Dear Sir or Madam,

In Hansard Daily for 17th Sep 2008, the Secretary of State for
Transport stated that DVLA carried out a trial of using Debt
Collection Agencies to secure payment of Late Licencing Penalties
(LLPs) from June 2006 and, following this, commenced using external
Debt Collection Agencies from Feb 2008.

The reason given for this was that "Initially, the Agency used the
Civil Court procedure to deal with non payment but this process
gave poor results and costs were high."
[http://www.parliament.the-stationery-off...
accessed 28th December 2008]

Please supply all information you hold that supports the "poor
results" of Civil Court action, specifically including the total
cases brought for each year this system was used and the number, or
percentage, of those cases in which the respondent was found to be
not liable for the LLP as issued.

Yours faithfully,

Joe Horner

Dear Mr Horner

Thank you for your e-Mail dated 27 December 2008 in which you have
requested statistical data relating to Continuous Registration
enforcement action undertaken by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency
(DVLA).

The information you have requested is being dealt with under the terms
of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) and you will receive a
response within the statutory 20 working days from the date of receipt.
We will endeavour to respond to your request prior to the 20 working
days.

If you have any queries about this letter, please contact me quoting
the above reference number in any future communication.

Yours sincerely

Freedom of Information Champion
Local Services Network

show quoted sections

Dear Mr Horner

Thank you for your e-Mail dated 28 December 2008 in which you have
requested statistical data relating to Continuous Registration
enforcement action undertaken by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency
(DVLA).

The information you have requested is being dealt with under the terms
of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) and you will receive a
response within the statutory 20 working days from the date of receipt.
We will endeavour to respond to your request prior to the 20 working
days.

If you have any queries about this letter, please contact me quoting
the above reference number in any future communication.

Yours sincerely

Freedom of Information Champion
Local Services Network

show quoted sections

Dear Mr Horner

Thank you for your e-Mail dated 28 December 2008 addressed to the
Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA), Swansea, requesting
information which led to the Agency+IBk-s decision to use external Debt
Collection Agencies (DCA) to collect Late Licensing Penalties (LLPs)
from February 2008. Your request for information about DVLA+IBk-s
previous use of the Civil Court procedure to deal with non payment is
being dealt with under the terms of the Freedom of Information Act 2000
(FOIA). I am replying as Head of Customer Services and Compliance.

At the outset, I need to advise you that, whilst the Agency may hold
the some of the information you have requested, some of it cannot be
provided.

In answer to your specific request:

"Please supply all information you hold that supports the +AJM-poor
results+AJQ of Civil Court action, specifically including the total cases
brought for each year this system was used and the number, or
percentage, of those cases in which the respondent was found to be not
liable for the LLP as issued.+AJQ

I must explain that in the past, if a penalty was not paid the
legislative framework for CR resulted in enforcement of non-payment
through the civil courts, potentially leading to a County Court
Judgement (CCJ) against the vehicle keeper. The settlement date in such
cases was a matter of County Court policy and is outside the control of
this Agency.

It is not possible, therefore, to quantify successful cases and +AJM-poor
results+AJQ as the successful imposition of a CCJ is not indicative of
achieving a successful payment for a LLP. The +AJM-poor results+AJQ
mentioned were not because cases were unsuccessful at Court but were the
result of the Courts being unable to reclaim the money. Further there
were associated costs in progressing a case to the Civil Court (whether
successful or not) which would also need to be accounted for.

I will answer your request in two parts.

In answer to the first part of your request:

+AJM-Please supply all information you hold that supports the +AJM-poor
results+AJQ of Civil Court action, specifically including the total cases
brought for each year this system was used*+AJQ

It may help if I explain that it has been a legal requirement since
January 1998 for the registered keeper of a vehicle to ensure that it
is, at all times, either currently licensed, or that a SORN declaration
is made. Under the system of Continuous Registration (CR) introduced
from 1 January 2004, the registered keeper remains responsible for
re-licensing or declaration of Statutory Off Road Notification (SORN)
until he or she has formally notified DVLA of the vehicle+IBk-s transfer,
destruction, export or theft. Failure to do so will result in a LLP
letter being issued. As enforcement action in respect of a failure to
re-license or declare SORN for a vehicle has been taken under the CR
legislation since March 2004, statistical information for either of
these offences has been recorded under the +IBg-CR offence umbrella+IBk.

The table below details the total number of Judgement Orders passed by
the Courts in DVLA+IBk-s favour for each calendar year:

Year Judgement Orders
2004 30,293
2005 136,576
2006 84648
2007 28175
2008 107

In answer to the first part of your request:

+AJM*and the number, or percentage, of those cases in which the
respondent was found to be not liable for the LLP as issued.+AJQ

The Agency does not record statistics in a format, which would supply
the requested data. CR cases are not pursued for a variety of reasons.
In order to collate this information, we would need to conduct a manual
interrogation of each individual CR enforcement case to determine the
reasons why cases were closed and to ascertain any payment achieved
through the Court following a CCJ. I should explain that, whilst DVLA
may hold this information, it is the Agency+IBk-s policy not to process
requests likely to exceed the cost limit of +AKM-600 for provision of
information under the FOIA. This information will not, therefore, be
made available to you as in the circumstances we are not obliged to do
so by virtue of section 12 of the FOIA.

However, I can tell you that the total number of defences received for
each calendar year since CR commenced is tabled below:

Year Defences
2004 1523
2005 8378
2006 6564
2007 2089
2008 0

The information supplied to you continues to be protected by the
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. You are free to use it for
your own purposes, including any non-commercial research you are doing
and for the purposes of news reporting. Any other re-use, for example
commercial publication, would require the permission of the copyright
holder.

Most documents supplied by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency will
have been produced by government officials and will be Crown Copyright.
You can find details on the arrangements for re-using Crown copyright on
the Office of Public Sector Information website at:

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/click-use/index.htm

If you are unhappy with the way the Agency has handled your request,
you may ask for an internal review. You should contact the Local
Services Network and Enforcement Directorate Freedom of Information
Champion, DVLA, +IBg-A+IBk Block, Longview Road, Morriston, Swansea, SA6
7JL.

If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you
have the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a
decision. Further guidance of DfT complaints procedures are detailed in
Annex A.

Yours sincerely

(sent unsigned)

Steve Alexander
Head of Customer Services and Compliance

ANNEX A

DfT Complaints Procedures

You have the right to complain about the way in which your request for
information was handled and/or about the decision not to disclose all or
part of the information requested. In addition a complaint can be made
that DfT has not complied with its FOI publication scheme.

Your complaint will be acknowledged and you will be advised of a target
date by which to expect a response. Initially your complaint will be
re-considered by the official who dealt with your request for
information. If, after careful consideration, that official decides that
his/her decision was correct, your complaint will automatically be
referred to a senior independent official who will conduct a further
review. You will be advised of the outcome of your complaint and if a
decision is taken to disclose information originally withheld this will
be done as soon as possible.

If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you
have the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a
decision. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at:

Information Commissioner+IBk-s Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF

show quoted sections