Accident Claims Companies are Scum

Every so often I will get a phone call on my Mobile, usually with a London or Birmingham number,  from some woman telling me that I have been in an accident that wasn't my fault.

Depending on what mood I am in I will take one of the following courses of action:

1. Use the foulest language I can think of to try to upset her.
2. Ask her if she is too stupid to get a real job.
3. Play along for a bit - "Ooh have I? - tell me more about it - it must have been awful for me."
4. Tell her that it is her and not her employer who will be prosecuted for phoning a TPS-registered number.

All make me feel a bit better after the nuisance call.

With number 3, they have a script that references "The RTA Register" and they tell me "that stands for the Road Traffic Accident Register.  Well I know what RTA stands for and I also know that this register does not exist and if it did and they had got my details off it, then they might just know my name.

Number 4 isn't actually true but they always hang up immediately.  TPS by the way is this lot - if you are not yet registered with them, I strongly advise to do so - unless you aren't in the UK although I'm sure similar services must exist in other countries.

I always report these calls to the ICO (Information Commissioner's Office) too.

This also makes me feel better.

So what news story has got me talking about this today? I've not had one of these calls for a couple of months now.

Well it is this one from The Huddersfield Daily Examiner.

It reinforces my belief that accident claims companies (like the PPI bastards) are rotten from the top down.  It seems that the boss of one of these companies, Miles Savory, invented an accident so that he could get personal details via the DVLA of the owner of a private number plate that he wanted to buy.

I tried to find a picture of him using Google Images but it kept coming up with sausage rolls and quiches.

Anyway, the owner of the plate complained to the DVLA who investigated and reported him to the ICO.

Savory admitted a charge of breaching Section 55 of the Data Protection Act 1998 by unlawfully obtaining personal data when he appeared at Bristol Magistrates’ Court. The defendant, of Whiteshill, Hambrook, Bristol, was fined £335 and was ordered to pay £364.08 costs and a victim surcharge of £33.

Good.

Mr./Mrs./Miss/Ms./Other

This lady is called Caron Garrod.

 

I don't know if she is married or not.

The BBC don't give us any clues in this article in which they refer to her as "Ms. Garrod."  They do point out that she suffers from multiple sclerosis - a condition which can affect the brain and/or spinal cord, causing a wide range of potential symptoms, including problems with vision, arm or leg movement, sensation or balance. (I got that from the NHS site on the subject)

I'm not sure if "Ms" actually stands for anything - it's just a compromise between Miss and Mrs. - usually.

But, as some twerp at the DVLA has accidentally (and yes I do think it was an accident) found out, it also stands for "Multiple Sclerosis":

That is a letter sent by them to "Multiple Sclerosis Garrod."

 

Oh dear.  It would be quite funny if it wasn't so offensive.

 

Don't think I'll be phoning to tell them about a recent dose of venereal disease.

Sex Plates

It is approaching September 1st which means that a new set of car registration numbers will be made available.

This means that a news organisation will do a report on numbers that the DVLA will hold back because they are "offensive".

This week it was the BBC's turn.

They use this depiction:

To be fair, rather than say they are offensive, they ask the question, Do these "suppressed" vehicle registration marks cause "upset or offence"?

 

The first looks a bit like "MURDER" and the second (and it took me a while to work it out) looks a bit like "NEGLECT" so the third one must be "NOGLMUM".

 

They claim that "NO MUM" has potential to cause offence irrespective of the numbers in between.  I'm not convinced that if you wanted to upset someone who had lost a parent that you would go to the trouble of transferring this registration to their car.

 

It may be more likely that the MUM, DAD and SON registrations are being held back to sell off at the next DVLA auction.

 

I'd like to know what will happen in two years time when ALL plates will be deemed offensive.

Don't Cry For Jeremy Argentina

I thought that the hoo-ha about the Top Gear Argentina Special would have blown over by now.

But watching Have I Got A Bit More News For You? last night convinced me otherwise.

For those who have been out of circulation for the last couple of weeks, the Top Gear presenters and crew has to abandon their trip through Argentina due to an unfortunate number plate on a Porsche driven by Jeremy.  Most news outlets reported it - here's the Telegraph's take on it.  The offending number plate was H982 FKL.

Some say that was a deliberate reference to The Falklands Conflict.  Top Gear say that it was a coincidence.  Others say that H982 refers to the year of the conflict (although it actually 1982) while obviously the FKL is from FalKLands which the Argentinians like to call Las Malvinas.

I can see some concern there.

Although a local councillor there lost some credibility when he said that the digits 269 on the number plate of the Ford Mustang Richard Hammond was driving were close to the 255 Britons killed during the 1982 war and that the numbers 646 on James May's Lotus could be taken as a reference to the 649 Argentinian casualties.

No they couldn't.

Top Gear are insisting that this was an unfortunate coincidence and that nobody realised the significance of H982 FKL until it was pointed out to them and then lots of war veterans (aged in their twenties according to Jeremy) started throwing stones at them.

There is no doubt that that Porsche has had that number plate for at least 10 years - this means that they didn't deliberately change it.  However, they could have deliberately bought that car due to its number plate.

They deny that they did this.

They also point out that when the significance of H982 FKL was pointed out, they changed the plates on the car.

This is true, there are photos of the car carrying H1 VAE.

That plate apparently belongs to a Porsche 911.  Maybe the original owner (maybe with initials VAE - perhaps ex-Brookside actor Vince Earl?) traded in the Top Gear Porsche for his 911 taking his personal number with him and left the old physical plates in the car when it got re-registered.

Sounds a reasonable scenario - it would explain why there was a spare set of plates in the car.

So the story can die away now?

Wrong.

Clarkson writes for The Sun so the other papers want to keep twisting the knife.

This weekend, The Independent had an interview with the Argentinian ambassador to the UK, Alicia Castro.  She accuses Jeremy of portraying Argentinians as savages.  I only really mention it because I like her quote, "We eat a lot of beef, but we have never eaten a journalist."

However, news has now emerged of another set of plates with the car.  This is what they were talking about last night on HIGNFY.

These were almost certainly meant for Jeremy as a joke to be used at some point in the show.

 

Being pedantic, I hate mixing upper and lower case letters in words - I find it particularly iRriTatINg.  But "BE11 END" is clearly meant to be "Bell-End" - a penile insult probably lost on most non-Brits.

 

So why would they expect to need a new set of plates?  Without seeing a script it does look a bit dodgy.

 

The Star took it a bit far though, claiming Jeremy could end up in prison.  Apparently, "The DVLA has said it is an offence to drive a car in the UK or abroad with a plate which is different to the one assigned to the vehicle."

 

Well, I doubt if the DVLA have any authority in Argentina and there is no evidence of it being driven with the wrong plates over here.

 

Besides, The Star's main story today is a complete hoax that they have fallen for about a giant crab.

 

So maybe not a very reliable source of news?

Tear Along The Dotted Line

This is not an instruction to drive quickly down the road-markings which separate two lanes.

I'm glad that I spotted this Telegraph story today because it means I can maintain my record of five posts per calendar month this year.

The story is about how the DVLA is running out of the thick-ish paper that they print Tax Discs on so they are printing some of their own on thinner paper without the easy-tear perforations.

This is on the back of the news that the media have just noticed that Tax Discs will no longer need to be displayed on or after October 1st this year.

This is mildly irritating to me.  My disc expires on 30th September.  This means I probably won't be sent one of the new, thinner, unperforated discs that they talk about in the Telegraph article.  This is a shame because there is always someone sad enough to collect unusual ephemera like that so I could have put it on e-Bay after it expired and cashed in on its historic value.

 

The article also goes on to say that many motorists are unaware of this change and that there is a serious danger that anyone buying a car after October 1st will need to arrange tax straight away because no tax disc means no transfer of the duty paid along with the car.  Hopefully the seller will be refunded any remaining monies as is the current system when you send the disc back to the DVLA.

 

Although I am one of the 58% of motorists (according to the AA survey quoted in the Telegraph) who did know it was happening (check out my post from last December) I didn't know the start-date or the implications for car buyers.

 

Or the implications for people who make tax-disc holders - don't buy any shares in these...

Could you just spare a minute...

...to sign this petition?

Honest John in The Telegraph is imploring us to sign one.  This is one of many on the Government's e-petition site, http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/.

This particular one asks the question, "Are some car insurers killing off Speed Awareness Courses?" and claims that, "Some car insurers are now increasing premiums for drivers who complete Speed Awareness Courses, despite them not being convicted of any offence. Perversely they are penalising drivers for choosing an option that is proven to improve driving standards. This is illogical and unfair, it deters others from taking the course and could affect its future availability. Insurers should promote Speed Awareness Courses, instead some penalise drivers who complete them."

I have signed it.

And so has my wife.

Basically, I think these courses are a very good idea and am annoyed at the motor insurance industry picking on them as an excuse to up premiums.

I am no stranger to the e-petition site and was one of 43057 signatories on the sadly unsuccessful petition to keep Formula 1 Free to Air in the UK.

After signing the Speed Awareness petition, I decided to see what other car-related petitions were on the Government site.

One of the first to catch my eye was another irritating insurance industry one: "Non-fault accident impact on Car Insurance"

This one reads,
"Please consider following changes for car insurance:

1. You need to declare last 3 years fault/non-fault accident claims while buying car insurance. Insurance companies say that as per some stats, a person is more likely to be involved in an accident if they have had any accidents in the past and in many accidents, there is a fault ratio involved.

We believe that such stats cannot be applied to every accident. Ex: If someone has been hit on the back of their car while they were stationary/moving in traffic or parked in parking bay, how they could become more prone to accidents in future?

Currently, they are still penalized by increased premium for next 3 years due to non-fault accident claim.

To avoid such situations, either non-fault claim declaration should not be mandatory while buying car insurance or a process should be defined to calculate fault ratio.

2. Insurance companies should be required to provide a breakdown of premium calculation in insurance quote."

Last year I was hit on the back of my car while I was stationary.  Now, how could I become more prone to accidents in future?  I didn't even make a claim - it was all done through the other person's insurance but I still have to declare it.


Next, I found "Car Lamps should be easy to replace" which tells us,

"All too frequently cars are seen with lights that are not working. Whilst some people will habitually ignore a defective lamp, the increasing tendency for manufacturers to make lamp replacement impossible for the average motorist to undertake, means that a garage appointment is required to fix the lamp.

The Government should therefore legislate to force manufacturers to make bulb replacement easy and well within the capabilities of most motorists without having either to damage your hands or remove large parts of the car to access the lamps.

This would increase road safety and therefore make driving safer!"

Even with my small, girly hands I struggle to change modern car bulbs - they tend to be positioned with the battery or fusebox or some pipework making them virtually impossible to get at.  So, yet another petition I agree with.  I think it's a bit fanciful though, to assume that the Government would legislate on it.

And, while we're on the subject, will Halfords please stop advertising the service of bulb-replacement when you purchase a bulb off them - if you actually look into it, they'll only do it if it is easy to fit anyway.


So, how about "Cars to give cyclists space"?

Apparently, "Cycling is the transport of the future being healthy, cheap and non polluting however many would be cyclists are deterred from taking up cycling on British roads due to the dangerous disregard by some motorists for cyclists.

Cyclists need a cars width between them and overtaking motorists to feel and be safe on the roads. Motorists passing cyclists with just inches to spare between them and the cyclist are putting cyclists at risk and causing distress and fear of harm which is a crime in itself. Cyclists have every right to use the public roads and should not feel threatened in doing so.

We are calling for the Government to make Police take much more robust action on motorists putting cyclists at risk prosecuting dangerous motorists in the same way as those threatening physical violence."

As a cyclist and a car-driver I appreciate the argument from both sides although haven't particularly noticed it as a problem when on two-wheels.  Any police officer witnessing a driver intimidating a cyclist would, I am sure, take some action, especially if a perceived danger was involved.

So how about a petition to make the Police take more robust action against cyclists contravening the road laws - like riding two-abreast on a main road when there is a perfectly good cycle-lane marked out on the adjacent pavement - OK, so it's not illegal, but it is bloody annoying - and a safety issue.


Now for one getting into the realms of fantasy - or is it?

How to stop car chases involving police.

"To stop car chases involving police all new cars should have wireless networking built into engine management systems. Each car could have a code stored in DVLA that the police could use to disable that engine.

If a car fails to stop, all the police need to do is send the code to the engine. That will effectively stop the car. This would save many lives and could be used against stolen vehicles.

Encryption would be used to stop any random signal affecting any engines.

The govenment need to make this law for all new cars/bikes."

Maybe it is possible nowadays.  It would put Tracker out of business but in any case, would be a manufacturer added option if anything.


However, the petition that most amused me - and mostly entered the realms of fantasy was the one entitled "water powered hybrid cars"

This one, funnily enough, only has one signatory - presumably the person who created it.  It informs us thusly,

"The government are wasting away our life's and others by causing us to waste away our money,lives and our future generations causing our own deaths when we can do something about it

all the government is doing is stopping us from buying water powered cars so they can take more money off us.

we can save money and save the planet in 100 years our human race could end up dead or back up in the dark ages so please sign and save us all and our future generations "

When I'd stopped laughing, I did a Google Images search for water-powered cars and found this:

It's a G-Wiz!  Now the G-Wiz is famously electric and I thought electricity and water were supposed to be a bad mix.

And is that Hannibal Lecter sitting in it? 


I wondered if any other countries allow the general populace to come up with sensible and daft petition subjects like this.

Canada, Australia, South Africa and Russia all seem like a big no.

But in America, they have - https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/

Unfortunately, the only car-related petition in there was the extremely boring "overturn franchise laws that limit auto manufacturers from selling their vehicles directly to consumers."

Then I remembered that Americans like to call cars "automobiles" so I did a search on that but there was nothing there.




OK, I think that's enough petitioning for one post - I'll sign off now.

Time to do something about the stolen V5s?

I can't believe it was as long ago as 2006 that a huge number of blank V5 documents were stolen from the DVLA.

But it was.

It was so long ago, I can't find the story online now - although I haven't looked particularly hard.


There are plenty of related stories though...

This one from July 2008...

this one from January 2010...

and this one from October of that year.


In all that time, nothing constructive seems to have been done about it.

Until now?

I received today a brown envelope.

I opened it with trepidation, fully expecting something from Her Majesty's Inland Revenue...

But inside was a shiny new V5 document.

I was so excited, I took a photo of it (with added Lego Bricks to hide the identity of my beloved Jag)...It came with this explanatory note...
Helpful eh?

Lord knows how much this will be costing - but I do know it should have been done back in 2006 when there was still some money left in the Western world...

...and before a lot of innocent people were ripped off.