Conclusions and Recommendations
1. The VED evasion rate rose to 5% in 2006-07
(£214 million) from 3.6% in 2005-06. The DVLA
uses its records to tackle VED evasion with action on known evaders,
including penalty notices, court action, debt collection and wheel-clamping.
But there are rising numbers of persistent evaders and vehicles
which are not on the DVLA's records. The Department and the DVLA
need to target this group by increasing the level of "on-the-road"
enforcement activity.
2. The Department and the DVLA do not have
the detailed figures and analysis needed to understand trends
in evader behaviour and to target action against them.
The increase in evasion therefore came as a surprise to the Department
and the DVLA. The DVLA needs to gather the data necessary for
an up-to-date and forward-looking picture of changes in evader
behaviour and motivations, and target its action accordingly.
3. Motorists renewing their VED can avoid
paying for one month without risk of penalty. The
DVLA should quantify the resulting losses to date and close this
loophole without delay by reducing the current two months allowed
before late licensing penalty enforcement is initiated.
4. Motorists who receive a VED late licensing
penalty are not required to renew VED and the DVLA does not recover
this lost income. The DVLA and the Department
should recover income lost through late renewal, and should require
all motorists to renew VED at the point of payment of the late
licensing penalty.
5. Persistent evaders with a record of previous
evasion are not targeted in the run up to their next VED renewal
date. The DVLA and the Department should
quantify the costs and benefits of introducing further monitoring
and penalties for repeat evasion, and should find a way of targeting
persistent evaders and reducing the number of "repeat"
incidences of evasion.
6. The Department removed the Secretary of
State's target to reduce the "vehicle underclass" from
the DVLA in March 2007 and it has not been allocated elsewhere
in government. The Department for Transport
should re-introduce a target for tackling persistently unlicensed
vehicles, whose owners are often associated with other forms of
crime and allocate lead responsibility for meeting the target
to a specific body within government.
7. The motorcycle evasion rate has risen to
38% from 30% the previous year, and enforcement action against
this group has been mainly based on the DVLA records.
The long-standing high and increasing levels of evasion critically
undermine the credibility of the DVLA's current motorcycle enforcement
regime. The Department and the DVLA need to target evading motorcyclists
by making the most of their new powers to enforce VED off publicly
maintained roads and by making their on-road enforcement more
effective. Unless there is a marked reduction in rates of evasion,
they should find alternative ways of tackling it, including impounding
unlicensed motorcycles and issuing penalty points against motorcyclists'
driving licences. The Department and the DVLA should also work
with motorcycle industry bodies to reduce concern about the reliability
of sampling methods used in measuring VED evasion by motorcyclists.
8. The DVLA does not collate or cross-reference
its evasion data with that of other interested parties, for example
Transport for London congestion charge evasion data. The
Department for Transport, the DVLA and other government departments
should draw up a strategy and detailed plans for sharing intelligence
on evasion with each other and related organisations to target
and reduce evasion by persistent evaders in particular.
9. Evasion is becoming more sophisticated
and international, making it more difficult to tackle. Technological
solutions, such as electronic chips in number plates, theft-resistant
plates and electronic sensors in vehicles, may become essential
in the medium-term to help fight evasion. Technical and
mandatory standards need to be agreed before some of these new
technologies can be adopted. The Department should lead
work with other enforcement agencies to develop Europe-wide standards
to combat the growth in evasion.
| 
