Eyesight Checks

I agree
But the reality isn't much...read a number plate at 20m?????????
Most should manage that.
 
Most glasses are for reading rather than long distance. So they might be able to read the numberplate but not see the dashboard unless they wear their glasses, or wear their glasses to see the dashboard but cannot then read the numberplate or road signs or even other cars.

Really, anyone who requires just reading glasses or just long distance should be wearing bi or varifocal glasses.
 
That is why I drive to the Toilet Block as I can not see it from the van
 
The 20m test, and the law, is in 'good daylight' many people, who pass this test, struggle in reduced lighting.
The test also ignores peripheral vision or depth perception.
Frankly, the eyesight test is still too lax.
 
The 20m test, and the law, is in 'good daylight' many people, who pass this test, struggle in reduced lighting.
The test also ignores peripheral vision or depth perception.
Frankly, the eyesight test is still too lax.
The number of people texting etc when they are driving is very apparent from the passenger seat of the cali, many need to use their reading glasses to do this, mind boggling.
 
The 20m test, and the law, is in 'good daylight' many people, who pass this test, struggle in reduced lighting.
The test also ignores peripheral vision or depth perception.
Frankly, the eyesight test is still too lax.

I agree. It would seem reasonable to me that everyone who wants to drive on the roads should be required to have a proper eye test at least every few years.

It would be a useful public heath measure anyway because, as I understand it, it can detect possible diabetes as well as serious progressive eye conditions like glaucoma and macular degeneration.

Driving without glasses, if you need them, is an endorsable offence of itself. And causing death by dangerous driving can carry up to 15 years in prison.

If you need glasses to drive, your driving licence says so (a little '01' code on the back) so the police will know if they stop you. And if you haven't told DVLA you need glasses, that's also an offence.
 
I agree. It would seem reasonable to me that everyone who wants to drive on the roads should be required to have a proper eye test at least every few years.

It would be a useful public heath measure anyway because, as I understand it, it can detect possible diabetes as well as serious progressive eye conditions like glaucoma and macular degeneration.

Driving without glasses, if you need them, is an endorsable offence of itself. And causing death by dangerous driving can carry up to 15 years in prison.

If you need glasses to drive, your driving licence says so (a little '01' code on the back) so the police will know if they stop you. And if you haven't told DVLA you need glasses, that's also an offence.
Not quit correct I am afraid.
Provided you are not a HGV/PSV licence holder - different requirements, and you suffer from Normal Short/Long distance vision that is correctable with Contact Lenses or Glasses and you can pass the Statuary Eye Test then you Do Not need to inform DVLA.

Screen Shot 2018-09-08 at 12.51.03.jpg Screen Shot 2018-09-08 at 12.50.32.jpg
 
Okay my mistake on that bit. I think my '01' note on my licence must be a hangover from HGV licence.

My general point though was that I think there's a strong argument for everyone who drives requiring periodic eye tests.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top