Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • So 2 days following the warrant issue.. Hermes finally contacted me to arrange payment and said they had not received my prior claim letters hence the lack of response? But they received this one though didn’t they before the bailiffs are in!   Am incredibly pleased and thankful to CAG! I didn’t know this great  community would be what I find back in Dec from a quick search! Really appreciate the time taken to help me on this and I wouldn’t have a clue without it! I have just donated. Its forums like these that really makes a difference to society, so we need to keep it going!   Key points to note: Hermes Parcelnet Limited (UK entity and HQ in Leeds - address to this) Don’t use packlink for high value items (it links ebay details to the courier selected) Never use Hermes for high value items EVER!
    • ???   you ignore them until they comply and we confirm the filing cabinet copy and paste bogroll they send IS enforceable. cause i bet you 100% it won't have come from them awaiting the OC to send it....their raiding their filing cabinets now i bet..
    • Still waiting for these diagrams. We've been dealing with this story for nearly 48 hours now and we are only starting to understand exactly what happened and we still haven't got information that we've asked for.  
    • Dx100uk well not really, considering he pulled out on me from the side of the road. He should have gave way. Why do you think he has told a different story to his insurance ?   Because he knows if he has said he pulled out on me he would be held liable.   He pulled away from my left hand side then braked- leaving his van in an angled position, it literally happened within the space of a split second  
    • Update: the lawyer friend sent a very good legal letter last week  The third letter will be sent over the next few days - here is the proposed text - your comments welcome as ever: Dear Will & John Letter Reference:xxxx I write with reference to your recent letter in relation to PCN numberxxxxx You threaten Court proceeding on behalf of your client yet your client’s rationale for charging me has no legal substance. An alleged parking offence as a breach of an alleged contract.  I have no contract or terms and conditions with your client.   Furthermore, the sum you are requesting is fictitious. I have no intention of paying any monies to your client. You had no legitimate reason to access my personal details so are already in breach of GDPR by texting me several times on my personal number which I have not given permission for you to use.  Coupled with the several letters you have sent your persistence amounts to nothing short of harassment. Should this continue I will have no hesitation in contacting the ICO to report the breach. The letters I have received will be useful as tinder for the open fire in my living room now the weather has turned cold again. Should you wish to take me to court, I will be seeking full costs through a recovery order under CPR 27:14 which will come in handy now I find myself in the unenviable position of redundancy as a result of Covid. Yours Sincerely   Copied to PCM UK "you don't want to be Gladstoned"   Thanks AJJM
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies
  • Recommended Topics

Driving after a seizure and DVLA still assessing fitness to drive


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1201 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

I had a seizure a couple of weeks ago, first one ever, and the hospital told me to speak to the DVLA, who told me I had to complete a declaration (FEP1 form) so they could assess my fitness to drive. According to the guidelines it could be a 6 month ban.

 

However the form says "you must not drive if your doctor says you cannot drive". Neither my doctor or the consultant at the hospital will give me a decision - they say that's for the DVLA to decide.

 

So, while the form is being processed etc - am I OK to drive, since no one has said I can't?

Link to post
Share on other sites
I had a seizure a couple of weeks ago, first one ever, and the hospital told me to speak to the DVLA, who told me I had to complete a declaration (FEP1 form) so they could assess my fitness to drive. According to the guidelines it could be a 6 month ban.

 

However the form says "you must not drive if your doctor says you cannot drive". Neither my doctor or the consultant at the hospital will give me a decision - they say that's for the DVLA to decide.

 

So, while the form is being processed etc - am I OK to drive, since no one has said I can't?

 

p.18 of DVLA's guidance, for

First unprovoked epileptic seizure / isolated seizure : Group 1 (car) "Must not drive and must notify DVLA. Driving will be prohibited for 6 months from date of the seizure".

 

If you think your doctors aren't giving you a decision, you need to ask them why they feel that guideline doesn't apply - do they think there is a different cause?.

 

Unless there is some complicating factor in play here (where they should be explaining it to you), you and they know the answer; which is you shouldn't be driving.

If you cause an accident by driving and having a further seizure:

a) you won't be insured,

b) you'll be liable to prosecution.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then you have a choice to make.

Show your doctor the leaflet issued by the government and tell them they are wrong.

Or

Stop driving until the DVLA make a decision.

 

Do you want to take the chance of having another seizure and possibly mow-ing someone down and kill them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It may not be that the doctors are 'wrong',

they may have reason to be applying a different guideline than "First unprovoked epileptic seizure / isolated seizure"

OP's best bet is to not drive for now, and seek an urgent explanation from their doctor(s)!.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I would go with section 88 of the road traffic act rather tan DVLA guidance.

If the doctors are not willing to Say your fit to drive, I would take it as they don't think your fit to drive.

 

The consequences of driving and having another seizure far outweigh the slight inconvenience of not driving until a firm medical decision is made.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

p.18 of DVLA's guidance, for

First unprovoked epileptic seizure / isolated seizure : Group 1 (car) "Must not drive and must notify DVLA. Driving will be prohibited for 6 months from date of the seizure".

 

If you think your doctors aren't giving you a decision, you need to ask them why they feel that guideline doesn't apply - do they think there is a different cause?.

 

Unless there is some complicating factor in play here (where they should be explaining it to you), you and they know the answer; which is you shouldn't be driving.

If you cause an accident by driving and having a further seizure:

a) you won't be insured,

b) you'll be liable to prosecution.

 

Yes, that seems fair enough. Its just I've gone round in circles - the DVLA have said I need to ask my doctor if I can drive, and they say they can't decide that and its up to the DVLA.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well I would go with section 88 of the road traffic act rather tan DVLA guidance.

If the doctors are not willing to Say your fit to drive, I would take it as they don't think your fit to drive.

 

The consequences of driving and having another seizure far outweigh the slight inconvenience of not driving until a firm medical decision is made.

 

Section 88 seems to refer to people who don't currently have a licence. I do - I just need a decision made as to whether I can drive while my circumstances are investigated.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It may not be that the doctors are 'wrong', they may have reason to be applying a different guideline than "First unprovoked epileptic seizure / isolated seizure"

OP's best bet is to not drive for now, and seek an urgent explanation from their doctor(s)!.

 

The consultant at the hospital said that although I'd had a seizure, in his opinion I did not have epilepsy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Section 88 seems to refer to people who don't currently have a licence. I do - I just need a decision made as to whether I can drive while my circumstances are investigated.

 

Have you clicked the link and downloaded the leaflet??????

 

You need to find out if the dvla have suspended your licence whilst they look at you application. They sometimes do this carte blanche.

Your doctor can overturn this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I may not have been far off with

It may not be that the doctors are 'wrong', they may have reason to be applying a different guideline than "First unprovoked epileptic seizure / isolated seizure"

OP's best bet is to not drive for now, and seek an urgent explanation from their doctor(s)!.

 

Since,

 

The consultant at the hospital said that although I'd had a seizure, in his opinion I did not have epilepsy.

 

which begs the follow-up question:

"OK, what do you think caused the seizure, and what is its impact on my fitness to drive....."

 

Section 88 seems to refer to people who don't currently have a licence. I do - I just need a decision made as to whether I can drive while my circumstances are investigated.

 

Precisely (regarding S.88)

 

Well I would go with section 88 of the road traffic act rather tan DVLA guidance.

If the doctors are not willing to Say your fit to drive, I would take it as they don't think your fit to drive.

 

The consequences of driving and having another seizure far outweigh the slight inconvenience of not driving until a firm medical decision is made.

 

S. 88 isn't applicable here.

 

S.88 applies either:

a) when someone has previously voluntarily surrendered their licence because they think they don't meet the guidelines, and then re-applies once they believe they meet them again. They can then drive pending their application being reviewed. This encourages voluntary surrender (it doesn't apply if DVLA revoke / rescind the licence rather than it being voluntarily surrendered), or

b) A licence expires, and an application for a new licence has been made prior to the expiry (and the applicant believes they meet the standards). The applicant can then drive (but only in the UK, the situation regarding S.88 permission is unclear for other jurisdictions) while their application is being processed.

 

If DVLA are 'making medical enquiries' and a licence expires while they are still assessing the application they send the applicant a (not terribly helpful!) S.88 letter!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Or the dvla suspend the licence whilst investigating.

 

This happens to my father.

He had a blackout, not driving.

He informed dvla

They suspendedlicence while investigated, but failed to notify my dad, letter missing in post.

Its only when he checked online on my advice he found out.

 

Doctor then said its a one off and ok to drive.

Dad informed dvla

Suspension lifted while they continued to investigate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Or the dvla suspend the licence whilst investigating.

.......

 

Doctor then said its a one off and ok to drive.

Dad informed dvla

Suspension lifted while they continued to investigate.

 

This isn't the OP's situation though. Op has specifically noted that they haven't been told they are OK to drive ......

 

Not being told "you mustn't drive" isn't the same as being told "you can drive" !.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Have you clicked the link and downloaded the leaflet??????

 

You need to find out if the dvla have suspended your licence whilst they look at you application. They sometimes do this carte blanche.

Your doctor can overturn this.

 

They've sent me a letter saying "thanks for informing us of your change in health, you can either surrender your licence or if you don't wish to, fill in this medical form and we will make an assessment". And then "if you don't do this within 14 days we may revoke your licence". So I don't think they'll have suspended it yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My father wasn't told either.

 

He also wasn't told his licence was revolked whilst under investigation.

 

It was only after finding out he went to doctor.

Hence my first couple of replies.

But we are rather splitting hairs here.

 

If it was me....

I wouldn't drive until dvla Said I'm good to drive

Link to post
Share on other sites
This isn't the OP's situation though. Op has specifically noted that they haven't been told they are OK to drive ......

 

Not being told "you mustn't drive" isn't the same as being told "you can drive" !.

 

Kind of is, I think. I think the neurologist would have said that if it was so important.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Kind of is, I think. I think the neurologist would have said that if it was so important.

 

You can bet that if you drive, get caught (or have an accident as a result of a seizure), you can bet that their approach will be "no, I definitely didn't tell them they could drive"!

 

They've sent me a letter saying "thanks for informing us of your change in health, you can either surrender your licence or if you don't wish to, fill in this medical form and we will make an assessment". And then "if you don't do this within 14 days we may revoke your licence". So I don't think they'll have suspended it yet.

 

And theirin lies the rub.

If you don;t surrender your licence, and have another fit, causing an accident, you'll likely get prosecuted and will almost certainly find yourself uninsured (have you spoken with your insurers? if they won;t cover you, that might influence your drcision!).

If you don't surrender your licence and DVLA revoke it, you won;t later get the benefit of S.88

 

If you decide to surrender your licence (which you may decide to do, especially if your insurers won't cover you!), you then get the benefit of S.88 (although you may find you still can't get insurance until DVLA re-issue your licence!).

 

Either way, take a copy of your licence (and any counterpart!), as entitlements have been known to 'go missing'.

If you surrender your licence or DVLA revoke it, when you get a new licence you may find that you no longer have C1/D1 entitlement that used to be issued automatically if the first 'B' test was passed before January 1997

Link to post
Share on other sites

What's the benefit of S.88?

 

I've found the below here: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/general-information-assessing-fitness-to-drive:

 

"Driving during medical enquiries

The time taken to obtain all necessary reports can be lengthy but a licence holder normally retains entitlement to drive under Section 88 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. However, a driver whose last licence was revoked or refused because of a medical condition or is a High Risk Offender re-applying after a drink/drive disqualification from 1 June 2013 would not, however, be eligible to drive until they are issued with a new licence.

 

The driver may be covered to drive but this carries implications for road safety in that the licence holder may continue to drive with a medical condition that, on completion of the DVLA’s enquiries, may ultimately result in licence withdrawal.

 

It is for the patient to assure themself that they are fit to drive. Medical professionals asked for an opinion about a patient’s fitness to drive in these circumstances should explain the likely outcome by reference to this guide. The final decision in relation to driver licensing will, however, rest with the DVLA.

 

By reference to the DVLA’s guidance, the doctor in charge of an individual’s care should be able to advise the driver whether or not it is safe for them to continue to drive during this period.

 

Patients must be reminded that if they choose to ignore medical advice to stop driving this may affect their insurance cover. Doctors are advised to formally and clearly document the advice given."

 

 

Interesting that my consultant has refused to provide guidance on this, other than to tell me to speak to DVLA.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...