Collaboration is a recurring theme in discussions about vehicle crime. Police, insurers, manufacturers, technology providers etc. … frequently described as “working together” to address a problem that is both complex and persistent.
The National Vehicle Crime Reduction Partnership (NVCRP) is one such initiative, positioned as a cross-sector effort to improve outcomes. However, recent disclosures raise an important question:
- What does collaboration actually mean in practice?
The Engagement
In May 2025, I was approached to engage with NVCRP following my work in the vehicle crime space. This involved:
- a structured submission of some 20 suggestions
- discussions
- an invitation to participate in a ‘steering group’.
The engagement was presented as:
- collaborative,
- solution-focused,
- aprecaitive of input.
The Reality
Subsequent disclosures, including internal correspondence, suggest a different position. An internal email dated August 2025 indicates that:
- the strategy and its aims had already been agreed,
- selected individuals were to be engaged to “feel involved”,
- there was no intention to invite alteration to those aims.
The purpose of the engagement was therefore not to shape strategy, but to present it.
The Outcome
Following that engagement:
- no further communication was received
- no outcomes were shared,
- no explanation was provided.
More recently, it has been confirmed that:
- no action was taken in relation to my involvement,
- none of the submitted proposals were progressed,
- no further discussion took place.
The Missing Piece: Accountability
This raises several concerns.
- Was the engagement accurately represented?
The process was presented as collaborative, yet appears to have been predetermined.
- Were contributions properly considered?
There is no evidence that submissions were evaluated, recorded, or acted upon.
- Where is the governance?
No records of decision-making, outcomes, or conclusions have been identified.
Why This Matters
This is not a personal grievance. It goes to the heart of how initiatives such as NVCRP operate. If collaboration is:
- selective,
- controlled, or
- designed primarily to secure endorsement,
its effectiveness is limited. More importantly, its credibility is at risk.
A Wider Question
Public statements continue to emphasise:
- collaboration,
- partnership working,and
- shared effort.
These are important principles, but they require substance.
- If external input is invited, how is it used?
- If engagement takes place, how is it recorded?
- If ideas are submitted, how are they assessed?
Conclusion
Vehicle crime will not be addressed through alignment alone. It requires:
- challenge,
- transparency, and
- a willingness to adapt.
Collaboration is not simply about bringing people into the room. It is about what happens next.
For ongoing commentary and practical proposals, follow updates under #CarCrimeUK on LinkedIn.