In an article in The Times, is says that The DVLA is selling drivers? names and addresses to clamping companies that break industry rules by charging drivers more than £500 for minor parking breaches
link to 'The Times' removed as they are not permitted here.
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 06/06/2009 at 17:20
|
Nothing new. I have some serious concerns that the DVLA will sell your address for a nominal fee to anyone with a half baked un-corroborated story.
If you went to a Police Station and, gave them a reg number and they handed the registered keepers details over someone would be in serious poo for breaching Data Protection. Can't see any difference.
|
As soon as you make something governmental into an "agency", and suggest to them that they're some sort of half-baked version of Tesco and have to make money, they will start selling odd bits and pieces of whatever they have to sell here and there.
There's something to be said for keeping public sector stuff firmly in the public sector IMHO.
|
DVLA = Capita PLC, same as TV License Autority etc...
One of New Labour's preferred corporate partners.
|
Re: Rogue wheel clampers...
Has anyone tried to bring a prosecution under the Road Safety Act 1986, section 70....
'Tampering or intefering with a motor vehicle without good cause or excuse'?
|
IIRC, anyone can buy data from DVLA paying them a fee.
|
|
|
|
.... something governmental into an "agency", ... and have to make money, they will start selling ... .
There's something to be said for keeping public sector stuff firmly in the public sector IMHO. >>
IMO, you are on completely on the wrong track there.
1. Would you prefer that DVLA carried out their statutory duty to provide this information free of charge? The charge is there to discourage frivolous applications and to recover some of their costs in providing the service. That is the same principle as buying information from the Land Registry, or Companies House, etc.
2. The legal basis on which this is done was covered here:
www.out-law.com/page-8439
tinyurl.com/38zzku [pdf file of the official ICO guidance]
3. There is/was consultation on tightening the controls on which companies could buy the information:
www.dvla.gov.uk/media/pdf/consultations/cons160309...f
|
Currently electronic access to the DVLA database for Parking Enforcement is limited to those approved under a sel regulation scheme run by the British Aprking Association. DVLA were consulting on extending that requirment to enforcers using paper based access. A degree of progress but does nothing to answer criticism that the BPA is funded and run by some of the biggest offenders against good practice.
The consultation was only for 6 weeks and was limited to the parking industry AA/RAC and the Information Commissioner. Cabinet Office require public consultations to run for 13 weeks but in view of the limited audience ministers approved 6 weeks in this case.
|
|
|
Thanks, jbif. Your link took me to this:
The Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) may pass on individuals? personal details if there is good reason, such as the prevention or detection of crime, according to guidance published today by the Information Commissioner?s Office (ICO). >>
In what readily comprehensible sense is clamping those who infringe parking regulations or sending them a fine by post anything to do with the "prevention and detection of crime"?
|
In what readily comprehensible sense is clamping those who infringe parking regulations or sending them a fine by post anything to do with the "prevention and detection of crime"? >>
Okay, then here is a lesson in English:
" .... if there is good reason, such as the prevention or detection ... "
"such as" means it is one example. It does not mean it is the only good reason.
|
"such as" means it is one example. It does not mean it is the only good reason. >>
Here is an expanded list of reasonable causes: Last Updated: 17/03/2009
"Release of information from DVLA?s vehicle register
The provisions governing the release of information from the vehicle register are long established and pre-date the existence of the DVLA. Identical provisions were available to local councils when they had responsibility for vehicle registration and licensing.
Currently, Regulation 27 of the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2002 allows the Agency to release information from its vehicle register to the police, to local authorities for the investigation of an offence or decriminalised parking contravention, and to anybody who demonstrates ?reasonable cause? to have the information made available to them. Regulations also allow for a fee to be charged to cover the cost of processing requests.
?Reasonable cause? is not defined in legislation but release is normally associated with road safety, events occurring as a direct consequence of the use of the vehicle, the enforcement of road traffic legislation and the collection of taxes. The Agency has to evaluate very carefully the reasons for the request as well as the way in which the information will be used before releasing the information.
This means that information will be lawfully made available for a variety of purposes under the reasonable cause provisions. Circumstances that have previously been considered to meet ?reasonable cause? are listed below. A list of bodies the Agency has previously considered demonstrated reasonable is also available.
Information is released on condition that it relates to and will only be used for the purpose of which it was requested. It is an offence under the Data Protection Act to obtain information under false pretences or for information to be used for any purpose other than that for which it was released. The Agency will refer any suspicious applications to the Information Commissioner for investigation and where appropriate prosecution.
Circumstances in which information has previously been released
safety recall by vehicle manufacturer ? to enable the manufacturer, or an agent acting on their behalf, to trace keepers to ensure that a vehicle is checked and any modifications are made
abandoned Vehicles ? to help trace keepers who abandon their vehicles on private property outside the control of local authorities
minor hit and run incidents ? to help trace keepers of vehicles involved in minor hit and run incidents not warranting a full police investigation.Circumstances could include incidents of personal injury or damage to property
toll/road charges ? information may be released to help trace keepers of vehicles that have failed to pay road/tunnel/bridge charges
drive-offs ? to help trace keepers of vehicles that drive off without paying for goods/services. Circumstances could include incidents of failing to pay for petrol or repairs for a vehicle
unauthorised parking on private land ? to help landlords or their agents to trace keepers who obstruct access, contravene parking restrictions or trespass on private land
suspected fraud ? to establish keepers of vehicles where insurance claims have been received
investigations into suspected vehicle ?clocking? ? to confirm if a vehicle?s recorded mileage is genuine
enforcement of traffic related offences outside the UK ? to UK agents acting on behalf of non-UK authorities to pursue keepers for non payment of penalties for parking and toll road violations incurred outside the UK
stolen cheque payments ? to investigate payments related to a vehicle using stolen cheques
tracing company assets ? to a liquidator appointed by the court to confirm the assets of a company following insolvency
confirmation of keeper details to ensure seizure of correct vehicle by bailiff/debt collection agents under court order
person acting as an executor of a deceased?s estate to confirm vehicle assets "
Edited by jbif on 06/06/2009 at 18:57
|
As I said, and demonstrated above by your helpful list of examples, the release of the information has precious little to do with the prevention or detection of crime.
And no, I wouldn't rather have information released for free. I'd rather not have it released.
Frankly I don't think the "reasonable cause" argument is good enough. Why should someone be able to find out my name and address by saying I'd parked on private land?
And in your helpful lesson in English, the comma should go after the word "then" and not before it.
|
And no, I wouldn't rather have information released for free. I'd rather not have it released. >>
Well, then tell your MP. [Are you Mr. Cross in disguise?]
And in your helpful lesson in English, the comma should go after the word "then" and not before it. >>
I disagree. The comma can be used correctly in either place.
p.s. Is it correct to say "I wouldn't"?
Edited by jbif on 06/06/2009 at 21:07
|
|
|
|
|
|
_COLON_no_upscale()/cdn.uk.prod.group-mobility-trader.com/images/cas/89299d347ff035f5a09f2d539db70815/e526d612085f60be7b2ba59f71c91e4a.jpg)
_COLON_no_upscale()/cdn.uk.prod.group-mobility-trader.com/images/cas/b2f969b9bf341e7523f7ba55e182ca78/1fc3d45a4d6ebf327e4e388c698f3072.jpg)
