Issue On Post-Being Done For D&D

[DTCwordfan]

A colleague of mine phoned me this afternoon to say that she has lost her job - this meaning I likely will have to cover in the interim until a replacement is found. However, I can hardly believe what she told me.

I knew that she as done for drinking and driving 2 years ago and did her 'time' off the road.
The DVLA had given her license back on a 1 year conditional.
Apparently they contacted her and asked her if she had drunk anything - she was completely, perhaps too, honest and said , 'yes, over Xmas, half a bottle of wine - but I didn't drive'.
Now they have said that they aren't renewing her driving licence and have revoked it.

Is this possible - do they have that right to hold back her licence? Even if she hasn't driven under the influence....there was, apparently, no action from the police in pulling her in and testing her, never mind blood work. surely the DVLA is way out of line on this?

My advice would be a lawyer's letter to DVLA and backed up by a doctor's letter - but what's your 'learned' view?

[bobbinwales]

Sounds odd- more like a misunderstanding to me or storys got mis-translated somewhere?

[jno]

what was the condition on which the licence was given back to her?

[Buenchico]

My guess (and it's definitely only a guess) is that the lady was classed as a 'high risk offender'. (See this link: https://www.gov.uk/driving-disqualifications/disqualification-for-drink-driving ).

Then, during the medical assessment prior to getting her licence back, she admitted that she'd had a problem with alcohol addiction, with her licence only then being returned to her on the basis that she agreed to totally refrain from drinking alcohol.

However it still seems rather odd to me!

[DTCwordfan]

I agree about it being a little odd and whether there is a condition about staying dry - apparently she was twice the limit over the first time around....however, a couple of glasses for christmas and not driving does seen 'harsh'....can they legally impose such conditions about remaining dry at all times?

[wolf63]

It sounds like you only got part of the story.

Look on the bright side- extra £££ for you. I didn't know you were working!

[DTCwordfan]

I don't want to work this much as its in the evening - I do it in part, yes for the extra £££ but also to keep the mind ticking over as to what has happened to the mater.

[New Judge]

The DVLA can revoke (or refuse to reinstate) the licence of anybody whom they believe may be medically unfit to drive. This, of course, includes those whom they suspect of being alcohol dependent.

She would only be a "high risk offender" if her conviction was on the basis of either (a) her recording more than 2.5 times the legal limit, (b) if she refused to provide a specimen or (c) if she had a second alcohol related offence within 10 years of the first.

The route to appeal this is via the Magistrates' Court. The DVLA should write to your friend giving her the reasons for the revocation, and whether and when she can reapply for her licence. If she wants to appeal this she must request a hearing in the Magistrates' Court. These are often tricky matters to challenge and, depending on the DVLA's reasoning, she may need to employ a specialist solicitor or barrister to put her case.

As above, there may be more to this than she is telling you because if she recorded twice the legal limit she would not be classified as a "High Risk Offender" and in normal circumstances the DVLA would not take any follow up action. Even if they did, I very much doubt that her saying "I had a few drinks over Christmas" would cause them to revoke her licence on that basis alone. In any case she must get the written confirmation of her revocation from the DVLA together with their reasons before she can proceed.

[barry1010]

Why has she lost her job? Was she working during her ban?

[Beaupeep]

I think you need to be aware that the DVLA have employed retired GP's for many years on very lucrative salaries in order to vet such matters.
My own GP, spent 14 years with them and said he loved working there for 40 hours each week, no weekends and interviewing about half a dozen applications for return of licences mainly by phone. It was a doddle for the £100k they paid him annually.
Fighting the system like this is futile. Lawyers aren't qualified to challenge the decision of a long standing GP employed by the DVLA and neither are the successors to that GP in general practice. Exactly what kind of doctor could challenge such a decision better than a DVLA employed doctor? Would his expert witness stand up in court and say the DVLA doctors were unfair and biased? Has he any idea of the cost if he ever found such an expert? Have you ever heard of a successful appeal in such circumstances?

[barry1010]

Beaupeep, this little old lady took on the might of the DVLA and won. Many people have successfully challenged decisions made by the DVLA, I know of 2 diabetics that did
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/road-and-rail-transport/11358734/DVLA-suffers-High-Court-defeat-for-revoking-elderly-womans-licence-based-on-age-alone.html

[New Judge]

Quite so, barry. Many State organisations suffer from appallingly poor decision making and the DVLA is no exception. Regrettably, attitudes like that displayed by Beaupeep do nothing to encourage them to change. DTC's colleague must await her revocation letter before deciding how to proceed.

[DTCwordfan]

Many thanks for your responses and esp. NJ's lucid explanation. I shall probe further with her.

As to Barry's remark, we all need vehicles to get to clients - and at odd hours, particularly in getting back to our homes....

[barry1010]

DTC, I just assumed she had been able to work during her ban and was confused as to why she lost her job this time round.
If she has grounds to appeal she should consider doing so