Car never paid for - how to obtain details?

ROY47

you could try this ,it won't trace the owner but at least you can get it off your name

apply for a new log book in your name £25.00 if you can do it with just the reg number

if and when you get it ,return it as if the car has been scrapped

gilbert_and_sullivan

Can't help you other than to re-assure you that though we are thin on the ground, some men of honour still live in this country.

Despite the creeping diseases of dishonour disloyalty and greed, examples of which our ministers politicians and celebrities display on a daily basis, we still soldier on.

I'm sorry for you that you trusted someone who betrayed you, yes learn from it, it's a mistake i've made in the past too.

I hope you have some success, it might be a fruitless search and then nothing to be gained, however the satisfaction of giving this dishonest rogue the headache's of bailiffs and debt collectors might be worth the time and small fees involved, good luck.

forgotmyname

Cost more to trace him than it owes you. Providing he gave a real name and address of course.

It could have been a rented property used for all manner of dodgy deals. Friends had catalogue used & items
delivered to a different address. By the time she got the statement and police investigating the property
was empty. They had several reports for the same property.

Pavel_S

I understand that, but if the car is still on the road (which I assume it is due to MOT + Tax) then whilst HE may not be easily traceable, surely the car must be. If it was flagged up on the database, surely an ANPR would pick it up (that's assuming that he's not at the address that the car is now registered to)

Pavs

vaio

yep, but he didn't steal it, he conned you into giving it to him. I'm surprised the bailiffs can't get ownership details of the car and if he still owns it then enforce the judgement against him.

DVLC will sell you the details if you have a good enough reason, if enforcing a ccj isn't good enough I suppose you might be able to apply for a court order to get them but then you are almost certainly into significant costs and the risk of throwing good money after bad

asbokid

davemorton wrote: »

I would have thought that [DVLA] would not give you the details of the present keeper, because you dont own the car any more.

Around ten years ago, a young woman reversed into my car while it was parked on private farmland. She had no right to be on the land and was trespassing. She drove off before I could speak to her. A third party saw what happened and tried to block the road to stop her exiting, but was assaulted for his trouble.

I called the police. The burly fellow who was assaulted didn't want to report it, and the police said that since the accident was on private land, it wasn't in their remit to become involved.

However, I did jot down the girl's number plate and asked DVLA for her details, enclosing the statutory £3 fee for the information.

As the OP found too, the DVLA refused, claiming that I had not shown legitimate reason for wanting this information.

Yet DVLA passes on our vehicle details to all manner of dodgy parking enforcement companies, who then use the data to illegally harass car owners. I wonder how the kickbacks work for the DVLA and for Crapita, the company that actually runs the Agency?

Strider590

Pavel_S wrote: »

Fraid not! And unfortunately I don't think Patel qualifies as an unusual name.

Cheers,
Pavel

I'm sorry to say he probably used an alias name and fake address.
It'll be registered to a fake name and address even now. Does it still come up as MOT'd / Taxed? im betting it's not insured though!
Not too sure what the DVLA are playing at!

Pavel_S

asbokid wrote: »

As the OP found, the DVLA refused, claiming that I too hadn't shown "legitimate reason for this information".

Yet DVLA passes on our vehicle details to all manner of dodgy parking enforcement companies, who then use the data to illegally harass car owners. I wonder how the kickbacks work for the DVLA and for Crapita, the company that actually runs the Agency?

Appears I'm not the only one that struggles.

Anybody know how to obtain this info from DVLA/police in such cases? As asbokid, I too am appalled at how easily they give this info out to others and then make it so difficult for genuine requests to go through.

It would be good to know what to do in this case if anybody has been in the same situation with a successful outcome!

Happytohelp

The correct procedure to request information from DVLA involves completing form V888.

More information here:

personalisednumberplates4u.co.uk/tracing-the-owner-of-a-vehicle-using-a-registration-number

asbokid

Pavel_S wrote: »

Anybody know how to obtain this info from DVLA/police in such cases?

The powers allowing the disclosure of information are defined in Regulation 27 of the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2002.

From: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/2742/made:

PART V
DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION

Disclosure of registration and licensing particulars

27.—(1) The Secretary of State may make any particulars contained in the register available for use—

(a)by a local authority for any purpose connected with the investigation of an offence or of a decriminalised parking contravention;
(b)by a chief officer of police;
(c)by a member of the Police Service of Northern Ireland;
(d)by an officer of Customs and Excise in Northern Ireland; or
(e)by any person who can show to the satisfaction of the Secretary of State that he has reasonable cause for wanting the particulars to be made available to him.
(2) Particulars may be provided to such a person as is mentioned in paragraph (1)(e) on payment of such fee, if any, of such amount as appears to the Secretary of State reasonable in the circumstances of the case.

Here is a reply from DVLA to a FOI Act request. It concerns the Agency's policy on disclosure of registered keeper information:

From: http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/29668/response/76496/attach/2/FOIR1853.pdf

DVLA releases information to both private and public sector bodies, where they have evidence of “reasonable cause” to request it. DVLA takes the view that disclosure of data where there is a breach of criminal, civil or contract law is both fair and reasonable.

In reply to another FOI Act request for clarification on keeper disclosure, the DVLA responded..

From: http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/36656/response/93347/attach/2/FOIR1982%20Payne.pdf

The ‘reasonable cause’ provisions of Regulation 27 [of the 2002 Regulations] allow for information to be provided to Debt Collection Companies (DCCs) to pursue a civil debt where that debt relates directly to that vehicle.

What 'reasonable cause' does the DCC have to show?

DCCs are used when a person has failed to pay charges that are due and, where a debt is owed, so the release of information in these circumstances would fall under the reasonable cause provisions, as DVLA takes the view that the release of information under these provisions should relate to the vehicle or its use, following incidents where the driver or keeper of the vehicle has a liability to the third party.

The provision of information to DCCs is lawful as it is released to enable the pursuit of a civil debt, and this falls under the ‘reasonable cause’ provisions for release. These allow for redress to be sought where charges owed have not been paid.

What codes of practice, safeguards and limits are placed on the DCCs to regulate the behaviour of DCCs, and to restrict the use of and protect personal data supplied by DVLA?

This information is not held. All DCCs work within their own guidelines and adhere to the Credit Service Association and Office of Fair Trading guidelines. It is a condition of working with the DVLA that they must be registered with the Office of Fair Trading and be a member of an Accredited Trade Association and abide by their Code of Practice.

And from one more FOI Act request, concerning "Accredited Trade Association access to the DVLA vehicle database":

From: http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/27809/response/71993/attach/2/FOIR1813.pdf

Clarify whether a ‘demonstrable just cause’ is still a requirement for [Private Investigator] access to the DVLA data or is membership of one of the approved ATAs [Accredited Trade Associations] enough?”

Enquiries from Private Investigators can be submitted for different reasons, which must be judged on their own merits. However, in all cases reasonable cause must apply. It would not be acceptable for the requestor to simply state they are an ATA member in order for information to be released.

Provide an example of some of the typical ‘just cause’ reasons given by Private Investigators as to why they ought to have access to the DVLA data on registered keepers that have resulted in the requested information being provided.

Private Investigators who apply for information via a service provider can only do
so for a limited range of reasons. These would include:

(i) For investigations following a road traffic accident where the keeper details were not supplied.

(ii) For investigations on behalf of a finance company where the finance company need keeper details due to a default on the agreement.

It would seem that the DVLA routinely rejects keeper information requests that are submitted by members of the public. To the agency, it does not matter how "demonstrably just" their cause may be. Requests from the general public are being rejected solely because the requestor does not belong to an "Accredited Trade Association".

In contrast, the DVLA allows Debt Collection Companies with ATA membership to have unrestricted access to the vehicle database.

By the Agency's own admission, there are no codes of practice, no safeguards nor limits in place to restrict the use of, or protect personal data supplied to DCCs by the Agency.

Unsurprisingly, this shamefully unjust policy is not described anywhere in statute nor in any code of practice on access to information held by the DVLA.

Yet another example of the ultra vires manner in which the Agency operates today.