to report ndn driving against doctor's advice

[willowcatkin111]

especially since she just crashed into our wall. Worried what/who else she might hit!

Apparently the doctor told DVLA and they have told her she can continue to drive until she surrenders her licence or they revoke it but her insurance may not be valid Not worried about the wall, is covered on house insurance, but am worried like the rest about 'collateral damage'. She has not driven since then anyway and we are keeping the gate on our shared entrance shut so she will struggle to drive out

you should report. In Scotland we have had a few instances where drivers have passed out at the wheel and killed people - most recent Glasgow bin lorry where 6 people died. In each case the driver had a condition that meant they should not drive

You do need to report. The DVLA may not have revoked her license yet but it is illegal to drive without valid insurance.

Apparently the doctor told DVLA and they have told her she can continue to drive until she surrenders her licence or they revoke it but her insurance may not be valid - well that sounds like a load of codswallop. Report it.

I had this with my mum after her stroke. She'd been recommended to not drive pending assessment at a disability driving centre. But she was driving anyway and would not listen to reason (heavy pressure) from me.

When I tried to report her I discovered it was a really grey area- that her insurance MAY be invalid, but might not be. The DVLA were not helpful. The only thing that worked in her case was me writing to her GP who then wrote to her to be clear that if she was driving it was against medical advice. And I don't think he had to do that. She seemed to stop then.

3 failed assessments at the driving centre later, I finally persuaded her to sell the car...

The DVLA don't let people choose whether they are safe to drive or not. It may be that the DVLA are still considering her medical records and haven't reached any decision yet (this can take months). However, if she surrenders her licence she will be able to drive again sooner than if she waits for it to be formally revoked. But this is all irrelevant as her own Dr says she is unfit to drive. Whether the insurance is valid or not, she could easily have a terrible accident with awful consequences. She should still be reported to the DVLA just to be on the safe side.

However, if she surrenders her licence she will be able to drive again sooner than if she waits for it to be formally revoked.

Why is that?

I think it is quite a grey area. When you inform the DVLA of a medical condition you are allowed to continue driving while they make the decision, if doctors say that you are fit to do that. However, you may not have valid insurance as there is sometimes a clause stating that you have informed DVLA of medical conditions and they have deemed you fit to drive.

However, if she surrenders her licence she will be able to drive again sooner than if she waits for it to be formally revoked. This assumes the DVLA decide she is unfit to drive. If she voluntarily surrenders her licence now, when the DVLA come to review her case and decide if/when to return her licence she will be able to drive whilst they review her case and make the decision (provided her Dr has said she is fit). If she waits for the DVLA to revoke her licence, she is not allowed to drive whilst they review her case (no matter what her Dr has said). She has to wait until the DVLA make their final decision. These types of decisions/reviews take around 12 weeks, so many people decide that its better to surrender the licence initially rather than have to wait all this extra time (ie if the initial ban is a year, the 12 weeks "decision making" is in addition to the 12 months). Every week counts!

I know the above is completely illogical, but its the way it is!!

You can report it to the DVLA. She should have filled in the form which tells them the dr has told you no driving.

DH has a heart condition and has had it for a number of years (10 +). Up until recently he has never been told not to drive. His condition has not changed but a new doctor recommended that he didn't drive.

Whilst I agree with previous posters in that it sounds like someone who has just had brain surgery shouldn't drive, I'm not sure that one doctor's opinion is necessarily the final say in the matter.

FWIW I've driven into walls and there's nothing wrong with my health.

FWIW I've driven into walls and there's nothing wrong with my health

No, just your driving.

Whilst I agree with previous posters in that it sounds like someone who has just had brain surgery shouldn't drive, I'm not sure that one doctor's opinion is necessarily the final say in the matter

The Dr doesn't have the final say. When the DVLA are informed, they take the decisions to revoke/restore the licence based on the advice of their medical experts. These are in house medics who look at the info supplied by the person's Dr, but this info is just a recommendation and the medical panel have the final say. This is why the DVLA have to be informed and non-informants face the risk of £1,000 fine

When (on my consultants advice) I informed the DVLA of my Glaucoma, they arranged a medical at the local hospital (it was the same unit that I attend as a patient). I had a specialised field vision test, and was passed fit to drive - no restrictions.

What would've happened if someone was other side of wall. Report.

OP, I think you should claim for the wall off her insurance, either car insurance or house insurance.

She's the one who damaged it, after all. Why should you have to pay (or your insurance)?

She doesn't claim off anyinsurance. She sends the bill to the person who caused the damage. It's up to the driver whether she pays herself or sends the bill to her own insurer.
But she should not have been driving and her insurer my well refuse. That leaves the bill with the driver.