Dear Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency,

Having searched the what do they know website for information regarding vehicle license plate information I have found some mutually contradictory information which I am hoping you can clarify.

In the response to Mr Mark Slater here https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/c... the DVLA specified that "DVLA considers a vehicle registration number (VRN) to be personal information where the registered keeper of the vehicle is an individual"

But in this response to Mr John Pafvett https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/n... the DVLA clearly states that "We can confirm that registration numbers are the property of the Secretary of State, and are assigned to vehicles so that they can be uniquely identified for law enforcement,"

The two responses are separated by a year and the latest was 2016.

The issue is that according to your responses, the number plate and number belong to the Secretary of State and are assigned to the Vehicle and not the registered keeper so the vehicle can be uniquely identified by law enforcement.

However you also appear to be stating that the number plate and number are personal to the registered keeper which cannot be true if they are actually owned by the secretary of state and the registered keeper details are only available from your organisation for "valid reasons".

Since the law requires that number plates must be clearly visible at any time the vehicle is being used on the road then surely it cannot be classed as personal information, since a data subject has the right to restrict and or prevent the processing of personal data and no such right exists in relation to the vehicle number plate which is owned by the government and must be displayed whether the vehicles registered keeper agrees or not.

Your organisation controls the access to the personal information linked to all registration numbers and decides if or when that "personal" information will be provided to anyone enquiring regarding a vehicle.

The response to Mr Pafvett clearly specifies "It is also worth noting that the numberplate itself is not intended to provide information about an individual driver but is solely to ensure that a vehicle is registered and to help enforcement agencies in identifying who the registered keeper of that vehicle might be."

Can you please confirm once and for all that a vehicle registration number plate does not belong to the registered keeper, is not in and of itself personal information which can identify any living person, and as it is owned by the secretary of state and can only be used to identify the vehicle and therefore it is not personal information within the meaning of the GDPR or DPA 2018?

I make this request because my vehicle was damaged whilst parked in a supermarket car park covered by CCTV.

I have asked the supermarket to provide the license plate number of the red vehicle parked next to mine which caused the damage and they are refusing to do so claiming it is personal information.

I reported the matter to the Police who refused to record the incident as no injury occurred and in their words the driver probably didn't even notice the collision had occurred.

They simply instruct me to claim on my insurance and let the two insurers deal with it thereby raising my insurance premium and the premiums for every other driver by letting the criminal simply avoid punishment.

In a response from your agency here https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/5... from last year, you state
"Regulation 27 of the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2002
allows the DVLA to disclose vehicle keeper details where reasonable cause is
demonstrated. While reasonable cause is not defined in the law the Government’s
policy is that it should relate to the vehicle or its use, following incidents where there
may be liability on the part of the driver.

Circumstances that have been judged to meet reasonable cause include safety
recalls by manufacturers, minor traffic incidents not warranting a full police
investigation and insurance companies dealing with accidents and investigating
fraud. Requests from private car park enforcement companies are also considered
to be a reasonable cause. "

It also provides a link, ostensibly to information which provides Guidance on what
constitutes on reasonable cause

Unfortunately the link no longer works

http://www.gov.uk/request=information-fr...

If I as the owner of a vehicle which has suffered a minor collision, had been given the number plate details of the red vehicle by the staff within the supermarket, what would I need to provide to your organisation in order for you to then release the registered keepers information to me?

Yours faithfully,

W Hunter

Dear Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency's handling of my FOI request 'Vehicle License Plate Personal Information?'.

Mr Aubrey

You have stated my request is not classed as a FOIA request despite me clearly asking for information which is recorded within the DVLA.

In addition I have included at least two FOIA responses posted on this website which constitute written information originating from the DVLA regarding these very issues and I believe there will be many more FOIA responses in the DVLA records which would also apply.

You have clearly specified that "a VRN in itself is not personal data" as defined under the DPA or GDPR.

You have further stated that the sole purpose of the VRN is to allow any person having reasonable cause to be allowed to obtain the identity of the vehicles registered keeper from your very organisation.

The VRN exists specifically to be "a personal information identifier " for your organisation alone, as yours is the only organisation which holds, and indeed is required to keep, a register of all keepers of every VRN issued specifically so the keeper can be identified if you are supplied with reasonable cause.

I have reasonable cause to identify the registered keeper of the vehicle which impacted with mine, but the very information which would allow me to track the person responsible via your organisation is being withheld from me claiming it cannot be disclosed to me as it would identify the person linked to it upon application to you.

Since your stated position negates the very purpose of maintaining a register of keepers, please provide any information originating from the DVLA which applies to the subject of VRN/s to include all FOIA responses, as you appear to have simply ignored the two responses already listed in my original request.

Please also provide the details for the head of your organisation and provide information on how I may contact them either via email or telephone, as I believe they have a duty to issue a directive to the ICO and any other organisation specifying once and for all that the VRN exists to identify the individual responsible for the vehicle to which it is attached and as such it must be provided to any person with reasonable cause can apply to your organisation for that very information.

The position currently held by your organisation is contrary to your your core purpose and must be addressed.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/v...

Yours faithfully,

W Hunter

Dear Freedom of Information Team – C2/W, Data Sharing & Protection Group | Strategy, Policy and Communications Directorate | DVLA | Swansea | SA6 7JL

I requested an internal review of the handling of my request, which also contained further FOIA requests, on the 2 October 2019.

The ICO specifies that an internal review should take no longer to process than the original FOIA request for which the statutory time limit is 20 working days.

Despite 36 working days elapsing since my internal review / foia submission I have received no response whatsoever from the DVLA

Please provide details of when or indeed if you are ever going to respond and register a formal complaint regarding your failure to respond to date.

Regards

W Hunter

Dear Mr Price

You appear to be intentionally disregarding my communication in favour of making clearly untrue statements regarding it.

In the first instance you should already know that for a FOIA request to be valid it must be in writing with a name and a reply address included and be in relation to information held by the organisation.

My FOIA request met all of those criteria but for whatever reason Mr Aubrey chose to ignore those facts.

Specifically my original request included the following

"Can you please confirm once and for all that a vehicle registration number plate does not belong to the registered keeper, is not in and of itself personal information which can identify any living person, and as it is owned by the secretary of state and can only be used to identify the vehicle and therefore it is not personal information within the meaning of the GDPR or DPA 2018?"

And

"If I as the owner of a vehicle which has suffered a minor collision, had been given the number plate details of the red vehicle by the staff within the supermarket, what would I need to provide to your organisation in order for you to then release the registered keepers information to me?"

Admittedly you would have to read the whole request and the two previous responses posted on this site to clearly grasp the meaning of the first request, which was simply that you have previously provided two mutually contradictory responses regarding VRNs approximately one year apart and I was requesting a decision and explanation as to the current view of the DVLA in relation to the DPA and GDPR, both of which clearly specify that the VRN is not Personal Information within the meaning of either legislation.

It is as your organisation has specified a Personal Information Identifier only when supplied to your organisation with a valid reason for the person to be so identified under regulation 27.

Until it is provided to your organisation it is not and can never be personal information and it's sole reason for existence is to be a personal information identifier for your organisation alone.

Mr Aubrey gave responses to both parts of my request, albeit without actually addressing the underlying issue in the first part and by providing a working link to the ,gov website which takes you eventually to the V888 form here https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk...

To obtain the registered keeper details of the suspect vehicle you demand a significant amount of information about the person making the application for no discernable reason and you appear to require this all be addressed by surface mail with payment of £2.50 by Cheque.

In my request for internal review I asked for

"please provide any information originating from the DVLA which applies to the subject of VRN/s to include all FOIA responses, as you appear to have simply ignored the two responses already listed in my original request."

And

"Please also provide the details for the head of your organisation and provide information on how I may contact them either via email or telephone,"

Both of which in and of themselves constitute a valid FOIA request to your organisation submitted on the 2 October but to which I have received no response.

Your latest reply has again simply ignored my FOIA requests, refused to supply the details asked for and provided a link to make complaints to the DVLA but not in respect to the FOIA process, the complaints procedure for which is still being withheld.

My request for a complaint to be registered was sent to you on the 21 November, kindly ask whoever within your organisation is responsible for complaints to contact me with a timescale for their response in relation to it.

Regards

W Hunter

Dear Mr Price

You have again chosen to ignore my clearly stated FOIA requests.

Your response to my "please provide any information originating from the DVLA which applies to the subject of VRN/s to include all FOIA responses, as you appear to have simply ignored the two responses already listed in my original request." was to send links to two FOIA responses, one of which is the same response quoted in my original request.

Both responses refer to requests for bulk disclosure of multiple VRN details rather than the information from a single identified VRN.

You have also failed yet again to provide the details requested for the head of your organisation and their email or telephone contact details.

It would therefore appear that you are deliberately breaching section 77 of the FOIA by refusing to release information upon receipt of a valid FOIA request.

I have already reported this matter to the ICO who will no doubt address it in due course.

In the meantime please advise your manager that a formal allegation under section 77 has been made against your organisation as a result of your failure to address my request.

Yours sincerely,

W Hunter