Another DVLA medical - I would be grateful for advice please

[jamie2007]

A couple of years ago the police broke into my friends house on a few occasions

and discovered small amounts of herb which was for personal use, each time I got cautioned.

 

Then letters started arriving telling me to go for medical tests

 

 

Since then I have already had a drugs test then an eye test then another doctor's test then a psychiatric test

and now it's come back to them wanting me to go for another drug test as I got letter from dvla yesterday morning.

 

This is causing me a lot of stress. Are they able to do this?

 

 

Thanks

[BazzaS]

A couple of years ago the police broke into my friends house on a few occasions

and discovered small amounts of herb which was for personal use, each time I got cautioned.

 

Then letters started arriving telling me to go for medical tests

 

 

Since then I have already had a drugs test then an eye test then another doctor's test then a psychiatric test

and now it's come back to them wanting me to go for another drug test as I got letter from dvla yesterday morning.

 

This is causing me a lot of stress. Are they able to do this?

 

 

Thanks

 

It depends.

How many cautions have you had?. Does that give them grounds to suspect you have a 'dependence"?.

 

For a single test positive for use of cannabis, the "fitness to drive" medical standards allow them to revoke your license until you have been shown to be drug free for 6 months.

It may be that they rarely do so, but the standards allow it, and if they did, and you appealed to a Magistrates Court : the appeal would almost certainly be doomed.

 

Where they have reason to believe there is or has been 'dependence' (which multiple convictions / cautions could suggest), they can insist on a test at any time, and as before, if you test positive - license withdrawn for 6 months, and re-licensing subject to a clear test.

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/526635/assessing-fitness-to-drive-a-guide-for-medical-professionals.pdf

 

page 80 is the source on which I base my comments.

 

If it were heroin, coke, or meth : 1 year rather than 6 months.

If it is more than one substance (including alcohol and a drug) : "not compatible with fitness to drive or licensing consideration" until you can show you have no use / dependancy for both.

 

Intriguing that they also insisted on an eye test : what triggered that?.

 

If you want to keep your licence, don't get caught with / having used drugs.

[BazzaS]

The source I've cited is DVLA's "fitness to drive" standards (intended for medical professionals) published by the Driver's Medical Group, based on the advice from the Honorary Medical Advisory Panels to the Secretary of State, who then authorizes the standards, giving them their legal standing.

 

Interestingly enough, the pages they point to for the lay public don't have nearly as much details, but https://www.gov.uk/drug-use-and-driving notes

You must tell DVLA if you’ve used illegal drugs or misused prescription drugs.

 

You can be fined up to £1,000 if you don’t tell DVLA about a medical condition that affects your driving. You can be prosecuted if you’re involved in an accident as a result.

Smoked one joint?. You have to tell DVLA (who may then revoke your licence for 6 months), and if you don't: potential fine of up to £1,000.

[jamie2007]

Thanks for this information Bazza, I have no idea what triggered the eye test.

 

The bottom line is that it is a herb which means its ok to use legal highs?

 

I would never take Salvia and drive for instance as thats damn right irresponsible

 

I see it as another way of enslaving us and extortion against the motorist.

 

Thanks for your advice its very much appreciated

[BazzaS]

The bottom line is that it is a herb which means its ok to use legal highs?

 

That is quite some non-sequitur!

 

It isn't OK to drive impaired no matter what the substance.

It is potentially reason to revoke a licence if there is habitual use / dependence on any substance that impairs driving.

 

"But what about alcohol" I hear you say?.

Usage:

a) if there is no dependency,

b) only within the prescribed limits, is permitted.

 

 

"Legal highs"? :

a) still an offence if they impair your driving

b) still reason to revoke if there is habitual usage / there is dependency, and

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36384729

Not quite so legal anymore!

 

 

I would never take Salvia and drive for instance as thats damn right irresponsible

 

I see it as another way of enslaving us and extortion against the motorist.

 

Thanks for your advice its very much appreciated

 

Yes, poor enslaved, picked on motorist, no longer free to drive impaired .....

Habitual usage of an illegal drug : changes the risk you pose.

 

Your choice : licensed to drive or keep smoking weed (or, get the law changed).

[jamie2007]

Nice one, I will stick to the methylated spirit or one of many of the carcinogens in cigarettes

[BazzaS]

Nice one, I will stick to the methylated spirit or one of many of the carcinogens in cigarettes

 

Wow, another non-sequitur.

 

Just because it is (currently) legal doesn't make it safe, or sensible.

You can choose to accept a risk and use a substance that DVLA doesn't have an overt policy on.

 

That doesn't mean it is sensible, nor that DVLA can't hammer you for it, if they can establish that habitual use / dependency poses a risk to other road users.

 

Meths? will probably come under general dependency.

Smoking (tobacco, not weed!) : currently not on DVLA's radar, but yup, causes cancer.

It doesn't (usually : except for passive smoking) pose the risk to others that drivers with substance misuse issues can though ......

[Tony P]

Smoking (tobacco, not weed!) : currently not on DVLA's radar, but yup, causes cancer.

It doesn't (usually : except for passive smoking) pose the risk to others that drivers with substance misuse issues can though ......

 

However drivers on tobacco, spared the threat of substance analysis, can possibly be ever so slightly distracted when getting a new fag from the box, find the lighter, check their vehicle is not a work place, or children present (not sure about this one, yet!) then the eye, hand, mouth co-ordination to light it while controlling a couple of tons or more of metal progressing at 70 mph plus - to say nothing of the subsequent contortions to ensure ash doesn't spoil the interior of their vehicle. And should said lighted fag slip and be dropped ....

 

Finally, tossing the lighted butt out of the window to potentially cause verge fires. spreading into the countryside beyond.

 

To my mind smoking tobacco is a definite risk to others who decided to use the roads.

 

(Sorry if my rant is going off the thread's topic!)

[think about it]

Wait, the police 'broke in'? Or do you mean executed a search warrant?

 

As another road user, yes. They can and they should continue to test. Bear in mind also that while smoking at the wheel in its own right isn't an offence, driving without due care and attention is, fiddling around for your fags is no better than texting and given time will result in someone wedged into another car/wall/pedestrian.

[king12345]

I beg to differ.

Smokers don't need to look at a cigarette to light it and smoke it.

It's such an automatic habit that you could do it blindfolded.

Anyhow, I don't smoke in the car because I hate the leftover smell.