04/04/2014
Dear Mr Swift
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST REFERENCE NUMBER: 000046/14
Thank you for your request for information regarding AVCIS which has now been considered.
Applicant Question:
I am seeking information in relation to the ACPO and / or AVCIS policy relating to the charges associated with locating, recovering and returning stolen vehicles to insurers or the vehicle owner if the policy differs. My particular interest is with regard to those vehicles located at Ports.
I understand that for in excess of a year, upon finding a stolen vehicle, AVCIS, have been seeking payments from insurers that differ from and exceed the regulated charges. I am seeking to understand the charges being levied.
I ask to be provided:
• The date the policy commenced • A copy of the policy, the process.
• How the amount requested from an insurer is calculated, for example, fixed fee or percentage of the vehicle value and how the sum is arrived at
• The number of vehicles to which the policy has been applied • The total payments (£) received from insurers.
• The actual cost to ACPO of recovering the vehicles.
Where an insurer has declined to meet the charges, I ask to be provided:
• The grounds cited by the insurer for refusal
• ACPO / AVCIS’ response (arguments)
• Details of any inducements or sanctions that may be applied (or have been applied) to the insurer.
Please confirm whether the process is also applied to vehicles in respect of which there is no insurer interest
i.e. where a victim of crime is seeking return of the vehicle and for example, has no insurance, was not paid out or where their cover was Third Party Only.
ACPO Response:
ACPO does not hold information captured by your request. There is no ACPO / AVCIS Policy for charges associated with locating, recovering and returning stolen vehicles to insurers.
The Freedom of Information Act affords anyone in the world the right to request information held by a public authority. It does not cover thoughts and / or opinion. The ACPO Vehicle Crime Intelligence Service (AVCIS) works with partner agencies and stakeholders within the trade and associated businesses to tackle vehicle-enabled crime by gathering and disseminating intelligence and sharing best practice. AVCIS incorporates a number of specialist functions including the national Vehicle Fraud Unit and the Caravan Safety and Security Group.
In wishing to provide assistance to you, I have liaised with Detective Chief Inspector Gordon Roberts who heads the unit and I am able to provide information to you outside of the Act.
The first billed recovery was on 14/02/2013. There is no written policy. The charges are for costs that have been incurred by the Port of Tilbury London Authority – a private limited company. The charge depends on the value of the vehicle and the circumstances in which the vehicle was recovered/found.
If a company is not prepared to cover the recovery charge they are informed as to the location of the vehicle – the same as any other police force, when the insured does not want to be included in the Police Vehicle Recovery Scheme.
The amount from insurance companies was based on the same as the Port of Tilbury London Authority (5% of the bottom book value).
It would be impossible to determine the total cost to AVCIS in the recovery of these vehicles as there is no direct record which details the hours spent by officers, administration, equipment etc.
The Home Office recovery scheme applies to public premises / none private roads only.
Where there has been a refusal to pay, location of the container, contact details for the ports and police authorities are provided for direct recovery of the vehicle . The fees for storage are not set by AVCIS and are set by the relevant charging authority.
Yours sincerely
Sherry Traquair
Freedom of Information Officer & Decision Maker
12/05/2014
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST REFERENCE NUMBER: 000073/14
Applicant Question:
I understand that a different process was in place prior to 14/02/2013, that a percentage of value claim is a newer development.
Please can you:
- Confirm the first billed recovery on 14/02/2013 was based upon a percentage of vehicle value
- Provide a copy of the pre-14/02/2013 policy (non-percentage of value policy) or in the alterative, explain how it differs.
- I note that If a company is not prepared to cover the recovery charge, they are informed as to the location of the vehicle – please advise:
- What restrictions are placed upon the vehicle and authority in possession of same i.e. is the authority served with a s6.6. PACE 1984 notice (do not dispose of or alter in any material way) or similar.
- How is the vehicle prevented from moving on; stopped from being exported, before an insurer is able to mobilise recovery and attend upon the vehicle.
- How the circumstances in which the vehicle was recovered/found affect costs.
I note the Home Office recovery scheme applies to public premises / non private roads only i.e.
it does not appear these charges should be applied.
- Whether, if the insured has elected to be included in the Police Vehicle Recovery Scheme, this covers all charges associated with Ports recovery.
- With regard to the 5% of the bottom book value, what ‘book’ (guide / measure) is utilised.
With regard to the costs incurred by AVCIS, please confirm:
- that AVCIS make no payment to the recovery operators of Ports Authority i.e. the insurer is expected to make payment direct to the recovery operators of Ports Authority
ACPO Response:
- Confirm the first billed recovery on 14/02/2013 was based upon a percentage of vehicle value
1. ACPO does hold information captured by parts of your request.
I can confirm that the first billed recovery was on 13/03/2013, not 14/02/2013 as stated within my previous FOI response. I apologise for the anomaly. I have liaised with AVCIS colleagues who advise that recovery dates and billing dates will always vary, and I have no explanation as to why the date of 14/02/2013 was provided to you.
The Port of Tilbury is where the billing and administrational processes in relation to billing is taken place.
I can confirm that the first billed recovery on 14/02/2013 was based upon a percentage of vehicle value.
AVCIS started to have a ports presence from 2011 at Tilbury, then Felixstowe and finally Southampton.
2. Provide a copy of the pre-14/02/2013 policy (non-percentage of value policy) or in the alterative, explain how it differs
2. ACPO does not hold information captured by your request.
As stated in my previous response, there is no ACPO / AVCIS policy for charges associated with locating, recovering and returning stolen vehicles to insurers. However, this is currently being reviewed and a policy document is being considered. I can confirm that AVCIS have received no funding from the Ports.
3. I note that If a company is not prepared to cover the recovery charge, they are informed as to the location of the vehicle – please advise:
4. What restrictions are placed upon the vehicle and authority in possession of same i.e. is the authority served with a s6.6. PACE 1984 notice (do not dispose of or alter in any material way) or similar.
ACPO does not hold information captured by your request.
The information that you seek is not documented or recorded in any other form.
In wishing to assist you, I can provide you with the following information outside of the Act:
I can confirm that the owner is contacted and asked if they wish to have the vehicle recovered. If they do not, they are effectively opting out of the ‘Finders Recovery Scheme’.
As explained in our previous response, if a company is not prepared to cover the recovery charge, they are informed as to the location of the vehicle, the same as any other police force who adheres to the Home Office agreed vehicle recovery fees would, where fees that can be charged by forces are applied when a vehicle that has been reported stolen is found on public property. It is then up to them to negotiate recovery and payments to ports staff directly as the vehicle is on private land.
ACPO does not hold information captured by your request.
5. How is the vehicle prevented from moving on; stopped from being exported, before an insurer is able to mobilise recovery and attend upon the vehicle
5. ACPO does not hold information captured by your request.
6. How the circumstances in which the vehicle was recovered/found affect costs.
6.This request for information isn’t valid as it does not specifically identify recorded information.
The Freedom of Information Act is not designed to answer general questions. As you will be aware, the legislation places two key obligations on an authority that is covered by the Act when they are considering a request for information. These obligations are set out in section 1(1) and stipulate that when that authority receives a valid request (which is defined elsewhere in the Act) that authority must confirm what information is or is not held (S.1(1)(a)) and, if that information is held, it must be provided to the applicant unless it is considered to be exempt information (S.1(1)(b)).
It is therefore reasonable to assert that if we are unable to meet these obligations under S.1(1) of the Act – i.e. in answering a question we are not able to confirm or deny what information is held by ACPO because none has been requested – we cannot handle that request under FoIA. Such questions would be best handled outside of the FoI legislation.
Whilst I appreciated that this is an oversimplified assertion, as there are many other helpful provisions of the Act that encourage clarifying the scope of requests and providing advice and assistance; helping applicants access as much information to which they are entitled, this position has been supported by the Information Tribunal on several occasions.
For example, the hearing of Day v ICO & Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) (EA/2006/0069)2, the Tribunal notes:
‘Information is defined in section 84 of the Act as “information recorded in any form”. The Act therefore only extends to requests for recorded information. It does not require public authorities to answer questions generally; only if they already hold the answers in recorded form. The Act does not extend to requests for information about policies or their implementation, or the merits or demerits of any proposal or action – unless, of course, the answer to any such request is already held in recorded form’. (para. 15).
7. Whether, if the insured has elected to be included in the Police Vehicle Recovery Scheme, this covers all charges associated with Ports recovery.
7. ACPO does not hold information captured by your request. In relation to third party payments, these are outlined in any invoices sent to the insurance company by the Port of Tilbury. No monies are received by AVCIS who are a non profit organisation.
8. With regard to the 5% of the bottom book value, what ‘book’ (guide / measure) is utilised.
8. The bottom book value (BBV) is calculated from the HPI website and for your convenience I have provided you with the following direct web-link:
www.hpicheck.com/
With regard to the costs incurred by AVCIS, please confirm:
9. that AVCIS make no payment to the recovery operators of Ports Authority i.e. the insurer is expected to make payment direct to the recovery operators of Ports Authority
9. I can confirm that AVCIS make no payment to the recovery operators of Ports Authority i.e. the insurer is expected to make payment direct to the recovery operators of Ports Authority.
AVCIS have not received any monies from Tilbury for recovered vehicles.
Tilbury is regulated by the ‘Port of London Acts’ and I provide you with the following direct weblink: http://www.pla.co.uk/Port-of-London-Act-1968 . The link provides information in relation to the Port Authority’s Police Force, finances of the Port Authority and Duties and General Powers of the Port of Authority.
I can confirm that payments paid on invoice to AVCIS to date are £17,659.31 in 2013 and £16,460.00 in 2014. This information was not provided to you in your previous response and I apologise for the omission.
I believe that you have also visited and spoken with members of AVCIS on the 10/04/2014 and I understand they provided you with much information and assistance. I hope this was of benefit to you.
Yours sincerely
Sherry Traquair
Freedom of Information Officer & Decision Maker
Sent: Monday, May 12, 2014 2:41 PM
Subject: Charges for Stolen Vehicles Located at Ports
[redacted]
I have thus far refrained from returning to AVCIS and explaining that what they are conveying at:
does not agree with my experiences. AVCIS will say:
- I can confirm that the owner is contacted and asked if they wish to have the vehicle recovered.
If they do not, they are effectively opting out of the ‘Finders Recovery Scheme’. - As explained in our previous response, if a company is not prepared to cover the recovery
charge, they are informed as to the location of the vehicle, the same as any other police force
who adheres to the Home Office agreed vehicle recovery fees would, where fees that can be
charged by forces are applied when a vehicle that has been reported stolen is found on public
property. It is then up to them to negotiate recovery and payments to ports staff directly as the
vehicle is on private land.
AVCIS appear to have missed out a large part of the process … namely that they will apparently not prevent the vehicle from being shipped … a response in early January 2013 read:
- I will until further notice adopt a process unique to (1)**** and *(2)**** where I will not remove a stolen vehicle from a container where (2) are the interested party. I will locate it, have it examined for scenes of crime in situ, alert you to the vehicles location and container number. I will reseal the container and return it to the stack. It will then be up to you to recover the vehicle from the port.
- As your representative said on the phone
“WE NEVER HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO RECOVER THE VEHICLE OURSELVES”
I will now create you this opportunity. The cost to move a container from the stack to the customs area is
currently fixed at £423. (please got o DP world Southampton.com and click fees for clarity, checking export fees) This is a cost we do not pass onto you and it is absorbed. Should you need access to a container to retrieve your vehicle you would be liable for these costs. - Should the container have been exported in the time you take to arrange this you can imagine that the shipping lines will have costs for this to be returned as well. A container to be returned from Africa is approximately £4,000. The container above was loaded onto a ship that evening hence why I worked all Saturday removing your vehicle. So it is not unrealistic for the export of the container to take place in the time your recovery department take to come to the port.
However, I note that in the most recent response there is reference to the charges and:
- As stated in my previous response, there is no ACPO / AVCIS policy for charges associated with locating, recovering and returning stolen vehicles to insurers. However, this is currently being reviewed and a policy document is being considered. I can confirm that AVCIS have received no funding from the Ports.
I may be able to ascertain who is creating this policy document … would this be of interest to you?