Good news if you are approaching 70yrs old (1 Viewer)

[Traveller_HA5_3DOM]

An article from the Guardian a couple of days ago could make a great deal of difference to those under 75 yrs Produced by the Older Drivers Task Force set up in 2014 recommending raising the current expiry date to 75 yrs old. http://www.theguardian.com/society/...-until-75-before-renewing-licence-says-review it does of course refer to driving licences not the three score and ten.

 

[Landy lover]

Seeing as the think we are fit to work up until 70 years old why would we not be fit to drive unimpeded until 75. In my experience the main thing people do not do that they should is to take a regular eye test

 

[PeteH]

I wouldn't object, EXCEPT that the greedy bar-stewards expect you to pay for medicals etc; despite paying "zillions" over a life time into the NHS!

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Tootles]

75? The wife couldn't drive without hitting something at 35.

 

[Devon Sue]

75? The wife couldn't drive without hitting something at 35.

Probably the other half in the passenger seat

 

[BILL 875]

This might not be 100% correct but if you don't wear glasses it's up to you to go for an eye test but if you do wear glasses you need an eye test every 2 years if you miss or don't bother for years your van insurance could be void if you have a bump, can anyone confirm this.

Regards

Bill

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[EX51SSS]

In the upcoming years, retirement is extended to 67, so for 2 years they are expected to have a medical yearly. Other than PCV drivers, who else relies on such measures to allow you to work at your profession? So, like my friend who took the young drivers course will have been a HGV driver for 47 years by age 65. If he doesn't pass, what can he do. Unemployment? Sick? He's never claimed a penny benefit. No kids, always worked. Its not a question because its happening just a hypothetical question.

 

[Xabia]

This might not be 100% correct but if you don't wear glasses it's up to you to go for an eye test but if you do wear glasses you need an eye test every 2 years if you miss or don't bother for years your van insurance could be void if you have a bump, can anyone confirm this.

Regards

Bill

I think that goes under the definition of an urban myth! No truth in it.

 

[Puddleduck]

This might not be 100% correct but if you don't wear glasses it's up to you to go for an eye test but if you do wear glasses you need an eye test every 2 years if you miss or don't bother for years your van insurance could be void if you have a bump, can anyone confirm this.

Regards

Bill

Don't know if that is true or not but I would never miss an eye test.

In the upcoming years, retirement is extended to 67, so for 2 years they are expected to have a medical yearly. Other than PCV drivers, who else relies on such measures to allow you to work at your profession? So, like my friend who took the young drivers course will have been a HGV driver for 47 years by age 65. If he doesn't pass, what can he do. Unemployment? Sick? He's never claimed a penny benefit. No kids, always worked. Its not a question because its happening just a hypothetical question.

Many professions require an annual certificate of competency. Depending on the profession a medical may, or may not, be required. If you don't pass you lose your job.

Pilots have annual medicals as do some health care workers (I did).

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[PeteH]

A lot of "professionals" are required to have Medicals. A lot of Employers pay for them (not all. and definitely NOT agencies!!!). However we are talking here of "civilian" drivers, I have (today) just had another eye test, (20/20btw) but with a caveat that I have a small "growth" in one eye which will be monitored, My point is that having paid into the NHS for over 50 years (and STILL paying out of my Pensions) for those of us who are NOT "professional" but still required to have medical BY LAW. it should be FREE. (Not 90quid a time as for my C+E).

With the Retirement Age progressively being raised. ALL these type requirements should also be raised. If for no other reason than "what is good for the goose (a higher retirement age) Is Good for the Gander, (we must still be automatically "fit" to drive IF we are still "fit" to work!). IF society feels otherwise, then society, should be made to pick up the "tab". NOY penalising the individual.

Pete

 

[The Wino]

A lot of "professionals" are required to have Medicals. A lot of Employers pay for them (not all. and definitely NOT agencies!!!). However we are talking here of "civilian" drivers, I have (today) just had another eye test, (20/20btw) but with a caveat that I have a small "growth" in one eye which will be monitored, My point is that having paid into the NHS for over 50 years (and STILL paying out of my Pensions) for those of us who are NOT "professional" but still required to have medical BY LAW. it should be FREE. (Not 90quid a time as for my C+E).

With the Retirement Age progressively being raised. ALL these type requirements should also be raised. If for no other reason than "what is good for the goose (a higher retirement age) Is Good for the Gander, (we must still be automatically "fit" to drive IF we are still "fit" to work!). IF society feels otherwise, then society, should be made to pick up the "tab". NOY penalising the individual.

Pete

Why should someone else pay in who does not drive the same as you if ou are going to get driving medicals paid for by th enhs? how about a professional pilot if their terms of employment are they pay for their own medical should that be on the nhs? A lot of people seem to think driving is a right look at the threads about losing your license if medically unfit ........its a choice not an essential part of life I think those who chose to drive ought to pay for the medical and by the way those who choose to have sex with many partners pay for the condoms and drugs to reduce the chance of hiv. You paid into an nhs that didn't offer free driving medicals it would have cost more if they did so you can't expect to get what you haven't paid for.

 

[PeteH]

Why should someone else pay in who does not drive the same as you if ou are going to get driving medicals paid for by th enhs? how about a professional pilot if their terms of employment are they pay for their own medical should that be on the nhs? A lot of people seem to think driving is a right look at the threads about losing your license if medically unfit ........its a choice not an essential part of life I think those who chose to drive ought to pay for the medical and by the way those who choose to have sex with many partners pay for the condoms and drugs to reduce the chance of hiv. You paid into an nhs that didn't offer free driving medicals it would have cost more if they did so you can't expect to get what you haven't paid for.

Your opinion. I stick by mine. IMV Government, (any colour) would gladly see all elderly "shuffle of their mortal coil" in order to save money. It`s all about cash not quality.

Pete

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[GJH]

My point is that having paid into the NHS for over 50 years (and STILL paying out of my Pensions)

You paid into an nhs that didn't offer free driving medicals it would have cost more if they did so you can't expect to get what you haven't paid for.

The main problem faced by the NHS is that it is having demands placed upon it that it was never designed to cater for. Many services that are now available are specialised in that they are not treatments for illnesses but required by relatively small minorities to support lifestyle choices. A general NHS (like any such insurance scheme) is bound to fail if it is required to fund everything.

 

[Chris]

When I approach 75 I am just going to start driving in a hat, probably a trilby.

This will warn other road users to steer clear of me

 

[Littlewheels]

When I approach 75 I am just going to start driving in a hat, probably a trilby.

This will warn other road users to steer clear of me

If you wear backwards way around it will take years off!! People will think you're a Boy Racer"

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[buttons]

An article from the Guardian a couple of days ago could make a great deal of difference to those under 75 yrs Produced by the Older Drivers Task Force set up in 2014 recommending raising the current expiry date to 75 yrs old. http://www.theguardian.com/society/...-until-75-before-renewing-licence-says-review it does of course refer to driving licences not the three score and ten.

THe last paragraph sort of sums it up.....Quote: A DVLA spokesman told the Telegraph that there were currently no plans to change the system of drivers over 70 having to renew their licence every three years and declare any medical condition which they believed may affect their driving.

 

[EX51SSS]

Why should someone else pay in who does not drive the same as you if ou are going to get driving medicals paid for by th enhs? how about a professional pilot if their terms of employment are they pay for their own medical should that be on the nhs? A lot of people seem to think driving is a right look at the threads about losing your license if medically unfit ........its a choice not an essential part of life I think those who chose to drive ought to pay for the medical and by the way those who choose to have sex with many partners pay for the condoms and drugs to reduce the chance of hiv. You paid into an nhs that didn't offer free driving medicals it would have cost more if they did so you can't expect to get what you haven't paid for.

Not necessarily! NHS supplies condoms at their clinics if you want to go. I know someone that used to go weekly and get a dozen. Plus, at the GUM clinics, the tests are free and prescriptions are free over 60's and also various conditions.
I don't have a problem paying for my own medical next year but the upcoming guys and gals have to have their medicals at 65 but retirement is going up but its yearly after 65 for VOCATIONAL licences. No, driving is not a right but a vocation. Incidentally, there is also the requirement to also hold a current Driver CPC which is payable by the individual (unless company pays) and without that, you can't drive. Its absolutely farcical. You could take the same module 5 times in 5 years and that suffices. Mine is due next in 2019 and I certainty won't renew.
Also remember, the HGV drivers are treated with massive contempt by most road users although this is our workplace and by companies and importantly by the Police until you do something wrong then all oif a sudden, you're classed as a professional driver.

 

[PeteH]

The main problem faced by the NHS is that it is having demands placed upon it that it was never designed to cater for. Many services that are now available are specialised in that they are not treatments for illnesses but required by relatively small minorities to support lifestyle choices. A general NHS (like any such insurance scheme) is bound to fail if it is required to fund everything.

I quite agree, however, The fact remains that the Issue of "underfunding" (like pensions) was KNOWN years (nay decades) ago. But as with all Governments (and Bureaucrats) they ALWAYS take (took) the easy option. Which in these cases was tantamount to Burying their heads in the sand, and failing to tackle the issue EARLY. So now the people who paid most in are those who are being made to suffer!. Current taxation rates are 14% BELOW where the where in the Good/bad, old days (Take your pick?), But the fact remains that such things need funding and the only source of (Governmental) funding IS TAX, Recent Government is/was AFRAID of using the "T" word for fear of losing Votes!. Which ever choice, it come down to paying, BUT IMV it is grossly unfair to now push the burden onto the Retired Generation, which is what is potentially (actually?) happening!

Pete

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[ambulancekidd]

When I approach 75 I am just going to start driving in a hat, probably a trilby.

This will warn other road users to steer clear of me

Totally correct. My dad's advice when I started driving was to "Never trust ANY driver wearing a hat" & its served me well so far.

 

[GJH]

I quite agree, however, The fact remains that the Issue of "underfunding" (like pensions) was KNOWN years (nay decades) ago. But as with all Governments (and Bureaucrats) they ALWAYS take (took) the easy option. Which in these cases was tantamount to Burying their heads in the sand, and failing to tackle the issue EARLY. So now the people who paid most in are those who are being made to suffer!. Current taxation rates are 14% BELOW where the where in the Good/bad, old days (Take your pick?), But the fact remains that such things need funding and the only source of (Governmental) funding IS TAX, Recent Government is/was AFRAID of using the "T" word for fear of losing Votes!. Which ever choice, it come down to paying, BUT IMV it is grossly unfair to now push the burden onto the Retired Generation, which is what is potentially (actually?) happening!

Pete

And the alternative is? The fact is that there isn't one. You can't force payment from somebody who has nothing so it has to come from those who have something.

Governments have been urging people to save for their retirement for 50 years in my memory but no government can force it. Even the workplace pensions that have been introduced will only go so far. Look at state pension levels (including bus passes, TV licences, fuel allowances &c) and they are far more generous than we could have expected 45-50 years ago when current pensioners started work. We can't say, therefore, that we are getting less than we were told we would get alol those years ago. What we can say, though, is that such levels are not sustainable from taxation levels which are likely to fall with teh ending of teh baby boom bubble.

If any government had tried to force people to save (thereby preventing them from having their foreign holidays, fags, booze and Sky TV) they would soon have been thrown out at the next election because too many people think they have a right to what anyone else has no matter whether they have earned it or not. There have always been, and will always be, those whose earning capability is low and who need state support in retirement but if anyone was burying their heads in the sand it was people who were too thick/stupid/selfish make provision when they had the chance.

Simply blaming governments/bureaucrats because they refused to pander to individual whim just ignores the facts. Consider, also, that the best resourced career pension funds are the contributory ones that the "bureaucrats" of local government and the like paid for. They have a far better funding base than those of other public sector employees (including the armed forces) and the private sector.

 

[The Wino]

Actually the best funded schemes are the ones the bereaocrats are in but how much has been funded by emplyee contributions or employers is debatable. I heard at one time the local university pension scheme had employee contributions of 5% employer 15% and suspect a lot of final salary schemes have very high employer (ie taxpayer) contributions. It seems when it comes to the pensions crisis due fortunately to average life expectancy being so good we are not in it all together!!!.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[GJH]

Actually the best funded schemes are the ones the bereaocrats are in but how much has been funded by emplyee contributions or employers is debatable. I heard at one time the local university pension scheme had employee contributions of 5% employer 15% and suspect a lot of final salary schemes have very high employer (ie taxpayer) contributions. It seems when it comes to the pensions crisis due fortunately to average life expectancy being so good we are not in it all together!!!.

All pension funds have significant employer contributions. They pay part of their employees' salaries into the pension funds rather than into the bank each month.
The difference with the ones I mentioned is that they have been much better managed than others so the funding is there rather than a black hole.

 

[The Wino]

All pension funds have significant employer contributions. They pay part of their employees' salaries into the pension funds rather than into the bank each month.
The difference with the ones I mentioned is that they have been much better managed than others so the funding is there rather than a black hole.

And that is why in the private sector nearly all final salary schemes have gone but in the public sector the taxpayers who mainly have no access themselves to a final salary scheme are subsidising the public sector employees. I think a public sector pension ought to be available to everyone whether in the public or private sector the contributions would be a lot higher for those funding the full cost themselves but it would make clear the actual value of the scheme.

 

[GJH]

And that is why in the private sector nearly all final salary schemes have gone but in the public sector the taxpayers who mainly have no access themselves to a final salary scheme are subsidising the public sector employees. I think a public sector pension ought to be available to everyone whether in the public or private sector the contributions would be a lot higher for those funding the full cost themselves but it would make clear the actual value of the scheme.

No reason why that shouldn't happen. Except, of course, that the same people who complain about paying for something in retirement would complain about having to pay for it during their employment.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Jim]

The main problem faced by the NHS is that it is having demands placed upon it that it was never designed to cater for.

Yes, things like many 100's of mi££ions on IVF while many thousands of kids are in care awaiting adoption

 

[The Wino]

No reason why that shouldn't happen. Except, of course, that the same people who complain about paying for something in retirement would complain about having to pay for it during their employment.

The reason it wont happen is because the politicians want to keep quiet about the real cost I suspect an annuity on similar terms to a public sector final salary pension might be as low as 2.5% of the final pot making the pot required for a 2/3 final salary pension 40xfinal salary in other words for someone retiring on a final salary 0f 60k 3.6 million how much of that have they contributed themselves?

 

[GJH]

The reason it wont happen is because the politicians want to keep quiet about the real cost I suspect an annuity on similar terms to a public sector final salary pension might be as low as 2.5% of the final pot making the pot required for a 2/3 final salary pension 40xfinal salary in other words for someone retiring on a final salary 0f 60k 3.6 million how much of that have they contributed themselves?

No idea about the figures but who in the public sector gets 2/3 final salary as a pension? Even the LGPS was only half final salary at best and is now a career average scheme.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Paddywack]

No idea about the figures but who in the public sector gets 2/3 final salary as a pension? Even the LGPS was only half final salary at best and is now a career average scheme.

Stop blurring the argument with facts Graham.

 

[The Wino]

No give some more facts what does it cost to run the public sector pensions
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...3k-debt-for-public-secret-pensions-and-other/

I know its only in the press but the nao say contributions are only 1/4 of the payout

 

[GJH]

No give some more facts what does it cost to run the public sector pensions
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...3k-debt-for-public-secret-pensions-and-other/

I know its only in the press but the nao say contributions are only 1/4 of the payout

It's also a general report which doesn't differentiate between those public pensions which are funded directly from taxation and those which are funded by investments.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}