|
2012 I was asked to attend a medical. I had done so before, so no problem with the process at that time. And no issues were found to cause my licence to be refused.
As I understand it these medicals are required every three years until age 65, unless a medical reason requires an annual medical.
As no issues were detailed to me, I expected my next medical to be in 2015.
In 2013, no medical was required, bearing out my premise.
Except I was asked to attend a medical in 2014, the council citing that I require an annual medical.
I wrote to ask why and was told I was advised in 2012 by the doctor that I would require an annual medical. As I was not, I queried this with the council to ascertain the reason why I was now all of a sudden being required for medical annually.
Now you would think this wouldn't be a problem for a properly administered council system?
After all, in order to prove the integrity of the process, wouldn't the council check to ensure that proper reasons for recall annually were given, in order to prevent the private company just racking up fees for annual medicals that were not really needed, in other words the process being abused by service providers turning it into a cash cow?
No so in Edinburgh's case. Once again the information doesn't exist, no checks appear to have been made to ensure proper compliance.
Now the serious issue here is that in order for a doctor to have reason to examine me annually for fitness, he would have to know what the problem is. I wasn't told so the assumption is that he may have found something which impacts on my health and I have no knowledge of what it is, or able to do anything to deal with it.
So, the council is obscuring the "problem" potentially injurious to my health.
So, why won't the council tell me what the problem is?
And, in the absence of this information, how can there be any confidence that the annual examination is a medical necessity and not just the latest ruse trumped up to refuse my licence?
How can I have any confidence that any medical I now subject myself to will be conducted independently and in an unbiased way.
And it also causes me some concern that the female who called me today to ask me to attend for examination again told me that if I was refusing to attend at this time, then she would get back on to "Eddie" (Edward Molloy, Licensing Officer) and let him know. So, how cosy is their relationship? And I'm supposed to trust this process?
Surprise, surprise, the company I attended for medical in 2012 is no longer the service provider, it has been replaced by city health.
Isn't this just another deliberate f*ck up by City of Edinburgh Council, which fires out processes affecting our lives, and without bothering to test the impact they have on our fundamental rights?
I've asked the questions, now I can watch as they squirm to find a way not to answer them.
_________________
Skull, "You are a police inspector, aren't you?"
Cab Inspector Smith, "Yes."
Skull, "So, are you going to tell Mr Taylor what his rights are?"
Smith, "And ... What rights?"
|
Login
Register
FAQ
