Stuartli while i apllaud your thinking there are many ways and reasons that the records are not up to date
i weekly try and educate mr public but the adverts are on tv and in the papers but they have the attitude that its not their responsibility so im coming round pretty fast to the idea of keeping my shop clean and ''' them.
however the dvla are also pretty intransigent ant they have a monoploy so its not a
level playing field
|
>>they have a monoploy so its not a level playing field>>
...because it's a agency working on behalf of the Government, just as with TVLicencing (which collects yet another stealth tax on its behalf, as not all the licence fee goes to the BBC as so many believe).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
>>they have a monoploy so its not a level playing field>> ...because it's a agency working on behalf of the Government just as with TVLicencing (which collects yet another stealth tax on its behalf as not all the licence fee goes to the BBC as so many believe).
>
Hey, I've got an idea, let's privatise TV Licencing - we could sell it to that nice Mr Murdoch, I bet he'd buy it and collect the money for us. In fact let's sell the BBC to nice Mr Murdoch - then we can get rid of that boring elitist BBC, which is stuffed full of overpaid Politically Correct dunces (read all about them in the Sun and Daily Mail- such a scandal) and replace it with Sky One instead. And the subscription will only be about four times the licence fee - a bargain at twice the price!
Once we've sorted that little job then let's privatise DVLA. We could break it up into three competing companies. Each with their own colour number plates. We could then have a 'market' in vehicle registration. Not sure how that would work, but I'm sure we could call in a consultancy to put something in place - I bet they wouldn't charge more that £100m to set it up for us.
|
Bit behind the times on TV licensing :-)
www.tvlicensing.co.uk/aboutus/index.jsp
|
|
|
|
I know this won't go down well, but I actually think DVLA are pretty good. I have always found them helpful if I call them and speak civilly to them. I have never had any incorrect data given (AFAIK).
Data is only as good as what we given them. If you mis-spell your name or address, or write down incorrect vehicle data (e.g. change of engine no. etc) then, yes, the data DVLA hold will be wrong. The alternative would be to have some kind of 'policing' out there, involvng going to a police station when you buy or sell a car or change any details so that it can be verified. I don't thing many folk would like that.
Still, it makes a good story for the Daily Mail....
|
When I bought my current car, they mispelled the name and address.
How can this happen in the world of databases and intrnet?
Surely they should have a system that would spot the address is invalid (just as most websites can) and that no-one of that name lives at that address (electoral roll etc..) and that someone of a 95% similar name does.
|
"and intrnet?"
Just like that ! :-)
|
|
|
When I bought my current car they mispelled the name and address. How can this happen in the world of databases and intrnet?
Given your track record (above) are you sure its they that made the mistake and not you.....? ;-)
|
are you sure its they that made the mistake>>
"it's" even...:-)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
|
|
|
Surely they should have a system that would spot the address is invalid (just as most websites can)
The postcode database itself is pretty hopeless, and relies on 8 discs in an antiquated 1970s format being updated every month. Even then they can never be entirely up-to-date, and the process relies on council workers etc. updating records.
If you've ever used a website that insists you must be on the postcode database, or maps your valid address to the nearest approximation, you will know what a bad idea this is.
|
|
|
|
|
I have found them helpful A recent mix-up by the Garage where we bought MrsP's Golf over her personal plate, I spoke to a very knowledgeable staff member then who assured me that it would be sorted. A sceptic to the core I didn't believe however a nice letter arrived a couple of weeks later acknowledging the mistake and rectifying it.
|
im sure ive put this before but you need to know the definative answer before you phone them or otherwise they will blind you with wordspeak
this is why i pleaded last week for leniancy
i also want to put on record i think they do a dammed good job
|
I find the DVLA the best govt agency that I deal with, possibly not as good as my electricity supplier but certainly far far better than the clowns that provide my gas.
--
I read often, only post occasionally
|
|
|
|
>Still, it makes a good story for the Daily Mail....
This wasn't a story in your favorite fish-wrap.
It was an unsolicited admission from the DVLA themselves - which conjures up a few other questions.
Why would the DVLA be pro-actively notifying the finance industry of the unreliability of their records?
They wouldn't be trying to worm their way out of responsibility for money-laundering id problems would they? Nah, they wouldn't do that.
Kevin...
|
t wasn't only in the Daily Mail....:-)
But why spoil a good tale for the sake of accuracy?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
>But why spoil a good tale for the sake of accuracy?
Stuartli,
If you are trying to infer that my OP is "a good tale" unspoiled by "accuracy" then you are seriously mistaken.
Kevin...
|
>>then you are seriously mistaken. >>
I wasn't referring, in any way, to your posting...:-)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
|
t wasn't only in the Daily Mail....:-) But why spoil a good tale for the sake of accuracy?
What a bizarre thing to say. If he's read it in the Daily Mail, how is he supposed to know it has been reported elsewhere as well?
Should we all check every other paper in the newagent before daring to raise something we've seen on here?
|
>>how is he supposed to know it has been reported elsewhere as well?>>
As a retired journalist, I'm well use to finding out information - I was referring to the media in general, not just newspapers...:-)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
It was an unsolicited admission from the DVLA themselves - which conjures up a few other questions.
As I read the OP, it wasn't unsolicited, it was a very carefully worded answer to a probing question regarding the accuracy of their records.
"Unsolicited" would mean that suddenly, out of the blue and apropos nothing, they chose to announce that millions of their records were incorrect.
|
in reply to the o.p. by kevin; taking his points in turn:
My wife works in the finance industry. One of the forms of id she is allowed to accept for money-laundering and fraud regulations (two are required) is a drivers license.
in which case she should know that the "msb2 anti money laundering (aml)guide" issued by hmrc gives full guidance on how to make sure that the aml requirements are properly satisfied.
This week she received an interesting letter from the DVLA. In the carefully worded letter they warn that 7.8 Million of their license records are considered to be inaccurate in one way or another.
in which case why was she not already aware of this fact which is very old news, assuming she is a responsible aml professional.
That is just driver licenses - I wonder how accurate the vehicle registration and road tax databases are?
if you and your wife are really interested (and she should be if she is a responsible aml professional), use your favourite search engine for these three words: dvla records accuracy
|
I still think DVLA could do a lot to put their house in order like implementing a database of cars currently available for sale.
OK, there are still expceptions which would manually have to be keyed and older cars would not be worth the hassle but for mainstream models it would save a lot of time and hassle.
I have a Volvo S60 which I bough from a Volvo main dealer where it was first registered.
The V5 showed the car as an estate, something a post2000 S60 has never been.
The dealer filled in the form in front of me when I bough the car, noting the body type was incorrect and the car was a 4 door saloon. I checked this and the information given was correct.
My V5 now shows the S60 as a 3 door hatchback and somehow I am responsible for verifying this is correct.
Even when you do give them the correct information, they still screw it up.
At least they can still manage to sell your details to anyone for a few quid.
|
p.s. to kevin
re : .. the "msb2 anti money laundering (aml)guide" issued by hmrc ...
do note that another acceptable document metnioned is a passport. now that is not a very accurate document either as evidenced here
www.passport.gov.uk/downloads/HC1544_UKPS.pdf
as your wife probably knows, best advice from the treasury, hmrc, fsa, and bba is : " k.y.c. "
|
I still think DVLA could do a lot to put their house in order like implementing a database of cars currently available for sale.
Sounds straightforward, and I think they're someway there as our 05 car shows six letter variant/version codes on its V5. But what about all the special editions, the Cyprus or wherever versions sold through car warehouses and those that sat unsold on airfields for 2 years?
Currently available is a pretty elastic definition !!!
|
Dalglish,
I told the wife that "she should know that the "msb2 anti money laundering (aml)guide" issued by hmrc gives full guidance on how to make sure that the aml requirements are properly satisfied."
I then asked her "why was she not already aware of this fact which is very old news, assuming she is a responsible aml professional." and "if she is a responsible aml professional" she should be Googling "dvla records accuracy".
I am typing this from my bed at North Hampshire Hospital using a pencil held in my mouth. Thank-you.
Kevin...
|
PS. It still doesn't explain why DVLA would be pro-actively advertising the fact that their records are so woefully inaccurate.
Kevin...
|
It still doesn't explain why DVLA would be pro-actively advertising the fact that their records are so woefully inaccurate.
they are just reminding sloppy finance professionals that the dvla is not there to do the job for the joint money laundering steering committee (jmlsc), or the hmrc, or for that matter the police.
and i am just as puzzled as to why you are advertising the fact that your wife seems so woefully unaware of the aml & jmlsc "guidance" on this matter (in common with many professional finance people who do not seem to know the difference between guidance and the law ).
"k.y.c." is the king in this matter, and a "risk based approach" is the new mantra in achieving this.
|
p.s. to kevin - in case it is not obvious, i am saying that people who live in glass houses ....
(perhaps your wife's employer should be asking if they themselves or her are "fit for the purpose". )
|
(perhaps your wife's employer should be asking if they themselves or her are "fit for the purpose". )
thoroughly agree dogleash........
on the occasions i need to properly identify myself, i have the benefit of a police warrant card, with my ugly mug on it, unique number and easily checkable........yet..........often this isn't deemed acceptable for me to prove my id, i have to use my driving licence.......there are loads more dodgy driving licences doing the rounds than there ever are police warrant cards.... (and,it used to be the old green thing with no photograph on it).
where's the sense in that.........oh well 'rules are rules'.....let's just go through the motions rather than doing it properly
|
>they are just reminding sloppy finance professionals that the dvla is not there to do the job for
>the joint money laundering steering committee (jmlsc), or the hmrc, or for that matter the police.
Yeah, right!
In a moment of sudden enlightenment the DVLA decided that the UK finance industry didn't have enough official guidance and regulatory watchdogs so they'd fix that by sending out a letter telling everyone how inaccurate their own records are.
I guess you had to bend over to pull that one out.
>and i am just as puzzled as to why you are advertising the fact that your wife seems so woefully
>unaware of the aml & jmlsc "guidance" on this matter
Mmmm,
Since your only contributions to a thread about the accuracy of DVLA records have turned into a personal attack on my wife I will try and answer you in terms that hopefully you can understand. If you have problems, try running your finger under the words as you read them or ask someone to help.
i) She did not complain about the DVLA. I am the one questioning the DVLA's worth.
ii) You are the only person in this thread who seems to think that my wife (and other finance professionals) rely entirely on drivers licenses or DVLA data as proof of ID. I merely mentioned that they are allowed to accept it as one form of ID.
iii) She is very well aware of the regulations and "guidance", probably more so than you are. She has a dedicated "technical team" who's only responsibility is to ensure that everyone understands the regulations and guidance and they are strictly adhered to in every case. In addition; her own dept. is overseen by two other separate depts. called "Compliance" and "Governance" - guess what they do. Anyone who steps outside official guidance or procedures is immediately given a "Rule Breach" which can and does lead to dismissal depending on severity and frequency. You don't last long if you don't know what you're doing.
iv) If your intent is to snippity snip
Kevin...
Moderated and you know why....! - PU
|
in reply to kevin:
i am questioning your labelling the dvla as "not fit for purpose" based on 2nd hand information from your wife.
re your point (iv) -
bring it on. i have challenged: legal counsel at two major building societies; the compliance officers at one major insurance company and one major international investment fund management company; and ian mullen of the bba, during the past few months, re. the jmslg guidance and its interpretation, and won hands down. so many professionals misunderstand it and that it beggars belief. they try to hide behind compliance and governance departments in the hope that that will demonstrate to the fsa that their company has done a good job when al theytend to do is no better than the worst "jobsworths" who fail to understand the subtle language of the guidance (even though the 2006 revision tried to make it easier for them.)
now back to motoring - i.mo. the dvla do a far better job, nay, an excellent job, compared to many commercial financial institutions in the uk.
|
>I am questioning your labelling the dvla as "not fit for purpose" based on 2nd hand information from your wife.
No you were not. Read your own posts again.
>"just reminding sloppy finance professionals.."
>"your wife seems so woefully unaware of the aml & jmlsc "guidance" on this matter.."
>"perhaps your wife's employer should be asking if they themselves or her are "fit for the purpose"
You were trying to pump your own ego by implying that my wife personally, (and other finance professionals), work to the same standards that you have seen in other organizations when all I had said was that she had received a letter from the DVLA admitting the inaccuracies in their records.
That was completely out of order and I called you on it.
>I am questioning your labelling the dvla as "not fit for purpose" based on 2nd hand information from your wife.
So you attack my wife based on 2nd hand information from me?
I suppose only hypocrites can have it both ways.
I agree that the finance industry has more than it's fair share of cowboys and it always will (that's where the money is). My wife comes home angry at least one night every week because she's had to deal with IFA's or other companies who are fleecing their clients (and there's very little she can do about it).
There are also IFA's who are genuinely doing their best for their clients. You get good and bad in every profession, deal with it.
>re your point (iv) -
>bring it on...
So that was your intent.
>now back to motoring - i.mo. the dvla do a far better job, nay, an excellent job, compared to
>many commercial financial institutions in the uk.
7.8 million erroneous records out of a total of 37 million (iirc) is "an excellent job"????
Dalglish - You are Tony Blair and I claim my five pounds!
"Back to motoring" - Good idea.....PU
Kevin...
|
|
|
|
|
|
