When they did that a many years ago in my area they caused grid-lock on every road for a 10 miles radius - a normal 30/45 minute commute took 3 hours. To make it worse the local radio station chose (or were forced) not to report any hold-ups and told everyone listening that it was a 'normal' morning for traffic.
Thought I had to consent to them checking MID last time I renewed ...
On 03/10/2014 17:56, "Nightjar
OK - I assumed they did.
It would not be a huge leap forward to make that addition though...
With the advent of SORN all the logical pieces are in place.
Never seen that type of pull-over setup.
We often get, on the A21 at Johns Cross, a VOSA pull-over setup - mostly looking for pikey fuel and pikey vans with bits falling off.
Yes it has, you have to be on the insurance database. The post office just enter the details and the computer says yeah or not. It also checks the MOT status at the same time.
Only in the same way as tax and insurance are compared throughout the year.
MOT, yes. But there's no explicit insurance check any more - either online or in the PO (where you still need to take a paper MOT in - if they check MID online, why not MOT too?). There hasn't been since late last year, after the continuous insurance regs came in.
Dennis@home wrote
WTF is going to pay for this ?
alan_m wrote
Bet the courts were busy afterwards.
I've seen a 100 mile 'exclusion' zone on the M4. It ran from Newport across the Severn to Swindon. There must have been hundreds of police cars, vans and bikes at every junction and on every bridge. I thought they'd been some terrorist attack in London, before I sussed it out.
Tim Watts wrote
With constant ANPR surveilance, they are catching people all the time now. Watched a programme on the box recently where court bailiffs were catching parking fine evaders, with the police running a mobile ANPR.
The Dole get in on them too, "Why are you claiming benefit and sat in this 'ere van wearing overalls, covered in paint?"
Thy check. If you don't believe me go and try and tax an uninsured car.
Who do you think is paying.
Dennis@home wrote
As it's your bright idea - you.
If such things really concerned somebody then looking at the vehicles windows may produce more fruitful results than an easily swapped about or forged paper disc. While not universal many cars will have the vehicle registration number etched on the Windows and if that differs from the plates it may indicate that something is amiss. There can be valid reasons for them to differ,heritage plate transfer,all windows replaced from a reclamation source if vandals have smashed the originals but it makes a starting point. OTOH unless you are directly concerned like you have just been in a prang with such a vehicle you could just ignore it and let the police and other agencies like the DVLA do their job. Members of the public constantly wanting to report others are a right pain and tie up police time as they clog them up with petty things and sometimes for retaliatory reasons like a fallout with neighbours or the Inlaws. if people want be a part time Police person then they can become a special and have the proper resources behind them and a bit of regulation around how they behave.
G.Harman
Even the dimest wooden top given a list of date/time/location reports for H982 FKL would probably notice if it "moved" a distance that would be "difficult" to do in the time.
Of course you pick the plates of a legit car of the same make/model/colour in the area that you are going to use the false plates in and you'd avoid the static ANPR cameras, so only the mobile ones in traffic police cars are a "problem".
?
That restricts you to routes without static ANPR cameras. Which might itself be a big problem. Plus the need to keep up to date with ANPR deployment.
Thanks, but I tend to insure my off-the-road cars before driving 'em to the MOT station.
If you don't believe me...
Here's the Gov't consultation response that says they're about to do it in Dec '13, and why :-
Here's the late '12 announcement that they're going to do it :-
Here's a press report that says they did it :-
For a single vehicle, yes.
The missing step is automatically trawling the database looking for clones.
reports
You don't need to. When you do the look up you check when and where the ANPR system last "saw" it. What you could do is analyse the times bewteen vehicles appearing on different cameras and build a "knowledge base" of how long it would normally take to get from one camera to the ones within an area. Less than that time plus a margin, flag it as a possible clone.
You don't think that this numberplate/date/time/location information is discarded do you? I *think* it is after a while, FSVO "a while". Wasn't there a bit of fuss about the retention of this sort of data a while back and some limit is now applied, a year, 6 months?
I don't think there are any static ANPR cameras within 15 miles of here maybe 20... As for traffic police, the only ones vaugely in that line are trainee police motorcyclists out for a runs along roads that are really rather nice for driving. Gentle curves, hair pins and sections where you can see three or four bends ahead. Allowing you to "use" the road. B-)
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.