Skip to main content

Brake, FTA welcome new guidelines on reporting medically ‘unfit’ drivers

Road safety charity Brake and the Freight Transport Association have welcomed the General Medial Council’s strengthened guidelines to all doctors emphasising their duty to disclose information to the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) or DVA (Northern Ireland), where the patient has failed to act. It’s a shift that’s welcomed by road safety charity, Brake, which has long called for greater clarity from the GMC. Gary Rae, director of communications and campaigns for the charity, said: “This is
November 27, 2015 Read time: 3 mins
Road safety charity 4235 Brake and the 6983 Freight Transport Association have welcomed the General Medial Council’s strengthened guidelines to all doctors emphasising their duty to disclose information to the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) or DVA (Northern Ireland), where the patient has failed to act.

It’s a shift that’s welcomed by road safety charity, Brake, which has long called for greater clarity from the GMC.

Gary Rae, director of communications and campaigns for the charity, said: “This is a positive move by the GMC, which will clarify the responsibilities and duties of both doctor and patient. We do recognise that, previously, doctors have been in a difficult position regarding confidentiality of their patients but the guidance makes it clear that this confidentiality is not absolute.”

“I would appeal to all drivers to ensure that they do declare any medical conditions that could prevent them from driving safely to the DVLA/DVA. If they fail to do so, they will pose a continuing risk to themselves and other road users.”

The Freight Transport Association (FTA) says the new guidance is a step in the right direction but more still needs to be done. It says the guidelines will provide some additional reassurance for employers, but employers need to be able to do more to protect themselves.

Following a number of high profile cases where medical conditions were found to have contributed to incidents involving commercial vehicles, FTA has been calling for transport operators to be given access to any medical decision which could indicate that a driver is unfit to drive.

Existing rules mean that it is the driver’s responsibility to notify the DVLA of any relevant medical condition and there are penalties in law, including a fine up to £1,000, should they fail to do so.

Ian Gallagher, FTA’s lead on DVLA, said: “We’re in a ridiculous situation that the employer is completely reliant on the individual to notify them that they have a medical condition. In some cases it’s the employer’s own checks that actually highlight that entitlement has been suspended or revoked on medical grounds. Employers have no right to access medical records. Patients can even veto doctors’ letters if they don’t agree with what’s been written.

“FTA believes that GPs should seriously consider the draft guidance and put what’s written into practice and notify DVLA if they know patients are driving against their advice, but, this doesn’t go far enough.  We need a process that involves the employers that provides access to necessary medical information which could ultimately save lives’’.

Niall Dickson, chief executive of the General Medical Council, said: “We are clear that doctors carrying out their duty will not face any sanction – and this new guidance makes clear that we will support those who are faced with these difficult decisions.”

Related Content

  • October 22, 2018
    Grey areas: who's legally responsible for C/AVs?
    Connected and autonomous vehicles are an exciting development in the ITS sector – but amid the hype some big questions about their deployment remain unanswered, finds Ben Spencer Connected and autonomous vehicles (C/AVs) have the potential to change the way we travel - and to eliminate road fatalities. But policy makers and regulators will need to ensure user and public safety is included in future planning. The legal and insurance industries will have to catch up, too. For example, questions over who is
  • July 27, 2012
    Give offending drivers credit for good behaviour
    Andrew Rooke and Dave Marples of Technolution B.V. take a look at what can be done to address a long-standing problem: the all-or-nothing approach of automated enforcement. To start, a brief history of speeding: on 14 November 1896, the first Veteran Car Run was staged in England from London to Brighton. It was organised to celebrate new British legislation to raise the maximum speed of vehicles from four to 14mph while also removing the need for a person waving a red flag to walk in front of the car and wa
  • August 1, 2012
    Simplifying enforcement systems type approval
    Martyn Harriss looks at what we can do to simplify the type approval of enforcement equipment in Europe. I doubt that there are many who can remember the days when policemen hid in the bushes with stopwatches and flags to catch speeding motorists - and I'd suggest that back then there were few who were caught who would have dared question the accuracy of those watches or those who operated them. Probably, fewer still here in Europe could have dreamt that a supranational body such as the European Union (EU)
  • February 1, 2012
    Growth of legislation in favour of US enforcement market
    The automated road safety enforcement industry in the United States had a very robust 2010. The industry continued to grow to the point that providers now have nearly 5,000 cameras deployed in 25 of the 50 states and the District of Columbia, with more than 650 communities utilising such life-saving technology. Intersection safety cameras are the most common application but more communities are also implementing road safety camera programmes to deter excessive speeding. Deploying cameras to protect children