A SHERIFF has called on the DVLA to introduce tougher checks on people who have a history of high blood pressure before granting them a driving licence.
The recommendation has been made following a Fatal Accident Inquiry (FAI) into the death of a van driver who was handed a licence after being examined by a doctor who did not have access to his medical records.
The Crown Office has argued the accident that killed Douglas Gordon would not have happened if he had not been driving that day, having gained his licence just eight months before.
Read more: Soaring response as Goldfinch artwork to make historic visit
In the case of Glasgow bin lorry driver Harry Clarke, whose vehicle killed six people in George Square just before Christmas 2014, the Crown Office said he could not have known he would suffer a medical “episode” on the fateful day. The families of those killed are currently seeking a private prosecution of Mr Clarke.
A FAI earlier this year heard Mr Gordon, of Glasgow, died in July 2014 when his van swerved across a roundabout and crashed into an HGV. He was working as a driver, ferrying passengers and their luggage to Glasgow Airport from a nearby Airlink car park in Paisley. His employer did not carry out any reference checks before giving him the job.
Subsequent inquiries showed Mr Gordon had gained a driving licence after attending a medical examination with Dr Lesley Anne Somerville. She did not have access to his medical records because she was not his GP.
A blood pressure reading taken by her on the day did not appear excessive. She said if she had been aware of his three previous blood pressure readings – which were high – she would have advised him to stop driving and inform the DVLA. Mr Gordon had also been asked if he suffered from a range of other medical conditions, including sleep apnoea syndrome, to which he replied: “No”. However, at the time of the examination, he was still a patient of a sleep disorder clinic in Glasgow.
Read more: Soaring response as Goldfinch artwork to make historic visit
At the FAI, the DVLA described as “trite” the assertion from the Crown Office that the accident would not have happened if Mr Gordon had been refused a driving licence.
In submissions, the Crown Office responded: “The Crown submits it would have been a reasonable precaution, on hindsight ... if DVLA had sought further medical information and had not accepted the little information that had been submitted in Form D4 in relation to Mr Gordon’s hypertension, and that in these circumstances the group two licence may not have been granted on the basis of the further information provided and that therefore the death might have been avoided.
“If Mr Gordon had not been driving that vehicle on that date at that place he could not have been involved in the road traffic accident that caused his death.”
Sheriff Colin Pettigrew has now ruled Mr Gordon’s death might have been avoided if the DVLA had contacted his GP to seek information on his blood pressure history.
He also said the Secretary of State for Transport should consult on whether the law needs to be changed on ensuring the DVLA has “completeness and accuracy” of the information before making fitness to drive decisions.
Read more: Soaring response as Goldfinch artwork to make historic visit
Sheriff Pettigrew has recommended that, in future, the DVLA should contact a driving licence applicant’s GP when the applicant confirms a history of high blood pressure but the last three readings are not available.
He concluded: “I agree with counsel it has not been proved on the balance of probabilities that Mr Gordon did not meet the DVLA standards for fitness to drive as at the date of the accident.
“There was no evidence that a medical episode contributed in any way to the tragedy. As I have found, the reason or reasons for Mr Gordon losing control of the Ford Transit van cannot be established.”
A spokesman for the Crown Office said: “In his determination following the FAI into the death of Douglas Gordon, the sheriff found Mr Gordon’s death might have been avoided and it would have been a reasonable precaution for DVLA, when assessing his application for a driving licence, to have requested further information from his GP about his medical condition.
“These are entirely different sets of circumstances and it would be incorrect to attempt to compare them.”
A spokesman for the DVLA added: “We are considering the report.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article