Am I right in thinking that in the past I had to be able to read a car
number plate at 25 yards whereas now it is only 20m? I am not sure if
the size of the number plate characters have changed.


--
Michael Chare

On 06/09/2018 23:16, Michael Chare wrote:
Am I right in thinking that in the past I had to be able to read a car
number plate at 25 yards whereas now it is only 20m? I am not sure if
the size of the number plate characters have changed.

The character sizes were reduced to allow for an EU/GB logo without
increasing the plate size. I am pretty sure that the distance was
reduced to allow for the reduced character size.

SteveW

In some countries there is also a field of vision test to see if older
people, in particular, have blind spots. You look at a light and press a
button if you see a flash.
In my view this sort of thing should be done for people if they drive or
not it might catch a lot of early eye problems that can be treated.
Brian

--
----- --
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Steve Walker" wrote in message
news
On 06/09/2018 23:16, Michael Chare wrote:
Am I right in thinking that in the past I had to be able to read a car
number plate at 25 yards whereas now it is only 20m? I am not sure if the
size of the number plate characters have changed.

The character sizes were reduced to allow for an EU/GB logo without
increasing the plate size. I am pretty sure that the distance was reduced
to allow for the reduced character size.

SteveW

On 06/09/2018 23:16, Michael Chare wrote:
Am I right in thinking that in the past I had to be able to read a car
number plate at 25 yards whereas now it is only 20m? I am not sure if
the size of the number plate characters have changed.

The requirement is now that you must be able to read a number plate,
made after 1 September 2001 at a distance of 20 metres (about 65 feet).
I.e. it has to be one with the current layout of two area code letters,
two date numbers and three other letters. A new character set was
introduced for those.

Prior to that, the standard was 75 feet for dateless number plates, of
up to six characters long and, from 1 May 1965, 67 feet for the smaller
characters used on number plates with a year letter and up to seven
characters long.

--
--

Colin Bignell

Brian Gaff brought next idea :
In some countries there is also a field of vision test to see if older
people, in particular, have blind spots. You look at a light and press a
button if you see a flash.
In my view this sort of thing should be done for people if they drive or not
it might catch a lot of early eye problems that can be treated.
Brian

I had that (peripheral vision test), as part of my normal eye test just
a few months ago. I sailed through the test. They have you look at a
cross on the screen and press a button when you see a tiny light near
the edge - the button failed to work every time.

"Nightjar" wrote in message
...
On 06/09/2018 23:16, Michael Chare wrote:
Am I right in thinking that in the past I had to be able to read a car
number plate at 25 yards whereas now it is only 20m? I am not sure if the
size of the number plate characters have changed.

The requirement is now that you must be able to read a number plate, made
after 1 September 2001 at a distance of 20 metres (about 65 feet). I.e. it
has to be one with the current layout of two area code letters, two date
numbers and three other letters. A new character set was introduced for
those.

Prior to that, the standard was 75 feet for dateless number plates, of up
to six characters long and, from 1 May 1965, 67 feet for the smaller
characters used on number plates with a year letter and up to seven
characters long.

I hadn't realised that the characters of a pre-1963 "ABC 123" number plate
were bigger than those for a post-1963 "ABC 123A" numberplate. I wonder why
the rules only changed in 1965, and not on the same date (1 Jan 1963) when
"ABC 123A" plates started to be issued in some places (*).

The choice of font makes a difference to legibility as well. White-on-black
plates used a rounded font which was easier to read than the
rectangular-with-rounded-corners fonts that tended to be used as
black-on-yellow plates were introduced.

I gather that the font used for modern "AB12 DEF" plates has been redesigned
to make similar-looking letters more distinct from each other.


I wonder if the new on-the-spot eyesight tests will also test people's
reactions in some way. I wonder if a lot of the problems attributed to
eyesight (ie poor focus, restricted visual field) are actually due to people
*seeing* the hazard but either failing to classify it as a hazard or taking
a long time to react or reacting in the wrong way (the classic "hitting the
accelerator instead of the brake" problem).

My unaided eyesight is probably good enough for me to pass the eyesight
test, but I wear distance glasses (most of the time, when I remember them)
for driving as this sharpens letters on road signs very slightly. I'd wear
them all the time, but they definitely make closer objects (computer screen)
more blurred. I shall make sure I always take my glasses with me when I'm
driving now, just in case I'm stopped. I think I've only been stopped twice
in my life: once when I'd parked briefly after giving someone a lift and had
forgotten to turn my lights back on again (lack of headlights was not
immediately apparent in bright street lights); and once when I may have been
a few mph over a 30 limit and the police took the opportunity to check my
documentation (I had everything in the car, having re-taxed it that day) and
do a quick visual inspection of the car (tyres, lights).

Does anyone know why, when the "AB12CDE" format was introduced, they decided
to change the two-letter location code? It's still two letters, so there's
no saving there. Maybe it was simply to make it more hierarchical, with the
first letter denoting the part of the country and the second letter
narrowing it down to one of a couple of sub-regions within that area. It's a
shame that when offices in individual towns closed down (maybe when the DVLC
opened) that we lost the exact tie-in to individual towns. Growing up in
West Yorkshire, I got to know UA, UB, UM, NW for Leeds, HL for Wakefield, CX
for Huddersfield etc.



(*) It's always seemed rather cack-handed and inefficient that some places
continued to issue ageless plates for a year or so after 1963, rather than
the same standard being compulsory throughout Great Britain on the same day.
That's why there are far fewer A and B suffix cars on the road than C
onwards, even allowing that they are fractionally older and therefore
slightly less likely to have survived until 2018.

On 07/09/2018 07:06, Brian Gaff wrote:
In some countries there is also a field of vision test to see if older
people, in particular, have blind spots. You look at a light and press a
button if you see a flash.
In my view this sort of thing should be done for people if they drive or
not it might catch a lot of early eye problems that can be treated.
Brian

A lot of opticians perform a field of vision test but often administered
by poorly trained staff. They fail to tell you to concentrate on only
looking forward and not to scan the whole field of the screen. The last
time I went to Vision Express it was obvious that the machine makes a
just perceptible buzzing noise before flashing up the random
timed/spaced lights.


At an opticians the test will be performed in a few minutes. Have the
same type of test as part of a appointment with a consultant and the
test takes nearer 30 minutes.

I would hate to rely on poorly trained staff at high street opticians
making the decisions on driving ability based on my experience of their
field of visions testing.

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 07/09/2018 10:28, alan_m wrote:
On 07/09/2018 07:06, Brian Gaff wrote:
In some countries there is also a field of vision test to see if older
people, in particular, have blind spots. You look at a light and press a
button if you see a flash.
Â* In my view this sort of thing should be done for people if they
drive or
not it might catch a lot of early eye problems that can be treated.
Â* Brian

A lot of opticians perform a field of vision test but often administered
by poorly trained staff. They fail to tell you to concentrate on only
looking forward and not to scan the whole field of the screen.Â* The last
time I went to Vision Express it was obvious that the machine makes a
just perceptible buzzing noise before flashing up the random
timed/spaced lights.

The ones that show multiple lights may have a warning sound. You tell
the operator how many you see and where they are if you miss any.

The other kind show only one light at a time (in random position and at
random-ish time) and you press a button when you see it.

--
Max Demian

It's done in this country, although not specifically for driving
(although that is now being discussed).

I had one on my eye a while ago.

On Fri, 07 Sep 2018 07:06:38 +0100, Brian Gaff wrote:

In some countries there is also a field of vision test to see if older
people, in particular, have blind spots. You look at a light and press a
button if you see a flash.
In my view this sort of thing should be done for people if they drive
or
not it might catch a lot of early eye problems that can be treated.
Brian

--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

Jethro_uk wrote:
On Fri, 07 Sep 2018 09:34:20 +0100, Nightjar wrote:

On 06/09/2018 23:16, Michael Chare wrote:
Am I right in thinking that in the past I had to be able to read a car
number plate at 25 yards whereas now it is only 20m? I am not sure if
the size of the number plate characters have changed.

The requirement is now that you must be able to read a number plate,
made after 1 September 2001 at a distance of 20 metres (about 65 feet).
I.e. it has to be one with the current layout of two area code letters,
two date numbers and three other letters. A new character set was
introduced for those.

Prior to that, the standard was 75 feet for dateless number plates, of
up to six characters long and, from 1 May 1965, 67 feet for the smaller
characters used on number plates with a year letter and up to seven
characters long.

Presumably when stopped, the police officer starts by selecting a target
in excess of the requirements, and it would only come down to a tape
measure if there's any doubt.

It's worth reinforcing that these are *minimum* requirements, and that
there are plenty of other vision defects that might disqualify a driver
that can't be picked up at the roadside.

You say that, but how legally enforceable are any defects outside the basic
number plate reading exercise?

My impression is that as long as you pass the basic test, you can legally
drive. An optician can strongly advise that you shouldnt if you have other
defects but youre not actually breaking the law.

I may be wrong of course.

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

Jethro_uk Wrote in message:
On Fri, 07 Sep 2018 12:02:40 +0000, Tim+ wrote:

My impression is that as long as you pass the basic test, you can
legally drive.

In which case, how come the DVLA have strict criteria for driving vision
including field defects ?

Funny how the DVLA couldn't stop a bin man with a history of
blackouts from driving a bin lorry, or indeed even stop him
renewing his license despite a history of massacring
people.



Ultimately it's something that the individual is supposed to take
responsibility for. Which is probably the weakness in the system, since
generally, people aren't very responsible.

So any issues can only be dealt with in hindsight.

Indeed. It seems that the legal powers are weak, which was my point.

Tim


--

On 07/09/2018 10:19, NY wrote:
....
I hadn't realised that the characters of a pre-1963 "ABC 123" number
plate were bigger than those for a post-1963 "ABC 123A" numberplate.

I think they reduced from 3 1/4" to 3 1/8" high.

I
wonder why the rules only changed in 1965, and not on the same date (1
Jan 1963) when "ABC 123A" plates started to be issued in some places....

Perhaps it took a while for anybody to realise there was a problem. It
is not a particularly arduous test to pass and the year letter A was
only used in London and Birmingham. It wasn't until 1964 that it went
nationwide. Even then, new cars with the seven character plates would
have been relatively rare.

--
--

Colin Bignell

In article -
,
says...

I gather that the font used for modern "AB12 DEF" plates has been redesigned
to make similar-looking letters more distinct from each other.

On the contrary, some are diabolical. Compressing the width of
Ms and Ws to the same width as the other characters makes it
very dificult to differentiate between an M and a W, I find.

The font was actually designed for the benefit of ANPR
cameras, I think you'll find.

--

Terry

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

On 07/09/2018 10:19, NY wrote:
"Nightjar" wrote in message
...
On 06/09/2018 23:16, Michael Chare wrote:
Am I right in thinking that in the past I had to be able to read a
car number plate at 25 yards whereas now it is only 20m? I am not
sure if the size of the number plate characters have changed.

The requirement is now that you must be able to read a number plate,
made after 1 September 2001 at a distance of 20 metres (about 65
feet). I.e. it has to be one with the current layout of two area code
letters, two date numbers and three other letters. A new character set
was introduced for those.

Prior to that, the standard was 75 feet for dateless number plates, of
up to six characters long and, from 1 May 1965, 67 feet for the
smaller characters used on number plates with a year letter and up to
seven characters long.

I hadn't realised that the characters of a pre-1963 "ABC 123" number
plate were bigger than those for a post-1963 "ABC 123A" numberplate. I
wonder why the rules only changed in 1965, and not on the same date (1
Jan 1963) when "ABC 123A" plates started to be issued in some places (*).

It would have taken several years for the 7-character plates to be
common, especially since the A suffix ones were only issued in the
London area as they ran out of numbers sooner. I expect examiners were
told only to test against the old plates.

--
Max Demian

"Max Demian" wrote in message
o.uk...
I hadn't realised that the characters of a pre-1963 "ABC 123" number
plate were bigger than those for a post-1963 "ABC 123A" numberplate. I
wonder why the rules only changed in 1965, and not on the same date (1
Jan 1963) when "ABC 123A" plates started to be issued in some places (*).

It would have taken several years for the 7-character plates to be common,
especially since the A suffix ones were only issued in the London area as
they ran out of numbers sooner. I expect examiners were told only to test
against the old plates.

Yes, I think the thing that is most puzzling is that the *allocation" of
letter-suffix numberplates was phased, rather than being introduced
throughout the whole of Great Britain (excluding Northern Ireland which is
*still* a law unto itself) from the same date. The delay in the changed
eyesight rules is less significant because, as you sya, it would have taken
time for them to realise that it was a problem.

My dad had a C-reg Austin Cambridge GGO 259C, but then that was south-west
London. However before that he had a Ford Corsair 650 HLC (north west
London) which, according to
http://www.oldclassiccar.co.uk/registrations/lc.htm, dated from Jan 1964. So
evidently parts of London were still issuing old-style numberplates after
January 1963.

A typical British half-measures balls-up :-)

I wonder how many people said "I told you so" when the car manufacturers
started lobbying the registration authorities to change the changeover date
from 1 January to 1 August, to avoid the peak in demand for the new letter
occurring just after everyone was returning from Christmas holidays. Looking
at it with the benefit of hindsight, I think it was blindingly obvious that
whenever you make the changeover date, there will be a peak in demand, so
you place that at a time when the industry is geared-up for the demand and
the issuing authorities are geared-up for allocating registration numbers.

Did garages tend to get a block allocation of numberplates which they then
allocated themselves to individual cars as they sold them, informing the
licensing authority accordingly, as happens nowadays, or did each owner have
to go along to their local registration office individually to register
their new car?

On 06/09/2018 23:16, Michael Chare wrote:
Am I right in thinking that in the past I had to be able to read a car
number plate at 25 yards whereas now it is only 20m? I am not sure if
the size of the number plate characters have changed.


I always thought the big anomaly was when reflective plates came in.
They are *much* more readable than the old black and silver ones, but
the distance remained at 25 yards.

I still remember my bike test, when I was initially asked to read one of
the old ones at about 35 yards, which had me struggling. (In those days,
opticians significantly under-corrected short sighted youngsters, the
theory was that this "encouraged" eyes to degrade more slowly).

On Friday, 7 September 2018 16:55:14 UTC+1, Nightjar wrote:
On 07/09/2018 10:19, NY wrote:
...
I hadn't realised that the characters of a pre-1963 "ABC 123" number
plate were bigger than those for a post-1963 "ABC 123A" numberplate.

I think they reduced from 3 1/4" to 3 1/8" high.

I
wonder why the rules only changed in 1965, and not on the same date (1
Jan 1963) when "ABC 123A" plates started to be issued in some places.....

Perhaps it took a while for anybody to realise there was a problem. It
is not a particularly arduous test to pass and the year letter A was
only used in London and Birmingham. It wasn't until 1964 that it went
nationwide. Even then, new cars with the seven character plates would
have been relatively rare.

--
--

Colin Bignell

You can tell where the real problems are by insurance premiums.
My Roller costs £86 to insure.
The problem is with young drivers, not old.
It's just more ****ing bull****.
Probably "harmonising" with the EUSSR.

On 08/09/2018 08:59, harry wrote:
On Friday, 7 September 2018 16:55:14 UTC+1, Nightjar wrote:
On 07/09/2018 10:19, NY wrote:
...
I hadn't realised that the characters of a pre-1963 "ABC 123" number
plate were bigger than those for a post-1963 "ABC 123A" numberplate.

I think they reduced from 3 1/4" to 3 1/8" high.

I
wonder why the rules only changed in 1965, and not on the same date (1
Jan 1963) when "ABC 123A" plates started to be issued in some places....

Perhaps it took a while for anybody to realise there was a problem. It
is not a particularly arduous test to pass and the year letter A was
only used in London and Birmingham. It wasn't until 1964 that it went
nationwide. Even then, new cars with the seven character plates would
have been relatively rare.

--
--

Colin Bignell

You can tell where the real problems are by insurance premiums.
My Roller costs £86 to insure.

My first car cost £7/10/- to insure, which was for a teenager living in
London.

The problem is with young drivers, not old.
It's just more ****ing bull****.
Probably "harmonising" with the EUSSR.

In 1965? You really need to start taking your medications again.


--
--

Colin Bignell

In article , Nightjar
writes
On 06/09/2018 23:16, Michael Chare wrote:
Am I right in thinking that in the past I had to be able to read a
car number plate at 25 yards whereas now it is only 20m? I am not
sure if the size of the number plate characters have changed.

The requirement is now that you must be able to read a number plate,
made after 1 September 2001 at a distance of 20 metres (about 65 feet).
I.e. it has to be one with the current layout of two area code letters,
two date numbers and three other letters. A new character set was
introduced for those.

Prior to that, the standard was 75 feet for dateless number plates, of
up to six characters long and, from 1 May 1965, 67 feet for the smaller
characters used on number plates with a year letter and up to seven
characters long.

Considering how long ago this requirement was first introduced makes one
wonder just how relevant it is to the ability to see adequately for the
purpose of driving.
Would it perhaps be better to specify the distance at which one can see
the an object the size of a child for example? (Stopping distance at
30mph is 75 feet).
--
bert

In article , NY
writes
"Nightjar" wrote in message
...
On 06/09/2018 23:16, Michael Chare wrote:
Am I right in thinking that in the past I had to be able to read a
car number plate at 25 yards whereas now it is only 20m? I am not
sure if the size of the number plate characters have changed.

The requirement is now that you must be able to read a number plate,
made after 1 September 2001 at a distance of 20 metres (about 65
feet). I.e. it has to be one with the current layout of two area code
letters, two date numbers and three other letters. A new character
set was introduced for those.

Prior to that, the standard was 75 feet for dateless number plates,
of up to six characters long and, from 1 May 1965, 67 feet for the
smaller characters used on number plates with a year letter and up to
seven characters long.

I hadn't realised that the characters of a pre-1963 "ABC 123" number
plate were bigger than those for a post-1963 "ABC 123A" numberplate. I
wonder why the rules only changed in 1965, and not on the same date (1
Jan 1963) when "ABC 123A" plates started to be issued in some places (*).

London in particular had run out of numbers.
The choice of font makes a difference to legibility as well.
White-on-black plates used a rounded font which was easier to read than
the rectangular-with-rounded-corners fonts that tended to be used as
black-on-yellow plates were introduced.

Does the background colour of the vehicle have any impact? Are the
police literally going to ask the driver to read a plate or will they
carry test equipment? I can see many legal challenges arising.
Snip
--
bert

"bert" wrote in message
...
Are the police literally going to ask the driver to read a plate or will
they carry test equipment? I can see many legal challenges arising.

I would imagine that it will be like the situation used to be with
breathalyzers: that a fair crude test is used which gives the police
sufficient grounds to arrest a suspect and administer a more accurate,
legally binding test at a police station.

What's the case with roadside breath tests these days? Is the result of that
test legally binding or is a second test on more accurate equipment still
needed at a police station?

On Monday, 10 September 2018 15:39:04 UTC+1, NY wrote:
"bert" wrote in message
...

Are the police literally going to ask the driver to read a plate or will
they carry test equipment? I can see many legal challenges arising.

I would imagine that it will be like the situation used to be with
breathalyzers: that a fair crude test is used which gives the police
sufficient grounds to arrest a suspect and administer a more accurate,
legally binding test at a police station.

What's the case with roadside breath tests these days? Is the result of that
test legally binding or is a second test on more accurate equipment still
needed at a police station?

AIUI you can accept or dispute the breathalyser test. If you dispute you get a blood test.


NT

NY wrote:

What's the case with roadside breath tests these days? Is the result of that
test legally binding or is a second test on more accurate equipment still
needed at a police station?

From the various TV programmes, it appears to be the case.

Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK


Plant amazing Acers.

"bert" wrote in message
...
In article , Nightjar
writes
On 06/09/2018 23:16, Michael Chare wrote:
Am I right in thinking that in the past I had to be able to read a car
number plate at 25 yards whereas now it is only 20m? I am not sure if
the size of the number plate characters have changed.

The requirement is now that you must be able to read a number plate, made
after 1 September 2001 at a distance of 20 metres (about 65 feet). I.e. it
has to be one with the current layout of two area code letters, two date
numbers and three other letters. A new character set was introduced for
those.

Prior to that, the standard was 75 feet for dateless number plates, of up
to six characters long and, from 1 May 1965, 67 feet for the smaller
characters used on number plates with a year letter and up to seven
characters long.

Considering how long ago this requirement was first introduced makes one
wonder just how relevant it is to the ability to see adequately for the
purpose of driving.
Would it perhaps be better to specify the distance at which one can see
the an object the size of a child for example?

Trouble with that approach is that they really need to be
able to see something the size of a cricket ball coming
out between cars because there might well be a child
coming out after it it. And you also have the complication
of whether the ball contrasts with the road too.

(Stopping distance at
30mph is 75 feet).

"NY" wrote in message
o.uk...
"bert" wrote in message
...
Are the police literally going to ask the driver to read a plate or will
they carry test equipment? I can see many legal challenges arising.

I would imagine that it will be like the situation used to be with
breathalyzers: that a fair crude test is used which gives the police
sufficient grounds to arrest a suspect and administer a more accurate,
legally binding test at a police station.

What's the case with roadside breath tests these days? Is the result of
that test legally binding or is a second test on more accurate equipment
still needed at a police station?

We still need the better test at the cop shop here.

And the eye test is done using the standard optician's chart,
when you renew your drivers license and get a new photo ID.

On 10/09/2018 18:14, Rod Speed wrote:


"NY" wrote in message
o.uk...
"bert" wrote in message
...
Are the police literally going to ask the driver to read a plate or
will they carry test equipment? I can see many legal challenges arising.

I would imagine that it will be like the situation used to be with
breathalyzers: that a fair crude test is used which gives the police
sufficient grounds to arrest a suspect and administer a more accurate,
legally binding test at a police station.

What's the case with roadside breath tests these days? Is the result
of that test legally binding or is a second test on more accurate
equipment still needed at a police station?

We still need the better test at the cop shop here.

And the eye test is done using the standard optician's chart,
when you renew your drivers license and get a new photo ID.

In Ozland I assume you mean. How often do you have to renew?

--
Max Demian

"Max Demian" wrote in message
...
On 10/09/2018 18:14, Rod Speed wrote:


"NY" wrote in message
o.uk...
"bert" wrote in message
...
Are the police literally going to ask the driver to read a plate or
will they carry test equipment? I can see many legal challenges
arising.

I would imagine that it will be like the situation used to be with
breathalyzers: that a fair crude test is used which gives the police
sufficient grounds to arrest a suspect and administer a more accurate,
legally binding test at a police station.

What's the case with roadside breath tests these days? Is the result of
that test legally binding or is a second test on more accurate equipment
still needed at a police station?

We still need the better test at the cop shop here.

And the eye test is done using the standard optician's chart,
when you renew your drivers license and get a new photo ID.

In Ozland I assume you mean.

Yep.

How often do you have to renew?

That varys, You get to choose the term, 1,3,5 or 10 years.
But you can't get a 10 year license after you are over 44

On Tue, 11 Sep 2018 03:14:28 +1000, cantankerous senile geezer Rot Speed
blabbered, again:

We still need the better test at the cop shop here.

And the eye test is done using the standard optician's chart,
when you renew your drivers license and get a new photo ID.

In case you haven't realized it, this isn't an Ozzie newsgroup, Ozzietard!

--
Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp addressing Rot Speed:
"You really are a clueless pillock."
MID:

"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...
In Ozland I assume you mean.

Yep.

How often do you have to renew?

That varys, You get to choose the term, 1,3,5 or 10 years.
But you can't get a 10 year license after you are over 44

My first driving licence, obtained in 1981 when I passed, was valid until my
70th birthday. That's the actual piece of computer-printed paper that was
valid and never needed to be exchanged.

The only occasions that a paper licence was reissued were if you moved house
so your address changed, or if you were a naughty boy/girl and earned
penalty points for speeding etc which had to be added to the licence so the
police knew about them if they stopped you.

Then the plastic credit-card with a photo was produced. For a while you had
to produce both this and the paper "counterpart" if the police asked for
your licence.

Now the paper part is superfluous. The plastic card shows who you are, and
the licence number on it links to a central database on which the police can
check for any endorsements/points.

I'm trying to remember when the DVLA brought in the requirement that the
licence had to be reissued every ten years to make sure the photo was kept
up to date. It's a good money spinner because I'm sure the renewal fee far
exceeds the cost of copying the photo onto the new piece of plastic. It's
the same with passports - I'm sure the passport office make a big fat profit
every 10 years.

I'm not sure what the present rules are about the validity period of
licences once you reach 70. My grandpa carried on driving well into his 90s
(he died in 1999) and I remember him saying that he had to get a doctor's
report every so often once he reached a certain age - he bemoaned not the
fact that this was necessary (he fully supported the need to make sure he
was still capable), but the fact that he had to *pay* the doctor for the
report.

On Tue, 11 Sep 2018 05:23:11 +1000, cantankerous senile geezer Rot Speed
blabbered, again:



In Ozland I assume you mean.

Yep.

Which has nothing to do with the UK, in case you haven't realized it yet,
you disgusting senile Ozzie troll!

--
Bill Wright addressing senile Ozzie cretin Rot Speed:
"Well you make up a lot of stuff and it's total ******** most of it."
MID:

"NY" wrote in message
o.uk...
"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...
In Ozland I assume you mean.

Yep.

How often do you have to renew?

That varys, You get to choose the term, 1,3,5 or 10 years.
But you can't get a 10 year license after you are over 44

My first driving licence, obtained in 1981 when I passed, was valid until
my 70th birthday. That's the actual piece of computer-printed paper that
was valid and never needed to be exchanged.

The only occasions that a paper licence was reissued were if you moved
house so your address changed, or if you were a naughty boy/girl and
earned penalty points for speeding etc which had to be added to the
licence so the police knew about them if they stopped you.

Then the plastic credit-card with a photo was produced. For a while you
had to produce both this and the paper "counterpart" if the police asked
for your licence.

Now the paper part is superfluous. The plastic card shows who you are, and
the licence number on it links to a central database on which the police
can check for any endorsements/points.

I'm trying to remember when the DVLA brought in the requirement that the
licence had to be reissued every ten years to make sure the photo was kept
up to date. It's a good money spinner because I'm sure the renewal fee far
exceeds the cost of copying the photo onto the new piece of plastic. It's
the same with passports - I'm sure the passport office make a big fat
profit every 10 years.

Ours has always been a revenue raiser because they are
done by the states and they dont have income taxes.

I'm not sure what the present rules are about the validity period of
licences once you reach 70.

Ours varys with the state. Some states dont have any cutoff at
all and others like mine, NSW, its an annual medical certificate
that you are fit to drive after 75 and a practical driving test
every second year after 85 unless you are happy with a restricted
license which limits how far from home you can go and
the time of day you can drive.

My grandpa carried on driving well into his 90s

Yeah, my dad did too.

(he died in 1999) and I remember him saying that he had to get a doctor's
report every so often once he reached a certain age - he bemoaned not the
fact that this was necessary (he fully supported the need to make sure he
was still capable), but the fact that he had to *pay* the doctor for the
report.

We dont have to pay the doctor for ours if they 'bulk bill'
and many do for those of that age, including my doctor.

NY wrote:

"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...
In Ozland I assume you mean.

Yep.

How often do you have to renew?

That varys, You get to choose the term, 1,3,5 or 10 years.
But you can't get a 10 year license after you are over 44

My first driving licence, obtained in 1981 when I passed, was valid until my
70th birthday. That's the actual piece of computer-printed paper that was
valid and never needed to be exchanged.

The only occasions that a paper licence was reissued were if you moved house
so your address changed, or if you were a naughty boy/girl and earned
penalty points for speeding etc which had to be added to the licence so the
police knew about them if they stopped you.

Then the plastic credit-card with a photo was produced. For a while you had
to produce both this and the paper "counterpart" if the police asked for
your licence.

Now the paper part is superfluous. The plastic card shows who you are, and
the licence number on it links to a central database on which the police can
check for any endorsements/points.

I'm trying to remember when the DVLA brought in the requirement that the
licence had to be reissued every ten years to make sure the photo was kept
up to date. It's a good money spinner because I'm sure the renewal fee far
exceeds the cost of copying the photo onto the new piece of plastic. It's
the same with passports - I'm sure the passport office make a big fat profit
every 10 years.

I'm not sure what the present rules are about the validity period of
licences once you reach 70. My grandpa carried on driving well into his 90s
(he died in 1999) and I remember him saying that he had to get a doctor's
report every so often once he reached a certain age - he bemoaned not the
fact that this was necessary (he fully supported the need to make sure he
was still capable), but the fact that he had to *pay* the doctor for the
report.

You don't need to get a doctor's report unless you tell the DVLA of a
condition that might affect driving ability. Of course, you are legally
obliged to tell the DVLA if you have such a condition. Age alone is not
an issue except for having to renew the licence and a health statement
every three years after age 70.

--

Roger Hayter

On Tue, 11 Sep 2018 06:47:40 +1000, cantankerous senile geezer Rot Speed
blabbered, again:


Ours varys with the state.

Nobody asked how it's done in Ozzieland, Ozzietard!

We don¢t have to pay the doctor for ours if they 'bulk bill'
and many do for those of that age, including my doctor.

See above, Ozzietard!

--
Bill Wright addressing senile Ozzie cretin Rot Speed:
"Well you make up a lot of stuff and it's total ******** most of it."
MID: