Recurring concern

Failure to reliably assess driver fitness and driving safety

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

First reported 14 May 2014•Latest report 8 Dec 2025

Definition

What this concern includes

Includes failures in dedicated driver fitness or driving-safety assessment processes, including DPRA assessments, use of current driving guidelines, assessment of driving standards or ability after collisions, consideration of relevant health or age-related fitness factors, and evaluation of conditions encountered during early independent driving.

Not included

  • Excludes vehicle licensing entitlement, registration and formal licence-issuance controls where the concern is the licensing system itself.
  • Excludes generic driver training, supervision or enforcement deficiencies where no failure to assess driver fitness or driving safety is identified.
  • Excludes vehicle design, road infrastructure and individual unsafe driving incidents where no assessment-control deficiency is asserted.
  • Excludes clinical fitness assessments unrelated to a person's ability to drive safely.
Reports
13

Distinct published reports

Individual concerns
18

A report can raise multiple concerns

Date range
2014–2025

First to latest report issue date

Stated actions
17

Described in published responses

Reports over time

Reports over time

Reports about this concern issued each year.

* 2026 is projected from reports observed to 7 Sep 2026.

Most frequent recipients

Most frequent recipients

Reports about this concern sent to each recipient.

Department for Transport8
Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency5
Association of British Insurers1
Brake1
Cambridgeshire County Council1
Chartered Insurance Institute1
DHL Supply Chain Limited1
Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency1
Financial Conduct Authority1
Snap Group Limited1
South East Coast Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust1
South Wales Police1
Transport for London1

Concerns and responses across reports

Only concerns grouped under this recurring concern are included. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. Cornwall and Isles of Scilly

    AI-generated summary

    Henry Prow · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Henry Prow died at the scene after his car collided with a roundabout while he was returning from a medical appointment. A medical event before the collision could not be excluded. Concerns were raised about mechanisms for medical review of drivers with deteriorating or fluctuating health, the potential impact of licence surrender, and whether required vehicle modifications remained appropriate and were being used.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of mechanisms for formal medical review of drivers with deteriorating or fluctuating health

    Wider context from the report

    “At the inquest concerns were raised by the police and a friend as to the criteria required by the DVLA and Department of Transport for the issuing and surrendering of driving licences and the terms and conditions for ensuring appropriate modification of driver’s vehicles. Mr Prow had been a very fit and active man and worked as a training instructor in the Army for 3 years. As a result of his deteriorating poor health he lost his mobility and he was keen not to lose his driving license which would reduce his independence. At inquest it was considered that the collision was possibly preceded by Mr Prow having a medical issue/event. The DVLA appears to have limited mechanisms for drivers to be formally medically reviewed for the purpose of being medically fit to drive. In particular in cases where drivers have deteriorating health or fluctuating health (of which they may not have insight) as in the case of Mr Prow. It is understood that at present the treating GP/doctors or the driver themselves have a duty to advise the DVLA of medical issues which can affect a person’s ability to drive. A driver’s voluntary surrender of a driving licence (especially in a rural area with little public transport) may have a serious detrimental effect on their health and social/employment situation making it unrealistic expectation on the driver in many cases. There was concern, that the driver's GP/doctors could have a conflict of interests in such situations as they would have a duty to inform the DVLA of medical issues which could result in the surrender of the driving licence which could/would result in deterioration of the patient/doctor relationship e.g. such as patients withholding significant medical information with their doctors for fear of losing their licence. There were also concerns that there appeared to be no mechanism for ensuring the required modification to the vehicles were still relevant to the vehicle that they were driving at the time (he had changed cars since requirement made and his health had deteriorated) and were appropriately in place and used . ”

    Source location

    Henry Prow · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Independent medical or driving assessments are already used in complex cases, so broader mandatory assessment is not adopted.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Your report suggests that when deciding whether someone is medically fit to drive, consideration should be given to using independent medical assessment. I can confirm that in more complex cases, the DVLA already uses independent medical or driving assessments before deciding whether to issue a driving licence.”

    Source location

    2017-0227-Response-by-Department-for-Transport
    Page 1 · response
    Published 6 October 2017

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Mandatory medical or practical assessments would not be introduced without evidence of improved road safety because they could be costly and overly bureaucratic.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The current process focuses on those drivers who have a medical condition. It is designed to be fair and proportionate without penalising those drivers with disabilities who continue to drive safely. There is little evidence to suggest that introducing a stricter regime which includes mandatory medical or practical driving assessments would improve road safety. To impose such a requirement without the appropriate evidence would be overly bureaucratic and potentially very costly. Britain’s roads are some of the safest in the world and our road safety record compares favourably with other countries with stricter and more intrusive driver licensing regimes.”

    Source location

    2017-0227-Response-by-Department-for-Transport
    Page 2 · response
    Published 6 October 2017

    Open published response

  2. Birmingham and Solihull

    AI-generated summary

    William Francis Driscoll · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    William Francis Driscoll died at Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham on 30 June 2015 from injuries sustained when a vehicle mounted the pavement and hit him while he was walking. The driver lost control during an epileptic seizure. The report identified serious deficiencies in the DVLA medical assessment process, including limited investigation of health conditions and failure to follow up an identified relevant consultant, which could allow inadequately assessed drivers to continue driving.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Limited investigation into health conditions declared on form POLN3

    Wider context from the report

    “████████ gave evidence that if he had been aware of the incident in September 2014 he would have carried out further investigations revealing the epilepsy that was ultimately diagnosed in August 2015 and thus preventing ████████ from driving before the collision with the deceased. It appears that there are serious deficiencies in the medical assessment process as regards the limited investigation into the health conditions on the form POLN3 and/or in not following up the GP’s identification of a ‘Relevant Consultant’. As a consequence drivers may be permitted to drive who have not been adequately assessed as fit to do so. ”

    Source location

    William Francis Driscoll · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

  3. Portsmouth and South East Hampshire

    AI-generated summary

    Arthur Clifford Shaw · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Arthur Clifford Shaw was struck by a car while crossing Privett Road, Gosport, on 31 December 2012 and died in hospital on 1 January 2013 from injuries sustained. The report raised concern that assessment of older drivers' fitness to drive did not specifically consider mental fitness, including dementia, beyond sight and hearing tests.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to assess mental fitness to drive during driving-licence renewals for people over 70

    Wider context from the report

    “The driver of the vehicle that struck Mr Shaw was herself 87 years old and was suffering from dementia at the time of the collision. This was confirmed by her GP whose evidence was that she had been diagnosed as suffering from dementia in November 2012 and the doctor believed the dementia had been present prior to that diagnosis. Her condition was such that the GP did not think she would be capable of giving reliable evidence at the Inquest and, accordingly, she was not called as a witness. I was told by police witnesses that when persons over the age of 70 renew their driving licences, they have to be certified by their doctor as being fit to drive. However, whilst doctors check hearing and vision, there is no specific need for the doctor to consider mental fitness to drive. I believe that the circumstances of Mr Shaw's death demonstrate the need for more careful examination of an elderly person's fitness to drive beyond simple sight and hearing tests. ”

    Source location

    Arthur Clifford Shaw · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · concerns

    Open source report
Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026