Driving card and diabetes

I repeat, take an eye to the BOE and read all the tests that are supposed to be done.
In my last recognition I played a seventy doctor and many years.I was very attracted to age.
Where less tests have done to me.

If you declare diabetes, they may not assure you the car, just as they do not make life insurance in many mutuals.Nor doe, I have already looked and ask for a lot, it will be in case the palms ahead of time.

Going "legal" in this society, leaves you out.

pot said:
hello.

I don't write much but I read you and learn with interest.My case is as follows: I am 68 years old and I have been with diabetes and insulin for more than 40 years, and fortunately I have no sequelae ...... Wood.

I will also take many years with the driving license, (only of cars). Always I renew it I never said anything about diabetes and I never had problems.

The fact is that when I renew it next time I will reach 70 years, (I hope) and I have read there that if it is not declared they can put high fines.

This morning being in a trusted mechanical workshop, I told the boss and told me that I would not have problems, in any case play a role of the doctor, I suppose to say that I can drive.

Has anyone been in this situation?

What do you think?

Thanks and greetings.

Hello, I think the best is always telling the truth.Not only with diabetes but with any other pathologies that collect the standards.
With diabetes and car you have to think about other people who can be victims for hypoglycemia.

And I ask those who declare it:
Communicate that you are diabetic prevents you from having hypoglycemia and affecting other vehicles or pedestrians?Are you a better driver?

ruthbia said:
and I ask those who declared it:
Communicate that you are diabetic prevents you from having hypoglycemia and affecting other vehicles or pedestrians?Are you a better driver?

True, to others when you declare diabetes, the important thing is to be well controlled, since if you pass the tests they ask you in medical recognition, they give you as apt, the only thing that influences another that is not diabetic is in the time of renewal (10years) for the rest you have the same rights

I advise to say it, you stay much quieter, because in case of accident the insurance doctor will have access to your history and will be a problem.
For renewing it every 5 years, it is not worth taking risks.

Good morning

I have read your words.Opinions for all tastes.If what it is about is to give this forum vidilla, it has been achieved with this issue.Decisions are usually made after one informed.And my coclusions, and my opinion, in which I ratify myself, for an issue that at my age I value greatly: tranquility, it is better to go legal.
Each, regardless of other considerations, legal ins and outs, undercover traps and the occasional pilla, to do what it creates most appropriate.In any case, it is enriching to read so much diversity of opinions, and even entertaining.

Greetings to everyone.

I emphasize each, each one who does what they want.I know perfectly what he puts in the BOE, Ruthbia, and if you can show that he has not made recognition as he says, because you are in your right to denounce it and then he or she has a problem.But if you have an accident, even a friction, worse if it is more serious, and you have not said it;Who performs an illegality and therefore annuls the insurance (but they do not return the money by assuming that not doing so is bad faith) is you.Like or not like.

And declare that you are diabetic does not prevent you from having hypos or go with hyper, etc.And something can happen to you.What makes you legally protect yourself.Moreover, for what they say of recognition tests.If I were the doctor and come to me they have not done the tests, I would say: "These tests (like the sound) did not do them because it is shown that the loss of hearing is from x age. The person, he did not tell meThat I worked in a risk profession and not saying that it was diabetic, I did not assume that it could have a risk factor.And it will turn out that one thinking of blame the doctor, but not saying everything, you leave the door open so that the fault, even if they do not do the tests is yours.Because I warn you, diabetes is a risk factor for many things.If anyone studies medicine and ask in class (of the subject that is and speaking of anything) "what is a risk factor?", If you say diabetes, will you succeed in 98%.

After everyone does what they want, everyone knows their circumstances, as I said the bad is that as it said it is doubled, at least and that cannot be paid by the whole world.And by the way, if I think we should fight for that to regulate, not allowing those climbs without justification.But well, that each one can do what he wants.

@Nosft that is not entirely true.With full risk insurance, if you steal your car and the thief has an accident, it covers him to the same thief.It was as the mutual explained to me.My mutual covers me 3 parts a year without contrary.
The evidence indicated by the BOE are mandatory, regardless of age X of the driver.Nor do you have to declare your profession, that's what the work mutual is.

We have already said before the mutual by subscribing the insurance does not ask for the state of health as it happens with medical insurance, it is the recognition center that must ask and guarantee the state of health, but as we all know, they only open the box, they charge and give you the "Apt".In other countries the driving card is taken once and is for a lifetime, without reviews.See Germany for example.

I would like you to write a diabetic that has had a mishap and that the mutual has not covered him for his condition;that he had to bes to and demonstrate that he was not under the effects of hypoglycemia at the time of the accident.

ruthbia said:
@nosft that is not entirely true.With full risk insurance, if you steal your car and the thief has an accident, it covers him to the same thief.It was as the mutual explained to me.My mutual covers me 3 parts a year without contrary.
The evidence indicated by the BOE are mandatory, regardless of age X of the driver.Nor do you have to declare your profession, that's what the work mutual is.

We have already said before the mutual by subscribing the insurance does not ask for the state of health as it happens with medical insurance, it is the recognition center that must ask and guarantee the state of health, but as we all know, they only open the box, they charge and give you the "Apt".In other countries the driving card is taken once and is for a lifetime, without reviews.See Germany for example.

I would like you to write a diabetic that has had a mishap and that the mutual has not covered him for his condition;that I had to printed and demonstrate that it was not under the effects of hypoglycemia at the time of the accident.

How do you cover the thief?
It covers the owner of the insurance, it only was missing that you have to pay damage with paid insurance.And then they claim the thief.
The insured has not cheated, he is not to blame for anything.Nothing to do with situations in which the insured lies or hides information.

I will say it quickly and simplely.Insurance will never ensure illegality.And not declare that you are diabetic is considered as such.So it doesn't matter if this at all risk or even pay the best insurance in the world that if you have a touch with a Citroen C3 (without detracting anything from that great car) you pay the insurance a cruise and change your car for a Ferrari(I prefer Citroen, but to understand).From the moment he comes to light that you did not say that you are diabetic, he is in his right to throw himself out.Because you have broken the principle of good faith, for which you do not hide anything in order to benefit and also something that is already stipulated and regulated as mandatory;By being the case of affecting driving, as well as daltonism or people who have problems in view and strong lights can affect them.

And about the evidence, I repeat that it would be your word against that of the doctor.That already by appointing him as such, I think you will realize that his word for the administration has more weight than that of a normal person.And he will always have legal obstacles not to be done.Such as telling you that you must do audiometry test;But according to medical societies it is from x age.And the evidence, as you have said do not specify age, then it is at the optional criterion.They are mandatory, yes, he must make sure you have no problems.But before a complaint with saying that you deliberately hid information, the load or guilt you stay.No him.And I will tell you lighter, I know that because I know when that has happened (trying to blame that they did not do all the tests in recognition and because of that shortly after he had an accident. He was not diabetic and loThat they answered was that.

It is more I will tell you that even if all the tests are done and all great.If you have an accident and you have not said it, even if the fault is not of diabetes.If insurance wants (that is, if it is quite quantity and finds out that you did not declare it, your hair can fall).Since I do not pass only to drive, surely there is someone else to pass them, but also the recognition of the merchant sailors, carried out by the Social Institute of the Navy.Where they do everything, they don't skip a comma.And since the first time I was clear that I had to declare it.And that when I told the doctor he had not noticed it even in the analytics because he was perfect.That if since then they marked me as a diabetic and as soon as you enter is already the first thing they look at.But I knew that if I do not say it and I have any problem and I say that I am diabetic and it does not appear in that recognition, first the insurance that I had is thrown out, second for having lied (even if it is only not to say) by not declaring a pathology I could cost meVery expensive (and I don't talk about money).Because automatically recognition, even if it was perfect, is without any value, neither for or against anything, is wet paper, would only proof that I did not say what I should.

But that, many say nothing and not that is why the world explodes.Everyone must weigh.But do not take us to deceit that if nothing will happen.It can happen, the safest thing does not happen, because you are not going there, serious things happening, but the possibility is there.And I can't say that the statement to Merchant Marina does not prevent me.I have the title is almost 15 years ago.Well, even some few could not embark.Imagine having invested 5 years of your life in something and that they tell you that being diabetic you cannot do it.But I had other job outings.And some agoA few years already let the diabetics type 1. But with extremely restrictions.So many that I have to do a year of shipping and I even see it danger of so many restrictions they put.

That is why I think we should not argue whether or not to say it, understanding that if it is not said, it is under your responsibility since you are committing an illegality like a house and you cannot rely anything, or blame another in an illegality.But we should unite to be "yes, I am diabetic and what?"Test me and if I am the same as the rest, give me the same permission as to the rest.Not I do not drink, not smoking, having the great glycosilada, doing sports, taking care of myself.And you give me a permission only for navigations near Costa (which I would need further) because you are already giving me the maximum that the law allows, although it does not use me at all.But then to another that is obese, problems in the liver, vision, even consumer of some porrito from time to time (I know the cases and say that in the best case), with health problems, etc.;You let that other leave without any restriction or problem.That's where I see injustice, not to declare it.Because if we still had any improvement, as if it happens in the same area to people of certain studies, who only ask for 6 months of shipping, but others do not, one year (6 months a type of navigation and 6 months another type, just thethat with recognition there are problems to do).And I know there are complaints in the maritime captains by the diabetics for that.But literally, they ignore.

@isabelbota because all risk insurance cover at 5 (or 4 according to vehicles) passengers and third parties always.Not only to the driver.Even with franchises.
Another thing is that you have a third parties without occupants or a third with occupants as I had before in my previous vehicle, which also covers everyone.
Prices vary, of course.
I asked specifically and explained it as is.We cover everything, even to the car in case of accident.

@Nosft no, they don't work that way;And do not mix things.A recognition with state administration is not the same to be marine, bus driver, subway, military, police, etc.that the "private" recognition that one pays to renew the card.
They are private entities such as ITVS and hire those who want, do the tests they want and pass what they want.
Enter the list of diseases, everyone has to keep a report;I am struck by sleep disorders, anxiety, hypertension, depression or hype/hypothyroidism ...

I love illegalities, I rarely go to 50km/h in Madrid for the Castilian, neither I nor anyone ... are all illegal: D in everything, we have not paid b invoices to third parties ... and othersMany more things.

@Ruthbia
I will not go into the issue of Insurance, sector in which by the way, I have worked 10 years.You compare churras with merinas (thieves with occupants or third parties) without understanding, as they tell you, the difference between a non -guilty and someone who does not act in good faith.
I just want to make it clear what an eye with deceiving.That it will not necessarily happen, but it can have its consequences.And there each one.

I have found this article in this regard
Link
By the way, if diabetes is overtaking, that is, I have the insurance hired before debuting, is it mandatory to tell the insurance the leaks that are going out?And a non -diabetic person?Roll: I have adorned 50 kg, I have presbyce, I have arthritis, fatty liver, etc?

salad said:
I found this article in this regard
Link
By the way, if diabetes is overtaking, that is, I have the insurance hired before debuting, is it mandatory to tell the insurance the leaks that are going out?And a non -diabetic person?Roll: I have adorned 50 kg, I have presbyce, I have arthritis, fatty liver, etc?

Obviously I think not.I have worked in auto insurance and we have never asked the client about health (as well as to make a life insurance asks everything, if he smokes, if he drinks, weight, diseases ... a full -fledged interrogation).
The only thing that you can grab the insurance is that we have lied when we have been asked when renewing the driving license, when they ask us about diseases.It is difficult for them to do it but they can.And there if we should count the fat leaks.

salad said:
I found this article in this regard
Link
By the way, if diabetes is overtaking, that is, I have the insurance hired before debuting, is it mandatory to tell the insurance the leaks that are going out?And a non -diabetic person?Roll: I have adorned 50 kg, I have presbyce, I have arthritis, fatty liver, etc?

Thanks for the link to the article, which read carefully and read it again.
I only put some appointments of said article:
-"When you hire insurance for your car, the company gives you a questions about the driver and the vehicle to secure to offer you a price consistent with your risk profile. Regarding the driver, these issues are oriented to knowAge and years of experience with the card, but are not interested in your diseases.
If you suffer from an accident for an episode derived from diabetes, insurance will take care of all damages that occasions through civil liability coverage.In no case, the accidents caused by diseases exclude, unlike, for example, from the claims in which the driver circulates drunk or drugged. "-

This, according to my judgment, proves that insurance if it covers the cases of diabetes since: --- "In no case, the accidents caused by diseases" --- but eye!If the cases exclude: --- "Unlike, for example, of the claims in which the driver circulates drunk or drugged." --- (this last one made reference in previous post).
But it also says: --- "People who suffer from diabetes who have severe metabolic instability that require hospital assistance or treatment with insulin or hypoglycemic drugs, will not be suitable for obtaining or renewing the driving card of cars, motorcycles or cyclomotor. "--- and then nuance :-" However, in cases where treatment with insulin or hypoglycemic drugs is necessary, a report of the specialist that proves adequate control of the disease "can be provided ----
I believe that the last paragraph accredits how so brought and taken in previous post.
In my opinion (only in mine), I deduce that a person who is diabetic is not the same for causes outside their desire and have their controls and responsibilities well or a person who unfortunately drives drunk or drugged who, in most casesThey could avoid.
It's my opinion, thanks for the link.
Greetings.

Hello, I will explain my experience:

When I became a diabetics I had my driving license in force, I didn't have to renew it, and I didn't go to the DGT to communicate my new condition.Approximately a year later I had a circulation accident, a car envied me on the left.We did the part, I communicated it to my insurance, who does not know that I am currently a diabetic, everything was managed, an expert valued, they fixed my destruction, and nobody asked or investigated my state of health.

emily said:
hello, I will explain my experience:

When I became a diabetics I had my driving license in force, I didn't have to renew it, and I didn't go to the DGT to communicate my new condition.Approximately a year later I had a circulation accident, a car envied me on the left.We did the part, I communicated it to my insurance, who does not know that I am currently a diabetic, everything was managed, an expert valued, they fixed my destruction, and nobody asked or investigated my state of health.

Well, it wasn't yours if it came on your left, little must be investigated there.

@isabelbota will depend on each insurer, not all are the same or all customers either.I have the Mutual Madrid for 32 years and I have never had a serious accident.In the parts that I have given they have never questioned me for guilt, nor have I had to litigate as guilty, they simply belong and proceed.
The only case in which they do not cover you:
- Loss of the cardboard
- Expired card
- Car without the ITV in force
- Go with alcohol or drugs in blood

I have had to permit and sign with my collegiate number once and in my report I only analyze trajectory, damage and place of impact, then the mutuals decide with the report, never put a culprit.You have to be objective in the expertise.

If you are a foreigner, German and in your country you should never renew, what does the Spanish mutual?Don't your Spanish vehicle assure you?
I rent many cars with "normal" companies and with carsharing applications, do we also have to tell them that diabetic somo in case we hypothetically have an accident?

There are many gaps that the law does not cover.

In driving card codes, associated with diseases there are:

If you declare diabetes you can put these others:

Yes, it is better to say it, in my case apart from the diabetes I am also operated on the heart and I am half deaf of the right and I think it is the best to comment on the review although they give me only for 3 years, at least I prefer it, I knowWhat I have and although the car is vital for me I would not like to mess it with a problem of mine.