You *are* being watched...
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: Ret. on 23 Mar 2010 14:40 Rob wrote: > Ret. wrote: >>> >>> The point I am trying to make is that the lives of the vast majority >>> of the motoring public are totally innocuous and, as such, the >>> police have not the slightest interest into checking where they are >>> going. > > And do you believe that this data will only EVER be available to the > Police? I do not even know if 'non-hit' readings are retained. Do you? Kev
From: Steve Firth on 23 Mar 2010 14:48 Maria <fallingdown(a)holeinshoe.co.uk> wrote: > Steve Firth wrote: > > Maria <fallingdown(a)holeinshoe.co.uk> wrote: > > > >> Several years ago, I had a letter from one of these survey companies > >> acting for the government - the letter said that I had been spotted by > >> one of those tall blue things by the road, > > > > I doubt it. > > What was it then? I don't know, but those "tall blue things by the side of the road" are nothing to do with surveys and the information they collect can't be easily traced back to the registered keeper. > The journey was late at night - I didn't see any surveys. I go out in the > seven-seater so rarely that I even remember the occasion! And did you notice any vans marked "Golden River" parked by the side of the road, for example?
From: Iain on 23 Mar 2010 15:08 "Steve Firth" <%steve%@malloc.co.uk> wrote in message news:1jftjbf.1hnbxh3154qgdlN%%steve%@malloc.co.uk... > ARWadsworth <adamwadsworth(a)blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: > >> What percentage of the "hits" will be false due to bad record keeping, >> new >> car owners, new insurance policies, recently taxed vehicles etc? > > That's hard to say, because AFAIK there is still no quality audit on the > various record sources used to compile the database used for ANPR. It > compiles data from the PNC, DVLA, VoSA, insurers and other more esoteric > agencies and government departments. No one can really say how much of > the data is drivel. > > However on a practical basis little use is made of the signficant number > of hits registered on a daily basis. There really is no resource > available to attend to them all. It's like having a burglar alarm that > goes off thousands of times a day, practically useless. > > The police, especially the plod end of the police, like to pretend that > the data is incorruptible and infallible. However it's not, and unless > things have changed a lot in recent years the data isn't even live. So > it's perfectly possible to insure a car, take it for a drive and create > a hit on ANPR because the database hasn't been updated. > > How long it takes to update depends on the insurer and the type of ANPR > used. Vehicles carry their own sub-set of the data available and are > only updated at intervals. I don't think that the interval for the > updates has been standardised across the different UK police forces. Out of interest then, if the information is not up-to-date (or wrong) on the database and it cannot be proven there and then that the car is legal, and the car is siezed, is it easy to claim the towing and storage back? Or would the car simply not be siezed? Iain
From: Rob on 23 Mar 2010 15:18 Ret. wrote: || Rob wrote: ||| Ret. wrote: ||||| ||||| The point I am trying to make is that the lives of the vast ||||| majority of the motoring public are totally innocuous and, as ||||| such, the police have not the slightest interest into checking ||||| where they are going. ||| ||| And do you believe that this data will only EVER be available to the ||| Police? || || I do not even know if 'non-hit' readings are retained. Do you? Of course they are. Why would anyone delete data that was expensively collected, when it may be of use in the future - cf. email traffic, phone logs, isp logs etc..etc. -- Rob
From: Conor on 23 Mar 2010 15:19
On 23/03/2010 01:02, TJ wrote: > I fully agree with disrupting the scum that live amongst us. Make it > difficult for criminals. The trouble is that it makes it difficult for everyone else as well. Also, it leads to the removal of one of the founding principles of our legal system - innocent until proven guilty. -- Conor I'm not prejudiced. I hate everyone equally. |