DVLA Database

Post by **martyhopkirk** » 23 Jan 2005, 15:13

But still ay the moment there are so many complete idiots out there who have no insurance and tax (was dealing with one on Friday who was most indignant his Transit van had been impounded, which meant he couldnt work and illigally fly tip to supliment his meagre social benefits income).
Fine, untill they run into you and your left picking up the bits. So if the DVLA can tell who is taxed and MOT'd (and probably insured as well) Surely they must be able to push a button on the database which will tell them the registartions of cars without all this - the police (or even traffic wardens) can cross check as a matter of course and stop / remove offending cars.
The technology is there, it must be - If I can drive past a camera which checks the fact i am taxed against my number plate and can be pulled witin half a mile of going past that camera - then surely the rest is just numbercrunching?
Not sure compulsory TPO insutance in fuel costs would do anything other than push the price of fuel to even more ridiculous highs - what about all the drivers who run their cars on SVO, Red Diesel, paraffin etc? Who wouldnt be paying the compulsory insurance. Dont you think if fuel costs got much higher there would be an upsurge in black market fuel supply? Its a big problem in NI with red diesel being treated and sold through normal pumps as white diesel, and I know someone who used to run his twin tanked petrol Jag on pink paraffin.
As with anything there are flaws - the old chestnut of more propper coppers needed, not cameras crops up again - propper policing which not only shows results, but creates a deterrent too.

DoubleChevron · Post by **DoubleChevron** » 23 Jan 2005, 15:53

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Homer

I believe so, and the system is said to work very well.
I believe 3rd party insurance is included in the Australian equivelant of VED (road tax), any of our Aussie visitors care to comment?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
I live in Victoria Australia. 3rd party insurance is a part of your registration. By 3rd party I mean ONLY personal injury is covered. ie: the people hurt of covered medically, however there car/belongings are not. You still need insurance to avoid having to pay for the damage done to any car you hit.
seeya,
Shane L.

ACTIVE8 · Post by **ACTIVE8** » 23 Jan 2005, 16:26

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by martyhopkirk
As with anything there are flaws - the old chestnut of more propper coppers needed, not cameras crops up again - propper policing which not only shows results, but creates a deterrent too. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
I agree !
It has been reported that there are more police, and recruitment levels are up, yet we don't see more of their presence out on the road.
All the time we keep constantly getting more, and more cameras everywhere.
A report I saw the other night, mentioned about the fact that although there are many more cameras, the accident rate has gone UP ! 
Motorists end up getting frustrated with cameras, and up speeding up slowing down etc where they are sited.
With the patrol car out on the road, if necessary you can pull people over, and run checks on them.
They also have cars equipped with cameras that record the vehicle, and run checks on the police national computer, if the vehicle is suspicious it can be stopped, and checked.
Speed cameras are cash cows, and revenue generators.
The patrol car would be more effective policing, and would get these Chav, and low life types who think they are above the law, into the courts.

weety · Post by **weety** » 23 Jan 2005, 19:56

i agree with Active8, drink driving is, apparently, on the increase again as without patrol cars to pull them over they just get away with it. Motorway aggressive driving gets worse every day (people are now taking to driving down the hard shoulder to get past stationary traffic on the M25). Cameras only slow traffic down for the ten yards in front of them everyone just speeds away again afterwards.... we need more patrol cars

Ragandbone · Post by **Ragandbone** » 23 Jan 2005, 21:27

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by ACTIVE8

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by martyhopkirk
As with anything there are flaws - the old chestnut of more propper coppers needed, not cameras crops up again - propper policing which not only shows results, but creates a deterrent too. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
I agree !
With the patrol car out on the road, if necessary you can pull people over, and run checks on them.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Two words - Peter Sutcliffe.
Caught in a routine roadside check - an argument for more road police if ever there was one

bxbodger · Post by **bxbodger** » 24 Jan 2005, 01:36

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Two words - Peter Sutcliffe.
Caught in a routine roadside check <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
And before searching him they let him go for a slash in the bushes- whereupon he disposed of his hammer!!!!!

ACTIVE8 · Post by **ACTIVE8** » 24 Jan 2005, 17:21

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by bxbodger

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Two words - Peter Sutcliffe.
Caught in a routine roadside check <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
And before searching him they let him go for a slash in the bushes- whereupon he disposed of his hammer!!!!!
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
So, if that's the case, these officers didn't have much (if any) common sense.
Since then, they (maybe) managed to stay in the police get promoted, up the ranks, and then implement over zealous use of cameras !

uhn113x · Post by **uhn113x** » 24 Jan 2005, 21:07

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Homer
The only way to remove uninsured cars from the road is to have basic 3rd party insurance automatically included in fuel duty. This would take away the biggest single cost of running a car legally and you would have far fewer people evading VED and not bothering with the MOT.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Amen, Homer. There are more pros than cons for this method, likewise for putting the excise licence on to the fuel price.
It would then be pro rata car size and miles covered, as it should be.
Lose a few jobs-for-the-boys, though [:(]