Licence Loss Due To Self-Declaration

Convicted Driver Insurance

birt

Member
Hi all'

Just after a bit of advice. When I had my HGV Medical for my 65th birthday I self-declared that I drink on average 12 pints of beer/24 units a week - which is the amount I've been declaring for the last 35 years. This lead to my licence, including my car and motorcycle entitlement being revoked with no warning. I have never been convicted of drink-driving, and have only a couple of minor speeding convictions from 20 years ago. I have 3 maximum no-claims bonuses.

I've contacted my GP, who says there has been contact from the DVLA, and that he told them that I'd declared to him that I drink an average 14 pints of beer a week. I had a blood test for my birthday which showed full liver function etc. I'm in fairly good health, and ran two half-marathons last year. I asked my doctor about having a Blood CDT test, without changing my drinking habits, to determine exactly how bad my drinking problem was, but he refused, saying my only option was to give up drinking completely (he does seem to be a bit of an anti-drinking zealot..).

This has all come as a bit of a shock TBH, and everybody I know seems a bit incredulous that I could lose my licence without warning for what I thought was moderate social drinking. I've given up on getting my HGV licence back, but with two sports cars and two classic motorcycles it would be nice to be able to drive again sometime in the future if I don't have to give up my entire social life.

I thought the best way to do this would be to take a series of CDT tests and get my drinking down to a level that doesn't effect the levels - so I have a paper trail of results rather than relying on self-declaration. But I assume the DVLA will only take any notice of a test they have ordered rather than one I've ordered myself. Any other advice would be welcome
 
You will get your licence back, however, you are just going to have to play ball with the DVLA to do so.

The current guidelines from the UK Chief Medical Officer are 14 units a week so at 24 you are somewhat over that, even if you, and perhaps many others, do consider it to be part of your normal routine.

It is odd that DVLA have suddenly made an issue of it but it’s somewhat of a moot point now as they’ve talked with your GP and assessed there’s an issue. DVLA see things in black or white, there’s never a grey area.

Provided it has been revoked for alcohol misuse as opposed to dependency, you will need a minimum of 6 months of controlled drinking (CDT 2.2% or less providing you have no history of dependence) or abstinence, and normalisation of blood parameters to get your car and motorcycle entitlement back.

You are correct in your assessment that you will not be able to solely rely on third party tests you’ve arranged by yourself. Albeit you are perfectly entitled to get one for your own knowledge to see what your levels currently are.

Chin up! You will get there
 
You've fallen foul of the classic trap doctors/DVLC set for you. Even if your drinking is perfectly normal, you are perfectly healthy and you never drink and drive, admitting to a doctor that you drink over 14 units a week (or whatever the limit is this week) risks your licence.

In fact it's best to not admitting to drinking at all to a doctor or the DVLA (unless it's a glass of wine at Christmas).

If everyone was honest and DVLA found out about their drinking, 60% of drivers in the country would be banned and the country would grind to a standstill.

Has your licence been revoked for 6 months or 12 months?
 
Bad_karma said:
It is odd that DVLA have suddenly made an issue of it but it’s somewhat of a moot point now as they’ve talked with your GP and assessed there’s an issue. DVLA see things in black or white, there’s never a grey area.
Click to expand...

Respectfully, a moot point is a debatable point, unless you're American, in which case it means 'academic'.
 
Hobgoblin said:
You've fallen foul of the classic trap doctors/DVLC set for you. Even if your drinking is perfectly normal, you are perfectly healthy and you never drink and drive, admitting to a doctor that you drink over 14 units a week (or whatever the limit is this week) risks your licence.

In fact it's best to not admitting to drinking at all to a doctor or the DVLA (unless it's a glass of wine at Christmas).

If everyone was honest and DVLA found out about their drinking, 60% of drivers in the country would be banned and the country would grind to a standstill.

Has your licence been revoked for 6 months or 12 months?
Click to expand...

I actually think the percentage of Brits who drink above 14 units a week is much higher than 60%. There are a couple of excellent documentaries about alcohol misuse in the UK - one was covered by Ross Kemp, while the other was covered by Adrian Chiles from the One Show a few years ago.

Many people have come to this forum over the years who have been revoked not banned and not guilty of criminal offences. The only mistake was innocently disclosing they drank a little too much and this had no impact on their lifestyle. Sadly, those people ended up having their driving licence taken off them.

I actually know someone who is presently going through a bad time due to a separation with a long term partner and he is drinking quite heavily. I have actually advised him to avoid visiting a GP in case his drinking habits are flagged up and the DVLA get wind of it. I am satisfied he isn’t drink driving or putting himself or others at risk, but if he did seek professional help, this might do more harm to him if he can’t drive and thus can’t do his job, pay his bills, etc.

It is very sad when you have to think like this, but the DVLA and may GPs are drawing a line in the sand and forcing good honest decent people to be deceitful and not seek help when they should.

CJ
 
Hobgoblin said:
Respectfully, a moot point is a debatable point, unless you're American, in which case it means 'academic'.
Click to expand...
Yes. A moot point is something that could be debated but for which the debate would reach no consensus, be useless since usually this issue had been decided or such debate would lack practical value.
 
Hobgoblin said:
You've fallen foul of the classic trap doctors/DVLC set for you. Even if your drinking is perfectly normal, you are perfectly healthy and you never drink and drive, admitting to a doctor that you drink over 14 units a week (or whatever the limit is this week) risks your licence.

In fact it's best to not admitting to drinking at all to a doctor or the DVLA (unless it's a glass of wine at Christmas).

If everyone was honest and DVLA found out about their drinking, 60% of drivers in the country would be banned and the country would grind to a standstill.

Has your licence been revoked for 6 months or 12 months?
Click to expand...
Car 6 months, HGV 12 months, but I assume with the DVLA it will take a lot longer than that.

Asking around it seems my GP has a bit of a reputation for this. I'm thinking of using my new status as a pedestrian to change to a different GP nearer to me. I assume that I would still be able to get my medical records from the new doctor. My present doctor warned me not to try to obtain the facts of my case from the DVLA under FOI, which made me think a bit.. He also "doesn't believe in" the blood CDT test and says I will need total abstinence, rather than controlled drinking, to get my licence back. To be honest I'd rather give up driving for good.

The 14 unit limit seems to be a bit arbitrary. Almost as if people who claimed to be meeting the old guidelines obviously weren't so they changed the guidelines.

Could I spend one week drinking my normal 12-14 pints of beer and then drink only tap water for the next week and still claim to be doing controlled drinking? I find restricting my intake very difficult because one pint makes me want another, up to four or so. So easier to go out with no intention of drinking

I have been approached by a journalist wanting to do a "sad face" story in a national paper, but doubt it would do me any good.
I really would like to have a blood CDT test done, without changing my lifestyle, just to find out how bad my problem actually is, but paying £100 plus having to spend the day on a bus/train to get to anywhere, for a test that can be ignored at will by both my GP and the DVLA is a bit steep for me ATM.
 
Bad_karma said:
Yes. A moot point is something that could be debated but for which the debate would reach no consensus, be useless since usually this issue had been decided or such debate would lack practical value.
Click to expand...

That seems more like the American meaning of the word to me. The OED says 'a point that is open to argument, debatable or uncertain.'
 
Hobgoblin said:
That seems more like the American meaning of the word to me. The OED says 'a point that is open to argument, debatable or uncertain.'
Click to expand...
Well that is the definition that I have always known and used.

An issue regarded as potentially debatable, but no longer practically applicable. (Wikipedia)
A moot point is a point, an aspect, or a topic that is no longer relevant or can no longer be questioned or debated. (Grammarly)

From Phrases.org.uk “What’s the meaning of the phrase ‘Moot point’? An irrelevant argument. Some may disagree with the above meaning and argue that it means 'a point open to debate', rather than 'a point not worth debating'. That former meaning was certainly the correct one when the term was first coined, but that's going back a while. The change in meaning has come about following the introduction of 'moot courts', which are session where law students train for their profession by arguing hypothetical cases, that is, 'moot points'. The lack of any substantive outcome from these theoretical cases has led to the 'unimportant/not worth discussing' meaning of 'moot point', which is what many people accept today.”

Undoubtedly there is debate over its meaning and perhaps the language which I use has been influenced by such Americanisms or American acquaintances I have. Regardless, it seems pointless to even have the discussion of something so trivial, not least on this specific thread but on the website as a whole.
 
birt said:
Car 6 months, HGV 12 months, but I assume with the DVLA it will take a lot longer than that.

Asking around it seems my GP has a bit of a reputation for this. I'm thinking of using my new status as a pedestrian to change to a different GP nearer to me. I assume that I would still be able to get my medical records from the new doctor. My present doctor warned me not to try to obtain the facts of my case from the DVLA under FOI, which made me think a bit.. He also "doesn't believe in" the blood CDT test and says I will need total abstinence, rather than controlled drinking, to get my licence back. To be honest I'd rather give up driving for good.

The 14 unit limit seems to be a bit arbitrary. Almost as if people who claimed to be meeting the old guidelines obviously weren't so they changed the guidelines.

Could I spend one week drinking my normal 12-14 pints of beer and then drink only tap water for the next week and still claim to be doing controlled drinking? I find restricting my intake very difficult because one pint makes me want another, up to four or so. So easier to go out with no intention of drinking

I have been approached by a journalist wanting to do a "sad face" story in a national paper, but doubt it would do me any good.
I really would like to have a blood CDT test done, without changing my lifestyle, just to find out how bad my problem actually is, but paying £100 plus having to spend the day on a bus/train to get to anywhere, for a test that can be ignored at will by both my GP and the DVLA is a bit steep for me ATM.
Click to expand...
I too had my car licence revoked & HGV refused after I had ticked the box allowing DVLA access to my medical records. I had previously admitted to my GP that I drank 1/2 bottle of wine a day. Liver function normal. I had no idea such measures were possible. DVLA will consider no mitigation (drinking rose to those levels after my wife's stroke) nor compassionate circumstances (I am my wife's carer). I reduced my drinking to within the 14 units, and less in the last month before a medical, when my CDT test was 0.9%. It took 8 months, 15 phone calls, and a begging letter before DVLA issued a temporary licence, subject to ongoing annual reviews.

The support of your GP is crucial. They will contact him when they are assessing your case. It's worth having a discussion so you know if he will 'tolerate' controlled drinking. If not, look elsewhere, and do it soon so you can build a positive relationship with your new GP.

Good luck. Brace yourself for a long haul.
 
StunnedDisbelief said:
I too had my car licence revoked & HGV refused after I had ticked the box allowing DVLA access to my medical records. I had previously admitted to my GP that I drank 1/2 bottle of wine a day. Liver function normal. I had no idea such measures were possible. DVLA will consider no mitigation (drinking rose to those levels after my wife's stroke) nor compassionate circumstances (I am my wife's carer). I reduced my drinking to within the 14 units, and less in the last month before a medical, when my CDT test was 0.9%. It took 8 months, 15 phone calls, and a begging letter before DVLA issued a temporary licence, subject to ongoing annual reviews.

The support of your GP is crucial. They will contact him when they are assessing your case. It's worth having a discussion so you know if he will 'tolerate' controlled drinking. If not, look elsewhere, and do it soon so you can build a positive relationship with your new GP.

Good luck. Brace yourself for a long haul.
Click to expand...
Yes it does seem a bit OTT, and hardly likely to create an honest relationship with your GP. It seems they're using guidelines for healthy living as an absolute maximum, and yet no penalty for heavy smokers or the seriously overweight. Surely just insisting on a CDT test in the first place, without a change in lifestyle would be the sensible option?

I'm still wondering whether it's worth bothering to get my licence back, if I'm going to be treated as some sort of criminal for the rest of my life, with temporary licences and constant Orwellian monitoring of my drinking. I might just do what it takes to get my licence back, then sell my Lotus and Ducati (really difficult without a licence...), and settle down to a life as a pedestrian. No doubt my insurances will be prohibitively expensive now anyway.

If they're really bothered about road safety, perhaps they should do random roadside CDT tests and catch the 7 pint every night pisstakers rather than the silly self-declaring method? I'm angry that I'm being treated as badly as someone who has actually driven a car under the influence
 
birt said:
Yes it does seem a bit OTT, and hardly likely to create an honest relationship with your GP. It seems they're using guidelines for healthy living as an absolute maximum, and yet no penalty for heavy smokers or the seriously overweight. Surely just insisting on a CDT test in the first place, without a change in lifestyle would be the sensible option?

I'm still wondering whether it's worth bothering to get my licence back, if I'm going to be treated as some sort of criminal for the rest of my life, with temporary licences and constant Orwellian monitoring of my drinking. I might just do what it takes to get my licence back, then sell my Lotus and Ducati (really difficult without a licence...), and settle down to a life as a pedestrian. No doubt my insurances will be prohibitively expensive now anyway.

If they're really bothered about road safety, perhaps they should do random roadside CDT tests and catch the 7 pint every night pisstakers rather than the silly self-declaring method? I'm angry that I'm being treated as badly as someone who has actually driven a car under the influence
Click to expand...
I share your pain. Re appeals: the advice I had, from two independent solicitors, was that since DVLA are acting within their statutory mandate to revoke a licence for anyone drinking more than the CMO's guidance, the only grounds for appeal is if you can convince a court that you were lying when you told the doctor you drank 24 units/week. i.e., don't bother, unless you have £5k-£10k to waste.

And if you know your Orwell, learn to love Big Brother.
 
Do we have any idea about how many people nationally are in my position (losing their licence because they didn't know the guidelines have changed...)?
Everyone I know, including the Citizens Advice lady (who drinks more than me..) I saw t'other day, seems blissfully unaware of the law, or rule, or whatever it is - which isn't even displayed prominently on the YouGov website (you have to go into the sub-menu to find the guideline that everybody wants to see - which can't be accidental..). A law/rule that can have such serious life-changing consequences really should be more in the public domain. I'd be amazed if more than a few % of the public are aware of the guidelines, and encouraging even those few to lie to health professionals has obvious consequences

I'm fine now, but actually felt quite suicidal over christmas. My drinking levels must have trebled since the surprise letter, so a guideline intended to improve public health, rather than being anything to do with road safety, clearly hasn't.
 
I have shared my story quite widely (like you, I had nothing to hide) but no-one I've told knew about this except my GP. The fact that he didn't warn me has shattered all trust, permanently; he is the interface to an organisation that does not act in the patient's interest.

The shock waves spread outwards; a wide circle of contacts now also know never to trust their GP. One friend of many years, who drinks far more than I ever did but also never drinks & drives, has since chosen not to consult his doctor for a possible condition. He'd rather risk cancer than risk his licence.
 
I remember, about ten years ago, my late mothers neighbour was a total piss-head who was obviously drunk most of the time. Her car was fitted with an interface to prevent her driving it until she'd performed some form of impromptu breath test.
 
Thinking out loud here.

Would there be any point in starting a "change.org" type on-line petition to at least make people aware of the situation. I'm not hoping to change my personal situation, and I'm well aware that the majority of the public don't drink and disapprove of "drunk drivers". But the Chief Medical Officer probably(?) makes similar recommendations on smoking or diet/foodstuffs and people don't lose their licences for smoking 60 a day, or being bloaters. Basically the DVLA is using a guideline for something it was never intended, and worse the public seem to be totally unaware of any discrete limit on alcohol consumption for drivers other than the blood/alcohol levels when actually driving

any thoughts welcome
 
birt said:
Thinking out loud here.

Would there be any point in starting a "change.org" type on-line petition to at least make people aware of the situation. I'm not hoping to change my personal situation, and I'm well aware that the majority of the public don't drink and disapprove of "drunk drivers". But the Chief Medical Officer probably(?) makes similar recommendations on smoking or diet/foodstuffs and people don't lose their licences for smoking 60 a day, or being bloaters. Basically the DVLA is using a guideline for something it was never intended, and worse the public seem to be totally unaware of any discrete limit on alcohol consumption for drivers other than the blood/alcohol levels when actually driving

any thoughts welcome
Click to expand...
If DVLA are obstructive when my 1 year licence is due for renewal in July, then I will not only appeal but invite the support of my MP. My fallback plan also involves 'pitching' the story to the national press as an example of bureaucratic over-reach. It could be newsworthy, especially with my personal 'angle'; many years ago I was left with life-changing injuries by a drunk driver. He died in the wreckage. So did 2 others. I really, really don't drink drive.

Until my case is reviewed I'll go with the flow rather than put deeply personal stuff into the public domain.
 
This situation perfectly illustrates why you should never share any information about your drinking with anybody. And yes, I know that some here will say that's potentially irresponsible in terms of an individual's health and it's wider impact on family and society, but the responsibility for that lies with the DVLA's stupidity.
 
Dave W. said:
This situation perfectly illustrates why you should never share any information about your drinking with anybody. And yes, I know that some here will say that's potentially irresponsible in terms of an individual's health and it's wider impact on family and society, but the responsibility for that lies with the DVLA's stupidity.
Click to expand...
It's potentially such a big issue, and, like the Post Office scandal it's happening in plain sight. I'm not sure the DVLA was ever given a proper mandate to act in such a draconian way. Certainly the public is collectively very much unaware..

According to the government "21% of the adult population in England and 24% of adults in England and Scotland, regularly drink at levels that increase their risk of ill health" which presumeably means 1 in 5 of the population are exceeding the government guidelines for driving. Obviously if they ban all that lot the country would grind to a standstill overnight, so the DVLA has to cherrypick a few easy pickings. All a bit shite really - and nothing to do with road safety.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Enter code DRINKDRIVING10 during checkout for 10% off
Top