From my perspective, I think that this is something that we haven't quite got right yet. It's a good question, but you need to decide what you want from the answer. Is it your aim to make people safer - i.e. less likely to be involved in a collision that could lead to injury, or to protect the business in the event that someone is involved in a serious accident and the focus is on your management of driving activities. A combination of both is perfectly reasonable of course. But in terms of controls, I see people randomly throwing in things not really considering what it is they are trying to achieve. Mixing the two streams leads to confusion in my view. Giving people an eye test, checking their licences, passing out handbooks, writing policies, providing material on better driving, limiting use of personal vehicles etc etc all have a different effect not only on likelihood but on different regions of 'risk' associated with the topic. Individual safety of each driver can only be influenced so far. There are 28 million idiots all out there coming at you (ok you know what I mean) and there are so many variables that you can only do what you can do. No reason not to do it, but there is a limit. In terms of operational risk management, the controls are different and stem more from how serious you are about the personal risk factors in the individual risk set. We can all say how much we take driving seriously, but that road is paved with good intention isn't it. When it comes to demonstrating your business's appetite for living those values will you be as good? So, I know I haven't provided a list of things to do, but I am just saying you need to determine what it is that you want good to look like and into which 'box' the various strategies will fit. Does photocopying a licence and insurance every 12 months actually make someone less likely to be in a collision? I mean really, materially? Does it show that you care, are on top of things and run a company that means business, yes it probably does. Clarity of thinking really is the key to this one, I think. Safer drivers and/or better management of driving activities. Jericho

I think that you need to clarify the situation first as like many things the question is dependent upon a number of issues and I am unsure as to exactly what your scenario is. You wrote “drive to and between various residences to work using their own private cars.” Driving from a place of residence to a designated work place is commuting. You have no immediate responsibility and their private car insurance does not require business use for this. So I see no need to check their paperwork. This can sometimes be complicated and there are some exceptions, if for example: • You do not consider issues such as forcing staff to work excessive hours (so they are tired and unfit to drive in a safe manner). • Substances used at work that may have an impact on their ability to drive. • If they are carrying freight etc. that belongs to your business. The list above is only three considerations that must be taken into account during a risk assessment. If however you send your staff to another place of work (in their car) that is not their normal place of work, require them to use their car during the working hours, or send them on a course for example, then you get in the question of use of a private vehicle for business use. My experience is that obtaining proof of MoT, business use on car insurance and details of penalty points on licences is the norm and sufficient. YES, also make sure you have a policy in place with clear instructions on what you have covered and also detail situations when staff can use mobile phones or adjust satnavs.