PC received. My cars been cloned.

The_Deep

Because it'll likely kill the thing off and cost the PPC £27?


I pay more than that for a haircut. Do it my way and it could cost them £327.

EdGasket

HO87 wrote: »

I really wish the press would not continue to peddle the idea that so-called "cloning" is a common problem. It most certainly is not.

..and how exactly do you know how many cloned number plates are being used on the road? It is the simplest thing in the world to get number plates made up from a make/model similar to your own (which you bought/stole but never informed DVLA). attach them to your car and drive around with no insurance, tax, MoT, parking, or toll worries. I would say it IS a common problem.

1 in 12 cars; and not common??
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/cars/news/one-in-12-cars-have-cloned-number-plates/

Umkomaas

The_Deep wrote: »

Because it'll likely kill the thing off and cost the PPC £27?


I pay more than that for a haircut. Do it my way and it could cost them £327.

That Afro style went out in the 1970s TD. Are you a Kevin Keegan groupie?

bluesue

bod1467 wrote: »

I'm not Elle Macpherson.

Oops just noticed my mistake.

The_Deep

I am not inclined to believe that this practice is uncommon, especially amongst the riff raff. I know one person whose car VRN was cloned.

http://www.moneysupermarket.com/car-insurance/blog/what-is-car-cloning/

HO87

EdGasket wrote: »

..and how exactly do you know how many cloned number plates are being used on the road? It is the simplest thing in the world to get number plates made up from a make/model similar to your own (which you bought/stole but never informed DVLA). attach them to your car and drive around with no insurance, tax, MoT, parking, or toll worries. I would say it IS a common problem.

1 in 12 cars; and not common??
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/cars/news/one-in-12-cars-have-cloned-number-plates/

Oh, I profess no greater knowledge of precisely how many numbers are supposedly cloned than either you or the so-called expert does. But please also bear in mind that the research is likely to have been funded by the insurance industry who have a vested interest in maintaining the illusion that car theft is a widespread problem because it encourages people to be careful.

However, I suggest you read the article again and dwell for a moment on the evidence the so-called expert relies upon for his conclusion. It is again from ANPR systems.

No ANPR system will claim a better than 95% "successful" read rate - that is it will accurately read no better than 95 in 100 registration plates - and that will be under ideal conditions. On the basis of this so-called expert's analysis that provides for only a minor change to the strap line:

"One in 20 of the 37 million vehicles on UK roads could have cloned registration plates, according to new research."

By the time allowances for target speed; prevailing weather conditions; ambient lighting; cleanliness or otherwise of the target plate; illumination, angle of incidence, vibration, reflection, quality of lens; cleanliness of the lens; quality of camera and accuracy of OCR conversion etc and it is no great step to turn that "no better than 95% read rate" to a "no better than 92% read rate" - which is what the completely alarmist headline actually breaks down to.

Once you understand that ANPR systems are far from foolproof the "problem" tends to dissipate somewhat.

Disguising your car to avoid speeding tickets, tax or insurance etc - which is what the local toe-rag does with his "pool car" isn't really serious criminality (and the chances are that he will simply steal the plates from the "donor" vehicle in the first place). It might be serial criminality but there is a difference. Quite how ANPR detects a stolen 2014 black BMW 530d Touring carefully disguised as a damage repaired 2014 black BMW 530d Touring I'm unsure. Even experienced stolen vehicle examiners will be down to checking manufacture dates of individual components. ANPR hasn't a hope which is what makes this headline grabbing piece of gobbledygook really quite shoddy.

Edit: And by the way, the Telegraph's maths doesn't add up. The learned Dr claims a figure of roughly 1.75m out of a total of 37 million. Admittedly, my arithmetical skills rely on a 40-year O-Level but even then its very obvious that the figures don't add up to 8% (1 in 12). They actually run out at 4.75% (1 in 21). And there is still no allowance for misreads.

Gadfium

HO87 wrote: »

Edit: And by the way, the Telegraph's maths doesn't add up. The learned Dr claims a figure of roughly 1.75m out of a total of 37 million. Admittedly, my arithmetical skills rely on a 40-year O-Level but even then its very obvious that the figures don't add up to 8% (1 in 12). They actually run out at 4.75% (1 in 21). And there is still no allowance for misreads.

Read the article again. They are including legit plates that have been altered "The remainder of the one-in-12 total - about 1.25 million vehicles - is made up of legitimate registrations that have been doctored so they read differently."
Or, even better, read the original published text, rather than relying on your own opinion and the spin put on it by the journalist.