I was asked to participate in this BBC programme...but the police advised against it.
As some of you will know, I bought a stolen/cloned car last April. The V5C was confirmed as being authentic by the police, I confirmed the details on the form with the DVLA, I carried out an HPI check. I even called the supplying dealer who confirmed the specification and dealer-fitted options were an exact match.
I lodged a formal complaint and claim for compensation with the DVLA in December. They have a 4 stage process you have to go through (local DVLA office, Customer Service Manager, Chief Executive, then Ombudsman). I'm currenty at stage 3.
Here's an extract from my letter to the Chief Executive, Noel Shanahan...
"I am following your complaints procedure and have now reached Step 3. I shall assume that previous correspondence has been filed and is available to you.
I telephoned the DVLA on [...] to confirm the details contained in a V5C document after an HPI check and prior to purchasing a motor vehicle. I gave details including the VRM, document serial number and document reference number to one of your agents. Nothing untoward was flagged and it was confirmed that the vehicle was with the motor trade.
On the same day, I took the document to my local police station, where an officer confirmed that it was an authentic, watermarked V5C document and details matched those on file after carrying out PNC, insurance database and DVLA database checks.
I purchased the car from a motor trader in [...]. Promised paperwork and other items never arrived. I reported this to Thames Valley Police. They sent an officer to inspect the vehicle. It was declared ?sound? except for an invalid tax disc.
I took the V5C and road tax disc to my local DVLA office in [...]. I was told the fontsize on the V5 document was incorrect. Both items were confiscated and I was told they would be sent back to Swansea for investigation. I was allowed to re-register and re-tax the car.
I reported the matter to HPI. Their investigations led the DVLA to report back that the validation character on the V5C document was incorrect. This letter is not confirmed as part of any check.
I received a letter from the DVLA dated [...] informing me that, due to a discrepancy in you records, the vehicle would have to be inspected. An acknowledgement letter from the DVLA followed, confirming I was no longer the registered keeper of the vehicle. DVLA Oxford requested an inspection by VOSA on [...].
The car was declared to be a stolen and had been professionally cloned vehicle, with matching VIN/engine numbers, specification, dealer-fitted accessories and paperwork to the original car.
I sent a full statement of events to [...] CID on [...]. This was followed up and investigations revealed that the car I bought is one of more than 100 stolen by the same criminal gang last year (25 turning up in [one English county]), all of which had apparently been sold on with the aid of authentic V5C documents stolen from the DVLA ?in early 2009?.
I wrote to the DVLA?s Customer Service Manager on [...] and received a reply from dated [...] denying any responsibility or liability on the part of the DVLA. He also confirmed in subsequent telephone conversations that:
a) Administrative procedures currently in place at the DVLA may not flag stolen or fraudulent V5C documents when queried over the telephone, only on processing;
b) Recorded calls to the DVLA are only retained for 3 months. A record of my conversation in April 2009 therefore no longer exists;
c) The original fraudulent V5C document confiscated by DVLA was not in fact investigated, but simply processed when it reached Swansea, then microfilmed and destroyed;
d) There has apparently only been one theft of documents from the DVLA or its suppliers (in January 2007) according to [...] and the DVLA?s Press Office;
e) The DVLA accepts no liability for this event, has never paid any compensation and refuses to offers compensation to victims of such crimes after serial numbers are released to the press;
f) The 2007 batch of stolen documents had serial numbers in the letter range BG to BI. The V5C that came with my vehicle had a serial number with [a different] prefix. Pre-printed elements of this document, including these letters, had not been changed or tampered with.
Finally, I went back to [my local] DVLA office on [...] to clarify events. I spoke with the manager, who confirmed that
i) There was no record or recollection of events;
ii) No copies of the confiscated documents were taken;
iii) No case history notes were written up; and
iv) It would be ?very difficult? to change the pre-printed serial number letters BG or BI to [...] without this being noticeable.
[...] and other CID units have now begun a major national investigation into car key burglaries resulting in stolen cars being sold on as clones with valid documents. This is called Operation [...]. It is not linked to Operation Drift from [the theft of the V5Cs in] 2007."
I have edited parts as you will see to avoid giving away personal or potentially sensitive details. Please let this be a warning to all...
bazomis
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 31/01/2010 at 18:12
|
bazomis:
I am curious why would anyone want/need to do these two checks:
1. >> I telephoned the DVLA on [...] to confirm the details contained in a V5C document after an HPI check and prior to purchasing a motor vehicle. I gave details including the VRM, document serial number and document reference number to one of your agents. Nothing untoward was flagged and it was confirmed that the vehicle was with the motor trade.
2. >> On the same day, I took the document to my local police station, where an officer confirmed that it was an authentic, watermarked V5C document and details matched those on file after carrying out PNC, insurance database and DVLA database checks. >>
|
|
I wondered that too, you must have suspected a problem before purchace to make those checks.
|
|
|
within the motor trade this has been known about for some years. The forms are in the batches BG8229501 to BG9999030 and BI2305501 to BI2800000.
As I heard the story it was not DVLAs fault at all. The private company that prints the forms made printing errors and so shipped a load of forms to another private high-security shredding company for secure disposal. Somehow an employee/s at either the printing compmany or the shredding company must have stolen some forms.
Its not DVLAs fault, its not the governments fault, its not even Gordon Browns fault.
Any claims should be against either the printers and/or the shredders.
|
|
One more thing - dont rely on V5c. It is litterally not worth the paper its printed on. Anyone could knock up a fake V5.
|
|
|
BG916-BG919 according to the DVLA web site WorkshopTech. Forms apparently rejected by DVLA because of tint on the back page being slightly wrong. Not clear if stolen when DVLA disposed of them, when en-route back to the printers or from the supplying printers. DVLA implicitly blaming the printers.
If I had knowlingly or unknowingly played even a small part through incompetence in crimes worth an under-estimated £13m to date and all I did was to post a press release on my web site to that effect, do you think I should get off scot-free?
|
BG916-BG919 according to the DVLA web site WorkshopTech. Forms apparently rejected by DVLA because of tint on the back page being slightly wrong. Not clear if stolen when DVLA disposed of them when en-route back to the printers or from the supplying printers. DVLA implicitly blaming the printers.
The cicular that we received when this happened, which is a few years ago, clearly stated they went missing between printers and the high security shredding plant. So either printers or shredders to blame. Bit childish to keep insisting that DVLA are to blame.
|
The cicular that we received when this happened which is a few years ago clearly stated they went missing between printers and the high security shredding plant. So either printers or shredders to blame. Bit childish to keep insisting that DVLA are to blame.
Not really - Bazomis has no relationship or contract, implied or otherwise, with the printers or shredders so he hasn't a snowball's chance of getting anything there. On the other hand, like the rest of us he periodically gives money to DVLA who must take some responsibility for their records and the use of them. If DVLA chooses to use sub-contractors then it must take responsibility for any resultant damage and recover from its peccant suppliers if it can.
|
Thanks Manatee. According to the Ombudsman, a complaint can only be considered if there is a) failure of service or b) maladministration. I believe both apply to the DVLA and it's current slack operating procedures.
I also can't help but think there's a bit of a conspiracy brewing against my claim for compensation...why else would I have got the response I did from the local DVLA? The protocol in such cases is apparently to call in the local police and pass all fake or forged documents to them for investigation. Why was this not done and why have no record or copies been kept by the DVLA??? The manager could offer no explanation at all. Even the person who dealt with me now professes to have no recollection of anything...
|
|
|
|
WorkshopTech:The forms are in the batches BG8229501 to BG9999030 and BI2305501 to BI2800000. >>
That does not tie in the experience of bazomis, who said:
"The V5C that came with my vehicle had a serial number with [a different] prefix. Pre-printed elements of this document, including these letters, had not been changed or tampered with."
So it would seem that V5C docs with prefixes other than BG and BI are being used to clone cars.
|
You've hit the nail on the head jbif. It was CID that told me many of the cloned cars they picked up last year had V5s with different prefix letters and it was from a batch stolen in "early 2009". DVLA deny this, despite the info being passed on to their Police Liaison Unit.
The line the DVLA are sticking to is my loss was the result of a criminal act and someone must have altered the detals on one of the original BG-BI forms. If you take a close look at a V5C you'll see that it would be nigh on impossible to change the pre-printed prefix letters in the serial number without it being noticeable.
|
|
|
I'd assume the DVLA won't publish all the ranges stolen as they don't want the public to know how incompetent they are at keeping hold of such vital documents. It does make me wonder why they use outside printers to print the blank forms. If it is so important then the forms should all be produced in house on a one off basis with security features and in a way that can be tracked back to an individual employee. Then there aren't any blank forms to steal. The serial numbers should also be more random so that you can cross reference a particular car with a particular serial number when it was first registered and make sure that serial number stays constant over its life.
The fundamental problem is that it is nigh on impossible to identify a car as definitely being a particular car in any way. They are a mass market product and one Ford Mondeo looks like any other. Unless you embed some unique identifier that cannot be copied on each and every car at manufacturer then you can never solve this problem completely.
|
|
130,000 documents in a single print run does seem quite a large number! I wonder if the Royal Mint prints and looks after 50 quid notes in much the same way??
|
The Royal Mint don't produce £50 notes, or any other notes, for that matter. They only produce coins.
All notes are printed at the Bank of England printing centre at Loughton in Essex. Mind you, their security could possibly be as bad as the DVLA's!
There was a TV play produced several years ago about the story of a group of workers at the print centre who worked out a way of stealing large amounts of used notes. The play was based upon a scenario which really did take place. The print centre refused to make any comment at the time.
I believe the play was called "Hot Money".
That was the correct title, more information can be found here:
www.imdb.com/title/tt0305648
|
|
|
|
I'd assume the DVLA won't publish all the ranges stolen as they don't want the public to know how incompetent they are at keeping hold of such vital documents. It does make me wonder why they use outside printers to print the blank forms. If it is so important then the forms should all be produced in house on a one off basis with security features and in a way that can be tracked back to an individual employee. Then there aren't any blank forms to steal. The serial numbers should also be more random so that you can cross reference a particular car with a particular serial number when it was first registered and make sure that serial number stays constant over its life.
I believe that many years ago the log books were done in house. No doubt some consultant or account appointed by governement to look for efficiencies then decided that outside private companies should do the job because they would be cheaper, more efficient etc etc. Bit like what was supposed to happen with outsourcing in general i suppose.
|
|
|
|
WorkshopTech: >> The forms are in the batches BG8229501 to BG9999030 and BI2305501 to BI2800000. >> That does not tie in the experience of bazomis who said: "The V5C that came with my vehicle had a serial number with [a different] prefix. Pre-printed elements of this document including these letters had not been changed or tampered with." So it would seem that V5C docs with prefixes other than BG and BI are being used to clone cars.
Yes, there are plenty of fake V5C in circulation, they dont have to be stolen! I think even I could make a fake V5C using a scanner and some software. It would fool more than 50% of buyers, easily.
Edited by WorkshopTech on 31/01/2010 at 16:25
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, the HPI report came back saying no former keepers and last V5 document issued was the original when the vehicle was registered. The V5 received said one former keeper and later document issue date. Called DVLA to clarify. Said paperwork not updated on their database and confirmed vehicle with motor trade. That's why I also took it to the police station before buying. They confirmed from a PNC check that the original keeper had reported they no longer had an interest in the vehicle and therefore the DVLA recorde were wrong. Officer also said I should ignore as the DVLA database is responsible for 90% of all errors they come across.
|
|
The British establishment and the large private corporations which run it are riddled with despicable criminals at all levels. The British people have been conditioned for centuries to consider this impossible and can't even construct such a thought in their minds. Don't underestimate how much of a link there is between these criminals and the establishment.
|
riddled with despicable criminals at all levels.
I'm sure there are a certain number of dishonest people, but 'riddled' might be an exaggeration.
|
Riddled - 600 + MPs - crooks on the fiddle. Think about it!
|
600 + MPs - crooks on the fiddle. Think about it!
Most of us have thought about it I imagine AS. Politics is a strange metier. One of the basic skills is the ability to misrepresent without lying, but there are a lot of others, too many to list. Certainly it demands a high level of intelligence or anyway cleverness. And a sort of sinewy moral flexibility.
But 600-plus crooks on the make? If only it were that simple. But it's a slander really, vulgar cynicism. You shouldn't believe all the trumpeting of the media.
|
Just a thought
Toyota has a problem and is going to replace 8 million accelerators.
Honda has a problem and is going to replace millions of switches.
DVLA has a problem and is doing nothing..........................
|
|
Because you have to buy from the DVLA
|
|
So how can we be sure we are buying a legit car without buying it new from a known dealer. Is there a way of protecting us from not knowingly purchasing a cloned car?
|
|
Maybe not Lud but I believe the DT Supplement which details all MP's expenses claims and I have kept it! Many made no claims of any sort, some claimed up to the limit and some ripped the system off in a manner which would have seen a member of the public in Jail and with a Criminal Restitution made against their property. They are not all bad or crooked but a lot of them are and they and we know it!
Edited by Armitage Shanks {p} on 31/01/2010 at 21:44
|
> Don't underestimate how much of a link there is between these criminals and the establishment.
Oh good grief. Someone here clearly gives credence to the David Icke "we are ruled by lizards from outer space" theory.
|
|
I saw on the news a car park full of nice Merc's etc that had been impounded by police with this scam. What happens to those cars now as they cant be sold on - can they? Or are they broken up for parts/sold on and the funds put back into the national purse?
|
|
Having just come back from Germany from Christmas I was interested in a auto program on German TV it involved a very cheap looking unit bought on the internet for under 20 euros which jammed the radio signal of central locking and was being used in car parks to stop people locking their cars.The theif could then steal the contents at will but they then introduced another unit which looked the same which blocked any tracker unit fitted to the car which would also undo the car central locking plus a rolled up bag full of keys which could be adapted like a locksmith to drive away any car total cost on the internet under 50 euros.Both VAG and DB refused to comment but a number of insurers were.Itwas possible to walk up to the latest Merceded and drive it away as fast as the owner could do with the correct keys probabley why so many top of the range cars disappear without trace even though they havetracker units.Paying for a tracker unit according to the program was worthless you would be better buying a good chain for the car and a gaurd dog.
|
used in car parks to stop people locking their cars.
My understanding was that if you don't use remote locking (via chweek-chweek sound), you can still lock the doors by physically inserting the keyfob through key hole.
|
How does cloning work - like this?
1) Crook sees a valuable car, and notes down its details, colour etc.
2) Crook steals, or buys from another crook, a car looking the same as the one already noted.
3) He fits false number plates, possibly alters a few other bits, perhaps resprays, adds on any remarkable extras.
4) He sells the car to Mr Gullible. Unless Mr G is incredibly incredibly gullible, the crook will need to show a (faked or stolen) V5, get Mr G to sign it, and leave him with the tear-off portion.
5) Mr G goes away happy, and waits for his new V5 to arrive. When it fails to arrive in 6 weeks, he rings up DVLA, who tell him car is still registered to someone else, and tell him he needes to complete a V62 - application for a new registration certificate.
6) Mr G does that, but then what?
I was in exactly this position recently. The seller (a reputable national LandRover reconditioner) had either failed to send in the V5, or more likely, it had been lost/delayed in the post. Mo matter, said the DVLA, on receipt of the V62 they re-registered it in my name anyway.
So presumably the same would happen to Mr G?
At what point would someone notice the car was a clone?
|
|
at at the point of a v62 being sent to the DVLA , they then write to the "last" owner , telling them that "there" car is about to be re registered?
|
Is there any law which protects Mr Gullible (when vehicle he bought turns out to be a clone)?
case 1: When he bought from main dealer
case 2: When he bought from a motor trader who is not a main dealer
case 3: When he bought private
Obviously, case 3 offers no protection to buyer anyway.
What about case 1 & 2 then?
|
at at the point of a v62 being sent to the DVLA they then write to the "last" owner telling them that "there" car is about to be re registered?
DVLA didn't check with the previous owner. I know because I asked him, and he just said sorry, you'll get a new V5 with the V62 anyway. Which is what happened, by return of post.
I imagine that if it had been cloned, no one would notice until someone tried to double-tax it?
Or would the crunch come when the real car was finally declared stolen and DVLA notified? How would they then know which car was the clone, as only one would actually exist? Is there another scam creating virtual clones and then arranging for them to be "stolen"?
|
point of order: , dvla DO send out a letter , wether you recieve one is a different matter , this has happened several times to me with m/bike sales , and the V5 has not been sent on , or lost in the post
|
Like this...
1) Crook gathers details of original cars of interest, either from within the trade, at car auctions or in cahoots with the keeper/owner
2) Crook steals car that is a close match by burgling someone's home and taking key
3) Changes windscreen VIN, covers chassis number on chassis with rubbberised sticker showing new chassis number, replaces engine number plate under bonnet and number plates to match original
4) Fills in a dodgy V5 and possibly also a fake service book
5) Advertises the car on a well-known web site, priced somewhere around the PX mark
6) Borrows some premises
7) Buyer(s) come and he takes deposit(s). Gives legitimate looking receipts
8) If a buyer is canny enough to ask for more than a receipt (e.g. personal ID or takes a photograph) crook will probably complete deal
9) Agrees to deliver car to door using trade plates
10) Makes up some story about not being able to get to you before the banks close (congestion, delays) and will have to re-arrange for another day (implying but not stating you need to go get cash instead)
11) Promises any missing documents/keys to follow because not yet received from previous owner/leasing company, etc
12) Takes your money, fills in the V5 leaving you the green slip, provides you with another receipt saying paid in full. Will even sign your own receipt if you want him to
13) DVLA contacts you 6 weeks (or 6 years) later to say there is a discrepancy in their database - no doubt two cars with the same VRM either with a new change of keeper just been recorded on the original car or another application received to renew VED.
14) Go to VOSA inspection, they call the police, you lose your car.
Mr Gullible
|
Ah, right. So the stolen car isn't the cloned one, just one that can be made to look like a third car that is still being driven innocently around?
But the missing link is still the alleged check by the DVLA before issuing a new V5 in response to a V62. As I know from my case, they issue the V5 straight away without making any check. Or is it enough that they do eventually write to the real keeper?
|
My car was registered with DVLA as being with a motor trader at the time. Don't know if they write to them to confirm they have sold it!
When I had to re-register the car, Swansea processed both the fake V5 as normal and the newly-completed V62 - both with identical reg numbers and other details - at the same time and didn't pick this up. They then sent me out a single replacement V5C as the new keeper. It was only 6 weeks later, when the original car was (re)sold that the discrepancy was spotted by the DVLA.
|
|
|
|
|
Listened to the Donal MacIntyre programme and also the BBC 1 Insideout programme last night. It was brilliant,, I can?t tell you how pleased that this has hit the news. I?ve also read with interest your situation with the DVLA. Do you think the claim will come to fruition?
I too bought a cloned car,did a car data check before hand and various other checks to establish the authenticity of the seller/vehicle. All checks in place, it still turned out to be a cloned car and I lost a large amount of money. Trying to get any form of assistance, basic help or any form of information and coupled with the fact that I was dropped from a huge height when I approached the Car Data Check compan(ies), insurance company etc. Instead of car data check companies reeling you into a false sense of security with all their adverts and insisting that you should do a check before buying, they should clearly state what they offer but just as clearly what they DON?T offer! People are buying these and are completely blind to the fact that hidden in the terms and conditions are the words ?not covering cars wearing false plates?.
The lack of information for victims is enormous. Victims support have no knowledge, CAB cant offer advise, Trading Standards pass it back to CAB who then suggest you ring Victims Support. It would also be great to see a website offering some clear cut advice to victims. Perhaps the enormity of this crime would come into the public domain if they had a forum such as this!!! My plight continues, or should I say banging my head against a brick wall continues! People were arrested for the crime they committed against me and another 10 to 15 other people. The were sentenced and have now served their time. The only avenue I have open to me is to take them to civil court. I recently wrote to the CPS to get information connected with the court case and also their addresses. The response was ?due to data protection? and they suggested I contact CAB which I did. CAB rang the court, the court said, put it in writing which I did and the response?..have you guessed ?due to date protection?. They have suggested I write to the solicitors acting for the defendants!
With regards the interview with Noel Shannon and his response to this HUGE problem. I am nothing short of furious, one, from the point of view that not only does he shirk all responsibility for the failure in his duties but to deny that there is an ongoing problem. How can anything ever be resolved when you have this attitude? And as he obviously considers me to be an idiot who could be easily ?duped? ? I consider the man totally incompetent and unworthy of the position he holds or the salary he commands. The cost of setting up a special police division to deal with this, £13 million pounds worth of vehicles retrieved in eighteen months, countless pound lost by unsuspecting victims and he seriously doesn?t think it has anything to do with him! He needs to be removed from his position and perhaps lose his substantially large salary and then when he complains we can all sit back and blame it on the criminals! Let the campaign begin!!!
I think you and countless other people out there who are in the same boat know that there is a huge problem which is being swept under the carpet. The DVLA really don?t know how many of the 2.2 million documents actually reached the shredder, first issuing a warning for 23,000 of them and only later to discover that other batches were appearing. How many will appear in the future? What does the heading say ?130,000 possible cloned cars out there! Unless they take steps to change the forms, change the format and change the system, I dare say that DCI Hooper will be reporting another £13 million pounds worth of vehicles in another eighteen months time. In my opinion, the real criminal here is Mr Noel Shannon and the DVLA after all, he?s conning all of us!
|
Hi there
Just reading your thread about you buying a cloned car! Just wanted to know what's happened? Did you ever get any money back on it?
My hubby bought me a car for valentines day and it turned out to be cloned with one of these stolen dvla registration forms!
The police are investigating and have spoken to the insurance company for us and they told us we can buy it back and they will give us a call. Heard nothing do spoke to copper again and he has been told it had been sold in and going to auction and will probably go for the price we paid for it!
In the time we had it we had £1000 worth if work done on it so whoever gets the car is going to get a b***** good deal!
As we r the victims of this why do we dip out! The women who the car was originally stolen from has had her insurance pay off and been offered the car back and we get nothing!!!
Like you I have spoken to cab and victim support and there is nothing they can help me with! Can deal with the loss of car but what can we do about the work we had done on it we haven't even paid the garage for the new radiator and cam belt and hoses and stereo bits!
|
|
Hello,
I am so sorry to hear that you have lost the car and your money.
I have found myself to be in a similar position to yourself and I am suffering from the lack of information out there of what to do.
I have only just become suspicious that there is something not quite right with my vehicle and I have made the police aware and they are coming to inspect it.
I know that my best hope of recouping any of the money that was stolen from me is to buy the vehicle back from the insurance company.
Do you have any advice? It seems that doing the right thing and calling the police does not pay off.
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
