Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2024

Geoffrey Toase and Michael Midgley

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2024-0507, written 12 Aug 2024. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report12 Aug 2024
Reference2024-0507
DeceasedGeoffrey Toase and Michael Midgley
CoronerJessica Swift
Coroner areaKingston Upon Hull and the East Riding of Yorkshire
CategoryRoad (Highways Safety) related deaths
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses published1

The report

Text extracted from the PDF text layer. Reproduced verbatim, including the scan's own layout.

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS 

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO:  

1. Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) 

1 

CORONER 

I am Jessica Swift, Assistant Coroner for the City of Kingston Upon Hull and the East 
Riding of Yorkshire. 

2 

CORONER’S LEGAL POWERS 

I make this report under paragraph 7, Schedule 5, of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 
and Regulations 28 and 29 of the Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 2013. 

3 

INVESTIGATION and INQUEST 

On  8  August  2019  an  inquest  was  opened  into  the  deaths  of  Geoffrey  Stewart  Toase 
and Michael William Midgley. 

The  inquest  concluded  on  2  August  2024,  the  conclusion  reached  was  the  short  form 
conclusion of road traffic collision.  

4 

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH 

On 3 August 2019, Mr Toase and Mr Midgley had arranged to spend the day riding their 
motocycles around Yorkshire, they were accompanied by two associates.  

At  around  3:45pm,  whilst  travelling  down  the  A166  Garrowby  Hill,  Mr  Toase  and  Mr 
Midgley  were  involved  in  a  head  on  collision  with  a  car  that  was  travelling  from  the 
opposite direction. That car was located wholly on the wrong side of the carriageway at 
the point at which it collided with Mr Toase and Mr Midgley.  

The driver of the car involved had a number of health-related conditions, including Type 
1 Diabetes Mellitus, controlled by insulin injection. As a result of the diabetes, the driver 
of the car was required to reapply to the DVLA for a license every 3 years.  

At  the  time  of  the  collision,  the  driver  of  the  car  was,  on  the  balance  of  probability, 
suffering  a  hypoglycaemic  episode  which  had  compromised  their  ability  to  drive  in  an 
appropriate manner.  

Emergency services attended the collision scene swiftly, but the injuries suffered by both 
Mr Toase and Mr Midgley were such that nothing could be done to save them and they 
were both declared deceased at the incident scene.   

1 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 5 

CORONER’S CONCERNS 

During the course of the inquest the evidence revealed matters giving rise to concern. In 
my  opinion  there  is  a  risk  that  future  deaths  will  occur  unless  action  is  taken.  In  the 
circumstances it is my statutory duty to report to you. 

The MATTERS OF CONCERN are as follows:–  

I heard evidence from two representatives of the DVLA at the inquest, including a DVLA 
employed Doctor. That Doctor gave evidence about their role in the medical review and 
decision to re-issue a license to the driver of the car involved in the fatal collision. That 
evidence gave rise to the following concerns:  

a)  DVLA  Doctors  are  not  actively  encouraged  by  the  DVLA  to  request  further 

information about an applicant’s medical history.  

b)  The  DVLA  does  not  generally  seek  further  information  from  any  identified 
Speciality  Doctor  that  may  be  involved  in  an  applicant’s  medical  care  and 
treatment;  any  requests  for  further  information  are  usually  directed  to  an 
applicant’s General Practitioner (GP). 

c)  The forms sent to an applicant’s GP  by the DVLA for the  purpose of  obtaining 
further  information  are  largely  tick  box  in  nature  and  do  not  provide  sufficient 
scope  for  the  GP  to  provide  more  detailed  information  and  this  therefore  does 
not allow for a full assessment to be conducted by the reviewing DVLA Doctor.  

d)  Current  DVLA  working  practices  do  not  appear  to  allow  DVLA  Doctors  to 
consider the interplay between different medical conditions an applicant may be 
suffering with.  

e)  There  is  no  apparent  system  in  place  to  verify  the  accuracy  of  the  information 
provided  by  an  applicant  within  their  medical  self-declaration  and  that  this 
information is generally accepted by the DVLA without question. 

f)  The information provided by an applicant within their medical self-declaration is 
no  longer  sent  to  their  GP  by  the  DVLA  alongside  any  request  for  further 
information,  which  limits  any  scope  for  the  GP  to  identify  if  the  information 
contained within a medical self-declaration is accurate.  

g)  The  DVLA  Doctor 

involved  in  this  case  gave  evidence  that  they  felt 
“constrained” by the DVLA guidance, standards and working practices they are 
required to work to.  

h)  The  decisions  made  by  DVLA  Doctors  when  considering  to  re-issue  a  license 
are  not  subject  to  any  form  of  audit  procedure  to  ensure  accuracy  and 
consistency of decision-making. 

6 

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN 

In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe you (and/or 
your organisation) has the power to take such action. 

7 

YOUR RESPONSE 

You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report, 
namely by 7 October 2024. I, the Coroner, may extend this period. 

Your response must contain details of action taken or proposed to be taken, setting out 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 the timetable for action. Otherwise, you must explain why no action is proposed. 

8 

COPIES and PUBLICATION 

I  have  sent  a  copy  of  my  report  to  the  Chief  Coroner  and  to  the  following  Interested 
Persons:  

  Family of Mr Toase and Mr Midgley; 
  The driver of the car involved in the collision (via his legal representatives). 

I have also sent it to the following who may find it useful or of interest:  

  Department for Transport 

I am also under  a  duty  to  send the Chief Coroner a  copy of your response. The Chief 
Coroner  may  publish  either  or  both  in  a  complete  or  redacted  or  summary  form.  She 
may send a copy of this report to any person who she believes may find it useful or of 
interest.  You  may  make  representations  to  me,  the  Coroner,  at  the  time  of  your 
response, about the release or the publication of your response by the Chief Coroner. 

Your response will also be shared with the above named Interested Persons. 

9 

Jessica Swift 
Assistant Coroner for the City of Kingston Upon Hull and the East Riding of 
Yorkshire 
12 August 2024 

3

Responses

1 response published against this report on judiciary.uk. A response is a body's written reply to the coroner's concerns; publication is at the discretion of the Chief Coroner's office, so an absent response does not mean nobody replied.

Response from Dvla (PDF)
Jessica Swift
Assistant Coroner
City of Kingston Upon Hull & East Riding of
Yorkshire
Coroner’s Service
The Guildhall
Alfred Gelder Street
Hull
HU1 2AA

Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency
Head of Strategy and Policy
Longview Road
Morriston
Swansea
SA6 7JL

www.gov.uk/dvla

Phone:
Website:

Your Ref:

Our Ref:

Date:

4 October 2024

Dear Jessica Swift,

Thank you for your report of 12 August 2024 made under paragraph 7, Schedule 5 of the
Coroners and Justice Act 2009 and regulations 28 and 29 of the Coroners (Investigations)
Regulations  2013,  following  the  inquest  into  the  deaths  of  Geoffrey  Stewart  Toase  and
Michael William Midgley.

I was very sorry to learn of the circumstances of Mr Toase and Mr Midgley’s deaths and I
would like to express my sincere condolences to their families.

I have considered your report and its recommendations carefully and I can assure you that
the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) takes such matters very seriously.

The  current  driver licensing arrangements are underpinned  by  a  legal requirement that all
drivers, of any age, must inform the DVLA at any time if they develop a medical condition that
may affect safe driving. All drivers must meet the appropriate medical standards for driving
and a licence will only be issued to those who meet those standards.

Where  a  driving  licence  holder  or  applicant  is  suffering  from  a  relevant  or  prospective
disability, driving licences may be issued for a shorter period so that fitness to drive can be
regularly reviewed. This helps to ensure that drivers continue to meet the required medical
standards for driving. These arrangements are designed to be balanced and proportionate
for all drivers, balancing road safety and the mobility of individuals.

The  medical  standards  relating  to  fitness  to  drive  are  set  out  in  the  DVLA’s  guidance:
Assessing fitness to drive: a guide for medical professionals. The guidance is based on both
domestic legislation and advice from the Secretary of State for Transport’s Honorary Medical
Advisory Panels. The guidance advises members of the medical profession on the medical
standards that need to be met by individuals to hold licences to drive various categories of
vehicles. The medical panels provide the DVLA with expert medical advice about relevant
medical conditions and their impact on driving and this feeds into the guidance provided.

 The guidance  specific  to  diabetes  is  based  on  legislation  and  the  advice  provided  by  the
Secretary of State for Transport’s Honorary Medical Advisory Panel on Driving and Diabetes
Mellitus.

The  DVLA’s  Drivers  Medical  team  assesses  all  driving  licence  applications  against  the
required standards. A medical questionnaire will be sent to the applicant in the first instance,
asking them for more information about their condition. The applicant is also asked to provide
authorisation  for  their  healthcare  professional  to  release  information  from  their  medical
records to the DVLA.

If  further  information  is required,  the  DVLA will  write  directly  to  the  relevant  doctor  and/or
consultant managing the care and treatment of the applicant. This information is requested
in the form of a questionnaire which is designed to be completed from medical records. Other
registered  healthcare  professionals  can  also  provide  information  to  the  DVLA  where  it  is
appropriate  to  do  so.  It  is  for  the  individual  practice  or  hospital  team  to  decide  which
appropriately registered healthcare professional is best placed to complete the questionnaire.
Healthcare  professionals  can  also contact  the  DVLA’s  doctors  directly  if  they  have  any
concerns about their patient driving.

Where more information is needed to establish fitness to drive, the DVLA may also request
a medical examination and/or driving assessment. If the investigation finds that a driver has
a  relevant  disability  and  cannot  meet  the  medical  standards,  an  existing  licence  will  be
revoked or an application refused. As outlined above, the DVLA can also issue a licence for
a  shorter  period,  typically  between one and five  years,  allowing  driving  fitness  to  be more
regularly monitored.

Any applications referred to the DVLA’s doctors are usually more complex and often involve
multiple medical conditions. A reviewing DVLA doctor wishing to carry out a full assessment
can  decide  to  write  to  the  nominated  healthcare  professional  to  request  any  further
information on the applicant’s health that they may consider relevant.

The DVLA’s doctors take a holistic clinical view of each case and consider the impact that
multiple  medical  conditions  could  have  on  fitness  to  drive  in  order  to  make  a  licensing
decision. Particularly complex cases are sometimes referred to one of the expert members
of  the  relevant  medical  panel  to  review  and on  occasion,  cases  may  be  discussed  at  the
relevant medical panel meeting.

All drivers have a legal responsibility to notify the DVLA of the onset or worsening of a relevant
medical condition. It is an offence not to do so and drivers who fail to notify or make a false
declaration can be fined up to £1,000.

Drivers are encouraged to discuss any concerns about their ongoing driving fitness with their
own  healthcare  professionals  and to notify  the DVLA where  appropriate.  The DVLA takes
road safety very seriously and the UK’s roads are among  the safest in the world. However,
we are not complacent and our processes and policies are kept under review. Last year the
DVLA  issued  a  call  for  evidence  to  gather  a  wide  range  of  views  and  evidence  that  may
support future  changes  to the  legal  framework  which  underpins  the  current medical  driver
licensing process in Great Britain. The responses are currently being analysed.

 I am grateful to you for bringing your concerns to my attention. I can assure you that we take
road safety very seriously and we are focused on ensuring that only those who are fit to drive
are granted a licence to do so.

Yours sincerely

Head of Strategy and Policy

Find out about DVLA’s online services
Visit: www.gov.uk/dvla

Related reports

Other reports by Jessica Swift

See all →

More reports categorised “Road (Highways Safety) related deaths”

See all →

Track Road (Highways Safety) related deaths

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Road (Highways Safety) related deaths, and how often a new one appears.

What would an alert for this have sent me? Search the full text

Free to try — the preview shows the real matches and how many arrived in the last 12 months. Your first email alert is free.

These reports are published by the Chief Coroner's office at judiciary.uk and are © Crown copyright. The text here is reproduced from the published PDF so it can be searched. If something on this page is wrong, or you are a person named in it and want it reviewed, email drcjar@gmail.com and we will act promptly.