I have a relative who recieved a parking charge notice from a private parking company. It became apparent later that 50 cars were issued with PCN's. The car park in question is retail and it borders a free council run one. What i and probably you find annoying is how the DVLA issue our details out like confetti.
What i would like to ask the forum is.
1. Does anyone know of an individual putting a complaint to the DVLA regarding this.
2. What response did they get.
3. Anyone know of any statistics of such.
My reasoning here is have thet been challenged on this matter of issuing our info out.
|
www.dft.gov.uk/dvla/foi/Disclosure/ReleaseofInfo.aspx
If you open the above it will take you to the register of requests to the DVLA under the freedom of information act. If you open the PDF for request of information dated 17 December 2007 you will find the DVLA's justification for issuing registered keeper info. to private car parking companies.
|
|
The response date 4th October 2007 will giver you the statistics
|
|
I don't consider that any details the DVLA may have about me or my car are confidential.
|
I sent off the change of keeper form when I sold the Volvo and included the application for a refund of the RFL.
I got back a notification thanking me for putting my car on SORN and warning me about the dangers of driving whilst SORNed.
A stiff letter is going back to them on Tuesday.
|
I really can't see the point of having to redeclare SORN every year - must create a tremendous amount of admin that the DVLA have to take on. Seems the system doesn't work as well as it should either: -
tinyurl.com/2av6g8n
|
Ash, "create a tremendous amount of admin". Yes. And in the government's eyes that's a bad thing because...?
JH
|
Actually, to be fair, the DVLA are the most efficient (only?) government department going.
you could sack 90% of the staff there and the computers keep it all going. The only reason they havent is because its in wales.
|
The Information Commissioner has issued guidance on the subject which can be viewed at tinyurl.com/38zzku Parking enforcement is a legitimate reason for DVLA to disclose data.
There may be other issues around how organisations are allowed electronic access to the keeper register but they are outside the scope of this question. Brentus's relative can of course ignore the PCN. As advised previously these things are to all intents and purposes unenforceable, though I guess revisiting the same car park might invite a clamp or tow.
|
Thanks Bromptonaut. Yes i already told my relative to ignore any correspondence.
I think thier are a lot of issues around disclosure of personnel info especially from the dvla. L'escargot is correct everyone has your details, he says he is not bothered. I am sure he would be if an undesirable got hold of it.
|
Ah yes JH - I was looking at it from a common sense perspective. My mistake ;)
|
|
Thanks, AshT - that's very, very good.
|
|
Need to redeclare SORN every year mirrors re-licensing & provides a check that the vehicle is still extant and in same keepership. Unfortunately the public cannot be relied on to provide updates themselves.
|
>> Unfortunately the public cannot be relied on to provide updates themselves.
That's what a SORN asks them to do, though!
|
>> I don't consider that any details the DVLA may have about me or my car
>> are confidential.
>>
Please send me your full name, address, and details of all cars you own. I would like to clone them.
|
>> >> I don't consider that any details the DVLA may have about me or my
>> car
>> >> are confidential.
>> >>
>>
>>
>> Please send me your full name address and details of all cars you own. I
>> would like to clone them.
>>
Details of me and my car are already known by employees of DVLA, employees of my insurer, employees of the dealer I bought it from and employees of the dealer at which I get it serviced. What could you do that they can't?
|
>> >> >> What could you do that they can't?
>>
They are presumed trustworthy, and would be traceable and could be disciplined and prosecuted. Letting personal information out into the wide world, as in "not confidential" would surely lay yourself open to all sorts car/identity theft?
|
Surely the posiiton the DVLA take is a reasonable. Detail of who a car belongs to cannot reasonably be held to be confidental nor should it be freely available. It should however be available to anyone who has a reason to ascertain that info.
If a car were parked illegally on my property I think it is reasonable that I should be able to find out who the owner of that car is. How I go about dealing with the offending parking is not the business of the DVLA
|
>> Detail of who a car belongs
>> to cannot reasonably be held to be confidental nor should it be freely available.>>
We are surely misusing words here. If information is not confidential then it means someone who has that information is free to pass it on to anyone they like.
If I learn something at work that is confidential I keep it to myself. If it is not confidential I can talk about it freely down the pub or post it on the internet.
|
Understand what you say but to me there seem to be three alternatives:
1 Information is confidential so should not be disclosed to anyone without the car owners permission-
2 Information is not confidential and should be publicly available e.g online
3 Information is not confidential but is only available if you have reasonable grounds for acquiring it - the current DVLA and legal situation
Position 1 is obviously not workable, 2 seems OK to me but I know many would find this uncomfortable, 3 is a reasonable compromise.
|
<< 3 is a reasonable compromise.
>>
But in practice what that means is that it is available to cowboy clampers, anyone willing to tell a small lie saying why they need the information, or people who know someone with access who is not too scrupulous about looking it up for them.
|
So what would you like them to do? Surely the problem lies with the law relating to clamping and not with disclosure of info.by the DVLA.
|
I wasn't actually advocating a solution to anything, just pointing out the meaning of the word "confidential", and that the logical consequence of saying DVLA information was not confidential is that it should be available to view.
But since you ask, I think we should go back and remember the reasons for having a car registration system in the first place. Surely these were:
1) So that vehicles could be uniquely identified and so taxed
2) Because the police, traffic regulation authorities, and the general public had a right to be able to identify miscreant vehicles and their drivers.
It was therefore long ago accepted that vehicles should carry registration plates, and that these identification numbers should be easily read by anyone with normal eyesight.
It seems to me therefore that the inescapable logic is that vehicle registration information is not confidential, but should be freely available. If that causes problems of identity theft, then owners should fit their cars with other, more secure, means of identification, the same as they are advised to with other valuable items.
|
DVLA Complaints - CGNorwich
