An inquest into the deaths of four people killed by drivers with failing eyesight has found enforcement of visual legal standards for motorists is "ineffective and unsafe". HM Senior Coroner for Lancashire Dr James Adeley has sent a report to Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander to say action should be taken to prevent future deaths. He labelled the licensing system as the "laxest in Europe" as he pointed out the UK was one of only three countries to rely upon self-reporting of visual conditions affecting the ability to drive. Dr Adeley said it was also concerning that the UK was the only European country to issue licences without any visual checks for a continuous period up to the age of 70. He made the remarks at the inquests of Marie Cunningham, 79, Grace Foulds, 85, Peter Westwell, 80, and Anne Ferguson, 75, held earlier at Preston Coroner's Court. Friends Mrs Cunningham and Mrs Foulds were struck by Glyn Jones, 68, in his Audi A3 as they crossed the road in Southport, Merseyside, on 30 November 2021. Jones was aware for some years before the collision that his sight was insufficient to meet the minimum requirement to drive a car but failed to declare it to the Driving and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA). When he was jailed for seven years and four months, his sentencing hearing was told he could not even see his steering wheel clearly. Mr Westwell was hit by Neil Pemberton, 81, as he crossed the road in Langho, near Blackburn, on 17 March 2022. Pemberton, who was jailed for 32 months, had a long history of eye disease and was informed on several occasions by different clinicians that he should not drive, the inquest heard. He also repeatedly failed to declare his sight deficit on multiple licence applications to the DVLA. Mrs Ferguson died when she was struck by a van driven by Vernon Law, 72, in Whitworth, Rochdale, on 11 July 2023. A month before Law was told he had cataracts in both eyes but he lied to an optometrist that he did not drive. Law, who was jailed for four years, knew he had problems with his eyes for years before the collision but his sight loss could easily have been corrected. Law also failed to declare his sight issues on multiple licence applications to the DVLA, the inquest at County Hall heard. Following the inquests, the family of Mrs Cunningham said: "Our mum, and her friend, were killed by the selfish, reckless actions of Glyn Jones. "His decision to put his own convenience before the law, before ethics, before human lives, cost our family everything. "This tragedy was not inevitable. It was entirely avoidable. "And we are left grappling with the painful truth that if this man had acted responsibly our mum would still be with us." Terry Wilcox, of Hudgell Solicitors, representing the families of Mrs Cunningham, Mrs Foulds and Mr Westwell, said loop holes that are available for drivers who want to evade reporting on their eyesight are "jaw-dropping". He said: "People ignore what they are told when it doesn't suit their lifestyle, and in reality there is nothing in place to stop selfish people putting others at risk by getting back behind the wheel. "We presently have a system under which the DVLA relies upon drivers to self-report, hand over their licence and stop driving when they've been told by a qualified healthcare professional that their eyesight is not to the required standard. "This inquest has shown that simply doesn't happen." Dr Adeley said: "The four fatalities shared the same feature that the driver's sight was well below the standard required to drive a car. "The current system for 'ensuring' drivers meet the visual legal standards is ineffective, unsafe and unfit to meet the needs of society as evidenced by the deaths of Marie Cunningham, Grace Foulds, Anne Ferguson and Peter Westwell where the DVLA continued to provide licences to drivers who had failed to meet the legal sight requirements." The Department for Transport said it would consider the coroner's report once received. A spokesperson added: "The NHS recommends adults should have their eyes tested every two years and drivers are legally required to inform the DVLA if they have a condition which affects their eyesight. "We are committed to improving road safety and continue to explore ways to achieve this." Rob Heard, chairman of the Older Drivers' Forum, warned that more people would die if changes were not made soon. He called for it to be made compulsory for opticians and GPs to check a person's eyesight once they turn 70, and inform the DVLA via an online system without the "worry of breaching patient confidentiality". "A car is a lethal weapon and we need to be fully in control and safe on the roads to be able to control it," he said. Mr Wilcox said there is currently no infrastructure for IT which would allow a sight test to be uploaded to the DVLA. "You can be told the car is unsafe but a driver is never told they are unsafe and the DVLA aren't informed - the driver is unsafe," he said. "Drivers are the solution and yet we don't appear to have anything in place to solve the problem." Listen to the best of BBC Radio Lancashire onBBC Soundsand follow BBC Lancashire onFacebook,XandInstagramand watch BBC North West Tonight onBBC iPlayer.
Eyesight rules for motorists unsafe, says coroner
TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:
"Coroner Calls for Reforms to Motorist Vision Standards After Fatal Accidents"
Bbc News
7.0
TruthLens AI Summary
An inquest into the tragic deaths of four individuals in accidents involving drivers with impaired vision has revealed significant flaws in the enforcement of visual standards for motorists in the UK. The Senior Coroner for Lancashire, Dr. James Adeley, described the current licensing system as the "laxest in Europe," highlighting that the UK is one of only three countries that depend on self-reporting regarding visual impairments affecting driving abilities. Alarmingly, he noted that there are no mandatory visual checks for drivers up to the age of 70, which raises serious concerns about road safety. The inquests, conducted for victims Marie Cunningham, Grace Foulds, Peter Westwell, and Anne Ferguson, showcased the tragic consequences of inadequate oversight, with all four fatalities linked to drivers whose eyesight did not meet the legal requirements to operate a vehicle safely. For instance, Glyn Jones, who struck Cunningham and Foulds, had been aware of his deteriorating vision for years but failed to report it to the Driving and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA). Similarly, both Neil Pemberton and Vernon Law had been informed by healthcare professionals that they should not drive due to their eye conditions yet continued to operate vehicles, leading to fatal accidents.
In light of these findings, Dr. Adeley has submitted a report to Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander, urging immediate action to prevent further tragedies. The families of the victims have expressed their grief and frustration, emphasizing that the deaths were entirely avoidable had the drivers acted responsibly. Legal representatives have pointed out the alarming loopholes that allow drivers to evade reporting their eyesight issues, indicating a systemic failure that puts others at risk. The Department for Transport has indicated it will review the coroner's report. Advocacy groups, including the Older Drivers' Forum, are calling for mandatory eyesight checks for drivers aged 70 and above, suggesting that optometrists and general practitioners should be required to report any vision impairments directly to the DVLA. This proposal aims to enhance road safety and ensure that drivers are fit to operate vehicles, as the current reliance on self-reporting has proven to be ineffective and dangerous. The inquest highlights the urgent need for reforms to protect public safety on the roads.
TruthLens AI Analysis
The coroner's inquest into the tragic deaths of four individuals due to drivers with impaired vision raises significant concerns regarding road safety and the regulatory framework governing driver licensing in the UK. The findings highlight critical flaws in the current system, particularly the reliance on self-reporting and the absence of mandatory eye tests for drivers up to the age of 70. This situation is compounded by the alarming fact that the UK is one of the few countries that do not require regular vision assessments for older drivers.
Public Perception and Safety Concerns
The article aims to create a heightened awareness about the dangers posed by drivers with unreported visual impairments. By detailing the cases of the deceased and the drivers involved, the narrative seeks to evoke sympathy for the victims while simultaneously raising alarm over the potential for future tragedies if systemic changes are not implemented. It underscores the need for stricter regulations and more rigorous enforcement of existing laws to protect public safety.
Regulatory Critique
Dr. James Adeley's assertion that the UK's licensing system is the "laxest in Europe" draws attention to the inadequacies in visual health assessments for drivers. This critical view of the regulatory framework suggests a pressing need for reform, which could resonate with advocates for road safety and campaigners pushing for stricter driving standards. The emphasis on the lack of visual checks may also lead to public pressure on the government to take immediate action.
Potential Concealment of Broader Issues
While the article focuses on the immediate issue of visual impairment, it may divert attention from larger systemic problems within the transport and health sectors. By spotlighting individual cases, it could obscure the broader conversation about road safety, healthcare accessibility, and the responsibilities of both drivers and regulatory bodies. The specific targeting of older drivers raises questions about ageism and whether the narrative might unintentionally stigmatize a demographic that already faces significant challenges.
Manipulative Elements
The article’s language and framing could be seen as manipulative, particularly in its emotional appeal. By sharing personal stories of the victims, it evokes a strong emotional response, which may sway public opinion towards a call for change. The focus on drivers' negligence in reporting their conditions also serves to highlight personal responsibility, possibly deflecting blame from systemic failures.
Trustworthiness of the Reporting
The report appears credible, as it draws from official inquest findings and statements from a senior coroner, lending authority to the claims made. However, the emphasis on specific narratives could lead to an incomplete understanding of the broader context of road safety regulations. The reliance on anecdotal evidence may result in a skewed perception of the overall issue.
Potential Societal Impact
The implications of this report could extend beyond mere regulatory changes. It may influence public opinion on road safety legislation, prompting discussions about the responsibilities of older drivers and potential policy changes regarding mandatory eye tests. This could also affect the insurance industry, where stricter regulations could lead to increased premiums for older drivers or those with pre-existing conditions.
Target Audience and Community Response
The article is likely to resonate with communities advocating for road safety, families of victims of traffic accidents, and organizations focused on elderly care and advocacy. It aims to mobilize support from these groups to push for legislative changes that enhance road safety and driver accountability.
Economic and Market Considerations
While the news primarily focuses on regulatory issues, it could have indirect effects on the automotive and insurance markets. Stricter regulations may lead to increased operational costs for insurance companies, potentially impacting stock prices of firms in the automotive insurance sector.
Global Context
In a broader geopolitical context, this report reflects ongoing discussions about public health and safety regulations, which are increasingly relevant in light of global aging populations. The findings could contribute to international dialogues on transportation safety standards, especially as countries navigate similar challenges.
Use of AI in Reporting
While it is unclear if AI was employed in crafting the article, its structured approach and focus on specific data points suggest that advanced data analysis tools may have been utilized. AI models could have assisted in identifying trends or compiling statistics that informed the coroner's conclusions. However, the emotional narratives presented seem to be crafted to engage readers on a human level, which would be less likely to be the work of AI. The article's emphasis on personal stories and the call for reform signals a clear intent to advocate for change, aiming to provoke thought and action regarding driver safety in the UK. Overall, while the reporting is based on factual events, the presentation may influence public sentiment and drive policy discussions in the near future.