Elderly drivers, a worrying example.

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/gosport/...est.4960582.jp

An elderly man has lost his driving licence after he hit a cyclist and
drove down the road with him trapped under the car.


John Kellett, 82, was driving along Privett Road in Gosport last
December when he ran over David Lewington.
The 48-year-old cyclist, from Gosport, landed on the windscreen of the
Ford Fiesta, shattering it, and then rolled down in front of the car
and became trapped underneath.

Kellett, of Long Drive, Rowner, claimed he did not know he had hit
someone and continued to drive more than 65ft until passersby managed
to stop him.

Fareham Magistrates' Court heard Mr Lewington was cycling along the
road, wearing a high-visibility jacket, when the accident happened on
December 5, at 2pm.


An extract of a statement was then read out in which Mr Lewington
said: 'Next thing I remember, I was under a car.'

Prosecutor Jane Metcalfe explained to the court how witnesses saw the
crash and described seeing Mr Lewington's arm entangled in the wheel
arch and the wheels of the car repeatedly driving over his head and
body.
People shouted at Kellett to stop driving but it was only when a
passerby ran in front of the car and leant on the bonnet that he
finally did so.

As a result of the incident Mr Lewington was left with a cracked bone
in the lower vertebrate, six cracked ribs, severe grazing to leg and
head and is still signed off sick from work.

When police arrived on the scene they asked Kellett to do an eye test.


Regulations state that a person must be able to read a registration
number on a parked car from 25 meters away.



But he could only do so at 12 meters

On 15 July, 14:11, spindrift wrote:
http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/gosport/...ght-test.49605...

An elderly man has lost his driving licence after he hit a cyclist and
drove down the road with him trapped under the car.

John Kellett, 82, was driving along Privett Road in Gosport last
December when he ran over David Lewington.
The 48-year-old cyclist, from Gosport, landed on the windscreen of the
Ford Fiesta, shattering it, and then rolled down in front of the car
and became trapped underneath.

Kellett, of Long Drive, Rowner, claimed he did not know he had hit
someone and continued to drive more than 65ft until passersby managed
to stop him.

Fareham Magistrates' Court heard Mr Lewington was cycling along the
road, wearing a high-visibility jacket, when the accident happened on
December 5, at 2pm.

An extract of a statement was then read out in which Mr Lewington
said: 'Next thing I remember, I was under a car.'

Prosecutor Jane Metcalfe explained to the court how witnesses saw the
crash and described seeing Mr Lewington's arm entangled in the wheel
arch and the wheels of the car repeatedly driving over his head and
body.
People shouted at Kellett to stop driving but it was only when a
passerby ran in front of the car and leant on the bonnet that he
finally did so.

As a result of the incident Mr Lewington was left with a cracked bone
in the lower vertebrate, six cracked ribs, severe grazing to leg and
head and is still signed off sick from work.

When police arrived on the scene they asked Kellett to do an eye test.

Regulations state that a person must be able to read a registration
number on a parked car from 25 meters away.

But he could only do so at 12 meters

A driver doesn't notice a cyclist in broad daylight.

He doesn't notice the bady smashing his windscreen, he carries on
driving.

And he gets his license back in a year!

spindrift wrote:

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/gosport/...ght-test.49605...

A driver doesn't notice a cyclist in broad daylight.
He doesn't notice the bady smashing his windscreen, he carries on
driving.
And he gets his license back in a year!

Did you miss:

"We understand that you will not be applying for a new licence in any case"?

"spindrift" wrote in message
...
http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/gosport/...est.4960582.jp

An elderly man has lost his driving licence after he hit a cyclist and
drove down the road with him trapped under the car.
Regulations state that a person must be able to read a registration
number on a parked car from 25 meters away.



But he could only do so at 12 meters

FFS, what is the world coming to. 12 meters, is that parking meters? It is
metres for distance you twerp of an excuse for a journalist, no your spell
chucker won't help you with that.

On a serious note, whilst I hate lycra clad urban warrior cyclists, I do
have to agree with this. The standard of driving is appalling these days and
not just in the elderly. I wouldn't mind having a retest every 5-10 years,
if the government did it cheaply and didn't use it as a stealth tax such as
passports etc. But most importantly, it would need to be a test on ability,
not a test of being able to stick to 30mph for the duration of having an
examiner sat next to you. It is more important to be able to read the road,
spatial awareness, to be able to judge distances and speed.

On Jul 15, 3:22*pm, "Road_Hog" wrote:
"spindrift" wrote in message

...

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/gosport/...ght-test.49605...

An elderly man has lost his driving licence after he hit a cyclist and
drove down the road with him trapped under the car.
Regulations state that a person must be able to read a registration
number on a parked car from 25 meters away.

But he could only do so at 12 meters

FFS, what is the world coming to. 12 meters, is that parking meters? It is
metres for distance you twerp of an excuse for a journalist, no your spell
chucker won't help you with that.

On a serious note, whilst I hate lycra clad urban warrior cyclists, I do
have to agree with this. The standard of driving is appalling these days and
not just in the elderly. I wouldn't mind having a retest every 5-10 years,
if the government did it cheaply and didn't use it as a stealth tax such as
passports etc. But most importantly, it would need to be a test on ability,
not a test of being able to stick to 30mph for the duration of having an
examiner sat next to you. It is more important to be able to read the road,
spatial awareness, to be able to judge distances and speed.

Why do you hate cyclists who wear lycra? I hardly ever see lycra-clad
cyclists nowadays, apart from a foxy girl who cycles neat Tate Modern
in tight black leggings.

And what's a "spell chucker"?

robert hancy wrote:
On Jul 15, 3:22 pm, "Road_Hog" wrote:
"spindrift" wrote in message

...

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/gosport/...ght-test.49605...
An elderly man has lost his driving licence after he hit a cyclist and
drove down the road with him trapped under the car.
Regulations state that a person must be able to read a registration
number on a parked car from 25 meters away.
But he could only do so at 12 meters
FFS, what is the world coming to. 12 meters, is that parking meters? It is
metres for distance you twerp of an excuse for a journalist, no your spell
chucker won't help you with that.

On a serious note, whilst I hate lycra clad urban warrior cyclists, I do
have to agree with this. The standard of driving is appalling these days and
not just in the elderly. I wouldn't mind having a retest every 5-10 years,
if the government did it cheaply and didn't use it as a stealth tax such as
passports etc. But most importantly, it would need to be a test on ability,
not a test of being able to stick to 30mph for the duration of having an
examiner sat next to you. It is more important to be able to read the road,
spatial awareness, to be able to judge distances and speed.

Why do you hate cyclists who wear lycra? I hardly ever see lycra-clad
cyclists nowadays, apart from a foxy girl who cycles neat Tate Modern
in tight black leggings.

And what's a "spell chucker"?

A Witch that casts spells? :-)

Bod

"spindrift" wrote in message
...
http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/gosport/...est.4960582.jp

An elderly man has lost his driving licence after he hit a cyclist and
drove down the road with him trapped under the car.

More fuel for my idea of compulsory driver re-testing evey x years. And
when I get to be PM, I'll also make cycling tuition and testing mandatory.

"robert hancy" wrote in message
...
On Jul 15, 3:22 pm, "Road_Hog" wrote:
"spindrift" wrote in message

...

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/gosport/...ght-test.49605...

An elderly man has lost his driving licence after he hit a cyclist and
drove down the road with him trapped under the car.
Regulations state that a person must be able to read a registration
number on a parked car from 25 meters away.

But he could only do so at 12 meters

FFS, what is the world coming to. 12 meters, is that parking meters? It is
metres for distance you twerp of an excuse for a journalist, no your spell
chucker won't help you with that.

On a serious note, whilst I hate lycra clad urban warrior cyclists, I do
have to agree with this. The standard of driving is appalling these days
and
not just in the elderly. I wouldn't mind having a retest every 5-10 years,
if the government did it cheaply and didn't use it as a stealth tax such
as
passports etc. But most importantly, it would need to be a test on
ability,
not a test of being able to stick to 30mph for the duration of having an
examiner sat next to you. It is more important to be able to read the
road,
spatial awareness, to be able to judge distances and speed.

Why do you hate cyclists who wear lycra? I hardly ever see lycra-clad
cyclists nowadays, apart from a foxy girl who cycles neat Tate Modern
in tight black leggings.

And what's a "spell chucker"?

----------------------------------------------------------------

Question A) Assuming that the question is serious and not something to do
with the fact that some new material that looks like lycra is used/has been
invented, but is called something different, the answer is because they're
****s who generally dislike car drivers, ride several abreast and don't have
any respect for other road or pavement users and have an attitude problem.
People who rode bikes in the '80s and early '90s (and previous to that, but
I didn't drive then) were generally considerate to other users.

Question B) A spell chucker is a **** take out of others, that rely on them,
especially when an incorrect word is used but spelt correctly.

Road_Hog wrote:
"robert hancy" wrote in message
...
On Jul 15, 3:22 pm, "Road_Hog" wrote:

On a serious note, whilst I hate lycra clad urban warrior cyclists,

Why do you hate cyclists who wear lycra? I hardly ever see lycra-clad
cyclists nowadays, apart from a foxy girl who cycles neat Tate Modern
in tight black leggings.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Question A) Assuming that the question is serious and not something
to do with the fact that some new material that looks like lycra is
used/has been invented, but is called something different, the answer
is because they're ****s who generally dislike car drivers, ride
several abreast and don't have any respect for other road or pavement
users and have an attitude problem. People who rode bikes in the '80s
and early '90s (and previous to that, but I didn't drive then) were
generally considerate to other users.

What about those who were cycling since the 1970's,(and earlier), through
the 1980's and 1990's, who might choose to wear something which offends your
fashion tastes ?


I try to be considerate to other road users. But there are some idiots on
cycles just as there are some idiots in cars. I've met both sorts of idiot
when cycling and driving. Fortuately both are not that common, though its
the ones in cars who seem more likely to kill or injure others.


- Nigel


--
Nigel Cliffe,
Webmaster at http://www.2mm.org.uk/

spindrift wrote:
http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/gosport/...est.4960582.jp

Why the ageist subject title? The main factor was apparently poor
eyesight. Poor eyesight can occur at any age.

--
Matt B