APPENDIX 20
Memorandum submitted by the Association
of London Government
INTRODUCTION
1. This paper sets out the evidence by the
Association of London (ALG) on behalf of London boroughs.[14]
The ALG is a representative body of the 33 London local authorities.
Its Transport and Environment Committee (TEC) is the statutory
joint committee[15]
responsible, among other things, for setting decriminalised parking
penalties in London and operating the Parking and Traffic Appeals
Service (PATAS). It also operates the TRACE service which provides
telephone information on cars which have been legally removed
from London's streets (see Annex 1). This is an officer response
at this time as the Transport Committee's timescale has not enabled
the ALG to seek member endorsement.
DRIVER AND
VEHICLE LICENSING
AGENCY (DVLA)
2. The ALG and Boroughs have established
a good working relationship and partnership arrangements with
the DVLA. The main services provided to Boroughs are the provision
of vehicle and keeper information for moving traffic and parking
contraventions. The ALG also has a link for the operation of the
London night lorry control scheme. This kind of information is
also vital for the operation of the congestion charge by Transport
for London (TfL).
UNTAXED VEHICLES
3. ALG and Boroughs recognise that uninsured,
unlicensed and untaxed vehicles account for a significant share
of traffic and parking contraventions and in many cases are likely
to have incorrectly registered keeper details which further undermines
effective enforcement. To help reduce this problem and the issue
of abandoned vehicles, the ALG and boroughs set up Operation Scrap
It in 2003 with funding from the Home Office (£13.4 million
over two years) which included enforcement against untaxed vehicles.
4. 29 of the 33 boroughs enforce against
untaxed vehicles using devolved powers provided by the DVLA—the
remaining four have contracted to use DVLA's contractor. This
arrangement has been successful. Between October 2004 and September
2005, almost 30,000 untaxed vehicles were issued with warning
notices, clamped or removed by boroughs—about 80% of these
were removed. Borough destroyed around 12,000 vehicles. Therefore
surety payments will have paid on around 12,000 vehicles and a
significant number of these will have subsequently retaxed. In
addition the number of abandoned vehicle fires has dropped by
54% in the two years (October 2002-March 2003 compared to October
2004-March 2005).
5. According to figures from DVLA vehicle
excise duty evasion in London has dropped from 283,000 in 2003-04
to 144,000 in 2004-05—if each vehicle is on average taxed
at £150, this means around £21 million extra for Treasury.
Although some of this will have been due to enforcement action
by DVLA and by TfL, the majority of activity is down to boroughs.
6. The Home Office funding for Operation
Scrap it is about to end. It is by no means clear that Boroughs
will continue to see dealing with untaxed vehicles as a priority
for them when most of the benefit goes to Treasury because of
higher levels of compliance.
7. The ALG and Boroughs would like to see
greater priority be given by DVLA and other agencies to the enforcement
of uninsured, unlicensed and untaxed vehicles and would like Boroughs
to be incentivised to deal with untaxed vehicles, for example
by allowing boroughs to share in the extra tax revenue generated
by their enforcement action.
ILLEGAL, COPIED,
STOLEN OR
TAMPERED NUMBER
PLATES
8. Number plate tampering, copying and theft
also undermines effective enforcement using Automated Number Plate
Recognition Systems (ANPR), as do number plates with the wrong
layout or font. This has been addressed in part by the introduction
of regulations enforced by DVLA and Local Authority Trading Standards
agents governing the issue of number plates. However more could
be done and Boroughs suggests that DfT/DVLA consider the expansion
of devolved powers as highlighted in paragraph 4 above to include
enforcement of vehicles found on street to be displaying illegal,
copied or stolen number plates. Consideration should also be given
to the adoption of new technologies to better control the issue
of number plates and to prevent copying and tampering.
ACCURACY OF
DATA PROVIDED
BY DVLA
9. Boroughs currently issue over 5 million
Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs) a year to vehicles which commit
civil parking and traffic contraventions, including driving in
bus lanes and other moving traffic contraventions, such as banned
turns.
10. The provision of accurate, up to date,
vehicle and keeper details from the DVLA is essential to the effective
and fair enforcement of these contraventions. Initiatives such
as continuous registration of keeper details and the issue of
penalties for untaxed vehicles directly from the DVLA record have
therefore been welcomed. However Boroughs consider that further
improvements could be made. For example, Boroughs would like DfT/DVLA
to consider greater use of new technology with existing partners,
such as the Post Office, to improve the accuracy and timeliness
within which the DVLA record is updated. This could be further
enhanced by new legislation that required the transfer of vehicle
arrangements to be conducted by both purchaser and vendor through
the Post Office as is the case in some other EU states.
FOREIGN REGISTERED
VEHICLES
11. The enforcement of civil traffic and
parking contraventions is limited by current powers in relation
to foreign registered vehicles. In London, about 5% of PCNs are
issued to foreign registered vehicles—of these PCNs only
4.5% are actually paid.
12. Whilst the impact on overall compliance
and the effectiveness of existing parking, charging and traffic
schemes is relatively small there is an urgent need to address
two major issues to change this situation which is set to get
worse as more traffic and parking contraventions become decriminalised
across the UK and new initiatives such as the London Low Emissions
Zone are introduced:
(i) The lack of availability and co-ordination
of vehicle and keeper information related to evading foreign registered
vehicles.
(ii) The lack of EU wide legislation that
enables the legal enforcement of civil penalties incurred by foreign
registered motorists in the UK to be enforced in their country
of residence (or vice versa).
13. The lack of keeper information and the
legislative framework to enforce means agencies, such as Boroughs
resort to "best endeavours" to enforce contraventions
committed by foreign registered vehicles.
14. The DVLA has extensive experience and
knowledge of such issues and has been an active participant at
various meetings, initiatives and discussions to identify possible
solutions to the problems. In addition, the DVLA has been represented
at the Enforcement Task Force, a working group made up of the
Association of London Government, TfL, the Police and other interested
parties which was established to co-ordinate at a high level the
enforcement activities and initiatives being undertaken across
London. Boroughs believes that the DVLA is ideally positioned
to take a more active role in the delivery of effective short
and long term remedies to these issues.
15. In particular Boroughs would like the
DfT/DVLA to take a more direct and leading role in: (i) the provision
of one single interface and database of vehicle and keeper data
for all UK based enforcement agencies into other EU States licensing
agencies so that such data can be used for following up contraventions
incurred by foreign registered vehicles and (ii) the lobbying
for the speedy implementation of EU wide legislation for the enforcement
of civil penalties incurred by non UK registered motorists (and
vice versa).
VEHICLE AND
OPERATOR SERVICES
AGENCY (VOSA)
16. Boroughs also work closely with VOSA
to organise vehicle inspection stops. It is important that good
liaison continues so that such stops take place in sensible locations.
CONCLUSION
17. ALG and boroughs believes that the services
provided by the DVO agencies make a real contribution to the effective
delivery and enforcement of DfT and borough policies. Boroughs
also believes that the DVLA is ideally positioned to support the
expansion of civil enforcement of parking, traffic, air quality
and charging schemes in London and across the UK.
18. Boroughs consider it essential that
the relevant agencies are provided with clear direction by the
DfT in respect of the effective deployment and use of new technologies
and facilities that ensure more accurate recording and provision
of up to date vehicle and keeper data; the on going development
of vehicle emission testing and certification; the introduction
of flexible systems and expansion of databases; facilitating the
effective enforcement of foreign registered vehicles, and in particular
the ALG and Boroughs request that:
— Greater priority is given by DVLA
and other agencies to the enforcement of uninsured, unlicensed
and untaxed vehicles.
— DfT/ DVLA consider the expansion
of devolved powers to include enforcement of vehicles found on
street to be displaying illegal, copied or stolen number plates.
— Further consideration is given to
the adoption of new technologies to better control the issue of
number plates and to prevent copying and tampering.
— DfT/DVLA consider increased use of
new technology with existing partners such as the Post Office
to improve the accuracy and timeliness that the DVLA record is
updated. This could be further enhanced by new legislation that
required the transfer of vehicle arrangements to be conducted
by both purchaser and vendor through the Post Office as is the
case in some other EU states.
— DfT/DVLA take a more direct and leading
role in: (i) the provision of one single interface and database
of vehicle and keeper data for all UK based enforcement agencies
into other EU States licensing agencies so that such data can
be used for following up contraventions incurred by foreign registered
vehicles and (ii) the lobbying for the speedy implementation of
EU wide legislation for the enforcement of civil penalties incurred
by non UK registered motorists (and vice versa).
— Boroughs should be incentivised to
deal with untaxed vehicles by allowing them to share in the extra
tax revenue generated by their enforcement action.
10 January 2006
Annex
THE ROLES OF THE ALG AND THE ALG TRANSPORT
AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE
The Road Traffic Act 1991 required the London
local authorities to establish a joint committee for various purposes
involved with parking enforcement. These include:
— Determining additional parking charges
and parking penalties.
— Appointing adjudicators.
— Providing administrative support
and premises for the adjudicators.
The Greater London Authority Act 1999 amended
the 1991 Act to require TfL to be a member of the joint committee
with respect to adjudication.
This joint committee was established in 1992
as the Parking Committee for London (PCfL). PCfL's constitution
allowed it to carry out other activities related to parking enforcement,
as detailed in the body of this evidence. In 1998, as a result
of a merger with other transport related joint committees, PCfL
changed its name to the Transport Committee for London (TCfL).
In 2000, the boroughs consolidated all their joint activities
under the umbrella of the ALG. TCfL became an associated joint
committee of the ALG and again changed its name to the ALG Transport
and Environment Committee (ALG TEC).
At a member level, ALG TEC retains its separate
status and boroughs still nominate members directly to ALG TEC.
ALG TEC raises its own finance with its own budget. ALG, through
its Leaders' Committee must approve this budget and also approve
the general policy of ALG TEC (carried out through approval of
the business plan).
At an officer level, all ALG TEC's functions
are carried out by ALG staff who are integrated with other ALG
functions.
In addition to its statutory functions, the
joint committee carries out other functions on behalf of its members,
where it makes practical or financial sense for these to be done
jointly. These include:
— Code of Practice on Parking Enforcement
and Parking Attendant's Handbook.
— TRACE: the 24 hour call centre providing
information on vehicles which have been removed.
— Common databases on persistent evaders
and invalid blue badges.
— IT links between the boroughs and
DVLA and the County Court.
14 When the term "borough" is used in this
paper, it should be taken to include the Corporation of London. Back
15
As required in s73 of the Road Traffic Act 1991. Back
| 
