Calendar An icon of a desk calendar. Cancel An icon of a circle with a diagonal line across. Caret An icon of a block arrow pointing to the right. Email An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of the Facebook "f" mark. Google An icon of the Google "G" mark. Linked In An icon of the Linked In "in" mark. Logout An icon representing logout. Profile An icon that resembles human head and shoulders. Telephone An icon of a traditional telephone receiver. Tick An icon of a tick mark. Is Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes. Is Not Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes with a diagonal line through it. Pause Icon A two-lined pause icon for stopping interactions. Quote Mark A opening quote mark. Quote Mark A closing quote mark. Arrow An icon of an arrow. Folder An icon of a paper folder. Breaking An icon of an exclamation mark on a circular background. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Caret An icon of a caret arrow. Clock An icon of a clock face. Close An icon of the an X shape. Close Icon An icon used to represent where to interact to collapse or dismiss a component Comment An icon of a speech bubble. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Ellipsis An icon of 3 horizontal dots. Envelope An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Home An icon of a house. Instagram An icon of the Instagram logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. Magnifying Glass An icon of a magnifying glass. Search Icon A magnifying glass icon that is used to represent the function of searching. Menu An icon of 3 horizontal lines. Hamburger Menu Icon An icon used to represent a collapsed menu. Next An icon of an arrow pointing to the right. Notice An explanation mark centred inside a circle. Previous An icon of an arrow pointing to the left. Rating An icon of a star. Tag An icon of a tag. Twitter An icon of the Twitter logo. Video Camera An icon of a video camera shape. Speech Bubble Icon A icon displaying a speech bubble WhatsApp An icon of the WhatsApp logo. Information An icon of an information logo. Plus A mathematical 'plus' symbol. Duration An icon indicating Time. Success Tick An icon of a green tick. Success Tick Timeout An icon of a greyed out success tick. Loading Spinner An icon of a loading spinner. Facebook Messenger An icon of the facebook messenger app logo. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Facebook Messenger An icon of the Twitter app logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. WhatsApp Messenger An icon of the Whatsapp messenger app logo. Email An icon of an mail envelope. Copy link A decentered black square over a white square.

DVLA policy means taxpayers are subsidising private parking firms’ access to driver data

Post Thumbnail

Taxpayers are being charged millions of pounds for drivers’ data to be passed to private parking firms that are seeking prosecutions.

A Courier investigation has revealed a galling policy quirk where the DVLA loses 34p every time a parking company applies for a registered keeper’s details.

This year the agency has already received more than 1.8 million of the applications meaning in excess of £600,000 was lost from the public purse.

And that could be the tip of the iceberg.

The DVLA was unable to say how long the bizarre charging anomaly has been in place and whether it also applies to the hundreds of thousands of data requests received every year from intermediaries, insurance firms, solicitors, mileage check companies, finance companies and toll road or bridge operators.

However, our Freedom of Information inquiry showed that documentation procured by parking firms for £2.50 costs the agency £2.84 to handle.

Labour Shadow Transport Secretary Mary Creagh said: “Private parking firms are part of an industry that is highly lucrative and cash-rich, so it is galling that taxpayers are subsidising their DVLA applications.

“The UK Government should swiftly review its charging structure to fully recover its costs.”

A spokesman for the TaxPayers’ Alliance said: “To subsidise these searches is bizarre, especially as there is a lot of anxiety among drivers about the data being released at all.

“It’s quite wrong that a tax-funded agency does not seem to have its costs and prices worked out properly.

“Why should taxpayers help fund private companies who are trying to fine them? It’s an additional and highly unwelcome penalty.”

Online applications for registered keepers’ details via the Electronic Vehicle Record Inquiries system have gone up 150% since 2006/07.

Over that period nearly £37 million has been paid to the DVLA for 14.6m records. If each of the records cost 34p to handle, the taxpayer would have faced a bill of £5m.

In reply to the information request, Robert Toft, DVLA head of data sharing policy, said more than three-quarters of driver licensing and vehicle registration transactions are provided free of charge.

He added: “All costs of driver licensing and vehicle registration, including the cost of providing information to parking companies, are pooled and covered by total fee income.

“DVLA charges £2.50 per application to parking companies. DVLA sets fees to recover costs we do not aim to make a profit.

“The current unit cost for processing a request for information from a parking company is £2.84. DVLA announced in the 2013-14 business plan that it would be reviewing all fees.”

The DVLA also charges for paper vehicle record inquiries (£2.50), the electronic driver entitlement checking service (£1.50), driver licence check (£1), the fax verification service (£5) and driver licence validation service (£5).

The body dealt with 2.5 million postal applications for paper records between April 2006 and December last year.

A DVLA spokeswoman said information is only provided under strict controls to parking firms which meet the standards set by an Accredited Trade Association and are compliant with its code of practice.

She added: “If it is brought to our attention that a company does not meet the necessary standards, we will investigate.

“If the allegations are proven we will stop the release of keeper information to them.”