Keeping the Whereabouts of Stolen but Recovered Vehicles from Insurers

Dear Sir or Madam,

Further to Mark Weston’s correspondence of August 20th 2009,
reference HQ(PSD) CO/00204/09, I ask to be provided:

1. A copy of the ‘Nottinghamshire Police Stolen Vehicle Recovery
Guidance’ and the associated policy (as at or before 20.08.2009)

2. The research and associated information acquired and considered
giving rise to the conclusion that, upon finding a stolen vehicle
in respect of which the victims insurers had been notified (a claim
submitted), the whereabouts of the vehicle could not be conveyed
(without the victim’s consent) to the insurer concerned or their
representative.

3. The awareness material produced (and circulated) by Mr Weston,
in relation to the processes to be adopted following the recovery
of a stolen vehicle. In particular the advice to Nottinghamshire
police staff about not informing insurers about the location of a
vehicle that has been recovered.

4. The processes in place in the event the Nottinghamshire police
are unable to contact the insured to notify them of their vehicle’s
whereabouts and thereby enable this information to be passed to
insurers

5. The consideration given to the possibility that some insured’s
may not wish to be reunited with their stolen / recovered car and
therefore intentionally fail to advise insurers thereby obtaining
settlement in respect of a vehicle that has been located.

6. The alternative means of addressing the situation that were
considered and dismissed resulting in the ‘new’ policy.

Yours faithfully,

Philip Swift

Dear Mr Weston,

I refer to an aspect of an e-mail you have sent me today (below),
as opposed to responding via this web site. With regard to the
guidance, I am seeking the information that pertains to recovery of
vehicles, a facet that does not feature in the MOU. The MOU
addresses the situation where information is required in respect
of:

a) any claim is believed to be fraudulent or
b) a need to validate the claim.

I am raising the issue of a stolen but recovered vehicle; the
context is not one in which I am suggesting fraud or trying to
validate the claim. The intention is to progress an aspect of a
claim efficiently, economically, to the benefit of all concerned
i.e. insured (victim) , police and insurers; to reunite the victim
with a car or arrange for the associated cost to be reduced and /
or repair to be facilitated. I remain concerned at the obstruction
I am encountering from Nottinghamshire on this point, particularly
as your constabulary has stated that ‘losing’ vehicles (in the
system) is not uncommon. .

I trust future responses will be provide via the web site
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ke...
and that a full response will be provided to all issues raised.
Your response to my FOIA request is limited and I am surprised not
to be provided an explanation of the appeals process etc.

Yours faithfully,

Philip Swift

From: Weston, Mark
Sent: 10 November 2009 12:21
To: Philip Swift
Cc: Beasley, Brian, DSUPT
Subject: FW: Freedom of Information Act Application

Mr Swift

In response to your recent request relating to the guidance
material that has been circulated on disclosing information to the
insurance industry, the attached text has been circulated to the
Nottinghamshire Police Control Rooms and to the Data Protection
Officers. It is to be made available throughout the organisation in
the very near future.

Regards
Mark Weston

Providing Information to the Insurance Industry

It is essential that queries from the Insurance Industry are dealt
with in compliance with the Memorandum of Understanding that exists
between the Association of British Insurers and ACPO.

In brief, this enables the Force to provide Insurers or Loss
Adjusters with:

1. information that is relevant to a suspected fraudulent insurance
claim, using Appendix Form E (as referred to in the MoU). There is
no fee for this.
2. information where there is specific reason to check a claim,
upon receipt of written consent from the insured, using Appendix
Form D, and payment of an appropriate fee.
3. relevant details relating to criminal proceedings resulting from
a fraudulent claim in order that the insurer can claim
compensation.

Information may not be provided by telephone or by e-mail due to
the need to maintain adequate security and to provide information
in the agreed format.

Further guidance can be obtained from the Data Protection Officers.

Dear Freedom of Information,

thank you for the acknowledgement

Yours sincerely,

Philip Swift

Dear Nottinghamshire Police,
Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of
Information reviews.
I am writing to request an internal review of Nottinghamshire
Police's handling of my FOI request 'Stolen vehicles ‘lost’ by
Nott’s Constabulary'.
1. you have not sought further time
2. you have not provided data within 20 working days
3. you appear to be in breach of the FOIA; it appears you have
committed an offence
it does not appear your statement:
"In some circumstances Nottinghamshire Police may be unable to
achieve this deadline. If this is likely you will be informed and
given a revised time-scale at the earliest opportunity."
Is accurate; I have not been informed and provided a revised
timescale.
Please treat this notification as a formal complaint.
A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is
available on the Internet at this address:
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ke...
albeit the above does not include Notts Police Mark Weston’s
limited reply directly to me of 08.11.2009 which does little more
than confirm the request had been read. On 10.11.2009 I replied to
MR Weston referring him to this on-line service writing:
With regard to the guidance, please see:
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ke...
I also responded on 10.11.2009 via this site (as above)
in responding, please refrain from contacting me directly .
Thank you
Yours faithfully,
Philip Swift

Dear Freedom of Information,

thank you for this

Yours sincerely,

Philip Swift