Many motorists cannot be prosecuted.

(Ziggy) said:

See here:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6568813.stm

So (just off the top of my head) why do they not have a system whereby if there
are outstanding issues with a vehicle and there has been no response to
statutory notices, these vehicles are put on a list for police and traffic
wardens to get clamped when seen?

They do

Sniper8052

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

(Ziggy) said:

See here:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6568813.stm

So (just off the top of my head) why do they not have a system whereby if
there
are outstanding issues with a vehicle and there has been no response to
statutory notices, these vehicles are put on a list for police and
traffic
wardens to get clamped when seen?

They do

I was under the impression too that it is an offence to sell a vehicle
without informing the DVLA that you have done so and to who.

So they should be fining the last known owner for that offence even though
they cannot do so for the original offence.

With speeding the keeper has a duty to inform the police who was driving if
it is not them and if they do not they too are prosecuted.

Around West Yorks the Police have had a clamp down on certain car offences
where certainly from an Exise Licence point of view but I think also others
where there are fines outstanding on the registered keeper - the vehicle are
towed away and then wait for it to be reported missing then prosecute them
or if no claim they have been crushing them.

Dave

Ziggy said:

See here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6568813.stm

"The BBC Radio 4 probe found cameras in the capital catch about 500,000
people a year, but a third of those cannot be traced to an address."

1/3 of vehicles are not properly registered - another consequence of the
speed camera proliferation. I wonder what other negative effects that
they are causing will be revealed. Not only have they apparently halted
the advances we had made in terms of road safety, but now they have also
practically nullified most of the justifications for having a motor
vehicle registration database.

--
Matt B

On 19 Apr 2007 02:14:57 -0700, "[email hidden]" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

(Ziggy) said:

See here:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6568813.stm

So (just off the top of my head) why do they not have a system whereby if there
are outstanding issues with a vehicle and there has been no response to
statutory notices, these vehicles are put on a list for police and traffic
wardens to get clamped when seen?

They do

Just extremely ineffective, apparantly.

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 10:35:27 +0100, "Dave" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

I was under the impression too that it is an offence to sell a vehicle
without informing the DVLA that you have done so and to who.

So they should be fining the last known owner for that offence even though
they cannot do so for the original offence.

Yes, but the last keeper cannot be held responsible for the new keeper using an
incorrect address.

Ziggy said:

On 19 Apr 2007 02:14:57 -0700, "[email hidden]" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

(Ziggy) said:

See here:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6568813.stm

So (just off the top of my head) why do they not have a system whereby if there
are outstanding issues with a vehicle and there has been no response to
statutory notices, these vehicles are put on a list for police and traffic
wardens to get clamped when seen?

They do

Just extremely ineffective, apparantly.

They just cannot keep up with the effect on vehicle registration that
camera enforcement of speed limits, congestion charging, parking
restrictions, etc. is having.

A potentially useful tool for the detection of serious crimes such as
hit-and-runs, has been rendered virtually useless by its abuse for the
prosecution of petty and technical motoring offences.

--
Matt B

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 10:38:42 +0100, Matt B <"matt.bourke"@nospam.london.com>

Quoted message said:

Ziggy said:

See here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6568813.stm

"The BBC Radio 4 probe found cameras in the capital catch about 500,000
people a year, but a third of those cannot be traced to an address."

1/3 of vehicles are not properly registered - another consequence of the
speed camera proliferation. I wonder what other negative effects that
they are causing will be revealed. Not only have they apparently halted
the advances we had made in terms of road safety, but now they have also
practically nullified most of the justifications for having a motor
vehicle registration database.

The simple answer to that is to have an offence of registering a vehicle at an
address at which you are not normally resident, with a nice, beefy fine (and
perhaps some points), and actually enforce the law!

Dave said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

(Ziggy) said:

See here:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6568813.stm

So (just off the top of my head) why do they not have a system whereby if
there
are outstanding issues with a vehicle and there has been no response to
statutory notices, these vehicles are put on a list for police and
traffic
wardens to get clamped when seen?

They do

I was under the impression too that it is an offence to sell a vehicle
without informing the DVLA that you have done so and to who.

So they should be fining the last known owner for that offence even though
they cannot do so for the original offence.

They probably do. That doesn't impact the problems though of number
plate cloning, the use of incorrect addresses, etc.

Let's face it - car number plates are virtually pointless, isn't it time
that the burdensome, expensive, and intrusive system is abolished.

--
Matt B

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 10:47:57 +0100, Matt B <"matt.bourke"@nospam.london.com>

Quoted message said:

Ziggy said:

On 19 Apr 2007 02:14:57 -0700, "[email hidden]" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

On 19 Apr, 10:02, [email hidden] (Ziggy) wrote:
> See here:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6568813.stm
>
> So (just off the top of my head) why do they not have a system whereby if there
> are outstanding issues with a vehicle and there has been no response to
> statutory notices, these vehicles are put on a list for police and traffic
> wardens to get clamped when seen?

They do

Just extremely ineffective, apparantly.

They just cannot keep up with the effect on vehicle registration that
camera enforcement of speed limits, congestion charging, parking
restrictions, etc. is having.

A potentially useful tool for the detection of serious crimes such as
hit-and-runs, has been rendered virtually useless by its abuse for the
prosecution of petty and technical motoring offences.

Then they need to bring in some new offences with nice beefy fines and possibly
points, for people who attempt to pervert the course of justice by registering
vehicles at addresses at which they are not normally resident.

They are quite capable of closing loopholes in tax law as people find new ways
of avoiding tax so there's no reason why they can't do the same thing with
motorists.

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 10:52:47 +0100, Matt B <"matt.bourke"@nospam.london.com>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

So they should be fining the last known owner for that offence even though
they cannot do so for the original offence.

They probably do. That doesn't impact the problems though of number
plate cloning, the use of incorrect addresses, etc.

Let's face it - car number plates are virtually pointless, isn't it time
that the burdensome, expensive, and intrusive system is abolished.

The better response to acts like driving a car with false number plates is to
treat it as an *extremely* serious offence. One for which jail would be
considered appropriate.

The correct response to people who flout the law is to beef up the enforcement
and penalties, not junk the law so the criminals win.

"Ziggy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 10:35:27 +0100, "Dave"
<[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

I was under the impression too that it is an offence to sell a vehicle
without informing the DVLA that you have done so and to who.

So they should be fining the last known owner for that offence even though
they cannot do so for the original offence.

Yes, but the last keeper cannot be held responsible for the new keeper
using an
incorrect address.

So in those cases it should be as suggested - on a database so that when
spotted the driver is pulled.

I work with a chap who has a good friend who works for a government
department involved in traffic. I can't remember which one but apparently
they have more powers than the police to stop and impound a vehicle.

They have a computer mounted in a car on the motorway (or other road) and a
camera that scans number plates and it is fast enough to be able to check
them all as they approach. If anything is put up on screen the vehicle is
stopped.

Perhaps this is what needs to happen more on normal roads too - they could
get all those without VELs of which there are plenty. Generally meaning no
MOT or insurance and lots of other offences.

Get this sort of [censored] off the road.

Dave

"Ziggy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 10:38:42 +0100, Matt B
<"matt.bourke"@nospam.london.com>

Quoted message said:

Ziggy said:

See here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6568813.stm

"The BBC Radio 4 probe found cameras in the capital catch about 500,000
people a year, but a third of those cannot be traced to an address."

1/3 of vehicles are not properly registered - another consequence of the
speed camera proliferation. I wonder what other negative effects that
they are causing will be revealed. Not only have they apparently halted
the advances we had made in terms of road safety, but now they have also
practically nullified most of the justifications for having a motor
vehicle registration database.

The simple answer to that is to have an offence of registering a vehicle
at an
address at which you are not normally resident, with a nice, beefy fine
(and
perhaps some points), and actually enforce the law!

And relieve them of the vehicle too.

Dave

Ziggy said:

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 10:47:57 +0100, Matt B <"matt.bourke"@nospam.london.com>

Quoted message said:

Ziggy said:

On 19 Apr 2007 02:14:57 -0700, "[email hidden]" <[email hidden]>
wrote:

> On 19 Apr, 10:02, [email hidden] (Ziggy) wrote:
>> See here:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6568813.stm
>>
>> So (just off the top of my head) why do they not have a system whereby if there
>> are outstanding issues with a vehicle and there has been no response to
>> statutory notices, these vehicles are put on a list for police and traffic
>> wardens to get clamped when seen?
> They do
Just extremely ineffective, apparantly.

They just cannot keep up with the effect on vehicle registration that
camera enforcement of speed limits, congestion charging, parking
restrictions, etc. is having.

A potentially useful tool for the detection of serious crimes such as
hit-and-runs, has been rendered virtually useless by its abuse for the
prosecution of petty and technical motoring offences.

Then they need to bring in some new offences with nice beefy fines and possibly
points, for people who attempt to pervert the course of justice by registering
vehicles at addresses at which they are not normally resident.

New offences are of no use against the criminals who have no respect for
authority. Those who are prepared to illegally use cloned plates will
not be swayed by yet another law aimed at making motor vehicles traceable.

However, those who respect law and order will be further inconvenienced
and alienated by even more bureaucracy and regulations with which they
will dutifully comply.

--
Matt B

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 10:59:20 +0100, "Dave" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

So in those cases it should be as suggested - on a database so that when
spotted the driver is pulled.

I work with a chap who has a good friend who works for a government
department involved in traffic. I can't remember which one but apparently
they have more powers than the police to stop and impound a vehicle.

They have a computer mounted in a car on the motorway (or other road) and a
camera that scans number plates and it is fast enough to be able to check
them all as they approach. If anything is put up on screen the vehicle is
stopped.

Perhaps this is what needs to happen more on normal roads too - they could
get all those without VELs of which there are plenty. Generally meaning no
MOT or insurance and lots of other offences.

Get this sort of [censored] off the road.

Absolutely!

Plus, they should have records of which cars are insured so that they can catch
some more of the idiots driving without insurance.

There is a significant minority of motorists who can and do flout the law to a
ridiculous extent and on a regular basis.

It would be better for all, including the majority of motorists who (apart from
the odd excursion over the speed limit) do obey they law, if these people were
caught and prosecuted.

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 11:04:10 +0100, Matt B <"matt.bourke"@nospam.london.com>

Quoted message said:

New offences are of no use against the criminals who have no respect for
authority. Those who are prepared to illegally use cloned plates will
not be swayed by yet another law aimed at making motor vehicles traceable.

Then they will have to be caught and prosecuted. Jailed, if necessary.

Quoted message said:

However, those who respect law and order will be further inconvenienced
and alienated by even more bureaucracy and regulations with which they
will dutifully comply.

So what you are really saying is that we shouldn't have laws since those who
want to will break them and they put an unnecessary burden on those who obey
them.

An _interesting_ approach to civilisation, but not one that willgarner a great
deal of support (apart from amongst the criminal fraternity), I think.

Dave said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

(Ziggy) said:

See here:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6568813.stm

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

So (just off the top of my head) why do they not have a system whereby if
there
are outstanding issues with a vehicle and there has been no response to
statutory notices, these vehicles are put on a list for police and
traffic
wardens to get clamped when seen?

Quoted message said:

They do

I was under the impression too that it is an offence to sell a vehicle
without informing the DVLA that you have done so and to who.

So they should be fining the last known owner for that offence even though
they cannot do so for the original offence.

With speeding the keeper has a duty to inform the police who was driving if
it is not them and if they do not they too are prosecuted.

Around West Yorks the Police have had a clamp down on certain car offences
where certainly from an Exise Licence point of view but I think also others
where there are fines outstanding on the registered keeper - the vehicle are
towed away and then wait for it to be reported missing then prosecute them
or if no claim they have been crushing them.

Dave

Whilst there is a duty to inform licencing authority when one sells a
vehicle there is no effective means of proving that the address given
by the purchaser is correct or that the information arrived at or was
put onto the system. In this respect the system fails.
If I receive a demand for an offence and have sold the vehicle there
is nothing much they can do if I say I sent them the details xy or z
months ago and have since registered another vehicle to my home
address.
Whilst nothing is perfect the slippage is acceptable in the overall
picture.

Sniper8052

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 11:01:09 +0100, "Dave" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

And relieve them of the vehicle too.

Certainly in the most egregious cases - and for subsequent offences.

(Ziggy) said:

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 10:38:42 +0100, Matt B <"matt.bourke"@nospam.london.com>

Quoted message said:

Ziggy said:

See here:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6568813.stm

Quoted message said:

"The BBC Radio 4 probe found cameras in the capital catch about 500,000
people a year, but a third of those cannot be traced to an address."

Quoted message said:

1/3 of vehicles are not properly registered - another consequence of the
speed camera proliferation. I wonder what other negative effects that
they are causing will be revealed. Not only have they apparently halted
the advances we had made in terms of road safety, but now they have also
practically nullified most of the justifications for having a motor
vehicle registration database.

The simple answer to that is to have an offence of registering a vehicle at an
address at which you are not normally resident, with a nice, beefy fine (and
perhaps some points), and actually enforce the law!

That's already an offence £1000 fine

Sniper8052

On 19 Apr 2007 03:11:48 -0700, "[email hidden]" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The simple answer to that is to have an offence of registering a vehicle =

at an

Quoted message said:

address at which you are not normally resident, with a nice, beefy fine (=

and

Quoted message said:

perhaps some points), and actually enforce the law!

That's already an offence £1000 fine

Excellent!

Now all we need is for the police and traffic wardens to enforce the law.

(The fact that they evidently do not, to a satisfactory degree, probably being
more down to home office targets rather than incompetance on their part).