Type 1 diabetic and the implications of not declaring this
Discussion
No, not me. Just the hypothetical "friend" who's not owned a car or had to insure one since being diagnosed.
They reckon that the circumstances under which they were diagnosed and the way subsequent conversations with various GPs have been held means that the usual letter to the DVLA has not been sent. ( I presume that this is a requirement of the GP? )
We know that license renewal periods are reduced. But what other issues, expenses should a Type 1 expect on diagnosis?
What is the likelihood of a well managed type 1 being found out?
And what are the consequences beyond insurance being invalidated?
They reckon that the circumstances under which they were diagnosed and the way subsequent conversations with various GPs have been held means that the usual letter to the DVLA has not been sent. ( I presume that this is a requirement of the GP? )
We know that license renewal periods are reduced. But what other issues, expenses should a Type 1 expect on diagnosis?
What is the likelihood of a well managed type 1 being found out?
And what are the consequences beyond insurance being invalidated?
Zombie said:
No, not me. Just the hypothetical "friend" who's not owned a car or had to insure one since being diagnosed.
They reckon that the circumstances under which they were diagnosed and the way subsequent conversations with various GPs have been held means that the usual letter to the DVLA has not been sent. ( I presume that this is a requirement of the GP? )
We know that license renewal periods are reduced. But what other issues, expenses should a Type 1 expect on diagnosis?
What is the likelihood of a well managed type 1 being found out?
And what are the consequences beyond insurance being invalidated?
If they don't disclose it then the Insurer can void their policy which can mean ultimately they end up paying for any damage to other vehicles and people and have no cover for their own vehicle.They reckon that the circumstances under which they were diagnosed and the way subsequent conversations with various GPs have been held means that the usual letter to the DVLA has not been sent. ( I presume that this is a requirement of the GP? )
We know that license renewal periods are reduced. But what other issues, expenses should a Type 1 expect on diagnosis?
What is the likelihood of a well managed type 1 being found out?
And what are the consequences beyond insurance being invalidated?
How will they find out... From his driving licence of which the checks are going automatically online shortly and the law also allows that should his Insurer discover his lie in the future they can come back to him at a later date to chase him for payments they made on a claim. So it's possible he could get away with the fraud this year, have an accident and then his Insurer check his licence on line in a couple of years time, discover his fraud and then come after him for the money they paid out in a claim.
another way they could discover it is if he has an attack and has an accident, this would be fairly obvious to the Insurers as the police would be involved.
You also have that Insurers record details of quotes, many will then compare these to what you actually declared when you took out the cover. He's obviously got quotes as otherwise he would not be trying to find out about not declaring the diabetes.
Insurers also use the Hunter database which cross refers applications with previous applications, so can flag up if he omits information on a new policy.
Apart from having to pay his own and any other claims, he'll have a void policy against his name which will make it almost impossible for him to obtain any type of Insurance for the rest of his life including Motor, Business, Life and Home Insurance. Funnily enough, Insurers don't like people who lie
Type 1 Diabetes can be a huge risk to Insurers as the claims if you have an attack can be huge, whilst not a diabetic attack, the bin lorry crash in Scotland was due to the driver blacking out. Imagine the cost of that claim
I am type 1 and declared everything immediately, I believe the hospital also inform the DVLA if they know you drive.
It has not cost me anything extra and keeping to the conditions of the licence can be a pain at times but you soon get used to it.
Not declaring could lead to massive problems, see the glasgow bin lorry crash thread for details of how badly it can go wrong. As somebody that wont declare is unlikely to stick to the conditions that ensure regular and pre drive testing of BG levels and that spells danger.
It has not cost me anything extra and keeping to the conditions of the licence can be a pain at times but you soon get used to it.
Not declaring could lead to massive problems, see the glasgow bin lorry crash thread for details of how badly it can go wrong. As somebody that wont declare is unlikely to stick to the conditions that ensure regular and pre drive testing of BG levels and that spells danger.
As far as i'm aware GP's / NHS Specialists are under no instruction to directly notify the DVLA unless they have reason to believe said person will not do so, therefore it's up to the diagnosed themselves to declare it as soon as the diagnosis is confirmed.
The DVLA should place the driver on a 1 to 3 year renewable licence, but that's obviously subject to them proving the condition is properly managed, HBA1C's are within the correct allowance, they don't suffer from hypos at times of risk, test their blood glucose regularly if driving, etc. If there are any concerns the DVLA ask for it to be backed up by proof from their diabetic specialist / nurse and / or GP.
More info here:
https://www.diabetes.org.uk/Guide-to-diabetes/Livi...
The DVLA should place the driver on a 1 to 3 year renewable licence, but that's obviously subject to them proving the condition is properly managed, HBA1C's are within the correct allowance, they don't suffer from hypos at times of risk, test their blood glucose regularly if driving, etc. If there are any concerns the DVLA ask for it to be backed up by proof from their diabetic specialist / nurse and / or GP.
More info here:
https://www.diabetes.org.uk/Guide-to-diabetes/Livi...
Edited by AlexRS2782 on Wednesday 20th January 01:25
NoNeed said:
I am type 1 and declared everything immediately, I believe the hospital also inform the DVLA if they know you drive.
It has not cost me anything extra and keeping to the conditions of the licence can be a pain at times but you soon get used to it.
Not declaring could lead to massive problems, see the glasgow bin lorry crash thread for details of how badly it can go wrong. As somebody that wont declare is unlikely to stick to the conditions that ensure regular and pre drive testing of BG levels and that spells danger.
Absolutely agree. My son is T1 with a 2 year restricted licence. He controls it very well and it hasn't really caused any problems and insurance costs don't seem any different. At the 2 year renewal the DVLA medical assessment required details or confirmation of his meter readings from his quarterly check ups.It has not cost me anything extra and keeping to the conditions of the licence can be a pain at times but you soon get used to it.
Not declaring could lead to massive problems, see the glasgow bin lorry crash thread for details of how badly it can go wrong. As somebody that wont declare is unlikely to stick to the conditions that ensure regular and pre drive testing of BG levels and that spells danger.
Not declaring and running into problems later isn't worth the risk. Sounds like your friend may not be controlling his diabetes well?
Any reluctance to declare driven by concern over additional costs or potential restrictions is selfish beyond words.
In 2006 I got rear ended by a diabetic who'd fasted overnight for a blood test and then decided to drive herself home afterwards without anything to eat. She lapsed into a coma and smacked into the back of me at speed writing both cars off and putting us both in hospital. The paramedics who arrived to help clear up the mess said they'd never seen a blood sugar level that low in anybody still alive.
The collision occurred in the vicinity of a primary school during mid morning break.
The bill for all this carnage went some way north of five figures and left me unable to work efficiently for weeks. Soon after I was seen by a hearing specialist who diagnosed the Tinnitus that started after the collision is permanent and incurable and directly attributable to it.
So yes - insure and inform IMO.
In 2006 I got rear ended by a diabetic who'd fasted overnight for a blood test and then decided to drive herself home afterwards without anything to eat. She lapsed into a coma and smacked into the back of me at speed writing both cars off and putting us both in hospital. The paramedics who arrived to help clear up the mess said they'd never seen a blood sugar level that low in anybody still alive.
The collision occurred in the vicinity of a primary school during mid morning break.
The bill for all this carnage went some way north of five figures and left me unable to work efficiently for weeks. Soon after I was seen by a hearing specialist who diagnosed the Tinnitus that started after the collision is permanent and incurable and directly attributable to it.
So yes - insure and inform IMO.
Thanks for the replies, some useful thoughts there.
It's interesting that everyone is assuming my friend is male though. (This is neither confirmation or denial)
Definitely Type 1. Definitely well managed. (Assumption is viral induced.)
As I said, they've not owned a car since diagnosis. But I think my friend's concern is the cost of insurance being relatively young and only having passed their test in the last 5 years.
It's interesting that everyone is assuming my friend is male though. (This is neither confirmation or denial)
Definitely Type 1. Definitely well managed. (Assumption is viral induced.)
As I said, they've not owned a car since diagnosis. But I think my friend's concern is the cost of insurance being relatively young and only having passed their test in the last 5 years.
Why on earth would you not declare it.
Been Type 2 now for 15 years, inject twice a day and on tablets.
Told the DVLA at the start and as treatment progressed to injections, kept them informed throughout.
Three year restricted licence but no problems whatsoever.
So is he/she telling the insurance company that they have no medical condition?
It's simply not worth the risk.
Been Type 2 now for 15 years, inject twice a day and on tablets.
Told the DVLA at the start and as treatment progressed to injections, kept them informed throughout.
Three year restricted licence but no problems whatsoever.
So is he/she telling the insurance company that they have no medical condition?
It's simply not worth the risk.
Not shooting at you at all.
The point is that, if they need to take out car insurance, why not declare it?
If they are safe to drive and the condition is controlled then there really shouldn't be any problem in getting insurance.
Presumably they will have to declare it at some stage and explaining why it wasn't declared at the start could be difficult - especially as the DVLA may check with the Doctor at that time.
The point is that, if they need to take out car insurance, why not declare it?
If they are safe to drive and the condition is controlled then there really shouldn't be any problem in getting insurance.
Presumably they will have to declare it at some stage and explaining why it wasn't declared at the start could be difficult - especially as the DVLA may check with the Doctor at that time.
Edited by Davel on Wednesday 20th January 14:21
I've been diabetic since I was 8 so went through all the insurance stuff when I passed my test at 17 (god that was a long time ago 
) I paid the same, and lots of times cheaper insurance than my friends, so I would presume that they didn't penalise me for being a type 1 and the difference was down to the usual insurance variable like location and car etc.
If they are really worried a comparison site with diabetes as the only change should show if there is any difference.
) I paid the same, and lots of times cheaper insurance than my friends, so I would presume that they didn't penalise me for being a type 1 and the difference was down to the usual insurance variable like location and car etc.If they are really worried a comparison site with diabetes as the only change should show if there is any difference.
Zombie said:
Thanks for the replies, some useful thoughts there.
It's interesting that everyone is assuming my friend is male though. (This is neither confirmation or denial)
Definitely Type 1. Definitely well managed. (Assumption is viral induced.)
As I said, they've not owned a car since diagnosis. But I think my friend's concern is the cost of insurance being relatively young and only having passed their test in the last 5 years.
My son referred to in my earlier post is 20( diagnosed T1 at age 9) and insured his first car at age 18. Having just spoken to him he confirmed his condition made absolutely no difference to the premium then or now. I may be wrong but I don't think insurers are allowed to discriminate these days.It's interesting that everyone is assuming my friend is male though. (This is neither confirmation or denial)
Definitely Type 1. Definitely well managed. (Assumption is viral induced.)
As I said, they've not owned a car since diagnosis. But I think my friend's concern is the cost of insurance being relatively young and only having passed their test in the last 5 years.
I think in light of the Glasgow bin lorry crash, failure to declare a notifiable condition that affects the ability to drive is probably taken more seriously these days.
Personally I think it is reckless and potentially puts others lives at risk and may also risk the liberty of the person who decides not to declare the condition.
Personally I think it is reckless and potentially puts others lives at risk and may also risk the liberty of the person who decides not to declare the condition.
gottans said:
I think in light of the Glasgow bin lorry crash, failure to declare a notifiable condition that affects the ability to drive is probably taken more seriously these days.
Personally I think it is reckless and potentially puts others lives at risk and may also risk the liberty of the person who decides not to declare the condition.
He is just something else I heard he has even tried to get his licence back since the crash, talk about Denile.Personally I think it is reckless and potentially puts others lives at risk and may also risk the liberty of the person who decides not to declare the condition.
gottans said:
I think in light of the Glasgow bin lorry crash, failure to declare a notifiable condition that affects the ability to drive is probably taken more seriously these days.
Personally I think it is reckless and potentially puts others lives at risk and may also risk the liberty of the person who decides not to declare the condition.
But the OP thinks it's all a big joke:Personally I think it is reckless and potentially puts others lives at risk and may also risk the liberty of the person who decides not to declare the condition.
Zombie said:
imagineifyeswill said:
My ex wife was type 1, weve been split since 17 years but at that time my insurance was loaded 25% because of her condition.
Condition? Ah, you mean female...
Zombie said:
No, not me. Just the hypothetical "friend" who's not owned a car or had to insure one since being diagnosed.
Hamish Finn said:
gottans said:
I think in light of the Glasgow bin lorry crash, failure to declare a notifiable condition that affects the ability to drive is probably taken more seriously these days.
Personally I think it is reckless and potentially puts others lives at risk and may also risk the liberty of the person who decides not to declare the condition.
But the OP thinks it's all a big joke:Personally I think it is reckless and potentially puts others lives at risk and may also risk the liberty of the person who decides not to declare the condition.
Zombie said:
imagineifyeswill said:
My ex wife was type 1, weve been split since 17 years but at that time my insurance was loaded 25% because of her condition.
Condition? Ah, you mean female...Zombie said:
No, not me. Just the hypothetical "friend" who's not owned a car or had to insure one since being diagnosed.
So kindly foxtrot oscar.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff