Newbie to KB.. but with a bit of a problem...

**scumdog** · 2nd September 2007, 11:03

Get a gun and shoot peasea.

Oh, and definitely write that letter.

**Rosie** · 2nd September 2007, 13:12

Originally Posted by Motig

Somethings not right here. You need glasses to see the front properly for lectures but an optician now reckons you dont. So which is it ? Can you now miraculously see fine now at the lectures without your glasses or not ? If you still need them for lectures your short sighted and need them when riding, vanity wont help you if you crash.

You'd be surprised how bad your eyes can be before you fail the eyesight test for driving. According to my optometrist, my eyesight is good enough (though only just) that I could operate my car and bike without glasses (but not a truck, interestingly). But since I feel I need my glasses for other long-ish distance things (navigating the supermarket, recognising people on the street, mountain biking etc) I wouldn't feel comfortable driving without them.

**imdying** · 2nd September 2007, 14:58

It's free to try, I'd write the letter. I've been pulled up a few times since I had my eyes fixed (lasered), and only once has a copper mentioned the fact that I didn't have my glasses on. He did however mention that if I'd been less honest, and said that I was wearing contacts, he'd naught have thought twice about it.

**sAsLEX** · 2nd September 2007, 20:36

Originally Posted by peasea

Alternatively, give it a shot by writing a polite letter explaining all the circumstances. If you don't need glasses to drive why was it a condition of the license? I need them for reading but I'm fine on the road and I don't have a condition set on my license.

Possibly because someone decided a vision test was needed for licenses, a fair call we all get sick of "Sorry didn't see you", but when it came to implementation this was done poorly and many fail the little box in the AA..... even with perfect vision.

**Karma** · 2nd September 2007, 20:43

Originally Posted by sAsLEX

Possibly because someone decided a vision test was needed for licenses, a fair call we all get sick of "Sorry didn't see you", but when it came to implementation this was done poorly and many fail the little box in the AA..... even with perfect vision.

Erm... you've gotta be pretty poor to fail that...

**ynot slow** · 3rd September 2007, 07:49

What happens in the reverse situation,I've been stopped a few times,check points and speeding,and most times the cops never ask about the glasses/contacts clause endorsement on back of license.Shit how many tickets could I have got off,can think of 3 worth $320 in total.
I mean you could say in letter to get off, you were wearing contacts(I do),and was nervous at check point,girlfriend said she might be pregnant,so wasn't thinking straight at time of check point.
Seriously though anyone tell me what is the claim about minor ticketing and if the police don't ask if your wearing contacts or corrective lens',can you exploit that part as a defence,being the officer wasn't doing his/her job properly,nit picking I know but what's the difference that as a condition of your license and say no wof, which is a condition of the road laws.

**PuppetMaster** · 3rd September 2007, 12:14

Originally Posted by Karma

Or you could have been wearing contacts

Yes. But too late now. Should have said this to the lady porker at the time.
I have that "must wear corrective lenses" on my license too. If they ask, and they do sometimes, Im wearing contact lenses.

**klingon** · 3rd September 2007, 12:53

Originally Posted by sAsLEX

...many fail the little box in the AA..... even with perfect vision.

Originally Posted by Karma

Erm... you've gotta be pretty poor to fail that...

The little box eye test in the AA is completely useless to me. I have to pay every time to get a proper test at the optometrist. And my vision is slightly better than 20/20 (no corrective lenses needed).

The little box just doesn't work for some people.

**fireball** · 3rd September 2007, 16:31

Originally Posted by klingon

The little box eye test in the AA is completely useless to me. I have to pay every time to get a proper test at the optometrist. And my vision is slightly better than 20/20 (no corrective lenses needed).

The little box just doesn't work for some people.

i know how that feels... stupid failing eye...

**NighthawkNZ:Me** · 3rd September 2007, 16:33

you had contacts in...???? but yup send that letter...

**iamkirk** · 5th January 2008, 16:30

After writing a polite well explained letter the next day they actually let me off after sending in a photocopy of my correct license (without glasses condition) Sorry i didnt post earlier but i actually completly forgot about my post! I'm actually amazed at the amount of reponse i got from everyone at KB

**sAsLEX** · 5th January 2008, 16:39

Originally Posted by Karma

Erm... you've gotta be pretty poor to fail that...

well I have decent vision with my glasses on as I get tested regularly, go free medical!

And yesterday went in and did the test and have learnt a trick, do it one eye at a time, its cheating but makes it soo much easier to see!

**iamkirk** · 6th January 2008, 12:13

haha yea i can also say that the 'one eye' trick really works, this nice little indian lady helped me through it at the AA when i did my restricted! No more pain in the ass optometrist visits..

**The Stranger:Me** · 6th January 2008, 12:30

Originally Posted by fireball

write to the address in wellington to complain, provide a copy saying you dont need glasses signed by a JP and you should be sweet

What's the basis for your complaint?
Cause you were too dumb to understand a license condition?
Or too lazy to sort it out in the first place?
Or because the cop was doing their job?

Why not ask them to reconsider in light of the fact that you don't actually need glasses for driving.