XXXX Department for Transport Zone 3/29 Great Minster House 33 Horseferry Road London SW1P 4DR Tel: 0300 330 3000 Web Site: www.dft.gov.uk Our Ref: F0011871 17 th December 2014 Dear XXXXX, Freedom of Information (FOI) request - F0011871 I am writing in response to your further request for information on the Continuous Insurance Enforcement (CIE) Scheme. Your email was received and forwarded to our Freedom of Information (FOI) Team on Friday 21 November and I am dealing with the greater part of it under the terms of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. For ease of reference I have numbered the questions that you asked and in addition your statement about a perceived lack of guidance has been addressed and answered as if you had asked a question. With the exception of question 2 (a statement) and question 5, which is asking for an explanation rather than recorded information, all other questions are answered under the Freedom of Information Act. Q1/ I have read your response to my earlier enquiry and there are some areas of concern and further enquiry which I hope to raise for clarity in due course. In the meantime, can you send me a list of all the organisations that attended discussions and the findings, minutes or concerns raised in those discussions please? This will assist me to understand what the thoughts of each organisation was during the consultation to which the motor trade as a whole had it appears no input. Please find attached a copy of the consultation document on CIE issued in January 2009 together with a general summary of responses and a more detailed breakdown of responses from organisations.
During 2010 and early 2011, the Motor Insurers Bureau (MIB) and DVLA had several meetings with representatives from the motor trade. No formal minutes were taken of these meetings. The notes of the meetings are being withheld in reliance on the exemption at section 35(1) (a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 that relates to the formulation or development of Government policy. In applying this qualified exemption we have had to balance the public interest in withholding the information against the public interest in disclosure. I have attached the stakeholder engagement plan that the DVLA and MIB followed and the agenda and PowerPoint presentation from the stakeholder meeting that was held at the Department for Transport headquarters on 10 November 2010. The invitation and the attendance list for the launch event is also attached and you will see that the motor trade was represented. Newsletters were also circulated to industry representatives from August 2010 until December 2011. Many shared this across their networks I have attached the front page of each issue that was sent out. Q2/ Having spent 36 years in the trade I have not seen any guidance on continuous insurance to advise customers of the affects and definitely no information anywhere as to the effect on trade cars. I understand the trade are exempt but how and to what degree is not published on DVLA, MIB or any Gov site. This failure to publish any information to the trade or to the public has been one of my concerns hence this investigation. The commencement of CIE was announced by the Minster on 23 rd May 2011 to coincide with a 4 month TV advertising campaign by the insurance industry. Information was also released to national, regional, trade and specialist press at the same time. A CIE insert was included with V11 vehicle tax renewal forms issued from March 2011 and continued for 6 months. Information was also made available and remains at www.direct.gov.uk/stayinsured (now www.gov.uk/vehicleinsurance/uninsured-vehicles) and www.mib.org.uk. Q3 Is it possible to send me a copy of the typical letter(s) which are sent to the public when advising there appears to be no insurance cover in place?
I would also like to see a copy of the penalty notice that would be followed up if there was no response from the letter. I am trying to establish what the information is on the notice to make people aware as to the seriousness of any breach and the impending action to follow (Court). You were sent copies of the following documents on 25 November 2014:- The initial advisory letter sent out by the Motor Insurers Bureau (MIB) The fixed penalty Notice (FPN) sent out by the DVLA The fixed Penalty Notice Reminder FPNr) sent out by the DVLA 4. Are there any mitigating circumstances as defence that the DVLA have so far accepted or are they simply prosecuting regardless as they currently adopt this approach? I notice you say that the only mechanism of Appeal is before the Court at a hearing, this concerns me. All keepers have the right to dispute the penalty once issued and can do so by completing the reverse of the FPN or FPN reminder with whatever mitigating circumstances they may have to explain why they should not have been issued with the penalty. All responses and disputes received from registered keepers are investigated by DVLA before deciding whether enforcement action remains appropriate. Should the registered keeper demonstrate that the vehicle was insured, declared SORN, or had been correctly notified to DVLA as having been disposed on the alleged date of offence then the case is closed without recourse to enforcement. DVLA holds information about mitigating circumstances. The information in the attached Annex A has been retrieved and extracted from DVLA Operating Instructions. However, the information redacted from the Annex (indicated by X) as well as the remaining information in the Operating Instructions is being exempted from disclosure under s31(1)(b) of the FOI Act. To disclose that information would be likely to prejudice the apprehension or prosecution of offenders. Before applying the exemption DVLA considered the public interest test between disclosing and withholding the information with the outcome favouring non-disclosure. Further details on why DVLA favours exempting the information can be found at Annex B.
5. Why have the DVLA not set up any proper appeal procedure in house similar to parking tickets which can be administered independently rather than expensive Court time and costs. As stated above all keepers have the right to dispute the penalty once issued and can do so by completing the reverse of the FPN or FPN reminder with whatever mitigating circumstances they may have to explain why they should not have been issued with the penalty. All responses and disputes received from registered keepers are investigated by DVLA before deciding whether enforcement action remains appropriate. There are also additional checks embedded in the systematic process to ensure that compliant keepers are not unnecessarily inconvenienced. 6. The costs claimable for DVLA time is limited to 110 and the fine can be up to 1,000. Can you confirm the average fine imposed and if it has been cost effective to prosecute? Upon conviction, Magistrates Courts will determine the level of fine appropriate to an individual s case circumstance following guidelines issued by HM Courts and Tribunal Services. It would not be possible to provide figures that confirm the average fine imposed since the start of the scheme without individually accessing each case. The estimated cost of doing this would exceed 600. Under Section 12 of the FOI Act, DVLA is not obliged to comply with a request where the estimated cost of retrieving and extracting the information exceeds 600. As it is the DVLA s policy not to respond to requests for information that would exceed the appropriate costs limit, I am afraid that the information will not be supplied to you. 7. Has a budget been costed as to how much it costs to put each motorist through the Court on this type of claim and if there has been a gain or loss to the taxpayer? DVLA does not hold this information as no budget has been costed. However, the tables below provide details of revenue from FPNs and costs awarded to DVLA at courts since CIE became operational in 2011. FPNs Financial Year 000
2011 2012 1,563 2012 2013 2,879 2013 2014 4,151 Costs Awarded at Court Financial Year 000 2011 2012 5 2012 2013 61 2013 2014 1,272 If you are unhappy with the way the Department has handled your request or with the decisions made in relation to your request you may complain within two calendar months of the date of this letter by writing to the Department s FOI Advice Team at: Zone D/04 Ashdown House Sedlescombe Road North Hastings East Sussex TN37 7GA E-mail: FOI-Advice-Team-DFT@dft.gsi.gov.uk Please see attached details of DfT s complaints procedure and your right to complain to the Information Commissioner. If you have any queries about this letter, please contact me. Please copy any follow-up correspondence relating to this request to the FOI Advice Team to help ensure that it receives prompt attention. Please also remember to quote the reference number above in any future communications. Yours sincerely, XXXXXX Road User Licensing Insurance and Safety Division
Annex A Extract from DVLA Operating Instructions 1. Deceased / Bereavement Background When dealing with notification of death cases, telephone clerks will usually request that the customer send a letter into DVLA for the vehicle record to be updated. Casework Actions / Checklist Keeper Deceased X If the AO is still recorded as the keeper on VSS the information contained in the letter should be copied and forwarded to the relevant SC Team in order for them to remove the AO from the vehicle record. If an original death certificate is included this should be copied and the original returned to the informant with the NFA letter. You may also receive the information via a Notification of Death (NOD) for more information on this click here (insert link). Third Party Deceased Where an AO is stating that a relative or friend etc has passed away which resulted in them being unable to comply with CIE, you should discuss the case with your line manager, who will decide whether to continue with the enforcement. Should your line manager decide that the AO is still liable then you should follow the instructions in the Liable column of the table below. *When making a decision, consider how a magistrate would view the case and the whether it could lead to damaging consequences or distress if the case continued to prosecution.*
2. Illness / Injury Background Sometimes you will receive a reply to the penalty letter stating that illness or injury prevented the AO from complying with CIE. Casework Actions / Checklist Upon receipt of such a piece of casework you will need to consider the reason for non compliance and the severity of the illness/injury. If unsure discuss the case with your line manager, who will decide whether to continue with the enforcement. In some instances you will need to write to the AO requesting proof (letter from doctor etc) of the illness/injury mentioned. In these cases you should follow the actions in the Further Information column of the table below If you or your line manager considers that the case should be closed NFA then you will need to follow the actions in the Not Liable column of the table below. Should your line manager decide that the AO is still liable then you should follow the instructions in the Liable column of the table below. *When making a decision, consider how a magistrate would view the case and the whether it could lead to damaging consequences or distress if the case continued to prosecution.* 3. Bankrupt Background Bankruptcy can only be declared by a court order following the presentation of a bankruptcy petition: An individual may present his own petition on the ground that he is insolvent, i.e. unable to pay his debts A creditor or creditors may also petition for a bankruptcy order to be made against an individual debtor. Casework Actions / Checklist When you receive a reply to correspondence stating that the alleged offender is unable to pay the out of court settlement as they are Bankrupt etc then a written statement of liquidation or bankruptcy should be requested before you can continue with the case. You should follow the actions in the Liable/Further Action column of the table below.
When evidence is received or if the alleged offender has included evidence with their original response then you should follow the instructions in the Not Liable column of the table below. If the registered keeper states they are having financial difficulties an extension of time may be offered. See the Additional Time chapter of the OI's for more information. 4. Armed Forces Personnel Background When you receive a reply to correspondence relating to armed forces personnel certain consideration should be given if deployed on active duty. Casework Actions / Checklist Serving abroad on active duty (e.g. Iraq or Afghanistan) If a response is received that the keeper was abroad on active duty on the date of offence they will need to provide evidence. Acceptable evidence could be a written statement from the Commanding/Base Officer that confirms the date the alleged offender was on active duty. If acceptable evidence is provided, the clerk should refer the case to a manager for approval to close the case. If approval is granted, the case can be closed following the instructions in the Not Liable column of the table below. If no evidence is received the case would be pursued following the instructions in the Liable column of the table below. Armed Forces Personnel on non active service Non active service would be classed as training exercises etc: Continue as normal following the instructions in the Liable column of the table below. *When making a decision, consider how a magistrate would view the case and the how it would reflect on the Agency if the case continued to prosecution. 5. Unroadworthy Background In some cases an AO may claim that the vehicle was or is in the care of a garage whilst repairs/work is being carried out. However, the AO is still responsible for the vehicle and should therefore have complied with the legislation. Actions / Checklist As the vehicle was unlicensed / uninsured and kept off the road, even if it was by the garage, the AO should have declared a Statutory off Road Notification (SORN). X X
Annex B Exemption - Section 31 (law enforcement) S31(1)(b) Information which is not exempt information by virtue of section 30 is exempt information if its disclosure under this Act would, or would be likely to, prejudice the apprehension or prosecution of offenders Factors for disclosure Factors for with-holding To demonstrate that DVLA deals with all enforcement cases with a consistent, even-handed and fair approach. To demonstrate that discretion can be shown in limited exceptional circumstances when mitigation is presented in enforcement cases. To ensure effective prosecution of CIE offences and pursue those who fail to comply with their statutory obligations by enforcing CIE. To ensure that information about circumstances where enforcement action is not commenced or continued is not utilised to avoid or frustrate that action. To ensure the policy of enforcement in relation to CIE remains effective and continues to deter or prevent the evasion of insuring vehicles. Reasons why public interest favours withholding information To disclose information concerning mitigation accepted in enforcement cases would prejudice the enforcement of CIE as knowledge of what may constitute mitigating circumstances (and hence when liability is unlikely to be pursued) would be likely to lead to an increase in CIE evasion.
Annex C Your right to complain to DfT and the Information Commissioner You have the right to complain within two calendar months of the date of this letter 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 s Office Wycliffe House Water Lane Wilmslow Cheshire SK9 5AF