ANPR opt-out

[10110001]

Originally Posted by danny_kiernan

I didn't know this, so spent a while looking at sites, apparently the US embassy does have to pay the Congestion chage in a couple of countries - but I am glad they are challenging it, thanks for the info

As far as I know the US does pay the equivalent of the C-Charge in Singapore, it’s a toll-both system rather than a camera system - but I recall they reclaim it adding a handling charge.

ANPR is coming whether we like it or not, and they'll be on every 100 meters of road. This will result in a 2 tier motoring culture where we have the legitimate and the illegitimate.

The illegitimate will comprise of anything from the middle earner who renewed his tax one day late to the unregistered car driver who doesn’t renew anything either because he can’t afford to or is doing so in protest. It’s this type of driver that will always have a low-value car.

The rest will be looking over their shoulders while on the road knowing they can have their car taken at a moments notice – and its not car thieves or hijackings they’re worried about.

I reckon motoring in London within 15 years will be what Calcutta is today. With all these ANPR cameras everywhere looking for 1-MPH over limit, go near a bus lane, stop on a box junction or they forgot to renew their insurance. Bang and your car is confiscated and you are fined to the hilt, It might even screw the economy.

This is why I only drive bangers in India, if I am hit by a bus I am likely to be beaten up by the driver (or passengers), but if I get out and he sees I’m a westerner and firing shots through his windscreen I know he’ll run. Its lawlessness due to deprivation and London is only fueling it by penalising the low-income motorists.

Its over-policing of drivers and the motive is clearly financial than rational.

[lilal]

Foreign registered vehicles already pay to use our roads by virtue of the tax and duty on petrol/diesel. Roughly 75% of the price of a litre of fuel goes to the Treasury. If road pricing were introduced then foreign vehicles would be contributing even more to the Treasury.

foreign trucks do not fill up in the uk ,have a close look at the trailer and you,ll see extra fuel tanks .cars yes but stay in the uk too long then the car has to be registered. a mass week protest of #plates removed

3) Take the cost of DVLA administration/court costs right down

i can,t see them closing this dept ,what about all the poor civil servants being made redundant ,they look after their own the payoffs and pensions awarded would probably amount to more than the current costs

[danny_kiernan]

Originally Posted by lilal

i can,t see them closing this dept ,what about all the poor civil servants being made redundant ,they look after their own the payoffs and pensions awarded would probably amount to more than the current costs

Hi Lilal,

I have come up with a solution to that - its a bit silly, but it would work - simply make the employees of the DVLA, who would be made redundant, an offer of a sideways promotion into the police force (then they would have to actually face people, not just be a megalomaniac on the phone) The police force definitely needs more officers, as there are thousands retiring within the next 5 years.

Dani

[danny_kiernan]

Hi XXXXX,

Thank you for your swift reply.

I would like to ask a few further questions to clarify my understanding of the data protection act, if that is ok?

1) Who would your agency deem as authorised persons?

2) If the authorised persons are parking enforcement, debt collectors/bailiffs - how does that fall in line with the following sections of the Data Protection Act.

10 Right to prevent processing likely to cause damage or distress (1) Subject to subsection (2), an individual is entitled at any time by notice in writing to a data controller to require the data controller at the end of such period as is reasonable in the circumstances to cease, or not to begin, processing, or processing for a specified purpose or in a specified manner, any personal data in respect of which he is the data subject, on the ground that, for specified reasons—
(a) the processing of those data or their processing for that purpose or in that manner is causing or is likely to cause substantial damage or substantial distress to him or to another, and
(b) that damage or distress is or would be unwarranted.
(2) Subsection (1) does not apply—
(a) in a case where any of the conditions in paragraphs 1 to 4 of Schedule 2 is met, or
(b) in such other cases as may be prescribed by the Secretary of State by order.
And Schedule 2

SCHEDULE 2 Conditions relevant for purposes of the first principle: processing of any personal data

1 The data subject has given his consent to the processing.
2 The processing is necessary—
(a) for the performance of a contract to which the data subject is a party, or
(b) for the taking of steps at the request of the data subject with a view to entering into a contract.
3 The processing is necessary for compliance with any legal obligation to which the data controller is subject, other than an obligation imposed by contract.
4 The processing is necessary in order to protect the vital interests of the data subject.

I will give you an example:
Say a person is stopped whilst driving for speeding, wouldn't the release of personal driver details to the police fall under part II section 10 as a fine/conviction would be both damaging and distressful for the driver?
Or a persons car is parked on a double yellow line, and a parking enforcement company contacts your agency - that would also warrant damaging and distressful - if your agency gave out the drivers details?
3) Wouldn't the same apply to registration details?
4) If the answers to any of my questions are true, wouldn't this indicate, that the DVLA has been in breach of the Data Protection Act for quite some time?
Thank you in advance, for taking your time, to answer my questions
Dani Kiernan

[danny_kiernan]

Cool - I got a different response this time:


bh 11/10/2007
Thank you for your email
I confirm receipt of your email. A full reply will be sent to you shortly.
Regards
XXXXX XXXXX

Last time I got this:

THIS IS A SYSTEM GENERATED AUTO REPLY - Please read it as it may apply to you.

Thank you for your e-mail.

We will endeavour to respond to your enquiry within 3 working days.
Alternatively, for help, advice and online services you can visit the website at
www.direct.gov.uk/motoring where you can also download many of our forms.

Please Note: If you do not appear to have received a reply within 3 days, it would be advisable to check any 'Junk Mail' or SPAM filters which may be installed on your system, prior to any further contact. Our reply may have been erroneously blocked by such software.

[Rob S]

Originally Posted by danny_kiernan

Hi XXXXX,


I will give you an example:
Say a person is stopped whilst driving for speeding, wouldn't the release of personal driver details to the police fall under part II section 10 as a fine/conviction would be both damaging and distressful for the driver?

You gave this as an example???

[danny_kiernan]

Originally Posted by Rob S

You gave this as an example???

There is a reason, but I'd rather not explain until I get a reply - I don't do anything without a clear purpose in mind - everything about the email is intentional, including the Huuuuge letters on schedule 2.

dani

[danny_kiernan]

Finally a reply:

Thank you for your e-mail of 10th October to the Drivers Customer
Services. Your query has now been passed to me as I am responsible for
the release of data from the Driver Register.

I have had sight of the previous correspondence regarding your initial
request invoking section 10 of the Data Protection Act 1998 (Data Protection Act). As
you are now aware, the Agency does not process personal data without the
licence holder's permission unless there is a legal obligation to do
so.

You have now asked for further clarification in respect of authorised
persons and compliance with the Data Protection Act. I should begin by explaining the
Driver and Vehicle registers are entirely separate. Different
legislation applies to each, therefore an authorised person for the
purpose of driver licensing may not be an authorised person for vehicle
matters.

Regulation 27 of the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing)
Regulations 2000 provides for information held on the vehicle record to
be released to police, customs officers, local authorities investigating
an offence or a decriminalised parking contravention, or to those who
can demonstrate "reasonable cause" for having that information made
available to him. This includes parking enforcement officials etc. In
addition to this various Government bodies have powers under specific
legislation to request data from DVLA, for purposes prescribed in that
legislation. Examples include HM Revenue and Customs and the Child
Support Agency.

Under section 10 Data Protection Act if an individual believes that a data controller,
(in this case DVLA), is processing personal data in a way that causes or
is likely to cause substantial unwarranted damage or substantial
unwarranted distress to them or another, that individual has a right to
send a notice to the data controller requiring him to stop the
processing ("the data subject notice"). An individual is not entitled
to serve a notice if any of the first four conditions of processing in
Schedule 2 apply. These conditions were listed in your second request
therefore I shall not repeat them all. In this instance the relevant
condition is that " processing is necessary for compliance with any
legal obligation to which the data controller is subject, other than an
obligation imposed by a contract". It is due to a legal obligation (set
out in paragraph 4 above) that DVLA would release information to a
parking enforcement official.

This is also applicable to your example of a driver who is stopped
whilst speeding. The driver is required by law to provide his/her
personal driver details to the police. The driver has broken the law
therefore the punishment by fine or conviction is not unwarranted. Again
if a person parks on double yellow lines, enforcement action would not
result in unwarranted damage or distress.

I hope that the above is sufficient to answer your query and that you
are satisfied that the DVLA is operating in compliance with the Data Protection Act. If
you require anything further please let me know.


More emails to follow

Dani

[bandit8450]

remember this if your car is nicked and there is no anpr then you have little chance of getting it back....god almightly this site is full of people who
a) dont wanna pay up when they cock up
b) just slag everythink off
c) dont want any responsibility for anything they do wrong.

you all wanna grow up or move to the states, you'll fit in there

[patdavies]

Stolen cars were recovered before ANPR was available.

The law as regards parking is precise; equally the parts of the law that are used to enforce it are equally precise. It cuts both ways, both the parker and the enforcer must act within the law.

What is generally 'slagged off' on this site is the ever increase automated enforcement which does nothing to achieve the end result - it merely raises revenue.

If you don't like this site then you are very welcome to leave. Your post above does nothing to offer advice or support to others. It is not even in English.

[buzby]

I'm unaware of ANPR being used for the recovery of stolen vehicles. That would require a bit of intelligence (a phrase being used in the literal sense, than as a verb) on behalf of the agencies that receive feeds of ANPR data.

Your comment may seem reasonable for someone who has only recently joined, but when you see how easy it is for authorities and firms to use technology for their own purposes, YOU do not benefit in the slightest. ANPR is a case in point, if your car is stolen I guarantee it will never be of use as an aid to recovery. However it may assist HMR&C to know your are commuting when you are supposedly signing on, or that you are declaring a SORN on your vehicle yet using it.

[Rob S]

Originally Posted by buzby

ANPR is a case in point, if your car is stolen I guarantee it will never be of use as an aid to recovery.

What nonsense! If a car that has been reported stolen goes through an ANPR system, it will set off a warning. Plenty of stolen cars have been recovered as a result of passing ANPR cameras.

[buzby]

Really? Prove it! (And I don't mean police PR-puff stories on how ANPR solves crime). All it can do is confirm a vehicle of that number - assuming it was even read correctly - passed a set point at a known date and time. You'll be telling us next the police sit behind billboards 1m further on to catch them as they drive past?

[Chesterexpress]

Originally Posted by buzby

Really? Prove it! (And I don't mean police PR-puff stories on how ANPR solves crime). All it can do is confirm a vehicle of that number - assuming it was even read correctly - passed a set point at a known date and time.

Think you need to check your facts on this one buzby. ANPR can indeed be used to alert when a reported stolen vehicle goes through a checkpoint. Going by what you say, what would the point of ANPR be?

[buzby]

Originally Posted by Chesterexpress

Think you need to check your facts on this one buzby. ANPR can indeed be used to alert when a reported stolen vehicle goes through a checkpoint. Going by what you say, what would the point of ANPR be?

I suggest you read what I said. OF course it can 'alert' unspecified agencies that a vehicle went through a checkpoint. As for 'facts' do YOU know who receives and process the ANPR data? What it does not do, is instantly show police (if looking out for a particular stolen car) where it has been - not where it is. Are you also aware of how many folk can access the TfL ANPR database?

That said, following the logic so far displayed by those complaining I'm incorrect, am I to assume that there are no stolen vehicles within the London 'C' zone? As this is what is being implied. Add to this the bleedin' obvious - that a fake plate fools ANPR every time as there is no automatic match to make and model.

I've not stopped laughing yet at the ANPR supporters who are the closest I've seen to flat-earth devotees....

[patdavies]

Forget the TfL ANPR - that has a separate function, and you can't judge them all from this.

Individual patrol card have ANPR now and they do sit at the side of