• Please Remember: Members are only permitted to share their own experiences. Members are not qualified to give medical advice. Additionally, everyone manages their health differently. Please be respectful of other people's opinions about their own diabetes management.

Group 2 Licence Rejected

M

Matt37411

Member
Relationship to Diabetes
Type 1
Hi everyone

Just want to see if anyone else has had experience with the DVLA and applying for a group 2 licence (bus and lorry) ?

Reason being that I've just had my application rejected on medical grounds, this being that I don't use a old fashioned finger prick monitor. I do however use a Dexcom One Plus and check around 10-20 times a day and all around good control. However because I don't use the older monitor at least twice a day I've been knocked back.

I was then told I can only apply again in 6 weeks when I have used a finger prick monitor twice a day for the 6 weeks. This just seems so out of date and backwards with the technology we have. Obviously I can just wait for the 6 weeks, however there is a job offer pending on my licence coming back and passing the tests, and it's been going on since late November. So this feels like it's the final nail in the coffin as far as the job offer goes as the company probably won't wait another 6 weeks plus test times.

Has anyone successfully got a group 2 licence and what if any challenges did you have ? Because I don't want to waste 6 weeks if I'm just goanna have another herald put in front of me again.

Also is there anything Diabetes UK can do to highlight how backwards this seems to be ? Because in my eyes I get the older monitors can be a little more accurate. However they don't show trend arrows etc so the new tech has to be more fit for purpose and safer.
 
I don't drive myself but do know that the rules for a Group 2 licence are more stringent and do require finger prick testing too

More information is on this page:

Driving and diabetes

For most people with diabetes, driving isn’t a problem, and they can hold a driving licence and carry on driving. Here you’ll find everything you need to know about diabetes and driving. "As someone with diabetes, it's really important that I'm aware of the rules around driving in the UK" - Mim...
www.diabetes.org.uk www.diabetes.org.uk
 
The simple reason is the old school tech that is an FP meter is more accurate than a CGM. Even car drivers have to do an FP reading if the CGM reading is under 4 and have to carry an FP meter at all times when driving.

This isn't about backwards technology, it is about safety when you are in charge of an HGV or carrying passengers.
 
dannybgoode said:
The simple reason is the old school tech that is an FP meter is more accurate than a CGM. Even car drivers have to do an FP reading if the CGM reading is under 4 and have to carry an FP meter at all times when driving.

This isn't about backwards technology, it is about safety when you are in charge of an HGV or carrying passengers.
Click to expand...
I know a FP is more accurate, but at the same time a GCM is never going to be miles out. But like I say it very much feels like there not keeping up with the tech.

I understand the safety aspect of being more accurate, but surely having a GCM that's linked to a smart watch (like I have) is safter while driving compared to just a FP test at the required times.
 
Matt37411 said:
Reason being that I've just had my application rejected on medical grounds, this being that I don't use an old fashioned finger prick monitor. I do however use a Dexcom One Plus and check around 10-20 times a day and all around good control. However because I don't use the older monitor at least twice a day I've been knocked back.
Click to expand...
That’s exactly what it says in the rules, you need to fingerprick at least twice a day every day regardless of whether you’re driving that day and regardless of whether you have a dexcom. Make sure meter memory will store at least 3 months worth of results before first application or 6 weeks before annual exam and then you can reapply. It’s all explained on the DVLA website.

If you weren’t aware of this requirement are you aware of the requirements for whilst driving any vehicle and the requirements around your car driving licence?
 
Matt37411 said:
I know a FP is more accurate, but at the same time a GCM is never going to be miles out.
Click to expand...
That’s very much false and if you believe that then you shouldn’t really be driving at all to be honest!
 
dannybgoode said:
The simple reason is the old school tech that is an FP meter is more accurate than a CGM. Even car drivers have to do an FP reading if the CGM reading is under 4 and have to carry an FP meter at all times when driving.

This isn't about backwards technology, it is about safety when you are in charge of an HGV or carrying passengers.
Click to expand...
I agree with you about the importance of safety. Bearing that in mind, my understanding is that any reading under 4 (whether FP or CGM) means, "Stop now - and don't drive again until 45 minutes after your reading is above 4".

I imagine that legally this doesn't apply if the FP reading is above 4 (indicating a fault with the CGM) - but it would be up to the driver to convince the police or a court or an insurance company about that, in the event of a collision! Clearly, in any case, it would be unwise for any driver on a long journey to rely only on a GCM, given that they can and do go wrong sometimes.
 
CliffH said:
I agree with you about the importance of safety. Bearing that in mind, my understanding is that any reading under 4 (whether FP or CGM) means, "Stop now - and don't drive again until 45 minutes after your reading is above 4".
Click to expand...
Your understanding is wrong. If cgm says under 4 requirement is to fingerprick and go with fingerprick results. If cgm under 4 and fingerprick above 4 you’re fine to drive (have a snack first if 4-5 though)
 
Lucyr said:
If cgm under 4 and fingerprick above 4 you’re fine to drive (have a snack first if 4-5 though)
Click to expand...
This isn't correct and it's an interesting anomaly in the rules.

I'll cut and paste from the leaflet when I'm home but in short of you FP and you're above 4 but below 5 you can eat a snack and drive.

If your CGM is below 4 and you FP and are below 5 you have to wait until it's above 5 before you drive.

No idea why this discrepancy but that's what it says in the DVLA leaflet.
 
Matt37411 said:
I have full awareness of the rules around having a group 1 licence !
Click to expand...
The rules for group 2 are in the same place on the DVLA site and the written material you received and read then!
 
dannybgoode said:
If your CGM is below 4 and you FP and are below 5 you have to wait until it's above 5 before you drive.
Click to expand...
I don’t think you do, because it says you must “confirm with fingerprick” before it says the next line about waiting till you’re 5.0. Ie, the requirement to wait till you’re above 5 assumes the fingerprick confirmed the cgm reading and was also below 4
 

Attachments

  • IMG_6530.png
    IMG_6530.png
    91.6 KB · Views: 6
Lucyr said:
I don’t think you do, because it says you must “confirm with fingerprick” before it says the next line about waiting till you’re 5.0. Ie, the requirement to wait till you’re above 5 assumes the fingerprick confirmed the cgm reading and was also below 4
Click to expand...
I do hate these sloppily drafted regulations that appear all over the place. Reading it closely, it actually makes no sense at all!
I think you are right, @Lucyr , the word used is 'confirm' which suggests to me that it is expected that it would confirm that it’s below 4. Otherwise, if you were meant to wait til it’s above 5 in this particular instance, (which would be different from the normal finger prick rule) I think it would have just said 'take' a finger prick reading and wait til it’s above 5.
It doesn’t make much sense using the word 'confirm', frankly, it says 'confirm your finger prick glucose test reading' …but you haven’t taken one in the first place, you’ve only looked looked at your CGM, so how can you confirm a result you haven’t got?
I suspect a word has got missed out somewhere along the lines, and it ought to say 'confirm WITH a finger prick reading, (meaning, confirm that you really are below 4 by using a finger prick test or something like that).
 
Robin said:
I do hate these sloppily drafted regulations that appear all over the place. Reading it closely, it actually makes no sense at all!
Click to expand...

Yes it’s amazing isn’t it how something which should be so simple and “here are the guidelines, just follow these” is so confusing and how different but equally official leaflets and sources (eg those for Drs and those for general public) seem to say minutely different things in different places :(

Sorry to hear about the job vacancy , but perhaps you could assemble the required results for the Group 2 application and re-apply for the license @Matt37411. Hopefully it won’t be long before another suitable role comes up once you’ve got everything in place.

I know we have had commercial drivers with a new diagnosis who’ve had to take a 3 month break from driving to build up the required 90 day meter history. I think @Busdriver60 took the opportunity to swap to another career.
 
Last edited:
I read it as if your CGM says you’re 4 or below, you must stop and fingerprick. The rules assume the CGM read below 4 for a reason (ie the person possibly dipped to 4 or below briefly) therefore it tells you to wait until you’re above 5 to drive just to be safe. The glucose meters have a margin of error, so if your CGM is saying you’re 3.8 and your fingerprick says 4.3, you could still be below 4, hence the advice to not drive until you’re at least 5. Obviously if the CGM was way out and told you you were 3.8 when you were actually 5.9, you’d already be above 5 so could drive on.
 
As @Robin says these regulations are not clear.
I wonder when they have been applied in practice.
Let’s say I was involved in an accident. Does a police officer ask if I have diabetes treated with insulin and if so ask you to prove you were fit to drive? Or is it something that my insurance company would ask me to prove?

Thankfully, I have only been involved with one such accident and that was before I had diabetes.
 
Lucyr said:
I don’t think you do, because it says you must “confirm with fingerprick” before it says the next line about waiting till you’re 5.0. Ie, the requirement to wait till you’re above 5 assumes the fingerprick confirmed the cgm reading and was also below 4
Click to expand...
I understand what you are saying - it can be read either way...

• If you use a real time (RT-CGM) or flash glucose monitoring (FGM) system to check your glucose levels and the reading is 4.0mmol/L or below, you must stop driving and confirm your finger prick glucose test reading.
• Your finger prick glucose level must be at least 5.0mmol/L before returning to driving.

Take each one in isolation and you have to wait until the FP is above 5. The first bullet point is terribly ambiguous.
 
helli said:
As @Robin says these regulations are not clear.
I wonder when they have been applied in practice.
Let’s say I was involved in an accident. Does a police officer ask if I have diabetes treated with insulin and if so ask you to prove you were fit to drive? Or is it something that my insurance company would ask me to prove?

Thankfully, I have only been involved with one such accident and that was before I had diabetes.
Click to expand...
Absolutely the police can ask you to prove you were fit to drive hence why you need a device that can store 6 weeks of readings.

I was told by my DSN that, if I was unlucky enough to be involved in an accident and if I were able to, I should do a BG reading immediately at the scene.

Yes, your insurer or the third party insurer could ask for proof of fitness to drive.

Failure to follow the rules is a criminal offence and can lead to hefty fines.
 
Lucyr said:
Your understanding is wrong. If cgm says under 4 requirement is to fingerprick and go with fingerprick results. If cgm under 4 and fingerprick above 4 you’re fine to drive (have a snack first if 4-5 though)
Click to expand...
Yes, that's what I meant. The point I was trying to make was that the driver has to stop first before doing the fingerprick test!
 
Note: the side conversation which emerged out of this thread has been split away to here

H

Thread 'Fitness to drive?'

Moderator Note: This conversation was split away from an earlier thread here https://forum.diabetes.org.uk/boards/threads/group-2-licence-rejected.116045/
dannybgoode said:
Absolutely the police can ask you to prove you were fit to drive hence why you need a device that can store 6 weeks of readings.

I was told by my DSN that, if I was unlucky enough to be involved in an accident and if I were able to, I should do a BG reading immediately at the scene.

Yes, your insurer or the third party insurer could ask for proof of fitness to drive.

Failure to follow the rules is a criminal...
Click to expand...
  • Like
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top