Reference to this obscuranist movement here, in Benchmark: tinyurl.com/qx6lj39

Some diverting further links given. There may be a connection with "reptilian" theories of the Icke variety.

It doesn't make much difference, a vehicle seized under Section 165 can be for either no valid driving licence or no valid insurance cover.

In this case your husband has no valid driving licence for whatever reason. That is not down to the police, that is between you and the DVLA.

Reading between the lines of what you wrote, you sent the licence off to the wrong department, ie the one to change details rather than the one that puts the points on. Why did you suddenly also need to change the details - have you moved house? Maybe the DVLA wrote back to you but at the wrong address? If this is the case it highlights the importance of keeping your documents up to date in the first place to avoid problems like this.

If this all started off in August/September time, why have you not chased up the missing licence, it is now December. I'm sorry to say but it does sound like you have created your own problems here.

Also looking at S165 RTA 88 if he was asked to produce a Licence (has to be for Section to take effect) and only when one is not produced does grounds for seizure come into play.

DVD, has the law changed so that one is no longer given a "producer" to show the licence/insurance or MOT certificate within 7 days at a Police station? Is it assumed that all computer records are 100% up to date so a "producer form" would be a waste of time?

In the event that the database is, in fact, incorrect, what recourse (if any) does one have for seizure of one's vehicle based on the error? Not much , I guess :-(

HO/RT/1 (producer) system still applies...

BUT

Driving Licence, Insurance, Excise,Reg Keeper, inside leg details all accessabile by Police 24/7 through their ability to check various databases i.e. DVLA, MIB VOSA etc,

SO

for DL.

.Uniformed Officer to stop and,

make request to see DL and

driver fails

THERE AND THEN to produce

THEN PC has reasonable grounds to suspect no Licence in force because Computor say NO

THEN and only THEN gorunds to seize

so no need for a Horty.

As to action when databas gigo results I guess if HeadPlod does not play ball then it's a case to consider civil action for loss.

dvd