"Rise in the presence of the aged, and show respect for the elderly."

DriveABLE – CTV / CEO PJ Barclay present misleading broadcast

Home > Blog Senior Driving Issues > DriveABLE – CTV / CEO PJ Barclay present misleading broadcast




1) P-J Barclay CEO & President, DriveABLE

P-J Barclay, CEO

made misleading and even untruthful statements to CTV in a recent television broadcast hosted by Todd van der Heyden, broadcast by CTV titled
“DriveABLE seeks to prevent senior driving deaths”

2) The broadcast presented as an infomercial.
Playing across the screen throughout the broadcast was the

Todd van der Heyden

“Preventing senior driving deaths”.

3) The broadcast portrayed a negative stereotype of senior drivers as being a threat to public safety on the road, which is untruthful. (Tab 1 & 2)

4) The host, van der Heyden, when introducing DriveABLE, relied on severely, outdated data.

5) When Barclay was asked if DriveABLE testing is successful, he answered “incredibly effective”. However he failed to acknowledge, that the “incredibly effective” testing also misclassifies safe drivers as unsafe.

6) Then there is failure to remedy the failure or even acknowledge the failure

7) It has been published that 1 in 5 persons are misclassified by DriveABLE. Collateral damage caused by DriveABLE misclassification, has been significant. We have such documentation in our files.

8) When a senior has been misclassified by faulty DriveABLE testing, we have documented arrogant refusal by DriveABLE to

a) return the $250.00 (plus GST) payment paid for the DriveABLE assessment,

b) extend an apology for the misclassification / misdiagnosis, humiliation, inconvenience, that the client was subject

c) cover costs for expenses which the client sustained.

9) DriveABLE Assessment Centres Inc. is being sued in the Court of Queens Bench, Edmonton, Alberta, in regard to such a matter
Court File No. # 1803 25014

Louis De Vos v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Alberta as represented by the Department of Transportation: Linda Gordulic: DriveABLE Assessment Centres Inc., Allen Dobbs: Bonnie Dobbs: ABC Corporation: Canadian Back Institute Number 2 (GP) Inc.; Elena Sampululu and Sarah Feaver –

10) Barclay further stated that they are “positioning” themselves as being “part of a greater protocol”. Not so. Seniors are stripped of their right to drive if they score low on a DriveABLE test.

11) Note the attached DriveABLE Report prepared by a DriveABLE technician. (Tab 3)

12) In the cited Report, the client, a Class I licensee, professional truck driver, immediately following a computer based DriveABLE test is instructed by DriveABLE technician – “Mr.— was advised not to drive . . ..”.

13) Can you imagine. that you have been driving semi-trucks and even being an instructor, teaching the operation of such trucks, be advised by some technician that you are not to drive home because you are unsafe on the road?
It took this man close to a year, to reobtain his Class I license.

14) It is the computer-based DriveABLE test that causes the senior harm and ends up being the cause of denying the senior the right to drive. John Brown, Vice President of Love, DriveABLE, informed a BC Bus company that one of their drivers was unsafe to drive because he had scored low on a DriveABLE test. The man, a long time trusted employee and safe driver, had had no accidents or difficulties.
The trucker’s livelihood was totally threatened.

15) Barclay stated that DriveABLE does not discriminate against age inferring that the DriveAble assessment is widely intended for all ages. DriveABLE TARGETS SENIORS (Tab 4)

16) The attached Form states “when driving has declined to an unsafe level”
(Tab 5)

17) Barclay claimed the DriveABLE test to be “really simple to use”, “like operating an ATM”, “ simpler than that”, which is reportedly not true.

18) He inferred that it is clients, who appear to be at risk, who are referred for DriveABLE testing.

19) Not so. There are numbers of physicians who routinely refer all senior clients, who apply for license renewal, to DriveABLE.

20) We have documented that Class I licensees were referred for testing and who, when they scored low on a DriveABLE test, took months, even up to a year to reobtain Class I status. They often must undergo lengthy psychological testing, head scans, extensive reports from their physician, all at their own emotional and financial expense or permanently lose their right to drive.

21) We have been subjected to Cease and desist letters from DriveABLE.

DriveABLE is a multi-million dollar business made on the backs of seniors. (Tab 6)

23) DriveABLE has published implausible statements.
(Tab 7)

24) CTV broadcast questionable information presented as an infomercial. Why?

Finally, we urge CTV to apologize to the older citizens of this country for widely publishing a distorted, ageist presentation of the truth.

We would be grateful to be in receipt of your response by the 20th of February, 2020.

Thank you.
Yours truly,

References / Attachments

(Tab 1)

Drivers Age and Sex

Drivers Age and Sex


The fact that seniors are safe drivers, has now been reinforced by the powerful United States Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. On February 21st., 2014, Joan Lowry of Associated Press issued a News

Release in Washington D.C. by the United States Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, stating that they were wrong in thinking that an older population would lead to more accidents, and just the reverse has happened. Their reasons given were; because vehicles are getting safer and seniors are generally getting healthier, the institute said.

The marked shift began taking hold in the mid-1990s and indicates that growing ranks of aging drivers as baby boomers head into their retirement years are not making US roads deadlier.

Since 1997, older drivers have enjoyed large declines as measured by both fatal crash rates per driver and per vehicle miles driven than middle-age drivers, defined in the study ages 35 to 54.

From 1997 to 2012 fatal crash rates per licensed driver fell 42% for older drivers and 30% for middle-age ones, the study found. Looking at vehicle miles travelled, fatal rates fell 39% for older drivers and 26% for middle-age ones from 1995 to 2008.
The greatest rate of decline was among drivers age 80 and over, nearly twice that of middle age drivers and drivers 70 to 74.
“This should help ease fears that aging baby boomers are a safety threat”
, said Anne McCartt, the institute’s senior vice president and co-author of the study.

Alan Pisarski, author of the authoritative
“Commuting in America” series, who reports on driving trends states that,

“”The main point is that these 70-80 year olds are really different than their
predecessors. They learned to drive in a very different era. They are far more comfortable driving in freeway situations.
This matters immensely for the future because we are seeing dramatic increases in older workers staying in the labor force and continuing to work and commute well past 65”.


Unfortunately there are those who continue to promote the outdated 2001 “high crash risk” data.

A study dated February 4, 2014. “OLDER DRIVERS DO NOT HAVE A HIGH CRASH RISK- A REPLICATION OF LOW MILEAGE BIAS”, challenges old data.
The study of authors, Langford J, Methorst R, Hakamies-Blomqvist L., found that most drivers aged 75 years and older and above were safer than younger age groups.

(Tab 2)


(Tab 3)

(Tab 4)

(Tab 5)

(Tab 6)

(Tab 7)


a) “DriveABLE testing is the only assessment program of it’s kind to be able to objectively measure the patients cognitive ability to drive.”

b) Predicts actual on- road performance

c) It is the only cognitive assessment shown to be highly predictive of actual on road performance.

d) Measures the cognitive skills needed for safe driving.

e) “Not only do DriveABLE assessments provide healthcare professionals with the risk evaluations regarding patient’s cognitive driving abilities, they also provide a new source of revenue that was previously inaccessible”

f) We protect safe drivers from misidentification.

g) Through award winning, university research, we developed the DCAT.

h) The DCAT advantage predicts actual on-road performance.

i) “We are the global leader in evidence-based assessment technology for the fair and accurate assessment of cognitively at-risk drivers. We protect safe drivers from misidentification”.

If DriveABLE presented the above claims to a judicial proceeding, they could be found guilty of an indictable offence.

Criminal Code of Canada
Section 137 Every one who, with intent to mislead, fabricates anything with intent that it shall be used as evidence in a judicial proceeding, existing or proposed, by any means other than perjury or incitement to perjury is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years.