BANNED
PLATES
Car licence plates which bear the sequence SN07
were banned from the streets of Edinburgh because
they are "offensive". The plate had
been due to follow on from the SN56 registration
but officials at the DVLA changed the plate to
TN07 to avoid it being similar to the word
"snot". The change means that cars
registered in the capital are the only ones in
Scotland not to begin with an S.
A DVLA spokesperson said the decision to change
the plates was taken to avoid offending car
buyers in the capital and added, "It is our
policy that any registration mark that can be
construed as being offensive to people will be
suppressed. In this case, the SN07 marks would
have been too similar to the word 'snot' and, as
that could possibly offend some buyers, they were
replaced with new TN07 registrations."
(Source: BBC News, Jul/07) |
|
|
DVLA
Page 1 | 2 | 3
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. The agency made more than £4 million last year
by selling the details of 1.6 million drivers. It sold
900 names and addresses to Newline Securities and Parking
Control Management, both of which have repeatedly
double-charged drivers for parking breaches and inflated
bills by adding spurious charges. Newline left a family
stranded overnight after seizing a car and refusing to
allow the owner to retrieve his house keys.
PCM charged an elderly couple £375 after they parked for
30 minutes outside a boarded-up office. The agency has
continued to sell drivers details to the companies
despite being aware of their behaviour. This contradicts
the agencys claim that it carefully vets companies
seeking access to the vehicle register. The agency also
claims that it denies access to companies that have
breached the industry code on parking enforcement.
Parking companies seek drivers names and addresses
when they have been unable to clamp a vehicle.
They use closed-circuit television to read numberplates
and, having obtained the owners details from the
DVLA, send demands for payment in the post. If the driver
fails to pay, the companies multiply the charge and send
debt collectors to peoples homes. There is no right
of appeal to an independent body, as there is for parking
fines incurred on the public highway. The DVLA offers
parking companies two ways of obtaining drivers
details: they can either apply manually for each
individual address or be granted automatic access via an
electronic link to the entire register.
The DVLA claims that there are safeguards covering each
approach. Companies seeking automatic access must sign up
to the British Parking Associations (BPA)
self-governing industry code. Usage of the automatic
route has doubled in the past five years, with companies
obtaining names and addresses of 1.37 million drivers
this way in the year to the end of March. With manual
applications, the companies merely have to show that they
have a contract to enforce parking on private land. The
DVLA admits the manual approach is open to abuse and is
proposing to require all applicants, by either route, to
be BPA members.
However, there is evidence that the BPA fails to enforce
its code and ignores evidence of breaches by its members,
including Newline and PCM. The owner of PCM, David Blake,
sits on the BPA panel, which is supposed to ensure fair
treatment for drivers. Newline charged Panos Eliades
£532 to retrieve his car after he parked on a private
road in North London. Newline charged separate fees for
clamping and removal, even though the BPA code states
that only one fee can be imposed if the car is removed
within three hours of being clamped.
The BPA has admitted that PCM and Newline breached its
code but it is refusing to suspend or expel either
company. The DVLA states on its website that
failure to comply with the BPA code could result in
suspension and expulsion, and mean that they could no
longer apply for information from the DVLA vehicle
record. A DVLA spokesman said, We encourage
anyone who believes their data has been misused to report
it through our complaints procedure to inform our
handling of future queries. We keep our processes under
constant review to ensure they remain robust.
(Source: Times Online, Jun/09)
<<<
Prev
|
|
|