Glasgow bin lorry crash

[Luckypants]

Well I agree with the broad sentiment expressed that nothing we can do will change what happened to those 6 people and also that maybe the driver's medical history may not have come out without immunity from prosecution.

The massive "BUT" for me is that if no prosecution is made, this will encourage others to lie about their medical history and another tragedy like this will occur. The perception is that no matter what you do, there are no consequences.

Sure, we can improve recruitment processes, tighten up medical checks but the process relies on the applicant being honest. There should be consequences to not being honest and where the results of your lies can be or (worse) are as serious as this, those consequences should also be serious.

[Bibio]

put yourself in his shoes. he was found fit to drive by medical practitioners and as such he placed his trust in them. he more than likely has a mortgage, credit cards and a family to support. what would you do give up your job when you were found fit to continue your duties?

it can happen to anybody at any time as any of us can have an underlying medical condition that we dont know about. it took me to collapse in a hospital car park going for tests for them to discover i had serious heart disease which required immediate surgery and resulted in a 5 graft bypass, prior to this i was 'fit as a fiddle' according to my doctor.

[Luckypants]

He may have been deemed fit to work - but as what? I don't know if he was passed fit to drive heavy vehicles or passed fit to do office work, I have not seen reports to that effect.

I do know that he was asked point blank on the application if he had history of feinting or black-outs. He could have been truthful and pointed out his fitness to work report from the Dr. saying he was fit to drive again (if he had one) and made an honest application. He chose to do wrong and lie. There was a clear reason for the question.

Yes he has to earn a living, but if not able to get a job as a driver due to medical history, then I'm sorry he should have looked for alternative work. I know that is hard-faced of me, I know that it would be hard to accept and hard to find that work. Finding a new job is hard, I know.

Now there is the inescapable fact he lost control of his vehicle and killed 6 people, when in all probability he should not have been driving.

[Bibio]

i'm not condoning what he done faaaaarrrrrr from it and i think what he done was disgraceful, i was pointing out that it could happen to any one of us. personally like you LP i would not have applied for the job knowing that there was a possibility of me blacking out at the wheel. in saying that he could have done the same driving his car.

should he have been prosecuted and put in jail.. yes.

off topic...
did you know that some methadone users are allowed to drive...

from the Gov website https://www.gov.uk/current-medical-g...ditions-m-to-o
Group 1 entitlement ODL – car, motorcycle

Persistent use of, or dependence on these substances, confirmed by medical enquiry, will lead to licence refusal or revocation until a minimum one year period free of such use has been attained. Independent medical assessment and urine screen arranged by DVLA, may be required. In addition favourable consultant or specialist report may be required on reapplication.


Applicants or drivers complying fully with a consultant supervised oral Methadone maintenance programme may be licensed, subject to favourable assessment and, normally, annual medical review. Applicants or drivers on an oral buprenorphine programme may be considered applying the same criteria. There should be no evidence of continuing use of other substances, including cannabis.

i have watched people jump out of their cars go into the chemist and get their 'medication' then jump back in their cars. shocking thing is a few of them looked very respectable people with i would guess good jobs judging but their attire and cars they were driving.

[Littlepeahead]

If someone has a history of blacking out should they ever be allowed to drive again?

So we know of one orger who currently has no licence due to medical reasons who feels that because he hasn't had a loss of consciousness for 2 years he should get his licence back. However, there's no guarantee that he won't suddenly blackout again without warning, and so should he be allowed to drive? A motorbike may be smaller than a bin lorry but if it careered into a crowd of people with an unconscious rider it could cause death and injury.

And people take medication all the time that probably affects them as badly as drinking a couple of pints or more, with printed warnings on the pack, yet they get in their cars and drive knowing they probably shouldn't. I won't drive if I've taken codeine but I know plenty of people who do.

And eye sight deteriorates - I know people who have never had an eye test so how do they know 25 years after passing their test that their site is still OK to drive? It's a gradual thing so you don't notice how bad it's got. Should eye tests be compulsory?

Sadly this one incident won't change a lot of the issues that need to be addressed.

Originally Posted by Littlepeahead

If someone has a history of blacking out should they ever be allowed to drive again?

They're not, at least not until they've been cleared by a doctor and haven't had a blackout for an extended period of time and are considered no more at risk than someone who never had one.

Of course there's no system in place where anyone other than the driver notifies the DVLA so in practice its a trust system. Same with eyesight and pretty much all other medical conditions.

Plenty of older people know full well their eyesight and reactions aren't up to scratch yet they drive anyway and there isn't really any deterrent, if they lose their licence they'll only be back where they would be if the surrendered it and nobody ever thinks they'll kill someone else with the risks they take otherwise we'd all travel the speed limit all the time.

Seems that the driver asked for his licence back in April. Not entirely sure that's a sign of a remorseful man.

[NTECUK]

Two year's is rather long.
But then its a medical call on someone that you hope the Dr is qualified to judge the case.
But
There's plenty of medically fit people who have been distracted or by other means not in complete control of a vehicle that kill and maim.
Should they be treated differently?

[Littlepeahead]

Originally Posted by NTECUK

Two year's is rather long.
But then its a medical call on someone that you hope the Dr is qualified to judge the case.
But
There's plenty of medically fit people who have been distracted or by other means not in complete control of a vehicle that kill and maim.
Should they be treated differently?

As Spank said, in some cases they ask people to wait a certain amount of time, but if the doctors don't know what caused the blackout in the first place and they can't say they have cured the problem then the DVLA don't feel that that driver should get their licence back at all which I agree with. Size of vehicle makes little difference. I wonder what the situation was with this driver?

I wonder how many people here would make the right call if they were faced with losing their job and transport (and hobby) over a potentially very slim chance they might have a blackout sometime in the future when they may or may not be driving.


not too sure I would, I'd like to think so but not sure, job gone, transport gone, potentially home gone(if I can't get another job)...