Written evidence from the European Secure
Vehicle Alliance (ESVA) (CMI 23)
ESVA was formed in 1992 as an associate parliamentary
group focused on reducing the incidence of theft of and from vehicles
and whose interests have widened over time to be now concerned
with the reduction of all vehicle related crime and disorder and
a growing interest in enhancing driver compliance.
In approximate terms - the incidence of theft of
vehicles peaked in the mid 1990s at around 400,000 vehicles per
year with the ratio of opportunistic to organised crime being
approximately 80/20. The rate of theft of vehicles has fallen
steadily since then to approximately 100,000 vehicles per year
whilst the ratio of opportunistic to organised crime has reversed
to 20/80 meaning that whilst opportunistic crime has reduced dramatically
- the level of organised vehicle crime has not changed during
the past 15 years.
In terms of detection rates for police recorded crime
in 2009-10 - offences against vehicles at 11% is the lowest of
all crime categories versus 28% for all crime and this pattern
of poor performance has remained the same for many years due in
part to the complexity of vehicle crime and its capacity to work
well across police boundaries.
At the peak of vehicle crime in the mid 1990's -
the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) presented a plan
to the Home Office with 14 recommendations to reduce vehicle crime
and ESVA has maintained a keen interest in their proposals since
that time. One recommendation was the adoption of the Swedish
method of number plate manufacture and distribution - they have
one central supplier of security printed number plates linked
to their equivalent of the DVLA which has been operating successfully
since 1972.
The United Kingdom has 40,000 suppliers of number
plates and little control of what is becoming to be regarded as
a commodity as are batteries and windscreen wipers.
And yet the UK motorist is charged at least the equivalent
of a 50% premium for a set of plates versus the price charged
to Swedish motorists.
A second ACPO recommendation which was also mindful
of another international initiative was to propose a £1 a
policy surcharge to all vehicle insurance policies that would
be invested in an expert body dedicated to the reduction of vehicle
related crime and fraud. The Texas Automobile Theft Prevention
Authority was established in 1991 and continues to operate on
the basis of a $1 a vehicle levy alongside another collaborative
network known as the National Insurance Crime Bureau (NICB) which
operates across all jurisdictions in the USA. The NICB's remit
includes investigations of fraudulent personal injury claims and
staged accidents.
ESVA has itself developed strong links with two vehicle
crime reduction organisations based in Holland and Australia and
these are funded in a significant manner by their country's insurers.
Furthermore - such organisations also operate effectively in Sweden,
France and South Africa.
In ESVA's view - the British insurance industry and
its representative body - the Association of British Insurers
(ABI) - have shown a disappointing reluctance to adopt a broad
and collaborative approach to reducing vehicle related crime and
disorder.
The ACPO Vehicle Crime Intelligence Service (AVCIS)
continue to play a key role in developing collaborative networks
with a number of stakeholders and are able to demonstrate meaningful
returns, for example, in their work with the Finance and Leasing
Association on tackling fraud on leased vehicles. ESVA is of the
view that the insurance industry are well placed to reduce their
costs associated with all aspects of vehicle related crime and
fraud by adopting a more significant 'invest to save' effort with
the police and other investigative bodies.
Some evidence as to the potential value of this approach
can be garnered by the success the Motor Insurance Bureau have
enjoyed since 2006 by working closely with roadside deployed police
Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) technology.
Before 2006, the number of claims as a result of
incidents involving non-insured drivers had continued to rise
steadily but have fallen by perhaps as much as 5% per year since
then as ANPR was deployed alongside the availability of a national
database of vehicles with current insurance which was able to
be searched in real time.
ESVA's prime strategic approach to vehicle crime
reduction was to adopt the same strategy as deployed by road safety
accident reduction experts namely the 3E's - Engineering, Enforcement
and Education. ESVA took a particular interest in perhaps the
most challenging area - Education - which involved to a small
degree advising motorists as to how they could reduce their risk
of becoming a victim of vehicle crime - and to a larger degree
trying to alert young men as to the risks and pitfalls associated
with driving stolen or non-insured cars. ESVA helped raise nationally
in excess of £1million to develop "motor projects"
which demonstrated to young men aged 15 to 19 an appropriate way
in which they could learn about cars and the significance of this
approach has been to a degree reflected in the growing emphasis
on vocational education.
ESVA has also followed with interest the capacity
of "black box" technology in cars to monitor the driving
of motorists and to provide feedback which is especially valuable
to young drivers. The first wave of such initiatives occurred
approximately five years ago and failed to achieve sufficient
market penetration. ESVA would like to pose the question as to
whether a second attempt using this approach has a greater chance
of success?
And finally - ESVA would like to sound a note of
caution as to the efficacy of the deployment of a punitive enforcement
approach associated with non-compliance of young drivers. Current
road traffic legislation places a burden on new drivers who in
their first two years incur six penalty points which results in
their licence being revoked and such drivers being required to
take again a driving test. DVLA data indicates that for the past
four years - approximately 20,000 new drivers are subject to this
penalty per year - but only 12,000 of these young drivers are
registered per year as successfully passing their retest. What
is the fate of the balancing 8,000 new drivers?
November 2010
| 
