quicker.
> From this you  may see why I am loath to get involved again!
> ...


Why should you expect DVLA staff to understand Spanish and the Urdu comment is racist.
I think it's time you gave up driving because you are an idiot.


----------



## Smaug (Apr 15, 2013)

oldpolicehouse said:


> Why should you expect DVLA staff to understand Spanish and the Urdu comment is racist.
> I think it's time you gave up driving because you are an idiot.



I don't see the need for abusing the poster. Can you not make a point without abuse?


----------



## BrianG (Apr 15, 2013)

oldpolicehouse said:


> Why should you expect DVLA staff to understand Spanish and the Urdu comment is racist.
> I think it's time you gave up driving because you are an idiot.



each to his own opinion! the comment on urdu was not meant to be racist but rather a plug at a government deptments incompetence. For your additional information I have lived 2 years in Bahrain, 7 years in Iran and 4 in Libya. I still maintain contact with 2 Libyan friends and 1 Iranian friend here in the UK.    Racism is a very easy description to throw around thes days  IDIOT


----------



## Caz (Apr 15, 2013)

At the point when you thought you might not be able to read a number plate at the distance required by UK Law, you say you went to your optician who advised your prescription did not need changing - but you don't say whether you asked them if you eyesight, as corrected by that prescription, met the standard required for driving. Did you?

This is something I always ask my optician at Test time!

Frankly, if your eyesight doesn't meet this standard you are driving illegally and your Insurance is not valid. You should not be telling fibs to the DVLA, you should cease driving.


----------



## BrianG (Apr 15, 2013)

wildman said:


> The wisdom of age should tell you when its time to stop driving. If you cannot pass the eyesight test wearing glasses then for goodness sake stop. With age our reactions are massively slower than when we were younger, yet cars and traffic speed have increased significantly in our lifetime. I Trust I will know when its time to turn in my licence for the sake of those around me.



My optician and my specialist both inform me that I am well enough sighted to drive. I would also like to add that my prescription has not changed since taking the D rating medical in 2008 with it's stricter criteria.  Please read everything I have said. Surely the optician and the specialist are the people to best be able to judge my visual ability to drive. If you read carefully you will realize that even the dvla have agreed when they last renewed my licence. What I want to avoid is another debacle when I next renew in 2014.


----------



## BrianG (Apr 15, 2013)

Kainene said:


> At the point when you thought you might not be able to read a number plate at the distance required by UK Law, you say you went to your optician who advised your prescription did not need changing - but you don't say whether you asked them if you eyesight, as corrected by that prescription, met the standard required for driving. Did you?
> 
> This is something I always ask my optician at Test time!
> 
> Frankly, if your eyesight doesn't meet this standard you are driving illegally and your Insurance is not valid. You should not be telling fibs to the DVLA, you should cease driving.



I have stated several times that both specialist and optician have said no problem. Please read everything before commenting.


----------



## Smaug (Apr 15, 2013)

BrianG said:


> I have stated several times that both specialist and optician have said no problem. Please read everything before commenting.



Nah, why would anyone want to take any facts into account?


----------



## barryd (Apr 15, 2013)

If your specialist and optician have both stated your fine to drive are you sure your reading the number plates from the correct distance when testing yourself?

Why dont you measure 20 metres properly and try it?  Do you feel confident driving or are you struggling to see and concentrate?

Maybe you dont have a problem.


Some of you need to calm down a bit an all.  This forum is not as friendly as it used to be.  The guy is only asking for some help and advice.  Ok so he needs to keep within the law which he is clearly worried about, hence the post.


----------



## Tco (Apr 16, 2013)

When you sign the application form for your licence, you are stating that ALL the information given is true. Therefore if you are aware that it isn't then you are making a false declaration, which if found out, could lead to a bit more trouble than losing your licence and your insurance.

My optician tells me that standard prescriptions do not alter at a distance of more than 6m. I am 71 and was uncomfortable driving with my standard prescription spectacles, so have another pair of "driving" glasses which have a longer focal length. These often do not cost any more with many opticians providing "Two for one" deals.

My wife has the early stages of Macular Degeneration which will affect her eyesight in time. As she also drives she declared this to the DVLA. She was required to give details of the consultant who diagnosed the condition and have prepared a statement of her condition. Her licence renewal came through in three weeks the only stipluation was that she had to have a further examination in about three years time. I cannot fault the way that DVLA dealt with her licence renewal. That are not always as bad as they are sometimes painted.

I would suggest that you talk to your specialist about your fears and suggest a solution similar to mine and then you cannot accuse DVLA of encouraging you not to tell the truth.


----------



## BrianG (Apr 16, 2013)

Thank you both last posters. At last some sense on the site. The point about extra focal length lenses is particularly useful.
By the way, I am going out.today to find and employ a mediumto help me contact Maggie Thatcher so that we can open a bottle of Chateauneuf-du-Pape and console each other about the horrid things being said to us by the nasty people on this site.


----------



## BrianG (Apr 16, 2013)

Tco said:


> When you sign the application form for your licence, you are stating that ALL the information given is true. Therefore if you are aware that it isn't then you are making a false declaration, which if found out, could lead to a bit more trouble than losing your licence and your insurance.
> 
> My optician tells me that standard prescriptions do not alter at a distance of more than 6m. I am 71 and was uncomfortable driving with my standard prescription spectacles, so have another pair of "driving" glasses which have a longer focal length. These often do not cost any more with many opticians providing "Two for one" deals.
> 
> ...



Hi Tco, just out of curiosity which opticians are you using?


----------



## grumpyengraver (Apr 16, 2013)

AuldTam said:


> -DITTO-
> 
> 
> Have you thought about getting a prescription windscreen fitted...



If that's possible I want one:


----------



## BrianG (Apr 16, 2013)

[No message]


----------



## g4jnw (Apr 16, 2013)

To be honest I don't think age comes into it really, i was in the ambulance service for over 20 years and have seen some horrific accidents caused by people of all ages who shouldn't be driving because of their health, one thing for sure if you make a declaration on any legal document and it turns out to be untrue, you are by default uninsured, they WILL throw the book at you and rightly so.
I'm just coming up to my 61st next month but had decided years ago that if im not fit enough to drive DVLA can have my licence back.

Just think how you would feel while waiting for the ambulance if there was a dead biker or child you had just not seen lying in the road after you caused an accident.


----------



## Tco (Apr 16, 2013)

BrianG said:


> Hi Tco, just out of curiosity which opticians are you using?



Vision Express for the tests, although they were too expensive to get new glasses this time, so I went to Specsavers, working from the VE prescription.


----------



## Tco (Apr 16, 2013)

I took as a suggestion that the DVLA was more likely to have staff who understood Urdu than Spanish. No more than that.


----------



## barryd (Apr 16, 2013)

Nobody could be as bad as my mother (sadly no longer with us) in the last few months of her driving.  It wasnt so much her eyesite as the fact that she had just lost her concentration and generally capacity to work anything mechanical!  

She was in sheltered housing and refused to give up her car (She was on her own as my dad passed the year before).  It was heart breaking taking it away from her but in the last few weeks it was also quite funny.   On several occasions the car was found buried in hedges, on the lawn and once in the actual entrance to the care home.

I kept getting calls from the management suggesting that we do something about it.  We had tried and eventually I put my foot down when I realised just how bad she had become.  Problem was though she had been cleared six months earlier as fine.  It all happened so fast.


----------



## g4jnw (Apr 16, 2013)

barryd said:


> Nobody could be as bad as my mother (sadly no longer with us) in the last few months of her driving.  It wasnt so much her eyesite as the fact that she had just lost her concentration and generally capacity to work anything mechanical!
> 
> She was in sheltered housing and refused to give up her car (She was on her own as my dad passed the year before).  It was heart breaking taking it away from her but in the last few weeks it was also quite funny.   On several occasions the car was found buried in hedges, on the lawn and once in the actual entrance to the care home.
> 
> I kept getting calls from the management suggesting that we do something about it.  We had tried and eventually I put my foot down when I realised just how bad she had become.  Problem was though she had been cleared six months earlier as fine.  It all happened so fast.



Its very sad and awful for a relative but i remember peeling a 10 year old child off a wall and taking him to Casualty then the mortuary after a taxi driver who do you believe was driving with a leg cast on and slipped off the brake pedal and on to the accelerator, stating to me he had to work or not get paid - i was quite pleased to make a statement to the police and even more pleased when he went down (he lost his pay then!!!!) sorry am getting on my soap box but sadly there is always another side to a story.


----------



## Caz (Apr 17, 2013)

BrianG said:


> I have stated several times that both specialist and optician have said no problem. Please read everything before commenting.



I'm sorry but with respect I did read everything you said before posting, and at that time you had not stated that your optician had confirmed that your eyesight, as corrected by your prescription, met the standard required for driving - which is to read a number plate at the required distance.

What you had said was: 

" Anyway when ccompleting the form I have say if I can read a number plate at Xnumber of metres. I know that I can't but my specialist at the hospital tells me I am perfectly fit to drive."

"  2010 I went to the optician for a check. .............. I asked the optician for an appointment with an eye specialist ................ I asked the specialist how this would affect my driving. She checked my chart readings and said no problems but, as a precaution, did a field vision check which was satisfactory."

"August 2011 Licence due for renewal I decided to not to bother with the D ratings and save myself the £80 medical fee. When filling in the form I declared the visit to the specialist. You can guess what followed. When did you last see the specialist? What is her name and address? When did you last renew your glasses? THREE WEEKS LATER "We have made an appointment for you to have a field vision test in two weeks time. Following the test, another FOUR WEEKS my licence appeared in the post. I could now go on holiday in France a month later than planned.
4. After this lot I began to think about how well I could read things like number plates, that being the BASIC requirement, so I did some rough checks while out walking the dog in the mornings. Without buying myself a longer tape measure I think I cannot clearly read a number plate at the reqd distance.
I have been to another optician since doing this rough check who confirms that there is no significant change in my prescription."

Thus what you had said was that the specialist and the DVLA had carried out field vision tests which were satisfactory and that your optician said that your prescription did not need changing. You did not say whether you had mentioned to the optician that you drove and did not think you could read the number plate, nor that they had confirmed that your eyesight met the legal requirements.

I agree that reading a number plate isn't the best way of testing a driver's visual abilities - but it is what is used and has to be complied with. This is the point I was making.


----------



## BrianG (Apr 19, 2013)

Just an update. I have just returned from a visit to another optician who says that my eyesight exceeds that reqd for the D1 licence. He also says that the cataracts are not severe enough for NHS sugery. He has however given me a new prescription which may give me the couple ofmetres I need. £15 for cheap glasses to try has to be worth it. All else failing I will have to consider private surgery.
 As a point of interest it appears that asking an optician if you are fit to drive does not mean that you can please the dvla and their plate test. Strange isn't it?


----------



## RoadTrek Boy (Apr 19, 2013)

Flip Flap said:


> Right then, as I see it.....
> 
> You say your prescription hasn't changed and you say you have cataracts??
> 
> ...



If you are over 60, then the chances of you not having some form of cataracts are pretty slim, it depends on how or if they are effecting your lifestyle, any form of operation presents a risk, so cat ops are only preformed when it becomes necessary. 
I hope this helps.

Colin


----------



## Smaug (Apr 19, 2013)

Flip Flap said:


> It wouldn't help the poor bugger that was hit by a driver with impaired vision.



Give it a rest & stop flip-flapping - most accidents are caused by inattention according to ROSPA, and we can all do that. If eyesight was really a big issue then the 25 yard number plate test would have been updated years ago.

Bikers know all about SMIDSY, & it's always due to inattention not poor eyesight.


----------



## RoadTrek Boy (Apr 19, 2013)

Flip Flap said:


> It wouldn't help the poor bugger that was hit by a driver with impaired vision.



Please re-read my post, but this time try to understand what it said!

Colin


----------



## RoadTrek Boy (Apr 19, 2013)

Flip Flap said:


> Please re-write it then I might!



I doubt it.

Colin


----------



## RoadTrek Boy (Apr 19, 2013)

Flip Flap said:


> Because you wrote tripe is why.



Please explain what part of my post you didn't understand and I will try and re write it as simple as possible.

Colin


----------



## RoadTrek Boy (Apr 19, 2013)

Flip Flap said:


> It's ok, you do simple rather well.


My father-in-law used to say "you can't educate pork".
End of

Colin


----------



## RoadTrek Boy (Apr 19, 2013)

Flip Flap said:


> So he's breeding it instead?? Time for fresh stock perhaps, something a bit brighter maybe??



So you don't even understand that one, that explains a lot of your posts.

Colin


----------



## Deleted member 967 (Apr 20, 2013)

BrianG said:


> Just an update. I have just returned from a visit to another optician who says that my eyesight exceeds that reqd for the D1 licence. He also says that the cataracts are not severe enough for NHS sugery. He has however given me a new prescription which may give me the couple ofmetres I need. £15 for cheap glasses to try has to be worth it. All else failing I will have to consider private surgery.
> As a point of interest it appears that asking an optician if you are fit to drive does not mean that you can please the dvla and their plate test. Strange isn't it?



Hi Brian

A lot of people on here are blasting off without knowing the actual facts or intensity of your problem.

Drivers of vehicles under 3500kg do not even have to have a formal eye test to retain their licence at 70 and can drive even if totally blind in one eye.

There is an online DVLA form "Medical Fitness to Drive" that does contain all the relevant information.

My eyesight does not meet the higher standard for a D licence, (because one eye does not meet the higher vision standard), but up to age 70. I am still entitled to drive D1 (9 to 16  seats) not for hire or reward. I have had this condition since contracting measles as a baby.  At 21 I held a PSV licence before they tightened up the eyesight standards and changed the class to D.

At 70 I will lose the D1 but still retain C1+E (vehicles 3500 kg to 7500kg).  I have a letter from DVLA confirming this.

I have just had my D4 medical yesterday to retain my C1+E licence at 70.  I had had a full eye test just before this and this included a field vision test.  Whilst my eyes may not meet the higher standards required by waggon C and bus drivers D and D1, I am classed as perfectly fit to drive a LGV up to 7500kg C1 & C1+E.

Cataracts are a notifiable condition that must be notified to DVLA but they do not prevent people with this condition from driving.  However for a D licence you need a very high standard if eyesight and the opinion of an optician is used as guidance for the officers at DVLA.

John


----------



## Smaug (Apr 20, 2013)

Flip Flap said:


> Horlicks... TOTAL BLIDDY HORLICKS...



Being rude & offensive does not help your argument, rather it suggests weakness, so it goes.

Here is the quote from the ROSPA site, note that impaired vision is not even worth including in the list, now please show me your source for accidents involving people with impaired vision. 



> Sadly, driver error remains the most common cause of road accidents.
> 
> Speeding
> Around 430 people a year are killed in crashes in which someone exceeds the speed limit or drives too fast for the conditions.
> ...



To put this in perspective, 12,000 ladies a year die of breast cancer. Being killed by a person driving a car with impaired vission is probably not much more  likely than winning the lottery, if a little less desirable.


----------



## Smaug (Apr 20, 2013)

Flip Flap said:


> So that's it sorted then. Sod the eyesight, just sit a lab in the passenger seat and it'll be ok because women get breast cancer.. HORLICKS.
> 
> All the elffinsafety we see here about gas and electrics is ok but saying someone should not lie about their deficient eyesight and carry on driving regardless is not OK ??
> 
> ...



I thought as much, you have no facts or evidence to support your rant. Thank you for your "contribution". I shall leave you to rant & rave on your own now.


----------



## Byronic (Apr 20, 2013)

W.
There is of course a law banning the tinting of the front, and side windows opposite the driver. That is, a minimum light transmittance %age level. You'd think the police could police this one fairly easily, but do they?


----------



## Byronic (Apr 20, 2013)

Plenty of police not the absence of same in the form of car patrols, at least where I live....... well it is north Essex! Just very few foot patrols. 
I take the view (as are many) that the police are taking a soft line on low level traffic law infringements, perhaps a bit of "can't be bothered" and/or a bit of "more important things to get on with" perhaps with justification.
Anyway must remember to peel the tinted visor off before a night time blast don't want to attract the attention of Mr. Plod.


----------



## BrianG (Apr 21, 2013)

First of all I would like to put everyone's mind at rest in that I decided after a half dozen replies to my post that I would NOT be signing a false declaration on my licence renewal form because I had not originally  realized the insurance invalidity this would cause. I have never, and would never drive without adequate 3rd party insurance.
I am however, glad that I posted originally, because it has opened up discussion and perhaps made people aware of the exact situation. How many people have answered the question about the 20 metres without a thought because they “ have always been able to do it”. I am certainly one of them.
An “eye test” of this type does have SOME validity in that  without another pair of eyes beside them  a new driver might drive into the nearest lamppost or something. Apart from that it is ridiculous.
          Lets take a look at what the  DVLA say.
“At the start of your practical driving test you have an eyesight test. You’ll have to correctly read a number plate on a parked vehicle.
If you can’t pass the eyesight test you’ll fail your driving test and the test won’t continue. DVLA will be told and your licence will be revoked.
When you reapply for your driving licence, DVLA will ask you to have an eyesight test with the Driving Standards Agency (DSA). This will be at a driving test centre. If you’re successful, you’ll still have to pass the DSA standard eyesight test at your next practical driving test“.
                   Also     
“You must be able to read (with glasses or contact lenses, if necessary) a car number plate made after 1 September 2001 from 20 metres. 
You must also meet the minimum eyesight standard for driving by having a visual acuity of at least decimal 0.5 (6/12) measured on the Snellen scale (with glasses or contact lenses, if necessary) using both eyes together or, if you have sight in one eye only, in that eye.
You must also have an adequate field of vision – your optician can tell you about this and do a test.”
                Also        “If you can’t pass the eyesight test you’ll fail your driving test and the test won’t continue. DVLA will be told and your licence will be revoked.
When you reapply for your driving licence, DVLA will ask you to have an eyesight test with the Driving Standards Agency (DSA). This will be at a driving test centre. If you’re successful, you’ll still have to pass the DSA standard eyesight test at your next practical driving test“.
          So lets now look at this more closely.     The acuity is a proven scientific method of assessing ones ability to see. The field of vision test is a proven scientific method also. Yet neither of these are ever proven to DVLA over the duration of driver’s life unless requiring a larger vehicle licence. Can anybody enlighten me as to why they find the number plate test more important?

Surely it would be better if  everybody had to produce a  certificate from a qualified optician prior to taking any driving teat. This certificate should then be renewed periodically. If this was done by opticians, the costs would probably be kept reasonable due to competition.  Something like this would  prove scientifically one’s  ability to see Like the speed limits. Like the stopping distances. Etc. Proven not self declared.
By the way I have made a mistake in previous posts where I have made reference to “D” driving licences. This should read “C” licence. I was thinking D because of the D4 medical form. This in no way affects the meaning of the posts.
          Several people have made reference to the fact that cataracts must be declared to DVLA. Mine have! and my licence renewed regardless of them. Some people also say that if you have cataracts ” a fog is permanently in front of your eyes”  This is not so in my case. The only thing I have is a sensitivity to glare. This is. according to the eye specialist, because strong light causes a halo effect a bit like the moon in an eclipse of the sun. Obviously other people’s have other effects. I limit my driving  at  night and take extra care when the sun is low in the sky. What have other people with cataracts found?
           As regards my suggestion of DVLA encouraging me to fib, any type of self declaration lends itself to a bending the truth. Tax self declaration for example. Also look at how many people supply half truths to the insurance companies when making claims. Claim forms are a type of self declaration.. This is the context in which I started the post. 
I think I have rattled on enough, probably too much, but thanks for listening. 
   Brian.


----------



## BrianG (Apr 21, 2013)

Simple mind simple post


----------



## Deleted member 967 (Apr 22, 2013)

Flip Flap said:


> Presumably the 20 metre thing is because the examiner sets the test, he's the one who will be getting driven about, not an optician who's certificate could be easily forged.
> And as for saying a self declaration is an encouragement to fib??? Well...



Hi Flip Flap & Brian G

The DVLA do not rely only on the opticians form.    

They contact the optician direct by email or phone and confirm the information.   This was the case when I doubted my eyesight standard.   The optician is paid £11 for filling in the form online.

That was how I rece1ved the letter telling me I was OK to renew my C1+E at 70, but not able to renew the D1, even if not for hire and reward or on a voluntary driver basis.   

The daft thing about these regulations is a driver with a car licence (B) can still drive a 30 year old double decker bus with all seat in, provided they do not carry more than 8 passengers (not for hire and reward) (Note. not just 8 seats).   However they cannot drive a 29 year old one.

I cannot drive a Motorhome over 3500kg without a C1 licence. and cannot drive a minibus 9 to 16 seats D1, with or without passengers, as it is the number of seats they go on, not the number of passengers carried.  I could drive the same vehicle if all seat over 8 are removed under the B category.  

John


----------



## BrianG (Apr 22, 2013)

You are proving yet again what a self righteous barrack room lawyer you are.


----------



## Devadvo (Apr 22, 2013)

Ive been following this thread with interest. I only have one question to ask BrianG.




Are you high?


----------



## BrianG (Apr 22, 2013)

Devadvo said:


> Ive been following this thread with interest. I only have one question to ask BrianG.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



No but I am happy now that I have new specs and don't have tolie anymore. Not that I have lied --just intended to.
I still think the plate thing is rubbish. Lets face it thechange from 22ish metres to 20metres to please Europe proves it.
Scientifically proven rules please


----------



## ricc (Apr 22, 2013)

Flip Flap said:


> Good god man, you admit to having substandard vision, you admit an intention to lie about said vision and to carry on driving regardless. You then say I am in the wrong??
> 
> You would have no chance in a court if a 5 year old was prosecuting you. Do yourself a favour and delete this whole thread as it is showing you in a very bad light and could possibly even result in you being prosecuted.
> 
> You deserve to be if indeed you do go ahead and drive with impaired vision knowing full well that it does not reach the standard required by a very lax law.



tis time you stopped being such a self righteous pillock

whats to gain by deleting a thread thats prompted lively discussion?

and youve got some funny ideas as to whats admissible in court as evidence for a prosecution .


----------



## RoadTrek Boy (Apr 22, 2013)

*Reading standard Number at 20M*

Reading a number plate at 20M means you have a v/a (visual acuity) better than 6/15, a v/a of 6/6 is the same as 20/20 vision. The 6/6 is metric and 20/20 is imperial. I hope this throws some light on the reading of the standard number plate at 20 meters. (no pun intended).

Colin


----------



## BrianG (Apr 24, 2013)

ColinD said:


> Reading a number plate at 20M means you have a v/a (visual acuity) better than 6/15, a v/a of 6/6 is the same as 20/20 vision. The 6/6 is metric and 20/20 is imperial. I hope this throws some light on the reading of the standard number plate at 20 meters. (no pun intended).
> 
> Colin


 
Hi colin,
Thanks for your post explaining the visual acuity. I have a visual acuity of 6/7.5. I also have had a visual range check which was 100% good. This is why I feel able to safely drive. Why therefore should I need also be required to also say that I can read a plate at 20metres. It just seems strange.   Cheers Brian.

Ps Thanks for the good luck message Fip Flap. Truce OK?


----------



## RoadTrek Boy (Apr 24, 2013)

BrianG said:


> Hi colin,
> Thanks for your post explaining the visual acuity. I have a visual acuity of 6/7.5. I also have had a visual range check which was 100% good. This is why I feel able to safely drive. Why therefore should I need also be required to also say that I can read a plate at 20metres. It just seems strange.   Cheers Brian.
> 
> Ps Thanks for the good luck message Fip Flap. Truce OK?



Hi Brian, I should have said for D/V (distance vision) ie anything over approx 2meters, if you were short sighted you could have a V/A of 6/6 uncorrected N/V, but your D/V may be 6/18 or worse.
 I take it that your V/A of 6/7.5 is corrected D/V (wearing specs or contact lenses), there is also the field test for prepherial vision. I am not sure what you mean by a visual range check and being 100%.

I am glad that you are all checked out and leagle.
 Unfortunatly there are some who insist that they don't need their glasses for driving, but their prescription says otherwise, and I am not necessary talking about those of us more mature in years.

Colin

PS. You know you are mature when you double our age and you know you ain't going to make it!....:lol-053:


----------



## Kontiki (Apr 25, 2013)

I haven't read all the posts in the thread but from what I read it does show that there are problems with the current system. I don't understand why a proper eye test is not a requirement to get a license & it should also state on your license if you are required to wear glasses. When I passed my test many years ago I didn't wear glasses (I assumed my eyesight was fine), in my 20's messing about at work I put somebody's glasses on only to find things much clearer. This prompted me to go to an optician & find I was short sighted.  Obviously must have satisfied the examiner at the time I could read a number plate I was asked for, I did always used to find difficulty reading road signs until I was close to them but thought this normal. Having a proper eye test when you reach 70 should be even more important for renewing your license

I think that you shouldn't be put in a position of having to lie to get your license, the decision should be without any doubt & made by somebody qualified, being able to see enough to drive safely is probably more critical nowadays with a lot more traffic around.

I sympathise with your dilemma & from reading some of your posts I see that it is not just a simple case of telling fibs & you have had your eyes checked by a professional.


----------

