DVLA's 14-week driving license fiasco – the tech, people and chatbot trying to clear it
The UK's Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) has faced significant delays in processing medical driving license applications, with wait times reaching over 14 weeks in February. To address the backlog, the agency introduced a new casework system and hired additional staff, reducing the average decision time to 56.6 working days by April. The improvements include an online portal and a modernized IT system, though applicants continue to experience prolonged processing times.
- ▪The DVLA took an average of 71.4 working days to process medical driving license applications in February 2026.
- ▪A new Drivers Medical Casework System, built on Microsoft Dynamics 365 and supplied by Kerv Communications, was introduced to replace a legacy IT system.
- ▪The DVLA launched an online portal on 31 March 2026 for reporting medical conditions and applying for licenses.
- ▪The agency hired 43 additional medical caseworkers, with 22 more expected to join soon.
- ▪Non-medical license applications were processed in an average of 1.2 working days from January to mid-April 2026.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
Public Sector DVLA's 14-week driving license fiasco – the tech, people and chatbot trying to clear it Medical license applicants still waiting months while agency insists it's 'putting things right' SA Mathieson Fri 1 May 2026 // 08:30 UTC The Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) has introduced new techto support driving license applications that require medical checks, after processing times exceeded 14 weeks in February. Transport minister Simon Lightwood told the House of Commons it took an average of 71.4 working days to decide on such licenses in February, partly due to increases in the numbers and complexity of applications. "That pressure was compounded by the need to replace a legacy IT system," he said on 23 April.
…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at The Register.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from The Register
