V5C Fraud - Beware

Takmon

Rum_Punched wrote: »

Years ago it couldn’t be done online so easily. But thanks for your comments ��

Well it has been possible online for at least 4 years...

Forumlurrker wrote: »

Hi rum punched,
Just a quickie to ask how you got on with resolving this issue. It just happened to me yesterday🙄🙄(exactly how you’ve written it), unbeknown to me whilst giving out the doc ref number (which I was aware I was doing) any tom, !!!! and Harry can change the name on the doc and cause havoc with your Reg plates however they see fit. In this day and age i struggle to believe that Dvla has zero online security?? Not even a DOB required, and according to them it’s my fault as the security is..........wait for it.........not giving out the number!! Well thank f*%k you’re here to help.
I’m aware this sits with me dishing out the number and trusting at the time that it can’t be that easy to change the names over but this is clearly something Dvla need to look at, even if it’s to save them selves a few quid by not having to ‘investigate’ every time this happens when a simple dob tab would put a stop to it.
Anyway, sorry I’m ranting, not at you but to give a better picture and help anyone else who’s reading or has fallen foul.
If you could let me know how you got on with resolving this, that would be great.
Many thanks FL

So how would having a DOB check help when they don't keep records of the keepers DOB?

Plus if your happy enough to give out the document reference number when asked then what would stop you giving out your DOB if they said they needed it to confirm your the registered keeper?

EdGasketTheSecond

You used to have to get the doc ref number from the seller to check out the MoT history (not any more) and I never had any problems obtaining this from the seller. If you truly need this now for an HPI check then there is scope for fraud obviously if you give out the number or to lose a genuine buyer thinking you have something to hide by not confirming the ref number so they can run an HPI. This needs to be fixed by DVLA

Forumlurrker

The point is not just a DOB it’s another layer of security, anything, they’re the ‘experts’. Not everybody knows you don’t need that number to check hpi and that it’s been online for four years if you haven’t sold a car for four years. Nowhere on the document does it state not to give out the number because anybody and their dog can change the name, this isn’t just about giving out over the phone (my fault��) what if you are burgled, or you leave it out somewhere, in the car, whatever!! It needs tightening up.

Forumlurrker

EdGasketTheSecond wrote: »

You used to have to get the doc ref number from the seller to check out the MoT history (not any more) and I never had any problems obtaining this from the seller. If you truly need this now for an HPI check then there is scope for fraud obviously if you give out the number or to lose a genuine buyer thinking you have something to hide by not confirming the ref number so they can run an HPI. This needs to be fixed by DVLA

As it turns out, you don’t need it to check for hpi, that’s the bit I didn’t know, having not sold a car privately for a while I was caught on the hop (shrugs) what can you do? I know now! But I still think it’s too easy to change into a n others name and needs looking at. DVLA not interested by the way! !!!!!!s

Marvel1

DUTR wrote: »

I'm not looking at the video, I like to consdider myself and the majority of readers here not to be naïve/stupid or whatever you want to call it.
Even though you can do certain transactions online I would still imagine that two parts have to be submitted , the new address of the requested V5 wouldn't match with the current registered one and as there was notice notice of change of ownership from the current keeper,I'm surprised it has gone as far as you have discovered.
I'm not saying I don't believe this really happened to you, just that you have been very unfortunate.

Just had a quick check to say i sold vehicle online, all it asks is for the 11 digit code from the V5C and for the new keeper details.

Give new the new keeper supplement to new keeper and destroy the rest of it.

afcj123

Hello, I am afraid to say that this has just happened to me, a man came to view my car on Thursday and I received a letter this morning from the DVLA to say that the new keeper is now registered. I am absolutely devastated. DVLA have said they will investigate. I called 101 and they gave me a reference number but told me to contact action fraud, action fraud said that identity theft is not a crime. I am now left with my car sitting on the drive, unsold and no v5 document.
Please let me know how long it took for DVLA to resolve this and did it increase the number of keepers on the log book? Also, did it affect your ability to sell the car? thanks in advance 

jimjames

DUTR said:

Rum_Punched wrote: »

Years ago it couldn’t be done online so easily. But thanks for your comments ��

Less than 6 years ago, people then asked for this and that 'what's the lowest you will take for it' and other BS.

A section of the V5 has to be returned upon sale, so two parts have to tally for a new V5 to be issued, as the new owner would have to purchase a new VED and the current owner possibly get a refund for the existing VED.

I know this is an old thread but wanted to highlight that this is not correct. There is no requirement for the two parts of the V5 to be returned before a new V5 is sent out. Whoever registers the change of keeper online with the V5 reference will get a new V5 sent to the address they specify. No paperwork is sent anywhere to trigger this.
When buying I've previously requested sight of the V5 to do vehicle checks and wouldn't have thought twice about letting a buyer see the V5. I'll be a lot more careful in future.

Ectophile

jimjames said:

DUTR said:

Rum_Punched wrote: »

Years ago it couldn’t be done online so easily. But thanks for your comments ��

Less than 6 years ago, people then asked for this and that 'what's the lowest you will take for it' and other BS.

A section of the V5 has to be returned upon sale, so two parts have to tally for a new V5 to be issued, as the new owner would have to purchase a new VED and the current owner possibly get a refund for the existing VED.

I know this is an old thread but wanted to highlight that this is not correct. There is no requirement for the two parts of the V5 to be returned before a new V5 is sent out. Whoever registers the change of keeper online with the V5 reference will get a new V5 sent to the address they specify. No paperwork is sent anywhere to trigger this.
When buying I've previously requested sight of the V5 to do vehicle checks and wouldn't have thought twice about letting a buyer see the V5. I'll be a lot more careful in future.

Your problem then is that it's been drilled into buyers for many years now that it's a very bad idea to buy a car without a V5.

Many buyers will walk away if you refuse to let them see the V5, as they will assume that you either don't have one, or there's something wrong with it.

Gsaver1

I'd like to know what Action Fraud actually do? I've had dealings with them and in my case the guy who used my labour and 14 others to line his pockets got away with it. Next I saw him with the same van and tools when he was supposedly "bust". I won my court case and my Sheriff Officers went to claim what they could but as he had put a different company name on the van, that and tools couldn't be touched. Unknown to me but came to light after the situation I found myself in he had done this before and no doubt will do so again. Companies House put a restriction on him running a business for a few years. New company has his son as boss but it is just a front. Fronting is badly thought of in the car insurance game but registering a company no one gives a toss. Action Fraud and Companies House are two pathetic institutions imo.

williamgriffin

Gsaver1 said:

I'd like to know what Action Fraud actually do? I've had dealings with them and in my case the guy who used my labour and 14 others to line his pockets got away with it. Next I saw him with the same van and tools when he was supposedly "bust". I won my court case and my Sheriff Officers went to claim what they could but as he had put a different company name on the van, that and tools couldn't be touched. Unknown to me but came to light after the situation I found myself in he had done this before and no doubt will do so again. Companies House put a restriction on him running a business for a few years. New company has his son as boss but it is just a front. Fronting is badly thought of in the car insurance game but registering a company no one gives a toss. Action Fraud and Companies House are two pathetic institutions imo.

I'll tell you.

Action Fraud record fraud offences instead of the police when the offender is unknown or doesn't live on the force area and hasn't been arrested. They complete some intelligence checks and if they deem it worth of investigation by the police send it to the most appropriate force to deal with.

In your case since you used high court enforcement it sounds civil rather than criminal so not a matter for action fraud.