Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Back to news
news
Crime & Legal
Motorist, 81, who twice crashed into cyclist while overtaking him keeps driving licenceStatue of Justice, Old Bailey (licensed CC BY 2.0 on Flickr by Ronnie Macdonald).jpg

Motorist, 81, who twice crashed into cyclist while overtaking him keeps driving licence

Cyril Booker was handed a fine by magistrates and had his licence endorsed with eight penalty points
by Simon_MacMichael
Sun, Dec 18, 2022 16:09
37

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.

Careless driving
older drivers
driving licence
Simon MacMichael

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.

Add new comment

37 comments

Avatar
NOtotheEU replied to LeadenSkies | 1 year ago
1 like

LeadenSkies wrote:

Would it be too sarcastic of me to suggest that the best compulsory safety device we could implement for ensuring drivers paid more attention and kept to sensible speeds appropriate for the conditions would be a six inch sharpened spike welded to the centre of the steering wheel.

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.

Avatar
eburtthebike replied to NOtotheEU | 1 year ago
1 like

NOtotheEU wrote:

That would be great combined with no drivers seatbelt and very weak seat runner bolts.

And the rusty 12" bayonet sticking out of the steering wheel.

Avatar
Hirsute replied to LeadenSkies | 1 year ago
1 like

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".

Avatar
eburtthebike replied to Hirsute | 1 year ago
0 likes

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?

Avatar
JustTryingToGet... replied to eburtthebike | 1 year ago
1 like
eburtthebike wrote:

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.

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.

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to JustTryingToGetFromAtoB | 1 year ago
3 likes

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...

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to eburtthebike | 1 year ago
0 likes

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

Latest Comments