RTA after doctor advised not to drive
Discussion
Murghee said:
True and i did contact dvla but they said as its not diagnosed or in the middle of treatment i can drive but all that was over the phone so no proof.
Maybe there is proof? most organisations record all calls so they can refer back to the call if it suits them, so there may be a recorded call.Murghee said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
julian64 said:
I suspect you have a problem. The insurance company have a reason not to pay you anything. You were driving against medical advice while awaiting the outcome of sleep clinic investigations, and I assume you hadn't informed the DVLA.
So what? He could have been driving whilst drunk, in a car with no insurance, tax and MOT, with a dead body in the boot and acting as a getaway driver in a bank heist. But he has been injured by a negligent third party, and therefore he has a valid claim against the third party's insurer for injury. He has no contract with the insurance company, so he is under no obligation to them to not drive when he's advised not to drive. He might have had a problem with his own insurance, as he had a contract with them that obligates both parties to do certain things, but he has no such agreement with the tp insurer.
Fastpedeller said:
Murghee said:
True and i did contact dvla but they said as its not diagnosed or in the middle of treatment i can drive but all that was over the phone so no proof.
Maybe there is proof? most organisations record all calls so they can refer back to the call if it suits them, so there may be a recorded call.julian64 said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
julian64 said:
I suspect you have a problem. The insurance company have a reason not to pay you anything. You were driving against medical advice while awaiting the outcome of sleep clinic investigations, and I assume you hadn't informed the DVLA.
So what? He could have been driving whilst drunk, in a car with no insurance, tax and MOT, with a dead body in the boot and acting as a getaway driver in a bank heist. But he has been injured by a negligent third party, and therefore he has a valid claim against the third party's insurer for injury. He has no contract with the insurance company, so he is under no obligation to them to not drive when he's advised not to drive. He might have had a problem with his own insurance, as he had a contract with them that obligates both parties to do certain things, but he has no such agreement with the tp insurer.
Alternatively, he may have a problem as first mentioned
There are punishments for driving when you shouldn't drive, and being crashed into by an idiot who isn't looking where they are going isn't one of them. So seeing as that's what has happened, the OP is entitled to injury compensation from the idiot's insurer.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Murghee said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
julian64 said:
I suspect you have a problem. The insurance company have a reason not to pay you anything. You were driving against medical advice while awaiting the outcome of sleep clinic investigations, and I assume you hadn't informed the DVLA.
So what? He could have been driving whilst drunk, in a car with no insurance, tax and MOT, with a dead body in the boot and acting as a getaway driver in a bank heist. But he has been injured by a negligent third party, and therefore he has a valid claim against the third party's insurer for injury. He has no contract with the insurance company, so he is under no obligation to them to not drive when he's advised not to drive. He might have had a problem with his own insurance, as he had a contract with them that obligates both parties to do certain things, but he has no such agreement with the tp insurer.
If things go south i wonder if ill have to pay legal fees and pay the car element back etc etc which is the main worry
paintman said:
The only place you're going to get the answer is your insurers.
No, lots of people know what the law of tort is. This has nothing to do with his insurers, it's between the OP and the other driver's insurers. He can get the answer on here, and indeed, I've given it to him.
Murghee said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Murghee said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
julian64 said:
I suspect you have a problem. The insurance company have a reason not to pay you anything. You were driving against medical advice while awaiting the outcome of sleep clinic investigations, and I assume you hadn't informed the DVLA.
So what? He could have been driving whilst drunk, in a car with no insurance, tax and MOT, with a dead body in the boot and acting as a getaway driver in a bank heist. But he has been injured by a negligent third party, and therefore he has a valid claim against the third party's insurer for injury. He has no contract with the insurance company, so he is under no obligation to them to not drive when he's advised not to drive. He might have had a problem with his own insurance, as he had a contract with them that obligates both parties to do certain things, but he has no such agreement with the tp insurer.
If things go south i wonder if ill have to pay legal fees and pay the car element back etc etc which is the main worry
As I said, there are set punishments for doing the wrong thing , but being crashed into by morons isn't on the list.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
paintman said:
The only place you're going to get the answer is your insurers.
No, lots of people know what the law of tort is. This has nothing to do with his insurers, it's between the OP and the other driver's insurers. He can get the answer on here, and indeed, I've given it to him.
Would you allow the medical company to view 10 years worth of records knowing that one line from a doctor may cause a whole of issues? Im a worrier so i think of all the possible scenarious that could happen so eventhough i may have a claim it maybe less stressful to call the whole claim off.
Murghee said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
paintman said:
The only place you're going to get the answer is your insurers.
No, lots of people know what the law of tort is. This has nothing to do with his insurers, it's between the OP and the other driver's insurers. He can get the answer on here, and indeed, I've given it to him.
Would you allow the medical company to view 10 years worth of records knowing that one line from a doctor may cause a whole of issues? Im a worrier so i think of all the possible scenarious that could happen so eventhough i may have a claim it maybe less stressful to call the whole claim off.
king idiot you insure, here's my bank details for you to transfer the compensation payment into." Or words to that effect.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Murghee said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
paintman said:
The only place you're going to get the answer is your insurers.
No, lots of people know what the law of tort is. This has nothing to do with his insurers, it's between the OP and the other driver's insurers. He can get the answer on here, and indeed, I've given it to him.
Would you allow the medical company to view 10 years worth of records knowing that one line from a doctor may cause a whole of issues? Im a worrier so i think of all the possible scenarious that could happen so eventhough i may have a claim it maybe less stressful to call the whole claim off.
king idiot you insure, here's my bank details for you to transfer the compensation payment into." Or words to that effect.
I suspect there may be difficulties here. There are 2 things going on.
The medical standards refer to obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome (OSAS), generally taken as sleep apnoea (OSA) with daytime sleepiness, it's a small, pedantic but very important point - the daytime sleepiness is the crucial factor between them. DVLA is not so concerned about OSA on its own. The Government A to Z guide states it is concerned about moderate to severe OSAS. With OSAS providing the sleepiness aspect is controlled driving is allowed, this often involves ventilation (CPAP) or other measures. The main focus will be around lorry driving rather than car.
However the problem is likely to be that a registered medical professional has specifically advised not driving and documented that fact, that will cause issues as it is likely to be seen by the company that advice has been disregarded. The treating Dr can give this advice on ceasing driving (likewise with re-starting under section 88 cover) as there is likely to be a delay in getting a decision on the licence from DVLA. I suspect they are going to trawl through notes for reasons now.
It may be worth having a conversation with your GP.
The medical standards refer to obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome (OSAS), generally taken as sleep apnoea (OSA) with daytime sleepiness, it's a small, pedantic but very important point - the daytime sleepiness is the crucial factor between them. DVLA is not so concerned about OSA on its own. The Government A to Z guide states it is concerned about moderate to severe OSAS. With OSAS providing the sleepiness aspect is controlled driving is allowed, this often involves ventilation (CPAP) or other measures. The main focus will be around lorry driving rather than car.
However the problem is likely to be that a registered medical professional has specifically advised not driving and documented that fact, that will cause issues as it is likely to be seen by the company that advice has been disregarded. The treating Dr can give this advice on ceasing driving (likewise with re-starting under section 88 cover) as there is likely to be a delay in getting a decision on the licence from DVLA. I suspect they are going to trawl through notes for reasons now.
It may be worth having a conversation with your GP.
Bone Rat said:
I suspect there may be difficulties here. There are 2 things going on.
The medical standards refer to obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome (OSAS), generally taken as sleep apnoea (OSA) with daytime sleepiness, it's a small, pedantic but very important point - the daytime sleepiness is the crucial factor between them. DVLA is not so concerned about OSA on its own. The Government A to Z guide states it is concerned about moderate to severe OSAS. With OSAS providing the sleepiness aspect is controlled driving is allowed, this often involves ventilation (CPAP) or other measures. The main focus will be around lorry driving rather than car.
However the problem is likely to be that a registered medical professional has specifically advised not driving and documented that fact, that will cause issues as it is likely to be seen by the company that advice has been disregarded. The treating Dr can give this advice on ceasing driving (likewise with re-starting under section 88 cover) as there is likely to be a delay in getting a decision on the licence from DVLA. I suspect they are going to trawl through notes for reasons now.
It may be worth having a conversation with your GP.
And how does any of that effect his claim against a negligent third party for injuries caused? The medical standards refer to obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome (OSAS), generally taken as sleep apnoea (OSA) with daytime sleepiness, it's a small, pedantic but very important point - the daytime sleepiness is the crucial factor between them. DVLA is not so concerned about OSA on its own. The Government A to Z guide states it is concerned about moderate to severe OSAS. With OSAS providing the sleepiness aspect is controlled driving is allowed, this often involves ventilation (CPAP) or other measures. The main focus will be around lorry driving rather than car.
However the problem is likely to be that a registered medical professional has specifically advised not driving and documented that fact, that will cause issues as it is likely to be seen by the company that advice has been disregarded. The treating Dr can give this advice on ceasing driving (likewise with re-starting under section 88 cover) as there is likely to be a delay in getting a decision on the licence from DVLA. I suspect they are going to trawl through notes for reasons now.
It may be worth having a conversation with your GP.
Murghee said:
Haha yes....one last point wouldnt the medical company go back to my insurer and say your driver shouldnt have been driving due to this line in the medical notes so lets claim all our time from your driver and fine them for not having insurance....hypothetical scenarios is my speciality unfortunately ??
Won't happen. And insurance companies cannot fine people for not having insurance. I think that's a court's job. Let's take this nonsense a step further. You're breaking lockdown rules, by going round to a mate's when you should've stayed at home. And whilst driving there, you're hit head on by an cement mixer who veers on to your side of the road because he's not concentrating on his job of driving the mixer, and you are paralysed for life.
Is anyone seriously saying "hang on mate, you have a big problem here, because you should not have been driving???"
Really!!! Is that how people think the law of tort works?
This isn't Rumpole of the Bailey stuff. This is day one of law school, lesson 1, snails in ginger beer, carbolic smoke balls, Donohue v Stephenson. This isn't advanced law, these are questions on Tipping Point!!!
Edited by TwigtheWonderkid on Tuesday 23 March 14:42
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Bone Rat said:
I suspect there may be difficulties here. There are 2 things going on.
The medical standards refer to obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome (OSAS), generally taken as sleep apnoea (OSA) with daytime sleepiness, it's a small, pedantic but very important point - the daytime sleepiness is the crucial factor between them. DVLA is not so concerned about OSA on its own. The Government A to Z guide states it is concerned about moderate to severe OSAS. With OSAS providing the sleepiness aspect is controlled driving is allowed, this often involves ventilation (CPAP) or other measures. The main focus will be around lorry driving rather than car.
However the problem is likely to be that a registered medical professional has specifically advised not driving and documented that fact, that will cause issues as it is likely to be seen by the company that advice has been disregarded. The treating Dr can give this advice on ceasing driving (likewise with re-starting under section 88 cover) as there is likely to be a delay in getting a decision on the licence from DVLA. I suspect they are going to trawl through notes for reasons now.
It may be worth having a conversation with your GP.
And how does any of that effect his claim against a negligent third party for injuries caused? The medical standards refer to obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome (OSAS), generally taken as sleep apnoea (OSA) with daytime sleepiness, it's a small, pedantic but very important point - the daytime sleepiness is the crucial factor between them. DVLA is not so concerned about OSA on its own. The Government A to Z guide states it is concerned about moderate to severe OSAS. With OSAS providing the sleepiness aspect is controlled driving is allowed, this often involves ventilation (CPAP) or other measures. The main focus will be around lorry driving rather than car.
However the problem is likely to be that a registered medical professional has specifically advised not driving and documented that fact, that will cause issues as it is likely to be seen by the company that advice has been disregarded. The treating Dr can give this advice on ceasing driving (likewise with re-starting under section 88 cover) as there is likely to be a delay in getting a decision on the licence from DVLA. I suspect they are going to trawl through notes for reasons now.
It may be worth having a conversation with your GP.
Bone Rat said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Bone Rat said:
I suspect there may be difficulties here. There are 2 things going on.
The medical standards refer to obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome (OSAS), generally taken as sleep apnoea (OSA) with daytime sleepiness, it's a small, pedantic but very important point - the daytime sleepiness is the crucial factor between them. DVLA is not so concerned about OSA on its own. The Government A to Z guide states it is concerned about moderate to severe OSAS. With OSAS providing the sleepiness aspect is controlled driving is allowed, this often involves ventilation (CPAP) or other measures. The main focus will be around lorry driving rather than car.
However the problem is likely to be that a registered medical professional has specifically advised not driving and documented that fact, that will cause issues as it is likely to be seen by the company that advice has been disregarded. The treating Dr can give this advice on ceasing driving (likewise with re-starting under section 88 cover) as there is likely to be a delay in getting a decision on the licence from DVLA. I suspect they are going to trawl through notes for reasons now.
It may be worth having a conversation with your GP.
And how does any of that effect his claim against a negligent third party for injuries caused? The medical standards refer to obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome (OSAS), generally taken as sleep apnoea (OSA) with daytime sleepiness, it's a small, pedantic but very important point - the daytime sleepiness is the crucial factor between them. DVLA is not so concerned about OSA on its own. The Government A to Z guide states it is concerned about moderate to severe OSAS. With OSAS providing the sleepiness aspect is controlled driving is allowed, this often involves ventilation (CPAP) or other measures. The main focus will be around lorry driving rather than car.
However the problem is likely to be that a registered medical professional has specifically advised not driving and documented that fact, that will cause issues as it is likely to be seen by the company that advice has been disregarded. The treating Dr can give this advice on ceasing driving (likewise with re-starting under section 88 cover) as there is likely to be a delay in getting a decision on the licence from DVLA. I suspect they are going to trawl through notes for reasons now.
It may be worth having a conversation with your GP.
Also OP, it might not be as simple as just withdrawing the claim. Depending on what funding is in place, and what disbursements/expenses your solicitor has incurred could mean that you are then liable for these if you just cancel it. There is nothing to hide from the medical evidence, it will not prejudice your position in regards to this claim. The only time (save for exceptional circumstances) that medical history can impact a claim is, if for example, you had a history of back/neck pain and were then injured in a RTA - the award can then be reduced as the pre-existing medical condition might have contributed to the RTA injuries.
Thanks all for the advice honestly thought this post would be washed away but i got responses within minutes.
Only way forward is to let them have my records and see what happens. I know for a fact they will bring up what the doctor advised because id do the same if i was insurer. Just got to handle it and give my reasons as to why i carried on driving.
Also the doctor who spoke to me on the day of the rta which was the day after i was advised not to drive didnt mention anything about why i was driving. They looked at my injuries and told me to be on my way wouldnt/shouldnt they have flagged it up?
Guess im clutching at straws. I mean it i did have a moderate or severe case of OSA i wouldnt be driving now but then the argument could be at the time you told the doctor no one knew what degree of osa you had hence why you shouldnt have been driving.
I will update all once the medical people get back to me after they have my records as like i said i havnt seen this example before. Plenty of examples of where people are driving when they have been diagnosed with a medical condition and theh shouldnt be driving but my case is before any diagnosis or even been checked physically.
Only way forward is to let them have my records and see what happens. I know for a fact they will bring up what the doctor advised because id do the same if i was insurer. Just got to handle it and give my reasons as to why i carried on driving.
Also the doctor who spoke to me on the day of the rta which was the day after i was advised not to drive didnt mention anything about why i was driving. They looked at my injuries and told me to be on my way wouldnt/shouldnt they have flagged it up?
Guess im clutching at straws. I mean it i did have a moderate or severe case of OSA i wouldnt be driving now but then the argument could be at the time you told the doctor no one knew what degree of osa you had hence why you shouldnt have been driving.
I will update all once the medical people get back to me after they have my records as like i said i havnt seen this example before. Plenty of examples of where people are driving when they have been diagnosed with a medical condition and theh shouldnt be driving but my case is before any diagnosis or even been checked physically.
Murghee said:
I know for a fact they will bring up what the doctor advised because id do the same if i was insurer.
Are you an experienced injury claims handler. Because if not, why would you think they'd do the same as what you would do? They know about this stuff, and you don't, or you wouldn't be asking on here for advice. . Murghee said:
Just got to handle it and give my reasons as to why i carried on driving.
Nope, you don't. Even if they ask, which they may not. If they do ask, you could answer "because I'm a dangerous lawbreaker with no concern for the safety of others." And they will still have to settle your claim. Murghee.
PLEASE listen to what Twig says. There are few on here who are genuinely experienced with the advice they offer.
Off the top of my head, if it’s insurance then Twig, parking Steve, motoring law AGT and most other law BV72.
There are probably a few more but these guys know their stuff.
PLEASE listen to what Twig says. There are few on here who are genuinely experienced with the advice they offer.
Off the top of my head, if it’s insurance then Twig, parking Steve, motoring law AGT and most other law BV72.
There are probably a few more but these guys know their stuff.
Murghee said:
True first thing i thought of bit couldnt remember the time or who i spoke to which is what they need to listen to the call....think as i was in a panic about not driving i lost my logical brain of recording information and in this day and age everything needs to be written down on paper, as del boy says what cant speak cant lie!
I've no idea how good or bad the DVLA's systems are but the call should be associated with your drivers record. That or they should be able to find it using the number you called from. If they won't play ball make a DSAR request asking for copies of call recordings.https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/driver...
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff